Replies

If there are scientists out there who wish to use scientific means to explore the "theory" of creationism, why is their work not as "legitimate" as that of those who wish to prove evolution.

Because they offer no evidence for their theory other than the Big Book. Proponents of evolution have offered a significant body of evidence backing up their theory; fossils, geological samples, astro-physical evidence showing the universe to be ~20B years old, etc. Other than quoting scripture, the only contributions the Creation ``Science'' types can make is to find small inconsistencies in the theory of evolution.

If you read "What is Creation Science" by Dr. Morris, he will not quote one scripture to you and shoot holes in several Darwin myths. None of these scientist are quoting scripture, they are just pointing out barriers they have encountered trying to explain the unexplainable, aka evolution. Most of the evidence creationists have is proving that evoluton is impossible and the evolutionist keeps adjusting their "religion" to explain away problems exposed by other scientists. If creationists can get a fair hearing, they always win the argument. That is where the vitriol of evolutionists come in. They say all we can do is quote scripture, and we say all you can do is call people morons. Well, more and more of these "morons" have PHD's in science and have won Nobel Prizes for their work. It is getting more difficult to relegate these people to mere "Bible thumpers".

And the 20 Billion year old universe was created by an uncaused-cause (Big Bang). What created the so called "singular" from which all matter came?

It is as much faith to accept this as it is to accept ID.