Creationists damage both realms

Though unintentionally, Stephan Pastis latest strip in his comic series, Pearls Before Swine, adequately shows how imbecilic Young Earth Creation (YEC’s) theorist appear when placed side by side with mainstream science...

These pseudo-scientists only claim to be using true science, when under the curtain they secretly pick and chose with bias what well established principles of science they find peace with and those they feel threaten their true intentions. They begin with a conclusion rather than with observation and work in reverse to the scientific method.

Kenneth Miller even puts out a great opportunity for which creationists have failed to exploit in all their anti-evolution arguments. Why, instead of completely ignoring the compelling evidence from the fossil record of an ancient Earth that has been steadily evolving … or referring to otherwise spurious “scientific explanations” in support of their views… have these people failed to find the value in coprolites?

All one would simply have to do is to take a poke at some prehistoric poop and find a extant species inside to have the conservative foundations of geologic time come crashing down (Miller, 1999). And yet this is the near opposite of what we see. Instead, Miller points out (and it's not hard to spot for oneself) how creation scientists avoid any hands-on science and stray away from credible experiments. They apparently know all too well that plesiosaur stomachs contain ammonites (extinct forms of cephalpods) rather than the average tuna.

The famous turd from Saskatchewan thought to have come from the backside of a Tyrannosaurus rex

It is no wonder than, why the vast majority of mainstream scientists do not take such efforts that try and discredit their work so seriously. Creation scientists truely are a case of people who hear only that of which appeals to them and avoid all other propositions. Rather than finding God in what science can explain, they try to place God in what science supposedly cannot explain. Instead of knowledge being the "compelling reason to believe in God" ... these people find ignorance the most compelling reason to believe in God

It also inevitably belittles their faith for another reason. If God is placed by his own believers in the question marks left by science, than what happens when those question marks are filled by suitable scientific principles? Those who think in this fashion are essentially arguing that their faith cannot flow along the lines of the methods of science. Kenneth Miller points out that this is a "profound theological mistake." The omnipresent deity of the Judeo-Christian faith is one that is suppose to live outside of his creation. Thus is why miracles and the coming of Jesus are considering such big events when they occur.

Works Cited:

Miller, Kenneth (1999). Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.