I found the following comment on a site where a creationist is debating a true scientist. I especially like this explanation for why some highly intelligent and educated scientists can't shake their religion: "...strong prior non-intellectual commitment...". It's true that religion attacks the young and most are not able to shake it. So thanks Mike, whoever you are.
It's easy to come up with lots of special ad hoc arguments for why God would have done things this way or that way. Someone who is educated and intelligent, but has a strong prior non-intellectual commitment can come up with a hundred rationales for why their view is not disproven - they can read the bible dozens of different ways.
These rationales turn into an elaborate structure, completely dependent on the original core and unchangeable (as your correspondent admits) religious assumption.
But they've given up on the core essence of scientific thinking: science isn't about coming up with arguments to justify your own way of thinking, it's about coming up with evidence to persuade your skeptical self and your peers (who come from many different religious/non-religious/cultural backgrounds).
So the question for these creationists is "You may believe the earth was created 10,000 years ago, but why should anyone else who doesn't share your religion believe it?"
Mike
