Legal Definitions - scientific creationism

Scientific Creationism

Scientific creationism refers to the effort to present the religious belief in divine creation as a scientific theory, often by attempting to refute evolutionary theory using arguments framed in scientific language. It seeks to provide "scientific" support for a literal interpretation of religious accounts of the origin of the universe and life, rather than through natural processes. While it uses scientific terminology and concepts, it is generally not recognized as a valid scientific theory by the mainstream scientific community, as it typically lacks empirical evidence, testable hypotheses, and often relies on religious premises.

Here are some examples illustrating scientific creationism:

• School Curriculum Debate: During a school board meeting, a group of parents and community members advocates for the inclusion of "scientific creationism" in the high school biology curriculum. They present arguments challenging the scientific consensus on evolution, citing specific interpretations of fossil records or genetic data that they claim support a sudden, divinely orchestrated origin of species rather than gradual evolutionary change. They argue that teaching this alternative view provides students with a more complete "scientific" understanding of origins.

• Privately Funded Museum Exhibit: A privately funded museum dedicated to natural history features an exhibit on geological formations. The exhibit includes detailed diagrams and models that interpret rock layers and fossil distribution as evidence for a global flood event described in religious texts, rather than millions of years of gradual geological processes. The accompanying text uses scientific terms like "hydroplate theory" or "catastrophic plate tectonics" to explain these phenomena, presenting them as scientific alternatives to conventional geology.

• Published Article on Biological Complexity: An organization publishes an article arguing that certain biological structures, such as the human eye or the intricate process of blood clotting, are "irreducibly complex." The article uses detailed anatomical and physiological descriptions to contend that these systems could not have evolved step-by-step through natural selection because all their parts must be present simultaneously to function. It concludes that such complexity points to an intelligent designer, presenting this as a scientific challenge to evolutionary biology.