Why do creationists think that science has to be 100% "provable"?

I agree, but I think it's like this. If Christians can reduce the value of proof, they bring science to the same level as Religion, and then they can fight it. When Science is 99.9999% proven, that last .0000001% could mean dissolution of their faith and ultimately the meaning of life as they see it.

One thing is that many many folks outside of science have very little idea how science works. They have no appreciation of the difficulty in designing and carrying out a really good experiment. Or, how much time and care it takes to interpret data and draw conclusions that are "reasonable". Now throw in peer review to get published and you have a lot of blood and sweat that goes into doing really good science.

If you take the above and mix that with the siege mentality of the creation camp and you end up with a group of people who will pick apart good science and foist up a total load of crap to replace it.

Here is the definition of faith from Dictionary.com Please note def. #2

faith

Audio Help /feɪθ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[feyth] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.

2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.

So what you're saying is faith is fine so long as it back what YOU believe.

The only science that I know of that demands 100% proof is mathematics. The others accept theories as long as the evidence backs them up. When contradicting evidence is found, REAL scientists are willing to either modify the original theory or scrap it entirely.

.

It's a good thing pencils have erasers, because of the amount of correcting and backtracking that science does.

I would think many new discoveries will become obsolete or super seceded much like technology.

Why do you so cavalierly state as fact that intelligent design has no "proof". Most naturalists accuse creationists of not investigating the issue honestly and openly, and yet they commonly are the ones who refuse to address the evidence FOR creation and AGAINST evolution. Come on, have you even tried to look at the other side? Of course you haven't. It suits you too much to have your naturalistic worldview. You don't have to be accountable to anyone, do you? www.answersingenesis.org, www.gotquestions.org

Because creationists are on the same level as those who were i the Dark Ages. You know ignorant of science but gullible by the teaching of religion. If it took the catholic church over 500 years to admit that they were wrong I say it will take another 1,000 for creationists to admit that they are wrong.

And yes I am aware about where the catholic church stands now. I was using the past to demonstrate how religion hardly ever changes its ideas and beliefs unless god (if he is real) says it is OK to change their ideas and results.

i don't think that it has to be 100% provable, i just think that if i must have even an iota of faith in something, i would rather it be in something that actually makes sense :)

thank you:)

If it doesn't require ANY faith on the other hand, and if you can prove it to me 100%, than i would accept the finding no matter how irrational it may seem to me.

Good question! Creationists think science needs to prove itself and yet believe the silliest things without any proof whatsoever! If anything they need to go about proving to us.. the scientific minded people!

I have to agree with you, as I'm learning (very quickly) that geology, in particular, is an uncertain science...however, it does have far more proof of its theories than ID does.

I shall now go off to read the other responses~