Science is the gathering and analyzing of information and data and using that information to tell us how something works or worked, what happened, and why something happens. The key here is that we use information to answer a question. In order to do this, we must be open minded and objective to accept what the information tells us. In other words, it is required that, for it to be science, we MUST accept what the information or data tells us.

For us to gather information or data, ignore what that information or data tells us, and believe what we want to believe cannot be science and is ridiculous. If we are going to believe what we want to regardless of or in spite of the evidence, that is religion, not science.

In evolution, we have been gathering evidence for over 100 years in an attempt to prove evolution and disprove creation. Is this science? Only if we accept what the data tells us after we have gathered and analyzed it. If the data proves one thing and we continue to believe what we want to believe, then that is religion.

Today, many evolutionists openly tell their fellow scientists that, if it were dependent on the evidence, they could not possibly believe that evolution happened or could happen but that they believe in evolution because they want to believe in it. Is this science? Of course not. But they continue to call it science because they don't want the general public to know the truth.

There are many proofs for this. Until the early 1980's, evolutionists argued that Darwinian Evolution was such an absolute scientific fact that it was ridiculous to even consider creation as a possibility. By 1984, the absolute fact of Darwinian Evolution had been dropped by the scientific community and replaced by the new absolute fact of Punctuational Equilibria without ever considering the possibility of creation. Is that science? Of course not.

The new absolute fact of Punctuational Equalibria states that life continued without any changes for millions of years and then, suddenly and for no known reason or method, everything miraculously evolved in perfect synchronization bringing about new perfectly balanced ecosystems. This is too miraculous for thousands of scientists who decided to see what this new absolute fact was. Thousands said this is absurd, looked around to see what else there was to believe in, could only find creation, and began doing scientific research into the feasibility of creation. They have accumulated a tremendous amount of data which supports creation and further disproves evolution. We call this Creation Science.

Mean while, thousands of other scientists also found Punctuational Equilibria preposterous but refuse to accept creation as even a possibility because EVOLUTION IS WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE IN. Is that science? Of course not. These people have splintered off into a number of different groups proposing their own ideas.

One group admits that science has proved that evolution did not and cannot happen but with a slight twist of the statement. They are trying to add the phrase,"here on Earth," to that statement. Their proposed belief is that life evolved on another planet "under different conditions" and was brought here by aliens. It is very important to understand exactly what they are saying here. When evolutionists use the phrase,"under different conditions," they are quietly admitting that they know that science has proved that it is impossible for life to accidently happen and evolve and they are trying to say,"but on another planet under different conditions, it could have happened." This is why there is suddenly a mad rush among evolutionists to find other solar systems "where life could have happened under different conditions." They are hoping they can find such a solar system before the general public becomes aware that science has already proved that evolution did not and could not happen. They are fighting desperately to keep what they WANT to believe alive. This makes evolution a religion and not a science because they refuse to accept what the evidence has proved and persist to try proving what they WANT to believe.

Another group has focused on the planet Mars as the hopeful savior of evolution. They are proposing that life may have accidently happened and evolved on Mars "under different conditions" and miraculously came here via a meteor. This is why NASA has suddenly put so much emphasis, effort, and finances into exploring Mars. Note that their emphasis is on finding evidence that life MAY have existed on Mars. (For my analysis of life happening on Mars and the possibility of living on Mars, see my page on Mars.)

Yet, at the same time, these same scientists tell the general public, media, politicians, and courts that it is such an absolute fact that life accidently happened and evolved here on Earth that it is ridiculous to even consider creation as a possibility. I ask,"If it is such an absolute fact that life evolved here on Earth that it is ridiculous to consider other possibilities such as creation, is it not also just as ridiculous to consider other possibilities such as life evolving on another planet under different conditions and miraculously getting here?" Oops!

The real irony here is that most evolutionists hate religious leaders who believe what they want to believe without considering scientific evidence. Yet, they have not only become the people they hate the most, they have become even worse. Evolutionists know that the evidence proves what they want to believe to not be true, but still believe it. And their actions have become incredibly similar.

When science was first trying to develop, the Catholic church used its influence over the courts to suppress and silence science by confining and oppressing people like Gallileo and Newton. Today, evolutionists use the courts to suppress and silence Creation Science. They even perjure themselves in court by insisting that evolution is an absolute fact when they know that science has proved that it did not and could not happen. The Catholic Church also used ridicule and peer pressure to discourage people from listening to scientists or checking science out. Today, evolutionist use ridicule and peer pressure to discourage people from listening to creation scientists or checking creation science out. Because they know the evidence, evolutionists have become the most fanatical and oppressive religious leaders in the history of the world. No other religious leaders have ever known that science disproved their beliefs.