Is There a Conspiracy to Suppress "Creation Science"?
Two Works Cited A frequent claim in creationist literature is that there is a wealth of scientific evidence to support creationism, but that secular, mainstream scientists are suppressing its publication in peer-reviewed journals. They are not giving creation-scientists a fair shake, they claim; they are being censored. The fact is that creation scientists are not even submitting scientific theories on creation for publication. Needless to say, mainstream scientists cannot censor what is not being submitted
One can begin to investigate this issue by examining what the creation-scientists are submitting for publication. One of the easiest, freest and most uncensored publishing mediums is the Internet. People can post any message they desire to talk.origins, the newsgroup devoted to spirited debate between evolutionists and creationists. So do creationists submit their scientific evidence there? The welcome page for talk.origins contains the following special plea to creationists:
"To really impress the regulars, come prepared with a scientific Theory of Creation. The ToC is the Holy Grail of the origins debate -- everyone talks about it, but no one's ever seen it... no one has ever presented a scientific theory of creation to us." (1)
But what about more old-fashioned media, like scientific, peer-reviewed journals?
In Arkansas in 1982, a famous trial pitted creation-scientists against evolutionists in a battle over what should be taught in public school textbooks. During the trial, creation-scientists repeated their claim that mainstream scientists were ignoring or suppressing their evidence. In response, two researchers, Eugenie Scott and Henry Cole, conducted a computer search of 1,000 scientific and technical journals over a 3-year time period for articles having anything to do with creation scientists or their work. (2) Their search uncovered only 18 items, some of them critical of...