Science is not Absolute Truth

questioning dog

Testing our assumptions should also be part of science.

by Dr. Michael Brown, Ph.D

Science is not absolute truth. Its concepts and mechanisms change as new data and viewpoints force it to change. Science does not describe what and how things are, but it is a description of what and how we think things are. We cannot get absolute answers to our questions, we can only observe, test, and probe the unknown until we begin to think we know what the answers are to our questions.

As a scientist I am aware of the changeable nature of science. Often we see many possible explanations that could solve a problem for the Creationist’s position. However we must ask ourselves whether our explanation is true or not. Is it fully supported by the data? What are it’s weak points? What needs to be studied to falsify the explanation?

Often clear answers seem to rise up from the data only to fall again as new evidence is realized for the first time. This is the way science works.

I have faith that further evidence for Creationism will be forthcoming, yet as a scientist, I must go where the data takes me. That is what makes what I am doing, Science. However, at the same time I must realize what my assumptions are when I am looking at the data. It may be that a chosen assumption may force the data to go away from what the Bible supports.

In essence, I am testing God with my research. At the same time, I am testing my assumptions. Testing our assumptions should also be part of science. The data can often go in several different directions, its the assumptions we make that determine which direction the data will take us. So, in this process, I am asking the question: “Can a scientific understanding of the data be obtained that fits with the Biblical story of Creation and the Global Flood?”…