Most people tend to look at things and ideas only through a set of mental filters, like how using various lens attachments on a high end camera can dramatically alter the finished photo image. Sometimes the result is radically unreal. The idea I'm going after is we all too often want to read into something what we want to see. The same is true for all scientists, who while many claim they never examine data evidence from some preconceived objective, the real scientists do like engineers of medicines. A need arises, and the best knowledge is applied to create new knowledge, resulting in a new cure or treatment. None blindly mix chemicals in hopes of chancing upon a desirable product.
The generally supposed age of the earth and universe, the possibility of the events of Genesis 1 occurring within a matter of 24 hour earth days, thoughts leading some to believe man evolved from some ancestor also linked to the ape line, evolution in general all stands today based on some interesting hypotheses that were studied, finding enough evidence to elevate those hypotheses into science theory status. However, much guessing is included, assumptions abounding, facts still being handled unfairly because of too many mental filters. Evolutionist-minded scientists are in fact indoctrinated from an early age, as we were too, but at an alarming intensity at the university level. They are trained not to depart from a standard way of filtering ideas. Standardization of processes is a very good idea for some things, like making antibiotics that are safe and effective because manufacturers obey the standards.
Not long ago scientists in general had no quarrel with the Genesis account, able to look at science and see God's hand in creation. Then the atheist movement among scientists grew such that the universities and lower schools began teaching perspectives that eventually blocked references to the Bible concerning science matters. They didn't change the truth, though.
Today there is a revival among scientists, sometimes all lumped together as "Creation Scientists", though some don't go on record as having an opinion about creation. It happens now that the work they do sometimes supports the creation account and a young earth age. Some of those scientists have stepped to the big plate to defy a major threat from academia, risking their careers and good name among peers. Some have openly identified themselves as being Christian. Among those are scientists who are taking a new look at old data, and like an evolutionist biologist looking through evolution glasses, that ridicule Genesis believers, Christians are daring to examine from a perspective "What if Genesis is true?" An amazing body of knowledge is growing on the side of special creation opposed to evolution over any time period. I have been charged up reading articles on cosmology, from a Christian cosmologist perspective, by people like Dr. Russel Humphreys, and Dr. Jason Lisle, and other scientists successfully challenging previously accepted ideas concerning age of the universe. In looking them up you will of course find rash skeptics who work against such scientists by presenting challenges that would cost millions/billions of dollars to answer, while not accepting similar challenges requiring them to prove old theories. All scientists are expected to just get in line and accept the works already paid for.
The truth is truth is hidden from unbelievers. Satan is the one blinding them because they refuse to listen to God. Rather than enjoy a real sunset in all it's natural splendor, some prefer a computer model of it.
Jim
