One thing that's always puzzled me is the creationist's ability to put their personal notions of science above science's itself. This despite never having studied the subjects formally themselves.
Faith, for example, has personal theories about geology, molecular genetics, evolution, palaeontology, and more - despite having no education at all in any of those subjects.
She really does believe that she can make stuff up in the moment and that the stuff she makes up is better than the work performed and published by real scientists working for lifetimes in the field.
At least part of this must be a total cluelessness about how science is actually done, the standard of evidence required to make a scientific claim and the necessity to fit the claim inside a pre-existing body of knowledge. Any claim that is inconsistent with other established findings requires substantial confirmation.
Having fairly recently published a scientific paper on a relatively simple idea, that took several years of real hard slog plus another year of review and criticism, this struck a chord with me
quote:
Other investigations of the phenomenon, such as "Why People Fail to Recognize Their Own Incompetence" (2003), indicate that much incorrect self-assessment of competence derives from the person's ignorance of a given activity's standards of performance.[3] Dunning and Kruger's research also indicates that training in a task, such as solving a logic puzzle, increases people's ability to accurately evaluate how good they are at it.[4]
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.