Why Creation Science Is Science
Two of the most basic requirements of the scientific method are that scientific theories must be testable and able to predict future discoveries. Evolutionary scientists say that creationism is not scientific because it fails these requirements.
Their claims, however, are without merit. For example, creation scientist Dr. Russell Humphries made several predictions about future findings in a paper published in a scientific journal in 1984. He began with the biblical description of the Earth and the planets having been created roughly six thousand years ago and that in the beginning all the planets had a magnetic field. Based on the rate that the Earth's magnetic field is decaying, small planets like Mercury and Mars should have no magnetic field left. However, the strong fields they had at their creation should be recorded in their rocks. He also predicted the strengths of the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune. Later, Voyager 2 confirmed his predictions. Later on, the Mars Global Surveyor confirmed that the rocks of Mars do record a strong magnetic field in the past, just as predicted.
While these findings support the Bible's repeated insistence that the creation is young, they provide us with another lesson. As in the past, there are still scientists who believe in creation, who publish scientific papers and even live to see their theoretical predictions confirmed.