Undoubtedly, one of the major factors which contribute to the immense appeal of the Darwinian framework is that, with all its deficiencies, the Darwinian model is still the only model of evolution ever proposed which invokes well-understood physical and natural processes as the causal agencies of evolutionary change. Creationist theories invoke frankly supernatural causes Darwinism remains, therefore, the only truly scientific theory of evolution. It was the lack of any obvious scientific or any obvious scientific alternative which was one of its great attractions in the nineteenth century and has remained one of its enduring strengths ever since 1859. Reject Darwinism and there is, in effect, no scientific theory of evolution. Denten's example proves that significant differences and disagreements still remain within the scientific community over evolutionary theory.
History proves that scientific paradigms change with the seasons.
Because of the many problems inherent within evolutionism, I reject it as a reasonable explanation of human origin. This statement should not be misconstrued to imply that I reject the historicity of Noah and the flood. I completely embrace Genesis 6-9, as I do the rest of the Bible, as a trustworthy account of past events. Walter Hearn legitimately questions why creation scientists would even bother to attempt to discredit the accuracy of dating techniques, since they believe that God created the earth with the appearance of age. Numbers, The Creationists, 206.