Original sentence: Creationists point to articles such as "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use" by Answers in Genesis as evidence of self-correction within creationist circles; however, the fundamental precept itself, that of an inerrant Biblical account of Earth history, is deemed to be non-negotiable and non-correctable.Critics of Young Earth creationism have established a project to identify examples of so-called "quote mining" by creationists.Many mainstream scientists regard this as a misuse and/or misrepresentation of their work.The leading creationist organisations, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and Answers in Genesis (AiG), require their members to pledge their support for Biblical inerrancy
Edited sentence: Creationists also point to articles such as "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use" by Answers in Genesis as evidence of self-correction within creationist circles; however, the fundamental precept itself, that of an inerrant Biblical account of Earth history, is deemed to be non-negotiable and non-correctable.Creationists argue that most practical science is operational rather than historical, thus has no bearing on the controversy.Creationists claim that they usually make it perfectly clear that the quotee is an evolutionist who by implication would not agree with the creationist conclusion.However, some evolutionists claim, "At times, the creationists criticize other creationists more strongly and more accurately than their opponents do.However, the leading creationist organisations, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and Answers in Genesis (AiG), emphasis the role of presuppositions, and are up-front about their adherence to Biblical inerrancy