Trust to 'review' creationist view

Ridiculing unsubstantiated and nonsense views based on a work of fiction that was written no later than 1,900 ago is exactly right. It doesn't even stand up to the basic tests imposed in genealogy.

This is a sad but expected outcome.Well done NT for trying to do what the evolutionary community should have been doing themselves - i.e. encourage debate of controversial issues. The statement "There is clearly no scientific debate about the age of the earth or how the Causeway stones were formed" is itself clearly wrong. the debate rages in spite of evolutions attempt to stifle it.Why have the evolutionists comments been so angry? The reason is not because They think that Creationist scientists are wrong, it is because their world view is under attack. This is a normal human response which scientists should all be vigilant against. Ridiculing and silencing opposing views is not the way to find truth. The fact that such anger has been demontrated is strong evidence that the evolutionists actually believe their worldview is under very real threat in spite of their protestations of "there is no debate". Their feelings are understandable. If you only hear one side of an argument then of course you will think it is right, but I would urge them to have a look at the mountain of evidence for the creationist side of the debate. There are plenty of places to try on the web e.g. 'answers in genesis and'creation.com which has thousands of articles written by PhD scientists .Have a look for yourself.

@ Steve Both interpretations? Sorry but this silly claim that there is a debate between science and the extreme creationist view of your particular religion is entirely in your own head. There Are the facts and there are some interesting creation myths (Hundreds of them) yours is only one of those hundreds and there is no debate.

Another example of the closing off of any kind of interpretation other than the one that science, the new dogma, approves of. The NT is not an academic, scientific body but a public body for the benefit of all the public, not all of whom believe that an "old world" view of origins has been proved. So sorry to see this caving in to the insidious pressure of the high priests of science.

There is no debate, Steve. The Bible is a legitimate reference as Táin Bó Cuailnge. Both written by men, interpreted by men but only one is purported to be the truth. Tell me where geology features in the Bible? If it is the duty of the National Trust to present information on how the Giant's Causeway was formed then they have a duty to present it without resorting to mumbo-jumbo. If they give credence to religious fundamentalism then they have to give full credence to Fionn mac Cumhaill and Benandonner. Now that would seriously be a nonsense. Thanks to Nelson McCausland Northern Ireland has appeared worldwide as being full of nutters. You might as well give legitimacy to scientology while your at it....