Many scientists believe evolution and an old world is the answer because there they see evidence of it, and there is little to no scientific evidence to any another answer.
Many reputable scientists across many fields of study see evidence for creation, but that often gets ignored because there is always a bias against any non-mainstream theory.
There is evidence that suggests creation may have taken place but it gets ignored the same way the scientists who mention it get ignored.
There seems to be this impression of some people that people who believe in an old world and evolution are scared that creationism is an answer. People who look to science for an answer are looking for reasons, and are open to new ideas. They aren't scared of them.
Yet very few scientists (or people for that matter) actually look at it objectively and allow all theories to compete on the same level. Several people have done it here in this thread when they say "evolution is science, but creation isn't" without considering there is scientific evidence to suggest either (or even both, as some people here have said) could be true.
As jtp said, it is as though the evolutionists all put themselves on this pedestal and look down on anyone else who has other theories or ideas. There is no need for them to consider the scientific merit of those other theories or ideas, as they are above that.
no its because scientists rely on evidence. when we learn new things and evidence changes, scientists go where the evidence takes them. They always have and they always will.
You really believe this? You're putting a lot of faith in scientists if you do, because it doesn't always happen. There are plenty of theories and ideas held by a minority of scientists who present evidence for them but the rest of the scientific community largely ignores it.
Most of the otherwise educated population of America follows mainstream science like sheep without considering anything might be different than what the mainstream suggests.
If scientists really wanted the answers to things, they'd consider alternative theories and the evidence for them alongside the mainstream ideas. They wouldn't shun any mention of competing theories, as they absolutely do in many cases.