creation.com é seguro?

This Is just another religious cult site who pushes their beliefs as facts, attacking anybody who does not agree with them. They idolize the Bible as infallible and condemn anybody who do not agree with their doctrine, like any fundamentalist fanatic. They vehemently attack anybody who speaks the truth about the danger and poison of fundamentalism, with its fear-mongering and shame approaches. This sounds like the doctrine of Demons or a religious cult.

This is a formal paper based on historical research and analysis. How can anyone in his or her right mind rated this web article at the lowest of rating in term of trust? Apparently people, such as those who are atheists and/or darwinian-evolutionists are very bias by their ideology. And clearly the reputation of WOT is gone with the winds. Also, I thought rating for WOT is to help us identify websites that harbor malwares, trojans and hidden viruses, i.e. bad and risky websites. And not about articles in which the content of ideology some people disagree with.

This site is being attacked by individuals and groups that don't agree with the truth on this website and therefore wants to discredit it by rating it negatively, because they are to lazy and judgmental to investigate the whole site and then take the easy way out by rating it on face value. It is total unethical behavior to discredit a site just because you're own personal views is in direct opposite with the views portrayed within the contents of a website and you don't have answers to the challenges brought up by the website  The negative ratings and accusations for this site is therefore a dishonest and cowardess covering for personal insecurities.   By who's standards, ethical or otherwise, is sites judged anyway? Who is it that weighs the motives and agendas of the people who discredits scientific websites like this. What authority does each rating has? The same people who discredits this site is also questionable in their own ethics and worldview that is not acceptable to many other.  These critics judge this site while they self has a questionable ethos and worldview. My view is that WOT should amend their criteria for rating websites only to point out the sites that really cause phisical and malware damage to computers while on the internet. Politics, religion, social and cultural subjects are for people to have the right to make their own responsible decisions and not decided for by ignorant websurfers who fears people away by negative ratings.  You have created a loophole through which peoples own worldviews can be openly attacked and discredited purely by clicking on a slider without properly considering the whole picture and thereby fear people away to not visit sites that carries a different color rating than green. This ratings is becoming useless without any moderating authority that can delete brainless comments.  .

these arguments seem very rationally sound to me (even if i didn't already believe the bible as truth). they are genuinely trying to uncover the truth through sound reasoning and evidence, and that all gets voided when people see christianity mentioned. what a shame.

NOTHING wrong with this website! MyWot seems to have many trolls who are more than happy to rate websites according to current "PC" standards. There is nothing harmful on this site. You may disagree with the information presented but there is nothing dangerous or misleading on this website.

it completely lacks neutrality and openly admits to confirmation basis of a western theistic biblical god within its mission statement and promotes non peer reviewed research as a positive due to unfounded claims of a global conspiracy against its faulty premise.

Who is threatened by the free exchange of ideas? Science should not be afraid of exploring alternative theories as to the origin of teh Universe. People against this site are obviously afraid to have their pet theories challenged. Good science should welcome controversy and inquiry, not try to stifle dissenting opinions.

There is lots of material for those with an evolutionary worldview to disagree with but that does not warrant a low rating for this site. Visitors to this site should, at minimum, take the time to read an article or two and see that they are well reasoned. The worst thing one can do is shut down the conversation before considering opposing views. Doing so is a sign of intellectual insecurity.