Creationism vs. Materialist Scientism*...neither provide a complete satisfactory answer. But talk about a biased headline! A little self-congratulatory.
* Science is a method of inquiry, not a monolithic philosophical perspective on reality. Scientism is a descriptor for the use of science to describe philosophical matters. Unfortunately, too many mix up the terms.
Creationists aren't a block of people that believe in all the points listed above. It's messier than this article portrays. Many don't really think about it all that much but prefer the religious explanation by default. Some are more considerate of the possibilities but don't buy the materialist perspective.
So, is the accepted "reality" one in which there is no intelligence behind the creation of the universe? That it all happened by accident and evolution only progresses by means of accidental but beneficial mutations and natural selection? Any belief in a non-human intelligence behind the creation of galaxies, stars, planets, and life is simply woo and the real reality is a lifeless blob of matter, churning through chemical reactions, that is just so immense and long-lived that the reality we observe in and around us, is simply an emergent phenomenon caused by a "happy accident" of nature?
What exactly is this "reality" that all the smart kids ascribe to? Is my description accurate?
= new reply since forum marked as read