Phat writes:
For the YEC, I ask if there should be a different definition as to what science is apart from critical thinking and the scientific method.
The user "Faith" has rather transparent reasons for wanting to change the rules of science, and those reasons are that Faith can't win a debate if we use the rules of science that have been around for the last 200 years.
We are told that it is "unfair" if YEC's have to follow the rules of science or the scientific method. Of course, the truth is just the opposite.
To help illustrate this point, let's look at my out-of-luck Seattle Mariners (an American baseball team for those outside of the US). They are below 0.500, and kind of stink this year. If I were to use the YEC definition of fair, then the Seattle Mariners should be allowed to change the rules when they are at bat. They should get 10 outs and 8 strikes per at bat so that they can win. Afterall, if they can't win then it isn't fair, according to YEC's. Right?
What YEC's can't seem to understand is that changing the rules is completely UNFAIR. We define cheating as those who try to change or circumvent the rules so they can win. It is YEC's who want the mantle of science in order to make their beliefs look believable. If they want to earn that mantle, then they have to follow the rules.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.