A Year In Intelligent Design

You have built an entire edifice of imaginary pseudoscience and alternative outcomes based on guesses and assumptions you pull directly out of your ass.

This is, I think, pretty rare. The set of facts often have multiple possible interpretations. Then there are ongoing arguments, sometimes not friendly, about those conclusions.Only further facts may finally force a consensus conclusion that may become universal.I think you have all that in mind with what you subsequently wrote.

Not only do the journals (ie science) find insufficient evidence for a young earth, it also finds enormous qualities of evidence for an old earth. It's long been settled science and won't be overturned by pure belief. There is no such thing as YEC science, if YEC was science, we'd just call it science. Science doesn't care where evidence comes from or what people believe about it, it only cares about the evidence. Your problem is that you have no science to publish, not that the publishers won't accept it.

I think you have to find an error in something pretty important to get a Nobel prize - if they handed them out every time someone fixed a mistake there'd be a lot more laureates.Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

Get ready to ignore me, dear. Keyword: Assumptions. They certainly won't accept the Bible as evidence if that's what you mean. Logically I can agree with that. If I were to become a Biblical Innerrantist instead, I would have to ignore my own intuition. Which may be what I need to do, in the final analysis. The jury is out.