Oh, okay. But I'm still not sure I understand your position, because what I see contains a significant contradiction. On the one hand you say you believe neither creationism nor evolution is science, but on the other hand you've offered scientific arguments in support of creationist positions, e.g., hydroplate theory in this thread, a Tiktaalik analysis in another thread, etc.
If you really believe creationism isn't science, then arguing for it on the basis of science makes no sense.
--Percy