Excuse me, excuse me, can you please recount the scientific method...list six steps...starting with the first, and then tell me that isn't science.
Read the requirements for the CRS I listed in post #114. That is not science as it does not follow the scientific method.
You cannot start with a goal of, for example, supporting young earth and global flood and filter all data through that filter and call it science. That is what creationists are doing, and in fact must do, because otherwise there is no way the data supports their position.
Don't bother asking me about those six steps. If you can't see where the CRS and general creationist positions violate the scientific method you wouldn't understand the rest of the details either.
(Any questions on radiocarbon dating? That's something I do a lot of.)