"I wouldn't accept that if I were inclined toward Creationism. Lie down with dogs . . . " - RightWhale
That's because you frame the debate as Science vs Creationism or Science vs Religion. While Creationist frame the debate as the Word of God vs the current extremely limited often faulty scientific interpretation. Creationists aren't against science at all. We're not against scientific observation, we're not against forming hypotheses or scientific testing (as long as it doesn't do something stupid like violate the sanctity of human life).
It's just that we know in the end, that the scientific explanation must match what God said happened. To assume otherwise, would be like taking the word of a modern literary critic over the word of William Shakespeare, about what Shakespeare's plays meant. The critic might be educated about literary forms and historical content, but his knowledge on the subject pales in comparison to the original Author.
“It’s just that we know in the end, that the scientific explanation must match what God said happened.”
This statement is the problem with the whole notion of “Christian science”. You have decided on what the outcome must be before performing the experiment. This is the very antithesis of science and rational inquiry.
For whatever reason, be it fear, a personal weakness, or simply indoctrination, you have come to the erroneous conclusion that when science disagrees with your book, it’s the science that is wrong. A rational person would recognize that it is the book which is wrong and would then come to the unavoidable conclusion that it is therefore NOT the word of god.
In other words, who are you going to believe, the Bible or your lying eyes?
It's not science if it must match a preconception. Your point is entirely anti-science if you require a biblical review when determining an outcome of an experiment. Nature is not obligated to follow the Bible so why should our experimental results?
It's just that we know in the end, that the scientific explanation must match what God said happened.
You are choosing dogma, scripture, and divine revelation over the scientific method and scientific findings?
Your claim that you "aren't against science at all" is totally inaccurate. You want to alter the scientific method, and the results of scientific investigations, at your whim, accepting some results and rejecting others according to your religious beliefs. And then you have the gall to claim you are not against science?
I guess you must be referring to creation "science" rather than real science, eh?