If you say so. In dealing with the physical world and human knowledge there are ways I tend to be less extreme. Eyewitness testimony to crime, inasmuch it deals with historic events, is subject to error. It does not enjoy repeated testing either. Human motives add to the potential for lies and, as a result, injustice. I am not as inclined as you to put courtroom activities on the level of "science."
Geology has a present world to observe and document. So does Astronomy. There are records (written in human language) showing observations of previous generations that are valuable in learning about the earth's history and the motions of heavenly bodies. When I question the claims and validity of evolutionism as "science," it is the unobserved, unrecorded assumption that all life is derivative of a common ancestor that I have in mind, or that order can arise apart from an intelligent agent.
In that regard, not unlike liberalism, evolutionism is not content to be called what it is: weak history and strong philosophy.
I bet you aren't willing to let criminals go free because forensic science doesn't meet your high standards.
When I question the claims and validity of evolutionism as "science," it is the unobserved, unrecorded assumption that all life is derivative of a common ancestor that I have in mind, or that order can arise apart from an intelligent agent.
I thought that's what you meant. the methodology of science is fine as long as it confines itself to sending criminals to execution, but let it declare certainty on biological history, after 150 years of investigation, and you are all over it.
Evolution leaves historical tracks. Both morphological, geological, and via DNA. The Chugabrew method of only allowing human witnessed science is a handy tool allowing you to ignore the facts supporting evolution. But otherwise it has no justification.
Your biblical interpretation does not see evolution spelled out in those few hundred words of Genesis 1 and 2, so you believe that God didn't do it. Whatever.
What I find more interesting is you insistence on a young earth. Now you've thrown out nuclear physics, relativity, geology. And to the extent that you've disallowed counting seasonal layers in Antarctic ice and the geologic layers, you've thrown out the fundamentals of accounting too.
The ability of people to close their minds so as to allow them to keep an unsupported religious idea is just amazing. I'll never wonder why some democrats are so pig headed again.