[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your engaging reply!

Indeed, a proper redefinition of "science" would include the wisdom of the Greeks and myths which are likely stories. Theories from all the historical sciences are myths because they are theories of continuums based on quantizations.

I seriously wonder about this myself, A-G. Is the theory a kind of "Procrustean bed" into which evidence is "forced" to fit? Further, parts of it seem to have a mythical quality -- e.g., the Common Ancestor.

Indeed. If science would only give up the presupposition of naturalism then there could be no complaints that the conclusion drawn was kluged to fit the orthodoxy.

[malakhi]

Indeed, a proper redefinition of "science" would include the wisdom of the Greeks and myths which are likely stories.

I thought you wanted to make science "epistemologically pure". How does redefining science to include myths and metaphysics, all untestable and unfalsifiable, contribute to the epistemological purity of science?

Theories from all the historical sciences are myths

Theories from the 'historical' sciences have evidence to support them.

If science would only give up the presupposition of naturalism then there could be no complaints that the conclusion drawn was kluged to fit the orthodoxy.

The only ones complaining seem to be those who want science to give up the presupposition of naturalism.