Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd)

[Ashendant]

Methodological naturalism is only used in the operational sciences. Creationists use it too in the operational sciences. We are talking about origins sciences here. A supernatural explanation in origins sciences is completely legitimate.

That's arguable

It's not arguable. It's laughable. Science makes no distinction between origin and operations. If it happened, or could happen, it is in purview of the one unified methodological naturalistic science. If you claim something to be supernatural, it means it never happened, nor could ever happen, but you are pretending it did happen; or it did happen, or could happen, but you are contented with being an ignoramus as far as that part of the methodological naturalistic science is concerned. Pretending something that never happened actually happened is not legitimate in real science. Being contented with being an ignoramus is not legitimate in real science. So a supernatural explanation in science is not legitimate in any circumstances.

What a supernatural explanation is in "origin science" is relevant because "origin science" is bullshit, not science.

That was not what i meant, what i meant is that claiming supernatural origins is stupid, because if someone that is supernatural is found to be true, it never was supernatural and always was natural