They say they are persecuted, but that is not true. I am all for a hypothesis being reviewed critically. Have they been posting their hypothesis to scientific journals to be reviewed? If so is it of suffecient scientific method to pass the editor of said journal to be published for world wide review? No scientific journal will publish just anything, as it would put into question their professional approach to the community. An editor should review any paper submitted to it to ensure it meets the bare minimal scientific requirements (can you make predictions from it? Is it repeatable and testable? Is it logically consistent or slam full of fallacies? ETC..). Can you imagine a scientific journal that is slam full of UFO's, Elves, and other wackadoodle speculations? Nobody would bother reading it anymore. Surely these creationists, if they are SCIENTISTS, will understand and approve of this pre-screening if they honestly wish to be taken seriously.
If they can get that far, then they deserve to have their hypothesis thrown into the gauntlet. If someone rips their hypothesis to shreds, they cannot scream "persecution", as any hypothesis goes through this gauntlet by the world scientific community. Asking for special circumstances is NOT what scientists do, at least not good ones in my opinion. If you have to ask for special circumstances, then it is a red flag that your hypothesis is speculation at best and flat out conjecture at worst in my opinion.
If they can get that far, then they deserve to have their hypothesis thrown into the gauntlet. If someone rips their hypothesis to shreds, they cannot scream "persecution", as any hypothesis goes through this gauntlet by the world scientific community. Asking for special circumstances is NOT what scientists do, at least not good ones in my opinion. If you have to ask for special circumstances, then it is a red flag that your hypothesis is speculation at best and flat out conjecture at worst in my opinion.
