Who arbitrates such things in science? All scientists and pseudo-scientists claim to be "true scientists," just like the "no true Scotsman" theory.
One fundamental thing you are overlooking. There is actual physical evidence to support a theory. Who decides what evangelism means is subjective. That makes all the difference in the world.
In Christianity we have some creeds which have been accepted by both Catholics and Protestants; these creeds act as "arbiters" of fundamental theological questions. Catholics also have a Pope and Magesterium to arbitrate disputes.
LOL! Who is the Pope? The "vicar" of Christ??? That's as anti-biblical as it gets.
Science has none of these things, so one could argue that the problem is more acute in science than in theology.
Uh, no, it's called "
peer-review," a concept lost on most creationists.
Please refer to my quote.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams
™ Version 4.2
