This is frightening that we still can't resolve this simple, basic issue:
jar writes:
To do science you MUST be willing to abandon positions when the evidence demands.
Absolutely. 100% true.
Creationists can't do science because they will never revise or abandon certain things. That's fine.
Creationists can do other types of empirical investigation besides science to describe the in-depth natural history of the world. Given the history of success of producing
useful theories in science vs. other methodoligies, it's UNLIKELY that creationists can come up with better theories than science. But, since creationists CANNOT use science to come up with theories, then that's what creationists are left with.
Science is revisionist. Creationism has many "fixed points", many conclusions that are fixed and not open to revision. They can't do science. Creationists, please, just abandon the claim that you can do science. It doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means that you're at a large disadvantage when it comes to producing sensical theories of the natural world.
Faith (or other creationists), can this be agreed on and finally accepted? It seems to be such a simple point...
(P.S. I'm replying to Jar's message, but I hope it's clear I'm addressing creationists. And not 'revisionist creationists', like jar ).