Why Creation Science is Pseudoscience With No Ifs Ands or Buts
About It  I had previously argued that science assumes there is
a natural explanation for everything it investigates precisely
because this is the only way it can work. If natural
explanations for events were not possible because God regularly
intervened in the world, then science would not be possible at
all. To be more precise, I argued that to the degree God
intervenes in the universe then to that same degree science is
not possible. But given the massive amount of knowledge acquired
by science it's crystal clear God doesn't intervene at all. The
very basis of science is predicated on a non-miraculous world
order. So we must choose between God or science. We cannot have
both. Undeterred, Vincent Torley at Uncommon Descent has written
a couple of rebuttals to my continued defense of this. Since I
usually try to keep my posts to a minimum I won't be responding
to everything he wrote. But I do want to respond with what I
consider to be a tour de f