Why do YECs refuse to do real science?

[Breckmin]

Naturalistic assumptions is all there is to them, they are not allowed anything else.

Not allowed??? Who is stopping them? Did someone say years ago
that everything had to be natural and everyone else followed along
without realizing that requiring natural conclusions is circular reasoning?

If you start with agnosticism and look at deductions that are 100%
(all information needs a source, all factories are build and don't self-
assemble, order does not form from random unless it is already part
of an existing process, etc)then you are allowed to make implications
which are not naturalistic

and you are not stuck with circular reasoning. Deduction is
superior to induction and circular reasoning.

Sorry to butt in but I wanted you to know what you were dealing with here.

I've been here before. Learning about inductions and circular
reasoning is the only way to dissect your way out of the deception.

Clearly panina and Homo sapiens do not share a common ancestor.
This is what the rest of the world who is not stuck in 10's of thousands
of inductions can actually see plainly without agenda.

Universal common descent is truly a fairy tale (for so called scientists
who are actually studying and observing creation).

Good thing there are at least a thousand scientists in the world who
reject fairy tales and actually study real science. Observation without
the agenda of fairy tales.

Michael

 

[The Barbarian]

Not allowed??? Who is stopping them? Did someone say years ago
that everything had to be natural and everyone else followed along
without realizing that requiring natural conclusions is circular reasoning?

You've been a bit misled here. Science doesn't say that everything is natural. It is merely unable to consider anything but nature. The method can only approach things that are perceptable to the senses, that can be repeatedly measured. This does not deny that there can be other things. It only means that science can't deal with them. Scientists who have religious beliefs much use other ways of knowing about them.

Deduction is superior to induction and circular reasoning.

The scientific method is inductive. But it works, and works much better than any deductive system, as far as understanding nature goes. That's all science is good for, but it is exceedingly good at what it does do.

You reason, most of the time, by induction yourself. There is very, very little in your life you do by deductive proof.

It's just that you don't recognize it when you do it.