Another Display of Religious Scientists

Once again I was having a discussion with my evolutionary coworker, this time about the moon. I appealed to him about several different facts about the moon that would lead us to believe that the moon and earth are only about 6,000 years old.

The next day he told me he had looked up stuff on the moon the previous evening. He told me that there were six theories about how we got our moon and the age of the moon. So I asked him if any of the six theories was that God created the moon and that it was young. None of the six theories posited the possibility of divine intervention.

This once again demonstrates the religious bias of "scientists". They are able to form theories, taking this data to substantiate their theory, yet all of the theories are atheistic theories. There is one place they cannot go in the interpretation of the data, and that is to God and a creation. Why? Because their religious presuppositions rule out this possibility. They are obligated by their religious beliefs to not even acknowledge the possibility of one theory (creation) while not having enough data to substantiate any of their own theories. Yet if a creationist took all of the evidence I bet all of it would fit perfectly into a young creation model. But thats not allowed. Why? Is it science or religion that prevents it? Well, science would allow all theories and then the theory which best explains all of the evidence would be "the most scientific". Yet to disallow a theory because it is not a naturalistic theory, because it appeals to something beyond what your religious beliefs will allow, well that isn't science, its religious intolerance. And such intolerance is vibrantly displayed on "scintific" websites such as the one my coworker visited.