I did not call you a liar, stu.
believing that you reinterpret science to fit in with your presuppositions would be correct.
if that is calling you a liar , it is only what you say about creationists when they present their evidences. whats good for the goose.......
so how can the scientific model- ie repeatable etc- be used to claim you are right about the past?.

musket- of course the atheist can have morality without a law book , but what is his ultimate authority , and what is to stop that morality being variable?
and please do not imply [if you are] that I am excusing abusers whether they be clerics or atheists.

shimrod which scientists think they know everything?
no- what we have is scientists that have presupositions that influence their research. it might be creation, ID ,or evolutionary.
the latter camp, I suspect hold the most power.

apologies grishka, for wrong spelling.
but what about those theologians who have examined evolutionism and found it cannot be taken seriously, not to mention scientists!

the argument from authority cuts either way.