That is a “red herring” as you well know. I could have been more precise by stating that germs are invisible to the naked eye. During the early days of medicine bloodletting was common and there was an elaborate practice and theory behind it. It makes for interesting reading. In terms of the practice, many people recovered after bloodletting, “proving” the validity of the theory behind it. As an interesting sidelight, bloodletting using leeches is practiced again today based on modern scientific theories. At this time I can’t remember exactly what ailments leeching is designed to cure. The theory and practice of bloodletting was so prevalent as the answer to virtually everything that early physicians were known as “leeches.”
”Of course, you're just throwing that out as a red herring, because comparing the scientific method that brought about germ theory to "scientific creationism" is apples and oranges.”
Before making assertions, it would be well to do research on the genesis of the knowledge that germs cause infections. It is not a theory, but an established fact. It was established by the ability of scientists to create and reproduce infections using the germs that caused them.
The problem with evolutionary theory is that is does not appear to be reproducible – at least until now. Therefore, alternative hypothesis regarding the development and creation of living things should be entertained. The refusal to entertain alternative theories, but to dismiss them with ridicule, is the mark more of a true believe than of an objective observer.