[RegulatorCountry]

Your comprehension of my sentence leaves a bit to be desired. Proceeding from the near term (here on FR), to midterm (all my life), to long term (since Darwin's time), is a perfectly logical progression.

Now, if we've devolved into juvenile "gotchas" over punctuation and spelling, perhaps it's time to bring our exchange to a close. If not, I'll suggest that science was unhampered prior to the advent of enforced anti-theism. It would be unhampered now.

[tacticalogic]

Perhaps.

There doesn't seen to be any possibility for a determination of unbiased research. If the conclusion of the results of research produce a conclusion that contradicts a literal interpretation of Genesis, that conclusion is held as evidence that there was an a priori assumption that the literal interpretation was not true before the research was conducted.

There doesn't seem to be any way to submit evidence of research being approached with the assumption that the literal interpreation of Genesis may or may not be true, and having the results produce evidence that it is not.