Mind reading. And, as it happens, false. AND irrelevant to the particular point of suggesting that special creation (or whatever) is analogous to transubstantiation.
I avoid conversations with people who leap to conclusions and base rudeness on the conclusions to which they leap. Conversations with people who switch from one point to another are fruitless.
There seemed to be a false analogy offered between transubstantiation and matters of scientific "law". My remarks were addressed to that false analogy, which I think you brought up, not to the larger question.
But I think I may be seeing a demonstration of the topic of the original post. I don't know why these conversations have to get so heated.
The analogy is not false; it is quite apropos. It illustrates the problem exactly:
Catholics reject the literal truth of Genesis because "that is what the white trash believe." There is no other legitimate reason to do this. Otherwise they would reject transubstantiation as well.