You have a point there. The catholic church has the Adam and Eve creation myth yet they're managed to incorporate it with what actually happened without compromising the belief system.
The Catholic Church doesn't follow the story as literal. Creation in this case is in the form of evolution so no "first" man or woman. The end product was man. The steps to the evolution of man are part of this creation. This is quite different following a literal version of the story. It created a new version of the story in which parts are no longer representation of fact or history.
Dan went to the store. Dan went to the theater. Both stories feature Dan but are different as the place in which Dan went to is different. It is no longer the same story even if much of the story includes the same elements.
The exemption was the creation of man in my example, I wasn't making a case against science. By their very nature, miracles go against the expected order of things.
Belief in such things don't necessarily disqualify one from using the scientific method in their appropriate fields.
The creation of man is a religious view, it is not a scientific one. As I said if you allow miracles, personal experience, magic, whatever you want to call it become creditable evidence you open a flood gate to any and all views. None of these views can be observed in real time or an experiment nor is there physical evidence of such views. For example I could easily claim I had a vision from God in which the Man were really from another planet. The "Fall" of mankind was really about coming to Earth in a ship. The story was wrong. My view is just as acceptable as religious ones. Both lack a meaning to perform an experiment in which either the vision could be observed or can anyone have the vision themselves. I can not provide evidence of the ship nor planet we came from.
Sure a belief in such ideas does not disqualify one from using the scientific method in general. However it the belief itself is not subject to the same method as I have pointed out above.
Yeah. No lightening. Things just poppoing into existence without any rational explanation.
This is an over-simplification to hide behind. Here is one rational explanation. The "Lightning" could have introduced a foreign element in the form of energy. This energy could have jump started a chemical reaction in the goo, which remains undefined, in which amino-acids were formed. Since we have no definition of what goo I, just as you, can assume goo is anything.
Topic: Explaining evolution