Mythodologists, you know who you are. Yes you, the ones trying to usurp science's mojo for your religion.
When it comes to understanding reality who is acting rationally and honestly—who has the mojo? Is it the "show me intellectually" methodologist, who has faith in the scientific method, or the "show me emotionally" mythodologist, who has faith in religion?
Science advances, not based on your feelings, nor your understanding, nor your acceptance. Science plods along according the available evidence. Religion by definition can't change—i.e. how can you change god's law? However does anyone deny that believers mine their books for laws that fit their various lifestyles?
Science has a self-adjusting mechanism that keeps it honest. That does not mean all scientists are honest but the system in which they function is.
Can mythodologists call their system honest? Does religion self-adjust when a new discovery invalidates a previous held understanding? Would the believer change a core belief based on empirical evidence?
Ironically religious creeds implore the believer to be honest except when it comes to their own dogma. Show irreverence to the most trivial tenet of your faith at your own peril.