Good post Iron, it pretty much describes every weakness in any cult's argument defending their fantasy stories. The biggest loophole in their rationale being #1 from your post:
1: Foundational Bias: In Foundational Bias, you admit bias towards a certain conclusion before making an argument. Foundational bias is not based on evidence or logic, but it is instead based upon personal preference and belief. Therefore, foundational bias opens the door to all logical fallacies.
This is the achilles' heal in their argument, and one which they always fail to address. Rational thinkers don't oversubscribe to any theory, we simply say "we don't know that yet". We state what is known with the latest evidence and that it is subject to change upon further discovery.
These cult followers are shackled by the fact that they already claim to know the answer. By restricting their arguments in such a way they are left to deal with the inconsistencies that are pretty much undisputed and chip away at their illogical house of cards. I must admit, they have quite an imagination to come up with some of their theories, many based on science that a few years earlier they didn't even agree with but has become so mainstream they now can not ignore.
Imagine two investigators trying to solve a plane crash. One believes in finding the evidence to know why the airplane crashed. Everyday he finds clues which he uses to put the puzzle together. If he never solves the puzzle, then he says there is not enough evidence to ascertain what happened.
The other investigator believes he knows what happened but has to find evidence to prove his vision and at the same time ignore any evidence which proves him wrong, regardless of how logical and undisputed such findings might be. It is inevitable for this investigator to resort to bending and stretching the truth (ie, lying) in order to continue with his position. It would be a huge loss of face and income if he were wrong, making it all the more desperate of an attempt.
