scombrid

<a href="http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story137138.html" target="_blank">that wacky false dichotomy persists</a>

Everywhere I turn I see this nonsense. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Hastur

Criminy.

What part of 'science class' to these assholes not understand?

Camaban

everyone should fear lies to the uninformed

why?

because unless contradicting evidence is pushed into their faces, people are liable to believe whatever they're told first.

(You don't disbelieve something unless you have a reason to, and going by the scientific literacy of America, they'll believe anything)

Lizard

Even *if* contradictory evidence is pushed in their faces, human beings tend to believe the first thing they hear. I found out about this in a class about brain/mind functions.

That's why it is more productive for pro-science people to focus on folks who are on the fence, rather than those who are already IDers or creationists.

Once a core idea has become anchored, it only attracts to it information that is compatible with it. However, when a person is still searching, s/he is open to new information.

Albion

Oh, good, the old "if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear" argument. Six million Jews might have had something to say about that if they'd been left alive long enough to say it.

It doesn't matter whether evolution is true or not; the thing scientists fear is skillful propaganda from the "the end justifies the means" crowd, whose agenda is entirely religious and political and who will do what it takes to foist their worldview on the whole of society and don't care if they destroy science in the process. After all, this isn't about science as far as they're concerned, and they have no respect for it but they do have a worrying degree of fear and loathing. That's what scientists are afraid of.

beoba

Are evolutionists practicing true science or religious intolerance and discrimination?

Are creationists practicing true science by deriving theories from evidence or are their minds already made up? What about "evolutionists"? Are you mad that they dont automatically accept your idea just because you like it? They expect evidence, and all you're providing are weak arguments against evolution, which in no way can be used as evidence for creationism.

Why do you think "evolutionists" would care about social aspects of their work? They base their ideas on facts that are applicable to the real world, not some 2000 year old book.

Duvenoy

I no longer get upset over this nonsense. Life is too short and my ulcer too flammable to bother with it.

Science is prevailing and will continue to do so. The evidence of this is found in the rising volumn of the squealing of the opposition.

doov

frostymama

In a way I feel sorry for people like that. I was duped into believing in Creationism when my (public) high school Biology teacher taught it to us. I know it isn't much, but I was actually the co-captain of our Science academic team and I still fell for it. I can imagine that it would be very easy to fool the average believer who has no science background.

Thankfully I saw that Creationism was nothing more than religious propaganda by my first semester in college. I still feel really stupid for falling for it.

Wyz_sub10

I've always wondered what the hell an "evolutionist" is? (Yes, I understand the definition in the context it is used)

What I mean is, the term implies the notion that evolution is somehown central to a way of thinking or a career dedication. It is neither. I know of biologists, geneticists, paleantologists, geologists, and embryologists...but no evolutionists.

What's the pay for the Chair of Evolutiony at Stanford anyway?

[ September 28, 2002: Message edited by: Wyz_sub10 ]</p>

RufusAtticus

Evolutionary Biologists is term you are looking for.