Creationism's Legacy: Anti-intellectualism, page 3

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by pieman

Show me this. I've not ever seen it this way. Evolution is taught in schools as fact because we know it happens, what is also taught as part of evolution is all the bits where it says "It is thought that" or "Scientists believe". Theories that are held by the scientific community will be taught, not as fact but as science.

evolution cannot be shown, mutation can be shown. the reason i say it is taught as if it were fact is because it is not made clear the extent to which holes exist in the theory. i am not a teacher, i may be incorrect, but i believe i am not. the holes weren't pointed out to me in science.

Also, hate to point this out to ya but you have been ignorant. Not only did a few of us have to explain the different between theory and hypothesis but the whole scientific method.

hate to point this out to you but i was asking you to expand on your misleading and dishonest spin. i was pointing out the spin involved in scientific proposal. was i too subtle for you? let me explain seeing as you didn't work it out all by yourself.

the difference between the usage of a word in the general population, students for instance, and the scientific community is very important in regard to education. explaining something to a lay person using misleading professional terms is duplicitous. requiring anyone to make an informed decision on something after offering only one perspective is duplicitous. providing the corroborative evidence while obscuring the opposing evidence is duplicitous. by having you and others provide examples to this effect by asking leading questions is more constructive to my argument.

i think perhaps you missed the reasoning for why i pointed out the attack, my point wasn't that i am not ignorant and shouldn't be attacked (ignorance is a state of not knowing, i am not ashamed that i do not know everything), my point was that i was attacked for ignorance, or rather that there was an attempt to diminish me because of my ignorance.

this is typical of the psudo-science priests of our culture. a real man of science shouldn't be afraid of questions and should be delighted to be given an opportunity to educate.

as regard to off topic posts, you are just as guilty, or more so, of de-railing the thread, despite my having stated it more than once, you have not expanded on the point i have repeatedly made, a single minded attempt to put forward only one perspective is anti-intellectual, not the attempt to promote creationism. not offering an alternative nor a quantification of the probability of a theory is anti-intellectual.