I see the label as derogatory, while conveying a point valid of many who are active in this type of debate. It is still derogatory and incites responses which detract from the debate.
I would expect and support your argument that a debate tactic was used. I took the opportunity to point out that interchanging "science" with "those who support a specific theory as above scrutiny" is not accurate. My point may have engaged semantics, but they are important as well.
It is not new to me.
I agree with you. But those who post such tripe are rarely interested in a debate at all and, from time to time, all of us get weary of dealing with them. Here's an excerpt of how Longshadow put it a few days ago.
... The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that many anti-Evo posters are disingenuous in their denial of Evolution. They proclaim their open-mindedness, their neutrality, their willingness to follow the evidence, yet when it comes to acting upon it to find out the truth of what they are arguing about, they won't lift a finger to do five minutes worth of research online to get an answer to the the question at hand.It seems to me that this sort of willful, disingenuous ignorance is not deserving of graceful behavior by the opposition, and no amount of satire used to expose the intellectual bankruptcy of such mendacity is too much.
A similar investment of five minutes worth of online Googling would reveal the utter bogusity most of the overly simplistic anti-Evo arguments that get trotted out here; even some of the better Creationist sites warn against using these laughably incorrect arguments. That the poster does not bother to do so BEFORE posting it is prima facia evidence that he is not interested in truth or accuracy, but rather in revelling in his own ignorance while disrupting the dialogue among those who are.