[MrB]

those who oppose science are not very conversant or knowledgeable ABOUT science

Ah, a combo "strawman" and "proof by arrogant condescension" with a half-twist.
I give it a 4, but the Russian judge gives you a 9.8.

[Mr. K]

I don’t see your argument with his statement

Most of those who are on the side opposing science are not generally very scientific, and can’t understand when you try to talk about method

for example, global warming is more like a religion than a science, with politics thrown in. (the worst of both- blind faith, and truth determined by ‘concensus’)

[allmendream]

Well “special” creationism formed as a movement in opposition to a scientific theory - and modern creationists are in opposition to the theories of plate, geology, astronomy, physics, archeology, paleontology and any number of OTHER scientific disciplines.

So yes Virginia - Creationists are anti-science. The only type of science they like is “Creation Science” which is not science at all as its methodology is in direct opposition to the scientific method.

Moreover it is to be expected that Creationists are not very conversant or knowledgeable about science - as the less educated someone is - the more likely they are to be a creationist.

That being said - creationists cannot seem to help sounding like total idiots talking about theories being “unproven” and offering up inane idiocy like “if humans evolved from apes - why are there still apes?”.

That is the general level of knowledge about science and evolution we have to deal with from people on the creationist side.