I'm reaaaally curious to hear you expound on this...
I was hoping to hear about that too.
We'll probably hear more about it at the same time as bondserv tells us of a modern achievement of creation science; you know, a gadget or effect or mineral find that runs counter to mainstream theory and matches creationist theory.
And at about the same time as bondserv corrects the nonsense on his profile page.
You asked me to expound. :-)
You probably have experienced a great professor. The reason they are great is because they completely understand their subject and can convey it to their students by bridging topic specific language to concepts the students understand. Real life experience will demonstrate to you how much of an exception these people are. I understand the fact that vocabulary plays a big part in categorizing various scientific mechanisms and formula. But the good scientists don't purposefully hide behind the language.
You overlook the fact that "elite" scientists will formulate a model which is frequently incorrect. Like a Meteorologist who gets the forecast completely wrong, the nature of science is that the theories are often proven to be wrong. Science in the area of Evolution is an imperfect science.
You guys have the tendency to disregard anything that disagrees with your idea of truth. You fail to continue reading the potentially valuable information because you chalk it off as Creationoid. When a scientist that was formerly accepted as credible begins shifting their perspective toward Design theory, they are immediately labeled a quack. This method of investigation is typical of the left. "I have already made up my mind, don't confuse me with any new information or a different view. Anyone showing a hint of ID colors has discredited themselves."
Conservatives are willing to wade through the hogwash to get to some meat (In science, by its very method, this is the rule as opposed to the exception). Because conservatives -- and our Founding Fathers -- have the innate belief that, free from oppressive brainwashing, our brains actually function well.
Consider also the fact that highly specialized scientists are like a Fire Marshall. They lose site of a balanced perspective on their subject because they are to close to it. For scientists in the past, this was not the case. A Fire Marshall will demand that schools keep all of the doors closed, because it has been shown that closed doors are the single most effective safety feature regarding fires. So on the infinitesimal chance that a fire will occur, children are forced to sit in stale closed door classrooms across the country.
This overspecialization creates islands of knowledge that don't overlap, which creates a vacuum of overall scientific understanding. Like lawyers who have created a vocabulary to protect the application of law, scientists have created topic specific vocabulary that some use to protect their genre.
I am convinced, through personal experience, that scientists that really understand their subject, have no problem relating very complex ideas in plain English, transcribing topic specific vocabulary to relateable verbiage (I understand that interdepartmental use of specific language can save time when relating information between experts). A person who desires a more in-depth understanding of scientific topics can learn the vocabulary, sans the interpretations, in a short period of time.