[longshadow]

Yet another example of anti-Evo dishonesty, this time by omission. The posted article would appear to be a news article published by the Seattle Times.

It isn't.

It's a guest editorial written by, you guessed it, a functionary from the anti-Evo and misnamed "Discovery Institute" :

"Jonathan Witt is a senior fellow with Discovery Institute and co-author of "A Meaningful World: How the Arts and Science Reveal the Genius of Nature" (IVP 2006)."

But in as much as the anti-Evos were caught lying through their teeth under oath in the Dover Trial, it would be of little surprise that their apologists here on FR would resort to milder forms of deception, such as camouflaging the TRUE source of the posted article, by way of omission.

[PatrickHenry]

... camouflaging the TRUE source of the posted article, by way of omission.

Hee hee.

[aft_lizard]

Ahh a ubiquitous fallacy argument. Because he is biased against evolution, his facts therefore cannot be accepted.

[Heartlander]

The post is linked to the Seattle Times Editorials / Opinion section and gives the author information (that you posted) at the bottom of the article…

Who is guilty of this ‘dishonesty’ that you claim?

[AndrewC]

But in as much as the anti-Evos were caught lying through their teeth under oath in the Dover Trial, it would be of little surprise that their apologists here on FR would resort to milder forms of deception, such as camouflaging the TRUE source of the posted article, by way of omission.

You find it difficult to click on the link provided at the top of the posting? Oh yeah, it's easier for you to use Ad Hominem.

Re: OSC File No. MA-05-0371 and MA-05-0015

First Amendment Violations, Religious and Political Affiliation Discrimination

Our investigation also shows that there is a strong religious and political component to the actions taken after the publication of the Meyer article. Much of the e-mail traffic after the publication of the Meyer article documented a personal investigation of you and tabbed you as a "creationist." One senior SI employee, when discussing the Meyer article stated, "the paper is a sheer disaster… We are evolutionary biologist, and I am sorry to see us made into the laughing stock of the world, even if this kind of rubbish sells well in backwoods, USA… under no circumstances should the Institution support the journal with page-charges, which up to this point has been a mainstay of the Society." After the publication when many in the SI were investigating your background one of the e-mails raised concerns that you had "extensive training as an orthodox priest." Another e-mail stated, "Scientists have been perfectly willing to let these people alone in their churches, but now it looks like these people are coming out and invading our schools, biology classes, museums and now our professional journals. These people to my mind are only a scale up on the fundies of a more destructive kind in other parts of the world. Depressing. Oh, if we only still had Steve Gould to lead the counter-attack."