This propaganda about "being opposed to science" is getting so old. Day after day there are threads right here on FR showing how science demonstrates evolutionary mechanisms are inadequate to explain most features of life. Yesterday's thread on folding of soft strata was a good case in point, as Darwinist after Darwinist avoided even attempting to refute this evidence for a young earth.
“The religious nuts...”
Oh, you must mean the young Earthers.
Yes. I call this way of talking subrhetoric. It is the daily bread of atheists and Darwinians.
[[This propaganda about “being opposed to science” is getting so old.]]
Yup- in an effort to belittle and malign htose hwo are sceptical of the wild assumptions about common descent, the bloviating briggade of the church of Darwin try to make it out that we’re ‘rejecting science’ altogether- it’s nothign but a silly immature ad hominem attack that can’t focus on the actual issues being discussed, and must try to divert attention away from the fact that those maligning Creationists don’t have any ammo with wwhich to defend their positions with:
“p(A) = “I am skeptical of Darwinism.”
A = “Darwinism”
Since here A = “Darwinism”, we must substitute something sensible to acheive the contrast, so choose A’ = “science”, and make some minor modifications to p,
p’(A’) = “Oh, so you are skeptical of science. You sound like a
Luddite. Why do you hate science?”
That ECG- This perfectly describes the silly tactics of a good majority of Macroevos on this site- Apparently, Creationists and ID proponents ‘oppose science’ because we aren’t willing to unquestioningly accept biological impossibilities. Evidently, we’re ‘psuedoscientists’ because we dare question the validity of the claims that defy scientific principles.