[cornelis]

I disagree that this movement is a polital effort to change the direction of science inquiry.

The threads of influence and consequence are often many to count. But some of the larger strands entwined as part the movement should be clearly seen. One larger strand is the idea of neutrality in the public sphere. Another is the requisite autonomy of fields of study. A third is the misunderstanding of parties, a fourth is the purposeful disinformation of parties. None of these threads are unique to evolution debates. That they get tangled is obvious. The constant tension between content neutrality and theoretical autonomy seems to imply another larger strand.

[Nebullis]

Scientists are keenly aware of the human foibles in scientific inquiry and the dissemination of knowledge. But there is no automatic claim to legitimacy for any and all detractors simply on the basis of the strength of their emotion or energy.