Populations shift over time as do traits. Trait drift is not the same thing as macroevolution. Though the media and many scientists and "educators" insist to clouding what evolution is and isn't so that every biological discovery is written in evo-speak. I'm not sure what an evolution denier is being that evolution is not a monolithic idea. I personally believe that change occurs in species groups, one would have to be a fool to not believe that. Do I believe that trait drift otherwise known as microevolution produces new phyla? No I don't. I also don't believe in the "standard" model abiogenises. Belief in abiogenises and in macroevolution is a matter of faith not far removed from a belief in a deity. Talk of “evolution deniers” is a political statement not a scientific one, and when a scientist resorts to politics to force the acceptance or exclude the ideas of others the scientist should reconsider the strength of their ideas. I think it would be far better if modern scientists would take some guidence from Kant and stop the posturing in a futil attempt to use science as a weapon against "God". I think Darwin would be ashamed of the behavior of some of his progeny in as much as their inability to address openly and honesty the deficits of his theory nor expand it to include directed evolution.
That's not bad. Science is not, or shouldn't be, about "accepting" anything.
Hah--you know, they sound like a worn-out preacher making an altar call!
re:I think Darwin would be ashamed of the behavior of some of his progeny)))
"Follow the money"--somebody's franchise is being threatened. It's all about passing the plate.