[dan1123]

>> I just did some spot checking - The Critical Analysis of fossils Prentice was the one that made post a suggestion to be carefuol using that site. The use of terms like macroevolution show a lack of familiarity with science while senctences like

“Their fossil “evidence” gets destroyed by facts every so often, but they never question their assumptions, they just string together a new set of bones and call it a “series of intermediaries” until it gets disproven as well.”

shows a desire not to educate but inspire blind disdain for science. <<

So you’re not talking about *facts* but *tone*.

[gondramB]

>>So you’re not talking about *facts* but *tone*.<<

There are fact problems and tone problems. Frankly the tone of disdain for science is so strong the site seems more about teaching kids to disrupt class than in helping them in any way.

But the the definitions they use of evolution, the fact they separate “macro evolution” - the incorrect description of intermediary fossils as composites, the mischaracterization of the duck bill platypus... and that’s just from a 10 minute spot check. That was plenty to suggest that parents should be cautious in using that web site as a resource.