I saw a website that refered to the macroevolution hypothesis as evolutiontarianism. I though this was humorous. I know science is a social enterprise and that when paradigms change based on the evidence that dissent is often not encouraged. Copernicus would be a good example. It seems to me though that the macroevolutionist are the academic equivalent of the Taliban although the current PC movement is in many ways equivalent.
Taliban? How on earth do you equate a scientific theory with a totalitarian theocracy.
And what on earth is the PC movement?
Even the evolutionist Behe cannot escape the academic Taliban's wrath and he is censored.
He isn't censored, infact he still has a wide following. His theories have just been thruoghly and unequivicably debunked.
Heck, he was given the benafit of the doubt scientificaly. His fist papers came out in peer reviewd jurnals. That's how he was debunked.
I have no problem with private ownership of journals and the setting of agendas but it seems hypocritical when they do not at least acknowledge that they are basing Behe's exclusion on tradition rather than any real scientific grounds.
How is it based on tradition? His papers were included, debunked, disproven, and thus disregarded. This is science!
How do you get Taliban out of this? If something is proven wrong then it is wrong.
™ Version 4.2