Shiney
What you are seeing is two opposing philosophies that are rooted in the world-views of people. Evolution is not any more 'scientific' than creationism:
Lie One.
the actual physical evidence and observations done by scientists can be taken to either side. Ken Ham has done much to show how this works in some of his writings.
Just like you can easily find some idiot who will use the 'same evidence' to argue for a flat Earth or geocentric model.
Evolution is a 'sacred cow' in academia and they enforce it through "peer pressure review" that does nothing but label others unfairly.
Yeah, just like in countries where you have to be accredited and tested by a certifying body before fitting gas appliances, gass fitting is a sacred cow and enforced through certification, and thosewithout such testing and accreditation are unfairly label as not competent to fit gas appliances. Life's a bitch. Why are you so against Creationist and ID-ot papers suffering the same invigilation process as all other scientific papers to reduce the chance of publishing erroneous rubbish?
We've all seen their treatment of Dember and Behe.
Yup; the trash science of Dember and Behe being demolished by decent science. Remember Behe has admitted in court that his definisiton of a theory, which he uses to insist that ID should be taught in schools, would also allow astrology to be traught in schools? What a scientist!! One has to say his 'irreducable complexity' arguments, for example regarding the eye and flagelli, inspired some wonderful science to thoroughly debunk it. Pity that those same arguments, although thoroughly disproved, are still being used by the Creationist and ID-ot communities today.
Scientists who dispute the theory are smeared and marginalized by the academics who presently have tenure.
Because they don't deserve the term 'scientist'. AT best they are Natural Philosophers with a presupposition.
You see, they have 'drawn a line' and inquiry into any science is ok until you challenge the actual beliefs in their world-view.
Oh, you can challange any belief in the scientific community if you have the evidence and a theory. As ID and Creationism has no evidence or theory, they are not regarded as science. They are philosophical masturbation for those who insist a narrow literalistic interpretation of a book written by bronze-age goat herds is the best way of establishing facts. This is done whilst ignoring there are those who also insist a narrow literalistic interpretation of DIFFERENT books written by bronze-age goat herds is the best way of establishing facts. And there is no method of distinguishing the quality of evdience offered by each book AS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE for the creative myths in those books, any more than there is evidence of everything coming about as a result of a god masturbating (as some myths hold is true).
They will gradually be gone and evolution will fade from the scene as a viable teaching. Naturalism is also going to be a casualty and deservedly so.
Yup, and flat-earthism and geocentricism will make a comeback too, along with sacrifices to Thor if there's thundery weather. Next; witch burning for the 21st Century with new 'scientific' methods of determining guilt. Oh brave new world that has such people in it!!
BTW, global warming is another one of their 'sacred cows' despite the fact that 17,000 American scientists have signed a statement of dispute of this teaching. This teaching is solely aimed at disprution of the American economy, which would weaken the military and that would lead to the eventual defeat or retreat of America.
Look, Shiney, if the USA has declared war on the rest of the world ('defeat' and 'retreat' sure make it sound like you think so), could they let the rest of the world know?
These are tenets of the socialist/communist bent of so many who are leftover from the '60s. Do you see how unfairly they treat those who disagree with them politically? Leftists must do this because of the weaknesses of their own world-view. They've seen the massive failure of the socialist states along with their lack of moral or ethical treatment of their fellow human beings.
Funny how you think Evolution is a communistic or socialistic thing. Darwin would be surprised, as would the majority of scientists today who are not communists or socialists. And I thought it was the American right-wing who claimed anyone who disagreed with them was unpatriotic (much as the Nazi party did in Germany pre-WWII)? I suppose that's fair treatment? The secular world in general has actually ensured human rights are established as the lead in the making of laws, instead of the religiously predicated law codes of the past, putting individual freedom for peaceful law-abiding members of society in place of religious repression.
Christianity and the republics are their worst enemies and this is why they are so shrill and reactionary toward people of faith, especially the American version since we have not knuckled under to their propaganda.
Yeah, whatever... you calling anyone 'shrill and reactionary' is a bit of a laugh, and your comment on propoganda when you are in favour of a government that propogandised going to war on a pretext is hilarious. But please carry on straining gnats and swallowing camels...
Islam and all other faiths are secondary opponents.
People looking for conflict as enthusiastically as you will find it no matter what. You sound like a hate-filled Iman, largely because your philosophy is based upon the same assumptions as their's are.
It is thinking like that that is the greatest danger to the world today.
Now, please go and evolve.
artists impression 
artists impression 
