Needless to say my project was exiled to the back corner of the room, and was the only one that didn’t get to go to the district competition.

Oh, GEEZ.

Like I said, the whole goal is to render the entire concept of science untrustworthy and believed specious.

Look, you nits. I grasp that you don’t understand what science even IS, much less how it WORKS.

I also grasp that you fail utterly to understand how it might be that an expert could EASILY refute Twain’s argument (well formed though it is) even though you are FAR TOO CLUELESS to even guess where it might be wrong.

One thing you have to grasp, however — the whole structure of science is interlocking. Knock out one piece, and many others fail as well.

Many of the precepts tying to evolution work into a VAST ARRAY of other sciences, which have FAR more empirical support than evolution does. If you claim evolution is utterly wrong, then you also claim those related sciences are utterly wrong, despite the facts that support THEM. Two more obvious arenas would be epidemiology and forensics (hardly a complete list, but two really obvious ones). If you claim those two don’t work, then why do all the statistics that epidemiology explains actually exist? Why do forensic scientists have sufficient shrift to their say that they can convict people in court?

Science and technology ALL INTERLOCK in ways you cannot begin to grasp. And that they are largely right is blatantly sitting before you.

The computers compute, the TVs televise, the planes fly, THE MAGIC FRIGGIN’ WORKS.

But trust me — just because it’s all magic to you doesn’t mean it’s magic to everyone.

Trust me — there ARE people who actually know what they are talking about. You, and the people who are telling you to listen to THEM don’t.

The charlatans and quacks aren’t the ones promoting evolution, which SAYS NOTHING ABOUT GOD WHATSOEVER.

The charlatans and quacks are the ones attempting to make idiotic arguments that God is REQUIRED to exist because He’s clearly too incompetent to do what He so clearly wants to do, and thus evolution IS NOT capable of explaining where things came from… THAT requires — utterly requires — the existence of a supreme being in its place.

Because the fact is, EXACTLY like those pushing AGW, the ones pushing Creationism have something to gain from your belief.

Me? I believe God is competent.

He clearly does not want to PROVE His existence to us — if He did, then all He need do is open up the skies and go, “Here I Am, Stupid!!”.

QED — for some reason we do not grasp, He wants us to believe in Him based on faith alone.

So the universe He designed CANNOT require Him to exist in order for it to be here, or else He would be proven to exist.

So the universe MUST have an alternative self-explanation built into it which does not presuppose His existence.

All current evidence suggests that that alternative explanation is some variant of evolution. Pieces of it are wrong, but the whole is trending towards accuracy.

One of your chief failings is your inability to grasp that “wrongness” is not, in many cases, an absolute, but a spectrum:

Asimov’s Axiom, after the noted author Isaac Asimov, describe the issue in his book of essays, The Relativity of Wrong. A statement that equates two errors is wronger than wrong when one of the errors is clearly wronger than the other. As Asimov put it:

**** “When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.”

Something that is wronger than wrong is therefore more wrong than something that is not even wrong.

The idea that evolution’s errors make it equate to a flat-out demonstrably dunderheaded notion like ID meets that description — it’s wronger than wrong

Which plays into their deeper game. One of the chief objectives of The Postmodern Left is to undermine and destroy all faith in Western Culture, and its heritage of Greek thought and idea.

Undermine science (or your willingness to rely on scientists to inform you of it), and you knock out one more supporting element of the entire Greek-based concept of Truth.

And if there is no Truth, then they are free to redefine “reality” in any way they want.

Postmodern Liberalism is a pernicious, evil, cancerous, and suicidal meme. It cannot and will not allow Western Culture to survive.

The real object to blame here is reporters and the media.

They are the ones who select which scientists to listen to, and which ones to ignore.

They are the ones who elevated cranks and charlatans to the mantle of “reputable scientists”.

The reputable scientists are still out there, and have been saying “Now Just Wait a Minute!!” all along.

And, now, the ozone hole turned out to be a good thing, and we need to simply shut down all refrigeration units everywhere because running them either requires CFCs (which damage the ozone layer) or non-CFCs (which don’t damage the ozone layer), and either case is a BAD THING when you consider you’re powering your AC units and refrigerators with EVIL ELECTRICITY GENERATED BY FOSSIL FUELS.

Is it any surprise that those of us that fought to save the environment from the actual, visible, and scientifically provable devastation caused by toxic wastes, are now concerned about trying to either undo our efforts or take the option we sought to avoid (eliminating all technology because the human race isn’t “worthy”) based on a bunch of computer predictions that might as well be astrological charts for all the accuracy they’ve demonstrated in the past?