Bias? What Bias?

This is absolutely blatant in its bias! I mean, if you flip this around, talk about creation as evolution and evolution as creation the guy would be censured for life! There is alot of hate and fear in this piece.

First off, look at the title. Radicals blow their tops! Right off you are told these people are idiots who hold to some outdated wierd philosophy and have no real intelligence. They blow up, not like the nice, calm evolutionists.

Then words like "ultra conservative" and "powerful religious" groups. No mention of who they are. Then words like "the latest political shot from religious creationists". Okay... tell me why this isn't the same as the latest political shot from evolutionists!

What about all the evolutionist lobbyist etc? Even the placing of intelligent design, a theory with ALOT of evidence for it, is placed in quotes, like it is a so called theory that has no facts behind it. The paragraph about the films "crimes" is interesting for its subtext. "How can you fault the films for this, they are just teaching fact. Those naughty creationists are keeping people from learning!"

Notice, they mention the evolutionists by name, but never mention any of the creationists or the creationist organizations. We are left with a "big brother" kind of group... THOSE people... this is a tactic that propagandists use!

This paragraph is interesting...

"Blocking scientific movies from IMAX theaters is only one part of the creationists' agenda; they also promote their own films that document their theory of a cosmos-crafting higher intelligence."

Obviously we have an agenda, and we aren't interested in fact, no we just want to oppress people and keep them from the truth!

The one evolutionist director of the NSF states that evolution is accepted fact. That is true only partly. It is accepted by many, but is by NO MEANS fact. It is a theory, it isn't even scientific because it can't be PROVEN. You can't repeat it. It is a theory of origin, a historical theory, just like creationism or intelligent design. The facts are that you see fossils, or that the red shift is there, or whatever. Evolution is a THEORY that brings these together. It has ALOT of holes, and doesn't fit all the facts. Intelligent design, despite what the Smithsonian says, DOES gel with the facts. But again, both are theories, and it depends on your preconcieved notions which you will believe. The evolutionists can't take that there could be a designer, and therefore throw out all theories that indicate there could be one right off. Is that science?

Anyway, just an interesting article that shows it's bias very easily. I don't mind that someone will disagree with me, but at least have the decency to play fair. State who the organizations are on the creation side, quote some of them, treat evolution as the theory that it is, don't play sides.