One of the most interesting insults that I have ever been given was that of a "serial fact denier". This was from someone who was confused that evolutionary conjectures were actually proven. Very few evolutionists have the courage to examine contrary evidence. Most of these are filtering the facts through their evolutionist worldview, and whatever does not comport with their assumptions is considered "wrong", or even "lies". Very disingenuous.
Sean B. Carroll is frustrated so many still deny evolution, but he shoots his own argument in the foot.Carroll, portrayed as wandering around the Smithsonian in ecstasy at all the exhibits showcasing evolution, was given ample space in a (echoed on ) to rant about all the fools who disagree with him. He can’t believe that people enter the museum and continue to carry their God bias even after sights like these:
Do not deny yourself the pleasure of reading the rest of "Evolutionist Beside Himself with 'Science Denialism'", here.
Much of the essay about “,” is buttressed with the views of fellow Tufts graduate Paul Offit. Offit and Sean B. Carroll (not to be confused with Sean C. Carroll of Caltech) positioned themselves as the promoters of reason and evidence. “ ,” Offit said. “ ,” Carroll said. They portrayed the “ ” as impermeable to evidence, being swayed instead by theistic bias or general distrust of experts. This is the either-or fallacy, overlooking the fact that science depends on belief and that many evolution skeptics are keen on scientific evidence, pointing to key evidences that evolutionists and advocates of consensus science ignore or re-interpret due to their “individual belief” (e.g., , , ).