<HTML>jameske,
> But I would argue that even incorrect belief systems can give
> rise to interesting scientific anomalies, and thus validate
> their existence - not as *true* belief system but rather as a
> *productive* belief system.
If creationist science was at all productive your point would be valid.
It may well be the case that
> Creation Science's aims are wrong but it may also be the case
> that some of the scientific anomalies it raises need to be
> disseminated and investigated further.
For every claim made by creationists, or supporters of intelligent design of any form, there are perfectly good scientifically sound explanations which validate evolution. Darwinism has been fighting this battle for 150 years and proven and reproven its case time after time. If evolution didn't work it would have been ditched from biology a long, long time ago.
Outside of the study of biology few people will bother to properly understand evolution and that is where the problem lies. Maintaining and promoting ignorance can in no way be considered revolutionary which is why anybody who disputes evolution should at least take the time to understand the mechanisms of it before they decide to denigrate it and declare it flawed - not too much to ask for is it?
Cheers,
Duncan</HTML>
