alt.education

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 19:54:00 -0400, in , Danwood
in < @ > wrote:

>Matt Silberstein wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:40:51 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
>> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> That depends on the sort of argument that you make. If your argument
>>> is an echo of the same arguments that the fundies make, then you are
>>> guilty of "walking like a duck and talking like a duck" so that they
>>> think you are that sort of duck.
>>
>> We should, however, avoid imediately treating people like ducks in
>> case they are actually geese. (Ok,I have thrown the metaphor to the
>> ground, someone stomp on it.)
>>
>>> If your argument reflects serious understanding of the scientific
>>> principles involved, then you will be treated seriously. If you have
>>> actual evidence to back your argument, you will be treated most
>>> seriously.
>>>
>>> If you refer to "evolutionists", you already mark yourself as a duck.
>>> That phrase is ONLY used by creationists seeking to reduce evolution
>>> to being merely an alternate choice of belief in contrast to
>>> creationism.
>>>
>> Larry Moran calls himself an evolutionist. You might want to go to
>> and call him a creationist. (I suggest doing a google
>> search on him first.)
> >
>I used the term "evolutionist" often. I certainly did not mean to insult
>anyone. If indeed it is an insult, I sincerely apologize.

Like many terms, it can be and it can not be. I certainly accept your
apology.



--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide





"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"