"Hence why two scientists, equally eminent in stature, may arrive at widely divergent conclusions based in factual analysis."
Very true. There can be honest disagreement among people who are equally eminent. However, what spawned this conversation was a discussion about evolution and creation. There are staggeringly few scientists who dispute evolution. When you narrow it down to those who are actually considered experts in their fields by their peers, it's vastly smaller (perhaps 2 or 3). When you narrow it down to those who are disputing evolution based on something they know from their own fields, you get down to a weak, but possible, 1.
Creation promoters tend to be religionists who INSIST that they've "done their homework," and who then go on to make numerous statements so profoundly stupid and contrary to what evolution actually says and how science actually works that they themselves disprove that they've done an honest day's homework on the subject. All they can do is repeat the garbage they've found on websites like AiG or ChristianApologetics, or ICR.
There is controversy in the political arena, but there is no controversy among serious and eminent scientists on the subject of whether evolution is good science.
