Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
I would accept the anti-science types as being scientifically acceptable within the parameters of creation.

A reflection of diversity and possibly a motivator to keep from being complacent or dogmatic in ones approach to define everything under one system of measure.

Besides the idea of someone being anti science is like being anti God. Whatever definitions one subscribes to or belief system regarding the terms may not be entirely equal to anothers point of view.
Often, just because someone doesn't like what another says regarding the subjective ideal can motivate one to say, the antagonist is anti-(fill in the ideal subject).
No one is ever really anti science, or refuses to accept anything that comes out of science.

Perhaps I should explain what I mean by "Anti-science"; by 'anti-science', I mean someone who is opposed to some forms of scientific research on philosophical/religious grounds; not someone who rejects anything that comes from science (which, I agree, would be few if any individuals in the real world).

So I'm referring to creationists, climate change deniers, anti-vaccinationists, anti-animal researchers, etc.

I, and my family, have been harassed and attacked by members of the later two groups. A few of them are still in jail for those actions.

Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
And no one is really anti-god.

Sure there is - anyone who rejects the existence of supernatural phenomena would be anti-god(s). A sense of awe is hardly god.

Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Every thing is relative.

But only by a very specific metric:


Bryan

UAA...CAUGCUAUGAUGGAACGAACAAUUAUGGAA