Changes

'''Quote mining''' is the fallacy of undermining a proposition by taking words out of context from a supporter of that proposition.  

'''Quote mining''' is a term typically used by evolutionists to attempt to justify a knee-jerk allegation made by an evolutionist that a quote of a prominent evolutionist admitting one or more of the many weaknesses of the evolutionary paradigm is being taken out of context when in most cases it is certainly not. This reflexive denialism and/or obfuscation occurs because Darwinism is an errant religion often practiced by dogmatists and it is not [[science]]. The Darwinist and atheist philosopher of science [[Michael Ruse]] admitted: "[[Evolution]] is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>

Quote mining is a form of [[quote out of context|quoting out of context]], and it is similar to the fallacy of [[appeal to authority]].

An objection sometimes made is that it is wrong to ignore evidence which supports a partisan viewpoint when evidence which disproves it is found. This is clearly an anti-scientific notion, as it violates the modern principle of [[falsifiability]]: no amount of evidence in favor of a scientific theory has merit if even a single counterexample can be found (see [[Thomas Kuhn]]).

Despite the [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution|heavy handed tactics]] used against Darwinism dissenters, Darwinists often appeal to alleged scientific consensus as a way to attempt to justify their empirically weak and counterfactual paradigm. So when quotes of evolutionists admitting weaknesses of evolutionist are pointed out, this can cause a significant amount of [[cognitive dissonance]] within evolutionists.  It is also upsetting to Darwinist zealots who don't want the major and minor shortcomings of evolutionary beliefs mentioned to others.  

[[Evolution]] proponents commonly object when their quotes are taken out of context and used against them. This is because scientific truth is determined from scientific evidence, not from authority, so any argument using merely quotations from authority (whether or not it is true), as opposed to the evidence in the scientific literature, is simply irrelevant. The scientific truth of a proposition does not depend solely on how widely-believed it is.  They have tried to make ''quote mining'' a [[pejorative]] term, but the neologism has yet to be recognized by major dictionaries.

 

Evolutionists have unfortunately chosen to hold onto their Darwinists religion, despite the fact that evidence which disproves Darwinism has been found repeatedly. This is clearly an anti-scientific practice, as it violates the modern principle of [[falsifiability]]: no amount of evidence in favor of a scientific theory has merit if even a single conclusive counterexample can be found (see [[Thomas Kuhn]]).

 

[[Evolutionists]] are notorious for expressing objection when their quotes are used against them. This reveals the [[dogma]]tic nature of their [[faith]], because real scientists always welcome evidence which contradicts mainstream theories (see [[scientific method]]).

While the entire fields of law and politics encourage quoting an adversary to [[discrediting attack|discredit]] him, [[evolutionist]]s do not feel their quotes should be used to criticize evolution, and have invented the term "quote mining" to criticize that practice.

They have tried to make ''quote mining'' a [[pejorative]] term, but the neologism has yet to be recognized by major dictionaries

==Intelligent Design Journalist Denyse O'Leary on False Charges of Quote Mining ==

==Intelligent Design Journalist Denyse O'Leary on False Charges of Quote Mining ==