Changes

'''Quote mining''' is the practice 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 using the words many weaknesses of partisans against them to undermine support for the viewpoint held by the partisansevolutionary paradigm is being taken out of context when in most cases it is certainly not. Quote mining does This reflexive denialism and/or obfuscation occurs because Darwinism is an errant religion often practiced by dogmatists and it is not refer simply to taking a [[quote out science]]. The Darwinist and atheist philosopher of contextscience [[Michael Ruse]] admitted: "[[Evolution]], as there is already a well-understood phrase for thatreligion. Rather, the charge This was true of "quote mining" reflects an objection to quoting someone for criticizing his own belief system, on the theory that if he still believes evolution in the system then beginning, and it is somehow unfair to quote his criticism true of itevolution still today. ”<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>

Another objection sometimes made 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.  Quote mining does not refer simply to [[quoting out of context]], as there is already a well-understood phrase for that . Rather, the charge of "quote mining" reflects an objection to quoting someone for criticizing his own belief system, on the theory that if he still believes in the system then it is wrong somehow unfair to ignore evidence which supports a partisan viewpoint when quote his criticism of it.  Evolutionists have unfortunately chosen to hold onto their Darwinists religion, despite the fact that evidence which disproves it is Darwinism has been foundrepeatedly. This is clearly an anti-scientific notionpractice, 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]]).