Sucking up to extreme stupidity is wrong.

This is from a letter to the editor of a Florida newspaper about evolution and the moronic magical creationism fantasy.

Most of it was well done but as usual the person who wrote it sucked up to religious stupidity. He wrote "Creationism, as a religious belief, should be so respected." That's ridiculous. Teaching this anti-science bullshit is child abuse. Why should anyone respect child abuse?

No matter how many times it's explained to them, the know-nothing evolution deniers don't understand what a scientific theory is. Of course how could anyone stupid enough to be a creationist understand anything? Their brain damage is incurable. Extreme stupid can't be fixed.

The only correct way to treat these assholes for Jeebus is never ending relentless ridicule. Being nice never worked and it never will work. Nothing works. These fucktards for Jeebus are totally insane. Imagine the stupidity required to throw out the bedrock of biology and geology and replace this science with magic. If you're a creationist get off my planet you stupid worthless piece of garbage.

Here it is, the science and the wimpy sucking up to science deniers:

Theology vs. science

The term “theory” is used often in the debate between creationism and evolution. Some think “theory” refers to an idea or thought-up plan about how something works. However, “theory” has two distinct meanings.

Webster defines the lay term “theory” as a speculative idea or plan, a mere conjecture or guess. A different meaning is a formulated principle supported by considerable evidence to explain the physical and natural world. In scientific terms, a hypothesis becomes a theory only when backed by a body of evidence and general scientific acceptance. Evolution has long since developed into a theory after being hypothesized by Charles Darwin in 1859.

Creation “scientists” confuse these distinctions when they equate creationism as a theory to evolution as a theory, as June 6 letter-writer Colleen Berry has done. Creationism cannot be put forward as a scientific hypothesis, much less a theory, since it cannot be empirically tested. Words used by educators should conform to their precise scientific meaning, such as gravitational theory, energy conservation theory, mass-energy equivalence theory (E = mc2). These are supported by extensive, empirically tested scientific evidence, as is the evolution theory.

For many of us, religion is an integral part of our lives, supporting families, communities and spiritual beliefs. Creationism, as a religious belief, should be so respected. Subjecting it to scientific inquiry disrespects creationism as a theological belief. Educators should make this distinction. Our students deserve to learn the difference between the very different disciplines of theology and science.