One aspect of the 19^th century 'Flat Earth Society' movement was to attack the cult of Science. Already by 1850 'science' was bifurcating into sundry silos where only 'experts' drenched in a certain world-view were allowed to 'explain' to the hoi-polloi, the dirty mass, their existential philosophy which they named 'science'. A reaction against the divinity of science and naturalist-'wisdom', was the establishment of groups who purportedly believed that the earth was flat. For many inside these organizations, the main theme was not that they believed in a disc-shaped earth, but simply that they were revolting against the divine-right-to-rule, by 'scientists', whose own world-view oftentimes precluded anything resembling science.

Most of what is termed 'factual' or scientific is in reality a statement of a philosophy. I am always reminded that T Rex hemoglobin, soft tissue and supple sinews found in 2005, somehow need to be reframed within the Darwinian world-view that they are 65 million years old. They are not. The evidence is quite clear on that. Yet facts are ignored and philosophy inserted in analyzing said specimens.

Post-modernism, which traces its own roots back to the 'materialist-dialecticism' of Marx, Darwin, Atheism [as given by that execrable dunce David Hume]; of the 19^th century, is deserving of nothing but contempt. What has this 'science' accomplished ? Not a single innovation or invention can be founded upon post-modern ideals. Evolution, atheism, materialism, socialism, communism, relativity – all of these post-modern shibboleths have retarded, not enhanced science. The academic cant and trivia, including the fraud of something like globaloneywarming, has nothing whatsoever to do with knowledge, investigation or 'truth'. It is about a world-view [materialism], and why anyone who denies the facts of this philosophy [evolution, warming, relativity]; must be a simpleton, who is in need of re-education or perhaps, a meeting with death.

An Australian philosopher back in 1982, one David Stove [Origins of a Post-Modern cult], wrote an entertaining book on the post-modern philosophy-stated-as-science fraud. He excoriates evolution [tulips to teachers etc.]; and dismembers the cult of Darwin, along with Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn and other worthies of scientist philosophy who extol 'rational positivism' [post modern cults love rhetoric]. He exposes the verbiage, the excessive hyperbole, the certainties, and the tautologies, along with the irreducibly incoherent memes of the post-modernists. If you read Kuhn, Popper et al, their theories inevitably lead to the fact that science can not be used to produce or understand science. How then are post-modern 'facts' so 'certain' and 'inevitable'? Stove's books are also fun as well as elucidating.