Wow. Your title sums it up well! I would ask if you suppose any of them could look at evidence in an unbiased and impartial manner, but they answer it themselves when they say " Real scientists have neither the time nor inclination to be bothered with evidence of Intelligent Design."It's always fascinating when people use the term "REAL scientists". Who determines whether one is a "REAL" scientist or not, for after all, do they themselves in the ban not acknowledge the advanced degrees of those they disagree with? It's not the degree nor the science, but whether or not they are on their side which leads to their determination (real or not). It's no different than ad hominem attacks and remarks made on playgrounds throughout the world... and you would expect scientists to understand this.
The unbeliever wants to pretend that he is neutral in his approach to science. When faced with evidence for design (which there is no shortage of), they will simply say "we don't know how it happened", and they are fine with that answer. They will then accuse the believer of adopting a "God of the gaps" philosophy, using God to explain what they otherwise cannot explain. So, no, it is not possible to "look at evidence in an unbiased and impartial manner".The real issue is the very foundation of science itself. Without God, there can be no science, because science presupposes that the natural world exists, and that there are universal and invariant laws governing our world. Those are assumptions that the atheist has no right to make.I'll post more on this issue in the near future.
Sword, just remember that the Brites write satire. This piece is intended to make fun of the evo's.
August,Good counsel,...and in there own way, I think they do a pretty good job!!!