Oh dear, I guess moral relativism is, um, relative. This seems to be yet another example of "liars for Christ." One would have to be deluded to accept this propaganda as anything other than misdirection and outright lies.
Great site that offers an alternative theory of the origin of the universe and mankind by using scientific observation and interpretation. It does not ignore evidence that proves your worldview is untrue and unsupportable, as does evolution. It is fair and well written. It appears many reviews are not based on the trustworthiness of the site or the truth of the articles, but on unjustly attacking the credibility of the site so people will not question the unsupportable ideas put forward as fact, but is not true science, by evolutionists who are afraid of an honest examination of their claims.
I noticed many people gave this site negative reviews because they disagreed with the authors of the articles it posts. This website is entirely safe - there are not any risks concerning viruses or malware. This site cites primary literature and directly quotes scientists and those involved in the issues discussed. You can disagree with the authors' arguments, but don't call it "unsafe". Please leave your religious (or anti-religious) biases out of your safety ratings.
People are rating this site poorly because they disagree with it, which is a misuse of WOT. I may not agree with Stephen Hawking either, but I'm not going to sites that quote him and tagging them as dangerous. WOT should be used for serious issues, not disagreements. This is a perfectly fine site.
The people giving this site a bad rating are using the Web of Trust service as a way to attack a world view that is contrary to their own. I wish that Web of Trust would fix this problem. Your service is being used illegitimately. This service is not supposed to be a way of advancing a political or cultural agenda. Those that are leaving comments casting doubts on the trustworthiness of the website use as their criteria a world view dis-qualifier. Seeing that a sizable portion of the population still adheres to the Christian world view, simply having a website which goes about the business of exploring that world view through the pursuit of information theory and other legitimate forms of inquiry is NOT a danger to anyone.
Misleading and untrustworthy website. Masquerades as a website providing news on evolution (as per the URL) but in fact pushes so called "Intelligent Design" (aka creation myths for the unaccustomed with their jargon) which is the complete opposite.
This is definitely a good site. The negative reviews are by by angry, unethical people who merely disagree with the opinions expressed on the website. Just because someone has a different view on a subject doesn't mean the view is not trustworthy. Grow up ... quit being so juvenile!
The views expressed in this site are perfectly scientific. Merely because their findings have theistic ramifications does not disqualify them as unscientific. Science is not meant to prove the non-existence of God but to study the evidence and impartially go where the evidence leads. To have a strong atheistic bias is contrary to the spirit of pure inquiry into truth. Preconceived notions are built on pride and can only mislead one from the truth. So if the findings of modern biology suggest a powerful intelligent cause for the workings of nature there is no need to balk from the conclusions on the basis of inherent atheistic bias.
This site reviews and writes peer reviewed articles. The reason for the untrustworthy rating is angry atheists can't stand anyone questioning their faith in evolution. If evolution is not questioned it is not science. This site is completely void of religion. Obviously most people rating it have never read anything on it. To say this site is misleading or unethical is misleading and unethical.
Blatantly creationist site masquerading as an evolution site by calling itself 'Evolution News', purely to mislead people who aren't aware of the vile tactics these fundamentalists employ. Do not trust anything written on this site at face value.
There is no truth to be found here. In the interest of a good debate, I read several articles on the site, all of which were entirely baseless and founded on extremely rocky premises.
One article, a response to Cosmos with Neil Degrasse Tyson, purported to investigate inaccuracies and omissions in the show. For their "evidence", they said that Tyson pronounced a book titled "Against Fate" as "Against Faith". Their support? Their close friends and relatives, who also said they thought he had said "Against Faith". They used this as their entire justification for bashing the show and discrediting science.
I mean... whaaat? Don't waste your time with this landfill.
This website attempts to portray itself as a balanced source of information regarding both sides of the "debate". However, all of the information is drawn from suspect, or untrustworthy sources.
This website attempts to undermine rigorous academic pursuit with blind adherence to religious texts.
"Intelligent Design" is creationism in drag. It is not science. This is a fundamentalist Christian fringe view wearing a lab coat and trying to fool you.
Evolution is the only theory that explains speciation. There are no competing theories.
This site is designed to spread FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. There is no science here. Do not trust anything you read here.
About this site
Evolution News and Views (ENV) provides original reporting and analysis about the debate over intelligent design and evolution.