I see a pattern of extremists on both left and right who, when faced with the facts of hard scientific truth, take one of several paths:

1. Attack the motives of the messenger.
2. Grasp at bogus pseudo-scientific straws to counter the message.
3. Ignore the message (the “plug your ears and shout ‘la la la, I can’t hear you’ response”)

You see it when the creationists face the hard scientific facts exemplified by this fossil discovery.

You also see it when Jenny McCarthy faces the hard scientific facts about the benefits of vaccination and the dangers of non-vaccination.

It’s easy to argue about what constitutes “the truth” when it comes to philosophy, theology, sociology, political “science”, history, english literature, and other such subjects that involve concepts coming out of the human mind. It’s a lot harder when, as with subjects such as biology, chemistry, physics, and mathematics, the arguer has to make arguments that account for known and observable facts. And with both the creationists and the anti-vaccinationists, we are watching intellectual bankruptcy on display, because they can’t make their story conform to the facts.