Also, I was not addressing the article, I was addressing the comment of pcunite and their problem with the language used in one particular sentence, which is something I partly agree with and is nothing whatsoever to do with the accuracy of the article itself.
If someone tries to teach children maths by telling them "listen up idiots, two plus two is four", and I pick them up for their use of language, it has no real bearing on my view of the usefulness of learning addition.
Maybe it's not that useful to creationists. Almost anybody else would be able to see past it and get some real content. I don't think most creationists would be bothered to do that either way.
Also, the observation that almost anyone other than a creationist would be able to get past a line that specifically insults creationists, is not that surprising.
edit - It is a great article, that for the most part deals with a very complex subject really well. I am just saying that the philosophical point scoring in the introduction added nothing to it and has then had a damaging effect on the discussion of it here, where that sentence has triggered the largest thread, to the detriment of the rest of the actual content.
If creationists are supposed to just get over being insulted, presumably atheists can also get over a single comment by a creationist asking not to be.
