Talk:Scientific fundamentalism

I propose we keep this article but put the following text:

Scientific Fundamentalism is a myth based on ignorance of the scientific method and the nature of scientific debate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zen Metheus (talk • contribs)
 * I'd say that's too POV toward the other end of the spectrum... but at any rate, until AfD closes, you should comment here, not on this page. Groupthink 04:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

PoV
I've edited the article to make it less PoV. No doubt some will say that it is now PoV in the other direction. Rjm at sleepers 05:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * By mistake, I described a recent set of edits as minor when they were not - my apologies. Rjm at sleepers 08:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually I'd say that's a good job... IFF it can be backed by citations. Groupthink 13:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposal
If no one objects, at this time tomorrow I will redirect this page to scientism. Groupthink 00:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Originators response
As the originator of the "scientific fundamentalism" page, I am unable to work more on it for now, so accept merging into scientism. However, those dismissing this term should read the eminent philosopher Mary Midgley - in particular her "Science as Salvation - a modern myth and its meaning" (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Salvation-Modern-Myth-Meaning/dp/0415107733/ref=sr_1_1/202-2746987-6635853?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187429748&sr=8-1). Mary is no creationist. Wakeford 09:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)