I dont think much of that article.
The writer actually equates denying the evidence of climate change, or evolution
with being against using animals in research?
That is apples and oranges. Or apples and ethics.
I mean, one category is simply denying or ignoring scientific evidence/consensus.
And the other category has nothing to do with denying scientific evidence. Its simply arguing science takes a backseat to compassion for animals. Now whether you agree or disagree with animal-activists, you cant equate them to evolution deniers.
w
v