Ultimately, science is a rhetorical enterprise that must persuade the public.
That's a ridiculous statement.
Interesting response.
Of course this is true. The public is composed of human beings who ultimately must be persuaded as to the truth of science. Scientists regard their studies as "objective" meaning they exist independent of whether people believe the results or not. However, science is based upon empiricism-- which is best available evidence. It is not offering absolute proofs.
The recent film "Flight of the Dodo" [not sure I have the name right] I think accurately explores the truth of my statement. Scientists need to understand how to communicate their research but they are all to often weak in this capacity. The film--made by someone who does agree with evolution-- tries to comically prod the evolution science community to take a more effective approach to communicating their studies.
Yes and no. I don't have time now, as I have an aerobics class I need to get to, but if I have time, I will explain further later tonight. FULL DISCLOSURE: I am a rhetorical scholar, although my cognitivist worldview flies in the face of the constructivist one. So do my politics, needless to say.