Apologetics is not supposed to be a bad word. Apologetics means logic based defenses of theology, although those defenses need not be science based. Many true apologetics arguments do contain flaws and bad science, but lying and distortion and slanted truth is not traditional apologetics.
In particular, quote-mining isn't apologetics. Quote mining is lying.
From Wiki: Apologetics (from Greek ἀπολογία, "speaking in defense") is the discipline of defending a position (often religious) through the systematic use of reason. So in this you are correct.
However, what the creationist websites present is a modern, and significantly different, version of apologetics: it involves all sorts of misrepresentations, quote-mines, willful ignorance, and outright lies. The goal is to reinforce religious beliefs at all costs, and to spread those beliefs to those who can't spot the lies. There is no regard for scientific accuracy. The only goal is to gloss over, misrepresent, or flat out lie about those things that contradict their religious beliefs.
I realize this is a bit off topic, but this is what I've seen in a lot of creationist websites. Radiocarbon dating is one of my fields, and what they dredge up to try to discredit radiocarbon dating is simply amazing. It has taught me to distrust anything they publish.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
™ Version 4.2
