Forester: Sorry for the delay, the holidays being what they are, I haven’t been able to check my blog (and un-spam your post) till now.

But, as much as I do believe in the theory of evolution, I wouldn’t ever want to imply that it’s an infallible theory, nor beyond question. Serious questions based on facts (or lacking facts) are always welcome. That’s what science is all about. In fact, that’s where much of the FUN of science lies.

I think people like yourself are very welcome, or at least should be. I certainly welcome you! Neither side should become so dogmatic that they stop asking the hard questions.

Unfortunately, so much of the “debate” in the public sphere is not of that kind. It’s primarily rhetoric based on fear-mongering. It’s that kind of rhetorical babble I’m complaining about (at least that’s what I meant).

Dan (fitness): You make a good point. Much of what we might call a debate, isn’t really a debate proper. Scientists aren’t changing the way they conduct business in any significant way because of the ID folk. They largely see them as whacko’s.

Likewise, hardcore Christian conservatives see ‘evolutionists’ as anti-God heathens.

There in lies the problem.

I just wanted to comment that my path through atheism (although I don’t call myself that) and science has been the opposite of what BlueOllie suggested.

I have always been non-religious and have never held any belief in gods or deities. I grew up in Kansas, where, even before intelligent design became a common term, there was almost no talk of evolution in the schools. Since religion was not an option to answer the ‘how did we get here’ questions, and I wasn’t finding answers in junior high or high school, I felt very compelled to study physical anthropology and human evolution at university and grad school.

I was raised agnostic. I believed in evolution through public high school and private university (Johns Hopkins). My understanding of evolutionary thinking isn’t shabby; I continue to read about it frequently. I think that addresses your point #1.

At the age of 25 I came to believe a lot had been glossed over in what I’d been taught. When I threw out my preconceptions and started over, thinking critically about evolutionary theory, I came to suspect it was flawed. (A few of my questions are here.)

However, I don’t wage war on science. I support evolutionary science because researchers are digging up and scrutinizing real animals in real rock layers. God is no deceiver. While I may disagree with the timeframes scientists conclude on, I can still appreciate what they reveal about the organisms God created that are no longer alive today. Further, I don’t demand that creationism be taught in schools — creationism needs to prove itself in the scientific sphere first (and I expect it will do so eventually). I hope this addresses your point #2 — evolution doesn’t scare me.

… and yet, unlike many Christians who see no conflict between evolution and faith, I do see evolution opposing Biblical Christianity. Genesis explains that God created a good world … but the world I see is not. Many question God’s goodness and/or power on the basis of suffering. Genesis explains suffering: the world fell into corruption as a result of humanity’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. Without a good creation, and without a literal Adam and Eve, this explanation for suffering falls apart — putting God’s character back in the crosshairs. I don’t consider this little conundrum a fabrication — it’s a real philosophical stickler.

Addressing your conclusion …

I am becoming increasingly convinced that the war between Science and Religion is largely a fabrication by those at the extremes to polarize an otherwise intelligent and reasonable public. With full access to the facts, and without the suppression that comes from creationists and those who favor ID to keep evolution out of schools, people would be far more likely to be able see evolution for what it is (and for what it isn’t).

… I’m a creationist who’s not at war with science, not even evolutionary science. I suppress nothing — I even post del.icio.us links to evolutionary articles on my blog. I expect all schools, even religious schools, to teach evolution thoroughly until it is debunked. I hope this qualifies me as “intelligent and reasonable”; if you read my blog I hope it will be seen as one that spurs others on toward intelligence and reason.

There is no war based on facts. There is simply animosity between groups that don’t really hear one another.

I agree with you to some degree. Yes, each side has advocates that are too polemic. But I don’t have any animosity, and I think I do hear the other side.

I write all of this to suggest that a person can be reasonable and intelligent, yet still have doubts about evolution.

My guess: many people turn to religion to help answer the question: “who are we and how did we get here?” If one truly accepts evolution, then one accepts the concept of random mutation and thereby accepts the concept that just plain randomness had something to say about why “we” are “we” and not some other creature with intelligence.

That is, evolutionary theory leads us to understand that, as humans, there is nothing that special about us. That in tern leads to a non belief in a personal deity (though some might posit the existence of some non-personal creative intelligence; even Dawkins admits that this is possible).

Thank you for the nice blog post!

I think akismet blocked my comment because it had 5 links in it. It wasn’t spam, I promise! If you dig through Akismet Spam you can retrieve and approve it (if you don’t mind). I was responding to your post from a different, nonpolarizing perspective.

Thanks,
the forester