Signing off

[Mallon]

I first joined CF with the hope of learning something, both about my own faith and about the creation-evolution “debate” in general. And while I have certainly learned a lot in my time here, this place has since turned into a gong show. Instead of intelligent discussion, conversation has degraded into a strawman shooting gallery. Challenges to evolutionary theory are made in the form of arguments from ignorance – a conveyor belt of absurd statements like ‘evolution says dogs came from cats’ or ‘evolution occurs at the level of the individual’ or ‘evolutionary theory attempts to replace God.’ Countering these silly proclamations over and over again was fun for a while, but I think I’ve outgrown it. As a scientist, my interest in defending the theory of evolution from army recruits, homemakers, and English teachers has long since waned. I can think of a few reasons to debate evolution with Creationists, but I can think of even more reasons not to…

• The scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of evolution. I feel no more obligation to convince YECs of its reality than I do to convince flat earthers that the world is round. If they wish to live in the 19th century, so be it. Science moves forward.
• Arguing with fundamentalist religion is like arguing with a brick wall. Words do not penetrate. Most fundamentalists are convinced that theirs is the One True Faith, on par with the very thoughts of God Himself. There is little that can be said to change their minds.
• As I’ve heard some Creationists here admit, if evolution were true, they would lose their faith in the Gospel message. Far be it for me, as a Christian, to take that away from them by convincing them of the strength of evolutionary theory.
• As Gould and Dawkins have pointed out, debating evolution gives the false impression that there exists a real debate among scientists concerning its veracity. No such debate exists.
• Not having to defend evolution over the Internet frees up time so that I can get real work done... like doing evolutionary science or reading a book.
• And perhaps most importantly, arguing about the creation-evolution “controversy” often leads to animosity between Christians and distracts us from our focus on the Gospel message.

Having said all that, I think I’m about done here with trying to convince people of the obvious. If anyone knows of another forum where origins theology is discussed intelligently, at a higher level, I would love to hear about it. In the interest of broadening my horizons, book recommendations would be appreciated, too. I suspect I may continue to post in this subforum, but I feel very little motivation to continue in the Origins Theology forum. More and more, I am under the impression that others here feel the same way. Thanks to all here who have taught me so much about origins theology since I first joined over a year ago.

 

[Deamiter]

I quite agree. There are often posts I feel interested in responding to, but very rarely am I interested in providing the entire science education that would be required to convince some people that evolution isn't an evil atheistic conspiracy. I do enjoy teaching radiometric dating (as far as I understand it myself) but when people won't accept our observation of unchanging decay rates as evidence, I balk at the thought of going through enough high-level calculus and statistics for them to understand the theory behind the observations! Heck, I balk at the thought of going back to my texts to figure it out myself and I NEVER want to get so far into it that I understand the theoretical basis behind why a certain atom has a certain half-life (as Kerr recently brought up).

Anyway, since I applied to be a mod again, my time here will be spent keeping the peace rather than arguing details so I suppose I too am taking a bit of a break. I think the key is that you cannot push yourself. If the current crop of regulars is driving you nuts, spend a few months educating YOURSELF rather than fighting to educate others. If the climate here hasn't changed and/or you don't feel like diving back in, the forum will miss you but overall the world will probably be better with you applying your skills elsewhere.

 

[staveoffzombies]

In the interest of broadening my horizons, book recommendations would be appreciated, too.

You may have already read this one, but Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller is the best book I've read from a Theistic Evolutionary viewpoint.

 

[Willtor]

Ah, Mallon. We loved having you here. Always a voice of reason. I hope you'll come back at some point, though, when (as Deamiter says) there's a new crop. As to YECs' faiths being challenged, I hope that some of the arguments cause them to reconsider the object of their faith, but I sometimes have the same concern, so I understand.

 

[FranciscanJ]

I cried when you took off your picture of Kent Hovind in jail stripes. Seriously though, you have been a great teacher here, for those who Christians who would listen.

Yeah, I can see how this place can start to seem like a lost cause. It seems like the best that can be offerred to Christians who would lose their faith over evolution is

1) Better reasons (natural theology, etc) to reasonably believe than what creation science, or their "plain litteral" hermeneutic offers them. Some people actually see YEC as their major apologetic. Doesn't make much sense but its what we're dealing with.

2) Theological models for Theistic Evolution. Most people who come here seem completely baffled at the idea of evolution and Christian faith working together. Many, like myself, were taught their entire lives by well-meaning Christians that if evolution is true, Christianity is not. With so much to lose if evolution is true (in their view), no amount of science will help this problem, at least for some of these people. It will only cause them to waver between unbelief with evolution or belief without evolution. The latest efforts of some atheist celebrity scientists have also not helped this problem.

Many of todays young atheists were likely raised as YECs.

We may think about providing some more accessable theological information for such Christians (in a loving way), books, information to help deprogram this sort of thinking. I know many Nazarene colleges regularly have to do this to classes full of creationist freshman.

Perhaps if resources were recommended here people could more easily learn how evolution could theologically work with their faith, excellent reasons to believe, and then possibly would be more open to being shown the scientific truth of evolution as well.

Maybe I should start a seperate thread about this too.

Good luck to you Mallon.

 

[crawfish]

I'm sorry to see you go. I think any board that broaches this subject will face its ups and downs in terms of quality. I hope you'll at least lurk so you'll be around if things get better.

 

[Melethiel]

Sorry to see you go, although I understand how you feel...I've also lost interest in rehashing the same debates over and over again.

 

[Mallon]

Thanks to everyone for the kind words. As I said, I likely won't be leaving this place entirely... just not participating in the OT forum.
For what it's worth (and I see it was mentioned recently in another thread here), shortly after I announced my "retirement", I got an email from Steve Martin inviting me to subscribe to his blog, An Evangelical Dialogue on Evolution:

http://evanevodialogue.blogspot.com/

It's a very intelligent piece of work, and there's a distinct lack of nutjobs there.

I also highly recommend the videos on following website:

http://www.blog.beyondthefirmament.com/video-presentations/

They very clearly explain why it is rediculous to expect the Bible to preach accurate science. A must-see for YECs to be sure, so feel free to post them in the OT forum.

 

[chaoschristian]

Ah, Mallon, I am saddened at your departure, but am heartened to know it's not complete.

The origins discussion brought me to CF, but that seems to have run it's course.

Hope to see you in the Kafeteria!

 

[shernren]

I do enjoy teaching radiometric dating (as far as I understand it myself) but when people won't accept our observation of unchanging decay rates as evidence, I balk at the thought of going through enough high-level calculus and statistics for them to understand the theory behind the observations! Heck, I balk at the thought of going back to my texts to figure it out myself and I NEVER want to get so far into it that I understand the theoretical basis behind why a certain atom has a certain half-life (as Kerr recently brought up).

I personally enjoy teaching any kind of math, physics, and even stamp collecting - sorry, chemistry and biology (heh. heh.) I can understand enough. It's a challenge for me; I'm turned on whenever I have to explore didactic expositions of truth. There is nothing more exciting to me than a ready and willing student.

Of course, there is nothing more disheartening to me, by the same token, than someone who just isn't willing to learn.

So I think I'll still be hanging around here for a bit. My standing offer to Busterdog to try to teach him enough calculus to understand why pulsar data disproves c-decay still stands.

 

[birdan]

Thanks Mallon for all the thoughtful posts and information you've imparted in this forum, and best of luck to you in the future.

As frustrating as these discussions can be, and fruitless too in trying to impart scientific information, just remember that the debate really isn't scientific - it's political. So keep tabs on your local and national political scene and do take time to email your political leaders when the 'debate' rears its ugly head.

Thanks again.