Kirt:
> If seeing the same tired misinformation  touted as support for
creationism, and >getting mighty tired of it, makes me arrogant and elitist
in some eyes, then so be >it...

Fair enough. But when somebody or something really gets to any of us there
is usually more to the picture than meets the eye.  If you said you were
fed-up or outraged that would be something I could relate to but the
insinuation expressed in the word "bored" borders on insult and disrespect
- like how dare the world be full of so many creationist idiots. :-)

>I _would_ be surprised. Yet, there are many intelligent folks who
>contirbute here (and, presumably, lurk here) and perhaps some will share
>their anti-evolution sentiments.

That would be interesting.

> Plenty of mystery, plenty of logical paradoxes, to go around. Science has
>not removed the "need" or usefulness of religious explanations.

Which is part of the reason why so many physicists today are drawn to
mysticism.

>It is all well and good to doubt that evolution satifactorily explains life
>on Earth--indeed, science is based on doubt. But using such doubt as an
>intellectual freedom to ignore reality is unbecoming.

I agree. But what I am really curious about are the mechanisms that drive
such behavior. If we beat our opponents into submission, we will never get
to understand them, and we will in our rejection inadvertently be creating
more of what we are trying to change.

>Considering the example of  the latter which inspired Ward to undertake
the work >involved in his post(s), I still stand firm that the fallacies
used to bash evolution >are boring

When you use the word boring you are closing your mind and stopping the
dialogue - you are no longer curious about what your opponent is trying to
express or where he or she is coming from. That is "boring" to me. :-)

>--they are repeated ad nauseum though they are false-to-facts. No matter
how logical Ward's post(s) are, no matter how well-researched, there will
be folks who dismiss it all and cling to their creationist explanations
and continue to spout the same fallacies which Ward did so well at
demonstrating the utter weaknesses of.

I look forward to seeing a creationist response to Ward's essay on evolution.

>That_ is boring year in and year out.

Your threshold for boredom must have gotten very low or you have been
hanging out too much on other lists. :-) On this list there have in the
past only been few debates about evolution.

> Ward's posts, however, were so succint and well-written that they were
anything BUT  boring.

I think that is because he is too passionate about the issue to be bored -
just like to a good teacher there is never a stupid question only a lack of
understanding of the plight of the pupil. Of course, moderators are exempt
from having to live up to these lofty ideals. :-)

Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]