Absolutely. Engaging is a two-way street. There’s good science and bad science. Good theology and bad. Having discussions, patiently, with one another (while listening to one another) is the best way to work through it. Not listening and responding robotically to key-words is not the best way to handle it. Hearing sound evidence and dismissing it is not a good way.
We aren’t born pre-programmed with the facts, but we are born with the ability to listen and sort through the evidence suggested. This is the discourse that should take place in a forum like PS. But, even if people choose to not listen, or to take their ball and go home, there are other curious folks who are reading and wondering, and for their sake we should also continue the dialog.
Yes, you hit the nail on the head, here! A tough call if the two issues at play are “science” and “theology.” If one doesn’t want to look (for now) at the evidence, and is currently unwilling to consider an alternate theological position (even if it is considered to be mainstream by the vast majority of theologians) then this kind of discussion won’t make much difference. Except, maybe, to the others who are reading but not participating in the discussion.