Measuring Judeo/Christian Fatigue here at PS.org

Conversation Side Conversation
,
1

I thought I would do some statistical analysis with one of the groups, specifically the group known as
READERS.

There are several members of the Readers group that maintained a constant presence from early days with Peaceful Science. Though admittedly,
those who serve as Administrators are understandably regularly active. And there are, of course, those who are particularly devoted to non-religious interpretations of Evolution who are quite constant as well.

image
image884Ă—241 27.7 KB

There is a column in the listing which lists the date of the last posting, and a final column which lists the date of the last visit to the P.S. system.

We have a total of 6 out of a Total Readers count of 22 that have visited the system within the last 30 days. So what about the other 16?

image
image838Ă—439 57.5 KB

In the data you will notice I include myself as part of a 3 person sub-group who leave the system more than 5 years ago. Walter Rogero (Seminarian Advisor) and Clinton Ohlers both depart around Aug/Sep of 2019. I believe complaints I was offering up in April 2019 (or so) led to virtually no corrective response by administrators or other volunteers.

Mark (Seminarian) lasted another year - departing the system permanently in Sep 2020.

Another 3 dropped off in 2021: 1 was a Baptist Theologian, and another was Luthern.

4 left the system in 2022:
Guy Coe, who was one of the charter members of P.S., as well as Jon Garvey. The 4th was a professor of Hebrew.

2 more members dropped out of sight in 2023:
Michael Callen who was an “Old Earth” founding moderator, as well as my buddy Curtis Henderson (De-Escalator-in-Chief). His de-escalation work is sorely missed.

This leaves Joel Duff (Biologist Historian) and Jordan Mantha (Chemistry Professor) as the last 2 out of 3; they both left before the end of June 2024.

The average number of months for these from 2019 to 2024 (inclusive) is about right at 25 months.

If we take the time to compare time scale based on first appearance to final appearance, I think we will find the average being somewhere between 12 and 15 months.

Needless to say, this data will probably be wiped clean to avoid any future comparisons. But I think my case has been surprisingly born out. In a platform that was born out of interest to show that GAE was less at odds with science than usually believed, our ability to drive away interested Judeo/Christian Evolutionists seems to be way above average!

George Brooks

2

If only…

1 Like
3

@gbrooks9 You are leaving out the historical context.

The READERS group are all people who were invited (and accepted) to preview @swamidass’ book prior to publication. Many of these people have been only occasionally active since that time. I don’t think that is unusual, as there is normally high turnover in online groups.

1 Like
4

@Dan_Eastwood ,

I understand what you are saying. But do you find it far-fetched that Christian-centric Evolutionists would find nothing of interest to discuss when any attempt to include God’s role in evolution is immediately dismissed?

Brooks

5

Considering it’s not something that actually happens here, I for one find it far-fetched that this could plausibly be a reason for any pattern in user traffic here.

1 Like
6

@Gisteron

When you say “it’s not something that actually happens here…”, what is “it”?

Brooks

7

In my experience, such people are perfectly happy to discuss science without inserting God into the discussion. They might also like to discuss matters of faith without inserting science into the discussion. Occasionally these topics might run parallel in a broader discussion.

8

I suppose I fit the definition of a “Christian-centric evolutionist” in that I’m a Christ-follower and I certainly affirm evolutionary processes and the Theory of Evolution. However, I don’t recall ever getting much push-back or opposition from this group. Perhaps that is because, in my view, “God’s role in evolution” is not so different from “God’s role in mycology” or even “God’s role in geometry.” That is, on a personal level, I happen to emphasize the basics of philosophy: Ultimate Causation and Proximate Causation are not in opposition or tension. By Ultimate Causation, theologians typically refer to a Creator. And Proximate Causation usually refers to the immediate cause and the “causation timeline.” Thus, the proximate cause of me was my parents. Further back in the chain of causation were my grandparents. But one can also point to my proximate cause being countless generations of genetic recombination. In any case, one can embrace all of the proximate causes which are described in biology textbooks while also regarding God as the Ultimate Cause.

Accordingly, I have no conflicts with evolutionary biologists here because I’m happy to learn all that I can about how evolutionary processes work and what the abundant evidence says about the evolution of life on earth. And while there are plenty of atheists and agnostics on this PS forum who don’t share my interest in philosophical and theological descriptions of ultimate causation, I continue to be educated by them on how evolutionary processes operate.

Occasionally someone has posted something about God “nudging along” certain evolution processes (as in influencing what we typically describe as random or within some stochastic model.) But how can scientific methodologies study and measure “divine interference” in the “randomness” of evolution? Obviously, by definition science is not equipped with the procedures or tools which can study non-natural phenomena, such as the activities of a deity/deities. So while this topic can be very interesting to some philosophers and theologians, I’m not surprised that it doesn’t draw the interest of those purely focused on the science. And I don’t see a problem in that.

I recently listened to a lecture by William Lane Craig where he said that he would never deny that God might have chosen to bring about mutations which would make some species convenient and abundant prey for some predator species he wished to propagate in greater numbers. But he also clearly stated the obvious: It is not at all clear that scientific methodologies would be able to detect this divine intervention (aka “Intelligent Design” by intervening in advance, so to speak.) So WLM doesn’t put down the ID proponents who focus on such topics—although I admit that I’m a bit more harsh on the Intelligent Design movement—but WLC doesn’t see an inherent conflict of preprogrammed development or intelligent design with evolutionary biology.

Every forum has its orientations and “atmosphere.” In this forum one would expect the significant number of professional scientists with massive expertise in the fields relevant to evolution biology to have limited patience for poorly formulated and downright erroneous thinking. I would agree that sometimes the courtesy and patience on this forum could be improved. Yet, I don’t personally find the atmosphere hostile or intolerable. But that’s just me. I don’t doubt that some people will not find this forum a comfortable one—just like I am not comfortable on various forums where the philosophical and even tribal barriers are ominous (and even hostile.) But we all have to find our own communities where we are comfortable. For me that often means just sitting back and reading and learning, without saying a whole lot. And to me that is still a “successful” forum.

That’s my 2 cents.

(As to Judeo-Christian fatigue, most of my fatigue is due to my age. Whether people get tired of me is another question.)

6 Likes