Our Front Porch

That blog post is too long.

I don’t have any disagreements. But most people won’t read it all the way through, and it won’t do much to attract new interest to the site.

Just my opinion.

I guess I can see why some people might think it too long—but I was fine with it. I come from a time when we skimmed material if we thought it too long and then we decided whether to go back and read further on some points. Also, we were taught to structure every paragraph so that the first and/or last sentence of each paragraph provided a summary of that paragraph. So English composition was taught with skimmers in mind, I suppose.

If an article is long, I can always have that option of skimming—but if it is overly short and fails to sufficiently expand on its main points, I may be left unclear on the author’s intent. So I prefer long. I’m probably an odd duck that way.

1 Like

yes, it is.

1 Like

Done.

In what sense do you affirm evolution?

I am of the opinion that essays are an important form to be recovered. This is why are blog posts can be quite long. Most ideas are best developed in more than a sound bite. Smaller contributes are best in dialogue, as we see on the forum. Ultimately, I’m trying to influence opinions of highly motivated people, not attract mere eyeballs. Essays are a time tested way of doing this.

That being said, this post was really two posts at once. One was a short update on Peaceful Sceince. Perhaps I need to start posting those separately.

2 Likes

Congratulation! and Happy Birthday!

This month, our bustling forum hit about 80,000 views per month, and is becoming our lively front porch with all sorts of interesting things. A book deal on the Genealogical Adam is now officially signed with Intervarsity Press Academic, and my first draft is nearly done. Recently, our work with Science for Seminariesand Concordia Seminary was in the spotlight at WIRED and RealClearLife, leading to an entertaining exchange with Jerry Coyne. This comes on the heels of about 15 articles of quality engagement from the Discovery Institute as well. Conversations with Reasons to Believe have begun to assess the scientific details of their human origins model.

Next week, I will be giving eight talks in eight days, including at FaithAscent in St Louis and at Hong Kong University on “Of Apes and Artificial Minds: The Paradox of Human Exceptionalism,” On top of it all, I turned 40 last week, graduated my second PhD student, and am expecting my second child in December. A big month, and more to come.

2 Likes

I think it is excellent. It has certainly exceeded my expectations as a place where diverse views can be discussed (and argued) but then reason always seems to prevail. A key feature is that there is enough latitude given by Dr. Swamidass and the moderators to allow the envelope to be stretched and then get back to serious discussion. Who can forget “Blasphemy Sunday” proclamation by atheists protesting heavy moderation. I am equally impressed with the number of true experts in many subjects.

2 Likes

I’ll never forget that, hehe. Though I recall it was protesting any moderation, not heavy moderation.

1 Like

It’s been my genuine pleasure.

But of course, that’s not my explanation of the forum but a quotation of yours @swamidass. :wink:

1 Like

@AJRoberts

Did you mean we should assert Common Descent, not Evolution?

Or that we should assert Evolution, not Common Descent?

One of them, at the very least, has to be asserted.

I don’t understand what is difficult to understand about my statement. Stop saying RTB (or AJRoberts) doesn’t affirm evolution. Joshua edited his statement to which my comment was directed. I’m glad he did; it is now more accurate. But the fact that he did seems to be confusing late comers.

1 Like

Evolution is equivocal. The statement you were making above was trying to simplify and categorize our/my basic position. We/I do not affirm universal common descent. That’s all the details I have time for today, sorry.

2 Likes

I think @AJRoberts has made it pretty clear before on this forum she accepts that evolution happens and believes it happens the majority of the time within families and orders. There are just basic Created types. For example, there were was an original Tyrannosaur type that all subsequent Tyrannosaurs evolved from. So she seems to accept Separate ancestry. More of an orchard than a single tree. This is how I have interpreted her statements anyway.

1 Like

My take away from this is to be more careful in phrasing the RTB position, using language that you’ve tuned in this where I can. This is an example of a place I can.

1 Like

@AJRoberts

If you keep saying Evolution is equivocal… nobody will know what you think the word is supposed to mean.

And Common Descent, without the Universal, usually just means Speciation.

So… can you affirm Speciation?

1 Like

Not too long.

Applying heavy moderation isn’t much fun either, but some people don’t want to respect any rules at all. Idealy the moderators work to educate people to the rules, and rarely need to intervene.

2 Likes

Obviously, I’ve been hearing this “orchard model” and “evolution within created kinds” for many years now but I can’t claim to really understand it. The same evolutionary processes and copious evidence which explains the divisions into families and orders also explains classes and kingdoms. So what is the evidence for rigid “boundaries” at those taxonomic levels? I don’t understand that. (Would I be mistaken that religion-based presuppositions are forcing selective notice of the overwhelming evidence? If yes—that is, I’m mistaken—I would love to get educated on this topic.)

3 Likes

It makes no sense. Do not adjust your television set.

You nailed it, IMO. It’s an effort to make “Kinds” or Baramin correspond to the creatures aboard Noah’s Ark.
As I understand it, the surviving Kinds then go through a hyper-evolutionary process, losing information from the original super-genome while diversifying into the species we see today. So the original “wolf-kind” split up into all the canines we see today, an so on. This greatly reduces the number of species on the Ark needed to repopulate the Earth.

Now if you will excuse me, I need to go flush my brain …

2 Likes

Always happy to help. :slight_smile:

Independent Birth of Organisms. A New Theory that Distinct Organisms Arose Independently from the Primordial Pond, Showing that Evolutionary Theories are Fundamentally Incorrect

Not true in the case of @AJRoberts and RTB. Their flood is regional, and does not require all animals to fit on the ark.

2 Likes