<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Florida: Palm Beach Post Article on Evolution and Intelligent Design</title>
	<atom:link href="http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/</link>
	<description>Wesley R. Elsberry&#039;s personal weblog, talking about falconry, science, antievolution, computation, and the broken body he lives in.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Jul 2010 21:11:22 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave S.</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-158810</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 12:17:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/#comment-158810</guid>
		<description>Ah yes, I see it now. Yeah, that similarity has struck me as well. Both the most radical elements on the opposing side would frame (sorry to have to use that word) the issue as science &lt;i&gt;or&lt;/i&gt; religion, as opposed to science &lt;i&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; religion, both sides confident that if the choice was forced, their side would win. For myself, I simply cannot see how the evangelical atheist side could be correct in this. People aren&#039;t going to give up their faith because of a science they don&#039;t understand and have little wish to understand. You see very few citzens at school board meetings arging for that position. What you see are citizens arguing that evolution erodes faith, or that evolution is compatible with faith.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah yes, I see it now. Yeah, that similarity has struck me as well. Both the most radical elements on the opposing side would frame (sorry to have to use that word) the issue as science <i>or</i> religion, as opposed to science <i>and</i> religion, both sides confident that if the choice was forced, their side would win. For myself, I simply cannot see how the evangelical atheist side could be correct in this. People aren&#8217;t going to give up their faith because of a science they don&#8217;t understand and have little wish to understand. You see very few citzens at school board meetings arging for that position. What you see are citizens arguing that evolution erodes faith, or that evolution is compatible with faith.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Austringer</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-158651</link>
		<dc:creator>Austringer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:20:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/#comment-158651</guid>
		<description>Well, it made sense to me because in my conversation with the reporter, the &quot;sides&quot; were specified as essentially the evangelical antievolutionists and the evangelical atheists. Both of those groups think the conflict model is peachy, the antievolutionists because they think more people will choose religion of their sort if told they can only have one of religion or science, and the evangelical atheists because they think more people will choose science instead of religion. Without that background, it is a bit confusing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, it made sense to me because in my conversation with the reporter, the &#8220;sides&#8221; were specified as essentially the evangelical antievolutionists and the evangelical atheists. Both of those groups think the conflict model is peachy, the antievolutionists because they think more people will choose religion of their sort if told they can only have one of religion or science, and the evangelical atheists because they think more people will choose science instead of religion. Without that background, it is a bit confusing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave S.</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-158628</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/#comment-158628</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;“Both sides aren’t satisfied with the idea that there are a substantial number of Christians who can also accept evolution,” said Elsberry,&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Huh?

Not sure what you mean by this Wes. It seems to me evident that there are many Christians on both sides of this (cultural, not scientific) debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>“Both sides aren’t satisfied with the idea that there are a substantial number of Christians who can also accept evolution,” said Elsberry,</p></blockquote>
<p>Huh?</p>
<p>Not sure what you mean by this Wes. It seems to me evident that there are many Christians on both sides of this (cultural, not scientific) debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Austringer</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-158578</link>
		<dc:creator>Austringer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2007/12/31/florida-palm-beach-post-article-on-evolution-and-intelligent-design/#comment-158578</guid>
		<description>Can we at least keep comments topical? This thread is about Florida. I was briefly confused by a comment that was directed at Texas, until I checked the post that the comment was supposedly directed at, and essentially the comment was a longish non sequitur.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can we at least keep comments topical? This thread is about Florida. I was briefly confused by a comment that was directed at Texas, until I checked the post that the comment was supposedly directed at, and essentially the comment was a longish non sequitur.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
