About a month ago, I posted a request for feedback on some ideas for new outreach for CORE. I got some responses that had some interesting observations about my blog. One in particular stood out, mostly because I sympathized with the writer. He said that sometimes when I post about genomes or scientific stuff, I don't give much context or background to appreciate it. Where's the creationist perspective on these news items?
Well, that's a good question. Every other creationist/ID and anticreationist blog out there rarely ever just posts a story on research without making it relevant to the point of their blogs. Why don't I do the same? Why leave my readers hanging?
I think it's pretty simple: I don't have the answers, and sometimes I'm just amazed by things. Often, that amazement doesn't really have an easy explanation. I guess it's like sorting through a jigsaw puzzle and getting excited over similar pieces that seem to come from the same part of the picture. Someday, when I get the picture together, I'll be able to figure out why those pieces are the way they are.
Meanwhile, one thing I think we all need to recognize is that there is no singular "creationist perspective" or "evolutionist perspective." There are individuals who describe themselves as "creationist" or "evolutionist," but none of these individuals can claim a monopoly on what "creationists" or "evolutionists" believe. Everyone has their own idiosyncrasies.
When I write about science, very often the context is simply my own idiosyncrasies. If those posts don't ring your bell, sorry about that. Stick around, I'll try to post something more interesting.
Maybe more posts about fighting dinosaurs?
Feedback? Email me at toddcharleswood [at] gmail [dot] com.