With so much hullabaloo over the 'F' word, I'm back to say I really enjoyed reading reactions to my post. Thanks to all for taking the time to think about these ideas with me. PZ suggests I need a lesson in Framing and on that topic, I've got some thoughts here, here, here, here, and here. And if I'm still having trouble, I've got Chris, but will add I have the utmost respect for PZ and admire his style.
What tickles me most is the way so many folks jumped too quickly to conclusions over what I do and do not believe based solely on twisting and turning my words to suit their purpose. The thread took on a life of its own and became very much a debate over semantics. Who knew a Monday could be so much fun!
PZ wrote: 'Without even saying a word about her position on the issue, it's quite clear where she stands. While giving us that great big clue, though, she also fails to explain anything about how religion and science are supposed to interact..'
Actually, no. My position was not included in that post, but there is more on that here where I do provide some hints. I feel faith has no place in science - the very reason I have not revealed where I stand. Still, it's quite obvious these concepts do interact as fair game on Science Blogs and I wont deny I'm having a great time engaging in this forum.
Throughout day I'll post on recurring themes from Monday's comments, but in the meantime, I have to walk to work. Check back very soon for more on another 'F' word: Fundamentalism
[And to those looking for a good fight in the comments, you have the floor.. err.. forum. All I politely request is that you limit personal attacks to me and not other commenters and please refrain from using a third 'F' word this time.]
