I see no evidence, no indication, anywhere of any sort for a god of any kind. Why should I allow even an iota of a possibility that such an entity may exist then by stating like an agnostic that I do not believe there are any gods rather than plainly stating that there are none? Why equivocate on the matter of the correctness of evolution by staying silent? For that matter why entertain pseudo-science of any form, or not speaking against same, thereby allowing people to assume agreement on various quackery?

Yet, it seems this is what the AAAS is advocating in order to gain influence among those in the church that prefer to remain ignorant of evolution and other science based concepts.

As long as concepts from a barbaric time retain influence in modern times there will always be division and turmoil.

Is this what must be done to gradually drag the believer into modern times? Stay silent on some things in order to advocate others? If the ignorance is still taught in churches, will that not win out in the end, since this attitude of staying silent has indicated that the ignorance of the church cannot be overcome in some areas? Doesn’t this still give the leaders of the church too much power?

Why relent?