"Ask yourself why someone like me needs to do the equivalent of pounding on a two-ton brass bell with a sledgehammer to finally get you to a position that, in any reasonable world, would be a normal default view?"

I ask myself that all the time. What does motivate you to spend so much time and effort trying to convince people of this? Especially people who would probably rather talk about something else. I feel very strongly about a lot of things I never bring up here, and even some of my pet peeves, like anomalism or doctrinaire religion, only get an occasional mention. I'll be honest with you, most people would be more receptive to your views if they were not framed as political issues. That is an almost instant turn-off because people are too busy reaching to see if their wallet is still in their jeans to listen. I know you don't always do this, but your positions there are pretty clear, and they can't help but color your analysis and put off your listeners.

For example, if I were really skeptical about the standard Darwinian interpretation of how natural selection works, (which I am, by the way), don't you think identifying myself as a Creationist would immediately make most of my listeners here simply tune me out? As it turns out, I believe there are serious flaws in evolutionary theory that have nothing to do with religious issues. They are purely scientific. A critical approach to global warming might be a lot more effective if presented that way.

Just a thought, and thanks for your reasoned response to my post, I was expecting a broadside.