"After reading ... I also decided not to bother reading ..."
Having your cake and improperly digesting it too, I see. When you view the entire world through the loupe of your own familiar circle of acquaintances, you miss a lot of the big picture.
There are more interesting things to read about than the neighbor's gossip, but it all depends on whether you take an interest in a wider world.
FR contains a MUCH BIGGER slice of the “wider world” than the rejects over at Darwin Central. Indeed, about the only thing your fellow Creation Opposition Groupies (COGs) do over at DC is gossip and fulminate about what’s happening on FR.
Oh, Goodie! We can have a "Who's got the 'Wider World' Contest!!!" Seems there are two camps here:
Camp 1: Proponents of dogmatic Darwinism
Camp 2: Proponents of the Creation story told in Genesis 1–3 and the Gospel of Saint John 1–5.
Which is the "wider" — did you mean "larger?" — world?
Anyhoot, I'd be glad to speak on behalf of Camp 2. Would you like to speak for Camp 1? It could be fun. Who knows, you might even enjoy yourself! :^)
Just to get the ball rolling, a preliminary offering from Camp 2:
...in all the sciences I studied, information comes first, and regulates the flesh and the world, not the other way around. The pattern seemed to echo some familiar wisdom. Could it be, I asked myself one day in astonishment, that the opening of St. John’s Gospel, In the beginning was the Word, is a central dogma of modern science?Hope to hear from you soon, NicknamedBob!In raising this question I was not affirming a religious stance. At the time it first occurred to me, I was still a mostly secular intellectual. But after some 35 years of writing and study in science and technology, I can now affirm the principle empirically. Salient in virtually every technical field – from quantum theory and molecular biology to computer science and economics – is an increasing concern with the word. It passes by many names: logos, logic, bits, bytes, mathematics, software, knowledge, syntax, semantics, code, plan, program, design, algorithm, as well as the ubiquitous “information.” In every case, the information is independent of its physical embodiment or carrier.
Biologists commonly blur the information into the slippery synecdoche of DNA, a material molecule, and imply that life is biochemistry rather than information processing. But even here, the deoxyribonucleic acid that bears the word is not itself the word. Like a sheet of paper or a computer memory chip, DNA bears messages but its chemistry is irrelevant to its content. The alphabet’s nucleotide “bases” form “words” without help from their bonds with the helical sugar-phosphate backbone that frames them. The genetic words are no more dictated by the chemistry of their frame than the words in Scrabble are determined by the chemistry of their wooden racks or by the force of gravity that holds them. — George Gilder, "Evolution and Me," National Review, July 17, 2006.