Not sure what you are getting at here. But it sounds to me like "Has anyone on either side found a magic bullet that would end the conflict?" Correct me if I am wrong.

But to answer what I think you are getting at.

YES, THERE IS A BULLET, BUT IT IS NOT MAGIC, nor is there a controversy. Science is the bullet to superstition and the cure for credulity.

Evolution is a fact. The fact that believers want to ignore it doesn't make it a controversy. It just means they still think the earth is flat and don't want to catch up with modern reality.

You can believe all you want, like the Ancient Egyptians did, that the sun was a god, but the sun, in reality is not a god.

Creating smoke and mirrors is what believers do because they don't want to face that reality is all there is and it frightens them that there is no Superman vs Kriptonite cause to nature or the universe.

I think it happens all the time though not always right then. The best you should hope for is to make someone think after the "conversation" is over. Most people will defend a position rabidly even when they realize there may be some credibility to what the other person is saying.

My own idea's have changed and "evolved" heavily over the last 10 years. I used to be more of an idealist but now pragmatism and the "reality" of things are a bit more solid for me though I still try to be optimistic in most things that warrant it.

Btw evolution might be a silver bullet to "god" but he has been dodging it for years.

This is particularly true when the "other person" appears to have credibility in their deconstruction of irrational beliefs, and another individual has their ego deeply entrenched with said beliefs.

He hasn't just been dodging it, nor is it a "silver bullet" or anything close, in terms of religion. "God" -more specifically, Judaism and Christianity- has been assimilating and adapting to scientific findings  regarding evolution, as well as the age of the universe, the (somewhat unwieldy) possibility of multiple universes, and the Theory of Everything/Unified Field Theory.

And now, there are at least dozens of millions of jews and christians who believe in science as reported by actual scientists, not by weathermen, partisan hacks, ideology, or religious ministers. It's likely these same set of people treat the Bible as allegorical, are not biblical literalists, etc.

The only thing evolution and other scientific findings like it do, is challenge and render obsolete some of the more asinine and misguided declarations found in the 'sacred texts'.

I still think that evolution did not, and does not, 'kill' creationist beliefs, or directly disprove religion, it just cuts the ground from under one of the biggest arguments for 'God', namely as an 'explanation' for the incredible diversity and complexity of Life, by providing an alternative, natural explanation.

It goes further, of course, in explaining why there are many examples of very much less-than-perfect 'designs'. This is the strongest argument against the attempt by less 'fundy' believers to paint 'evolution' as the tool God uses to 'design' life.

It also explains why there are so many examples of different species living in essentially the same ecological 'niche', or even just minor but measureable differences in what appear to be the same species on neighbouring islands or valleys in the same region. This doesn't really present a big problem to believers, altho it was what triggered Darwin to first begin to wonder why a creator would do that.

I think their biggest problem with evolution is that it has us as part of the 'animal kingdom'.

Some God believers are OK with evolution as applied to the rest of life on earth, but would much prefer to see us a 'special' or 'separate' creation.

Except you didn't say "creationism" originally. Moving goalposts a bit, hmmm?

Yeah, pretty much. What do you think intelligent design is? It's evolution enabled by an invisible magic dude.

Oh yes, which eventually leads you to deism, ie theism without religion. Deism is super flexible, as their is no specific dogma to deconstruct.

edit; shit, Bobspence beat me to it.

I think I have had a few experiences of this.

I blogged about one interaction submitted for your consideration. I entitled it Taming The Wild Fundie.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/2011/06/taming-wild-fundie.html

On the other side when I was a fundie minister I meet this very pleasant young couple who I forget how I met but they invited me into their home. I met them a couple of times and I tried to convert them to "the" faith (my faith-the right one of course). The husband said the thing he needed to understand is how can there be so much pain in the world and there be a loving, perfect god.

I bought them C.S. Lewis' Problem of Pain and did lots of research on the subject and we talked. We eventually parted ways on friendly terms but I walked away with a big crack in my facade which I sincerely doubted they noticed. I certainly wouldn't want to intimate it because I didn't want to burn in the lake of fire. 

It was religion itself that threw me. As I commented in my blog, being a thinking  Christian is a hard thing to do. After I left fundie-land,  evolution was the cherry on the top. It was never a persuasive point in my de-conversion, but then again I was only reading what fundamentalist wrote about evolution and didn't get it in school. 

I am blown away how much more evidence there is now for evolution than there was decades ago. Today I would have a harder time dismissing it.

This is one of those christian things where they turn an argument against christianity against non-believers.
The whole foundation of the judeo-christian faith is something has to die and brutally so in order for some one who is undeserving is permitted to live.

Christianity is a death cult. They praise his death and wear crosses and have to weep because he is so perfect and they are so undeserving.

I think evolution is about life and mixture of genes. Natural selection requires death but not in the ugly and mind f@cking way religion does.

That's a common misconception about the random nature of natural selection.

Natural selection is not about 'survival of the fittest'. Natural selection is a succinct phrase to describe the circumstantial way all things evolved.

That just demonstrates just how dishonest and corrosive the church is (and always was) to understanding and pursuit of 'truth', and education. They are in every sense of the word, about brainwashing and cultivating ignorance in their 'sheep'.

It's really not until the last century or so that they've really started to lose their grip, in 1st world countries, and more secular based societies.

The beauty is, is that the internet is difficult to stop. The inquisitive nature of minds is incredibly difficult to stop. It's a perfect combination for the eventually decline of religion into the ranks of astrology and fairy tale characters.

Of course. It's completely illusory to think if ourselves that way. We are really only made out of pencil lead after all, and will eventually be simply worm food...lol

I'm not familiar with the specifics of ID, as it seemed little else besides a (poorly disguised) trojan means of weaseling in some religion in classrooms.

Well, there's only a handful of animals that most closely resemble us, there's one animal that shares 97% of our DNA, and there's a cousin species of that one animal that can be tracked from 6-5 mya via fossils to Australipithicus to Homo and finally... humans.

But then, on the other hand, members of the Abrahamic religions are hardly unique in considering themselves a special case.