As much as I loathe the scientific community, with well fits the anti-emotional mister Spock stereotype, there’s still got to be some creationist science done if you want to have a credibile harmony of science and religion forum.
The mechanism of creation is choosing. There is science about it, mathematics / physicis, I’ve seen some of it, so then discuss it, if you want to have any credibility whatsoever as a semi-creationist science forum.
Biologos must accept unequivocally the fact that freedom is real and relevant in the universe, and then simply, without prejudice, report the best science about that fact of how things are chosen in the universe.
As said, I know some of it, just by looking around on the internet for the best science about how things are chosen. What makes it that religious people can suppose they have any scientific credibility whatsoever without portraying the least bit interest in the matter of how creation works? It doesn’t figure to me.