I'm not even going into my own questions, but others that have been closed like the one on school, this one about aliens, and perhaps most controversially this one about evolution and medicine were closed way too quickly. People were answering and engaging, and the conversations hadn't devolved into a flame war, so I think their closures were unjust.
I think there should be much tighter controls on closing posts, especially because several prominent users are taking control of the discussions and owning this board.
The question on school was understandable, especially knowing the user wasn't a native English speaker (and so should have been given some leeway). The one about aliens could have been addressed in many ways, including perhaps citing studies about demographics on who does/doesn't believe in aliens and then breaking down why, and the third ... that's the worst.
That was a totally appropriate question, well thought and interesting, and could easily have been answered if someone gave it a chance. While the individual questioned the answers, he did so in a reasoned way. This and other papers about MRSA evolution or this one about mitochondrial DNA, evolution, and genetic testing might have answered his questions, if others had been given a chance to weigh in.
Just dismissing him as a creationist crackpot with vague answers about how evolution is in every part of medicine is elitist, cowardly, and not in keeping with the spirit of this site. It's like you're literally trying to drive away people with dissenting opinions, and this site is becoming an incestuous breding ground where senior members ask questions they know will be easy to debunk.
And that rant is my way of saying I think you guys need to lay off and let some give people a chance to engage.