Moderation Procedures to level the playing field

I think that it is essential that the Administrators do all that they can to create an environment where all can present their best argument in support of their position.For some positions, this is fairly easy, there is an overwhelming body of evidence available or reason and logic and reality. Other positions are based primarily on emotion, myth and superstition.I think that the Administrators need to consider the basic supportability of a position, and when it is an emotional or superstition position, the Administrators should allow greater leeway from posters allowing them the freedom to use personal attacks on others, allowing the supporters of those positions to label those they are responding to as morons or freaks, even threatening others with physical harm or being shot.This does not mean that other people involved in the debate should not be allowed to challenge such positions, but that the challengers from the position of reason, evidence, logic and reality should be restricted in their challenge from using personal attack and required to address the argument not the individual.Those trying to support the emotional, illogical, irrational positions should be allowed the only tools they have available, personal attack, misrepresentation, misdirection and goal shifting.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

One problem is that it appears simply allowing Biblical Christians, YECs, IDists, OECs and Biblical Creationists to use personal attacks, misrepresentation, misdirection, false statements and moving goal posts may not be enough in their eyes. The positions they try to advocate are so weak, so flawed, so bankrupt that it appears they can only stand when never challenged.This is certainly a continuing trend with the growth of Avoidance Education and the recent tactics of groups such as Creation Science Evangelism (CSE).I believe that at EvC we need to allow everyone to make their best possible argument in support of their position, regardless of how weak that argument might be. However I do not agree with avoiding challenges to any position. The simple fact that positions like "Special Creation", "Young Earth", the "Flood", the "Exodus", "Biblical Creationism" or "Literal Biblical Interpretation" are unsupportable should not preclude either challenges to those positions or attempts to support them.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

An issue came up recently in Message 49, where a member was warned that calling the TOE stupid was suggesting that members were stupid.While such an argument when made without supporting the position with evidence or reason is a weak argument, when it is all that the person has available, should they be denied the right to use even the minimal tools they have?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, a lot of messages in the "General Discussion..." topic, that better belong here.AM

I wrestle with these kinds of issues all the time. Effective answers are hard to come by.My original vision for EvC was much more along the lines of what Jar describes. Unfortunately, not many creationists who come here these days can muster valid scientific arguments. Cracking down on such members tends to turn EvC into an evolutionists-only site.EvC is experiencing a rather extreme paucity of knowledgeable creationists at present. Long time members might remember TrueCreation, Tranquility Base and Peter Borger, who were all here in the early days of 2001-2003. Not a single creationist of their calibre has visited here in a considerable period. It's incredible to realize now that as horrible as we found the science of these creationists then, today's are much, much worse.I believe this is due to the Dover case that concluded near the end of 2005. Fundamentalists now face the reality that both creationism and ID have lost in court, and this has apparently taken considerable wind out of their sails. We used to have detailed discussions about the ideas of Stephen Austin, Andrew Snelling, William Dembski and so on as presented in their technical papers or books. Now the creationists who come are can barely mumble.The last strategy employed by ID before Dover was "Teach the Controversy." This is now dead since Dover found that the controversy was social/religious, not scientific, and so the current strategy is "Teach all the evidence," but that's no fun for creationists because there really isn't any evidence. People can really get excited about the idea of discussions with people they believe they can prove wrong, but the creationist braintrust is providing very little ammo these days.And so the creationists entering the creation/evolution fray these days tend to be unarmed. They can muster barbed wit or acerbic commentary, but actual scientific arguments aren't in their arsenal. I think raising the bar will just leave us with many fewer creationists.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Good, then how about promoting my new PNT that actually addresses the potential avenues open to Creationists.While this thread deals primarily with Moderation Procedures, that one deals with the possible venues of supporting a Creationist argument.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Percy,How much consideration have you given to the possibility that, if present trends continue, EvC might be evolving toward a broad Science/Faith discussion site? Maybe it is outgrowing its original focus on the evolution denial issue.

On TrueCreation.Chris was and still is a vibrant, bright person. However back then, TC was also still a kid in high school. Since those days, TC has grown up, is now a junior in college. As he currently describes himself: The last time I talked with Chris was just before they hauled Hovind away. He had been calling in to Hovind's infomercial show and raking Hovind over the coals.While I still believe TC could do a better job of supporting the Biblical Creationist position than most who show up here today, he also knows that the current models presented are absolute bunk.This happens.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The war is over. What's the plan for demobilization?How do we maintain a standing army with the capability of rapid mobilization in case of future troubles? How do we keep that army fit and dedicated when it has nothing to do?

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Then again, maybe we're just getting a moment to launder our fatigues before jumping back in. Muslim fundies are increasingly carrying the ball for Team Creo. The BBC article below quotes an education expert saying that 'a higher proportion of Muslim families do not accept evolutionary theory compared with Christian families.'BBC 2007.10.04
Teachers fear 'evolution lessons'
BBC NEWS | UK | Education | Teachers 'fear evolution lessons'

The teaching of evolution is becoming increasingly difficult in UK schools because of the rise of creationism, a leading scientist is warning.

​

Head of science at London's Institute of Education Professor Michael Reiss says some teachers, fearful of entering the debate, avoid the subject totally. This could leave pupils with gaps in their scientific knowledge, he says.

​

Prof Reiss says the rise of creationism is partly down to the large increase in Muslim pupils in UK schools. He said: "The number of Muslim students has grown considerably in the last 10 to 20 years and a higher proportion of Muslim families do not accept evolutionary theory compared with Christian families. That's one reason why it's more of an issue in schools."

​

Prof Reiss estimates that one in 10 people in the UK now believes in literal interpretations of religious creation stories - whether they are based on the Bible or the Koran.

​

[ . . . . ]

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

What we see here is the effect of a general education clash between cultures and a possible lack of preparation of teachers to teach the materials in question (where the teachers are generalists rather than specialists).

quote:

---

Instead, teachers should tackle the issue head-on, whilst trying not to alienate students, he argues in a new book.

​

'Not equally valid'

​

"By not dismissing their beliefs, we can ensure that these students learn what evolutionary theory really says - and give everyone the understanding to respect the views of others," he added.

​

His book; Teaching about Scientific Origins: Taking Account of Creationism, gives science teachers advice on how to deal with the "dilemma".

---

Could be an interesting book.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : finishedEdited by Adminnemooseus, : Fixed quote box.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

There is another related phenomenon, and that is since the Biblical Christians and Biblical Creationist positions really don't stand up to examination, since they cannot successfully support their position in an open environment, they simply don't try to support their position, but rather withdraw and hide their ideas in some isolated little ghetto where they no longer have to face challenge.That can be seen in the growth of all the "Avoidance Schools", things like "GodTube", the brazillion or two "Christian Televangelists", the separate and unequal "Creation Museums" and other efforts to hide away in some separate universe when they do not face challenge and question. We have even had a member who could not face open challenge of her positions here at EvC and so simply cried and whined and demanded to get her way or to be banned until she got her wish, then set up her own little controlled environment where SHE could control the content and avoid challenge.Is that also what is seen here?Can the avoidance and ghetto mentality succeed?Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

At the risk of annoying the monkey. (LOL)

quote:

---

There is another related phenomenon, and that is since the Biblical Christians and Biblical Creationist positions really don't stand up to examination, since they cannot successfully support their position in an open environment

---

Mangled grammar apart.By open you mean here? At Evc? It must be, because you use that expression immediately here:

quote:

---

We have even had a member who could not face OPEN challenge of her positions here at EvC and so simply cried and whined and demanded to get her way or to be banned until she got her wish, then set up her own little controlled environment where SHE could control the content and avoid challenge.

---

You mean like the controlled environment Percy set up? Where he can control the content and avoid challenge? EvC indeed.There is an "old" Irish song called "Whiskey in the Jar". It's a rabble rousing song- sung now only for tourists.

I assume you can show where Percy has ever controlled content or avoided challenge?AbE:Actually EvC is a great example of open discussion. TTBOMK No ONE has even been banned or even suspended at EvC based on their opinions. People are regularly allowed to post their best possible argument in support of their position no matter how weak it is.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion