Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,395 Year: 3,652/9,624 Month: 523/974 Week: 136/276 Day: 10/23 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ID Failing--at Christian Institutions
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1364 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 31 of 38 (268857)
12-13-2005 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Omnivorous
12-12-2005 3:48 PM


Re: just cause it bears repeating (or is that bares?)
A little grant money would certainly further my intelligent designs.
quite.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Omnivorous, posted 12-12-2005 3:48 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9141
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 32 of 38 (269115)
12-14-2005 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by MangyTiger
12-12-2005 6:31 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
Mangy,
Open another topic. Use his post as your basis for the topic. And have the topic be for substantiation of the claims he has made. Be interesting to see if he even posts to it and if he does what kind of evidence he uses.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by MangyTiger, posted 12-12-2005 6:31 PM MangyTiger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by RAZD, posted 12-14-2005 7:45 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 33 of 38 (269137)
12-14-2005 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Theodoric
12-14-2005 2:37 AM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
another one you mean -- it's been done.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Theodoric, posted 12-14-2005 2:37 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2190 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 34 of 38 (269140)
12-14-2005 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by MangyTiger
12-12-2005 6:31 PM


truly, I'm shocked
quote:
The record shows you made a claim and would not either back it up or withdraw it.
Randman is making factual claims that, when asked to back them up, refuses to support of withdraw?
How incredible! How unbelievable! How out of character for randman!
Isn't this sort of thing that got him suspended/made a moderator?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-14-2005 08:21 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by MangyTiger, posted 12-12-2005 6:31 PM MangyTiger has not replied

  
AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 38 (269165)
12-14-2005 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by randman
12-12-2005 5:49 PM


On being off topic
randman writes:
Mangy, no, because it would seriously take this thread off-topic.
OK randman, let's clarify.
randman, post 21?, 23? writes:
schraf, post 20 writes:
(Of course, the ToE makes no predictions at all about how many fossils there will be, only that they exist at all)
Wrong ToE predicts a process occurred. One can look at the fossil record to see if the fossil record indicates ToE occurred as evos claim, or did not. For example, evos claim the reason 99.9% of transitional forms are not seen is due to fossil rarity, but that is an unsubstantiated claim because it does not explain why, if fossilization is so rare, it is also so common for many species.
schraf makes a fairly off-topic side remark (based on a tidbit in your original post that was off-topic)... and randman, by responding, makes it an issue in the thread.
randman writes:
If you want to appeal to a moderator on this, please do so but quit taking this thread more off-topic than it is.
The deal is, if you don't want to go off-topic, don't take the thread in that direction. Don't respond to schraf's remark. If you wanted to respond to that, you should have said her remark was off topic, and that you'll respond somewhere else.
To respond to schraf, then get called to evidence your remarks (a completely valid move) and hide behind "it's off-topic" is absolutely bad form. The problem is not that "further substantiation is off-topic"; your remarks were off topic. If you knew it was off topic, you shouldn't have made the remarks. "Further substantiation" becomes off-topic only if that substantiation takes more than 2 or 3 posts to present it and come to an agreement.
That said, if you're really interested in addressing the questions, point MangyTiger to appropriate threads where it was discussed; simply mentioning that they "exist" is not very helpful. You know where the threads are, you made the comment, grab some links and post 'em up. We're here to discuss, we should be happy to link to discussions we've had and to get new people thinking about these ideas.
We each have a responsibility to stay on topic and keep the discussion flowing. Instead of pointing fingers, let's do it by looking at our own actions and how they contribute to the problem.
Any comments, please take them to the appropriate thread below.
Thanks.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
    New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
  • "Post of the Month" Forum
  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum
    See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 28 by randman, posted 12-12-2005 5:49 PM randman has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 36 by Theodoric, posted 12-14-2005 8:33 PM AdminBen has not replied

      
    Theodoric
    Member
    Posts: 9141
    From: Northwest, WI, USA
    Joined: 08-15-2005
    Member Rating: 3.3


    Message 36 of 38 (269440)
    12-14-2005 8:33 PM
    Reply to: Message 35 by AdminBen
    12-14-2005 10:07 AM


    Re: On being off topic
    Randman are you going to respond or just keep up your claims of not wanting to go off topic?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 35 by AdminBen, posted 12-14-2005 10:07 AM AdminBen has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 37 by MangyTiger, posted 12-14-2005 10:14 PM Theodoric has not replied

      
    MangyTiger
    Member (Idle past 6374 days)
    Posts: 989
    From: Leicester, UK
    Joined: 07-30-2004


    Message 37 of 38 (269500)
    12-14-2005 10:14 PM
    Reply to: Message 36 by Theodoric
    12-14-2005 8:33 PM


    Re: On being off topic
    randman has said in other threads he's away travelling until Thursday or Friday.

    I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 36 by Theodoric, posted 12-14-2005 8:33 PM Theodoric has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 38 by randman, posted 12-15-2005 4:01 PM MangyTiger has not replied

      
    randman 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 4919 days)
    Posts: 6367
    Joined: 05-26-2005


    Message 38 of 38 (269705)
    12-15-2005 4:01 PM
    Reply to: Message 37 by MangyTiger
    12-14-2005 10:14 PM


    Re: On being off topic
    Thanks for pointing that out.
    As sort of a close-out for this topic, some of the prior threads discussing fossilization in terms of whether the fossil record overall actually supports ToE or not, with a focus on whale evolution as the area of testing evo claims in this area:
    http://EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils -->EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils
    http://EvC Forum: where was the transition within fossil record?? [Stalled: randman] -->EvC Forum: where was the transition within fossil record?? [Stalled: randman]
    http://EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils Part II -->EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils Part II

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 37 by MangyTiger, posted 12-14-2005 10:14 PM MangyTiger has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024