|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Concerns for Percy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
A-N writes:
To me, that is as scary. Just how often do you find creationists on here that are willing to answer your questions directly without dodging or trying to change the subject? Oh, wait, every damn time we talk about dates and dating, biblical issues, and evolution itself. mostly I don't think "evaluation" in a real detailed sense is required. Is it on topic is a common one? The Laminator
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
Kendemyer!
But seriously: Buzsaw and Mike the Wiz would be good. This message has been edited by prophex, 06-26-2004 01:17 PM The earth is flat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rand Al'Thor Inactive Member |
Mike the Wiz has my vote.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5195 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Mike gets my vote.
Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Mike 1, Kenny zero from me
Added by edit But, you know, Buz has been a steady visitor. I think he might be able to step up to the challenge as well. This message has been edited by NosyNed, 06-27-2004 02:28 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
custard Inactive Member |
I vote for baba - er Mike the Wiz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Mike is certainly a good choice.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Is it really fair if we put mike in though? Mike isn't exactly pure-blood creationist. He's a creationist-evolutionist hybrid.
The Laminator
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
Ken is a prolific asset to creo strength represented on this board Is there, like, a whole alterantive EvC Forum on which you read? Ken is the kind of debater you really, really want on the other guy's side.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PecosGeorge Member (Idle past 6873 days) Posts: 863 From: Texas Joined: |
Shortage of creationists who are coherent and rational? What criteria do you use to denote such status on a person/persons? You arbitrarily dismiss creationists as so endowed, without exception, off the top of your head where there is mere space.
And so the back and forth begins. For exactly such careless remarks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
For a starter, you could start skipping an extra line to begin a new paragraph...
...like this. The Laminator
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DarkStar Inactive Member |
Today I received the following message from AdminNosy: Another break That was your last post for awhile.I have left you with rights in Suggestions and Questions and the FFA. You have not been responding in a manner conducive to good debating. A large number of resonable requests have been made to you and you show no signs of being willing to pay attention. {Added by edit footnote - To DarkStar: This seems to be a good place to ask you the question "Why do you go through the extra trouble to add extra formatting to your messages, such that they are more dificult to read?" Might I suggest to adopt the standard format. No reply needed. - Adminnemooseus} This post was in reply to a post in which I wrote: Get Stronger Lenses You poor fellow.....and I thought my eyesight was bad. My sincere condolences on your near blindness. Cheers That post in turn was a reply to a post by custard in which custard wrote: Re: My "For The Record" Post Location DARKSTAR, COULD YOU PLEASE MAKE YOUR SIGNATURE FONT BIGGER? I'M HAVING DIFFICULTY SEEING IT. Now my question is why should one person be penalized for submitting an obviously sarcastic reply to another obviously sarcastic post and yet the poster of the original sarcastic message does not receive the same penalty? AdminNosy's claim that I "have not been responding in a manner conducive to good debating" is a hollow one in my opinion when all of my posts are viewed. What is true is that my opinions are not shared by the vast majority of evolutionists or creationists, neither of which I claim allegiance to. And as to my style of formatting, which Adminnemooseus made mention of, it is done for my benefit alone, allowing me to read more easily, as my style is the only one where I am not forced to highlight the post in order to be able to read it without having my eyes hurt. Should I be penalized for problem eyesight as well? Not one person in this forum is required to read my posts other than myself. So what is it? Are the Admin's in this forum simply used to practicing their prejudices against certain individuals who may occasionally skirt the boundaries of appropriate behaviour while totally ignoring others who do the same based on the fact that the others may hold opinions which are more in line with the Admin's personal opinions? Is diversity of opinion discouraged here? Cheers BREATHE DEEP THE GATHERING GLOOM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Your suspension is for a continued pattern in your posts. I have to make a judgement call now and then. That's my judgement.
I'm certainly willing to take some input on it. I suggest you answer questions and support your assertions. Anyone of your posts isn't too bad. You have a bad pattern of behaviour. If you don't see it you might try reading over your threads.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DarkStar Inactive Member |
If there is a continued pattern in my posts, it is that I stand firm in my position, am willing to respond in like manner to obstinate posters, and have answered questions to the best of my ability. I am neither a scientist nor a theologian, thereby any response I give is automatically limited to my own knowledge in areas of both science and religion. In my defense, I have asked numerous questions that remain unanswered and yet have noticed no response from Admin's instructing others to do as I am instructed, have provided a requested post clarifying my personal position, have had numerous responses from posters where my words are twisted to fit their own bias towards my position, and have made every attempt to debate in good faith with those who have practiced reciprocity. While you may personally disagree with my position, it in no way invalidates my position. While my opinions on science and religion may not be acceptable to either evolutionists or creationists, they are my opinions and the only responses I have received to date concerning my position that have been positive can be counted on one hand with fingers to spare. Should I then alter my position in order to please a specific majority? Should I side with evolutionists only? Should I side with creationists only? Or should I remain true to my own convictions, allowing them to be shaped by the evidence as it is offered, while interpreting that evidence based upon my own understanding of the universe, and the nature of individual thought? Cheers BREATHE DEEP THE GATHERING GLOOM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
I think I'm going to spin-off the last three messages as a new topic.
Stand by. Adminnemooseus
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024