General discussion of moderation procedures

This may be true, to an extant.EVC has gotten quite sophisticated over the years. But in truth, if one really wants to stay, it is not hard.I could for instance support a lot of newer posters but to do so might confuse those who are finally starting to understand what I DO post rather than cheerlead.Perhaps posters can cut thier teeth somewhere else.It is clear to me that the evos here really are only expressing what they know but because science is the base of the conversation it is not like other sites. For me this is why I post here even though my own points on cve could be better conveyed in a different setup.my problem is not that people wont answer my questions, but that they wont read the posts. Reading is not an enemy it is one's friend and if one is afraid to read, there is no reason to be online.Reading is this one thing. Getting a response is another. The context creation and evolution makes the writing harder than conversation, thus, why simply saying something clearly can go by the boards. Be persistant if you really want to talk. People HERE do respond, you just might need to say it in as many ways as you can imagine.

I have been somewhat concerned with the point you made which is why I responded.Loondd's post could have been responded to by me, if I OPENED up a large discussion of Cuvier and the three phases of against a theory, against religion, we knew it all along ... of Agassiz's via Von Baer as used by GOULD, but this would strech the attentions' I might have already gained (it's always hard to second guess definitively), so when posts come up that COULD fairly easily garner a response, I dont, and I didn"t for strategic reasons, of, trying to hone into a more and more physical communication::rather than simply multiply the number and kinds, of my-responses. On other sites these kinds of things are easily handled,and ofthen are, but than there is less attention to creation than evolution.. which. would be required,,, to handle them. I hope/think you understand. Instead, people just dont respond some/often times. That's how it has worked as for instance posters became admins and the cookie crumbled.Your suggestion is firmly in the hands of the admins and I hope my comments did not detract from your wishes with its regards. Best, Brad.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 01-30-2005 17:50 AM

Blushingly- i think it the language of the future of science. If just one other person writes it, the candle is no longer descartes'wax. You got the whole ball.opps my pride of small success showed!Oh, and if you asked Mark25 he would have told you I did it on purpose. That is a bit strong but close to this truth.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 01-30-2005 17:53 AM

Sorry Pars it's not coming. But I am planning next to simply explain what Bertrand Russel meant by the center moved percipient. It will be over by the time I post anyway. We might as well enjoy the custard while it lasts. There will be a quote, a simple program, a possible extension, some conclusions and a provision for the future. The future is already here. I have expanded Lewontin's two genetic determinant blueprints with the fracolin etc and two consequences of evoutionary outworkings are drawable in limits. I am sorry if I am the only one who knew. Sorry that it took so much time.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 03-02-2005 15:02 AM

right! nothing inTELLigABLE as of yet.I am not going to post beyond
In the region of the interface itself a number of factors may play a role in adsorbtion. (A) An important factor must be the competition between molecules of A and B for the interface. This occurs because the interface is limited in extent, and nonexpendable (in the cases under discussion) and so differs very much from the bulk liquid phase.BOOK ON CHROMATOGRAPHY AND ADSORBTIONMATH and BIOLOGY supplied LIFE with a means of permitting notions of extinction from becoming emergent out of the analogy. For the two different kinds of 1-D symmetry will operate formally in reproduction no matter what survivability the biophysical equivalent of chemical competition is for any Darwinist. To the extent that DNA replication is not in competition with it’s interface nature some of the nonexpendable issues will not apply. Crucially however, polyploidy might DELIMIT something here that is a limit figure in the homological reality. Anyway a baramin does not seem to be able to contain an unlimited number of chromosomes per logical divisions of kinds of baramins. Interestingly the evolutionist Dyson insisted that there was a logical difference of replication and metabolism but this might not be strictly true in the case that the baramin discontinuity is more continuous than the distance across base pairs in DNA. It is not yet decided in any way that traditional genetic INVERSIONS are not point locations of perversions that provide discontinuous systematics more life than is purviewed by present purveyed against things that smack of nonsecular contributions. It is quite impressive to attempt to particularize the physical nexus by using the fluidity in Maxwell’s electrotonics where only thermal contacts are presently fathomed.You see that is what you asked NOT be posted.DONE- pretend you didnt see it and wait till next time.