quote:I don't think this is fair to Brad or people who read his posts. There are people here that I can chose not to read or respond to ... that is my choice. I would not want to say that those people should not be allowed to post.
I agree entirely. I think Brad has done better lately, but he clearly has some communications difficulties that get in the way of him making his points. Some of us enjoy reading his posts anyway. I think it would be unfair to place restrictions on him. So long as he isn't making any personal attacks against anyone I can't see why anyone should be so offended by him that they would want to limit his posts. He isn't hurting anyone.
Re: Bump - Considerations of focusing Brads output
This entire post of yours to the moose is pretty straightforward and easily grasped, Brad. I'm beginning to notice something: when you post on a non-scientific subject you are usually not difficult to understand, but when you post about science or creation you zoom past everyone here and probably no one but God can understand you.
I'm glad that you're having communication with Gladyshev and I'm also glad to hear that he apparently understands you. But as often as not, the rest of us here at EVC don't undertand you. I think it might have something to do with the fact that most of us have not made science or math our life's work. We simply don't have the level of knowledge that you have.
This is not something I would suggest to just anyone, but in your case I wonder if it might help if you tried talking down to us? In other words, try thinking of the EVC crowd as a bunch of jr. high school kids who desparately need tutoring in science and math. Your job here is to teach us about your ideas in a way we 7th and 8th graders can easily understand.
Let's take a look at a section of a typical paragraph of you describing something that apparently - based on my reading of earlier posts in the thread - relates to evolution (from this post in your 'My Understanding' thread):
It may be about infinite divisions OR in bashing logical empricism in some sense it may ONLY be about consrutive infinites which Wolfram has offered us the tool of. For me, BEFORE S. Wolfram was I was reading about the tension in Galielo of Muslim and Greek origins. I do not know if the Chinese already "thought" this. Ecosystem Engineering is the "Doable" part where I am attempting "contra"Muller not to use genetic engineering in th myopic protocol of crop enhancemnet but rather turing agricuture into biomass productivity.
We kids haven't yet read anything by Wolfram or Muller, nor has our teacher ever mentioned those names. We have heard of Galileo and some of us may remember that he once said that the earth went round the sun. Our teacher has shown us China and the Middle East on a map, and one day not long ago we saw a film about Hong Kong. To a fairly limited degree, we can understand words like 'ecosystem' and 'engineering'.
This may sound silly, Brad, but I'm serious. When you start referring to complex concepts and dropping the names of specific researchers, scientists, philosophers, etc. you lose us.
Try to focus on explaining whatever idea you're trying to convey without worrying about explaining where the idea came from or why it occurred to you. Just get the point across and if we can understand it we'll ask questions about it.