|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consecution | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
But what does it matter? If Faith wants to use her time to try find find a theory that matches evidence to Biblical stories, why so many people get angry and yell? Let her do it! If she succeeds, great for her! If this was the begining and the end, I would agree with you whole heartedly. The problem is that Faith is a member of a group (Fundies). She may not be the best example, but she's what we've got here. That group (maybe Faith as well, maybe not - don't know) often strive to replace science with it's theories. Theories which, frankly, are dangerous. Be it "Katrina was sent by God to kill the homosexuals" or "prayer cures cancer" or "we need to kill all the Desert bastards because they don't believe in Jesus", leaving them to their own devices could be big trouble for the entire world. That's why we draw a line in the sand and fight. Are we winning. No. Impossible to win. They will never change their minds. But, that doesn't mean we should just give up and let them take over.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: THe problem is that she DOESN'T succeed and resorts to double standards and dishonesty. She claims that she rejects standard geological explanatiosn because they don't make sense, but has no problems proposing "explanations" that are pure raving insanity. Contrary evidence must NOT be considered allegedly because it is "begging the question" Cosnidering other explanations for evidence is also ruled out on the same false grounds. IF her methods are so good then why does she need to rely on blatant double-standards and obvious lies to shut down any reasonable examination ? Faith can appear to be reasonable at times and that is a good reason to produce scientific evidence to refute her. If only to expose the fact that she ISN'T reasonable. But you have to recognise that she doesn;t stop at the point where her ideas are shown up as unreasonable - she keeps on going.T
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13017 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.8 |
This is a great discussion, but it probably belongs in the [forum=-11] forum. Please find an appropriate thread there or propose a new one, then post a link to it here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I cannot post to the Is It Science threads but Ben originally asked me to discuss this with him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13017 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.8 |
I've restored your privileges in [forum=-11].
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Thank you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Concerning the thread that asks Have any Biblical Literalists been to the American Southwest:
Without even making an issue of the abusiveness I had to endure on that thread by more than one poster, I do wonder how it serves EvC to have a thread on which I am energetically posting pulled out from under me and put into a science category where now it is languishing from lack of interest. It seems to be a form of suspending me without actually suspending me and the rudeness and unfairness are blatant. The thread was originally specifically placed in a non-science forum in order for Biblical literalists to respond to it. As Ben pointed out, it was the scientists, not I, who turned it into a science discussion. But then it was I, not the scientists, who can no longer post on it. And they have no interest in the subject without me to call names. Over and over what the scientists appear to object to most is the very thing a YEC does by definition, assume that they are wrong about an old earth, that the Bible is right, that the Flood actually happened. This is what a YEC assumes and tries to prove in any discussion of these things. It is ridiculous to allow this complaint from the scientists if you have any expectation of YECs posting here. The discussion must begin with the YEC assumptions or there is no discussion possible, at least on the non-science side of the board. I am called every name in the book for simply doing what a YEC does. This is absolutely absurd. This message has been edited by Faith, 09-10-2005 02:25 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
It is ridiculous to allow this complaint from the scientists if you have any expectation of YECs posting here. It's not my understanding that EvC exists to allow YEC's a soapbox from which to promulgate their views; Percy has on many occasions specified that the purpose of this forum is to examine the claim of many creationists that their models can be supported and investigated scientifically. It's contradictory to that mission, therefore, to allow YEC's to promulgate their models and conclusions portected from scientific challenge; people who come here to post from a YEC perspective need to understand either that their participation implies a claim that creationism can withstand proper scientific inquiry, or that this isn't the forum for them. If the YEC position is not one that you feel can be supported scientifically without arbitrary assumptions of biblical inerrancy, then it's not clear to me why you choose to post here. Above all this is a forum where we examine creationist claims via science, not where Biblical literalists are allowed to promulgate their beliefs beyond challenge. To the extent that YEC's are welcome here, they're welcome only because they bring beliefs for us to examine. If an examination of their beliefs is not something they're going to allow, then I don't see why they should be welcomed.
The discussion must begin with the YEC assumptions or there is no discussion possible, at least on the non-science side of the board. I'm not interested in discussing with you or with any other YEC if that discussion means that their arbitrary assumptions and the conclusions from them are set off-limits. And according to Percy's explicit mission for the forum, I don't understand why you believe such a person as yourself, who would set their model beyond scientific challenge, would be welcome here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
I agree with Faith on this. In my opinion, the thread should not have been moved.
Perhaps the thread had run its course and could have simply been locked. Or perhaps it should have been left open a little longer if Faith wished to continue responding.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
Without even making an issue of the abusiveness I had to endure on that thread So good of you not to make an issue of the abusiveness you had to endure. Of course, just as good that you didn't make an issue of the abusiveness you dealt out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm not interested in discussing with you or with any other YEC if that discussion means that their arbitrary assumptions and the conclusions from them are set off-limits. And according to Percy's explicit mission for the forum, I don't understand why you believe such a person as yourself, who would set their model beyond scientific challenge, would be welcome here. If I am not welcome here, I will leave, but you will only encounter the same old same old with any YEC who shows up. If EvC doesn't mind sending them all away, that's up to EvC, but on the face of it EvC appears to want YECs to fit in here. IDers usually stick around a little longer because they are willing to let go of some Biblical premises that YECs aren't, but YECs are the quintessential opponents of evolutionism so it makes no sense to keep the place as unfriendly as it is to YECs. Any site that seriously expects to discuss these questions is going to have to make room for YEC assumptions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
So good of you not to make an issue of the abusiveness you had to endure. Of course, just as good that you didn't make an issue of the abusiveness you dealt out. You want to go toe-to-toe on that one? Post your links.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I agree with Faith on this. In my opinion, the thread should not have been moved. Perhaps the thread had run its course and could have simply been locked. Or perhaps it should have been left open a little longer if Faith wished to continue responding. I was away for a while but intended to come back and answer the many posts to me that are still there unanswered. In my absence Nosy moved the thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
For the record - My point is not that you didn't take abuse, but that you gave it.
Here's some examples -
I've been here a lot longer than you have, Nuggin... when you are challenged you don't have to bother to really think about it either, just ride along on the EvC wagon, just shout along with the crowd. I mean seriously, not Nuggin's idiotic caricatures. Sometimes someone like Nuggin will create total confusion by making up an absurd caricature that has nothing to do with anything. Fine, then your prejudice factor is so rigid and closed-minded you really should not be involved in any discussions about it. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that anyone who could come up with such silly caricatures should be logic challenged as well. What part of the argument...can't you follow? Interesting that you don't address the substance of the argument, but continue to blow hot air. Why don't you actually THINK about the argument? It is your rank prejudice that calls it "unscientific." I couldn't possibly have forgotten that conversation. You consistently refused to address the main point I was making, never even seemed to grasp it, and your argument was therefore completely irrelevant. Now, was I particularly offended by these? No. But, since this thread we are currently in started because you tried to get me banned for suggesting people stop trying to change your mind, I'm not about to simply walk away and let you pretend you're some sort of embattled Saint. When you sling mud and expect it slinged back.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
It would be nice if this thread could stay on topic, that is, discussion of moderation. Can we skip the bickering.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024