THE EVOLUTIONISTS' GUIDE TO PROPER CHRISTIAN BEHAVIOUR

Although I'm not too sure how much time he's got available, I would like to suggest you contact forgiven for the position. In spite of his occasional crossing of swords with certain evo posters (not to mention any names John ), I think he'd make a pretty fair - in both senses - moderator.PS: You were kidding about Fred, right?

I'll second forgiven's nomination of Chara - she has been invariably civil here. Only one question - she hasn't posted all that much - is she willing to devote the time necessary to keep up with the threads?

quote:

---

It is an encouragement to know that others are willing to place their confidence in me as a moderator, but to be honest I don't believe that I have what it takes.

---

Chara: If I didn't feel, from your posts, that you had the ability and integrity to be a good moderator, I wouldn't have seconded forgiven's nomination. I hope you'll take Percy's offer.

Hi satcomm,Although schraf beat me to it, I would also like to hear which parts of the ToE you don't like and why? (might be better in a different thread, but you'd could give a couple of "whyfores" and we could talk about 'em).

Actually, looking back at my response to your utterly pointless cut-and-past from six months ago - which at the time you even stated you didn't agree with - I reiterate my challenge that you pick one or two to defend. Otherwise my refusal to discuss some idiocy that you didn't even write and weren't willing to defend is completely pointless rather than "handwaving".

quote:

---

WI, Quetzel is rhetorical and boasts a little knowledge, and for what? To ignore us handwavers (if there be such a thing)? To handwave out the handwaver with sinuous bias? You don't need to follow erroneous men, Quetzel and/or myself. Quetzel may still be repeatedly asserting all proteins are enzymes, and hence graft in subtle twists (fatal fallacies) against the IC/ID parameters. This is bad science, evilution.
Don't make Quetzel or me your hero. Please, think for yourself. I respect and cherish your words (and Quetzel's) and hope you expose my errors, bigotries, redemptive insights, or whatever, add a little bias to, fall short a little. I realize I picked a bad author but he (more crudely than you and less crudely than I) at least tried to give a detailed list of scientific gaps. (Ya gotta give him some kado)

​

Note Joe T's remarks are strong rebuttals; original and thoughtful rebuttals indeed; he is excellent at exposing my hypocracies, neuroses, psychoses, slanders, and/or errors, as Quetzel once was, till he went the way of John Nash in "A Beautiful Mind" (just kidding)

---

And with this final ad hominem insulting little mud-sling from the second-most-incomprehensible poster on this forum, my rebuttal reads: blow it out your cloaca.