Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 6:49 AM
22 online now:
Meddle (1 member, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,844 Year: 9,880/19,786 Month: 2,302/2,119 Week: 338/724 Day: 1/62 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
21Next
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19890
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 196 of 302 (308572)
05-02-2006 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by Adminnemooseus
05-02-2006 1:32 PM


Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
Is the topic in questions some sort of "creation with apparent age" sort of thing? If so, perhaps the topic belongs in one of the "Social and Religious Issues" forums.

That would work. It appears to be the direction 'relative' is going.

This could also serve to open up the debate for others that don't like to 'play' on the science forums.


www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=14&t=1157&m=1>Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-02-2006 1:32 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-02-2006 6:11 PM RAZD has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3884
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 197 of 302 (308584)
05-02-2006 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by RAZD
05-02-2006 5:41 PM


Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
I've just rebumped the YEC Age of Earth question (false appearance of age?) topic. That topic would seem to fit the needs.

I'll also quote something from my message 195 of this topic:

First of all, I'll point out (as being discussed in the "Private Administration Forum") that "relative" is apparently another incarnation of "simple", who is currently of "full suspension" status. Thus his very presence here is highly problimatic.

You are trying to debate something with one of 's problem members.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by RAZD, posted 05-02-2006 5:41 PM RAZD has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 114 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 198 of 302 (308596)
05-02-2006 7:59 PM


ID at Cornell
AdminMoose closed the ID at Cornell thread due to it having "wandered terminally off topic". In a pre-warning issued a half an hour or so before actual closure (and after which warning - but before closure, there was but 1 post) AdminMoose advised that the thread (which had racked up 160-odd messages at that stage) get back on topic.

The trouble was that no actual discussion direction (other than a bare cut n' paste about an ID course at Cornell) had actually been posted in the OP. One might imagine that going off a non-defined topic direction would be impossible here. And its not that something wasn't attempted to be made of it.

I joined the discussion at msg 13 and started out on one potential tack mentioned in the OP cut n' paste.

the cut n' paste writes:

"We'd just like a place at the table in the scientific give-and-take," she said.

What area could ID possibly tackle so as to begin to generate evidence (assuming there was some) of a scientific nature and so take a place at the table oft denied it? "Maybe a comparison between markers of human ID vs any found in nature" I thought to myself.

It wasn't long before the usual "its Religion not science" side-issue started creeping in, championed mainly (but not solely) by RickJB. Not exactly off OP topic it must be said given that this too is contained within the cut n paste.

cut n paste writes:

condemned the teaching of intelligent design as science, calling it "a religious belief masquerading as a secular idea."

and...

cut n paste writes:

Intelligent design is a theory that argues that life is too complex to have developed through evolution, implying a higher power must have had a hand. It has been harshly criticized by The National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which have called it repackaged creationism.

Thus the original main thrust of the thread ( ID markers: started around msg 13) took off in the direction of "ID = Religion". Me attempting to show it is not necessarily and Rick (and others) trying to show it is. After some contribution as Percy, AdminPercy steps in at msg 130 with the view that my attempt to show God is irrelevant to the discussion is off (non-defined)topic and tacitly supports the notion that God is inexplicably linked to ID. If there is any doubt about that then Percys statement below should make it plain...

Percy at msg 163 writes:

If life is too complex to have arisen on its own and required a designer, then the alien race that designed us must itself have had a designer, which in turn must have had a designer, and which in turn must have had a designer, and so forth ad infinitum. It's an infinite regress unless you say that at some point the designer was God, and that's why, ultimately, ID is religion and doesn't belong in science.

How one could expect this ship to sail if the holes in the logic weren't completely patched up with bias, I fail to comprehend. The thread was closed before Percy got a chance to explain why the intelligence which designed us (were that ever to be established) could not be completely naturalistically arising intelligence - and thus not necessarily regress to God

Notwithstanding the illogic of the reasoning here we have Percy posting in direct contravention of a ruling he made as Admin a short while before, in asserting off (non)topic

AdminPercy at msg 138 in a "too general - don't go there" type ruling writes:

The "naturalism as religion" argument fits in this category because you could take it into virtually any science thread at this site. The same is true of the "ID as religion" argument.

I kind of expected some trouble after a post to Percy at msg 106, when it never got a response. But that could be simply persecution complex:

www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=10&t=179&m=106 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=10&t=179&m=106">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=10&t=179&m=106

What were the reasons for closure at such a late stage? Why did the warning refer back to a vague discussion direction supposedly established within 11 posts of an OP devoid of suggested discussion direction? Why such quick closure after a topic drift alert? Why can Percy contribute posts which contain such blatant fallacies as outlined above which, when responded to, result in topic drift alerts, then closure?

edit typo

This message has been edited by iano, 03-May-2006 01:10 AM


Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Percy, posted 05-03-2006 7:28 AM iano has responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 18498
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 199 of 302 (308704)
05-03-2006 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by iano
05-02-2006 7:59 PM


Re: ID at Cornell
About Intelligent Design Class to be taught at Cornell University, I actually thought the thread had a firm topic, whether ID was sufficiently qualified as science to be included in a college course, and I thought ID's qualifications as science was what we were discussing. I actually had a 300,000 word comprehensive reply ready, too bad the thread is closed. :D

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by iano, posted 05-02-2006 7:59 PM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 8:29 AM Percy has responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 114 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 200 of 302 (308716)
05-03-2006 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by Percy
05-03-2006 7:28 AM


Re: ID at Cornell
The first notion was never really established and the thread moved quickly onto your second idea "Generally: Is ID science?"

If A = B and C = B then A = C (with A=ID B=Science and C= SETI) seemed to me to be a way of dispensing with at least one objection to ID not= science viewpoint. The need to deal with this arose due to the repeated insertion into the works of the the "ID=Religion" spanner (from about msg 60). Incidently you appear to be the first to make this assertion early on.

Percy at msg 15 writes:

ID will never be true science because the IDist pursuit isn't one of science, but of religion

I actually had a 300,000 word comprehensive reply ready, too bad the thread is closed

It would have only taken one word from you to deal with the response to the problem posed in your own ID=Religion-therefore-it-cannot-be-science case (the "IF Alien Intelligence THEN God" leap of logic )

*blush*

It was the dodgy nature of thread closure I was enquiring about but no matter. I get the jist: one plays the cards one is dealt


This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Percy, posted 05-03-2006 7:28 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Percy, posted 05-03-2006 11:50 AM iano has responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 18498
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 201 of 302 (308755)
05-03-2006 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by iano
05-03-2006 8:29 AM


Re: ID at Cornell
Don't get yourself in trouble - I've heard some of the moderators here can get maniacal about continuing the discussion of outside topics in this forum. Maybe it's just a rumor, but you never know! :D

If Adminnemooseus won't have mercy on us poor innocent victims of a misconstrual and reopen the thread you can always propose a new one.

--Percy

This message has been edited by Percy, Wed, 05-03-2006 11:51 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 8:29 AM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 12:42 PM Percy has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 114 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 202 of 302 (308772)
05-03-2006 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by Percy
05-03-2006 11:50 AM


Re: ID at Cornell
Don't get yourself in trouble - I've heard some of the moderators here can get maniacal about continuing the discussion of outside topics in this forum. Maybe it's just a rumor, but you never know!

Given the trouble encountered continuing them inside topics I can't but agree with you.

On reflection I can understand why Moose shut it down, he is, after all the one who opened it and is presumably the beneficiary of inside knowledge as to the precise way in which he would have liked the thread to progress. Not having any further part to play in it against which one could gauge his intent means that any explanation from him would be automatically sufficient.

Intelligent design? Blind Chance? It depends on which way one views the evidence I suppose...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Percy, posted 05-03-2006 11:50 AM Percy has not yet responded

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 203 of 302 (308778)
05-03-2006 12:53 PM


STOP

This is NOT a debating thread.


Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

    New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:

  • "Post of the Month" Forum
  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum

    See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


  • iano
    Member (Idle past 114 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 204 of 302 (308863)
    05-03-2006 6:25 PM


    Hey Moose - before you take your Admin hat off
    Bump

    Re: ID at Cornell thread

    addressed at AdminMoose a while back writes:

    What were the reasons for closure at such a late stage? Why did the warning refer back to a vague discussion direction supposedly established within 11 posts of an OP devoid of suggested discussion direction? Why such quick closure after a topic drift alert? Why can Percy contribute posts which contain such blatant fallacies as outlined above which, when responded to, result in topic drift alerts, then closure?


    Replies to this message:
     Message 209 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-05-2006 1:46 PM iano has responded

    RAZD
    Member
    Posts: 19890
    From: the other end of the sidewalk
    Joined: 03-14-2004
    Member Rating: 5.5


    Message 205 of 302 (309235)
    05-04-2006 9:45 PM
    Reply to: Message 195 by Adminnemooseus
    05-02-2006 1:32 PM


    Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
    First of all, I'll point out (as being discussed in the "Private Administration Forum") that "relative" is apparently another incarnation of "simple", who is currently of "full suspension" status. Thus his very presence here is highly problimatic. Do you want to do a "Great Debate" with "simple"?

    Is there any doubt anymore? We have the same simple theory of light etc changing at some unexplained date in the past.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 195 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-02-2006 1:32 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 206 by Admin, posted 05-05-2006 7:04 AM RAZD has responded

    Admin
    Director
    Posts: 12602
    From: EvC Forum
    Joined: 06-14-2002
    Member Rating: 3.8


    Message 206 of 302 (309310)
    05-05-2006 7:04 AM
    Reply to: Message 205 by RAZD
    05-04-2006 9:45 PM


    Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
    RAZD writes:

    adminnemooseus writes:

    First of all, I'll point out (as being discussed in the "Private Administration Forum") that "relative" is apparently another incarnation of "simple", who is currently of "full suspension" status. Thus his very presence here is highly problimatic. Do you want to do a "Great Debate" with "simple"?

    Is there any doubt anymore?

    Meaning, what? That you really want a Great Debate with Simple? His threads become moderator headaches. Adminnemooseus will decide whether debate with Simple should be encouraged in this way, but I share his skepticism that you know what you're doing.

    We have the same simple theory of light etc changing at some unexplained date in the past.

    The subject matter isn't the point. It's who you want to debate with that is the point. If you're into this kind of thing, perhaps we can set you up in a debate with John Hinckley about whether Jody Foster really loves him or not.


    --Percy
    EvC Forum Director

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 205 by RAZD, posted 05-04-2006 9:45 PM RAZD has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 207 by RAZD, posted 05-05-2006 7:59 AM Admin has responded

      
    RAZD
    Member
    Posts: 19890
    From: the other end of the sidewalk
    Joined: 03-14-2004
    Member Rating: 5.5


    Message 207 of 302 (309319)
    05-05-2006 7:59 AM
    Reply to: Message 206 by Admin
    05-05-2006 7:04 AM


    Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
    Is there any doubt that it is 'simple'?
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 206 by Admin, posted 05-05-2006 7:04 AM Admin has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 208 by Admin, posted 05-05-2006 8:22 AM RAZD has responded

    Admin
    Director
    Posts: 12602
    From: EvC Forum
    Joined: 06-14-2002
    Member Rating: 3.8


    Message 208 of 302 (309326)
    05-05-2006 8:22 AM
    Reply to: Message 207 by RAZD
    05-05-2006 7:59 AM


    Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
    RAZD writes:

    Is there any doubt that it is 'simple'?

    We're pretty sure it's Simple. Keep in mind that I'm an FL according to the Ohnhai discussion style index (The Problem of Restricted Binary Logic.). If I an RBL I'd say, "We're damn sure!"

    If you're going into this with eyes open, and in particular if you have some discussion style/approach ideas you'd like to try out for bringing a problem poster closer to constructive discussion, then I lean toward being encouraging.


    --Percy
    EvC Forum Director

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 207 by RAZD, posted 05-05-2006 7:59 AM RAZD has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 211 by RAZD, posted 05-05-2006 6:31 PM Admin has not yet responded
     Message 212 by DrJones*, posted 05-06-2006 2:25 AM Admin has not yet responded

      
    Adminnemooseus
    Director
    Posts: 3884
    Joined: 09-26-2002


    Message 209 of 302 (309397)
    05-05-2006 1:46 PM
    Reply to: Message 204 by iano
    05-03-2006 6:25 PM


    Re: The " Intelligent Design Class to be taught at Cornell University" topic closure
    My impression is that the topic is a disaster area. Certainly, the quality or lack there of, of my message 1 may be a primary cause of such.

    The topic could have gone into the "In The News" forum, but I deliberately avoided such because I really don't like the existance of that forum. I was about to change my topic destination suggestion from "Intelligent Design" to "Education and Creation/Evolution", but the topic was already promoted.

    As I envisioned the topic, it was one of a class happening at a (Ivy league no less) college. I guess I also envisioned it as being a topic of very limited discussion potential, but I did think the situation did meret a mention. What I didn't want, was for it to turn into a general purpose ID debate topic, which is what (IMO) happened.

    Via the lack of participation in the topic by either the non-admin or admin modes, the topic got way out of hand. Thus I ended up killing it at a later than desirable stage.

    Possible solutions:

    1) One of the other admins can reopen the topic, if they think it is justified.

    2) An importent theme can be pulled from the topic, to be used as a message 1 of a new Proposed New Topic.

    3) We can just let the whole thing stop where it currently is.

    Adminnemooseus


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 204 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 6:25 PM iano has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 210 by iano, posted 05-05-2006 3:13 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 114 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 210 of 302 (309433)
    05-05-2006 3:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 209 by Adminnemooseus
    05-05-2006 1:46 PM


    Re: The " Intelligent Design Class to be taught at Cornell University" topic closure
    Fair enough Moose...

    I was a little pissed at the abrupt halt given that loads of threads here veer away from the original idea but latch onto something along the way and develop along a new line. 160 posts in was a little late in the day I thought..

    Option 3 is fine by me...

    Thanks


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 209 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-05-2006 1:46 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

    RewPrev1
    ...
    1213
    14
    1516
    ...
    21Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019