General discussion of moderation procedures - Part οκτώ

Hi Admin. Instead of bringing up the message in moderation part 2, I'll just say that you appear to be making a lot of debatable points supporting the views of my counterparts in debate (abe: in the what science is/isnt thread). We moderators regard taking sides in the debates in admin mode as a nono since this allows no recorse or response in the public thread as members are not suppose to address admin messages.Imo, if you wish to make your points relative to how you see things that you should post as non-admin (Percy) as the rest of us ih admin mode are required to do to make it fair in order for the opposite viewpoint to be aired as a response. I see this as using your position as chief Admin to give the advantage to yourself and those who agree with you ideologically on the issues.At the beginning of the thread I welcomed moderation in the thread and appreciate that you did help align to topic. It's just that imo, you went too far into actual debating the topic since most of what you said worked to shoot down my high points and give the advantage to my counterparts, some of who were needing some moderation regarding their shabby debate tactics clearly counter to some Forum Guidelines. Of course it would've been wrong for me to moderate them and I didn't really want to make a big thing out of it in PAF. I didn't see it as anything that serious that couldn't be handled on the spot so I just voiced a couple of complaints as you are likely aware, having read the thread. Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

That leaves me with nothing to add to the thread, and for that matter any science forum. You might as well ban me along with any other bonafide IDists from science, now that you have made your position clear as to the direction you intend for EvC to go. When practicing highly qualified scientists are not considered as doing your definition and application of science you are narrowing EvC's tolerance of debate to EvE. This is why so few EDists care come or stay at this site. I thought you were heading toward a fair and balance board, but I see I was sadly mistaken.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

First off just before the Is It Science thread closed, having returned home from out of town business I clicked in on page eleven, noting a message, I believe from Kerusa to which I responded before going back to page 10 to read your instructions for all who wished to make an ending sumary. The thread was closed shortly after so I didn't get in my sumary and a chance to apologize for not seeing your instructions not to respond to another poster.Had I had time to make a sumary I would have done so. One of my points would have been that your rejection of ID/creo Dr. Baumgardner's flood geology science research paper as non-science while accepting his credentials, including peer review papers pertaining to secularist research shows that no matter how competent a scientist is as to status, qualifications, peer review et al, your narrow definition of science would bar even him from coming into your science forum and debating ID ww flood hypothesis. You suggested I try to recruit Chris Miller to do this when in fact these IDist creo scientists would present some some of the same arguments as mine, refined and articulated in more scientific language. Dr Baumgardner questioned the accuracy of evo dating methods as I did also. Though our reasons varied somewhat, you reject both his and my arguments that this would be a factor in the research data to be considered. I'm sure he would take issue on your claim that his WW flood geology sience research paper was not science as per your message 144 of that thread. Are you implying that you are more qualified and capable of defining what is science than he?You highly criticized my 10 pages of work to the point of being nonsense and buligerancy with no apology whatsoever for handicapping me with your board nono manner of debating thread points in admin status for a significant segment of the thread so as to render me unable to respond.At one point in the thread you assessed my complaint regarding the inability of ID and creo thought to be debated in science as rational. Now in your diatribe here you snatch back even that bone you threw to me, depicting me as a chronic complainer.Those complaints, my friend were intended to be constructive to the site so as to address the ongoing problem you have in acquiring and retaining competent IDist and/or creo input for the evo folks here to debate.Schraf opens a thread recently obviously expecting some creo input/debate on the credibility of evolution (forgot the name of thread). Some evos came on early to coax Faith into the debate. She wisely declined for the reasons he gave including the scaling back of heavy input by herself. How in the world can Schraf or anyone else expect to have debate on science matters like this when even Chris Miller or Dr Baumgardner's arguments on this topic would not be considered as viable science debate as per your stringent and exclusive definition of what science is? If I emailed you one email I received from Chris Miller regarding his assessment of TOE or if you sat in on one of his seminar sessions you would reject those arguments as non-science as well, unfit to be used in your so called evo/creo science debate forums, yet you want me to get him in as proxy to me to do science debate. LOL!

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

"Skirting carefuly around." Mmm, that sounds like even more exclusive than tiptoeing among the tulips. We might better stay the heck out of the tulip patch which you evos have so nicely cultivated and got up for yourselves in the science dept. That seems to be the way Faith sees it and it appears she's right.I'm going to have another good look at Baumgardner's flood paper and see if I can ascertain your problem with it relative to your message 144 as to what you see as science. I'm not comprehending a valid argument on your part as to why that paper fails your test, since it's physical, observable, and testable data that he's hypothesising about in his paper. Perhaps that would be something to open a thread on if I see enough there to debate. I'm not sure I can do so without crumpling a few of your tulips though and I'm not into making this place an unpleasant experience for either of us.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

It appears that "skirting around" means "stay out" of science. If that's what you mean why not just say it? You know if we go in there we're going in as IDists to debate as such. Right?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Hi AdminPD. In the Word of God thread on whether the Bible is the word of God my key point was that of fulfilled Bible prophecy for evidence that the Bible is the word of God. In message 31, Straggler challenged me to respond with evidence. You tagged it as off topic. I wish to back up my claim but to do so would need for you to lift the OT tag. Please have a look. Thanks. http://EvC Forum: Bible: Word of God or Not -->EvC Forum: Bible: Word of God or Not

Hi AdminsPD and Jar. I hear you both, but you know what happens when I don't support on topic claims. BUZ MAKES UNSUPPORTED ALLEGATIONS. I'll certainly honor your action with compliance. I thought about that topic problem. However my point regarding prophecy was spot on topic so had I not addressed the challenge to document my point, most likely I would've been chastised for it later in the thread as failing to support my position as I'm often criticized for. Had I responded, I'm aware enough about topic concern that I would have seen to it myself as an admin that topic adherance was followed.I'll leave it at that. You're right in that any comprehensive discussion on fulfilled prophecy would not have been good for the thread so I don't fault either of you for being concerned.

Thanks Admin. You've spelled out what is expected in such a manner that helps to know exactly what you expect. I'll work at keeping the peace without compromising my position in the debates. It gets to be somewhat of a tightrope walk at times for debating the minority viewpoint. I'm sure this is often the case with evos in creo forums.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Faith, your absense is a great loss to the board at large and your creationism input will be especially missed. My first impulse was to just permanently log out and go fishing but decided not to act on impulse. My prayers go with you. Perhaps a way will be made for you to return, that is God wiling. Sometimes God closes doors in order for us to go though others. We don't know, of course if that's the case here. Anyhow, may God's rich blessings be with you! Keep in touch.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Hi Iano. Perhaps you should reconsider. When I saw (abe: the Faith )announcement, my first impulse was so much as yours that I actually composed a message that I was permanently loggin out and I thought I had submitted that message. However when I returned to my computer the message had not been submitted. I don't know whether an angel of God erased it or whether I simply forgot to submit, but I took it as from God that at least until God wants me out I should remain. I've twice been permanently banned from EvC and here I am as member and moderator. All I can say is I remain so long as God leaves me here. JEHOVAH GOD IS OMNIPOTENT! I will be praying for you. Maybe he wants you elsewhere, but perhaps you should remain and think it over. At any rate, you would be dearly missed and whatever your decision, may God's richest blessing be upon you and Faith. Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

Hi PD. Is Purple Teddy gone? I didn't see where he wanted to dialog.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Thanks AdminPD. I'll wait to see how serious he is about talking. I'm not a fast thinker and not comfortable with chat where you don't have much time to think before speaking.

Holmes, IDist creationist EvC members have lived with this atmosphere for years while they last. Imo that it is coming to a head is providential. The irony of it all is that it took an encounter of Christian Percy vs athiest NWR to bring it about.

A hearty welcome back, Ned!

I agree that Herepton can be good at debate, but he's very difficult to manage on any board with his gross lack of respect for forum guidelines.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28