I thought you might also be drifting off-topic in the Universe Race thread. If there are topics you'd like to discuss for which there are no active threads, please propose new topics over at Proposed New Topics.
So you admit they have no matter or energy, right?
Heck, why don't you just ask him if he admits being the inside man for the last bank heist?
We have only two moderators, so it is important that we keep discussion focused and productive. It works against these goals to treat others like hostile witnesses determined to withhold evidence. If you think someone's being dishonest please keep these thoughts out of the discussion threads. The place for that would be the Windsor castle thread.
Please either address my points or retract your statements claiming I have not answered you.
We really don't need this style of participation. If you want to work constructively toward a mutual understanding with others like PaulK and Cavediver, I will hold everyone to the same standards. If you insist on taking an adversarial approach with those you disagree with, the same approach that has disrupted so many threads in the past, then I will suspend you again.
Please let board administration deal with problem members. Because open discussion between moderators and members about moderator decisions was draining ever increasing amounts of moderator time, that entire approach was abandoned earlier this year and the moderator threads were closed, but one new one was added, Windsor castle.
The changes also included a decision to become much more mechanically "by the book" with regard to enforcement of the Forum Guidelines. Mature adults should be able to follow simple requests such as, for example, "Please address the topic and do not accuse people of dishonesty and misrepresentation." Those who cannot follow this or any such similarly simple instructions will be given short suspensions, though of course they become longer if the behavior continues.
I don't know why some people are the way the are. Ideally a moderator would suggest to someone that, for example, they tone it down a little, or that they learn a little about a topic before discussing it, or that they take a little care to express themselves more clearly, and they would do so. But in the real world people are for the most part who they are, and someone posting like an idiot is most likely doing so because, and pardon my shouting, HE'S AN IDIOT!
I used to say all the time that EvC Forum is not here to host nonsense discussions, and one thing that is impossible to do is to convince someone that their pet idea is nonsense. EvC Forum stands ready to entertain all ideas that are presented with evidence and rational argument, but without this approach the random idea that might pop into someone's head is just nonsense, independent of whether it is right or wrong. Here at EvC Forum, moderators make the decisions about what is and isn't nonsense.
Why this strong focus on what is fundamentally a scientific approach to examining ideas? It's very simple. EvC Forum exists to examine creationism's claim to be legitimate science. Those who don't know science from seance are in no position to make the scientific case for creationism, and we actually do creationism a favor by not permitting them to participate here, since they can only place creationism in a bad light.
When moderators request that people let the moderators handle moderation issues rather than dealing with it themselves, one of the consequences is that moderators are then committed to actually dealing with these issues. That's the only reason I'm posting this message to you right now, and not because I never have more fun than when I'm getting on your case.
Anyway, this is the second time I've spoken to you about something like this recently:
Let's deal with some facts. Specifically, you admit that entanglement is real, standard QM, correct?
I promise that if you continue treating people like hostile witnesses that I will continue suspending you.
And this is the second time I've spoken to you about something like this recently:
Contrary to the derogatory comments offered here...
If you have complaints about posts, the place to do that is Windsor castle. I'll save you the trouble this time and rule that I find no derogatory comments directed at you in this thread that you did not instigate yourself. You can't expect people to just sit back and say, "Oh, okay," after you accuse them of dishonesty and misrepresentation. The next time I see any variation of, "If you were being honest..." in any of your posts, you'll be suspended instantly.
No suspension this time. Focus your discussion on the topic and not on how horrible everyone else is, treat people with civility and respect, and you'll have absolutely no problems here, and I will definitely make sure you receive the same treatment from everyone else.
Please, no replies or references to this message. Just do it.
Parading around trying to claim you understand this just makes you look like an idiot.
I have to enforce the Forum Guidelines evenly and fairly. That means I'd suspend Santa Claus if he stepped too far out of line. Please focus on the topic and let moderators take care of moderation issues. It isn't like I've been shy lately. If you are experiencing problems that aren't being addressed, please post to Windsor castle.
As has been explained to you many times now, the place for these types of complaints is the Windsor castle thread.
If you don't like board management please vote with your feet. Moderation policies are for the broader membership and will not be modified just to suit your whims.
You will only escape suspension as long as your contributions to discussion are civil and on-topic. Your skill at becoming offended and then using that as an excuse to disrupt discussion is well established and won't be tolerated.
I'm replying to you to request that you do one of the following:
Check your facts before posting; or
Engage in discussion to explore what is actually true instead of issuing blanket assertions.
The best example of what you're doing wrong is this:
You are just stating what the General Theory if Relativity states, not observed phenomenon. It is one mans idea of a possible explanation for gravity. It has never been tested nor can it ever be tested.
An error equally wrong in magnitude but in a religious context would be state unequivocally, "Jesus is Santa Claus." We wouldn't let an evolutionist repeat such wildly wrong statements in a religion thread, and we won't let a creationist do this in a science thread.
The general theory of relativity has passed a number of very stringent tests. If you'd like to challenge those tests then that would be fine, as long as it's on-topic. But if you're just going to deny the tests were performed then that fits under the category of a violation of the Forum Guidelines, specifically:
Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.
Enforcement usually begins with a 24-hour suspension.
Just thinking out loud and maybe should bring it up on another topic...
In case there's really doubt in your mind as to whether your query is on-topic, in my opinion it is very much on-topic. I don't know if CD or SG would agree, but the answer seems to me important to understanding the distinction between thinking about space and time separately, as we do in everyday life, versus thinking about space/time as a single concept.