Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-24-2019 9:12 PM
18 online now:
frako (1 member, 17 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,628 Year: 3,665/19,786 Month: 660/1,087 Week: 29/221 Day: 29/36 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
46NextFF
Author Topic:   Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 683 (594877)
12-05-2010 2:54 PM


I'd like to suggest that Bolder-Dash's "Life on Other Planets?" thread be renamed "Belief in God vs. Belief in Life on Other Planets - Which is More Reasonable?" or something similar. It's pretty clear that he intended to discuss that topic from the outset, and his thread title (and OP) currently make that technically "off-topic" as written.

I don't think he should be hamstrung in that manner now that it's emerged that it was his intended topic all along.


Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Admin, posted 12-05-2010 3:42 PM crashfrog has responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12579
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 107 of 683 (594887)
12-05-2010 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by crashfrog
12-05-2010 2:54 PM


Well, yeah, sort of. But as several people have pointed out, no one is saying they believe in life on other planets. They're saying that it seems like a reasonable possibility. I don't think Bolder-dash thinks God is just a reasonable possibility.

But you're right, Bolder-dash doesn't really seem interested in his purported topic, and it has also been correctly pointed out that Bolderdash is trying to play a game of "gotcha," and when people didn't give the answers he needed he just accused people of giving those answers anyway. If everyone else in the thread can just follow the Forum Guidelines a bit more closely for a day or so then I can bring some moderation to bear. As gets pointed out repeatedly, when no one in a thread is following the Forum Guidelines it's kind of difficult to single anyone out.

I don't know if you follow NFL football, but a week or two ago there was a major dustup between Cortland Finnegan and Andre Johnson. Punches were thrown, and both were ejected and fined $25,000. But Cortland Finnegan is a known instigator, so was it fair to treat them both equally? I don't think so, and I don't think the league thinks so, but there was no evidence that Cortland Finnegan was more to blame if you just look at that single incident. There was a basketball player a couple decades ago named Bill Laimbeer who was also an instigator who would goad players into major infractions. Robert Parish once punched him out.

But instigators on a bulletin board have a more difficult time hiding their instigations, but only if everyone else behaves. I know it's satisfying to get your licks in, but this site is supposed to be a boring "just the facts, ma'am" science site.

Edited by Admin, : Grammar.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 12-05-2010 2:54 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by crashfrog, posted 12-05-2010 4:44 PM Admin has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 683 (594924)
12-05-2010 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Admin
12-05-2010 3:42 PM


I don't have any further interest in discussing the Bolder-Dash "gotcha" situation in that thread or this, I think the point has been made. I completely take your points about instigators.

I'm genuine about my suggestion, though. Bolder-dash wants to contrast the reasonableness of two beliefs, and a lot of people, if not necessarily me, want to talk about it with him.

But that's off-topic in the thread as currently titled, and I think what you said in that thread - which, to repeat, I have every intention of following - indicates that moderators are likely to view any discussion that compares those two beliefs as "off-topic".

I'm just saying - that's what he opened the thread to talk about, that's what the people in the thread want to talk about, and if the obstacle to that is that the thread title makes moderators think that discussion is off-topic, we should have the thread title changed. This isn't an oblique response to your moderation of that thread, this is a genuine suggestion I'm making. Regardless of what I think about Bolder-Dash and his thread, he opened the thread to contrast the reasonableness of two beliefs, and it's not fair to hamstring him against discussing the topic he opened the thread in service of just because he may have been playing games with topic titles.

It's possible that in addition to the title change, the thread may have to be moved. "Which belief is more reasonable" may not be an appropriate topic for "Origin of Life", and again, my only concern here is that the misclassification of the thread not become an obstacle to talking about what Bolder-Dash clearly opened it to talk about.

Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Admin, posted 12-05-2010 3:42 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Admin, posted 12-05-2010 5:57 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12579
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 109 of 683 (594936)
12-05-2010 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by crashfrog
12-05-2010 4:44 PM


I have no objection if people want to discuss which belief is more reasonable. I guess it would have to be a comparison between "I believe God exists" and "I think it's possible that life exists elsewhere in the universe." I think it would be fine if you want to suggest that or something like that in the thread.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by crashfrog, posted 12-05-2010 4:44 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 185 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 110 of 683 (594976)
12-05-2010 11:01 PM


Proposed New Topics, rant from JH
Over in Proposed New Topics we have a long rant from JH titled "Challenge for Evolutionists": Message 1

Early on, in paragraph 2, the rant claims:

This reality is confirmed from biological studies on ancient bacteria. As stated, Almost without exception, bacteria isolated from ancient material have proven to closely resemble modern bacteria at both morphological and molecular levels. - The Paradox of the Ancient Bacterium Which Contains Modern Protein-Coding Genes ( Heather Maughan*, C. William Birky Jr., Wayne L. Nicholson, William D. Rosenzweig and Russell H. Vreeland )

I tracked down the article, even though there was no link, and found a critique as well. Seems there are problems.

The critique questions the age of the bacteria which the above cited article claims to be ancient. This blows the JH rant out of the water just two paragraphs in.

New evidence for 250 Ma age of halotolerant bacterium from a Permian salt crystal: Comment and reply

Perhaps JH's rant needs additional supporting documentation before being approved.

(I scanned the rest of the rant; what a steaming pile of PRATTs!)

Edited by Coyote, : Just scanned the rest of the article


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Panda, posted 12-06-2010 6:18 AM Coyote has not yet responded

Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 2887 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 111 of 683 (594982)
12-06-2010 1:27 AM


I'm not sure what user aleesterdonald is up to. His two posts so far have been almost copied from other users' posts in the same threads and he makes no sense. I don't know what's up with that.

See messages:

Message 32
Message 6

-Meldinoor

Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Panda, posted 12-06-2010 6:03 AM Meldinoor has not yet responded
 Message 113 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-06-2010 6:15 AM Meldinoor has not yet responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 1792 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 112 of 683 (594998)
12-06-2010 6:03 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Meldinoor
12-06-2010 1:27 AM


Meldinoor writes:

His two posts so far have been almost copied from other users' posts


It is as if he put an existing post into a English-to-Spanish translator and then into a Spanish-to-English translator.

Is Dawn Bertot using a new login?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Meldinoor, posted 12-06-2010 1:27 AM Meldinoor has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3879
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 113 of 683 (595000)
12-06-2010 6:15 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Meldinoor
12-06-2010 1:27 AM


Signature spam like message without any spam
Those messages kind of look like those of a signature spammer, but there was not only no signature displayed, the poster never created any signature. Not a hint of spam to be connected to that ID.

Maybe an extremely concise reincarnation of our much beloved Brad McFall?

Maybe another appearance will clarify the situation.

Adminnemooseus

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Tweak paragraph 2.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Meldinoor, posted 12-06-2010 1:27 AM Meldinoor has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Panda, posted 12-06-2010 3:41 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 120 by Panda, posted 12-07-2010 9:50 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 1792 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 114 of 683 (595001)
12-06-2010 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Coyote
12-05-2010 11:01 PM


Re: Proposed New Topics, rant from JH
I also saw this:
JH writes:

Trev, theres a lot more going on in a cell that we know about.


It seems like the post is a copy and paste from some conversation he saw.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Coyote, posted 12-05-2010 11:01 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 2887 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 115 of 683 (595107)
12-06-2010 3:28 PM


Moving Deconversion Experiences
Perhaps in the interest of avoiding off-topic banter, and getting some much needed moderation in that thread, it could be moved to the Faith and Belief subforum?

-Meldinoor


Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by AdminPD, posted 12-06-2010 6:46 PM Meldinoor has not yet responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 1792 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 116 of 683 (595110)
12-06-2010 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Adminnemooseus
12-06-2010 6:15 AM


Re: Signature spam like message without any spam
Meldinoor writes:

Perhaps in the interest of avoiding off-topic banter, and getting some much needed moderation in that thread, it could be moved to the Faith and Belief subforum?


I agree with Meldinoor that the thread Deconversion experiences should be moved (and moderated if possible).
The thread has attracted some very high quality posts and if a little moderation can get the thread back on track then I think that more quality posts will be added.

Edited by Panda, : added link


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-06-2010 6:15 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 117 of 683 (595136)
12-06-2010 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Meldinoor
12-06-2010 3:28 PM


Re: Moving Deconversion Experiences
I posted a response in the thread. No need to move the thread. The basic rules still apply. Just call for help when necessary.

Thanks
AdminPD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Meldinoor, posted 12-06-2010 3:28 PM Meldinoor has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by jar, posted 12-06-2010 8:00 PM AdminPD has not yet responded
 Message 119 by Panda, posted 12-07-2010 8:24 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 118 of 683 (595140)
12-06-2010 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by AdminPD
12-06-2010 6:46 PM


Re: Moving Deconversion Experiences
Dawn Bertot busy digging rabbit holes in the thread again.

Message 205

Edited by jar, : add link


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by AdminPD, posted 12-06-2010 6:46 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

Panda
Member (Idle past 1792 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 119 of 683 (595292)
12-07-2010 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by AdminPD
12-06-2010 6:46 PM


Re: Moving Deconversion Experiences
Dawn is still replying to off-topic posts: Message 220
This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by AdminPD, posted 12-06-2010 6:46 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

Panda
Member (Idle past 1792 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 120 of 683 (595303)
12-07-2010 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Adminnemooseus
12-06-2010 6:15 AM


bad stuff query
Why is my message Message 41 "bad stuff"?

Is it not on-topic to point out the flaws in someone's argument?

Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Edited by Panda, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-06-2010 6:15 AM Adminnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by arachnophilia, posted 12-07-2010 10:04 PM Panda has acknowledged this reply
 Message 122 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-07-2010 10:27 PM Panda has acknowledged this reply

Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
46NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019