|
Author
|
Topic: Has the bias made this forum essentially irrelevant?
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Bolder-dash writes: Is there anything left?
12 responses in a little over 1 hour. It would appear that the answer to your question is 'Yes'.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-25-2011 3:48 PM | | Bolder-dash has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 16 by NoNukes, posted 05-25-2011 6:24 PM | | Panda has replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
Message 19 of 355 (617079)
05-25-2011 6:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 16 by NoNukes
05-25-2011 6:24 PM
|
|
Re: Bolder-dash may be right...
NoNukes writes: Panda writes: 12 responses in a little over 1 hour. It would appear that the answer to your question is 'Yes'. I would suggest that the responses show quite the opposite. Twelve quick response to this nothing of a topic shows that we're starving for some real debate.
But you are currently involved in a debate with ICANT, yes? Or do you think that EvC should satisfy ALL your debating needs? That would seem to be a worthy aspiration, but not one that would often be achieved - by any web-site. Or can you name a forum that satisfies your debating needs? And it seems to me that BD is confusing 'evilutionists' with 'people that agree with each other'. People discuss more that just creation vs evolution on this site and they rarely agree. Anyway, if we feel that the discussions are lacking then the onus is on us to make it better - not the moderators. BD's patently false assertion that "all of the dissenting voices have pretty much disappeared" is mainly caused by his on-going sulk since being told-off for poor forum behaviour. And even if all the dissenting voices did leave, then there is no reason to blame the moderators. The fact that his post was promoted shows how ironic (and wrong) his OP is.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 16 by NoNukes, posted 05-25-2011 6:24 PM | | NoNukes has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 20 by subbie, posted 05-25-2011 6:49 PM | | Panda has replied | | | Message 22 by NoNukes, posted 05-25-2011 7:24 PM | | Panda has seen this message but not replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
|
|
Message 21 of 355 (617082)
05-25-2011 6:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 20 by subbie
05-25-2011 6:49 PM
|
|
Re: Bolder-dash may be right...
subbie writes: The fact that his post was promoted shows how ironic (and wrong) his OP is. Wow, that may be a record-a debate that was lost the moment it was promoted.
I think it is on a par with the other topics: "How do I get a topic promoted?" and "Why can't we swear on this fucking forum?".
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 20 by subbie, posted 05-25-2011 6:49 PM | | subbie has seen this message but not replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
|
|
Message 37 of 355 (617430)
05-28-2011 9:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 35 by GDR
05-28-2011 8:24 PM
|
|
GDR writes: It seems to me that this post is the reason there is so little debate from the creationist side. Using the terms dumb, stupid etc as part of an argument and then get a 5 rating for it, outlines the problem perfectly.
Or it could be that Dawn's posts are particularly illiterate and malformed. The way people reply to Dawn's posts is a reflection of his ability at comprehension (both English and general) and is not directly related to his ID'ist beliefs.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 35 by GDR, posted 05-28-2011 8:24 PM | | GDR has not replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Dawn Bertot writes: To us, me, your positions on these issues are as ridiculous and stupid. sorry if i ever used those terms. ... then if you disagree, try and refute it in the sameway, without sarcasm and insult. ... respond to my arguments not the person
Yes. You are clearly not someone that frequently uses insults and abuse as an argument.
Dawn Bertot writes: Maybe you idiot liberals and humanistic trash would like to discuss this idiots latest ignorant decision, amoung yourselves. It seems my original estimation about you was correct, you are a no class, no talent, bum and punk. Only a moron would suggest that Dawn needs to explain why order cannot arise through unintelligent processess Please your making me barf. Getting thins only partially correct, along with completely backwards and nonsensical, seems to be theme of yours Why dont we take a trip over to Namby Pamby land where we can talk about your feelings, here Only someone that has no understanding of reason could not see this simple point You havent actually debated publically have you, that would be a hoot to witness, not to mentioned being your opponent.
Ad nauseum... Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 49 by Dawn Bertot, posted 05-29-2011 12:04 AM | | Dawn Bertot has replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Re: Diminished Creationist Participation
Bolder-dash writes: ...while at the same time allowing others to call her stupid, ill informed and illiterate without even batting an eye, has absolutely nothing to do with creationists leaving this site! Dawn Bertot writes: Maybe you idiot liberals and humanistic trash would like to discuss this idiots latest ignorant decision, amoung yourselves. It seems my original estimation about you was correct, you are a no class, no talent, bum and punk. Only a moron would suggest that Dawn needs to explain why order cannot arise through unintelligent processess Please your making me barf. Getting thins only partially correct, along with completely backwards and nonsensical, seems to be theme of yours Why dont we take a trip over to Namby Pamby land where we can talk about your feelings, here Only someone that has no understanding of reason could not see this simple point You havent actually debated publically have you, that would be a hoot to witness, not to mentioned being your opponent. BD writes: And we are the irrational ones? Right
If by 'We' you mean Dawn and yourself, then I concur.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 57 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-29-2011 10:21 AM | | Bolder-dash has not replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Dawn Bertot writes: Panzy writes: Yes.
You are clearly not someone that frequently uses insults and abuse as an argument. Dawn Bertot writes:
Maybe you idiot liberals and humanistic trash would like to discuss this idiots latest ignorant decision, amoung yourselves.
It seems my original estimation about you was correct, you are a no class, no talent, bum and punk.
Only a moron would suggest that Dawn needs to explain why order cannot arise through unintelligent processess
Please your making me barf.
Getting thins only partially correct, along with completely backwards and nonsensical, seems to be theme of yours
Why dont we take a trip over to Namby Pamby land where we can talk about your feelings, here
Only someone that has no understanding of reason could not see this simple point
You havent actually debated publically have you, that would be a hoot to witness, not to mentioned being your opponent. You cut me like a knife Panda, you cut me deep. Do you realize at this very moment I am crying because I thought you and I had a close relationship. And after all those star lit nights and candle light dinners So you lied to me eh, when you said I meant the world to you I wish you could see my tears at this very moment Oh by the way. Such examples as you have provided for me are a rare occurance, unlike yourself, in which they appear in nearly ever post on your behalf. Perhaps that is what GDR is speaking about Dawn Bertot
So, you decide to prove my implication correct by submitting a post that is nothing but ad hominems. It appears that your god makes no requirements of his believers to be honest or polite. I think one less person believes in god each time you post. Thank you.  p.s. "Oh by the way. Such examples as you have provided for me are a rare occurance" So, you decide to lie. What a surprise. I searched 30 posts and found 15 insults. I then picked the worst. You seem to like lying for god. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Dawn Bertot writes: Curious. Did you happen to search through your posts. Lets see how many you can find without, insults, sarcasm, rudeness or depravation.
Curious. Did you happen to notice that you lied about the level of insults in your own posts? I guess your god loves it when you lie. And your response appears to be a smokescreen (see below).
Dawn Bertot writes: You and Dr InAdequate must have went to the same school of polemics. you know the one that teaches, if you cant answer questions, you blind and distract them with wit, sarcasm and insults. Then hope that no will notice you didnt actually respond to questions or arguments
It is obvious that if you can't answer questions, you try to blind and distract us with wit, sarcasm and insults. You then hope that no-one will notice that you didn't actually respond to any questions or arguments.
Dawn Bertot writes: I believe in debate thats called a smokescreen.
Correct. That is exactly what you do.
Dawn Bertot writes: Just tell me plainly Panda, theres someone else, isnt there. we have to be honest with eachother if our relationship is going to work
I see that you added extra patronisation. Anyway - back to what you should have responded to: The majority of your posts contain insults and abuse. Your god must be proud of you. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Dawn Bertot writes: Really. So the burden of proof is on you , correct? So out of 2571 post, lets see you demonstrate that the majority of them contain insults and rudeness. have at it junior
Sure thing, old man. My evidence: All of your posts. My method: Add up the ones containing rudeness or insults. My results: The number of your posts containing rudeness or insults outnumber the ones containing no rudeness or insults. Please feel free to verify this yourself. (You can view a list of the topics you have 'contributed' to by clicking your own name.) If you don't have time to verify this, then just read this thread for an indication of the proportion of your posts that are insulting. But since you won't even accept the evidence of your own posts, I expect you to put up a 'smokescreen' which is, as you stated earlier, the main type of debate you believe in.
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
|
|
Message 186 of 355 (617782)
05-31-2011 11:09 AM
|
Reply to: Message 185 by Theodoric
05-31-2011 11:04 AM
|
|
Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Theodoric writes: I can give you plenty of examples of scientists studying evolution who WANT to find particular conclusions.
Please do. I think he is referring to creationist scientists studying evolution who want to conclude that god-did-it. 
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 185 by Theodoric, posted 05-31-2011 11:04 AM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Bolder-dash writes: But since you feel the ToE is so science based, and simply a reading of the facts, please give 3 or 4 of your favorite examples of evidence for the ToE. This should be easy for you since there is so much. Pick the best 4 that have the strongest weight in your opinion if you don't mind. There is this really good forum. You may have heard of it: www.evcforum.net Or you can look up these words on google: Endogenous retrovirus Recurrent laryngeal nerve Nylon-eating bacteria Vestigial Organs If you wish to discuss them, then there are already threads open. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Bolder-dash writes: I don't think its very good form on a debate forum to tell me I have to go look up on google for your 4 strongest bits of evidence. Are those the ones you are going to choose or not?
Ok. Don't look them up on Google then. You could also look them up on this forum if you wish. As I said: threads have already been started. You asked for 4 pieces of evidence. I provided them.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 195 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-31-2011 12:48 PM | | Bolder-dash has not replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
I gave you 4 pieces of evidence. Clearly all that information has overwhelmed your mind. So, what was the point of you asking for evidence? Did you simply need more facts to ignore to justify your church membership? You appear to have reached the point where you are trolling your own threads.
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Bolder-dash writes: Panda, I asked you very clearly, were those your chooses, and are those your best 4? I will be happy to get to them, but I want to be fair and give everybody who isn't crying a chance first. Lets just make sure you don't try to move the goalposts later and claim that this isn't your BEST evidence. Yes, they are my choices. I have no idea why you thought they weren't. You asked for 4 pieces of evidence. I provided 4 pieces of evidence. The ball is in your court...but it appears that you forgot to bring your racquet. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3739 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Bolder-dash writes: As I said, I want a complete list first. I don't want you guys to go and trying changing the dimensions of the tennis court before the match even begins-not that I don't trust you and all. I don't believe you. Enjoy the inevitable ban.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 260 by Rahvin, posted 05-31-2011 5:41 PM | | Panda has seen this message but not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2