Has the bias made this forum essentially irrelevant?

Seeing how it all ties together is, precisely, seeing that it is not disconnected. Those would be antonyms. Still, it's a familiar cry from creationists: in effect you're trying to pretend that somehow the fact that we're right and you're wrong about everything in particular is an argument for believing that you're right about things in general.It isn't, of course.Presumably you won't argue for this bit of nonsense, either. Would you like us to blame the moderators for your inability to do so?

My understanding is that people like Newton were motivated by their Christianity because they believed that a created world would have order that could be discovered by the human mind using the scientific method. On a personal note, I regard science as a second scripture which is something that even Paul refers to in the first chapter of Romans.

quote:

---

19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

---

As far as Galileo is concerned the problem wasn't with Christianity. The problem was the church.

Again, did you missed the part where I said either you attribute your musical art to me, your god emperor, or you will suffer a horrible death.Of course Newton and other great minds attributed their works to their belief in god. To not do so would have meant alienation by their peers. Is this one of those no true scotsman thing?

You fall into a different but not uncommon category, Dawn. It often isn't possible to assess your level of knowledge or lack thereof because most of the time your arguments are incoherent or unintelligible. We can tell by how earnestly you engage in discussion that you believe you're making powerful arguments, but most of the time no one can figure out what you're trying to say.Also, English is your not your primary language. This wouldn't be as severe a handicap as it has become for you if you would believe people when they tell you that you may not be saying in English what you're thinking in your native language, but you don't.That being said, there were a significant number of occasions where it was clear you were wrong and unaware of the current state of knowledge, and your habit is to ignore almost all attempts to bring correct information to your attention. With so much knowledge available through the Internet today one must maintain stiff walls to keep it out, and the reinforcement of doubt and distrust that most creationists possess of the same science that makes modern civilization possible enables them to do this.--Percy

Secularistic ToE and BB theory has it's claws deeply embedded in the schools. What are you talking about? Creationism has been outlawed from the schools, by and large, compared to what it was like during the days of our founders and most of the US's history.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

If this is true then it has been true all along. How could it account for diminished creationist participation today?There were times in the past when we had more than 10 evolutionist moderators and 0 creationist moderators. Today we have 4 evolutionist moderators and 1 creationist moderator, and this has been true for maybe the past year or so. In the couple years before that we had 3 or 4 evolutionist moderators. Recruiting creationist moderators has proved to be a significant challenge.While discussing various other things, on several occasions I suggested to the moderators at EvolutionFairyTale that we should have some discussions about working jointly to create a combined and more balanced debate environment. They never responded to or even acknowledged the suggestion. I think it's because they consider themselves more a ministry than a debate site.We also added features to the forum software that have at least the potential to make moderation more fair. At one time suspensions had to be rescinded manually, and it was easy for moderators to forget to restore someone's privileges after a suspension. Now suspensions are timed automatically, and suspension periods ranging from 1 hour to 1 month to permanent are possible, and suspensions are never forgotten. The private messaging feature allows private dialogs with moderators.I don't know why you're using Bolder-dash as your example. Bolderdash is his own worst enemy because he ignores almost all moderation, and he is nearly always giving just as good as he gets, making it impossible for moderators to single anyone out. I've told him this many, many times.Creationists believe moderation here is biased because that is the easy and acceptable answer for why they perform so badly here, but most often the real reason is that everything they "know" about evolution comes from creationist sources, and they compound the problem by never quite believing that creationist sources, originating as they do with other Christians, would lie.But these creationist sources are not lying, at least not that they know of. In most cases they're just passing on what they themselves have been told. Many of the traditional creationist lies (shrinking sun and moon dust kind of arguments) originate with creationist leaders who were and are brilliant men, and as is well known, brilliant men are the ones most able to convince themselves of what they want to believe anyway. This is as much true of scientists as it is of creationists, as the examples of Fred Hoyle and Halton Arp attest, but the power of an idea isn't how strongly it convinces you but how well it convinces others, and in science evidence plays a key role in convincing others.But none of this science stuff affects the religious faith of those evolutionists who, like myself, are not atheists or agnostics. Their religious beliefs are based upon faith, not evidence, and no facts from the real world can challenge that faith. True faith needs no real world validation.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Spelling.

La-dee-da. I've made a study of the evidence for the Biblical record creationism for 60 years, including fulfilled prophecies history and archeology. I have experienced the reality evidence of the creator in my own life for six decades all of these decades, via phenomenal answers to prayer, etc, enforcing the physical evidence cited.Bolder-dash was right when he/she spoke of the logical disconnects which you seem to ignore in your 15 year study of the ToE. Logic in science has been brainwashed from the young minds full of mush in the schools. Abstract stuff like QM, relativity and math have essentially eliminated logic and reality such as the fact that order tends toward chaos and not vise versa as per ToE coupled with BB theory which premises no existing area in which to have happened, no existing time in which it could have happened and no existing space/area in which to expand.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Percy, with all due respect, two points in response to your message.

For eight years I have tried to convince you of Bolder-dash's point that creationists must be quite thick skinned to remain at EvC, especially ones who are the most effective on behalf of creationism.(abe: In my sojourn here, ) I have observed that it is when I begin scoring points that I get moderated most. Edited by Buzsaw, : Noted in context

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Hi Buz,What brings you to moderator attention is when threads devolve into constant exchanges where everyone else is asking where your evidence is while you respond that you've already presented the evidence.An example is the Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen? thread. It looks like Message 574 is still the last post, waiting for an answer from you for over a month. All you need to do is describe which mountain in the Google satellite images of Saudi Arabia is Mount Sinai and how you identified it.I understand that you're unhappy that I requested that you not post until you responded to my requests for evidence, but I only did that because you were ignoring everyone else's requests for evidence. Your silence in response to this request says that what was already obvious to everyone, that you were avoiding the issue with claims that you'd already presented the evidence, is true. If the evidence doesn't exist then just say so and move on, then the discussion can continue. Moderation is not preventing you from participating in that thread. It is your inability to support your claims, perhaps combined with a pride that prevents any such admission.Anyway, you can be sure that moderation is not going to stand idly by watching threads that consist of little more than one side asking, "Where's your evidence," and the other side saying, "I've already presented it." Whenever this happens be assured that moderators will never step in and say, "Hey, you guys asking for evidence, stop it!"--Percy

IMO, when it comes to the Biblical record and the Exodus thread, your bias as to what constitutes evidence was telling. At least 20 times you moderated me, all the while arguing your position as both moderator and member.Percy, when I was a moderator in PAF, the consensus was that moderators were not to abuse their role as moderator to advance their own positions in threads.You also backed up Admin PD's (IMO) abuse of administrative position in the Coffee House forum demanding evidence in three messages, two as member and one as moderator in a non science debatable topic involving the Roman Catholic Church, etc.Can you cite any instances when evolutionists were subject to these moderation practices?As I understand Bolder-dash, his motivation in airing an opinions here in this thread, like mine, is intended to be constructive criticism so as to remedy the ongoing problem of retaining quality creationist members, more so than as whiners. We all want EvC to be the best, but too often no one is listening.As wise King Solomon put it, "faithful are the wounds of a friend, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful."Evolutionists who are not on the receiving end of the bias do not comprehend the extent of it, as reflected in Ravin's Message 11 of this thread.

quote:

---

The moderators bend over backwards and allow great leeway to Creationists

---

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

edited out cause it's off-topicEdited by DrJones*, : No reason given.

---

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

Hi Buz,You appear to think that asking you to follow the Forum Guidelines is biased:

4. 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.

I can't think of any evolutionist who has ever been anywhere near as obtuse about the nature of evidence as you, or as obstinate about presenting it. I treated Dawn in a very similar fashion. He was given an entire thread to explain his position, and when he was unable to do this he was not permitted to use it as a basis for argument in other threads.In any event, this doesn't represent a change in moderation. I did the same thing with Peter Borger way back in 2004. This thread is about the reasons for the recent diminution in creationist participation.--Percy

Oh my heavens Percy, were you laughing your head off when you wrote this? Do you remember what you suspended me for a month for (of course you do). It was exactly for me asking evolutionists to present their evidence for how the mechanisms for evolution worked, and you accused me of spamming. Do you want me to go back and quote the exact last messages I wrote before you suspended me, because I would be happy to do so if your memory really is failing so bad.In fact this last statement by you is so preposterous and that I am just amazed at what you could possibly be thinking. You spend a awful lot of time here 9as you are doing again) telling all of the creationist posters of their failings, of their lack of understanding, of their inability to be coherent, of their refusal to address things (its what you constantly do) and now you say something that is so overwhelmingly untrue, and so blindly biased that it defies belief.You suspended me for demanding real evidence when all your side wanted to do was say they presented it or say good read a book! That is exactly what happened Percy. How can you possibly say anything so patently false. The thing is that I don't really care that you suspended me, I have already seen enough of how this site is being operated and I know that it will never be a level playing field. But for you to now say that is something you would never do is just too funny to pass on.

There is definitely a disconnect between how you view your attempts to provide evidence and how others view them. When I read your messages and moderator reaction to them, it seems to me that you are being coddled when you should just be suspended/banned.I agree that you are being micromanaged to a degree that anyone would find oppressive. You should instead be told to either follow the forum rules or to stay out of the science forum.I don't see the particular problems you have in the Exodus threads occurring with any other regular poster. I think the problem is that your particular method of supporting your position is incompatible with the science forums.You do have an incredibly thick skin and a strong chin to boot.

Oh absolutely. From that point of view, it's imperative that they evangelise me. My eternal soul is at stake after all. Which only makes it harder to see why so many creationists act like boorish belligerent assholes. And from my perspective that might actually be one of the few good things about creationism; it's so blatantly silly that it may well put a lot of people off Christianity altogether. A shame from your perspective, but a bit of a bonus as far as I'm concerned. But that assumes that there exists a chance of making headway with them. For some, that's just not true. I mean, how much headway do you think it's possible to make with, say, Robert Byers? None I'd say. the only thing left to do with such creationists is to roundly humiliate them in front of an audience, with the purpose of showing everyone else just how silly creationism really is.Mutate and Survive