Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,222 Year: 5,479/9,624 Month: 504/323 Week: 1/143 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Creationist Shortage

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist Shortage
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2302
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


(3)
(1)
Message 16 of 415 (661386)
05-04-2012 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Buzsaw
05-04-2012 10:34 PM


Re: Buzsaw Nutty? Say What?
Why then do threads which I actively engage in tend to be long and hot?
Because you're too ignorant to recognize when you've been refuted and to arrogant to admit to it. For example: your Message 162, is refuted by me in Message 171 and you've never acknowledged that you were supporting terrorists and repeating lies started by Limbaugh. You didn't even get hte country right.
Why weren't you or rdp in there refuting what you two allege to be nutty and easily refuted?
See above.

God separated the races and attempting to mix them is like attempting to mix water with diesel fuel.- Buzsaw Message 177
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Buzsaw, posted 05-04-2012 10:34 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Shield
Member (Idle past 2976 days)
Posts: 482
Joined: 01-29-2008


Message 17 of 415 (661387)
05-04-2012 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by GDR
05-04-2012 10:41 PM


I dont feel i was ridiculing Buz. Atleast it was not my intention.
Buzsaw DO come across as a right wing conspiracy guy (Yea, 'nut' was a bad choice of word in this case..). You know; NWO, Obama as an NWO agent, etc. etc.. '

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by GDR, posted 05-04-2012 10:41 PM GDR has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 18 of 415 (661388)
05-04-2012 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Shield
05-04-2012 9:59 PM


Re: Buzsaw Nutty? Say What?
rbp writes:
You're wrong about the right wing nutty conspiracy creationist.
I COULD be.
If i remember correctly, you DO believe in a 'New World Order'? A global conspiracy etc. etc.
If im wrong, please tell me.
Rpb, your own ignorance is showing. Nearly all late Presidents and especially Obama have been calling for a New World Order, just as was prophesied by the Old Testament and the New Testiment of the Bible for the these latter days. Nearly all world leaders are calling for one. It is indeed a conspiracy to absolve national sovereignty and ever increase the global order, imposing it on all nations by force if necessary until all citizens become subservient to a few powerful and brutal elete despots.
It's sheeple like you who's ignorance allows it to happen. .
[rbp]
Where were you when you thought my stuff was nutty? Why were't you in there, effectively refuting it?
You are right. I do not participate enough. I lurk alot but i do not post alot.
I had enough of the creationism debate a few years ago and i have no reason to participate in creationism debate on this board since it is almost non existing.[/qs]
Then that makes you a troll, posting nothing edifying. You're here criticizing us who do.
rdp writes:
Though i did not respond to your arguments in earlier threads, your argument are still bad.
You need to poop or get off the pot. You need to show evidence that they are bad. Here at EvC, one does not just declare stuff to be bad. You must do the evidence thing as the rest of us are required to do.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Shield, posted 05-04-2012 9:59 PM Shield has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2220 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(4)
Message 19 of 415 (661389)
05-04-2012 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Buzsaw
05-04-2012 9:16 PM


Re: Where Are The Creationists
He's banned one of your most effective creationists from all science forums which include some Biblical ones.
The reason, Buz, is that you are not posting science. Science has a specific set of rules and procedures that it must follow--generally lumped under the term the "scientific method." It relies on verifiable evidence, hypotheses, testing of those hypotheses, rejecting or reformulating the ones that don't measure up, all of which leads to scientific theories. Theories must also meet another criterion: they must successfully predict things that in turn are verified. Note, these terms are used in a different manner within science than they are used by the general population. The general population equates "theory" with anything from "guess" to "idea." In science a theory is the single best current explanation for a given set of observations, and it is an explanation that covers all of those observations without being contradicted by any. And, as noted, it makes successful predictions.
What you rely on is about the opposite of this. Your "chariot wheels" for example: they are based on a fuzzy underwater photograph and a lot of wishful thinking. To make these "chariot wheels" into verifiable evidence you need more than a fuzzy photograph--otherwise we would already have positive evidence that bigfoot and UFOs exist. If a potential chariot wheel is recovered and subjected to scientific investigation there are many tests which could be performed to determine whether or not it dates to the time period you say it does. Comparison to existing wheels from Egyptian tombs would be the first thing to do--if they are even chariot wheels at all! That has not been determined.
When nearly all of you, his evolutionst members voted that Buzsaw be reinstated into Science forums, Percy's one bully pulpit vote trumped all of yours.
That's up to him as the one who runs the board.
He dogged me, demanding what to post next etc in the last Exodus thread and now member Percy is demanding that I cease and desist posting on topic messages relating to how commodity goods made investors of it wealthy while $$ assets infate, becoming ever more worthless making these people less wealthy. He cited Dr Adequate's response as well, demanding no more responses relating to my message. He's made similar demands, even at FreeForAll. Go figure why you've won.
On the exodus thread he wanted verifiable evidence. You failed to provide any.
If Percy/Admin would leave the moderating up to Minnemooseus and the rest of his team of moderators, I assure you that you would not be winning and some other creationists might find this site a place where they would desire to stay and engage in debates.
Creationists come and soon they're gone after Percy mothers/dogges them as to what they must and must not post. . They need some fair and balance from Percy/Admin before you can expect others to feel welcome.
Creationists are not immune to the rules of science and evidence. Their claims, when refuted by scientific evidence, must be supported by scientific evidence, not by dogma, scripture, myth, and belief.
At 76, my business, church, garden and other activities limit my online time, especially during the summer, so if you all want more creationists you need to persuade Percy to stop running them off. He's nice to them at first, but sooner or later he drives them off.
Perhaps most creationists leave voluntarily when they make claims based on their beliefs, and when challenged are unable to support those claims with any verifiable evidence.
Here is the difference between religious belief and science: Science, when disputes arise, goes back to evidence or seeks new evidence, and from that determines which of the conflicting claims, if any, are the most accurate.
Religions, when disputes arise, tend to split. There are currently an estimated 30,000-40,000 different denominations or sects of Christianity alone. The reason for this is that they do not rely on evidence to address differences among them, but instead rely on belief. And as Heinlein noted, "Belief gets in the way of learning." If you don't agree with the others in your group you split into two groups and each go your own way as you have no empirical means to settle those disagreements.
I don't see much from astute physicists like Son Goku and Cavediver, etc anymore. They and other astute scientists share the same frustration as Dr Adequate. Activity livens up and threads get hot when bonafide creationst vs evolutionist debates happen. Otherwise, about all this site amounts to is a round table discussion among evolutionits and Big Bangers.
IMO, AdminPD needs to lighten up a bit on moderating as well. Imo, she needs to allow some more leeway in the treads relative to adherance to topic. IMO, moderating makes or breaks debate boards. Imo, the less, the better. It's the trolls and dumb-headed that they need to focus on. .
Buz, I think your problem, shared with many or most creationists who have passed through here, is that you are unable to come up with evidence for your beliefs which will convince most outsiders. You accept your evidence because it supports your beliefs, so "it has to be right!" But that's not enough to convince those who rely on verifiable evidence.
And because you are not relying on verifiable evidence you have a major problem in the Science Forum.
Perhaps a solution is to initiate a new Forum on this site--perhaps call it "Creationists' Corner" or some such. I would suggest it be moderated for abusive language, trolling, and the like without moderating content as is necessary in the Science Forum. Perhaps this would be a place where you could post more of your beliefs and the evidence you feel supports them without getting banned.
And we could soundly refute them as always. ; - )

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Buzsaw, posted 05-04-2012 9:16 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Modulous, posted 05-05-2012 7:45 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 415 (661390)
05-04-2012 11:28 PM


CreationJon
From this point on, I am a practicing Creationist.
Score one for the team!

Love your enemies!

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by ringo, posted 05-05-2012 12:56 PM Jon has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 21 of 415 (661396)
05-05-2012 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dr Adequate
05-04-2012 3:13 PM


Dr.A asks
Well, where are they?
I've been thinking about asking someone to come into EvC and try his luck here. I believe he is an Intelligent Design proponent. Not likely a YEC. Conservative politically.
I'm not sure about it, and there is a good chance he might refuse the suggestion out of hand anyway. If there were a page I could remember listing the PRATTs so I can have him go through those before retreading one, then he might take interest.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-04-2012 3:13 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 398 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 22 of 415 (661401)
05-05-2012 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by GDR
05-04-2012 10:41 PM


However, having said that you only have to read through this thread and see, the name calling and ridicule that Buz is subjected to and it becomes clear as to why there aren't any creationists left here.
No, that's not why.
I flatter and encourage people such as slevesque, wumpini, sac ... and they disappear. I talk softly to foreveryoung and he explodes with rage at everyone and goes about looking for my previous posts to vote 'em down. I tell Chuck77 that he seems to be a nice guy, and he hates me because I proved him wrong about a subject that I didn't even mention until he asked me to comment on it --- and then, like slevesque, throws up his role as moderator.
Meanwhile the people whom I do just mock, such as Buzsaw and Dawn Bertot, hang about forever but don't contribute anything to the debate. (Note that when I mention Buzsaw and Dawn in the same sentence, this is not to say that I put them in the same class: I like Buzsaw personally, as a man, whereas the most sympathetic feeling I can muster for DB is a sort of horrified pity.)
Right now, I'd even welcome the return of marc9000 --- except that if he came back he wouldn't do so to argue for a young earth or fiat creationism, he'd do so to lie about Barack Obama.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by GDR, posted 05-04-2012 10:41 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 7:28 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 157 by Dawn Bertot, posted 05-17-2012 12:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 152 days)
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


(3)
(1)
Message 23 of 415 (661404)
05-05-2012 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Dr Adequate
05-05-2012 3:27 AM


I completely agree with this. The problem is not so much that we're unduly mean to them, but that creationists are such delicate hothouse flowers that they wilt under the mildest criticism.
This seems to be a tendency amongst theists in general. There exists a certain subset of theists who simply cannot tolerate dissent. It's not all by any means; GDR and Catholic Scientist for example have thick skins and give as good as they get. It is a significant percentage who behave this way though. Any criticism of their beliefs is taken as an attack, an opportunity to "take offence", whatever that is supposed to mean. It's a useful way of stifling one's critics.
I think that creationists show this tendency to such a ridiculous extreme because they are fighting to maintain such a huge personal well of cognitive dissonance. They have an inkling that there are problems with their beliefs, but they don't like to think about it too deeply. It's uncomfortable. The ones who can weather the barrage of criticism at a site like this tend to be the ones whose cognitive dissonance is so deeply entrenched that they're no longer even dimly aware of it. Sadly, debating these folks tends to be rather fruitless.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-05-2012 3:27 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Panda, posted 05-05-2012 8:02 AM Granny Magda has replied
 Message 28 by nwr, posted 05-05-2012 10:01 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 99 days)
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 24 of 415 (661406)
05-05-2012 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Coyote
05-04-2012 11:21 PM


Re: Where Are The Creationists
Perhaps a solution is to initiate a new Forum on this site--perhaps call it "Creationists' Corner" or some such. I would suggest it be moderated for abusive language, trolling, and the like without moderating content as is necessary in the Science Forum.
Faith had a similar idea. What we ended up with was Theological Creationism and ID. It was meant to be a place to defend creationism/ID without recourse to science. It never really took off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Coyote, posted 05-04-2012 11:21 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3827 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 25 of 415 (661408)
05-05-2012 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Granny Magda
05-05-2012 7:28 AM


GM writes:
GDR and Catholic Scientist for example have thick skins and give as good as they get.
imho, I don't think GDR has displayed having particularly thick skin - I don't think he has needed to.
He simply doesn't encourage/deserve posts that could be considered abusive.
Certainly, I have seen some strong discussions take place, but they were gentlemanly in nature.
Although it sounds like I am cheer-leading for GDR, I simply wished to point out that not all creationists should be tarred with the same brush.
Just sayin'.

Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 7:28 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 8:06 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 152 days)
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 26 of 415 (661409)
05-05-2012 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Panda
05-05-2012 8:02 AM


As far as I am aware, GDR is not a creationist.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Panda, posted 05-05-2012 8:02 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 9:27 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 27 of 415 (661415)
05-05-2012 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Granny Magda
05-05-2012 8:06 AM


What is a creationist:?
Only in the broadest sense in that GDR like myself believe that GOD really is the creator of all that is, seen and unseen.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 8:06 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6445
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 28 of 415 (661419)
05-05-2012 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Granny Magda
05-05-2012 7:28 AM


GDR and Catholic Scientist for example have thick skins and give as good as they get.
Well, Catholic Scientist is an atheist who uses "Catholic" in his name.
Okay, just joking. But he posts so little on religion, that it is hard to be sure.
GDR has religious views that are more-or-less defensible. It's the theists with indefensible views who won't defend them. I wonder why?

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 7:28 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 526 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(3)
(1)
Message 29 of 415 (661434)
05-05-2012 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Jon
05-04-2012 11:28 PM


Re: CreationJon
CreationJon writes:
From this point on, I am a practicing Creationist.
I have considered becoming a creationist devil's advocate but I don't know if I could do it. My M.O. is to blaze away at anything that sounds stupid and creationism is so stupid that I'd probably just be shooting myself in the foot.
On the other hand, if Buzsaw sets the standard for effectiveness, maybe it is an attainable goal.
My user name could be ringomartinez.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Jon, posted 05-04-2012 11:28 PM Jon has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 05-05-2012 2:58 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 31 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 6:53 PM ringo has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 30 of 415 (661440)
05-05-2012 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by ringo
05-05-2012 12:56 PM


Re: CreationJon
ringomartinez would certainly be setting a high bar, perhaps one that is unachievable.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by ringo, posted 05-05-2012 12:56 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024