Hi AlphaOmergakid,
Apologies for suspending you for 24 hours, but I want you to realize that I meant it sincerely when I ruled that arguments based upon strict and precise definitions held inflexibly and determinedly should cease. That approach could be used to block progress in a discussion on any topic, as has occurred in this thread for nearly a month. I want to see constructive approaches, not accusations, complaints and inflexibility.
I would also like to see more consistency, as opposed to the inconsistency you have often displayed. For example, here you are at the end of November in
Message 141 saying you reject a continuum from chemicals to life:
What you and others are wanting to do is say that life is a continuum from chemicals to life, and that is a faith based premise that I do not accept.
And here you are just a couple weeks later saying the opposite in
Message 292:
However, if "life" is definable and clear, and "obvious" as I argue, then there can be a "chemical evolution" from chemicals to life.
Many times you appear to disagree just to disagree, regardless of how inconsistent with your past arguments. When you return after your suspension, please change your approach. No more "argument from definition." No more complaints about moderation. No more claims of what you have demonstrated. No more accusations that people are ignoring your arguments. Just calmly and straightforwardly make your points, and if they are rational and supported by evidence then they will carry the day.
-- | Percy |
| EvC Forum Director |