Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 418 of 860 (771096)
10-20-2015 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 417 by dwise1
10-20-2015 2:16 AM


Re: Free Faith...
Just for the record, since it seems to have been forgotten, I did not become a Christian until my mid to late forties, and didn't discover the creationist arguments until a few years later. Before that I was a pretty standard liberal atheist humanities-educated person, so your theory doesn't work in my case.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 417 by dwise1, posted 10-20-2015 2:16 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 420 by dwise1, posted 10-20-2015 2:54 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 421 by dwise1, posted 10-20-2015 3:06 AM Faith has replied
 Message 424 by dwise1, posted 10-20-2015 10:27 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 419 of 860 (771097)
10-20-2015 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by Coyote
10-18-2015 9:55 PM


Re: Free Faith...
Wow, thanks for that sweet post and for all the people who cheered it. That's quite touching.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by Coyote, posted 10-18-2015 9:55 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 422 of 860 (771102)
10-20-2015 3:21 AM
Reply to: Message 421 by dwise1
10-20-2015 3:06 AM


Re: Free Faith...
Wow, what's with the fury? I've reported this many times here. Your view of the Christian mindset doesn't fit mine. What's the problem? Remember, you wrote that in the context of talking about ME after all.
The year I became a Christian was somewhere around 1988 and the reason I say "around" is that I had read my way to belief and don't know at what exact point I was a genuine believer. I started reading in the Fall of 1984, with books mostly about Hinduism and Buddhism and the occult and Gnosticism and cults like Rosicrucianism. It took a few years to get to Bible Protestantism. My first experience of church as an adult was in late 1987 but I didn't join one until a couple years later. yes I'd been to church as a child but somehow managed not to learn much, lost it all as a teenager, never heard a word about creationism in those early years.
Then it would have been some time in the early 90s when I started reading books on creationism. Morris, Gish, all those guys.
What would I be lying about anyway?
ABE: You were assuming I had that restricted mindset you impute to Christian fundamentalists. But I was a reasonably well educated adult who did a lot of reading and was certainly used to encountering a variety of points of view. People raised in church and not exposed to any of that until adulthood probably are vulnerable to culture shock and losing their faith as you say. Even I lost mine, such as it was, as a teenager, and for similar reasons: encountering people who scorned what I had grown up with, what little there was of it. But having found out what it is really all about at an age when I could finally appreciate it and see it against the background of everything I'd learned before, has given me a very solid foundation.
At all costs, Faith must maintain her own theological focus. To "begin seeing some things a little from other people's point of view" would only weaken her position. Would only weaken it. She cannot allow that to happen, at any cost.
It's more a need to avoid falling into debate traps in an environment like EvC than it is any sort of worry about losing my theological focus. Trying to keep my arguments simple and clear is enough of a challenge here.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 421 by dwise1, posted 10-20-2015 3:06 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 425 by dwise1, posted 10-20-2015 10:40 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(5)
Message 460 of 860 (781529)
04-04-2016 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 459 by Phat
04-04-2016 9:11 PM


Re: I prophesy...
In my opinion he's way past any legitimate reason for continuing to tolerate him. He has no intention of debating, he's here to make trouble. Isn't that the definition of a troll? I've never seen anyone fit the description so well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 459 by Phat, posted 04-04-2016 9:11 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 462 of 860 (781812)
04-07-2016 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 461 by Tanypteryx
04-07-2016 8:29 PM


A couple of corrections and an apology
Oh suspend me please. I wish I could make EvC disappear. The people who need to be cleaned up are the ones lying about me, edge and the large winged insect, could also add jar and Dr. A and Paul K and some others, but nobody here will clean THEM up, they represent the Status Quo that is all that matters at EvC. They can lie and lie and lie and pat themselves on the back and nobody wqill ever do anything to stop them. Only me.
ABE: Responding to Percy's post below about how you can't lie about facts: that's pretty nave. You can certainly misrepresent facts like anything else. But I am objecting to lying about ME: They are lying about things like my supposedly "denying" evidence for one thing, which gets said mostly on the other thread about why EvC isn't getting many creationists any more. No, I have a different view of the evidence, I'm not denying anything. I realize, however, that this pernicious fiction will persist no matter what I say.
Also have to add here that Percy insists on the rule that I can't assume original horizontality any more because of that little experiment we did that showed it is possible for a layer to form on a low slope in a plastic container. I wish I had never agreed to that because Original Horizontality is a fundamental principle of stratigraphy, such an experiment isn't a trustworthy falsification because it's on too small a scale; and my arguments depend on the principle. The last one we argued about, the road cut in New York, was obviously originally horizontal whether a layer could form on such a mild slope or not. There are other clues to its original horizontality. And that being the case the gneiss beneath was pushed up, the strata were not deposited on top of it, and that is evidence for the young earth.
Besides making the above edits, I am also here to apologize for the name calling I always fall into when angry. Not the anger itself, though I'm over it now, because I'm objecting to a deceitful spirit which deserves anger, but the namecalling -- I'm sorry about that.
Bye again.
/abe
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 461 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-07-2016 8:29 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 465 by Admin, posted 04-08-2016 7:43 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 466 by ringo, posted 04-08-2016 12:02 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 464 of 860 (781828)
04-07-2016 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 463 by Tanypteryx
04-07-2016 10:44 PM


Crybaby. You needn't fear, I'll get punished eventually, I always do. Then you can feel good in your smug self-importance, securely safe from the Mad Creationist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-07-2016 10:44 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 471 of 860 (783038)
05-02-2016 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 470 by PaulK
05-02-2016 2:26 PM


Re: A strange complaint
I guess I should have explained that most pages other than EvC are very hard on my eyes so I need to avoid most links and can usually only read part of them when I have to. Same with reading books with slick white pages. I can only read so much before I have to stop. And I wear special blue-blocking lenses at the computer and while reading too. But I did also think the basic idea here is to give opinions in your own words, which I try to do even when I give links. And the point about a whole Google page is to show the range of opinion on a subject, or to show that it's not just a negligible point of my own.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 470 by PaulK, posted 05-02-2016 2:26 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 479 of 860 (783654)
05-07-2016 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 476 by jar
05-07-2016 11:10 AM


thread lengths and limiting participants
I find myself agreeing with jar about this. If I had some choice in selecting participants I'd probably be much less likely to lose my temper for one thing. I'd also prefer to have less emphasis on the debate factor and more on the "understanding through discussion" factor if at all possible (though I realize that may be asking too much).
Otherwise I don't think things get any more confused with long threads than a welter of short ones, so I'd vote for having a high number of posts if there is to be a limit -- say 1000.
abe: But really I prefer no limits. I like knowing all the opinions about gun control are somewhere on that extremely long thread for instance. It's not any harder to search a long thread than a hundred short threads to locate a particular opinion on the subject, in fact it's probably easier.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 476 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 11:10 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 480 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 11:44 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 481 of 860 (783657)
05-07-2016 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 480 by jar
05-07-2016 11:44 AM


Re: thread lengths and limiting participants
I get your point but there are people on the opposing side who are just about guaranteed to give me headaches, ulcers and fits. If I don't want to be trapped with a particular opponent how about an opt-out possibility.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 480 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 11:44 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 482 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 12:01 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 483 of 860 (783665)
05-07-2016 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 482 by jar
05-07-2016 12:01 PM


Re: thread lengths and limiting participants
Apparently I wasn't clear. I'm not talking about their personality, I'm talking about the irrelevance or illogic or strawmanning or game-playing of their typical arguments.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 482 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 12:01 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 484 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 12:30 PM Faith has replied
 Message 488 by Rrhain, posted 05-08-2016 6:14 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 485 of 860 (783668)
05-07-2016 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 484 by jar
05-07-2016 12:30 PM


Re: thread lengths and limiting participants
You'd think so but in my experience things don't happen that way when I'm the one doing the showing. And that makes for a discussion that wanders all over the place, raises my blood pressure, and accomplishes nothing.
However, because it's probably too much to ask I'll drop this line of thought and just hope for the best.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 484 by jar, posted 05-07-2016 12:30 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 487 of 860 (783689)
05-07-2016 5:00 PM


wrong thread
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 489 of 860 (784928)
05-26-2016 3:29 AM


Great Debate possibility?
I'm wondering if it's possible to turn this thread,
Molecular Population Genetics and Diversity Through Mutation
EvC Forum: Molecular Population Genetics and Diversity through Mutation
into a Great Debate even though it's late to ask. Genomicus knows her stuff and I get more out of debating with her than anybody else there, even though sometimes she piles on the technical language too deep for me to wade through. Ideally a creationist with the same level of science would show up on my side, but if wishes were horses etc.
[By the way, I think she's a she because of a comment she made about Dawn calling everybody "Sir" but if I'm wrong she/he can correct me.]
I can still try to answer all the others up to this point but it's going to take time. But they could continue to make their points in a Peanut Gallery.

Replies to this message:
 Message 490 by Genomicus, posted 05-26-2016 6:42 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 491 of 860 (784932)
05-26-2016 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 490 by Genomicus
05-26-2016 6:42 AM


Re: Great Debate possibility?
Yes the moderators have to decide to set it up. There's nothing really different about it except that we'd only be talking to each other, which would take a lot of stress off me from getting piled on as so often happens. Your thread was aimed at me anyway and the others are bringing different arguments into the mix. I'm glad you like the idea.
abe: OK I'll call you she, but it probably won't be necessary to refer to you in the third person on the thread anyway.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 490 by Genomicus, posted 05-26-2016 6:42 AM Genomicus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 492 by Admin, posted 05-26-2016 9:25 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 493 of 860 (784943)
05-26-2016 11:31 AM


cancelled and answered Percy's post instead.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024