|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,788 Year: 4,045/9,624 Month: 916/974 Week: 243/286 Day: 4/46 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Of course we do. What other default can there be but reality? The point is that you have no right to claim the default positionAn honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4443 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
The point is that you have no right to claim the default position In a discussion of a science topic, it seems perfectly legitimate to claim that the purpose of science is to model our understanding of the natural world as close to reality as possible. I'm puzzled by your reasoning that reality is not the default position. Edited by Tanypteryx, : spellingWhat if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Can not A'Tuin be both male and female?
Would the world not be equally stable were there only three elephants? Could A'Tuin not be a whale?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
This post by PaulK Message 864 has gone over the line into sheer personal attack after tending in that direction over the last few posts. I followed suit unfortunately though not to his degree of total lack of content:
Shouldn’t you be mortifying your sins rather than indulging them ? But thanks for proving my point about your lack of honesty. This kind of nastiness on PK's part is standard with him lately and it makes "debate" with him nearly intolerable. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Faith needs to stop repeating the same old lies and whining when caught at it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
Looks like it is time to close that topic. Both of you are guilty, however.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
What am I guilty of? Go read through that sequence of posts. And what PK just said on this thread alone deserves a suspension.
I don't think going into Summation Mode is going to solve anything. There are other conversations going on.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I read the topic. I stand by my summation. I respect your methodology as much as I respect secular science, but it must be pointed out how the two approaches differ. I believe that the cartoon describes it quite well.
You have a right to voice your methodology as do your opponents. My hope is that everyone gets better at expressing themselves and stops the personal attacks (and reactions to such attacks) Hopefully, we here at EvC are learning to coexist. Nobody is being singled out or banned (or even suspended) because we all have earned our place here at EvC. It is unfortunate that you do not have too many other creationists to help you make your case. Usually, I enjoy reading what you have to say. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22492 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
After reading this thread this morning from Message 60 onward I have serious concerns about those stating they will neither consider evidence offered nor offer any evidence of their own nor even educate themselves on the issues. Without specifying from whom or from which posts these quotes originate, I'm very concerned about the following statements. In my opinion participants expressing attitudes like these should not be permitted to post:
The evidence is everywhere, open your eyes. ... I'm not going to read your link. ... Not interested. Maybe later. Maybe not. ... I'm not keeping up with the issues,... ... No I'm not going to provide evidence... ... But all I'm going to say is OPEN YOUR EYES IT'S EVERYWHERE. Unless I feel like digging up some examples some time. ... The demand for evidence is just a way of calling your opponent a liar. Then there are the substance-free personal insults that have no place in any thread at this forum:
Typical stupid rejoinder. Babyish and stupid. ... Typical stupid denigrating spin. ... I know you are a vicious namecaller who has no interest in being reasonable. ... I do wonder where your heads can be. ... Obviously the Left has no room for it in their sneering self-righteous arrogance. The thread is about Jeanine's Pirro's book Liars Leakers and Liberals: The Case Against the Anti-Trump Conspiracy. The thread's originator should begin talking about what's in the book. So far the originator is avoiding their own topic and being unresponsive to questions about it. When people complain they're instigating insult wars and leveling unsubstantiated charges of bias and abuse, and when people offer evidence and/or make substantive arguments they're ignoring them. The originator's response rate is now below 50%. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Guilty as charged. Please act accordingly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Percy writes:
Faith has already basically answered your question.
The thread's originator should begin talking about what's in the book. So far the originator is avoiding their own topic and being unresponsive to questions about it.Faith,msg 1 writes: Faith is making it plain that she started this topic as a place to voice her views without appeasing the Left through the demand to provide evidence backing the validity of her views.
I gave up a long time ago saying anything about it here or to anyone except people who share my views.Faith writes: As the moderator of this thread, I am relaxing my demands to focus solely on the book, as the responses have been more civil of late. If the thread gets out of line, I may close it at times until people simmer down...but you all are doing better so far. Guilty as charged. Please act accordingly.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
If Faith wishes to voice her views without meaningful discussion she can and should do so on her blog. Not here.
If she does not want to discuss the book then the thread should never have been posted in the Book Nook. If she wants respect for her views, then displays of ignorance, prejudice and hypocrisy are hardly the way to get it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I do not want to DEBATE the book. Discussion is something else that hardly evey happens here although supposedly it's what the site wants to encourage.
As for your usual personal attacks who cares, but I'm asking for the basic kind of respect any human being owes another, I could not care less what you think of me personally, but I do care about basic decency as expressed in a discussion about anything whatever. I don't know why Phat didn't suspend you when he suspended the rest of us. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Plenty of discussion happens here. And the truth of the accusations in the book would seem to be a highly relevant point.
quote: And what respect is that ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22492 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Phat writes: Faith is making it plain that she started this topic as a place to voice her views without appeasing the Left through the demand to provide evidence backing the validity of her views. Rule 4 from the Forum Guidelines:
Should declaring up-front in a thread that one won't be following certain of the Forum Guidelines really absolve one from following those Forum Guidelines? Wouldn't this be a dangerous precedent? Doesn't this open the door to people possibly beginning their threads with a statement like one of these:
Moderating threads can be a difficult challenge, and not enforcing some of the Forum Guidelines would make the task easier, but it doesn't seem fair to those who *are* following the Forum Guidelines. And maybe it's just me, but I think those guidelines are part of the reason a lot of people are here, especially rule 4. I do think it makes sense in the current environment to cut some people some slack (but not total slack) in the interests of keeping discussion going, but what is occurring now doesn't seem like discussion. One side is begging for crumbs of substance. The other side is lambasting those unhappy with Trump while acknowledging they are uninformed and have no interest in supporting their claims nor in listening to the evidence provided by others. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Grammar.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024