Report discussion problems here: No.2

It seems the "report discussion problems" thread was lost during the recent disk space problem. Would it be a good idea to start a new one?Also, there's another spammer:http://EvC Forum: Design CounterargumentsA particularly stupid one as well.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Tweak topic title.Edited by AdminPD, : Changed Mood icon

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

I believe that this forum makes a genuine attempt or operate fair and unbalanced. However given the examples such as coyote here in this thread
http://EvC Forum: Abiogenesis -->EvC Forum: AbiogenesisI believe that the forum fails in this regard and allows itself to be duped by the posters such as coyote. The forum tends to give them great leeway in areas of personal attack, labeling other long time posters as 'trolls', not backing up their claims, changing the subject and so on. Simply making an appeal to science should not cause the mods to look the other way, but apparently it does.In this way the forum unwittingly becomes a tool of such individuals, and a evolutionist-atheist echo chamber.Now that is okay if that what you want, just represent it as such without any false pretenses.

Ichiban, thanks for your concern.JohnFolton has been around for a long time. He never supports what he says in an honest way. He has been given lots of information on the topics he keeps bringing up-- he ignores it. If someone 'makes an appeal to science' by supplying real information and reasoning then of course the mods 'look the other way'. In the science threads that is what is expected.If the opposing individual doesn't get enough information or has disagreements with the logic he is expected to ask for and receive what he needs. That is what honest debate is about.JohnFolton has shown many times that he is not interested in honest debate.He is, indeed, a troll. If you wish to defend him I suggest you can start a separate thread for that and examine what he has said before. It will prove futile.It might be a better use of your time to pick up on some point where you feel JF is correct and defend it yourself without reference to JF himself.ABEI also have to point out that the post you don't like is in "free for all". This is a pretty well unmoderated forum. Pretty much anything goes there. Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.

Ned, What happened to the unmoderated free for all thread in question. jfP.S. Percy if you can retrieve it from Google go for it, etc...Thanks,jf Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.

There seems to be a spammer here:http://EvC Forum: Greetings from sunny Costa Rica. -->EvC Forum: Greetings from sunny Costa Rica.At least, he has a highly suspicious sig

---

I hunt for the truth

Thanks, I'm going to call it spam.

This is an example of signature spamming. Websites can increase their rank in search engines like Google by increasing the number of websites that reference them.I get requests all the time to crosslink with other websites that have nothing whatsoever to do with the creation/evolution debate, and I always turn them down.But it's always very easy to create references to your website at discussion boards like this one by simply including the link in a message (there are companies that will do this for you). And this is just what this spammer has done.And so I will edit that message and break that link while leaving the message appearing exactly as it already does. Thus, when they check back in a week or so to make sure the message is still there, it will appear that all is well when it isn't, and they won't make another attempt to post the link here.Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

This looks like spam too:http://EvC Forum: Evolution National Standards Change.org idea -->EvC Forum: Evolution National Standards Change.org ideaI looked at the linked website and it's spam to me.Edited by CosmicChimp, : No reason given.

IMO, the use of the "Links and Information" forum is problematic.The link is somewhat spamish in that the source member seems to have registered just to post the link.Pretty feeble, but it is material relevant to this forum. We shall see if the topic originator ever posts again here. I'd bet on the "no" side.Adminnemooseus

---

The following exchange resulted in a warning by AdminNosy that I would be suspended if I continued in this vein. 1. My understanding is that the consensus by all, including conventional science is that the mountains were at some period, formed by some means which requires that at some period the surface of planet earth was smoother than is observed today.2. It is my understanding that there was a time of significant flooding on the planet as attested to by conventional science.3. If the planet's surface was less mountainous the amount of water in the deep oceans would be such that far more, if not all of the planet would have been flooded unless some of the water was in the form of atmospheric vapor.This is where I was intending to go with my argument. Thus I am requesting permission to continue posting in the current flood thread in the vein that I was pursuing.Granny Magda's position is that a world wide flood is/was impossible. I beg to differ.Problem for EvC: If the flood is considered proven to be impossible, why is the Biblical flood topic allowed at all on this board?Perhaps the topic should be moved to the Free For All.NOTE: I see the link is not working. I'll go ahead and post so as not to loose my message. Then I'll work to edit in the link fix.Edited by Buzsaw, : link fixEdited by Buzsaw, : Fix botched link fix.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Your understanding may or may not be correct.All you need to do is show evidence for points 1 and 2. You need to also offer quantitative values for "smoother" in point 1 and to what "significant" means in point 2.My post says: So you already have permission to continue posting. You don't have to ask for it. You just have to supply evidence for your first point and then logically link that to your third point.Once you have that done then you can move on to trying to make that connect to the Biblical flood. You don't have to do that at first, of course.

perhaps not the right place, but the thread "Divinity in the Bible", or whatever it was called, has seemingly vanished.It had, last I checked, about 357 posts, and that was yesterday afternoon (in sweden, at any rate. Percy time would be late morning). Mayhaps that's why it vanished? I know we have technical problems with huge threads, so.

You mean this one: http://EvC Forum: Anything Divine in the Bible? -->EvC Forum: Anything Divine in the Bible? ?I could access it just fine 5 minutes ago.

---

I hunt for the truth

yeah, it's here now. I think I'm going blind or something. I don't know how I could have missed that. I even scanned the page three times! hmm.