This is the issues and request thread for the newly introduced Showcase forum. It will likely take this forum a little while to get off the ground, but when it does members who would like to participate there should make their requests to this thread.
We don't plan to issue permissions for this forum freely. The goal is to constructively explore controversial ideas, and to remain constructive even when their advocates seem to be their own worst enemy.
Edited by Admin, : Add the originally withheld introductory information.
I had told JAD that I would be responding off EVC to him but I never did. I would like to understand his position a little better. He said past evolution is, but present evolution is not, or something qualified such, in the opening.
I think that it might be the case that I differ with him this time, around; (if he thinks that that 'evolution' can not be shown "in action"), but I need to ask a few questions and read some more either inter thread alia or off EvC, to find out. I think I have not shown any tendencies to excerbate in the past and I will conduct my self in proper accord if given permission. Thanks(in advance?)...
Here are the ground rules for participating in the Showcase forum. I tried to come up with as few rules as possible:
Permission to participate is granted by moderators.
Permission to participate can be rescinded at any time. There do not necessarily have to be good reasons, or reasons that make sense. The goal is to best showcase the luminaries views. That doesn't mean you have to agree with them or promote them, but it does mean to engage them constructively and politely. If things aren't working out for a participant then his permissions will be removed, whether or not it is his or her fault.
The decisions of the moderators about who gets to participate will not be explained. They may not make sense to anyone. I'm requesting of the other moderators that they let me decide who gets access in these early stages. If you're denied participation it doesn't mean you did anything wrong or that your a bad poster or anything like that. At least initially I'm looking for good chemistry, and what anyone thinks might be good chemistry is subjective in the extreme.
There are no plans for detailed moderation. Participants are expected to moderate themselves by keeping their contributions positive and constructive. Moderation will be conducted by who is permitted to participate.
Requests for access that are denied will receive no response. Requests for access that are granted will receive a brief reply.
Your request for access to the Showcase forum has been granted for purposes of discussion with John A. Davison in his A Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis thread. Keep in mind that the goal is to be constructive and positive. I don't say this to imply anything about you personally - I'll be saying this to everyone I grant access to, at least until the forum has some momentum and history.
I have a topic proposed in PNT. If this is not what EvC wants then why doesn't someone tell me what EvC wants ?
A Great Pyramid topic ?
Some other topic ?
Surely there must be a desired topic and match up ?
If not, why am I on display and caged and not banned ?
EvC should court match-ups. I have read many Evo-Creo books published lately that mention Internet debates. Glen Morton got his name mentioned in the latest book by Eugenie Scott. Creo-TEist flame wars are addressed. I recently had a bout with Dr. Wesley Elsberry and his errors here. The point is that the major debate boards are a major source of influence. This board should encourage, host and invite Great Debates. Moderation only exists to enforce agreed upon rules.
My suggestion is: 5 x 30 + 1 Debates.
Two debaters, 5 rounds, each post 30 kilobytes in length. Each debater OR the host board appoints a willing advocate for each side to post one conclusionary message 30 kb defending their sides arguments.
I am still feverishly writing my paper. I am under an unbreakable deadline. When I am through you all will be the first to know.
I'm requesting to have the priviledge to participate in the 'Why is the process blind?' thread by Herepton. Even though my field isn't biology, I believe my area of discipline can contribute positive insight to the matter.
The Davison v. Wounded King debate is perfectly synonymous with the content of my topic. JAD has bested WK with sources and logic exposing the Darwinian side to be arguing atheist philosophy under the disguise of science.
Does constructively exploring a concept neccessarily require disagreement? Surely you can effectively develop an idea with someone who agrees with your fundamental outlook?
Despite Ray's interpretation of JAD's thread I am specifically trying to approach the PEH as a working hypothesis and simply trying to understand what mechanisms if any there are which would be suitable to mediate semi meiosis and the sort of effects Davison's theory posits. I'm actively trying not to be oppositional.
The fact that both JAD and Ray simply see the same old 'Darwinian' Vs 'antiDarwinian' debate is frankly a bit confusing to my mind.
The Showcase forum and John's current discussion is indeed interesting, and if possible, I would like to request to be able to comment there. I understand I would not exactly be for or against the OP concepts altogether in John's thread, but the concepts and his theory are very intriguing on their own, and in general it seems that forum overall might be particularly conducive to real exchange and discussion.
By the way, some members who originally registered lower case names have been capitalizing the first letter. The newly released software allows you to do this. Just go to your profile and create an alias with the desired capitalization. If the name is otherwise identical to your current user name it will replace it.
The case you use while logging in doesn't matter for the user name. Naturally, passwords remain case sensitive.