Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2019 11:17 AM
20 online now:
Chiroptera, JonF, Tangle (3 members, 17 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,021 Year: 7,057/19,786 Month: 1,598/1,581 Week: 420/393 Day: 11/43 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   For Percy (New Section)
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 11 (631978)
09-05-2011 12:39 AM


Hi Percy, I have a suggestion. I think this is the right place to ask or suggest so forgive me if it isn't.

I've been following and reading your back and forths with Buzz and was also just reading Taz's new thread. This is my suggestion:

How about a "Creationsim" section on the site? You have Science, Social/Religion etc...but no actual "Creationsim'.

Putting in a Creationism section would eliminate a lot of problems IMO and atleast would maybe welcome more people to debate it.

IOW, if there is a Science section(Science Forums) on EvC(Evolution-V-Creation), then maybe there should be a Creation(ism) section- (Creation(ism) Forums) too.

What do you think Percy?

Also Percy, before you say "Chuck, If you are claiming Creationism should be considered Scientific and credible then you should have no problem fitting it in with the Science forums, what gives? Why do you wan't your own PseudoScience section? You are here to argue that Creation Scientists are doing Science so I don't see the problem. Are you admitting that Creationism isn't Science? If it's not then what is this ENTIRE debate ABOUT Chuck!?!? And why are we debating it!?"

Good questions Percy. Well, it seems people here are at odds about what evidence really is or isn't and what can or can't be used. Maybe this would help.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by NoNukes, posted 09-05-2011 2:13 AM Chuck77 has responded
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 09-05-2011 2:26 AM Chuck77 has responded
 Message 9 by Admin, posted 09-05-2011 7:52 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded
 Message 10 by fearandloathing, posted 09-05-2011 10:41 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 11 (631987)
09-05-2011 2:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 12:39 AM


How would the new section help...
Unless the intention is to relax the rules for participation, how would a new section for any topic help out with people not understanding what evidence is?

The board is not organized into separate evolution/creation sections. In fact there is no evolution section. Why then would it be logical to have a creationism section?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 12:39 AM Chuck77 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 5:52 AM NoNukes has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14959
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 3 of 11 (631989)
09-05-2011 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 12:39 AM


A creationist section would not help resolve the questions about what counts as evidence, how it should be validated etc. It would not even be an appropriate place to discuss it (the existing, "Is it Science" forum would be better - or maybe a Philosophy forum outside of the science forums).

So what discussions would be placed in a special creationism section and why ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 12:39 AM Chuck77 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 6:04 AM PaulK has responded

    
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 11 (631996)
09-05-2011 5:52 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by NoNukes
09-05-2011 2:13 AM


Biological Evolution
NoNukes writes:

In fact there is no evolution section.

In Fact there is a "Biological Evolution" forum.

There can be a Creationism forum. What's so hard to understand?

It doesn't need it's own huge section. Just a forum like the one stated above where references can be used as evidence that one would get from a Creationist site for example and not get suspended for it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by NoNukes, posted 09-05-2011 2:13 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by NoNukes, posted 09-05-2011 2:23 PM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 11 (631998)
09-05-2011 6:04 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by PaulK
09-05-2011 2:26 AM


The debate
PaulK writes:

So what discussions would be placed in a special creationism section and why ?

Well, for one Creationists would be better able to make there points with the evidence that is available to them. The evidence that is supplied by Creation scientists for instance.

There are Creationists that do research and when it's stated in a Science forum like the great flood for example it's shot down gibberish. It isn't doing anything for the discussion.

It would be a better way for Creationists to express themselves here instead of fearing they might get suspended for supplying evidence that evolutionists don't agree with.

What's so hard to understand? Creationists have their hands tied here. It's no fun. It should be exciting to debate with people instead of fearing you are potentialy "lying" or trying to decieve everyone intentionally when you're only trying to convey the evidence you have from certain sources.

Isn't the evidence available to all? Is it so bad to present the only evidence we have? What else can creationists do? I guess we could stop debating in the Science forums, which seems to have already happened.

Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 09-05-2011 2:26 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Huntard, posted 09-05-2011 6:34 AM Chuck77 has responded
 Message 8 by PaulK, posted 09-05-2011 7:23 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 436 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 6 of 11 (632002)
09-05-2011 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 6:04 AM


Re: The debate
Chuck77 writes:

Well, for one Creationists would be better able to make there points with the evidence that is available to them. The evidence that is supplied by Creation scientists for instance.


Are those scientists doing science? If yes, then it can be presented in the "science" section of this forum. If they are not, then you are admitting creation science is not science but a religious dogma.

There are Creationists that do research and when it's stated in a Science forum like the great flood for example it's shot down gibberish. It isn't doing anything for the discussion.

It's either legitimate science, or it is not. Where it is posted does not change this fact.

It would be a better way for Creationists to express themselves here instead of fearing they might get suspended for supplying evidence that evolutionists don't agree with.

I don't think anyone gets suspende here for posting evidence somebody else doesn't agree with.

What's so hard to understand? Creationists have their hands tied here. It's no fun. It should be exciting to debate with people instead of fearing you are potentialy "lying" or trying to decieve everyone intentionally when you're only trying to convey the evidence you have from certain sources.

Again, if the evidence is legitimate science, there's no problem posting it in the science section.

Isn't the evidence available to all? Is it so bad to present the only evidence we have? What else can creationists do? I guess we could stop debating in the Science forums, which seems to have already happened.

So, you're saying creationists don't use science? They're using religious dogma?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 6:04 AM Chuck77 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 6:54 AM Huntard has not yet responded

    
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 11 (632004)
09-05-2011 6:54 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Huntard
09-05-2011 6:34 AM


Re: The debate
Listen, Im just asking if there can be a forum/section where we can discuss Creationism freely, that's all.

Percy brings up some good points in this comment on the Do creationists actually understand their own arguments?in the coffee house:

Message 26


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Huntard, posted 09-05-2011 6:34 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14959
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 8 of 11 (632006)
09-05-2011 7:23 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 6:04 AM


Re: The debate
It seems to me that if "Creation scientists" are making scientific claims that the existing science forums are perfectly sensible places to discuss them. If not, what sort of claims are you referring to?

I do hope that you are not asking for a forum where criticism of creationist claims is banned. I can't see that serving any useful purpose.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 6:04 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12596
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 9 of 11 (632008)
09-05-2011 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 12:39 AM


Hi Chuck,

Thanks for this suggestion:

chuck77 writes:

How about a "Creationsim" section on the site? You have Science, Social/Religion etc...but no actual "Creationsim'.

Putting in a Creationism section would eliminate a lot of problems IMO and atleast would maybe welcome more people to debate it.

IOW, if there is a Science section(Science Forums) on EvC(Evolution-V-Creation), then maybe there should be a Creation(ism) section- (Creation(ism) Forums) too.

Again, thanks for the suggestion, but I think we've already got this covered, check out this forum: Theological Creationism and ID

I've been following and reading your back and forths with Buzz...it seems people here are at odds about what evidence really is

If we're talking about scientific evidence then the nature of scientific evidence should be discussed in the science threads, best forum being Is It Science?. If we're talking about other kinds of evidence, for example, the testimony of faith, then discussion should take place in Faith and Belief or Theological Creationism and ID.

--Percy


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 12:39 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

    
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 2285 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 10 of 11 (632021)
09-05-2011 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 12:39 AM


Hi chuck,

Are you admitting that Creationism isn't Science?

I think if you look at how many times creationism and its bastard-child ID has tried, and failed, to be included is schools science classes then you will see why a lot of us don't consider it science. You mention...

Why do you wan't your own PseudoScience section?

What section would that be?

If we did have a creation science section then there would be a pseudoscience section, which is what you propose. Imagine the nightmare of moderating that forum once Lam, Dawn. or several others who seem to get plenty of negative responses, starts a topic. What a dog-pile forum that would be. I doubt there would be much help between creationist also, seems be be a great divide between what you believe amongst yourselves.

There are lots of forums that deal only in creation, I have been kicked off several for...well providing real scientific evidence. Maybe you would be happier on one of those forums?


"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson

Ad astra per aspera

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 12:39 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 11 (632069)
09-05-2011 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Chuck77
09-05-2011 5:52 AM


Re: Biological Evolution
n Fact there is a "Biological Evolution" forum.

Wrong, there is a forum of that title that is intended for Creationism and Evolution discussion and debate.

The subtitle of the forum:

"Are today's species the products of descent with modification? Or are they the divine creation of God?"

Chuck77 writes:

Just a forum like the one stated above where references can be used as evidence that one would get from a Creationist site for example and not get suspended for it.

I'm not aware that anybody has been suspended for posting references from Creationist site. Ridiculed, maybe, but suspended? Not to my knowledge. But if you post stuff from such sites and the stuff is not supported, expect to have to defend it yourself. If I post stuff from non-authoritative sites like wikipedia, I expect to have to support it with primary sources and evidence if I'm called on it.

But if what you really want is a scientific section in which Creationist web pages stuff is accepted as authoritative, I am not supportive of that at all. Debate on scientific topics should consist of logical argument strongly grounded in the evidence. If you want to discuss Creationism in a non scientific fashion, why not do it in the "Theological Creationism and ID" section?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Chuck77, posted 09-05-2011 5:52 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019