Suspensions and Bannings

See Message 106. Chris has returned from suspension with a chip on his shoulder. I'll attempt a reply to his message to make clear my reasoning.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Welcome back!

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

See middle of my Message 49:

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi, TB, welcome back!After all my expressions of concern about misrepresentations of the views of mainstream geology, I was very surprised to see you say that mainstream geology now accepts that most sedimentation is rapid.Yours is a specific example of a very common tactic. Creationists often argue that science already accepts their views, or that a certain mainstream scientist supports their views, and that we here at EvC Forum have fallen out of step. The most common example of this is the claim that more and more scientists every year are recognizing the bankruptcy of the evolutionist position and are accepting Creationism.There's nothing wrong with a little hyperbole, but one shouldn't let one's enthusiasm carry one away. Let's keep it accurate, shall we? Thanks!

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

See Message 111 and Message 111 in thread Recolonization Flood/Post-Flood model.I admit to being puzzled. Tranquility Base claims to be an academic at an institution of higher learning in Australia where he is responsible for the research of a group of graduate students, yet he doesn't seem to understand how to lay out the basic outline of his model, he can't seem to form a coherent argument, he appears unable to support his arguments with evidence, and he is evasive to a high degree, answering in clipped one and two line replies, claiming he's already answered points, making promises to provide evidence later.This all makes moving the discussion forward impossible. His writing style displays the temperament of an academic, but his arguments have the sophistication of the average Creationist. He doesn't seem to understand the simplest principles of geology or physics, or that modern theoretical frameworks in geology are very tightly woven with evidence.So I don't know what to think. For now I'll assume he's being honest about being an academic, and that the weaknesses of his arguments and apparent knowledge level are because he's just not taking this at all seriously.The suspension is to get his attention that I accept his claims of being an academic, and so I am holding him to standards consistent with an academic.TB, you have to do better, much better. If you're really an academic then you already know this. If you're not then past experience here with many other members indicates that coaching does not do any good, and you'll just continue to pick up suspensions until you get discouraged and go away.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

TB,One way to look at EvC Forum is that the guy running it, namely me, is just a kook who has no idea what a valid scientific argument looks like. Maybe I'm just a know-nothing with inflated ideas about the validity of existing scientific theories. Perhaps I'm unable to recognize cogent and cohesive presentations of evidence, argument and insight. In that case, EvC Forum is an insane asylum that you want to avoid.But right or wrong, this is my place, and I have strong ideas about what represents valid science. Contributors to EvC Forum must work within the constraints I've defined. We do try very hard to take into account the degree of scientific sophistication of the individual contributor. This is why Mike the Wiz escaped sanction for quite some time. PeaceHarris contributed nonsensically for a long while, as did Faith.But you're supposedly an academic. So you must decide. Either Percy (that's me) is a loon to be avoided, in which case you go your own way. Or Percy has a fair idea of the requirements of science, and you're going to attempt to meet those requirements. I guess there's a third choice: you could get a lot of 24 hour suspensions.It's up to you.If you decide to stay, I'm not going to coach you toward successful participation. Supposedly you understand the requirements of science. Assuming that I also understand those requirements, then we should be in perfect agreement.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Please see Message 119 where Tranquility Base falsely accuses me as Percy of editing an error out of a post. The post in question is Message 115, and it doesn't even have the "edited by" annotation at the bottom that is automatically added by the software. In other words, it's never been edited. TB is therefore accusing me of editing the actual message database. It should be unnecessary for me to say this, but I will anyway: I did not in any way modify that post. It contains all the original text. I would never try to hide an error. I do not lay claim to god-like status, and I make mistakes just like everyone else.Please also see Message 121. In this message Tranquility Base continues his pattern of short answers, evasive-answers and non-answers. It is primarily for this post that I am suspending him again. He says he's an academic, and so I am holding him to the standards of an academic.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi TB, welcome back!Most discussions with Creationists very quickly become simple disagreements about what is possible and reasonable. While there is certainly plenty of room for reasonable people to disagree about what is possible and reasonable, and while a site like this should generally provide plenty of leeway, there are limits.The limits enforced here are not hard limits. We often make broad allowances for those unfamiliar with science or with certain areas of science, but that characterization does not fit you. Someone familiar with science would not argue that wisps of data from outside science like helium diffusion rates in zirconium crytals or sedimentation rates below flumes are sufficient to overturn or at least justify ignoring well established science like radioactive decay rates and sedimentation rates.Beyond that, someone familiar with science and working within science would hopefully be respectful enough of science to not misrepresent its views. Such a person would also understand the necessity for supporting points with evidence, and of the responsibility to not waste people's time by submitting and persistently defending half-baked ideas.In particular, the idea that the earth is young and everything happened millions of times faster than normal is silly because it contradicts so much evidence and even some physical laws, and because it is just so obviously Genesis in faux science clothing. The strength of you position is not measured by the stubborness with which you hold your position (nor by your ability to keep a straight face), but by the strength of your evidence and arguments. It is time to take the challenge you've set yourself seriously and start forthrightly addressing the significant issues before you.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

See Message 119. Board administration would like TC to deal forthrightly with the heat issue for CPT.I'm on vacation for most of this coming week, so I unfortunately won't be able to restore TrueCreation's privileges in 24 hours. If another moderator would like to do so, that would be appreciated.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

See Message 203.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

See Message 175.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Welcome back!

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

See Message 184.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Welcome back to the world of geology, but I suggest that before resuming discussion in your Recolonization Flood/Post-Flood model thread that you first invest some time in the What is good science? thread seeing if we can find some common ground on what constitutes legitimate scientific inquiry.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

TrueCreation's one-week suspension in the geology forum is up today, but I think it best to continue that suspension until there is a favorable conclusion to the discussion in the What is good science? thread. TrueCreation continues to have full privileges in all other public forums.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director