Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-19-2019 4:46 AM
26 online now:
PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle, vimesey (4 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,818 Year: 4,855/19,786 Month: 977/873 Week: 333/376 Day: 10/116 Hour: 2/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
5Next
Author Topic:   Please welcome AdminRandman
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3003 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 46 of 72 (261101)
11-18-2005 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by mark24
11-18-2005 7:11 PM


Re: biasness
In addition, one of your explanations is actually at odds with the bible,

This is the problem. To defend the stance, one must then go on to discuss the Bible on a science thread. Sorry, but there's no use continuing the discussion with you for that reason, imo.

My experiece, and I am learning, is that when evos resort to attacking the Bible when discussing a scientific fact, that there are stuck in a paradigm which is so strong they don't seem capable of hearing what you have to say. For them, it's more of a religious argument than a factual one, and so speaking of facts with them doesn't do much more than enrage them to attack the Bible or to attack my character, etc,...even more.

You showed and still show that this is where you are going with the debate, and therefore it's not worth discussing the issue with you, imo.

If you want a real discussion, you will change your tone, take out the misconceptions that attacking the Bible is relevant, and even misconceptions about what I believe, and stick to the facts.

This message has been edited by randman, 11-18-2005 07:23 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by mark24, posted 11-18-2005 7:11 PM mark24 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by mark24, posted 11-18-2005 7:39 PM randman has responded

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 3299 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 47 of 72 (261111)
11-18-2005 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by randman
11-18-2005 7:17 PM


Re: biasness
randman,

This is the problem. To defend the stance, one must then go on to discuss the Bible on a science thread. Sorry, but there's no use continuing the discussion with you for that reason, imo.

My experiece, and I am learning, is that when evos resort to attacking the Bible when discussing a scientific fact

Firstly, for the umpteenth time, I haven't attacked the bible. In order to attack the bible I have to criticise it. But I haven't, I juxtaposed it against your explanation. Surely someone of your mighty intellect & education can see that? Secondly, just ignore it, it was a side point, just address the real issues. In not doing this you have drawn far too much attention to your blunder than was necessary.

Thirdly, why are my other points irrelevant because of a side comment made? Answer; they aren't, you just have no answer & are doing what you always do, squirm. Just an excuse.

Mark


There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by randman, posted 11-18-2005 7:17 PM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by randman, posted 11-18-2005 8:03 PM mark24 has responded

    
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3003 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 48 of 72 (261118)
11-18-2005 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by mark24
11-18-2005 7:39 PM


Re: biasness
But I haven't, I juxtaposed it against your explanation.

Whatever. You're introducing the Bible in a science thread. You are still trying to steer the conversation towards discussing the Bible, which if you will just open a thread in the Bible topic area, I'd be glad to join in.

If it was a side point, know that your side point killed the argument. Live and learn.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by mark24, posted 11-18-2005 7:39 PM mark24 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by mark24, posted 11-18-2005 8:08 PM randman has not yet responded

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 3299 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 49 of 72 (261120)
11-18-2005 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by randman
11-18-2005 8:03 PM


Re: biasness
randman,

If it was a side point, know that your side point killed the argument. Live and learn.

The only lesson to be learnt is that you are serially capable of making the flimsiest of excuses of cutting & running to hide your own ignorance.

But the one that cuts & runs hands the victory laurels to his opponent. Live & learn.

Ooooh! It fits!

Mark


There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by randman, posted 11-18-2005 8:03 PM randman has not yet responded

    
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1152 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 50 of 72 (261121)
11-18-2005 8:13 PM


What ever happened to Faith or Admin Faith ?

If the above person is MIA then Percy has simply replaced. How is this not objective ?

Ray


    
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 72 (261122)
11-18-2005 8:15 PM


This is not a debate thread
Let's keep the debating to other places.

This is the welcome thread for AdminRandman. It is appropriate for him to make his statement in this thread. Maybe we don't agree. But it is his statement to make.

Let's be professionals, and postpone the debate until the issues arise in randman's postings on other threads.

I will make one small criticism. He should have posted that statement as AdminRandman rather than as randman. This is a minor oversight that he can still correct.


To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
  • Discussion of moderation procedures
  • Comments on promotions of Proposed New Topics
  • Thread Reopen Requests

  •   
    Buzsaw
    Inactive Member


    Message 52 of 72 (261130)
    11-18-2005 8:50 PM


    AdminRandman.......YES!
    A hearty welcome to admin, Randman, and thanks to Percy for working to make this board what it's suppose to be, i.e. evolution vs creationism. I pray that God will bless and grant wisdom to do this good work.

    A few familiar fretful folks find fault, feeling forsaken, forgetting fairness.

    Capably, carefully, confidently continue in Christ! :cool:


    The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
      
    BuckeyeChris
    Inactive Member


    Message 53 of 72 (261165)
    11-18-2005 11:26 PM
    Reply to: Message 16 by Percy
    11-18-2005 1:38 PM


    Re: Why AdminRandman?
    It very much satisfies my sense of symmetry to be assured that there are those occupying the outer regions of the bell curve on both sides

    I don't think anyone is saying that having Christian/creationist mods is a bad idea. But how is anyone supposed to respect the authority of a mod that himself has shown a complete inability to respect the forum guidelines, and imo a complete lack of respect for other posters. For example I notice that his first modding action (besides promoting a topic) is reprimanding FliesOnly for going offtopic. (whether that really is offtopic or not, I'll leave for others to decide)
    Randman is modding someone for going offtopic.
    There isn't a bit of irony there? How can anyone respect him as a mod, beyond you saying "I made him a mod. He IS a mod, therefore you will respect it until the situation is otherwise"
    This barely affects me; I lurk far more than post. But unless randman at least shows civility, how are people supposed to respect the authority of this board when one of its enforcers is such a poor example. Am I being unfair here?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 16 by Percy, posted 11-18-2005 1:38 PM Percy has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 54 by arachnophilia, posted 11-18-2005 11:35 PM BuckeyeChris has not yet responded
     Message 55 by NosyNed, posted 11-18-2005 11:43 PM BuckeyeChris has not yet responded
     Message 57 by nator, posted 11-19-2005 6:15 AM BuckeyeChris has not yet responded

      
    arachnophilia
    Member (Idle past 82 days)
    Posts: 9069
    From: god's waiting room
    Joined: 05-21-2004


    Message 54 of 72 (261168)
    11-18-2005 11:35 PM
    Reply to: Message 53 by BuckeyeChris
    11-18-2005 11:26 PM


    Re: Why AdminRandman?
    But how is anyone supposed to respect the authority of a mod that himself has shown a complete inability to respect the forum guidelines, and imo a complete lack of respect for other posters.

    it's kind of a tradition around here that we get the really obnoxious members to follow the rules by making them enforce the rules themselves.


    אָרַח

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 53 by BuckeyeChris, posted 11-18-2005 11:26 PM BuckeyeChris has not yet responded

      
    NosyNed
    Member
    Posts: 8842
    From: Canada
    Joined: 04-04-2003
    Member Rating: 7.3


    Message 55 of 72 (261170)
    11-18-2005 11:43 PM
    Reply to: Message 53 by BuckeyeChris
    11-18-2005 11:26 PM


    Give him a chance.
    Why not wait to see how he does?

    That example you gave was correct; Flies was indeed off topic. AdminRandman can be separate from Randman. He, like all of us, can wander off topic. It is very hard to stick to it.

    That doesn't mean that ARM can't see an off topic saunter when he sees it and take the trouble to point it out. So far so good.

    Randman as a debater has shown a total lack of ability to make a point, understand what is posted in return or remember what he as posted. That doesn't mean he can't do a good job watching what others do. It is not fair to prejudge.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 53 by BuckeyeChris, posted 11-18-2005 11:26 PM BuckeyeChris has not yet responded

      
    nator
    Member (Idle past 274 days)
    Posts: 12961
    From: Ann Arbor
    Joined: 12-09-2001


    Message 56 of 72 (261217)
    11-19-2005 6:11 AM
    Reply to: Message 42 by randman
    11-18-2005 7:04 PM


    Re: biasness
    quote:
    Edit to add I missed your latest reply and see it now. Please note that I did reply before and it sat there for awhile.

    Yeah, well, the reply was in no way substantive.

    It was avoidant and did not address the specific requirements of the OP, which I repeated for you in the thread.

    "I knew a black preacher in this one town and he said..." does not constitute evidence of the sort which actually addresses the OP.

    I am looking for better quality from you, randman, and less dodging.

    Cut-n-paste my questions, and answer them. That's how forthright and honest debate is undertaken. You might try it sometime.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 42 by randman, posted 11-18-2005 7:04 PM randman has not yet responded

        
    nator
    Member (Idle past 274 days)
    Posts: 12961
    From: Ann Arbor
    Joined: 12-09-2001


    Message 57 of 72 (261218)
    11-19-2005 6:15 AM
    Reply to: Message 53 by BuckeyeChris
    11-18-2005 11:26 PM


    Re: Why AdminRandman?
    quote:
    I don't think anyone is saying that having Christian/creationist mods is a bad idea. But how is anyone supposed to respect the authority of a mod that himself has shown a complete inability to respect the forum guidelines, and imo a complete lack of respect for other posters.

    Bing, bing, bing!

    Give the little lady a prize.

    You don't give the keys to the asylum to the craziest, most troublesome inmate!


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 53 by BuckeyeChris, posted 11-18-2005 11:26 PM BuckeyeChris has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 58 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-19-2005 2:06 PM nator has responded

        
    Cold Foreign Object 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 1152 days)
    Posts: 3417
    Joined: 11-21-2003


    Message 58 of 72 (261286)
    11-19-2005 2:06 PM
    Reply to: Message 57 by nator
    11-19-2005 6:15 AM


    Re: Why AdminRandman?
    You don't give the keys to the asylum to the craziest, most troublesome inmate!

    This comment is easily explained by the fact that its author is an atheist-Darwinist. Could one expect an atheist-Darwinist to say anthing else about a theist-Creationist ?

    Ray


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 57 by nator, posted 11-19-2005 6:15 AM nator has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 59 by Brian, posted 11-19-2005 2:24 PM Cold Foreign Object has responded
     Message 62 by nator, posted 11-19-2005 3:13 PM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded

        
    Brian
    Member (Idle past 3063 days)
    Posts: 4659
    From: Scotland
    Joined: 10-22-2002


    Message 59 of 72 (261288)
    11-19-2005 2:24 PM
    Reply to: Message 58 by Cold Foreign Object
    11-19-2005 2:06 PM


    Re: Why AdminRandman?
    Hi H,

    Could one expect an atheist-Darwinist to say anthing else about a theist-Creationist ?

    Ahem!

    From message 22 of this thread:

    I nominated Willowtree as an admin about a year ago and I was over ruled because he 'took up too much admin time!!" he hasn't taken a fraction of the time that Randman has.

    So could one expect an atheist-Darwinist to say anything else about a theist-creationist?

    Brian.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 58 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-19-2005 2:06 PM Cold Foreign Object has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 61 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-19-2005 3:02 PM Brian has responded

        
    mick
    Member (Idle past 3090 days)
    Posts: 913
    Joined: 02-17-2005


    Message 60 of 72 (261290)
    11-19-2005 2:39 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Admin
    11-17-2005 9:39 PM


    welcome randman
    Hi Randman,

    I must say I was very surprised by the announcement but I have confidence that like other mods you'll be able to objectively enforce the rules while posting as AdminRandman. Welcome as admin, and congratulations.

    The main reason I was surprised was that I thought you were anti-moderation. In a recent message on the politics forum thread, you said:

    randman writes:

    Are we little kiddies that can't have a free-ranging forum for non-science issues without you guys wanting it moderated?
    Is this symptomatic of the Nanny-state, socialist mindset?...somehow I am not surprised to see the Big Government types wanting more control and policing.

    I find quite frequently that right wingers who oppose "big government, control and policing" generally are in favour of it if they are the ones in charge!

    Seems a bit hippocritical on the part of randman (who might be more of a socialist/nanny-stater than previously suspected) but I'm sure AdminRandman will be okay.

    Cheers

    Mick


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Admin, posted 11-17-2005 9:39 PM Admin has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 64 by randman, posted 11-19-2005 4:14 PM mick has responded

      
    Prev123
    4
    5Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019