Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8960 total)
18 online now:
caffeine, PaulK, vimesey (3 members, 15 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,133 Year: 881/23,288 Month: 881/1,851 Week: 4/321 Day: 4/48 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Report discussion problems here: No.2
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 421 of 468 (573875)
08-12-2010 10:46 PM


spam alert
Message 11

Also, can I report the perseids for not showing themselves to me? It's a problem, and I want to discuss it....so it's a discussion problem HA.

edit: disregard. It's too early apparently. I'm impatient and have to get up early.

Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.


"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

Coyote
Member (Idle past 485 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 422 of 468 (574099)
08-14-2010 12:47 AM


Archaeologist has been doing the Gish Gallop, throwing out so many different things that there is no way to stay on topic.

Example Message 104.


Replies to this message:
 Message 423 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-14-2010 4:14 AM Coyote has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3912
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 423 of 468 (574120)
08-14-2010 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 422 by Coyote
08-14-2010 12:47 AM


Re: Archaeologist
Archaeologist has been doing the Gish Gallop...

My impression is things got even worse since you posted your message.

I try my hardest to not suspend those of the creationism side, but here I found that it had to be done (suspension announcement). The various admins need to consult on this matter - That will probably happen in the Private Administrative Forum. Time will tell, what public pronouncement comes out of that.

PLEASE, NO REPLIES TO THIS MESSAGE. Doing such may get you a suspension of your own.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 422 by Coyote, posted 08-14-2010 12:47 AM Coyote has not yet responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 424 of 468 (574200)
08-14-2010 3:52 PM


What's The Difference??
Perhaps Admin (abe: Purpledawn) could explain why member Buzsaw's message in the Circular Thinking Thread should be tagged as off topic when member Purpledawn's was not tagged as off topic.

Both member Purpledawn and member Buzsaw's messages pertained to evidence. My message was a response to PaulK who implicated believers as the only members who's MO was circular thinking, allegedly producing no evidence.

Message 119

purpledawn writes:


As an onlooker, I'm very disappointed. I have been waiting for you to show me the difference between what you were originally claiming and what crashfrog is claiming. I don't see a difference.
You expect real time evidence from crashfrog, and claim God is providing real time evidence. What you haven't shown is the real time evidence that you feel God is providing. All you offer for evidence is a book where the newest additions are over 1500 years old. The evidence may have been real time for the people back then, but what is available today?

To remain the ultimate authority throughout time, real time evidence would need to be available for authentication in every generation.

Where in the Bible does God actually claim to be the ultimate authority over everything?
Give a few examples from the Bible of the evidence that backs up that claim.
Provide current evidence that you feel still backs up that original claim today.

Buzsaw writes:

Message 132
Because the evidence is IN DISPUTE, who is convinced depends on the ideological mindset of who is convinced and who is not convinced OF THE DISPUTED EVIDENCE, so around and around (implicating circularity in both ideological camps) we merrily go, debating the DISPUTED EVIDENCE.

Secularists DISPUTE EVIDENCE like fulfilled prophecy, application of historical data, geology, and interpretations of archeological discoveries, geneological data, mysterious phenomena, human cultures and observed complexity.

Creationist believers DISPUTE EVIDENCE like dating methodology, mathmatical calculations, application of two, four, ten and eleven etc dimensional models for a three metric dimensional universe, historical data, geology, interpretations of archeological discoveries, geneological data, mysterious phenomena, human cultures and observed complexity.

(color emphasis, mine)

Edited by Buzsaw, : add name


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

Replies to this message:
 Message 427 by AdminPD, posted 08-15-2010 5:16 AM Buzsaw has responded

Coyote
Member (Idle past 485 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 425 of 468 (574264)
08-15-2010 1:38 AM


Preaching again
Archaeologist is back, and is still preaching and reciting catechism in the Science Forum.

There is no argument or evidence pertaining to science. The whole post is actually anti-science and anti-knowledge.

Message 108


Replies to this message:
 Message 426 by cavediver, posted 08-15-2010 4:19 AM Coyote has not yet responded

cavediver
Member (Idle past 2023 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 426 of 468 (574271)
08-15-2010 4:19 AM
Reply to: Message 425 by Coyote
08-15-2010 1:38 AM


Re: Preaching again
Yep, have to agree 100% with Coyote. archaeologist should not be allowed in the science fora - he shows no desire what-so-ever to connect with any information supplied, and dismisses all evidence with a shrug and a "na, that's obviously not true because I can think of the following..." I'm not sure why anyone is engaging him there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 425 by Coyote, posted 08-15-2010 1:38 AM Coyote has not yet responded

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 427 of 468 (574276)
08-15-2010 5:16 AM
Reply to: Message 424 by Buzsaw
08-14-2010 3:52 PM


Re: What's The Difference??
quote:
Perhaps Admin (abe: Purpledawn) could explain why member Buzsaw's message in the Circular Thinking Thread should be tagged as off topic when member Purpledawn's was not tagged as off topic.

Both member Purpledawn and member Buzsaw's messages pertained to evidence. My message was a response to PaulK who implicated believers as the only members who's MO was circular thinking, allegedly producing no evidence.


The difference is that PurpleDawn (me) is addressing the self authentication issue and the evidence required by the originator for self authentication concerning ultimate authorities.

Your post seems to be addressing the general body of evidence that Christians provide for their belief. That isn't what the discussion is about. It is about Pauline's argument concerning circular reasoning.

Since I don't see that your post deals with circular reasoning at all or any of the issues presented by Pauline, it was tagged off topic to prevent the potential for topic drift.

Read the OP.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 424 by Buzsaw, posted 08-14-2010 3:52 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 428 by Buzsaw, posted 08-15-2010 10:12 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 428 of 468 (574441)
08-15-2010 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 427 by AdminPD
08-15-2010 5:16 AM


Re: What's The Difference??
AdminPD writes:

Your post seems to be addressing the general body of evidence that Christians provide for their belief. That isn't what the discussion is about. It is about Pauline's argument concerning circular reasoning.

Thanks for responding, AdminPD. The messages that led up to my message pertained to circular reasoning. WSW24 alluded to the need for evidence relative to circular reasoning. PaulK responds, alleging that believers don't have evidence, implying that they are the circular reasoners. My message was to the effect that whether the evidence is viable depends on the ideology of the one making the assessment. That's why I said something like "around and around we go, debating the issues."

You chose to tag my message rather than PaulKs. If mine was off topic, so was his. His MO is to continually make these blind asserted statements that prophecy always fails. Had I not responded, he gets his property bash in.

I'll let it slide and move on. Perhaps it would be good for you to check what leads up to creationist's messages which occasionally on the surface appear to be off topic.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 427 by AdminPD, posted 08-15-2010 5:16 AM AdminPD has not yet responded

subbie
Member (Idle past 123 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 429 of 468 (575142)
08-18-2010 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Admin
12-02-2008 8:35 AM


Spam hide and seek
Can you find the spam in Message 7?

{AbE}AdminAsgara FTW!

Edited by subbie, : Winner declared!


Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Admin, posted 12-02-2008 8:35 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

archaeologist
Inactive Member


Message 430 of 468 (575230)
08-19-2010 6:56 AM


archaeologist,
One can have a good and honest discussion with unbelievers and those believers who believe differently than yourself. The trick is to argue the position and not the person. Also abide by the rules of the forum.

Rule #4: Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

Providing evidence or reasoned argumentation for your opinions help to move the discussion forward.

This is a debate board. People are going to disagree with you. Even on the religious side you need to be able to support your position otherwise the discussion doesn't move forward.

please stop posting these thngs as if i am the only violater. i am not. this message wa sposted right underneath a secularist who did not follow any of the rules once.

don't single me out when the whole board ignores the rules at some point, especially when they address me.

now i may not do this everytime but i am one of the few who does support his arguments, presents evidence, and links, quotes etc. so please take the blinders off.


Replies to this message:
 Message 431 by Huntard, posted 08-19-2010 7:14 AM archaeologist has not yet responded
 Message 432 by AdminPD, posted 08-19-2010 7:27 AM archaeologist has not yet responded
 Message 435 by Admin, posted 08-19-2010 7:46 AM archaeologist has not yet responded

Huntard
Member (Idle past 674 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 431 of 468 (575235)
08-19-2010 7:14 AM
Reply to: Message 430 by archaeologist
08-19-2010 6:56 AM


Dear archaeologist,

I assume I am the secularist you are referring to when you say:

archaeologist writes:

please stop posting these thngs as if i am the only violater. i am not. this message wa sposted right underneath a secularist who did not follow any of the rules once.


The reason I didn't follow the rules is because I was posting in the same manner you were, in the (perhaps futile) hope that a lightbulb would go on in your head and you would see that this is not a productive way of posting.

don't single me out when the whole board ignores the rules at some point, especially when they address me.

They are simply responding in kind. If you can clearly see that the way they are responding to you is not productive, perhaps you should think about changing your own posting style. Because that's exactly the impression we are getting from you.

now i may not do this everytime but i am one of the few who does support his arguments, presents evidence, and links, quotes etc. so please take the blinders off.

I think that you'll find that virtually evereyone you had a discussion with will disagree with you on this. And no, that is not because "everybody hates you/god/the bible/the truth or loves to sin/lead others astray". I don;t think anyone here hates you (well, perhaps Hooah does), nor do they hate god, in fact there is at least one other member (jar) who you've been talking to, and I can assure you he does not hate god.

In short, some friendly advice, if you are asked for evidence of something, don;t go spouting off that people don't want to believe because they hate god or something or other, present the evidence. That will get you much farther than essentially insulting people by calling them dishonest.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 430 by archaeologist, posted 08-19-2010 6:56 AM archaeologist has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 433 by AdminPD, posted 08-19-2010 7:34 AM Huntard has responded

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 432 of 468 (575237)
08-19-2010 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 430 by archaeologist
08-19-2010 6:56 AM


Follow Moderator Requests
As members, we are guests on this board and as guests we are asked to put forth our best behavior and follow the Forum Guidelines.

Rule #1 is to follow moderator requests. Since you've joined this board, you seem to have difficulty providing evidence or reasoned argumentation for your position. Moderators are trying to help you understand what you need to be a productive member.

If you'll notice, I did post a reminder to the other members under my comment to you.

I know they will adjust their approach per my request. You haven't learned to adjust your approach when requested. That's why you get a personal message. If you have provided evidence in the thread already, then refer opponents back to that post.

You are not the first to receive an Administrative Message and won't be the last. I will continue to post these types of messages as long as you continue on your current path.

In that thread, at that point, you are not providing evidence to support your claims. You've only caused your opponents to mirror your approach, which doesn't move the discussion forward.

Please follow moderator requests and adjust accordingly.

Thanks
AdminPD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 430 by archaeologist, posted 08-19-2010 6:56 AM archaeologist has not yet responded

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 433 of 468 (575239)
08-19-2010 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 431 by Huntard
08-19-2010 7:14 AM


quote:
They are simply responding in kind. If you can clearly see that the way they are responding to you is not productive, perhaps you should think about changing your own posting style. Because that's exactly the impression we are getting from you.
In case you haven't noticed, that mirror tactic doesn't work. I suggest you adjust and stop using it.

Be an example and not a mirror.

Thanks
AdminPD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 431 by Huntard, posted 08-19-2010 7:14 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 434 by Huntard, posted 08-19-2010 7:39 AM AdminPD has not yet responded

Huntard
Member (Idle past 674 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 434 of 468 (575242)
08-19-2010 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 433 by AdminPD
08-19-2010 7:34 AM


AdminPD writes:

In case you haven't noticed, that mirror tactic doesn't work. I suggest you adjust and stop using it.


Being a mirror and explaining it might.

Anyway, I hope the message was clear to archeaologist, back to regular programming.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 433 by AdminPD, posted 08-19-2010 7:34 AM AdminPD has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12655
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 435 of 468 (575244)
08-19-2010 7:46 AM
Reply to: Message 430 by archaeologist
08-19-2010 6:56 AM


Hi Archaeologist,

The moderators have realistic expectations about conformance to the Forum Guidelines. Our view is that as long as someone is following most of the guidelines most of the time then that's pretty good.

In the view of the moderator team the member exhibiting the worst conformance to the Forum Guidelines over the past few weeks has been yourself. These are the Forum Guidelines you seem to be having the most problems with:

  1. Follow all moderator requests.

  2. Please stay on topic for a thread. Open a new thread for new topics.

  3. Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

  4. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.

  5. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.

Your approach to discussion could be summarized as blustery, accusatory and complaining, combined with avoidance of central issues.

You're still a relatively new member learning how EvC Forum works and are not in any danger of permanent suspension at the present time, but unless you begin demonstrating improved adherence to the Forum Guidelines and making your general approach to discussion more constructive you will over time draw increasing amounts of attention from moderators.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 430 by archaeologist, posted 08-19-2010 6:56 AM archaeologist has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 436 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-19-2010 8:19 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020