AdminNosy banned?

Since EvC's core purpose is to refute the above, how is the IDist creo going to debate a hypothesis that is allegedly not science in the science fora? Aren't you claiming to have a debate forum where the other side cannot legally engage within the confines of your Forum Guidelines?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This thread has gone way off topic !!! ( I can't make a comment on that as an Admin because I banned myself. I am supposed to be the topic of the thread!!I banned myself because I am more than a bit addicted to EvC; because life is complicated and I shouldn't spend the time; because I don't think I post anything that others can say and say better and because I was being petulant.It had NOTHING to do with the topic that this thread has migrated too. It was not in protest of Percy's behavior. In fact, I agree with his position there completely.I think Jar is a much greater loss to EvC than I am and I can't understand why he has taken his action either.

Nobody's insist that anyone accept anything. To debate a hypothesis is not to demand acceptance from anyone. Let the debate itself determine who's argument is valid. You are the ones demanding acceptance of your hypothesis.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I thought it was over, but here comes some more loose change... Well obviously I wasn't privvy to that. Again I would have issues with that, as much as for his public request. To be certain I have never argued YOU are the only one at fault here. Its just you are the one I am talking to.I'm a bit perplexed at the "omni obliged" comment, as well as what appears at the end of your post to be some sort of conspiracy theory building. I'm not an admin recruited by jar, I have my own issues with nwr and jar, and yet I appear to be reaching a similar conclusion (except for not leaving). While I would disagree with nwr's private review of crash's post (crash did have some valid points to make), I think Omni's public reply to it was accurate overall.Indeed why shouldn't anyone notice that crash was defending you, and now you seem to be coming to his rescue to squish a bit on Omni?One person who has not been mentioned in all of this is moose, who said he was going to suspend you because he thought your actions were errant. Is he part of this conspiracy as well? What about modulous who seems to disagree with you? Archer? How vast is this connection?And indeed what happened to that suspension? Did it happen, and if not why not? Was there an intervention and by whom?Heheheh... I'm really not that wound up, but that seems to be where you are going in order to blacken the records of those who disagreed with you. Buddy, you shut me down with a threatened suspension when I questioned your decision.While I can agree with most of the idealistic commentary you put in this post, it is my opinion that you don't live up to that ideal. And some of your desires seem a bit less than realistic.It will be interesting to see if you begin to match these ideals.In all of this, you did not discuss how arguing the person should not be tolerated within any attack on a position. It seems to me a couple people noted that was an issue within your posts to nwr, and that sure as heck goes for what your defender has been posting around evc these days (including regarding nwr).Its always easy to describe opponents as thin-skinned, but that sure is a conveniently arbitrary estimate. If personal attacks are to be allowed perhaps you should describe how thick a person's skin is supposed to be when posting here.

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Once again, you've completely misrepresented Percy. Percy stated that the core purpose of EvC was to debate the above, not refute it.Can you explain this error? I don't see anything in Percy's post where he has christened EvC's mission to be the opposition to creationism, only to its exploration in terms of how well it is supported by the evidence. By fulfilling the purpose of EvC, and succesfully defending ID as a legitimate pursuit of science. That's where they have to begin, like every other conjecture.

Hi Ned. Good to see you back. I hope you stay. You didn't leave a clue as to why you left so I guess everyone assumed it was somehow connected with ongoing problems. Since there wasn't much to go on about your departure for this thread it appears that it became the arena for current unrest on the site.Do you wish elaborate a bit more as to what prompted you to leave? Was it more of a protest or simply a sabatical of sorts?

You don't seem to read too good Buz. I don't see anywhere where Percy said that the goal of EvC was to refute that statement. He said the purpose was to consider it.Now there may be members here who do come here specifically to refute IDist creationist claims, I would probably number myself as one, but I think it would be very unfair to suggest that we don't consider a lot of those claims as well.Except for in the cases of the most simplistic restatements of over recycled creationist arguments a lot of the positions of ID/creationist posters require some study and analysis if one is to hope to refute them with anything other than slander and ad hominems and I hope that most of us do aspire to a proper reasoned refutation.The only thing to stop 'the other side' engaging in debate in the science fora would be if they don't have any scientific evidence to substantiate their positions. That is the only 'legal' bar.SOmething which has to be said in Randman's favour, and in favour of our recent short term poster Eggasai, is that they often based their premises on actual extant scientific literature rather than talkingpoints off creationist websites or literature from other creationist sources.TTFN,WK

Poor Nosy, you have been supplanted in your own thread.What is the world coming to.TTFN,WK

But how can you fulfill the purpose of EvC by succesfully defending ID as a legitimate pursuit of science when:
1. ID is declared non-science, therefore off limits to science debate.
2. All ID science implies the presence of higher intelligence existing in the universe than seclarists are willing to tolerate in science debate hypotheses.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I read Percy loud and clear all over the place. He makes it clear everywhere in no uncertain terms that his science excludes ID creationism. Perhaps you need to apply what else we read of Percy regardng this to the statement here so as to assess it's meaning.Gotta get to my daily duties for now. Take care.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

quote:

---

Nobody's insist that anyone accept anything.

---

The whole basis of your complaint is that cetain claims are NOT uncritically accepted.

quote:

---

To debate a hypothesis is not to demand acceptance from anyone. Let the debate itself determine who's argument is valid

---

That's Percy's position and my position. It is the position that you are complaining about.

quote:

---

You are the ones demanding acceptance of your hypothesis.

---

And exactly how are we "demanding" that ? By pointing out truths that you don't like ? By actually winning the debate ? By NOT uncritically accepting claims that you want to be true ? That's what you're complaining about.

how the hell does this gel with: ????I mean, you basically just said that every single creationist, including those on this site, are not equal to the evolutionists. How can you honestly treat people fairly and equally when you hold this? Is the idea that separate, but equal, valid in your eyes then?Creationists get things wrong, yes. Some of them are crazy, yes. But guess what, so are we (evolutionists).I don't see how Faith is a 2cd class citizen
I don't see how Buzsaw is a 2cd class citizen
I don't see how nemisis juggernaut is a 2cd class citizen
I don't see how mjfloresta is a 2cd class citizen
I don't see how Randman is a second class citizen
I don't see how S1WC's is a 2cd class citizenIf you really think of these people as 2cd class citizens, I'm done here. I don't feel like living in the 1850s south.

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

By proving us wrong. Honestly you've got the much easier job, here, if ID is actually legitimate. Our side is perfectly willing to tell you what you have to do to convince us. We've laid it out for you! All you have to do is follow the directions, if you can. If you can't it's because ID isn't valid.Your side? Your side won't even entertain the notion of error. It's an uphill battle for evolutionists. Your side gets all the breaks. Secularists are unwilling to tolerate such implications because the presence of higher intelligences is an extraoridnary claim for which extraordinary evidence has never been presented.Present the evidence, and we'll revisit the claim. Maybe even change our minds if your evidence is sufficiently extraordinary and compelling.Buzz, don't mistake the fact that your side is impotent in debate for an indication that we're unwilling to change our minds. You simply have to convince us, if you can. We'll even tell you how to do it. When was the last time any of you made the same accomodations for evolution?

They're not 2nd class citizens in the way you're taking it.They're 2nd class citizens in terms of their representation by moderators who share their viewpoint, and in a secondary way, because they represent a minority of the membership and are outnumbered. I meant it in the same way we used to say that blacks were 2nd class citizens because they lacked representation within representative government, and because there were many fewer of them than the white majority.In other words, it's a reference to their unfortunate situation, not a denigrating personal reference.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Are the creationist on this board often excluded from scientific fora or restricted to one forum, yes.Are they excluded because of Percy's prejudice against them, no.They have excluded themselves by failing to adhere to the forum guidlines.If you don't think that Randman's current citizenship status in second class then why is he stuck in Showcase?The answer is that he consistently ignored the forum guidelines. Percy has made controversial efforts to provide a forum where those who persistently flaunt the guidelines to the extent of being permanently uspended previously may have their say on their own terms.These peoples status is not determined by categorisation as creationist by the admins but by categorisation as frequent transgressors of the forum guidelines.The correct analogy is not to racial descrimination in the south but to a system of criminal punishment where infringements can lead to the loss of certain rights and privileges and frequent infringements can lead to permanent loss of those rights and privileges.In my opinion both sides are, roughly, treated equally with regards to these. The fact that most of those with limited access are creationist is more due to their readiness to return and their frequent infringements than to a pro-evolution bias.Can you point out to us a thread on the science fora where a creationist has made a solid and convincing scientific argument supporting their position, or even in real life? If not then when it comes to scientific debate it is always going to be knives to a gunfight until the creationists/IDists make an effort to have a solid scientific basis for their hypotheses.Maybe such a basis has already been developed, but I've never seen any evidence of it here on EvC and I haven't seen any evidence of it in the wider world either.TTFN,WK