there is no logical or rational defense for creationism. this is repeatedly proven on this site. creationism is based solely on arguments of emotion from authority period. since buz can't deal with this blatant reality, he decided to shut jar up. abuse of power 3.0.
Brennakimi, no such claim relative to the Biblicalist creationist constituency at large has been proven on this site. Did you read my admin action on member jar? Surely both you and Jar are aware that Biblicalist creationist arguments have not all been conducted purely on emotion and they/we do use other aspects of creationism agenda such as what I itemized in my moderation action. Whether or not you agree with the arguments of your counterpart members is immaterial for the purpose of this discussion.
How about specifying why you think my action was an abuse of power. Btw, are you aware that it was Admin who administered the suspension on Jar and not AdminBuz?
AdminBuz action writes:
This thread is about Faith and her conduct and not member Jar's thread to insult and demean the creationist constituency of EvC. Creationists use such things as archeology, fulfilled prophecy, history, laws of science and other reason/logic/reality in the forum debates. Either cease and desist using these threads for your bash-creationist agenda or you get some time off yourself.
no, because it wasn't posted in the suspensions and bannings thread.
Next time all you need do is place your curser on the red suspension dot of any message of a suspended member and it gives the reason for the suspension as well as the one who administered the suspension is given. This has been the case for quite some time now. Thus there is no longer a necessity of informing regarding suspensions in separate thread by moderators as I understand it.
no such claim relative to the Biblicalist creationist constituency at large has been proven on this site.
maybe you're right. but it doesn't have to be. it's an argument based on authority. it's from a book that claims to be the word of god. argument from authority, period.
Both you and jar have debated creationists long enough to know full well that I'm right and that not all Biblicalist creationists debate on emotion alone as the statement clearly implied. Thus the rare usage of the "L" word which I rarely ever apply to anyone. I don't see how this can be brushed off as a mistake when it was quite obviously a deliberate lie, given the messenger knew full well that it was a meanspirited falsehood aimed at Biblical creationists.
How about specifying why you think my action was an abuse of power.
you used the word lie. i think that's a bit strong for moderator action, no? i'd wager you decided to add a little of your own authority to your whine against jar because you can't accept the fact that your beliefs are based on a book and nothing else. regardless of the truth of that book, there is not a rational or logical argument to be made, rather only the "god said it; i believe it" argument.
1. I would appreciate it if you would stop describing my action as whining when in fact it was Admin himself who obviously agreed with it by his action and his reason for the action. I have learned to be thick skinned here but you have admitted that perhaps I was right and I think you are being quite disrespectful and disingenuous, not to mention that you are by doing so implicating Admin as a whiner as well.
2. Just like Jar, you are lumping all of the Biblical creationist input here at EvC in one lump and all such members in one lump which in fact includes two moderators. A number of Biblical creationists over the years including myself have applied a whole lot more to many debates than simply god did it, emotion and Biblical authority. Surely you have been aboard long enough to be fully aware of that fact.
Omni, Jar's false and meanspirited comments were not about Faith's conduct and/or forum but clearly for the purpose of airing insults to the Biblical creationist constituency at large, past and present on the EvC board. He has been engaging in this sort of conduct for too long with impunity and it's time for it to be corrected so as to make this site one which all members are treated in a respectful manner.
Regarding my rare usage of lie rather than falsehood, I've already addressed that in my last message. This is one case where it is quite obvious that the blatant falsehood was deliberate aimed at demeaning all Biblical counterpart members of the EvC debates both past and present.
Would it be possible for you or Percy to point out exactly what you consider "false and meanspirited" comments so that others can seek to live under your rules? I have been looking around and I can't seem to be able to discern exactly what caused a one week suspension.
To perpetrate this lie that the only methodology of Biblical creationists on this board is emotion and Biblical authority is flat out blatant falsehood which has been parroted adnausium and as administrative moderator on behalf of Biblical creationists I think it's high time to confront the ongoing problem so as to insure that the respect required in Forum Guidelines item 10 is extended to all members alike.
I myself have applied the thermodynamic scientific laws, fulfilled prophecy, pages of logic and reason, archeological data including extensive Exodus research etc, etc. Others have also used other than emotion and Biblical authority alone in the debates.
Why is it that all the secularist moderators do their moderating with ease and everything's hunkydory but I so much as whisper a warning and I must leave all the threads I participate in and waste my time addressing this horrendous massive protest of my puny little actions by you evo people?
I'm off to church out of town for the day. Good day to all.
In the final analysis, I don't think Jar should have been suspended for the comments he made without first having been issued a warning.
A warning is the only action I took, period. He was warned. His response, as usual rather than compliance was insultive badmouth to me the moderator within the Faith thread when he's been around long enough to know that moderator action is to be addressed in the proper forum in a respectful manner. How long do you think Randman, IAmJoseph, Rob, Faith etc would have gone after similar response to mod action without suspension? He figured, as usual that he was Jar, the invincible, not subject to the rules the rest of us are obliged to follow. Admin then saw fit to suspend which I think was fully justified, given the way Jar has treated all complaints about his disrespectful conduct towards his debate counterparts with impunity for years. He uses the threads to irritate and demean the Biblical creationist constituency with the same nonsense that makes you, me and others wanting to avoid him.
On the other hand the man has been a great asset to Percy and the tech aspects of running a board. As well, he's often been the johnny-on-the-spot in the past when anyone including Biblicalists like me needed internet tech help with the computer etc.
Perpetrate = perform an act, usually with a negative connotation.
What I said as moderator/admin is what I wanted to convey in my statement that the conduct has been ongoing.
Brennakimi, and others, what you people seem to be discounting is the fact that nobody's ideology has been proven. We all have methodology which we use to support our views regarding origins etc when we apply history, archeological observations, application of science laws, etc to our respecive ideologies. For you people to agree with Jar that our methodology of supporting our ideology is nothing but emotion and Biblical authority is the epitamy of insult when folks like Rob, Nemmesis, me and others have continually applied logic reason, science, history, archeology etc to our debates. Because you people, our debate counterparts don't agree with our application of these aspects of debate you are perpetuating and perpetrating adnausium this blatant falsehood (I'm being nice here);) that all we do is blather emotion and preach Biblical gospel/doctrine.
So long as I'm moderator for ideological balance and respect for all members, I'll not tolerate this behavior to the extent that Jar has been perpetuating it and some of you people are perpetrating it. I very much appreciate Admin's unpopular supportive action on behalf of the minority constituency at EvC. May God bless him for doing something he felt needful to do for the good of all.
I am listening to Admin and the others of you who don't appreciate the lie word so I'll not apply it in the future.
I suppose a more compatible term might be "deliberate falasy" or something of that nature. Imo, it's more than a mistake. To believe you people actually think people like Rob use nothing but emotion and Bible doctrine to fill a 30 page science thread engaging one against 10 or so in science debate would be for me to insult your intelligence. I'm sure you know in your heart of hearts that such a charge is a blatant deliberate falsehood. Regardless of how some of you regard his arguments, he's gone to a whole lot of effort and put a lot of time into attempting to support his arguments doing science research study, bringing forth documentation data etc all of which have nothing to do with emotion and Biblical authority. Others like Randman, Faith etc have done so as well. Yes, there are times when Biblical authority is applied such as the Exodus account, but when I brought forth the work of Swedish scientist Moller, marine biologist citing his marine photography, exploration, and archeological data as evidence, it was put forth as additional corroborative evidence to support the historical aspects of the Biblical record. Don't forget, one of the properties of the Biblical record is history, whether you admit it or not. history has little to do with emotion and much to do with interpretation of archeological observations etc.
Imo, its coming to the point that if further debate is to be engaged on this subject it should be a separate thread. I have no interest in spending more time on it. It takes me hours to compose things like this so as not to mess up, being the slow thinker that I am. I just don't have the time for further debate on this matter.