I originally posted this in the"Peanut Gallery", but having thought it over I think that it belongs here rather than there:
Petrophysics, who declares himself a deist, wishes to debate RAZD, also a deist.
But in his OP petrophysics does not quarrel with anything at all that RAZD has ever said. Instead, petrophyiscs says:
* "the atheists here, who have no evidence for their position" * "strong or absolute atheists are hidding behind their keyboard" * "I have looked for months here where the atheists could present no evidence."
If he has a beef with atheists, then he should man up and pick an intellectual fight with atheists. Instead, he has used the "Great Debate" forum as a way to hit at atheists where we are not allowed to answer back.
And having hidden behind the forum rules, he tops this off by accusing atheists of "hidding behind their keyboard".
This is an abuse of the "Great Debate" format.
Suppose that Straggler and I asked for a "Great Debate" where we should discuss whether creationists are knaves or fools. Suppose that you allowed that. I think that the moderators should not allow that, but even if they did it would be an abuse of that privilege for me to say that creationists were "hiding behind their keyboards" because they did not answer me on a thread on which the moderators forbade them to answer me.
Ode To People Who Can Dish It Out But Can't Take It
Off-topic poem hidden. --Admin
For reasons you alone know why you slander, slur and vilify and libel and malign and lie and thick and fast the insults fly at those whom you demean; in words four letters long you prate about the people whom you hate; you smear, traduce and denigrate and cast aspersions and create an ugly scene.
But if some voice of protest's heard --- some angry or dissenting word to tell you that you're quite absurd or give the finger or the bird or dare to answer back or goad you on with words that nettle, you hypocrite, you show your mettle by calling on the mods to settle just which utensil, pot or kettle, is deeper black.
You two-faced fool, you prate and piffle and talk a lot of silly drivel and sob and scream and whine and sniffle how other people should be civil as though your posts don't stink. You throw your childish fit of pique and stamp your little feet and shriek, have tantrums 'til you're hoarse and weak and get so angry you can't speak or even think.
You moan of what you must endure: a terrible ordeal, I'm sure for one so deeply immature to get to taste the stuff that you're so fond of dishing out. With neither honesty nor wit you throw your little hissy fit and babble out your prissy shit and prove yourself a hypocrite beyond all doubt.
Feel free to scratch my name upon your potty little ostracon and tell the mods I should be gone and see if you find anyone who gives a tinker's damn. You silly whining little pest, though long and loudly you protest I think MacMahon put it best: "I'm here, I stay" ("j'y suis, j'y reste") --- and here I am.
I've been sending him PM's, most of which he's ignored.
Oh, in that case, OK. Perhaps you might have made that clearer in your suspension message, otherwise to an onlooker it did look a bit sudden and arbitrary. And we do suppose that there are indeed onlookers --- if you ask a forum poster why they even bother to argue with someone like Boulder-dash, they will often reply in effect that they're "doing it for the lurkers".
I think that new member OpticalIllusions is just a prank, a "Poe", a troll. I don't think that he sincerely believes what he's saying.
I have two reasons for thinking so. One is the sheer stupidity of his posts, eclipsing the usual stupidity of creationists. The second I will communicate by PM to the moderators at their request, because I don't want to broadcast to all trolls how to look unlike a troll.
That is not an insult. It merely raises, again, a point I have already made in that thread --- that the the home-brewed epistemology with which creationists want to defend themselves from evidence of past events would be laughed out of court if a defense attorney tried to use it to defend a client from evidence of past events.
When I wish to insult you, you will know about it.