Not the same thing. I'm not objecting to generic putdowns of creationists here, just to personal namecalling of identified individuals. Wherever I also do that then I'm happy to be suspended just so the rule will be upheld, but if you are going to get away with it I'm sure I can come up with some personal insults to you as well.
In other words you are willing to suspend the rules for the nasty Dr. A and you think I deserve the ridicule, you who are the second stupidest one on my thread. Now suspend ME. After the last couple of exchanges on that thread where I came up with some new ways of explaining my point, only to get the usual idiotic put downs in return, I'm finally giving up. So enjoy your self-satisfied self-indulgent self-confirming evolutionist bilge. I'm joining the other worthy creationists who have long since left, better late than never.
Moose: Not terribly interested in whining about your closing that thread on historical versus observational science since the empty responses I've been getting to my recent posts don't bode much in the way of future productivity. \
BUT in your moderator message you are objecting to what seems to you to be too many different topics and my answer to that is the ones I've brought up are meant to be examples of historical versus hard science. If anybody wanted to take the effort seriously we could maybe boil it down to one at a time, but the subject is the scientific method as it applies to many different examples so many different examples seem called for. However, I'm just as happy to leave it closed.
All you had to do was take the basic idea, use the same example or another example of your choosing and apply the same principles as YOU think they should be applied since you think my way of doing it was rigged.
ONE admin has the temerity to VERY MILDLY suggest that the Creationist is being ganged up on so that her reactions are understandable, and out comes the Snark Brigade to get on his case. I guess that's how all gangs defend themselves: the victim deserved it whatever abuse they inflicted on her.
Oh stuff it and stop lecturing me. You aren't in my position here. You don't have to deal with dozens of hostile respondents every time you open your mouth to make even the most seemingly benign or unobjectionable remark. I have my own agenda here, I play it as I see it, and if I am in a position to follow the scientific information given I often do so. Go wallow in that blue mess you exploded a while back.
I'm sure you have no idea how discouraging it is to hear that
... (I) have been able to draw only a single response telling me she's ignoring my messages, ostensibly because I'm keep telling her something she already knows, and because they contain links (they contain no links).
1. You many times repeated that the geo column is an abstraction which I'd already said myself dozens of times, yet you go on even now as if I hadn't.
2. The links in that particular message were to the messages you wanted me to read. Those ARE properly called links I believe.
For a general answer to why I'm not responding to your posts:
1. I'm wary: I've had some really depressing experiences with the way you misrepresent / misunderstand my arguments over the last year or so;
2. You post a lot in one message, which is often too much to handle on a very busy thread like this one. And often your diagrams and other graphics make me wary (see No. 1);
3. Nevertheless when a thread calms down I often go back to older posts. Whether that will happen or not I can't predict.
In general I've appreciated Percy's moderation, he's kept some subtopics in line and had a clarifying influence overall. I do agree that at times he goes over the line into participating in the debate. Not enough to make an issue of though.
What's bothering me today that brought me to this thread is that now he seems to be micromanaging me to extreme excess. Can't use this phrase, can't say that.
Thanks for the opportunity to vent.
Otherwise "I can heartily recommend the Gestapo to anyone." --(attributed to Sigmund Freud)
I understand your point, Mike, but unfortunately my conduct isn't always that exemplary, although lately I've been doing a lot better. And I added "hurt" because it does, and maybe you feel you have a choice about how things affect you but I don't. If it hurts it hurts.
Interesting that you mention a guy whose name I know only from seeing it at Evolution Fairytale. Did you expect me to recognize it from there?
ABE: You know what, I disagree about words. That little ditty about how words will never hurt me is empty bravado, I think words may actually hurt as much or more than a knife in the chest. I think this is implied in scripture too, since the tongue is described as an organ with the power of Hell, and our Savior is called The Word or Logos, and we are admonished that we will be judged for our every "idle word." I know there's more but those are what come to mind at the moment.
Percy shows up early in the mornings for a while though he doesn't post. Maybe you're right, he's on vacation. When I posted my complaints, however, it was more just to get them logged than wanting a particular punishment.