Has the bias made this forum essentially irrelevant?

You havent won the public battle you idiot, youve simply screamed louder to people like the Dover judge and others that dont know how reason works, dont understand the nature of the arguments concerning what constitues ID, and werent presented the logical approach to that topicThis is why most of the clowns here wont meet in actual live public debate on design. They know the position of ID is not how they represent here at this forumAs far as participation goes, arguments can only be carried to a logical empass. Once at that point, as I have more than demonstrated in my threads on ID, the opposition (my opposition) can no longer answer simple questions. Or its obvious they have no reply to the basic principles that surround the question of ID or creationism.There is no eb and flow, the two positions have been here since the beginning and all anyone needs to do is use thier head to see why both positions should be taught in any science context.Oh btw, still waiting for that person with some backbone to step up to the plate. No actual men here eh?Dawn Bertot

Hi Dawn,You didn't say anything about the topic.Bolder-dash believes that diminishing creationist participation here is due to moderation bias that favors the evolution side. I believe that Dover had a chilling effect on creationism and ID, causing a dramatic decline in their efforts to educate their adherents, with the result that creationists who come here today like yourself are far less prepared to debate creation/evolution than their predecessors from the pre-Dover period.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Thats the point percy, they werent debating creationism or ID as it is, they were debating, your misguided interpretation of those topics and responding to strawmen interpretations of fallcious arguments.If they had used my preparation, as you put it, the results would have been much different. My preparation has to do with simple rational and understanding. The secular fundamentalist evolutionist seeks to complicate its simplicity, to confuse not only the argument but simple minded personsAs youve seen those tactics dont work with the basic rational approachOnce youve frustrated not refuted, the simplicty of what is involved, a person can make a case for anythingDover and the predecessors started and finished in the wrong direction. this coupled with the fact that your side baited them in that direction, should be the only chilling fact to anyoneListen up Pecry. Most believers are not like Buz, ICANT myself and others. The reason you have us here and not a host of others is due to the fact that they do not see a need to debate the obvious. they look on you fellas as a curiousity, smile politely and move on. You know the ole, you shouldnt argue with a foolits not that youve won any arguments, its simply that there is no need to argue it past a certain pointYou really should think about doing it pubically, that is if you really think you have a case about ID and creationism and it not beign taught as scienceDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

That is about as dumb a post as you have made yet, and you've made many a dumb post.This forum is about as public as it can get, Evolution has NOTHING to do with atheism and you have never even tried to present either the model or method that explains either the totally stupid ideas of Intelligent Design or Creationism.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

It seems to me that this post is the reason there is so little debate from the creationist side. Using the terms dumb, stupid etc as part of an argument and then get a 5 rating for it, outlines the problem perfectly.

Well I have no idea who gave it a five rating but the whole point is content, and Dawn's post was filled with factual errors and unsupported assertions.If someone does not want their posts called stupid then perhaps they should not post totally stupid assertions.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Or it could be that Dawn's posts are particularly illiterate and malformed.The way people reply to Dawn's posts is a reflection of his ability at comprehension (both English and general) and is not directly related to his ID'ist beliefs.

Idiocracy need not be coddled. If someone says stupid shit, they very well should be told as such.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

Look at the title of this forum. It is Creation vs Evolution. Why have this forum if creationism is not a valid point of view?The point of the OP on this thread is that there are no creationists left to debate. I think that your post and the responses to my post gives a clear indication as to why.Essentially I believe in theistic evolution and so I'm more than happy to debate with creationist but hopefully I can do it without having to use terms like dumb and stupid.If it is decided that creationism is not a valid point of view then I suggest that the forum name be changed to theism vs atheism or something else again.Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

Because there are still people that think creationism is a valid point of view. The purpose of this forum is to educate them so that they will understand why Creationism and Intelligent Design are simply NOT even possible, worthwhile or informative points of view.Notice I do not call all posts from Creationists or even Intelligent Design stupid and dumb, only those like Dawn's where they consistently continue to repeat false allegations and assertions after they have been shown conclusively to be false.The first time a totally false assertion is made it is most likely simply a matter of ***, but when the person continues to repeat patently false statements it moves beyond simple *** and into the realm of intentional trolling at best.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This is from the page called "About This Site". It does seem to me that the webmaster felt it was worthy of debate to the point that he had to point out that he is pro-evolution.Again, the point of this thread was that Bolder-dash was lamenting the fact that there are almost no creationists left. I am merely trying to point out why. No matter what the subject, sarcasm and ridicule usually don't produce a reasonable debate or discussion.If Percy does not consider creationism a valid point of view then I suggest he change the title of the forum to something that actually depicts what he wants it to be about.

There was no sarcasm or ridicule in my post, period.I am always happy to discuss Creationism or Intelligent Design with anyone that is willing to actually hold a discussion. I do not think that either Dawn or Bolder fit that description based on the whole body of their posts.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

What would you call this then? I don't mean to pick on you jar. Your post is pretty typical and obviously by the 5 rating, as well as the other responses, you have a lot of support.Once again, I'm just giving my opinion as to why there are almost no creationists left on the board.

That is called a statement of fact. And notice, I then went on to point out exactly why I felt the content of his post merited that evaluation.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

I've made my point jar. I think it is unfortunate that there are so few creationists/fundamentalists/literalists on the forum.I think that there are many on this forum that could enter into a good discussion on a variety of issues. On the thread entitled "Catholics and Inerrancy" I just had a discussion with crashfrog about my beliefs. I frankly don't think he has a lot of time for my views but he didn't allow it to sink into name calling or ridicule. I enjoyed the discussion.I think we could do the same thing for creationists, and if we really are serious about trying to convince them that their views are wrong then I suggest that respect is the better route to go. JMHO.