Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9181 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,276 Year: 5,533/9,624 Month: 558/323 Week: 55/143 Day: 17/11 Hour: 2/1


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Creationist Shortage

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist Shortage
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 1 of 415 (661338)
05-04-2012 3:13 PM


Well, where are they? Even the creationists who we've got have most recently been wrong about economics. You have to go down eleven threads on "All Topics" to find anything about the EvC debate, in which, I note, creationists are not participating.
Don't get me wrong, I like hanging out here and debating with my fellow-evolutionists about politics and economics and the death penalty. It's fun. But surely it's not the point of these forums.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Blue Jay, posted 05-04-2012 8:13 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 21 by xongsmith, posted 05-05-2012 2:25 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 33 by shadow71, posted 05-08-2012 8:31 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 84 by foreveryoung, posted 05-11-2012 10:55 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 232 by herebedragons, posted 07-18-2012 11:50 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 8 of 415 (661378)
05-04-2012 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Buzsaw
05-04-2012 9:16 PM


Now Stop That
He's banned one of your most effective creationists from all science forums which include some Biblical ones. When nearly all of you, his evolutionst members voted that Buzsaw be reinstated into Science forums, Percy's one bully pulpit vote trumped all of yours.
Dr Adequate frowns upon people who refer to themselves in the third person, and he thinks that they look like idiots.
Seriously, why do you do this? Are you under the impression that you're a candidate for political office? 'Cos those are the only other people I've ever seen do that, and it invariably makes me want to not vote for them and also to kill them to death with a big axe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Buzsaw, posted 05-04-2012 9:16 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 9 of 415 (661379)
05-04-2012 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Shield
05-04-2012 9:05 PM


The above replies do not explain why most popular threads on this board are now about politics.
Because what else are we meant to argue about?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Shield, posted 05-04-2012 9:05 PM Shield has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Shield, posted 05-04-2012 10:13 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 22 of 415 (661401)
05-05-2012 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by GDR
05-04-2012 10:41 PM


However, having said that you only have to read through this thread and see, the name calling and ridicule that Buz is subjected to and it becomes clear as to why there aren't any creationists left here.
No, that's not why.
I flatter and encourage people such as slevesque, wumpini, sac ... and they disappear. I talk softly to foreveryoung and he explodes with rage at everyone and goes about looking for my previous posts to vote 'em down. I tell Chuck77 that he seems to be a nice guy, and he hates me because I proved him wrong about a subject that I didn't even mention until he asked me to comment on it --- and then, like slevesque, throws up his role as moderator.
Meanwhile the people whom I do just mock, such as Buzsaw and Dawn Bertot, hang about forever but don't contribute anything to the debate. (Note that when I mention Buzsaw and Dawn in the same sentence, this is not to say that I put them in the same class: I like Buzsaw personally, as a man, whereas the most sympathetic feeling I can muster for DB is a sort of horrified pity.)
Right now, I'd even welcome the return of marc9000 --- except that if he came back he wouldn't do so to argue for a young earth or fiat creationism, he'd do so to lie about Barack Obama.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by GDR, posted 05-04-2012 10:41 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Granny Magda, posted 05-05-2012 7:28 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 157 by Dawn Bertot, posted 05-17-2012 12:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(4)
(1)
Message 40 of 415 (661666)
05-09-2012 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by shadow71
05-08-2012 8:31 PM


One of the reasons I very rarely post is that even when the "anti-creationists" must admit that one of their pillars of evolution are not sound they respond with silly childist barbs. An example, when discussing mutations that are not random with regards to fitness such as the CRISPRSs system the replys are you don't know what your talking about. Well my question is: is the CRISPRS system an example of a dedicated non random, beneficial change that evolutionary theorists have excluded to this day?
If so how can one have a debate when a valid point is ignored by the so called scientific experts, because it does not fit into their theory?
And then you wonder why people don't take you seriously.
If you'll refer me to the relevant thread, I'll talk to you about this system. In the meantime, I will content myself with the following observation --- that the one and only, sole, singular reason that you know about this system is that "the so called scientific experts" discovered it. Was it discovered by creationists in their secret creationist laboratories? It was not. It was discovered by the very same "so called scientific experts" whom you now say have "ignored" their own discovery.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by shadow71, posted 05-08-2012 8:31 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Buzsaw, posted 05-09-2012 7:50 AM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 59 by shadow71, posted 05-10-2012 2:22 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(5)
(1)
Message 41 of 415 (661668)
05-09-2012 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Bolder-dash
05-08-2012 9:41 PM


Re: Its a debate site??
Perhaps you can put a big red message at the top of this site that says something like:
ALTHOUGH WE DO NOT ALLOW CREATIONISTS TO VOICE THEIR SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT ON EvC, AND ALTHOUGH VIRTUALLY ANYTHING THEY SAY WILL EITHER BE CENSORED, OR THEY WILL BE ACCUSED OF BEING "OFF TOPIC" EVERY TIME THEY MAKE A VALID POINT, AND EITHER BE SUSPENDED OR REFUSED POSTING PRIVILEGES, OR BE INUNDATED WITH A BARRAGE OF AD HOMINEN ATTACKS THAT THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO RESPOND TO OR AGAIN WILL BE SUSPENDED, THIS "IS" A DEBATE SITE, AND THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IT AND ANY OTHER DEBATE FORUM IS THAT DEBATING IS NOT ALLOWED HERE BY, BY DICTATE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR.
But of course they even let you post stuff like that, attacking them personally. Because this is the real world and not the fantasy world in your head.
Oh and by the way, do you know that Eugenie Scott, Richard Dawkins, PZ Meyers, as well as the entire body of the National Academy of Science all believe as a policy that evolutionists never fair well debating creationists, so they should avoid it when possible?
I do not "know" the stuff that you have made up in your head, because it is not, of course, true.
---
Now, do you have any fact that you can put forward in favor of creationism on some appropriate thread.? Only you seem to have dedicated many of your most recent posts to badmouthing evolutionists instead of discussing the natural world and competing ideas about how to explain it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-08-2012 9:41 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(8)
Message 43 of 415 (661677)
05-09-2012 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Buzsaw
05-09-2012 7:50 AM


Re: Who Takes Who Seriously
That is, who EvC evolutionist sheeples do not take seriously.
If you take him seriously, then please state in your own words what point he wishes to make about "the CRISPRSs system".
Otherwise you yourself don't take him seriously, you just like that he's on your side.
Tell me truthfully, before your God as witness, have you up until now ever spent five consecutive seconds thinking about the details of the CRISPRSs system? No? But you upvoted his post about it. And then you use the word "sheeples".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Buzsaw, posted 05-09-2012 7:50 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Buzsaw, posted 05-09-2012 9:34 AM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 70 by shadow71, posted 05-11-2012 2:02 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(9)
Message 51 of 415 (661725)
05-09-2012 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Buzsaw
05-09-2012 9:34 AM


Re: Who Takes Who Seriously
Not sure ...
You see what I mean?
You don't know what his argument is.
Consequently you don't know if it's any good or not.
You don't even know what his argument is about.
But you applaud it anyway, because he's a creationist.
And then you have the gall to talk about "evolutionist sheeples". When you applaud a creationist argument just because it is a creationist argument, while understanding nothing whatsoever of its actual content, what the heck are you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Buzsaw, posted 05-09-2012 9:34 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 57 of 415 (661794)
05-10-2012 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Buzsaw
05-10-2012 6:15 AM


Re: Who Takes Who Seriously
As has been pointed out already in this thread, the demeaning know-it-all attitude evolutionists have towards creationists ...
We don't know it all, but by crikey we know more than you.
Because you have no idea what you're talking about. You didn't upvote shadow77's post on the CRISPRS system because you agreed with him about it. You can't agree with him about it, because you don't know even what it is. He might as well have been saying: "Creationists are right because flurble-wurble bing-bong spoo" and apparently you'd still have cheered him on. It's not that we know it all, but that you know nothing about the subject under discussion, and you still presume to have an opinion on it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Buzsaw, posted 05-10-2012 6:15 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 154 of 415 (662494)
05-16-2012 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Bolder-dash
05-16-2012 5:21 AM


Re: why there are no creationists here
I am not sure your point here GDR.
Clearly you don't, since nothing that follows in your post has anything to do with what GDR posted. Others merely ignore the topic of the thread, but you have gone one step beyond that and ignored its content.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-16-2012 5:21 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(5)
(1)
Message 155 of 415 (662495)
05-16-2012 6:11 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Bolder-dash
05-15-2012 6:57 PM


Re: why there are no creationists here
You know , I think you may have something there Taq. I now realize, the reason evolutionists don't want to fairly debate their theory is because they have no evidence. And what's their reaction when they are asked t give evidence-they say it's off topic or they ban the questioner. Or they whine and whine about having to have their theory questioned in schools, lest students find out that there is no evidence. They say, "Oh its not fair to ask us for evidence, evolution is slow. Its hard to see. Fossils disappear a lot. Its not easy finding evidence...Hey, there was a bacteria once that ate something, isn't that enough for you...we weren't there, we can't go back in time..wha. Oh look at all those mean creationists who want to discuss the failure of our theory to provide real evidence in schools, whaaa whaa!" It's really quite immature.
I believe you have really stumbled onto something. Its the same reason why they censor wikipedia, why the National Academy of Sciences has a policy not to debate the subject, why PZ Meyers is afraid to debate, why Richard Dawkins is afraid to debate. Why Percy cuts off all questioning from creationists. Because they have nothing. They hide from the intellectual bankruptcy of their theory, by bullying away any objections. It all makes sense now, thank you Taq.
To someone unused to creationism, this collection of lies would seem remarkable in its mendacity. But for those of us who are used to it, the novelty has worn off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-15-2012 6:57 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 181 of 415 (667414)
07-06-2012 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by marc9000
07-06-2012 9:29 PM


Christians are interested in the science that develops things like computers, medical procedures, chemical advances, etc. — things that promote better societies here and now, not the speculation of what happened millions and billions of years ago, branches of science that do little more than provide intellectual fulfillment for atheism.
And for Christians who aren't idiots. And for Muslims and Jews who aren't all idiots. And for Hindus who aren't idiots.
Do bear in mind that not all religious people are fools and philistines, nor even all Christians --- so it is demeaning towards them for you to paint them all with the same brush.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by marc9000, posted 07-06-2012 9:29 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 191 of 415 (667470)
07-07-2012 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:12 PM


Science and atheism do the same thing, they both assume that one time dimension and three space dimensions are all there is to reality.
No.
Scientists disagree with each other all the time, some of them get things wrong, the atheist faith is never effected. There’s plenty of inconsistency, not only in human behavior, but in biology. Some humans live to be 100, others die of heart attacks at age 20. At one time, life originated on earth. It’s not originating at all right now. Not very consistent, is it?
* giggles at the funny man *

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:12 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 192 of 415 (667471)
07-07-2012 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
I don’t need it, but this forum needs it, if it wants to attract more creationists. No one needs the Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy forum either, but it’s a place to group all common threads in a single place, for easy reference ...
And this is useful because there are a group of threads with things in common that can be grouped together in this way.
This new forum could have the descriptive line; Do evolutionists start out as atheists? Or do they study evolution first and then become atheists?
Or something that wasn't an implicit falsehood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
(1)
Message 207 of 415 (668082)
07-17-2012 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by marc9000
07-16-2012 8:26 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
as we see above, many here seem to be a little shy about addressing that list.
You mean to say your off-topic drivel which has been rebutted in other threads only got 8 replies from 6 different people? --- the most replies, and the most respondents, to any post on this entire thread?
Let me tell you about your list. It's a list. It names some books. Curiously enough, the names of the books fail to prove whatever blitheringly stupid point you were trying to make.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:26 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024