Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,648 Year: 4,905/9,624 Month: 253/427 Week: 63/103 Day: 7/14 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Creationist Shortage

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist Shortage
Genomicus
Member (Idle past 2027 days)
Posts: 852
Joined: 02-15-2012


(1)
Message 346 of 415 (669557)
07-30-2012 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 344 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 8:37 PM


Edited by Genomicus, : No reason given.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Belated hide and off-topic banner. The forum was pretty much down last night, or I might have gotten here sooner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 344 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 8:37 PM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 369 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 1:03 AM Genomicus has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22621
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 347 of 415 (669558)
07-30-2012 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 339 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 7:39 PM


Re: who is the layperson?
Bolder-dash writes:
But it does highlight one point that is relevant. During the topic of Shapiro and Wrights papers, the point of the modern synthesis was brought and how Shapiros and Wrights concepts could be incorporated into the modern synthesis. The comments from me (which were deleted by admin and deemed off topic!) were directly related to what the modern synthesis actually means in terms of evolutionary theory.
Your comments were not deleted, they were hidden. You can still read them at Message 82 by clicking on "peek". I just read them again, they're still not on-topic. If you'd like to discuss the origin of and any subsequent changes to the modern synthesis then just cut-n-paste your message into a thread proposal over at Proposed New Topics.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 339 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 7:39 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


(4)
Message 348 of 415 (669564)
07-31-2012 2:03 AM
Reply to: Message 345 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 8:46 PM


Re: who is the layperson?
While a question concerning the modern synthesis might have been on topic (although it is pretty basic knowledge for anyone who's done any study of evolution) a rant accusing others of dishonesty just for using a term you don't know is not.
Likewise your posting to the wrong topic to complain about moderation issues is simply a mistake on your part not a sign that the site is run unfairly.
Finally - although there is more I could say - reserving the right to make insults and allegations of dishonesty etc. to people who's views you approve of is not even remotely fair. Yet that is what you appear to be asking for in the "name of fairness".
I think we can all draw the conclusion that the primary problem in your interactions here is not the moderation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 8:46 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3946
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001


(5)
Message 349 of 415 (669568)
07-31-2012 3:47 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by RAZD
07-29-2012 3:56 PM


Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
RAZD writes:
My observation would be that the more one argues an opinion against evidence the more one is likely to be moderated -- regardless of what that opinion is about -- and the more one reacts with an emotional outburst the more one is likely to be moderated.
It isn't the creationism that is is moderated, per se, rather it's the continued and repeated unsupported assertions and emotional replies.
This reply could come from Adminnemooseus, but I put on the full evolutionist hat and post it as Minnemooseus.
The evolution side recognizes that the creation "science" side is armed with an empty gun. Still, the evo side demand is that they fire something other than blanks. Isn't that a variety of cogitative dissonance in itself?
And we do have the problem of dogpiling the creationist, often by less than friendly evolutionists (evo-jerks). This is something that needs to be battled, and it's not an easy thing for moderators to sort through. So yet again I preach, "evo side, please bring up the friendly level".
Dewise1 does many epic and devastating argument messages, but does he ever descend to being an evo-jerk? Very rarely if at all.
My impression and recollection (being one of poor memory) is that Foreveryoung is a higher than average rationality creationist. He did some good discussions and I really do like the guy. Unfortunately, the combination of dogpiling and/or evo-jerks twice caused him to crack in an extreme manner. He needed a substantial suspension vacation for his own good.
Even when civility is high, the evo to creo ratio means the creo is going to get pounded. A creo has to be damn durable (Buzsaw?) to take that pounding and still stick around.
I think it should be an item of basic human decency here, but do we need the 11th forum rule of "Don't be a jerk"?
Feel free to rearrange my sentences and paragraphs in better order. Or something like that.
Moose
ABE - For reference, the existing "Dog piling" topic.
Edited by Minnemooseus, : ABE.

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by RAZD, posted 07-29-2012 3:56 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 350 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2012 6:56 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied
 Message 351 by PaulK, posted 07-31-2012 7:43 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied
 Message 352 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 8:17 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied
 Message 358 by jar, posted 07-31-2012 10:33 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 350 of 415 (669572)
07-31-2012 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 349 by Minnemooseus
07-31-2012 3:47 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
Hi Minnemooseus
see answer here
Cognitive Dissonance and Cultural Beliefs, cognitive dissonance and culture clash
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 3:47 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 351 of 415 (669573)
07-31-2012 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 349 by Minnemooseus
07-31-2012 3:47 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
While it may be a problem, it is one that can be alleviated a little through the Great Debate forum. And it is not the main thing that the creationists see to be complaining about.
Buz and Bolder-dash, for instance, both object to moderator actions taken against them, and want restrictions on evolutionists that would not apply to them - in the name of fairness.
In short, the greater part of the problem is that creationists do not want a fair forum, or even one with an acceptable level of bias in their favour.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 3:47 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 354 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2012 8:48 AM PaulK has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 352 of 415 (669574)
07-31-2012 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 349 by Minnemooseus
07-31-2012 3:47 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
My impression and recollection (being one of poor memory) is that Foreveryoung is a higher than average rationality creationist. He did some good discussions and I really do like the guy. Unfortunately, the combination of dogpiling and/or evo-jerks twice caused him to crack in an extreme manner. He needed a substantial suspension vacation for his own good.
I think this characterization is wrong. Foreveryoung started good threads, but he did not follow up on them. His first blow up started when people refused to buy into his radical theory without some evidence.
In fact, very few people participate in the physics discussions where Fy posted a good number of his threads. In a number of the threads he either stopped participating or when into loud profane rant mode in fairly short order.
The evolution side recognizes that the creation "science" side is armed with an empty gun. Still, the evo side demand is that they fire something other than blanks. Isn't that a variety of cogitative dissonance in itself?
That does seem a bit silly, but aren't those the rules of the game here? In your opinion, what should the response to a creation science argument be in the science forums?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 3:47 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 353 of 415 (669579)
07-31-2012 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 337 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 7:18 PM


Show me...
f one questions if that is really true, you are accused of being off topic, and thus its impossible to refute wild claims made by the evolutionists.
Except that the examples you've given really do seem to be off topic posts. We have had discussions about what constitutes the modern synthesis, so I doubt that you'd have had any problems generating discussion about that. But that point was pretty much irrelevant in the thread you raised it in.
You can say evidence abounds for your theory, but if asked to provide that evidence you can run under the skirts of the admins protection. That is standard practice here.
The Wright paper discussion was strictly about the evidence supporting the conclusion that mutations were random with respect to fitness. Yet your approach was to post questions out in left field. That is to thwart the discussion in the thread by directing it towards your own agenda.
The evolutionist is free to just say anything they want and pretend that its true.
Completely bogus. If you challenge someone on doing that, and they don't pony up the evidence, that's a win. Those challenges work quite well on the typical creationist arguments I see on this board.
But this would be a great thread for you to give a counter example. Perhaps I'm wrong.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 337 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 7:18 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 354 of 415 (669580)
07-31-2012 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 351 by PaulK
07-31-2012 7:43 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
Hi PaulK
See my reply to Moose re cultural clashes and cognitive dissonance.
In short, the greater part of the problem is that creationists do not want a fair forum, or even one with an acceptable level of bias in their favour.
It seems to me that they - and other creationists - want a discourse environment similar to what they are used to in their culture, where there is less\little emphasis on empirical evidence and more emphasis on making what seem to be reasonable arguments, the "let us reason together" approach to reaching a decision.
Going to a great debate doesn't resolve this culture clash.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 351 by PaulK, posted 07-31-2012 7:43 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 355 by PaulK, posted 07-31-2012 9:03 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 356 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-31-2012 9:38 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 393 by Itinerant Lurker, posted 08-02-2012 12:23 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 355 of 415 (669581)
07-31-2012 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 354 by RAZD
07-31-2012 8:48 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
RAZD, my assertion was that the Great Debate forum alleviated the problems of dogpiling and "jerk evolutionists". I did not claim that it solved or helped with any other problem.
However I must disagree with you on the idea that creationist arguments proceed by reasoning. More typically they jump to conclusions based on a superficial - and often selective - view of the evidence, or argue from their own authority (which they expect to be accepted). Examples are not hard to find. What reasoning there is is best labelled a crude rationalisation.
I would suggest that the major difference is that creationists take the apologetic mindset which starts with conclusions and has little regard for evidence, reasoning or understanding - and they often cannot understand why anyone would not be as heavily biased in favour of their beliefs as they are.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2012 8:48 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 362 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2012 6:44 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 3716 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


(1)
Message 356 of 415 (669584)
07-31-2012 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 354 by RAZD
07-31-2012 8:48 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
How many evolutionists on this site are suspended or restricted from posting in certain forums for supposedly being off-topic? I am pretty sure there are none.
I know of at least 3 creationists who are-so I guess that is about 75% of all the creationists who post here currently. I think that kind of makes your theory about what they expect as fair treatment a little inaccurate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2012 8:48 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by Tangle, posted 07-31-2012 10:00 AM Bolder-dash has not replied
 Message 360 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 2:50 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9533
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


(1)
Message 357 of 415 (669587)
07-31-2012 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 356 by Bolder-dash
07-31-2012 9:38 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
bolder-dash writes:
How many evolutionists on this site are suspended or restricted from posting in certain forums for supposedly being off-topic? I am pretty sure there are none.
I know of at least 3 creationists who are-so I guess that is about 75% of all the creationists who post here currently. I think that kind of makes your theory about what they expect as fair treatment a little inaccurate.
Of course the alternative is that non-creationists either stick to the topic or obey instructions after being warned.
So now you have two alternative explanations for your perceived issue; simply asserting that your hypothesis is correct isn't enough to persuade us - we need proper evidence. As all the evidence is available on this forum, you could fairly easily prove it one way or another if you put your mind to it. Then you'd understand how the scientific method works and how useful it is.
[But be careful; you may not get the answer you want.]

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-31-2012 9:38 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34064
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 358 of 415 (669590)
07-31-2012 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 349 by Minnemooseus
07-31-2012 3:47 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
The evolution side recognizes that the creation "science" side is armed with an empty gun. Still, the evo side demand is that they fire something other than blanks.
Not quite.
What happens is that we point out that if Creationists actually expect to achieve anything it might be smarter to load the gun with something other than blanks.
No one demands that they fire more than blanks but Creationists might wish that the folk that support the FACT that evolution happened and that the Theory of Evolution is the only model that explains what is seen were required to use blanks as well.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 3:47 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 359 of 415 (669605)
07-31-2012 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 8:46 PM


Re: who is the layperson?
In order to discuss randomness vs. non-randomness first we must know what that means.
I discuss those definitions in the thread with reference to the actual data. Again, I urge you to participate in that thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 8:46 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 360 of 415 (669615)
07-31-2012 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 356 by Bolder-dash
07-31-2012 9:38 AM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
How many evolutionists on this site are suspended or restricted from posting in certain forums for supposedly being off-topic? I am pretty sure there are none.
Nobody gets suspended for being off topic. Although it is probably possible to get suspended for deliberately refusing admin direction for such, I don't know anyone who gets suspended this way.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-31-2012 9:38 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 361 by Percy, posted 07-31-2012 3:52 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024