Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,596 Year: 4,853/9,624 Month: 201/427 Week: 11/103 Day: 11/0 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
Posts: 2293
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 5.9

Message 391 of 415 (669727)
08-01-2012 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 10:13 PM

Re: Revisionist Revisionist history;
The one difference is that ONLY creationists who rock Percy's applecart are ever suspended for this (don't go saying its equal)
False, check out Artemis Entreri for example.
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.

God separated the races and attempting to mix them is like attempting to mix water with diesel fuel.- Buzsaw Message 177
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 10:13 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-02-2012 12:06 AM DrJones* has not replied

Posts: 3977
Joined: 09-26-2002

Message 392 of 415 (669728)
08-02-2012 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 391 by DrJones*
08-01-2012 11:39 PM

A suspension I really felt bad about
This was a long time ago, and I'm not naming names. This member hasn't been active in a long time.
The admin staff had information that one of the evo side members had suffered a great personal tragedy. As I recall, his ex-wife and at least one child had very recently been killed in an auto accident.
Unfortunately, at that same time, this member also ended up posting one or more pretty ugly messages, and I gave him a suspension (this was back before the suspension lengths could be pre-set - The un-suspensions had to be manually done).
It was a difficult situation - I didn't feel I was at liberty to give out info on the members personal problems as a mitigating excuse, but I also didn't feel I could let the forum transgressions just pass. In hindsight, I probably should have just let it pass with taking any action.
Please, no fishing for information of who this member was.

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 391 by DrJones*, posted 08-01-2012 11:39 PM DrJones* has not replied

Itinerant Lurker
Member (Idle past 2737 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 12-12-2008

Message 393 of 415 (669729)
08-02-2012 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 354 by RAZD
07-31-2012 8:48 AM

Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
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.
I think that's exactly what's happening. I spend the majority of my time posting on pro-creationist boards and the amount of tightrope-walking I have to do just to keep from being banned is ridiculous. They are used to ToS ("Terms of Service") so vague they can be used to quickly get rid of those who disagree with them, as well as moderators (often who actively participate in discussions) only too happy to apply them. Because of this many creationists are simply unused to extended, and well-evidenced arguments against their claims and/or consistent demands for evidence. It's just not a standard they are held to in their home forums. Even the extensive archive of past topics available here is probably quite novel as on creationist boards particularly coherent arguments get revised and deleted fairly regularly by admins. There are also usually lengthy prohibitions against disrespecting anyone's views, much less overtly calling them out on bullshit, which are often also unevenly enforced.
On the upside, this is exactly why this kind of thinking will only suffer in an environment of free inquiry and debate. Which is, of course, why creationist boards very rarely allow free inquiry and debate to happen, and why creationists shy away from boards that do.
". . .truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself, and is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and can have nothing to fear from the conflict, unless (by human interposition) disarmed of her natural weapons — free argument and debate: errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them. --Thomas Jefferson, An Act for the Establishment of Religious Freedom, passed in the Assembly of Virginia (U.S.) in the year 1786.

Edited by Itinerant Lurker, : I don't check my messages. . .that's why.

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

Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 4.1

Message 394 of 415 (669731)
08-02-2012 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 390 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 10:13 PM

Re: Revisionist Revisionist history;
There is a giant elephant in the room, I don't know why its so hard for you to see.
EVERYONE who posts here could be considered to be insulting at times, and everyone could be considered to be off topic. The one difference is that ONLY creationists who rock Percy's applecart are ever suspended for this (don't go saying its equal). Its not hard for anyone who is honest to see why that is so.
This certainly isn't true. In fact I remember rather a significant purge of evolutionists. Many of them rather better behaved than you.
More recently Hooah has received a couple of serious suspensions - the first without any clear cause being given at all (even after protests - on the CORRECT thread), the current suspension for an offence that doesn't seem to merit a whole four weeks.
Suspension notices for Hooah: Message 152 Message 166
Any truly HONEST person currently active on the board would have checked their facts before making allegations.
And of course it is not just a question of occasional insults or going off topic, it's a matter of the severity and the pattern of behaviour. Occasional off-topic posting will result in nothing worse than a post being hidden with an off-topic notice and no real sanctions at all. Likewise Alfred Maddenstein's rudeness to Cavediver has resulted in no sanctions at all.
The biggest elephant in the room is the fact that you have NOT been permanently suspended despite a pattern of extremely bad behaviour - worse than many who were removed from the board in the purge. Even a fair moderation team could justifiably have removed you completely from the board.
If the administration were really unfair to creationists - rather than creationists being problem posters who attract administrator attention - I think we would be seeing at least more questionable calls like the Hooah suspensions. But we aren't. You haven't pointed to a single one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 10:13 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006

Message 395 of 415 (669735)
08-02-2012 4:03 AM
Reply to: Message 385 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 7:14 PM

Re: Revisionist Revisionist history;
That's very interesting research you did there nonukes. And gee, it almost gives the revisionist appearance that it was ME being trite and insulting, if one were to completely ignore what I was responding to..i.e Dr. A calling another poster a conceited i d i o t. Of course, I don't call people ****** here, because the software doesn't allow me to (insults are reserved for evolutionists use only). Fortunately that doesn't stop Dr. A , as he has the green badge to insult all he wants.
This is, of course, not true.
So yes, sure I was being provocative. Who else is going to point out the duplicitous-ness of how this site is run? You? We don't want the fence sitters to be confused and think this is an actual debate site, where BOTH sides get to present their opinions with equal rules do we?
Otherwise all those fence sitters might start to get confused and think that the reason creationists don't post much here is because they have nothing to say, or because they are ******-since Dr. A always gets to call them that-rather than the truth.
As I pointed out, and will now point out again, the poster I was debating is in fact an atheist who dismisses the existence of God as "pure fiction", and "perfectly contradictory and absurd", and is, therefore, not a creationist. I doubt that many creationists are deterred from posting here by the fear that someone might say something mean to an atheist.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 7:14 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Posts: 22607
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7

Message 396 of 415 (669746)
08-02-2012 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 380 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 12:43 PM

Bolder-dash writes:
What, under the biological evolution forums? Is that a parable or a very subtle joke?
The proposal would be entered in the Proposed New Topics forum, and it would most likely be promoted to the Intelligent Design forum.
Acting in my Admin role, I have restored your posting permissions in the Biological Evolution forum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 12:43 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Member (Idle past 493 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005

Message 397 of 415 (669762)
08-02-2012 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 10:13 PM

Re: Revisionist Revisionist history;
Bolder-dash writes:
There is a giant elephant in the room, I don't know why its so hard for you to see.
When only one person sees pink elephants, it's likely to be a hallucination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 10:13 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 399 by Theodoric, posted 08-02-2012 2:08 PM ringo has replied

Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006

Message 398 of 415 (669767)
08-02-2012 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 10:13 PM

off topic and related suspensions
EVERYONE who posts here could be considered to be insulting at times, and everyone could be considered to be off topic. The one difference is that ONLY creationists who rock Percy's applecart are ever suspended for this (don't go saying its equal).
Everytime you complain, which seems often, I ask you to post any specific infractions you may observe to the relevant thread. There may well be a bias in the administrators, which is why we request people post their specific complaints regarding discussions.
Anyway lyx2no was suspended for Message 204.
Coyote was suspended for Message 95
Dr A was suspended for his off topic posts over at this thread
dwise1 was suspended for being offtopic which was announced in Message 370
Lithodid-Man was suspended for being offtopic, announced also in Message 370
Catholic Scientist and Theodoric were suspended for discussing where they shouldn't be (kind of off topic) see Message 299 and what follows.
Taq had his post hidden over at Message 343
Huntard suspended for offtopicness at Message 85
Jumped up Chimpanzee suspended for offtopicality in Message 87
onifre and Rrhain for off topic bickering in Message 363 etc.
frako suspended for being generally divergent from topics in Message 105
ZenMonkey was suspended for Message 580
Dr A was suspended for offtopic snarkiness at Message 588 etc
nuggin for offtopic snarkiness in Message 612
nuggin for Message 623
jar gets four weeks for the offtopic and useless post in Message 170, though it was reduced.
Omnivorous suspended for this (Message 244 and some other posts).
NoNukes for Message 245
crashfrog for Message 247
Artemis Entreri suspended for Message 86

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 10:13 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Posts: 9277
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7

Message 399 of 415 (669769)
08-02-2012 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 397 by ringo
08-02-2012 12:31 PM

Is he really a creo?
I have assumed that Bolder-dash was a Poe. Look at his nick. It seems obvious that it is a play on balderdash.
senseless, stupid, or exaggerated talk or writing; nonsense.
One could say that the nick is to be an indictment of the "evolutionists"(still wondering about that term) he is "debating", but he is the one with the posts that match the definition.
Cluelessness like this does not seem to be possible, therefore I just assume we are being Poe'd

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by ringo, posted 08-02-2012 12:31 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 400 by ringo, posted 08-02-2012 2:39 PM Theodoric has not replied

Member (Idle past 493 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005

Message 400 of 415 (669770)
08-02-2012 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 399 by Theodoric
08-02-2012 2:08 PM

Re: Is he really a creo?
Theodoric writes:
Cluelessness like this does not seem to be possible, therefore I just assume we are being Poe'd
I think creationists have an everlasting Fountain of Cluelessness, which keeps them too clueless to Poe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 399 by Theodoric, posted 08-02-2012 2:08 PM Theodoric has not replied

Posts: 34054
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 5.1

Message 401 of 415 (669773)
08-02-2012 3:00 PM

Forums evolve and perhaps that is what is happening here just as it happens in real life.
The fact is that Evolution happened and the only model that explains the variety of life today is the Theory of Evolution.
That some people still believe in Creationism is also fact, but as with many other things, the only issue there is to see that such people do not get into positions of power, get to teach their nonsense in public schools or get elected.
The evidence is pretty much overwhelming that once a someone gets exposed to reality they soon find Creationism just cannot stand up to examination. Creationism cannot continue when children get exposed to reality.
Maybe it's time to simply ignore Creationism and Creationists and move on. Let them build their avoidance society and live their lives avoiding the universe.

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

Member (Idle past 3711 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 402 of 415 (669792)
08-02-2012 11:30 PM

Modulous's ridiculous attempt to show that some evolutionists occasionally get a 12 hour suspension, to me illustrates just how dishonest some posters who want to win an argument can be (oh no wait, maybe its cognitive dissonance!) Does Modulous wish to make a comparison of what creationists have gotten here for far less egregious posts-did any of those evolutionists get permanently banned for any of that, ever? Does he want to compare what's off topic, or discuss what DR. A or Panda or Theodoric or coyote write on a daily basis. Does he want to compare the treatment to Buzzsaw or Kaichos Man or Dawn or Alfred or the obscene and unforgivable way in which Viv Pope was treated here? Oh nevermind, modulous already knows the answer to this and wasn't really trying to be truthful here. He can deal with his own cognitive dissonance, it doesn't matter to me.
Secondly, the post was asking why there are less and less creationists posting here. So on and on the evolutionists babble about why they claim it is..while when creationists tell them the reason, they say, "no no, that can't be it, the real reason is because...."
Its like a wife who files for a divorce from her husband and the husband says, "Why do you want a divorce?"
Wife "Well because you never listen to anything I tell you, and you always spend time with your mates and you ignore me when I call you."
Husband says,"Is it because I bought that new fishing boat?"
Wife: "No no, I don't care about that, its because when I tell you something is wrong and I want to talk, you never listen. Remember when Billy was sick in the hospital and I called you, and you said, not now, I am with my mates?"
Husband "Is it because you don't like my job, I can change my job!"
Wife "Its not your job, its because you never listen to me. If I call you to tell you the house is on fire, like I did last month remember, when the house was burning, you told me to leave you alone, because you are busy with your mates...."
Husband "Its because you think I don't earn enough money isn't it? I knew it!"
Wife- "No! Listen! Remember on Friday when I called you to tell you I was mugged, and beaten and the car was stolen, and I needed a ride home from the hospital, and you said stop calling you, because you were with your mates...."
Husband-"Gee all you care about is money! You are such a golddigger!"

Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 4.1

Message 403 of 415 (669800)
08-03-2012 2:14 AM

What sort of creationists do we want ?
I don't think that we want just any creationists here at any cost. We want creationists who can make a overall positive contribution to the site. We don't want to destroy the site in the name of "saving" it.
Moderation serves a purpose. Simply rejecting all moderation of creationists by asserting that it is unfair is itself unfair, unreasonable and unrealistic. Equally playing a numbers game without examining actual decisions - and the behaviour of the posters involved - does not tell us much about the fairness of moderation because - as Bolder-dash has been demonstrating - the creationists are often very badly behaved. We certainly can't conclude that unfairness is the problem when all we have is the assertions of someone who seems to judge things very unfairly himself.
Moreover, I have to question if the opinions of the small number creationists who actually do post here says much about the opinions of creationists who don't. A small sample is always a questionable basis for a conclusion. And if the moderation is not "bad" enough to drive them away, we can't assume that it would drive others away. The more so since the better-behaved creationists - the ones we want - would not be moderated to anything like the same extent - which removes one of the major issues behind the alleged "unfairness".
To put it simply, setting up a grossly unfair moderation that lets Bolder-dash run riot on the site while silencing his critics is so obviously a bad idea that it isn't even worth considering. If that's what it takes to keep Bolder-dash here - then good-bye and good-riddance.

Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 119 days)
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007

Message 404 of 415 (669801)
08-03-2012 2:26 AM

Avoid the Meta-Debate
I originally posted this in response to Shadow71, but it applies just as well to Bolder-dash, so let it stand as my summation for this thread.
The point of this board is to debate the evolution/creation issue. That's its raison d'etre. If you are not going to participate in that discussion, for whatever reason, then your course of action should be clear; leave this board and never come back. If, as you say, the reason for your "unfair" treatment is that your interlocutors and the board moderators are fundamentally unfair, then you have nothing to gain by continuing to debate us. In particular, you have nothing to gain by trying to persuade such unfair opponents that the problem is their own unfairness, that's a guaranteed non-starter. Unfair people are rarely willing to admit that they are unfair. Continuing to participate in the meta-debate about whether or not the EvC punters are bastards is going to get you nowhere. If you're wrong you'll look a fool, if you're right we'll never acknowledge it, because... well, we're bastards. I can imagine no more futile exercise.
If you really believe that we're all unfair, you should tell us to go to hell and leave the forum. If you stay however, you should put forward your argument. Go ahead and argue for your vague, confused anti-evolution grumbling. Let the readers judge the merits of your arguments. Otherwise you have nothing to offer and absolutely nothing to gain by participating.
Basically, it's lead, follow or get out of the way.
Either post and argue your point, go into lurker mode or leave.
Whining from the sidelines is always an option, but it's not one that I would recommend.
Mutate and Survive

Member (Idle past 2187 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 405 of 415 (669802)
08-03-2012 2:47 AM

Creationists come here to, presumably, expose others to their beliefs and hopefully to convince some to accept those beliefs.
Those who hold other beliefs, or who prefer to follow the scientific method, are likely to ask for some evidence that a creationist's beliefs are worth following.
Many religions, and hence their followers, place a great value on belief and faith, while those who follow the scientific method place a great value on evidence and the testing of that evidence.
That leads to an automatic dichotomy here. This has been discussed at length in this thread and in the summations above.
Many creationists appear unable to accept any challenges to their beliefs, and so post once and never return.
Others post and then try to defend their beliefs against evidence brought up that contradicts those beliefs. (Young earth and the lack of a global flood ca. 4,350 years ago are two prime examples.) Often they don't last long in the face of overwhelming evidence; they either leave or start questioning their beliefs--by debating the evidence as well as they can.
Another category of creationist, of which we have a couple of prime examples, ignores all evidence that contradicts their beliefs and posts anything that may seem to support those beliefs, whether it actually does or not. When challenged, they claim to have posted definitive evidence, but when we look back we can't find it. Threads then spiral down into oblivion.
The problem can be said to be one of worldview. One side emphasizes evidence while the other emphasizes belief.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024