Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0

Perhaps I'm the only one who cares but the Catholicism-Protestantism thread is not the Humor thread despite the opinions of some posting there (recent post by Theodoric about the seasons, Message 198), and it is hard enough to keep the topic in focus without the off-topic posts of kofh2u. I respectfully request moderator intervention. Thank you.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I am no fan of Kofh2u, far from it, but I do have to protest this post by Theodoric, Message 728.

I have another complaint about Theodoric whose MO seems to be nothing but posturing, snark and namecalling, tactics aimed at intimidation instead of sticking to the topic, as in Message 864

If this is now going to become an issue, after many months of making such references and its not being an issue, I'm simply going to leave. If creationists aren't allowed to reason as we reason about these things, there's no point in being here at all. And it was certainly no "rant," it was a perfectly straightforward comment.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't know what rule applies here if any but jar has asked the same tiresome question so many times now that I think it should be regarded as some kind of harassment, and I'm arbitrarily starting at Message 971:971, 975, 977, 986, 980, 991, 995, 998, 1003, 1040, 1064, 1071, 1073 and 1081The question has been dealt with sufficiently many times, my latest direct answer being Message 1067.Thank you for your attention to this.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

His question is how does baking a wedding cake validate a marriage, and my answer has been all along that this is about a person's conscience, not an artificial equation between cake and validation. That's the only answer there is and it's been given over and over again on that thread. It obviously doesn't have that meaning for him but he can't make that decision for other people. It's the person's conscience that decides that to make such a cake is wrong because it would be supporting something that violates God's law.

{Content hidden. Reply to a message that does not belong in this topic. Adminnemooseus}Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Content hidden message.

Does anybody care any more about personal attacks?EvC Forum: Are you Racist? Homophobic? etc

And here's another personal attack, a very long character assassination rant:EvC Forum: Origin of the Flood Layers

And while I'm at it, I don't think AZPaul should have been allowed to get away with this attack on another poster either:EvC Forum: Chariots of God (Scripture & Photo Examined)

I'm happy to take the punishment too. Time the whole place stopped doing this.

It's usually a period of suspension, following a warning. Or that's the way it used to be.

The problem is that Scott RP should probably have been called on the carpet himself some time ago, but I still don't think anyone should tear up somebody's character the way you did. At this point I'm happy that Percy is going to be watching things a bit better so no need to go away now.

I consider what I do in trying to prove the Flood to be scientific and based on evidence. I get tired of being told I'm failing to do "correct science" so OK, maybe it's not "correct science" with its models and so on, so that's all I said, I wasn't "eschewing science." Proving the Flood DOES require a different approach than simply setting out as a scientist to discover something about the world. That is not "correct science" according to a million complaints people have dumped on me, and to that I say I could not care less. BUT I'm looking for evidence and arguing from evidence and I consider that to be science.HOWEVER, for the last day or so I've mostly been responding to complaints and am rather fed up with the debate for the moment. So I'll stay off the threads until I have something to say in the debate.

As for all the "what-ifs" they are attempts to find an alternative explanation for something that current science uses to prove the Old Earth. Every time I propose such a possibility it's denounced as not science. At least HBD finally came along and said it is an important part of science, as I would expect it to be. Edge however gets apoplectic when I suggest such alternatives to his expert knowledge. Sometimes he can give a reason for why he's so sure I'm wrong, and then of course I have to find a way to explain it in young earth terms and drive him even more crazy.But sometimes he really just doesn't get something that makes perfect sense, like the "strain" at the top of a three mile stack of wet sediments from being stretched over an uplift at such a height. That drives ME crazy.