Summations Only

There has been no intelligent and informed discussion here at all? There have been a lot of religious people who have come and gone here, making the very few who stay around for long periods greatly outnumbered. And that's 100% the fault of the religious?I thought the Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!! thread was an okay discussion, you didn't? Here are examples of the non-religious reaction to it; Message 524Message 651Message 703Message 706You'll notice that most of those messages, and most of those types of messages all over the place here, get approval dots from other members, and aren't flagged or moderated in any way. I hope you understand that intelligent, informed, religious people often have better things to do than engage with this kind of childish, atheist behavior. A huge percentage of the general public would agree with me that global warming atheists didn't do too well in that thread, particularly in dealing with my messages at the very beginning, and the very end.I understand that this forum is a gathering place for atheists with far left political views, and there's not a thing wrong with that. But it's simply wrong to claim a worldview superiority just because religious people don't post here much. These things equally go both ways, the religious attempts to introduce things into public school curriculums are often only an attempt to counteract militant atheists attempts to introduce their propaganda into school curriculums. It's true that 'religious science' has a lot of gaps. Equally, atheist science has a lot of gaps.From your earlier message; Atheists can be like that too, they worship the earth, they believe in the power of bigger and bigger government. The problem is, considering the structure of the current U.S. society, their big government views are more intrusive to the liberties and lifestyles of others, than are the views of small government religious people.Edited by Admin, : Fix link in 2nd para.

If you have anything of substance, you can depend on it!

A big enough issue so that you think it was not an okay discussion? Would it have been better if my posts had been censored?Free speech is one of the most basic staples of U.S. society, both when it was founded, and what has led up to what it is today. Now, beginning only in the past few decades, and ramping up drastically in only the past few years, we're seeing an increasing hostility and intolerance towards conservative free speech. For months now, Donald Trump has been banned from Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and Snapchat. This forum's longtime poster Faith, was permanently banned, not for breaking forum rules or vulgar language, but for having an opinion on something that administration deemed "dangerous". Rush Limbaugh was widely labeled "the most dangerous man in America" for a long time, and there were several attempts to censure him. Examples like this from recent years go on and on.But those examples are only liberal attempts against conservative free speech, not the other way around. Most conservatives for example, are more than happy to let Maxine Waters and AOC babble all they want, it exposes who they really are. There were attempts to censure Waters for her obvious incitements of violence, and her racism towards white people, but most would agree that was justified.You'll notice in Message 24 that it didn't take long for the vulgar language to get going in this thread, in response to a new, non-atheist poster.The list of liberals who are included on Fox News Channel discussions is long, while the list of conservatives on CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, etc. is practically non-existent. I see Rick Santorum is included at CNN, that's about all I can find. None of those networks get anywhere near the way Fox News allows Chris Wallace, a registered Democrat, to have their own one-hour show to do anything they want. Yes I know, these kinds of obviously dishonest statements are another of the many reasons why there aren't a wider variety of posters here. They don't disagree with the science, they disagree with the atheism. Everyone is religious, atheists have been writing the textbooks for science courses for a long time, because atheism controls science.

No there's proof that it is, for anyone with their eyes open. The proof was the scientific community's kneejerk meltdown in 1996 over the "Darwin's Black Box" book. It got plenty of attention in the coming years, not for any interest in the science, but to shout it down and discredit it. The scientific community was completely unified in its anger. Any religious biologist who dared do anything but toe the line knew he'd lose his job if he didn't.That book was not a threat to AMY religion, only to pure atheism. Their first, and most effective reaction was tie it to the "Wedge Document", as if that document was the sole purpose of Behe's work. They called it "thinly disguised creationism" largely because of that Wedge Document marriage they created with it. When questioned about books like The God Delusion", or the many articles about atheism we see in "The Scientific American" website and magazine, or the love of "science" at the American Atheists website, the constant THINLY DISGUISED ATHEISM in what the scientific community wants to teach in public schools, we always hear "oh that's just those atheist's personal opinions - has nothing to do with the science". Strange how the Wedge Document writers weren't allowed to have personal opinions apparently. The double standards really are glaring. Again, proven by Behe's demonization. Many people who pay taxes to support science don't believe that all of reality can be jam-packed into re-arrangement processes, the only scientific thing that humans can actually study.

Creation is defeated now? Because of one judge's decision at Dover? Because of a decrease in creationist posters here? Because of Biden's election?Morris and Dembski are inactive now, but their many books live on. Some of them in private hands, some of them still in book stores. Hopefully you don't think the government should seize them.