Creationism museum opens in Alberta

Judging by the discussion in this thread, it really belongs in the [forum=-11] forum, so I'm moving it there. Before doing that, I'd like to make a few points.First, a discussion thread is not a chat room. The discussion board format permits deliberation, study, thought and reflection. When you find yourself exchanging very short messages with the same person or persons every couple minutes, please post a message suggesting that everyone go to the EvC Forum Chat Room.Second, threads have topics, not to limit discussion, but to keep discussion focused. The topic of this thread, judging from the discussion so far, concerns science museums and their responsibility for accurate representation.Third, I am the 3rd moderator to post here in the past 24 hours. Obviously what moderators have observed in this thread is causing concern, so let me explicitly caution participants to focus on their discussion on the topic, and not on the people they're discussing with.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Thread moved here from the Coffee House forum.

Participants are reminded to keep discussion focused on the topic, which is science museums and their responsibility for accurate representation.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

[forum=-14] is one of the Side Order forums. This is the description of the [forum=-14] forum that appears on the Forums List page: EvC Forum is for discussion of topics and issues related to the creation/evolution controversy, and creation museums are definitely related to the creation/evolution controversy. It does not fit in the category of "other topics". Topics introduced to the [forum=-14] forum that are actually related to the controversy are usually moved to the proper forum.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi Keys,Though this is a reply to you, much of this is intended for everyone.First, I agree with you that Jar should not engage in name calling, such as his Christian Cult of Ignorance. I see little difference between calling someone's beliefs ignorant and calling the person himself ignorant.Second, I would prefer that no one refer to someone else's position as a lie. Call it unsupported by evidence or unsubstantiated or made up, but do not call it a lie. The intention is to discourage inflammatory language that gets in the way of meaningful dialogue.Third, about this: Nowhere in the Forum Guidelines will you find it stated that the thread's originator defines the rules in his thread, and this is because thread originators have no such privilege. Thread originators propose their topic, and if approved and promoted then discussion takes place under the same set Forum Guidelines that apply to all threads.Fourth, if your position is actually that the Ken Ham museum and the Alberta museum are not actually science museums but Bible museums, and that you think the opening of more Bible museums should be encouraged, then I can move this thread to [forum=-6].

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi Keys,I am gradually reading my way through the incredible number of messages posted to this thread last night, and I've decided to respond to each message that deserves administrative comment as I encounter it, rather than respond in a single message when I'm done reading.This is a debate site where the intention is that people makes points, other people rebut them, and then other people rebut the rebuttals, and so forth. The single word sentence, "Nonsense" is not rebuttal. I've already quoted the Forum Guidelines to you once, and here is the relevant guideline again:

4. Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

Please help the discussion become a substantive exchange of ideas and information.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

This kind of language is more likely to inflame than to prompt measured and thoughtful responses. Please conduct the discussion in a manner conducive to the productive exchange of ideas and information.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I've finished reading the thread.Meaningful discussion is built upon reliable information and evidence. Much of what I've seen from Keys in this thread is a strong reluctance to discuss information and evidence, and he has several times said he doesn't want a science discussion. He seems to want to discuss the presentation of Bible stories in a museum format.Since Keys participates at a time when I am asleep, rather than waiting 24 hours for an exchange of messages I will now transfer this thread to [forum=-6] where there is no requirement to keep discussion scientific or even based upon actual real-world evidence.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Thread moved here from the Is It Science? forum.

I think constructive dialogue is more likely to occur if inflammatory accusations were avoided and the focus were kept more narrowly on the topic. I confess to uncertainty what that topic is, but Keys was very clear that he doesn't want to discuss science. I'll continue monitoring this thread to be sure that Keys homes in on a valid topic of discussion related to the creationism museum in Alberta.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi Keys,I see you're replying to posts in order, and soon you'll be reading my posts commenting about this thread. I hope you and everyone else will take them to heart. I'd hate to have to close this thread or suspend anyone. The goal of EvC Forum is to host discussions that actually make progress, and those who consistently make this goal difficult to achieve quickly gain the notice of moderators.The topic is creationism museums and what is appropriate in them, and closely related topics are probably fine, too.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi Keys,As I think I've said at least a couple times now, the goal of EvC Forum is to have discussions that actually get somewhere, so responses like this make me very concerned that you're not only not embracing this goal, you're working against it: If you're not going to reply to people's points until you've decided whether the moderation here is to you're liking, then please stop posting. Just sit back and lurk and read threads. In case it saves you some time in making up your mind, let me assure you that we're very hard on argumentation styles based upon unsupported assertion rather than evidence.Let me repeat the bottom line just to be sure there's no confusion. Either begin engaging the points being made to you, or stop posting. I've only read as far as Message 188 so far, perhaps you begin engaging points further on, but that's pretty much the same thing I said to myself yesterday.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Okay, I've read the thread up to my previous post, this is what I think.While it can be a little hard to discern, I think a few "sort of related" topics are emerging in this thread:

1. What is the nature of the supernatural as contrasted to the natural? What form does evidence of the supernatural take?
   ​
2. What are some of the actual evidences supporting the Biblical displays in creation museums?
   ​
3. What are some of the actual evidences supporting the science displays in creation museums?
   ​
4. Does a creation museum have any responsibility to present science accurately?

This thread is one against many, so I ask the many to take that into consideration.Despite multiple advisements from multiple moderators, Keys has persisted in pretty much the same style from the beginning, so I don't think it is reasonable to expect a change at this point. Since this thread is nearing the 300-post limit and will close soon, sometime tonight if the current rate of posting continues, there's little point in moderators making further concerted efforts to improve discussion here. But kudos to all, including Keys, for keeping discussion fairly civil.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

This thread is nearing the 300-post limit. Those that are so inclined, please get your summations in now. I'm going to suggest to my fellow moderators that we let the thread go past 300 posts as long as the messages being posted are summations, and to close the thread at some predefined time, say 8 PM ET tonight.I encourage participants to refrain from responding to summations. If further discussion breaks out at this point so late in the thread then I'd be inclined just to close the thread immediately.Naturally, any member may propose a follow-on thread at [forum=-25].

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director