Christopher Bohar's Debate Challenge

Hi Budikka,Look, I understand what you're trying to do - get PB to answer a straight question (luck be with you). However, since I just took Fred Williams to task for his rather unpleasant "style"(I think I characterized it as "infantile"), I guess I better show equal opportunity here and ask you to turn down the heat a bit. Evcforum tends to run a bit more smoothly than some other forums I've been on in spite of only having three moderators, primarily because we tend to police ourselves a lot. I'd appreciate it if you'd help by ratcheting down the rhetoric a few notches. Thanks.

Adminemooseus: Very well. I stand corrected. Obviously I’m unable to understand the subtleties of board policy concerning the level of permitted vitriol — which is of course why I’m not a moderator. Feel free to moderate the farging board any way you wish.Budikka: I apologize for my comment. Since the board administrators apparently feel your responses thus far are acceptable, I publicly retract my statements and implied criticism. However, I would like to address two of the questions you posed to me in your response before leaving you to your exchange with PB.1. No, I’m not a moderator — obviously. My interest is that one of the things that has (or perhaps had) consistently attracted me to this board was the relatively high level of the average discussion and the relatively low level of flames. Evidently, I misunderstood the policies on this.2. A subtle insult is of course still an insult. However, and this is merely personal preference, I find that a subtle insult is significantly more creative than calling someone an incompetent boob (or words to that effect). It makes the insulter look clever, and leaves the insultee with nothing to chew on — and yet everyone knows that an insult has been levied.Again, please accept my apologies for the unsolicited comment.[This message has been edited by Quetzal, 11-03-2002]

quote:

---

Your father was a hamster and your mother smells of elderberries.

---

And don't come back or I will taunt you again.

Ten-sai: Are you actually here to discuss something? If so, please get on with it. Or are you merely indulging some pathetic childish propensity for insult? If this is the case, please continue. It's quite amusing - especially given your self-proclaimed invincible superiority. Maybe you could try addressing Budikka's first two question in post #1 of this thread. I'd love to see a lawyer argue for the existence of kreated kinds. Feel free to use whatever standards of evidence you deem appropriate - you are, after your own words, the only expert in evidence on the forum.

Peter: There's something I've been meaning to ask you:

quote:

---

Listen, Mr Buddika, it is the biggest evolutionist's fallacy to present population genetics as evolution. I know all about evolutionism and I know all about population genetics. They are not equivalent. I also know that you and Mammuthus and Dr Page present it as evolutionism and that is how you guys keep up the appearance of evolutionism. It is deception. You may be able to fool the public, you don't fool me.

---

I stand in awe of your knowledge. Please define "population genetics" for all of us ignorants.

Yep, definitely a lawyer. All those words and you didn't say a thing. DO you have a point somewhere in anything you've posted so far? If so, it escapes me completely - although I'd LOVE to see your explanation as to why you find Peter Borger's "work" is so compelling. Perhaps you have some additional "evidence" for his multipurpose genome, creaton waves/particles, and non-random mutations? Inquiring minds want to know...