Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
LoL! Why haven’t you started the thread, Patrick? Obviously you are afraid of something
LoL!@Richie- Only the delusional think I am fat.
(stop being hypocrites. If it is OK for Richie to call me fat then it has to be OK for me to post that)
And what, exactly, am I running away from? I have already posted how to test ID and you choked on that. Yet you can’t even link to this alleged modern theory of evolution. And you can’t say how to test the claim that blind watchmaker evolution produced ATP synthase.
BTW Patrick, there needn’t be a scientific theory of ID in order for ID to have testable entailments. The way it goes is the testable entailments come first and then the theory arises from that. And as far as that goes I posted that here- the testable entailments of ID- and you didn’t do very well with that. Unfortunately your position doesn’t have anything equal to or better than what ID has.
Frankie,
Someone doesn’t know what “entailments” means…
Yes, Richie, that someone is you. You don’t have any idea what entailments mean.
Alan how can you say that? They are not even following the rules right here since you have posted this.
I am thoroughly disappointed in you. You encourage a sewer atmosphere here, that goes in one direction. Good, that’s what you and Lizzie get then. You not only hide in Lizzie skirt, you invite a whole team to go there and lap dance with you.
Lizzie couldn’t follow the rules and discuss anything in good faith on another site, so she starts another site where the intent is not to discuss in good faith, the intent is to continue your bullshit guerilla skepticism.
Shameful.
A bidirectional sewer is probably a bad idea.
Alan Fox,
How many posts would I need to show you from them that don’t follow the rules before you would admit that is not true?
You can be as one sided and full of shit towards me as you want, I don’t care. But now you are making up policies as you go. You are being as dishonest as possible.
Your treatment towards Frankie has not been fair from the get go, because you have your own little beef. You are not trying to play fair.
In all due respect, go fuck yourself.
There there phoodoo. You should join forces with Frankie on his excellent ID blog, “intelligent reasoning”. Imagine how great a collaboration between you would be? I bet the whole internet would take notice!
phoodoo,
Phoodoo, they get upset with me because I expose them for what they are. My being put in moderation is something that makes me very proud as it shows that I am doing my job and doing it very well.
No one will debate me on the merits of ID vs evolutionism. And that says it all.
Frankie,
Invite Phoodoo to join your blogging team!
Because only you are concerned with evolutionism, we do evolution.
Richie:
LoL! Evolutionism is your alleged theory of evolution. Seeing that ID is not anti-evolution but is anti-evolutionism, there wouldn’t be anything to debate given ID vs evolution.
But thank you for proving that you don’t understand what is being debated.
Frankie,
No one’s debating evolutionism, chubs. Its Joeberish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism
“.. In the creation-evolution controversy, creationists often call those who accept the validity of the modern evolutionary synthesis “evolutionists” and the theory itself as “evolutionism.” Some creationists and creationist organizations, such as the Institute of Creation Research, use these terms in an effort to make it appear that evolutionary biology is a form of secular religion.”
Figures.
That is a lie. You owe Lizzie an apology.
I’ve said you can point out rule violations, PM me, and I will respond (though I can’t always do that immediately – I have a life outside TSZ).
I’m not usually impressed by hyperbole. You’d maybe do better sticking to the facts.
Off-topic to discuss moderation at other sites… but you have no evidence for your assertion that Lizzie couldn’t follow rules at UD. No explanation has ever been given as to why she was banned.
I’m not feeling it. All that has happened is that Frankie/Joe Gallien’s comments need an admin to approve them. They will still appear, in the thread where they were posted or in guano. Just as a matter of interest, are you aware that Joe Gallien remains banned at UD? Are you aware he is suspended from BioLogos for not following their rules on civil discourse despite warnings? That Joe Gallien was previously banned here for posting porn? That Lizzie agreed to Frankie (as Joe’s sock-puppet) to begin posting here, despite the ban? This site has been more than reasonable in the circumstances.
We’re so lucky to have you here to explain the scientific method to us. So, what exactly are you testing if you don’t have an hypothesis?
ID has testable hypotheses, Patrick. Evolutionism does not.
The evidence supports that claim- that Lizzie doesn’t post in good faith. Heck look at her post on allegedly producing CSI with NS
That is not true- you are trying to change the definition of “porn”. And do you know that link was posted? Because the moderators FAILED to do their job and they allowed personal attacks and substance-free drivel to be posted by evos in response to posts that show their beloved mechanism, natural selection, is impotent with respect to in universal common descent and also impotent as a designer mimic.
Do you realize that Biologos is run by hypocrites, liars and bluffing cowards? Of course they need to protect themselves as being exposed as such ruins everything they are trying to say.
UD- do you realize that you and your sock-puppets have been banned from there for posting nonsense and your usual bluffs?
It’s as if you are totally self-unaware
And those come before an hypothesis? What, then, are they testing?
Would you prefer the term “graphic portrayal of female genitalia”? Why don’t you try posting the same image at UD and see if KairosFocus thinks it’s porn?
Because Joe Gallien is utterly lacking in class and self control, even to the point of refusing to take responsibility for his actions?
Testable hypotheses come before a hypothesis? What are you babbling about now, Patrick?
It’s as if you have no clue at al.
Would you prefer the term “graphic portrayal of female genitalia”?Why don’t you try posting the same image at UD and see if KairosFocus thinks it’s porn?
Because Joe Gallien is utterly lacking in class and self control, even to the point of refusing to take responsibility for his actions?
Still clueless, Patrick. Now I know why you won’t debate me on the merits of ID vs evolutionism, ie the alleged theory of evolution. Talk about lacking class and self-control. Nice own goal
I’m just repeating what you wrote above:
I’d still like to know what you’re testing if you don’t have an hypothesis.
ID has testable hypotheses, just as I posted. Hypotheses is the plural of hypothesis.
It’s as if you are totally clueless. It is your position that doesn’t have testable hypotheses, Patrick. That must be what has you confused.
I look forward to you presenting them in detail in an OP, including their testable entailments. Surely such important information, the first ever testable hypothesis of intelligent design, needn’t wait for anyone else to post anything.
I’m simply responding to what you wrote: “The way it goes is the testable entailments come first and then the theory arises from that.” That’s quite a . . . unique perspective on the scientific method.
You first, Patrick. That way I will know what you will accept and you won’t be able to back peddle as you always do. If you refuse to do so I will know why.
And no, mine won’t be the first ever testable hypothesis for ID. And I already posted how to test ID on this blog- you choked on it
No, it isn’t. Testable hypotheses always precede theories.
I look forward to Patrick posting an OP that includes this alleged modern theory of evolution so we can see what it really entails. I look forward to him showing us how to test the claim that blind and mindless processes produced protein machines and the diversity of life.
We all know that will never happen, though
Since everybody knows Frankie is Joe Gallien, why not ban him for good? He just keeps repeating the same inanities anyway
Ah, that’s not what you said above. Thank you for clarifying.
We he and Phoodoo do give Onlookers a window into the mind and temperament of ID supporters..
Yes it is, You just have reading comprehension issues
He wasn’t banned for spouting inanities.
Yes, the only way to preserve what little dignity is left for the TSZ evolutionists they have to ban those who expose them as poseurs.
Why not just ban everyone who isn’t a devote evo? That way your circle-jerks will be uninterrupted.
I know
Elizabeth is a kind and merciful
dictatorsite owner.The site offers an Ignore Commenter function.
Doesn’t work in the comments page
But fair enough guys.
We need two especially hateful drooling idiots being nothing but asses to show the spawn of ID? Mung and FMM aren’t stupid enough trolls on their own?
If you want to play with him just say so. We certainly don’t need someone even ID/creationists end up banning to show what sorts ID attracts–esp. since he’s not very representative of the dull belief of most IDists. I’m certainly not questioning my decision to put him on “ignore.”
Glen Davidson
It was an inappropriate image for any general-interest site.
I’m guessing because you have no idea where the line is between normal, civilized behaviour and posting inappropriate graphic images on general-interest websites.
Good grief!!!
I have a fair bit of respect for the BioLogos crew, especially Dennis Venema, Kathryn Applegate, Ted Davies and Darrel Falk. It says a lot for your credibility that you describe BioLogos in such terms.
I think I’ve been banned and invited back as Alan Fox a few times over the years. I haven’t kept score with sockpuppets. Perhaps half a dozen: Aurelio Smith, Renard, Alicia Renard – can’t remember the others. I doubt you’d find an abusive remark in anything I’ve posted at UD. Difficult to know though why I was banned, as, in my experience the account just ceased to function without explanation. Did Barry ban you as JoeG? Did you get an explanation for being booted as Virgil Cain?
Tat’s right, obvioulsy! 🙂
I’m all in favor of verbally abusing the mods, but I think written abuse goes too far.
I’m not sure we allow uploading of voice recordings. I’ll see if there’s a plugin. In the meantime, post your Skype handle if you’d like to abuse us directly or your YouTube channel name if you don’t require realtime feedback.
Alan, you don’t have any credibility.
We have you and several other evos to fill that role. Nice own goal
…with Joe. Alan, you are unendorsed by Joe. Let us know how much sleep you lose.
No Richie, Alan doesn’t have any credibility at all. He lies about there being a modern theory of evolution. He lied about Darwin having a scientific theory of evolution- Darwin never said how to scientifically test his claims. And all he can do is trey to bluff his way through a discussion. Like all evos here he wouldn’t last an hour in an open debate on the alleged ToE.
Frankie,
Devistating!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnean_Society_of_London
“The first public exposition of the ‘Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection’, arguably the greatest single leap of progress made in biology, was presented to a meeting of the Linnean Society on 1 July 1858. At this meeting a joint presentation of papers by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace was made, sponsored by Joseph Hooker and Charles Lyell as neither author could be present.[9]”
evolution makes novel prediction, later confirmed:
http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/darwinism_and_the_age_of_earth
But you’ve had these pointed out to you repeatedly. But like a good creationist or KF, you just keep spouting your PRATTs.
Richie- nothing that you posted refutes what I said and a biological theory needs to make BIOLOGICAL predictions. The age of the earth doesn’t count. And you have been told that already.
Darwin did not posit a scientific theory of evolution as demonstrated by his lack of testability.
@ Rich
Feeling a little drowsy already! 🙂
I think we should seriously consider some sort of sanction against PRATT mantras.
Assuming this for the sake of argument… What the fuck does that matter? From the moment Darwin proposed his theory of natural selection, it was open to falsification by anyone who could present the evidence and the argument.
Joe, nobody in their right mind would bother giving you that attention. Stop looking for it and move on. I’m sure you’ll be happier.