Silverstreak Wonder - any chance you might return to this thread to take part in the discussion?
You seemed to think that you were being gagged, trapped, oppressed or something, but that’s not the case - there is plenty of scope for discussion, if you’re up for it.
If I admit that I don’t know what bellicose means, will you kick me out of this thread?
Ha. I’m just messin’ with you, tom. You remain my favorite mod, even if your calls puzzle the hell out of me sometimes.
I looked over the thread too and what I see was simply my beliefs, called ignorant by you, were told not to be allowed. I was NOT just told to take the origin of life to another thread, I was told not to post anything more in the thread, or answer, because I was too ignorant of your beliefs, that is the difference and it is a big one.
I had not posted in many hours, the thread was not being destroyed at all and said discussion of life origin went on. That was supposed to be what was so ignorant, right? Well my KNOWLEDGE of evolution was that “everything formed randomly with no creator” to best summarize.
That would include , to me, all of cosmology, the origins of matter, life, and why stuff changes over time after it exists. I didn’t even see the new rule I could not post till next day. I was going to add, yes, things can change in genetics and such in generations, we know that, look at dog breeds we did not used to have.
I assume this would be on topic with your opinion but I was never to post again in that thread because I believe AND STILL DO, that TOE means all things (INCLUDING LIFE) form randomly with no plan and change with no design beforehand. I think if you poll people on the street they would say yes to that as well as being “evolution”.
Leaving out the origin of life because it can’t fit in the randomness theory (because too complex, like finding a TV in the woods) is bad science method. If something does not fit the theory you want to just exclude it and force others to exclude it. I think what the mod tried to do was restrict all discussion to maybe just what was in Darwin’s book about animals and such. OK, but I had a broader memory of how evolution was taught to me to include the whole shebang, and no where did it say we can only talk about existing animals and not where they came from. I had no idea the origin of life had now been removed from evolutionary discussion at all. I also was going to mention how did we become self aware and all that but could not speak.
Lets turn it around then a bit, if to make life we discover it just can’t be made, and that a creator was needed, but all the other stuff was true in the theory, I bet almost everyone would still say evolution had been proven false. That’s because there is an intuition that you sure cannot leave life out and once you have a creator for that it makes sense then that the whole thing was a plan. I think you know that.
I am saying all this to show I was in fact giving my knowledge of evolution right as I remember it being taught, and I had never even heard of abio–whatever, that was my knowledge of it, right off my head. Now I am told because they renamed part of it later, I cannot have learned it that way???
I give up. Ban him!
Where the hell were you taught this?
Silverstreak Wonder, if you want to argue about what evolution is or isn’t, please do it in the thread about the subject, not here. You were not told to take your comments elsewhere because you challenged “our beliefs” (which is a highly inaccurate description of evolution). You were given that instruction because the mods felt your posts were off-topic. It’s true that most of what you’re saying about evolution is wrong, but this isn’t a personal issue.
Curtis Lemay’s denser younger brother, is that you?
[Moderator note]
Let’s refrain from insulting other posters in this forum.
Ooopsy, sorry, my bad, it won’t happen again.
(I intended it as a comparison, actually, not an insult, but I see your point!)
Oh nevermind. I have other places to be.
Including babby?
I think you just misunderstood what the thread was about, and because of that, posted in such a way as to appear to be hijacking it.
In any case, will you be returning to the other thread, to discuss your views on evolution?
Well I think everyone has expressed their opinion pretty much, and should I dare bring up some issue they don’t like it would just be the same argument all over. Besides, I was never given permission to post again in the first one, on topic as they say, or not. If you read the mods actions it was clear I was not to answer and that I was “done” there. Remember?
So I did post in the other one, to say I fear action for saying anything since it was already beat into me evolution has nothing to do with life, and I still just don’t believe that, so that is that, I said my piece there.
I noticed the other posts that are seeming to admit there is indeed just the link I said, and even saying the goal is to tie the 2 together, well I never separated them but sure got beat up for my view. They seem to be OK saying it, interesting.
I am having enough new trouble even talking about computers and logic now I don’t need more. Set this to music as I leave: "Its beginning to be a lot like Chi–na, every place I go…
Thanks, pedescribe. Koxigna’s posts were going over my head until you posted. :smack:
Silverstreak Wonder said:
Wow, did you really not understand what tomndebb said?
tomndebb said:
underlined for emphasis
“Hovind posturing” means acting like and carrying on in the manner of Hovind, i.e. Kent Hovind, a well-known young earth creationist and general anti-evolution wacko.
I’m seriously having trouble believing you mistook “posturing” for “posterior” - :dubious:
If you’re trying to be funny, it isn’t working, because we don’t know enough about you to know when you’re joking and serious. Frankly, you are coming off as trying to create problems rather than trying to contribute meaningfully.
Silverstreak Wonder said:
That wasn’t the problem. The problem was your continued refusal to listen to what everyone else in the thread was telling you.
John Cleese is a member of Monty Python, a British comedy sketch group that had a television show in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Monty Python is very familiar to a lot of the regulars on this board, and is quoted routinely.
Sorry you are not aware of the identities of the names being used. They are commonly seen around here.
Silverstreak Wonder said:
This is a major misconception, but a frequently encountered one. Unfortunately, it has been fostered by both sides of the Evolution/Creationism debate. I suggest starting a thread to discuss that topic, since it is technically not appropriate for this thread discussing the moderator action in the other thread.
And why is that? You were asked not to hijack one thread, and that was it. You weren’t told never to post about evolution or anything else. The only one who is making it into a larger issue is you.
Not taking the bait–not arguing. I do want to point out I did not open this thread, I did not make the issue out of it. I just answered the thread after it had many posts since it was about me, seems fair.
My fear I would again be shutdown were founded, all posters got booted in humble opinion just now for giving an opinion that computers could not or could be self aware, in our opinion. Not allowed, period. Sure glad I stayed out of that other trap now for sure!
No, I plan no ATMB thread about it, but if others decide to, I will speak too as a witness for them. No fight was going on, just repression for repression sake. The Chinese authority here is indeed repressive. At least it was not many hours later.
After searching the board to figure out what Silverstreak Wonder was talking about…
If a couple of posters in a thread are having a separate argument we sometimes ask them to start a new thread to continue discussing it. How does this equate to Chinese government-style repression in your mind?
Ahhhh, we were told warnings would be issued if we did not leave, and no fight or problem was even going on, and it killed a good discussion. Do I want to open a new one with that moderator around, no thanks.
We were not “just asked to start a new thread” we was whomped. What country are these mods in, anyway? Why stop a peaceful discussion? No one asked the mods opinion and I sure did not want it, doubt others did either. Isn’t this a discussion board?
C’mon, Marley, don’t try to hide those jackboots now.
Czarcasm asked that the computer topic be taken elsewhere, because that wasn’t the subject of the thread. He said warnings would be issued after the tangent kept going.
You were:
He took a harsher tone when this “pleading” was ignored. You think this is how it works in China?
Czarcasm’s in the notoriously repressive Pacific Northwest, I think. And all he did was ask that the tangent be taken to a new thread.