March, 2005, Posts of the Month

Jar also get's credit. I only expanded on his argument.

Poster: Faith
Forum: Is It Science
Topic: Is Evolutionist Disparagement of Creationism Justified?
Message: 10This is just one of the well thought out and superbly articulated statements of Faith, who is proving to be such a great asset to the creationist team here, exemplary of the kind we need more of. {Made the "10" a clickable link. Also added the subtitle - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-21-2005 03:16 AM

Name: Percy
Forum:Is it Science?
Thread:Is Evolutionist Disparagement of Creationism Justified?
Post: 54Percy, yet again, lays out an extremely clear, well-written analysis of a particular poster's argument flaws while couching it in a wider view of the Creo/Evo debate. {Made the "54" a clickable link. Also added the subtitle - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-21-2005 03:15 AM

Although I am not exactly fond of the quote buz presented, and I have plenty of factual issues with Faith's posts, I want to back up Buz's nomination in that I think Faith is at the very least being extremely articulate. Very good writing style. I would love to see Faith make it more into specific science threads in order to deal with factual issues.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

I want to back up Buz's nomination in that I think Faith is at the very least being extremely articulate. Very good writing style.

---

I agree 100%. Faith is an excellent writer and is very articulate.

quote:

---

I would love to see Faith make it more into specific science threads in order to deal with factual issues.

---

I think this is very, very unlikely to happen anytime soon.Did you see the fit Faith pitched in that thread because someone didn't let her/him weasel out of being accountable for what they actually wrote?I would like to think that Faith will eventually be able to handle the minute scrutiny and dissection that goes on in the science threads, but I have some serious doubts.I don't think Faith particularly likes being rigorous and precise when examining his/her own ideas and claims. In fact, I think Faith avoids it like the plague.

Whether I did or did not is beside the point for this thread. I certainly saw things that I thought were wrong, and things that might suggest future issues, but I want to set that aside to commend what excellent writing I did see.To be frank, I felt like Faith put me to shame in clarity and evenness of writing. I have not seen that level of performance from anyone in the creo camp, and very very few in the evo side (and yes that includes me).I'll hold my tongue about Faith's prospects till if/when we see Faith in the other threads. I note that you are forewarning me not to hold my breath, and perhaps I'll take that advice. But I want to underscore my interest in seeing something more develop.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Discussion of the nominations beyond "Here, here! Well deserved!" or "Thank you!" probably isn't appropriate.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Name: schrafinator
Forum: Is it science?
Thread: Is Evolutionist Disparagement of Creationism Justified?
Post #: #105I particular enjoyed this defense of science against the cry of prejudice; I hope Faith takes time to understand (and trust) the content. {Changed the "thread" info. The original had been the subtitle of the message. - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-21-2005 07:47 PM

thanks Pink!

Name: Holmes
Forum: Is It Science?
Thread: Is Evolutionist Disparagement of Creationism Justified?
Post #: 185 and moreI cite message 185 only because it is (at the moment) Holmes' most recent posting at the (fast moving) topic. He actually has a series of fine messages there. 185 may well not be the best of the bunch.Moose

IMHO, I don't think a post that disparages as "wacko" an opinion that may well represent a minority viewpoint at this forum, yet nevertheless was defended with evidence within the guidelines of the forum, really deserves consideration as "Post of the Month".

Wow. Your first post in a month and a half and it disputes a POTM?
I guess you're not bitter or anything...Perhaps the choice of "wacko" was not the best, yet it was a great defense against the argument that only creos get labeled as such and piled upon, while evos slap each other on the backs while ignoring each other's wacko arguments. In other words, the "disparaging" comments you found personally offensive directly countered the point at hand, that the evo side is specifically prejudiced against creos.It was also an aside in a rather lengthy post, the latter half of which I found exceptional.Apologies to admins and other members for discussion in the POTM forum; I simply wanted to make a quick defense of schraf's post and my choice.

This is not a forum to discuss POTM nominations. Take it elsewhere please.

---

Name: Sylas
Thread: Tired Light
Post: #236Sylas has been putting up these types of clear, structured posts throughout the thread. It's not just about being right--it's about taking the time to explain it in a clean, progressive manner.It's so easy to learn from Sylas. Thanks as always.

I'd like to second this nomination, and I'd also like to include PaulK's recent messages as worth reading because while I think what he's saying still needs refinement (it feels like he's still thinking through some of the logical contingencies), it is very thought provoking. And I'd especially like to include Faith for acting as so effective a foil for the evolutionist point of view, for contributing so many articulate and well-argued posts, and for sticking with the discussion in a venue where she's well out-numbered.--Percy