|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Showcase Forum Issues and Requests | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
DaveScot writes: Good grief. The edit history is starting to look like like old source code! Perhaps you'd like the opportunity to write some new source code?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5938 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
I wish to ask for permission to the topic by John A. Davidson in the Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis thread. I am curious to persue the physics behind the mechanism he seems to be proposing. I assume that he can explain the nature of the prescription in his title, and I am genuinley interested to hear what this entails.
Edited by sidelined, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John A. Davison  Inactive Member |
Sure. The more the merrier. I would only ask that the dialogue be related to the substance of the PEH. I have discarded the Darwinian model entirely except for its very limited capacity to generate varieties. For many life forms even that seems to be impossible.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
Herepton has requested that a new debater be assigned to his Why is the process blind ? thread in the [forum=-37] forum. Anyone interested please apply here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5902 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
As a clarification, Ray has specifically requested a Theistic Evolutionist be assigned to the thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John A. Davison  Inactive Member |
I am not interested in a private conversation with anyone. I welcome comments from anyone on the thread already available for the purpose of defending the Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis. So far I have nothing to defend.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3078 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
This is not a call-out.
Based on this thread by Quetzal I think we could have a productive dialogue. The thread and what is written could not be anymore objective. Both camps could do very well by absorbing what Quetzal wrote in that OP. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EZscience Member (Idle past 5184 days) Posts: 961 From: A wheatfield in Kansas Joined: |
Percy, it appears I am now unable to reply to Herepton in the 'Why is evolution blind?' showcase.
Has Ray been granted to the right to admit and dismiss his opponents as he sees fit? EZ Edited by EZscience, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
Quetzal must express his interest in debating you by making a request here. His above post appears to be a clarification about the type of evolutionist you would prefer to debate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
EZscience writes: Has Ray been granted to the right to admit and dismiss his opponents as he sees fit? In effect, yes, and I see Ray has changed his mind. Your access to [forum=-37] has been restored.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
rgb has asked yet again to debate with Ray in the showcase. I ask that permission be granted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5902 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Let me start by thanking Ray for his kind comments on my OP/Topic "Common Ground". However, for clarification, having had the opportunity to engage Ray in previous topics, I have to state that I have utterly no interest in discussing anything with him. To be fair, with one exception, I have no interest in engaging any of the folks who have been invited to participate in the Showcase forum, having had experience with all of them in the past.
For reference, the one exception is Peter Borger if he should return. I would very much enjoy involvement in a discussion of his idiosyncratic reinterpretation of Raup's Nemesis hypothesis in light of Peter's "creaton wave theory". Having a more than passing interest in and some slight knowledge of extinction theory, I feel that topic would be fascinating. Sorry Percy, I'm afraid I find the Showcase concept to be otherwise highly problematic, although I wish you the best of luck with it. "Cuisve hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare." Cicero
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
Quetzal writes: For reference, the one exception is Peter Borger if he should return. I would very much enjoy involvement in a discussion of his idiosyncratic reinterpretation of Raup's Nemesis hypothesis in light of Peter's "creaton wave theory". Having a more than passing interest in and some slight knowledge of extinction theory, I feel that topic would be fascinating. Calling Peter Borger... Calling Peter Borger... Anyone know where he is?
Sorry Percy, I'm afraid I find the Showcase concept to be otherwise highly problematic... As does most of the moderator team, but expectations have to be set aside during experimentation. Think of Showcase as just one more experiment to help us understand how best to structure the discussion. In this case we're studying whether there are any beneficial effects from eliminating the distractions, like posts that are really only saying the equivalent of "you're an idiot", and like the piling on that often happens as many evolutionists jump into debate with a single creationist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
remember bootcamp?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
arachnophilia writes: remember bootcamp? Sure! But the more important question is, "What were the lessons of Bootcamp?" dBoard 3.0 will have an interesting new feature. As I describe this keep in mind that this will be a capability of dBoard 3.0 that can be enabled or disabled through the board's control panel. In other words, the presence of the capability does not mean that EvC Forum would necessarily use it or parts of it. That decision would be up to the moderator team. In dBoard 3.0, threads will be able to be defined as inclusive or exclusive. By default, all threads are inclusive - everyone is permitted access unless explicitly excluded. But a thread can also be set as exclusive, which means everyone is excluded unless explicitly granted access. This dBoard capability would, for example, allow us to create a forum that grants regular users the ability to start inclusive and exclusive threads. This means users could start an exclusive thread and choose who they want to participate, or an inclusive thread where they choose who's not allowed to participate. Think how much more smoothly things would run if Faith could start threads where Jar wasn't allowed to participate!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024