Please welcome AdminRandman

The "was" distributes. She was nominated and was requested.

Over the last year or so, can you tell me which member has had the most suspensions/warnings from admins?

By whom?

What's really occuring here guys is that you evos, as a group, have a hard time seeing past your own biasness, and so you see every creationist as poorly educated or as irrational because you cannot imagine someone fully understanding what you believe and still rejecting it based on factual grounds, and it seems from Percy's post that he may see it that way as well.But contrary to what you believe, the insular perspective of the evos here is not necessarily shared by intelligent and educated people as a whole. Take the recent Washington Post and NPR stories that, considering their liberal perspective, dealt a rather severe thrashing in their reporting of the evos at the Smithsonian and the evo scientific community in general.You guys are so biased that it seems incredible to you that their reporting is not the result of being misled, or you downplay it, and cannot, for the most part, see why anyone thinks the evo community has acted deplorably, but you gotta know when NPR and the Washington Post are echoeing the randman here, that perhaps I'm not the one way out on the fringe.And that's part of the reason I accepted the moderator position. I would like to help this place return to foster a sense of discussion rather than juvenile attempts to win debating points with the audience being so one-sided that regardless of veracity, you get an amen corner.Before you try to argue against someone, you should be able to articulate and understand their position. I am confident I can present and argue evolutionist arguments as well as anyone here. I am also confident that many of the evos here cannot articulate and argue the stances I take, nor other IDers, nor creationists, and don't really understand the nature of our criticism.It's up the forum members to make a choice. They can choose to try to understand their critics and engage their points, which sometimes occurs, or the evos here can present their canned arguments that we have heard ad nauseum and in which we unbelievers in ToE don't find convincing, and frequently never acknowledging the real issues raised.That's my perspective. I think it would surprise many here to awaken to the fact that claiming critics of ToE don't post here not because they cannot argue their points or are poorly educated, but simply because the childishness, rudeness, and lack of willingness to engage in discussion are so prevalent from the other side. What needs to happen is for the evolutionists here to stop and realize that most people are well-acquainted with their theories and beliefs already, but that many don't accept those theories, and take the time to learn why, instead of assuming it's just because they lie to themselves, or are brainwashed, stupid, poorly educated, etc,...If you cannot bring yourself to consider that a well-educated, reasonable person can reject ToE, then you probably ought not to be wasting your time on the forum anyway because you are not interested in discussion, but in trying to make yourself feel better by bashing people you look down upon.As far as myself, perhaps I am too proud, but considering my background, education, etc,...it just makes me laugh to think of people trying to look down upon me intellectually, considering that somehow I am not intelligent or ignorant, etc,.., I am insecure about some things like all of us, but not about my intelligence and education.This message has been edited by AdminRandman, 11-18-2005 08:18 PM

So, why is it that you have great difficulty in understanding what is required to support an argument?I assume that you have a science degree of some description, did your university allow you to submit essays without references?

Uh... are you trying to be funny by quote-mining me?

I believe it was Percy.

By Percy, so nothing dodgy there then?

randman, That's the pot calling the kettle black. The last post you made to me you refused to engage, based on the false excuse that I had attacked the bible. Like that has anything to do with the rightness or wrongness of anything! Is this the action of someone who "engages their point"?You also had the logical fallacy "ad hoc" defined for you, had it shown why your arguments met the standards in order to be fallacious, & then without any explanation or refutation, simply declared your arguments "sound". Is this the action of someone who "engages their point"?I could list all of the other points you refused to to address along with their associated excuses, but time limits me. But please don't pretend, even to yourself, that you engage the points raised.The pattern is that you make a crap argument, it's logical or evidential flaw is pointed out, then you enter evade mode. So why don't you understand that you need sound premises in order to infer a sound conclusion? Why don't you understand that if you lack knowledge of your premises, then your conclusion will be as poor as your premises? Why can't you supply references?MarkThis message has been edited by mark24, 11-18-2005 06:39 PM

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

Mark, this isn't the place, but if you want someone to respond and discuss a scientific claim, you shouldn't resort to switching the topic to trying to get me to defend my interpretions of the Bible on a science thread. Maybe I over-reacted, but I am not interested in maintaining a discussion with you any further as long as that's your approach, even if that's just a side issue you throw out there.I would be glad to discuss my interpretations of the Bible with you on a different thread.This message has been edited by randman, 11-18-2005 06:49 PM

quote:

---

I think it would surprise many here to awaken to the fact that claiming critics of ToE don't post here not because they cannot argue their points or are poorly educated, but simply because the childishness, rudeness, and lack of willingness to engage in discussion are so prevalent from the other side.

---

Why don't you set a good example to everyone, now that you have the special position of Moderator, of how to debate in an honest fashion.I am still waiting for you to support or retract your claims in the "welfare myths" thread, randman.Either provide the evidence to back up your claims, as requested, or withdraw them.I believe this is rule #4 of the Forum Rules:I've challenged you with a fresh new thread which you have woefully ignored. Please support your position there, with more than just "I once knew a black preacher in this one town and he said..."I'd also like you to keep the following rule, #2, in mind as well: I'll look for your new, improved, always-follows-the-forum-rules-persona in our thread.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-18-2005 06:56 PM

Shraf, I assume you made an honest mistake here and just didn't see my reply which has been sitting there for awhile now.Edit to add I missed your latest reply and see it now. Please note that I did reply before and it sat there for awhile.This message has been edited by randman, 11-18-2005 07:09 PM

randman, I didn't switch the topic, all three of your explanations are logically fallacious, as described & unrefuted. In addition, one of your explanations is actually at odds with the bible, a partial irrelevance, but fun to see you resort to arguments that contradict your belief.But this is exactly what I mean. I have just accused you of: And you fulfill the prophecy. You have no answer, so invent a bullshit excuse, & run away.All the high falutin' talk of your education & intellectual integrity comes to nought. You always refuse to engage when you can't respond in a logical, reasonable way, which seems to be most of the time as far as I can see.MarkThis message has been edited by mark24, 11-18-2005 07:14 PM

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

Congrats and enjoy!

---

Nobody can make you feel inferior without your permission. -Eleanor Roosevelt-

moved here.This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 11-18-2005 09:53 PM

---

אָרַח