Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0

Actually, Percy, with respect, that's not what the OP says. Nor does the originator state in Msg #8 that he doesn't want to debate whether or not the accounts are contradictory.In fact, in the OP, after stating "Here is the argument," hepteract posts the two creation accounts, points out apparent contradictions, and says, "This contradiction seems to debunk the inerrancy of the bible. This thread is to provide a place for debate as to whether or not it actually does."In Msg 8 he merely declines to join ICANT's thread "because your thread explicitly states that the bible is the final authority. My thread explicitly states that the bible is being questioned. Therefore, the threads should remain separate."I see no cautioning against arguments for non-contradiction there.

From your lips to my godless ears...Never mind.

---

Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

Despite my considerable respect for Coyote and Panda (both on my short list of members whose posts I always read), I disagree.I've seen the board sometimes dominated by science threads, sometimes not. The rising tide of political threads tends to occur during high-pitch political moments and tends to recede on its own.Like it or not, science is a political issue. The fact of evolution and its denial are political issues. Demonstrable global warming and its denial are political issues. The teaching of ID or creationism in schools is a political issue.There are few places on the web where you can access political commentary on these issues by working scientists with an allegiance to reason and evidence. I'd hate to see this one diminished.There are facts in politics as surely as there are facts in physics--and far more lies that require refutation. Many of those lies are told either to denigrate science for political ends, or they are told with a reckless disregard for their subversion of science in particular and reason in general. The days when a scientist could emerge from the lab like an apolitical Rip Van Winkle and find that science's status and funding have improved yet again are gone.I think the appropriate solution for folks who want more directly science-oriented threads is to start them.

---

I know there's a balance, I see it when I swing past.
-J. Mellencamp

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

I do understand your concern, but I think balance will restore itself.Riled up forums (e.g., here, this election season) usually revert to their focus.And the science is strong in this one.

---

I know there's a balance, I see it when I swing past.
-J. Mellencamp

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

I've no idea what you did or didn't do.I also thought chuck's comments were quite as offensive as hooah's, but sometimes you have to pick your battles.The E side of EvC is supposed to champion reason and tolerance, and words really aren't sticks or stones. Chuck made a fool of himself--don't follow in his wake.You've certainly made your point. Let it go.

The essential problem with the Cheers/Jeers system is that each member has an infinite supply.I've noticed the "backdating" of them, too, as well as their use simply because the jeered post, while without personal attack or other off-topic comment, represents an opposing point of view.As it stands, with an endless supply of brickbats and no date limit on targets, it promotes juvenile behavior. I don't like the system, and I'd opt out if I could, losing both the rating and the ability to impact other members' ratings.Failing that, there should be an expiration date on when they can be applied to a post, and each member should have a limited store per time period.

So...if I post one negative reaction to one of your posts, that's my eternal vote on you as a poster?That doesn't make any sense, either.Am I misunderstanding your point?

IMJ is a quagmire.Declare victory and move on.

Am I to understand that:1) Faith and Belief is not a debate forum?2) Faith and belief are the only acceptable grounds for posts/assertions in the Faith and Belief forum?3) Those without faith and belief do not belong--and are not welcome--in this forum?