Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Fedmahn Kassad · 02-21-2005, 03:58 PM

A couple of people have asked about which posts of mine were deleted at ARN prior to my banning/suspension. (They still haven't answered any e-mail, so I don't know which it is).

Here was the first one:

-------------------------------
An Extraordinary Bit of Hypocrisy

I have been working on a couple of replies that I will post this evening or tomorrow. There are two items that I believe need addressing in the interim.

First, since Walter will share neither the reviewers’ comments nor his paper, I was interested in what the other side of the story was. So, I contacted a couple of the reviewers and asked for their version of the story. I won’t share the full extent or the identity, but one wrote back “He has of course distorted the facts to suit his own claims�?. Naturally, I was shocked! But he continued:

Quote:

I did not of course "suppress" his paper, as he claims - I rejected it for publication, which is rather different.

This is despite the fact that I did agree with a lot of what he wrote. Then problem was that it was essentially all old stuff, known to me and to many others in the 1970's. Here is an analogy. If someone wrote a paper for a math journal saying 2+2 = 4, you could not disagree with what was written, but you would not recommend the paper for publication.

The second matter is a bit more serious, IMO. If you have read this thread, any of Walter’s previous debates, or spent any time on his website, you are aware that he frequently makes an issue out of his opponents’ anonymity. Given that, I am sure you would agree that it would extraordinarily hypocritical for Walter to engage in that which he has so often criticized. Yet he has done exactly that:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...47d52af811547b

Note the postings from anonymous poster “IThinkSo�?. This poster speaks of Walter in the 3rd person. Some examples (there are many):

Quote:

IThinkSo: It's not a moot point whether you "double" ReMine's numbers. You
misrepresented ReMine. You have "rules" for creationists, but not for evolutionists. Your double standards are not a moot point.

Quote:

IThinkSo: If you want to be taken seriously you'll have to stop misrepresenting what ReMine addresses.

Quote:

IThinkSo: You just contradicted yourself. (You contradicted your original accusations against ReMine.) ReMine's argument is not about the difference between
living humans and living chimps.

Quote:

IThinkSo: You say evolutionists don't know the numbers. Therefore they cannot possibly have solved Haldane's Dilemma, in agreement with ReMine's thesis.

Imagine my absolute shock to learn that this anonymous poster was no other than Walter ReMine:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...cbf35e116b23cb

Here he is, a month later, now signing his name to the postings. I have to wonder, given his obsession with the anonymity of his opponents, what his supporters here at ARN have to say about such rank hypocrisy. I should say that this should forever put an end to ReMine’s harping on anyone’s anonymity, since he himself is guilty (and this wasn’t the first time, I suspect).

Texas

Fedmahn Kassad · 02-21-2005, 04:02 PM

That post was responded to by "Mung", whose post is still on the board. Here I quote his post and respond. Both of my posts were deleted and I was banned for "attacking" another poster.

----------------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by Mung:
[QB]

Quote:

Originally posted by Texas:
[qb]Here he is, a month later, now signing his name to the postings. [/qb]

Perhaps Walter decided that he should not himself post anonymously. Sounds like just the opposite of hypocrisy to me. Amazing how reality can be turned on its head in order to make an irrelevant point that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Ad hominem at that.[/QB]

No ad hominem at all. Walter has for years railed against posters regarding their anonymity. For years. Say that to yourself. Yet later he made a decision to start posting and supporting himself in the 3rd person. Anonymously. Just what he had railed against - for years. At that moment, he was guilty of rank hypocrisy. Oh, and this just happened to occur last month!

Maybe you do not understand what the words "hypocritical" or “hypocrite�? mean? Look them up. I only bring it up because he was making a point to bring up my anonymity earlier in this thread. But you show your true colors by condoning such behavior. I can tell you if a fellow evolutionist had done it, I certainly would not be defending that behavior.

Maybe he decided he was being a hypocrite and thought he should stop. Or maybe someone figured out who he was and he didn’t have a choice. Maybe Walter will tell us. Regardless, he has no business chastising anyone for being anonymous when he has chosen that path himself from time to time. I am sure he had his reasons. He can be sure that everyone who chooses to be anonymous has theirs. But if he is going to make an issue of it, well, glass houses and such.

Texas

pangloss · 02-22-2005, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedmahn Kassad

A couple of people have asked about which posts of mine were deleted at ARN prior to my banning/suspension. (They still haven't answered any e-mail, so I don't know which it is).

Here was the first one:

-------------------------------
An Extraordinary Bit of Hypocrisy

I have been working on a couple of replies that I will post this evening or tomorrow. There are two items that I believe need addressing in the interim.

First, since Walter will share neither the reviewers’ comments nor his paper, I was interested in what the other side of the story was. So, I contacted a couple of the reviewers and asked for their version of the story. I won’t share the full extent or the identity, but one wrote back “He has of course distorted the facts to suit his own claims�?. Naturally, I was shocked! But he continued:

I just about fell off my chair when laser_thing, I mean, Ithinkso, I mean ReMine boasted in response that you had supported his version of events!

These guys are SHAMELESS!!!

Sickening. :huh:

pangloss · 02-28-2005, 01:46 PM

Nothing major, but I was just lurking at the cloaca recently, and I get a kick out of how big a deal they make out of the number of people that visit the site ("Our visitor record is 97, set on 12-22-2004 12:01 PM."). They apparently believe that their little propaganda board has some sort of relevance.

Then I noticed something on this site - at the time I am writing this post, there are 70 people viewing the Political Discussions forum and 47 viewing the Evolution forum alone.
By the standards of the bean counters at ARN (the cloaca), this obviously means that Infidels has more influence on the public than they do!

Fedmahn Kassad · 03-01-2005, 07:01 PM

Well, they kicked me off the thread. Apparently, Mod 6 can't handle the truth. I pointed out that what ReMine is actually trying to do is to use Haldane's Dilemma to prove that evolution couldn't happen. ReMine asked "Can you provide an exact quote from me showing that?" So, I replied and got suspended for this:

Quote:

Yes, let’s play games. You can be “coy�? Walter. I shall be “cut through the bull�? Texas. If you wanted to play by the rules of a court of law, I would have you convicted in very short order. Remember, I have read your book. I have read your website. I have engaged you before. I have encountered your “1,667 are not enough�? shtick lots of times. Besides your NMSR debate (which was an entertaining digression) you have been a one-trick pony since you came on to the scene. “Haldane, Haldane, Haldane�?, blah, blah, “1,667 are not enough�?, “evolutionists aren’t making this clear�?, blah, blah, “I don’t have to defend my argument, you have to prove me wrong�?, blah, blah, “it’s in my book�?. Well, at least you didn’t deny that this is your purpose. I suppose you want me to believe that your actual purpose is to make a scientific contribution toward our understanding of genetics? I suppose your use of bombastic and condescending language to make your argument is the typical way one makes a contribution to science?

I guess that was more than the hero-worshippers could handle.

FK

KC · 03-01-2005, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedmahn Kassad

I guess that was more than the hero-worshippers could handle.

Well, they will claim it was a 'featured thread' with zero tolerance. Now they can celebrate your banishment and point to the rules, saying you did it to yourself. However, I think there wasn't much point in continuing. One can only take that passive-aggressive style of argumentation so long without losing it.

KC

Fedmahn Kassad · 03-01-2005, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC

Well, they will claim it was a 'featured thread' with zero tolerance. Now they can celebrate your banishment and point to the rules, saying you did it to yourself. However, I think there wasn't much point in continuing. One can only take that passive-aggressive style of argumentation so long without losing it.

KC

For a feature thread, they certainly let Walter and Mung get away with a lot of insults and bombast. When Walter kept complaining about anonymity even after they warned him, they merely closed the thread for 24 hours. They definitely apply a different standard, as is typical of creto boards.

Anyway, I was pretty bored with the argument anyway. I made the points I wanted to make. The next time Walter pops up somewhere else claiming that Haldane's dilemma is an evolution-buster, he will get hammered with the same questions. The next time he claims that Crow suppressed his paper, he is going to get hammered with Crow's own words that showed he beat Walter to the punch by 35 years.

All in all, it was well worth the effort.

FK

KC · 03-01-2005, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedmahn Kassad

For a feature thread, they certainly let Walter and Mung get away with a lot of insults and bombast. When Walter kept complaining about anonymity even after they warned him, they merely closed the thread for 24 hours. They definitely apply a different standard, as is typical of creto boards.

Anyway, I was pretty bored with the argument anyway. I made the points I wanted to make. The next time Walter pops up somewhere else claiming that Haldane's dilemma is an evolution-buster, he will get hammered with the same questions. The next time he claims that Crow suppressed his paper, he is going to get hammered with Crow's own words that showed he beat Walter to the punch by 35 years.

All in all, it was well worth the effort.

FK

Agreed. In a less protected environment, Walter will get quite a pasting from now on, given what we now know.

KC

pangloss · 03-02-2005, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC

Agreed. In a less protected environment, Walter will get quite a pasting from now on, given what we now know.

KC

But do you think Wally will venture to less protected forums?

His recent foray at sci.bio.evolution suddenly stopped when he started getting bitch-slapped at ARN.

I don't know - the guy has such an overblown sense of self-importance that he may actually not see that he has lost his little war.

pangloss · 03-02-2005, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedmahn Kassad

Well, they kicked me off the thread. Apparently, Mod 6 can't handle the truth. I pointed out that what ReMine is actually trying to do is to use Haldane's Dilemma to prove that evolution couldn't happen. ReMine asked "Can you provide an exact quote from me showing that?" So, I replied and got suspended for this:

I guess that was more than the hero-worshippers could handle.

FK

Well, nobody/Mod6/junkyardfrog/gom is one of the stupider, more dishonest cretins I have run across in some time. He seems to think little mantras like referring to DNA as 'the programming of Life' or 'God's programming' actually means something. He is also one of those who claim to have been an evolutionist until he 'did some research' and discovered some 'facts' which showed him that not only was evolution wrong, but that YECism was right. Ask him what research he did, what these facts are, you get silence.

Anyway, you could start a rule 9 thread.....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-28-2005, 01:46 PM	#14
pangloss Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 1,302	Nothing major, but I was just lurking at the cloaca recently, and I get a kick out of how big a deal they make out of the number of people that visit the site ("Our visitor record is 97, set on 12-22-2004 12:01 PM."). They apparently believe that their little propaganda board has some sort of relevance. Then I noticed something on this site - at the time I am writing this post, there are 70 people viewing the Political Discussions forum and 47 viewing the Evolution forum alone. By the standards of the bean counters at ARN (the cloaca), this obviously means that Infidels has more influence on the public than they do!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.