pz

Check again. In Christ Dougie is the one who said he was not going to post at all on II. He is apparently determined to instead babble at individuals through personal messages.

In that context, I told him to go away...in a personal message. If he'd like to instead join in the public discussion, no one is stopping him. He hasn't been banned.

Principia

Len, len, len...

You and I both know why you have increased your trolling activities. They strangely enough coincide with the recent re-opening of a barroom that we both frequented.

So, I pity your self-hatred. But really, take it elsewhere.

[ November 30, 2002: Message edited by: Principia ]</p>

Principia

[post deleted]

[ November 30, 2002: Message edited by: Principia ]</p>

Bubba

Actually, Geo Theo, Amie, HelenM, Agapao, Rev. Joshua, Wildernese...myself.

Lots of thiests post here without being harassed. I've said a few genuinely stupid things here on infidels and no one has ever really given me a hard time. On the contrary, I've had lots of really interesting discussions with people about science and life.

Every time I've had a question it has been answered honestly and politely.

So Leonarde, your wrong...we're not all Trolls.

Lest you doubt me your welcome to come to my sunday school class tomorrow morning.

Of course, being a high school/junior high school aged class we do have a lower age limit of twelve years. So if your going to bring Langan please bring someone to explain the tougher concepts to him.

Bubba

DrLao

Huh? I had nothing to do with making this thread. I've stopped reading the CL threads a long time ago... come to think of it, I don't think I ever started. They've actually chased me out of the upstairs at ARN. It is fun to read the summaries here though.

leonarde

Posted by Bubba: [added via edit]I never said that there are ONLY athiest-in-troll clothing types here, I merely pointed out the paucity of NON-evolutionary synthesis adherents on FORUM which purports to discuss the evo versus creationist question(s).[end of edit change] And I merely pointed out
that verbal abuse was a standard here, a standard so entrenched that MODERATORS freely use it and think that it constitutes an integral part of "discussion" (see pz's posts on pages 1 and 2).

Cheers!

[ November 30, 2002: Message edited by: leonarde ]</p>

Bubba

Len, if you want we'll set up a seperate thread and let you defend Langan and his writings if you wish. Or, he's perfectly able to come here and debate if he wishes.

Bubba

Daggah

Vander earned every bit of the abuse we threw at him. He's a liar.

pz

This forum and this whole dang website are dedicated to the principles of reason, rather than irrational superstition. That is why there is such a dearth of creationist/IDist adherents here -- they rely on the latter, not the former.

Now, since you took exception to my characterization of this ugly, clumsy neologism "syndiffeonesis" as idiotic, perhaps you can take a moment to actually defend it. Is there any part of this bizarre CTMU thing that you find reasonable?

Clutch

Now there a gorgeous example of the sort of wildly selective interpretation of data that indicates a creationist.

What was thrown at Vanderzyden, long before anyone started calling him what he is (see Daggah's post above), was pages and pages and pages of data, references, examples and counter-examples, answers to his questions, challenges to his claims... a full-credit course and more in evolutionary biology, given for free by some truly outstanding teachers.

Vanderliar's typical responses were either to leave the thread without any comment (to subsequently claim he had answered challenges and debunked data on some other thread), or to simply announce that none of what was offered amounted to evidence.

That len could cite Vanderwhiner as someone who came in good faith but was treated badly shows nothing about this board, but shows a lot about len.