pangloss

Notice that Sarfati abandoned the threads in the 'Science Lab' on varves/laminae - apparently, AiG doesn't teach its chemists the difference between varves and plain old laminae.

Of course, showing this has not stopped Jonny from posting the same crap about Berthault's "experiments" in other threads.

And yet another by the way - in my email exchange with "Momma Dee Dee", I referred to Socrates as Sarfati repeatedly, and she di dnot correct me or deny it.

Could be just a coincidence, but....

Oh, and one other thing - after I had had my "Refuting Evolution" review pulled - twice - from PropagandaWeb, I PMed and complained. I was told that it was seen as 'baiting Socrates'.

If Socrates is not Sarfati, how in the world is posting something critical of Sarfati's book baiting him?

Yet another piece of the puzzle...

pangloss

Sherbear had lamented about the ad hominem fallacy and how it was bad.

I post:

Really? Would you feel the same way if a fellow creationist called an active forum participant an idiot?


Referring to Sarfati calling tgamble an idiot (among many others, I am sure)


I check the thread today:

Really? Would you feel the same way if a fellow creationist called an active forum participant an Edited by a moderator.?

RufusAtticus

DDW is running around apologizing for Socrates's bad behavior again. According to her, it is wrong to make a parody of a person's name, but to dimunitize it is okay. I bet she calls grown black men "boy" too.

pz

What is wrong with these people that they continue to make excuses for Socrates? What kind of leverage does he have on them?

I mean, if you or I were to start posting with Socrates' attitude here, despite our dedication to the True & Rightful Cause of Atheism and Evolutionism, the admins would be putting our testicles in the wringer. They sure wouldn't be trying to defend our every insult. And if we persisted, we'd find ourselves banned without regrets.

RufusAtticus

Something involving "ends," "means," and "justifies" enters my mind.

Perhaps they're simply a bunch of baptists and since Socrates bad behavor is tolerated and encouraged because he is saved, and once saved always saved.

pz

Maybe they're a bunch of closet atheists, because the end being justified seems to be increasing the disrepute of theistic views. They are doing a really good job of that.

Bubba

For once, PZ, I think your wrong. I've never known an atheist to be THAT much of an asshole...

Why doesn't Rufus or Jimmy or someone invite Socratestes to an open debate in our debate forum here or in the gym forum at propagandaweb? Just a thought.

Although I do admit, Socrates does make Evolseptic and Douglas Bender look like models of rational thought and gentlemanly discourse.

In Darwin

Bubba

pz

I try, but every time I take a step in that direction, the admins and my fellow mods all press the button to activate my electro-collar.

RufusAtticus

Because I for one don't have the time right now for such a commitment, especially if it is to TW.

Bubba

Given the craphole that TW has become, I can't really blame you.

Bubba