Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Principia · 08-26-2002, 07:42 PM

Watch a game of "guess the author" trying to bash Dawkins, <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000289" target="_blank">backfire</a> in a most amusing fashion:

Quote:

Ok here is an easy one..who wrote

�Physics books may be complicated, but�.the objects and phenomena that a physics book describes are simpler than a single cell in the body of its author. And the author consists of trillions of those cells, many of them different from each other, organized with intricate architecture and precision engineering into a working machine capable of writing a book�.Each nucleus�contains a digitally coded database larger, in information content, than all 30 volumes of the Encyclopedia Brittanica put together. And this figure is for each cell, not all the cells of the body put together�

No google searches allowed
Vivid

EDIT: follow-up, conflict with <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000001" target="_blank">moderator</a> of his own ranks:

Quote:

Hi mturner, and all:

Dennis Wagner (ARN Chairman of Board) asked some arn members to help moderate, and to review the rule changes before implementation. I'll be moderator #4. Other moderators may prefer to remain anonymous.

One of your fellow members suggested a loose enforcement of the three post rule, and Dennis agreed. Dennis also mentioned that these rules would not be hardwired for awhile until other members had a chance to comment, and we pass a successful trial period. (I'm only paraphrasing, but I think I got that mostly right.)

I think the one new thread per member per day rule is aimed at needless, unfocused thread proliferation. I don't think the rule is aimed at members like mturner and julbon who provide relevent news posts. Perhaps Dennis would consider adding a "news forum" where the 1 post/member/day rule would not be strictly enforced.

I think most will agree that changes were warranted. When threads deteriorate to flame wars, ARN serves no purpose.

I'm not quite sure yet what my powers are as member-moderator. I haven't even attempted sign on as my new alter-ego yet. Hopefully, I won't have to. I'm really only posting now to figure out what my member number is!

-jazz

post edit to add P.S. - I see Dayton has made similar suggestion relative to a news forum!

[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

KC · 08-27-2002, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Scientiae:
Watch a game of "guess the author" trying to bash Dawkins, <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000289" target="_blank">backfire</a> in a most amusing fashion:

[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

The twelve-page gap for an ellipse is the second-biggest one I've seen. There was one Darwin quote I saw that had an ellipse span several chapters.

For all Vividbleu's damage control, if your ellipse has to span that far, you really have no business quoting the material that way.

Cheers,

KC

pangloss · 08-27-2002, 05:38 AM

Vivid was one of the ARNiots that I much loathed prior to being banned. Between him, Light Panther, Jazzraptor, and Tweedles dum and dummer, I really don' tmiss that slag pit much...

Principia · 08-27-2002, 05:31 PM

Quote:

ARN#4 since you have not deemed it worthy of your time to respond to my private message I am posting this in an open forum

Jazzraptor on another thread asked

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any rate, I apologize for being too harsh. I've just surveyed a number of threads, and I'm generally pissed off at the whole board for not having any sort of respect for opposing views. (Where are those moderators when you need them, hmm?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jazz in the case of ARN Mod # 4 he or she is to busy closing down threads after allowing an anti IDist to get off one last cheap shot off against me on the �guesss the author� thread. Yes, the �guess the author� thread had to be closed . Like rabid dogs a pack of anti Idst has taken a �game show � thread and turned it into a feedy frenzy against a pro Idst. Never mind that not a one of that rabble has been able to substantiate any of their charges that the quote I used of Dawkins in any way shape or form misrepresented or misquoted the man.

Of course this sadly is a pattern that is common on this board and with Moderators like #4 it does not seem to be going away any time soon. Where was ARN # 4 when I repeatedly asked from the �rabid pack� to factually demonstrate where I misrepresented and misquoted Dawkins? Where was MOD# 4 when this �rabid pack� kept evading providing any facts to demonstrate that which they accused me of? When does Mod# 4 show up? After PZ takes his or her cheap shot, laughs about it, then closes the thread.

ARN#4 you need to go back to Moderator school because you certainly need a course refresher. Not only was PZs cheap shot not funny it was dishonest and a perfect example of what I did not do, which was misrepresent Dawkins�yet you allowed his faulty analogy to stand, laughed about his dishonest attempt, and closed the thread which prevented my response�as if I did what PZ wants people to think I did.

However I am gatefull to PZ because his or her dishonest cheap shot presents me with a perfect example of how any of the �rapid pack� can prove I engaged in the type of behavior they accuse me of.

Here is the quote PZ used

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually it is all Dawkins words. It accurately represents exactly the point Dawkins was trying to make. Furthermore what nefarious purpose would I have for using this quote on this board on this thread? Since I did not quote mine, since I did not misrepresent Dawkins, since I was not attemting to decieve anyone regarding Dawkins position, since I was not using Dawkins quote to bolster an argumentative point, etc, etc, what practice are you referring to?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here was PZs rejoinder

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually it is all...nefarious...Since I did ...misrepresent Dawkins...I was...attemting to decieve.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now the PZ, the great academic who in his or her own words said

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaking as an academic who grades lots and lots of papers, this is unambiguously unacceptable. If a student did this, I'd put a big red X through the 'quote', turn to the first page, and put a big red "F" at the top -- then I'd make a note that they'd better come in and have a talk with me about standards of scholarship. This kind of thing is only one notch below plagiarism on the scale of academic no-nos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This self righteouss PZ however has no problem in engaging a false analogy that is not analogous to the point in question. PZ takes my quote and makes it say what I did not say as if that was the case with my quote of Dawkins. As I said , and no one in �the rabid� pack has refuted this, the quote I used accurately and exactly represents Dawkins position.

Now ARN#4 thinks PZ�s dishonest cheap shot is funny, ARN#4 you need to resign.

Just a few final thoughts. I recognize that this post may only be up for a few minutes, and given what I have said I will probably be banned, but a few things need to be addressed.

A few weeks back DNA and Douglas ( both pro ID by the way) also complained about the judgement exercised by the Moderators. I sort of blew it off until this happened. I call the group that excoriated me on �the guess the author� thread a �rabid pack�. I say this for this reason and ARN#4 you need to pay particular attention. It is no secret that there are many on this board who are only here because they see ID as a threat and in many respects diabolical in nature. Given this there sole desire is to run off anyone from this board that disagrees with them. They have already run off Mike Gene�he rarely posts here any more�they ran off DNA�.Light Panther had enough..etc, etc. They do this incorporating the same behavior they exhibited against me.

Lets look at the situation. The game is called �guess the author�. It�s a game!!! No one is making claims about the author. No one is misrepresenting the author. No one is using the author to bolster a claim. No one is engaging in any nefarious scheme. Yet one person (RBH) throws red meat on the floor and all the rabid dogs snarl and snap to get to it. Nevermind that no one has factually come up with anything to back up their assertions. The reason is that this is not about facts it is about attacking a pro ID person. When attacking a pro ID person anything goes. These kinds of people will do anything to run a pro ID person off and it speaks to the type of �objectivity� they bring to this board. This goes on all the time and you moderators allow it. And if you don�t start dealing with it you are going see more and more pro ID people leave.

Now ARN#4 I don�t know if you�re a pro ID mod that thinks you have to bend over backwards to make sure you are even handed to the anti ID crowd. Or if you�re a anti ID Mod and PZ is your comrade in arms so to speak. But if you really wanted to perform your job you would have been even handed in the matter and you certainly would not allowed PZ make his or her cheap and dishonest shot, laugh about it, then close the thread. I certainly hope you will exercise better judgement in the future.
Vivid

More IDi[s]ts whining about the moderation at <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000294" target="_blank">ARN</a>. This time its Vivid from the 'guess-the-author' fiasco. The irony is that <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000001" target="_blank">ARN Moderator #4 is jazzraptor</a>. LOL!

[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

Principia · 08-27-2002, 06:06 PM

[rant]
This whole case-building, play-the-innocent-victim, complain-and-storm-off routine at ARN is really beginning to piss me off. For crying out loud, most of these IDi[s]ts actually think the evolutionist 'majority' at their own board is somehow unfair. I mean, just how do they expect the rest of the sane world to take their ignorant, ill-tempered, and incessant ramblings? With infinite patience and understanding?

Will someone please explain this behavior to me?
[/rant]

pz · 08-27-2002, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Scientiae:

From a rant on ARN:

Now ARN#4 thinks PZ�s dishonest cheap shot is funny, ARN#4 you need to resign.

I'm such a baaaaaaaad widdle boy.

Principia · 08-27-2002, 06:20 PM

Now, mturner weighs in with a gratuitous crack against Infidels moderations:

Quote:

The mods can lock down this thread, just like the others, but now they have to face the fact that I am no longer the only one who detects an 'Internet Infidels' odour wafting from certain of their comments and decisions.

Unless they take steps to eliminate this bias, they will soon warrant the same contempt earned by the II's so-called 'moderators'.

mturner

Fiat justicia et pereat mundus.---Seneca (?)

Still sore from being banned from here, obviously.

mendacem memorem esse oportere -- Quintilianus

[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

Albion · 08-27-2002, 06:30 PM

I loved that last bit of quote mining by pz. I wonder how the IDists would like seeing themselves represented as saying "Evolution by natural selection....occurs...without the need for a designer."

Lizard · 08-27-2002, 07:44 PM

When I was still deluded enough to post at ARN, I had a private exchange with Vividbleau that convinced me he is not worth having any kind of exchange with. I think Lithium might help...

Principia · 08-27-2002, 08:38 PM

Update:

The aftermath of Vivid's fiasco, what do we get? More <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=17;t=000017" target="_blank">whining</a>:

Quote:

A quick scan of II and the subject "More ID Whining" will reveal a number of the more hostile IMO ARN posters. One of them , once again IMO, posted the most offensive post containing the most offensive picture,, and made the most offensive accusations, that I can remember on this board. And I have been around for several years.I never saw this particular poster admonished and posts here all the time. The only post comparable was when Pinky died and a poster IMO was quite insensitive.

Awww... what cowards.

[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

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

08-27-2002, 05:38 AM	#133
pangloss Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 1,302	Vivid was one of the ARNiots that I much loathed prior to being banned. Between him, Light Panther, Jazzraptor, and Tweedles dum and dummer, I really don' tmiss that slag pit much...

08-27-2002, 06:06 PM	#135
Principia Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere Posts: 1,976	[rant] This whole case-building, play-the-innocent-victim, complain-and-storm-off routine at ARN is really beginning to piss me off. For crying out loud, most of these IDi[s]ts actually think the evolutionist 'majority' at their own board is somehow unfair. I mean, just how do they expect the rest of the sane world to take their ignorant, ill-tempered, and incessant ramblings? With infinite patience and understanding? Will someone please explain this behavior to me? [/rant]

08-27-2002, 06:30 PM	#138
Albion Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com Posts: 2,829	I loved that last bit of quote mining by pz. I wonder how the IDists would like seeing themselves represented as saying "Evolution by natural selection....occurs...without the need for a designer."

08-27-2002, 07:44 PM	#139
Lizard Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Kansas Posts: 169	When I was still deluded enough to post at ARN, I had a private exchange with Vividbleau that convinced me he is not worth having any kind of exchange with. I think Lithium might help...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.