KC

One was Kevin Langdon, who apparently is Langan's rival in setting up Hi IQ societies. Apparently, they were both members of one group, and Langdon and Langan had a falling out.



He sounds like he's been intellectually cowed by Langan and his girlfriend.

Cheers,

KC

Principia

Really Langdon? That is amazing. He had all of 3 posts, IIRC. Well, that is certainly consistent with Jack Foster (Jazzraptor)'s recently zero-tolerance stance on his protectorates: MiKe GeNe, Chris Langan, and, of course, himself.

Katerina, whom you know, Scott, was the other person I know who was banned. She apparently got it for criticizing JF's hypocritical, dictatorial style of moderation. A few of her friends left with her.

Jed (no clue where he came from -- anybody?) got the axe for decking MiKe GeNe out in a couple of essays. Jed, too, was given the axe, after, as far as I can tell, less than a dozen posts. Apparently, according to Katerina, Jed also was sparring with Jack Foster, pointing out, among other things, the infamous Vividbleau-Jazzraptor fiasco from a few months back.

The place is slowly becoming a ghost town... Over the weekend, there were less than a dozen new posts in the main forum. My guess is that the recent purging is a Baptist Board-style attempt to give themselves a bit of dignity for being trounced by the critics. Anybody else sees the parallels?

Dr.GH

The ID movement is intellectually bankrupt, and ARN’s BB is merely symptomatic. I wonder what
percentage of Mike Gene’s posts are devoted to whining about the cruel nature of scientists, and critics of the mirage of ID ‘theory.’ This goes with the latest I’m-a-super-genius-and-you-are-not poster at ARN who claims his critics are intellectual terrorists.

I have made maybe one comment there in the last month and have found I don’t miss anything of substance.

It is not only the lack of moderation found in the moderation, but the level of the content is very low.

Xeluan

Don't you mean sycophantic?

Xeluan

monkenstick

I can't stand that langan guy, he drives me nuts - especially with his latest bout of postings;

(emphasis mine)

How the hell can he possibly claim that ID is substantive when it hasn't produced a goddamn thing

I'm going to have to stop reading that forum

Tom Ames

I think it's a bit unfair that mturner has to bear the brunt of the failings of ARN by having his name as the title of this thread.

Whatever you may have against him, I don't think he's anything like Langan. He strikes me as being solitary and cranky, but the Superbrains just plain CREEP ME OUT.

People like mturner like to think of themselves as iconoclasts, but they're basically harmless (if annoying).

Langan, on the other hand, is so crazed with narcissism that he's quite possibly dangerous. (Actually, he's probably what our very own Trebaxian Vir is destined to become.)

Anyway, ARN is history. And it wasn't mturner and the like who finished it off.

Whatever. Good riddance.

Principia

The success of an online forum depends largely on the moderators and the quality of the participants. You have to ask yourself why Chris Langan, who along with his groupie girlfriend runs and participates in several websites (all supposedly with High IQ membership), spends as much time as he does at ARN? Could the Smartest Man in America find no one among his intellectual peers to discuss his theories? Or have they all merely surrendered to his superior intellect? One only has to log on to one of the 'Mega' sites to find out, I suppose (Haven't tried it, but someone let me know what it's like?)

I remember not so long ago that comparing critics at ARN to Nazis (for those of you who were there, remember julbon1?) would receive a harsh reprimand. Today, not only are phrases 'intellectual terrorists' thrown about -- but it seems like all critics are trolls until proven innocent. The new moderation style at ARN is to stay, folks. Today they made an attempt to hide all of the complaints about Jack Foster (Mod #4), by 'erasing' them from the Feedback and Suggestions area. Plus, the <a href="http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=17;t=000001" target="_blank">new policy</a> is:
[ November 19, 2002: Message edited by: Principia ]</p>

KC

He seems to think that a theory which is so overwhelmingly supported by evidence that it appears obvious to any rational person is information-free because he hasn't written a cumbersome, overblown paper on it.

Cheers,

KC

pangloss

Apparently, "goddidit" has becopme real, substantive science for the super-smart....

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Dr.GH

As mturner is unable to post here, I think that it would be a good idea to alter thee thread title. As the threead has little to do with evolution, or creationism (of any flavor), I think it would be appropriate in a different forum.

That said, mturner is in many ways representitive of the ARN/IDistas. I found that mturner's intellectualism is very shallow. I first thought that his strange references to works that did not make the points he claimed was the result of a faulty understanding. I learned that he continues to refer to books that he did not read. And, when pressed, he refuses to read the very books that he claims to support his very idiocentric positions.

He knows no science to speak of, and refused to learn any. Thus, he is an example of one appex of the ID support triangle. He opposes science because he doesn't care for what he thinks science is about and imagines himself a bold, independent thinker.

The other corners would be the YECs such as Douglas, and pseudoscience proponents such as Mike Gene. The professional advocates of ID are just a step outside their supporters.