Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If AV is willing to admit that theres no evidence for what he believes, thats the first step towards admitting that creationism isnt science. (Since science is based on evidence). If hes willing to admit that, that at least makes him more honest than a considerable portion of creationists.
You probably havent been here long enough to be aware of this, but one of my pet peeves at this forum is when newbies start acting like they can call all of the shots, despite lacking any understanding of this boards history, or what sorts of things have been considered helpful or unhelpful over the past 5+ years. When threads end up getting derailed, it almost always seems to be newbies who cause it. Look at Tharumzas reply in post #30do you ever see that kind of thing from members who joined in 2005 or earlier?
In my opinion, this forum has really gone downhill. Weve even got a n00b for a webmaster nowPauler has been registered for less than a year, and as far as Im concerned, has yet to demonstrate the kind of familiarity with this boards needs thats necessary in order to run it properly.
I wish we could have Erwin back.
Of course, especially when you cant agree with what AV might say. Do you think it might work the other way too? From the attacks, belittling, mocking and out right rude and arrogant remarks constantly thrown AV's way he has truly held up better than any of his attackers. He is committed and uncompromised in his walk with God. He is a living example of many verses in the bible one being Ephesians 4:14 "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men. and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive." Standing firm in his beliefs, unshaken, unmoved like a pillar for Gods Word. Knowing full well that if God is for him. WHO can be against him? Romans 8: 38-39 "For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to seperate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
He is also well aware that his battle is not against flesh and blood, he is planting seeds, most likely lots considering his post count, and one day God will cause them to grow. AV your a good man, well saturated in God's Word. Keep throwing those verses out brother. Isaiah 55:11
Elitist tosh. Just because someone is new doesn't mean he's stumped by this boards "intricacies". A message board is a message board is a message board, and there's no reason for anyone to pull post-count-rank or sign-up-date-rank unless they can't make a proper argument. The guy made a pretty funny joke, playing on the old creationist canard that atheists have a set dogma, and you didn't get it. That's no reason to go all "old guard" on us.
<staff edit>
Maybe Pauler is good at being a webmaster? Perhaps he has qualities that you don't see as you don't work alongside him?
Did you look at his post #30? This is what Im talking about:
Not all newbies here have this problem. You seem to be okay, and one of my closest friends here, Naraoia, has been registered for less than two years. But what Im saying is that the longer someone has been registered, the less common this sort of behavior is. AV has it a little, but hes only been registered since 2006, which (relatively speaking) is still kind of recent. For people who registered in 2005 or earlier, you generally dont see this sort of behavior at all.
I think there are three reasons for this:
1: The environment of this board was inherently different before 2006, so people who registered before then tended to be somewhat different than the type of person who registers nowadays. Specifically, this used to be a fairly intense science debate forum, so people only registered if they thought they had something to add to these debates. You can see this if you look at any of the old threads in the forum archives. Another way to measure the same thing is by seeing how many threads from each year are listed in the C & E thread archivethe rate at which people have posted threads worth adding there has clearly dropped off.
2: The longer a person has been here, the more of an opportunity theyve had to learn from the other posters, both about science and about how to interact here. I remember what I was like in spring and summer of 2004, and I dont think I learned how to really contribute here until sometime in 2005. My best contributions werent until 2007, so it took me around three years to learn how to reach my full potential on this forum. The same principle applies to most other people also.
3: Remaining active at this board for multiple years takes a certain amount of dedication. I guess this ones kind of obvious: of any group of people who join the forum at a particular time, those of them who are still participating after 4 or 5 years are generally going to be those who care most about the topic being discussed there.
This isnt normally worth bringing up, but its really been getting to be a problem lately. During the four days that hes been registered, has Tharumza even read this boards rules? Judging by his post that I quoted, Id guess that he hasnt.
Ive read his posts (he doesnt have very many), and he doesnt appear to know how to do anything that Erwin wasnt better at. I posted something more detailed about this here.
If AV is willing to admit that theres no evidence for what he believes, thats the first step towards admitting that creationism isnt science. (Since science is based on evidence). If hes willing to admit that, that at least makes him more honest than a considerable portion of creationists.
You probably havent been here long enough to be aware of this, but one of my pet peeves at this forum is when newbies start acting like they can call all of the shots, despite lacking any understanding of this boards history, or what sorts of things have been considered helpful or unhelpful over the past 5+ years. When threads end up getting derailed, it almost always seems to be newbies who cause it. Look at Tharumzas reply in post #30do you ever see that kind of thing from members who joined in 2005 or earlier?
In my opinion, this forum has really gone downhill. Weve even got a n00b for a webmaster nowPauler has been registered for less than a year, and as far as Im concerned, has yet to demonstrate the kind of familiarity with this boards needs thats necessary in order to run it properly.
I wish we could have Erwin back.
Did you look at his post #30? This is what Im talking about:
Not all newbies here have this problem. You seem to be okay, and one of my closest friends here, Naraoia, has been registered for less than two years. But what Im saying is that the longer someone has been registered, the less common this sort of behavior is. AV has it a little, but hes only been registered since 2006, which (relatively speaking) is still kind of recent. For people who registered in 2005 or earlier, you generally dont see this sort of behavior at all.
I think there are three reasons for this:
1: The environment of this board was inherently different before 2006, so people who registered before then tended to be somewhat different than the type of person who registers nowadays. Specifically, this used to be a fairly intense science debate forum, so people only registered if they thought they had something to add to these debates. You can see this if you look at any of the old threads in the forum archives. Another way to measure the same thing is by seeing how many threads from each year are listed in the C & E thread archivethe rate at which people have posted threads worth adding there has clearly dropped off.
2: The longer a person has been here, the more of an opportunity theyve had to learn from the other posters, both about science and about how to interact here. I remember what I was like in spring and summer of 2004, and I dont think I learned how to really contribute here until sometime in 2005. My best contributions werent until 2007, so it took me around three years to learn how to reach my full potential on this forum. The same principle applies to most other people also.
3: Remaining active at this board for multiple years takes a certain amount of dedication. I guess this ones kind of obvious: of any group of people who join the forum at a particular time, those of them who are still participating after 4 or 5 years are generally going to be those who care most about the topic being discussed there.
This isnt normally worth bringing up, but its really been getting to be a problem lately. During the four days that hes been registered, has Tharumza even read this boards rules? Judging by his post that I quoted, Id guess that he hasnt.
Ive read his posts (he doesnt have very many), and he doesnt appear to know how to do anything that Erwin wasnt better at. I posted something more detailed about this here.
One thing that bothers me is when someone just joins and makes statements to me like:I dont think they merit special treatment per se, but they do merit certain behavior. Specifically, someone like Tharumza doesnt have the right to start bossing around and cursing off the other members less than a week after he joined.
The behavior itself is different. There have been times when USincognito acted as a sort of de facto moderator at this board, telling the other members what kind of conduct was and wasnt acceptable, and I dont think anybody had a problem with that. When he did this, most of the time he was right. But how likely is someone to know how to do this when theyve been registered for less than a week? Even if you ignore the actual amount of experience that a person has, it isnt possible to ignore the effects that it has on their behavior when they try to do this.
One thing that bothers me is when someone just joins and makes statements to me like:
That almost always draws my, "Do you want to plod through my more than 850,000 posts?" response.
- I've never seen you admit you're wrong.
- I've never seen you say anything right.
- You're the type of person that...
- All you do is...
- Why don't you ever...
One girl showed up out of nowhere and told me she has never seen me apologize or admit I'm wrong.
When I QV'd her to two of my posts from the past, she admitted she was wrong.
Even an "old-timer", who's been here longer than I, once called me out on something I said, and when I said it was a joke, he didn't believe me, until I showed him basically the same post from a year ago.
There are people here like Split Rock, Cabal, pgp_protector, and others that have 'put up with me' a lot more than a newbie has, and displayed more tolerance for what I stand for.
Yes --- I agree --- there is no science (or evidence) whatsoever supporting the Creation Week.AV, do you agree that creationism is not science?
I agree --- qv please: 11 and 12.If you are acknowledging that there is no evidence for ex nihilo creation, then that means belief in ex nihilo creation cannot be considered science.
If you're going to teach Creationism, then teach it, but don't branch out into trying to "disprove accepted scientific facts, theories and scientific paradigms", or you're going to [rightly] get sent packing.
Yes --- but I wish you would have tacked one more word on to your sentence: "today".Now, heres a second question: do you agree that science is a useful and beneficial way of learning about the world?
I agree with evolution, to a point; and I agree that the earth is billions of years old.Im using science here to include both the theory of evolution and the theory that the earth is billions of years old.
Yes --- but I wish you would have tacked one more word on to your sentence: "today".
I agree with evolution, to a point; and I agree that the earth is billions of years old.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?