Joined: Jan. 2011
|Quote (Seversky @ Jan. 21 2011,00:29)|
|We should thank Kris for proving our point.|
What he has posted here already, if apparently coming from an evolutionist, would be sufficient to get him banned from Uncommon Descent. (Hi, Clive)
It wouldn't have been published at all in "DI's living room".
Yet he is still here.
So come right ahead, Kris. Try and get yourself banned.
Every provocative comment you make here simply demonstrates how wide is the toleration gap between IDC and its critics.
If I were commenting on the DI site I wouldn't say things like I do here. The reason being that they are much more likely to actually discuss something than to resort to name calling and other insults. On this site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites the vitriol is so out of control that the only way to get you guys to even pay attention is to be as blunt as possible. If you all would speak and discuss things in a reasonable way, and actually follow the posting rules here, a real discussion might be possible. A 'discussion' isn't just everyone agreeing on the same things and attacking other ways of looking at those things.
The DI site has likely received so many attacks, insults, and threats that they probably just figure it's best to not allow comments at all, and frankly, I don't blame them. Just look at the responses I've gotten here and then imagine what some people have said to the people at DI.
I was banned from Panda's Thumb and the Bathroom Wall and Pharyngula. Some of my comments were either removed or never posted. I was attacked and insulted over and over again simply because I don't worship science like religious zealots worship their God, and I gave people back the shit that they started.
The vast majority of the people who post on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites aren't really standing up for science. They're just haters who need something to hate and bash, and if it weren't religion it would just be something else. If all religious beliefs in the world were gone they would still hate something and still be looking for an internet site where they could vent their pathological anger and arrogance.
If science is as solid as some people say it is, it doesn't need anyone to constantly attack religion. Attacking religion doesn't make science stronger and it doesn't make scientists look better. In fact, when ALL people do is bash religion, in the name of science, it makes science look real weak and as though it has no credible foundation. You people are chasing more people away from science than you are attracting them to it. Why would anyone with any decency want to associate with any of you? I'd rather associate or be friends with a rabid Tasmanian Devil than any of you.
Rather than constantly and only bash religion, why don't you guys let good science speak for itself? If you know of some well done science that isn't full of inferences, mistakes, fraud, or just plain bullshit, use it as your arguments. If the science is well done but is still provisional or incomplete, don't be afraid to admit it. Stop acting like you know it all or that science knows it all. Acting like that makes you look as pompous and delusional as the most flagrant religious wackos.
If you all would spend more time making sure science is done well, you might find that more people would trust science and you might not feel the need to bash religion so much. Science's real enemy is badly done science and the people who promote science and scientists as though they're perfect and have all the concrete answers to every possible question.
I care about science and that's why it bothers me to see so-called scientists or alleged science supporters fucking it up so much. You people are not doing science any favors. You come across like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh. Constantly spewing hypocritical, partisan anger, hatred, insults, and ridicule just makes the religious believers want to strengthen their beliefs and their defenses against you and science.
Many of you regularly argue that ID and creationism and religion in general don't have a satisfactory 'replacement' for the theory of evolution or just about any other aspect of science. You expect them to have that satisfactory replacement before you will even consider any of their theories or beliefs (take your pick). Well, what does science have that will satisfactorily replace all religious beliefs? For instance, does science have anything that will provide people the comfort and feeling of security they get from their religious beliefs? How about the companionship?
Most people in this country go to church mainly for the friendly fellowship. They like the fact that they're welcomed and treated nicely. Where can they go for that in science?
Yeah, you're likely thinking I'm religious and that I'm supporting religious zealots. I'm not. I'm simply thinking of how religious people must feel and why they believe what they do. If you guys (and science) were as smart as you think you are you'd be working at finding EFFECTIVE ways to get GOOD science across to the masses. It isn't going to happen if all you do is bash religion.
And what the fuck happened to enforcing the rule below? Why does such a phony rule even exist? All this board is meant for is attacking religious beliefs. Why should anyone believe a word of what any of you say when the so-called rules are constantly broken here and nothing is done about it? You all should think about cleaning up your own messes before condemning others for their behavior and belief system.
*Supporting* or *attacking* religious belief is inappropriate on this discussion board.
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato