RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (639) < ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... >   
  Topic: The Bathroom Wall, A PT tradition< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Arden Chatfield

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2006,10:35   

<b><i>DaveScot said:</i></b>

<quote>ROFLMAO! I kill me sometimes.</quote>

Yeah, yeah, <i>promises, promises</i>...

Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2006,11:32   

I see the frenzied bouncing is continuing. So this makes 2 people there who do this, Steve Reuland and Nick Matzke. I wonder if this will become the new policy of everyone's threads and whether it will be applied even-handedly...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4502
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2006,11:40   

That last wasn't Nick. Banned commenters on PT will have their comments unpublished and replies to those comments will go to the Bathroom Wall. That is a site-wide thing, not something that need be left to individual contributors.

This is not "frenzied bouncing". This is a considered application of the rules that we have laid down for comments.

We started the Bathroom Wall because there are a lot of comments that do not substantially contribute to consideration of a post, but we did not simply want to delete what commenters have said, even when it is digressive or otherwise inappropriate to the discussion. (And the contributor has the final say on that judgment.) So I think that moving comments to the Bathroom Wall should be pretty much a common thing for contributors to do. Now that I've made it easier to accomplish, I will be pushing contributors to make more use of it.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Mar. 12 2006,17:54

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
stevestory



Posts: 8936
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2006,12:32   

Quote
Now that I've made it easier to accomplish, I will be pushing contributors to make more use of it.
Good. PT is better with a bathroom wall.

   
Rilke's Granddaughter

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:42   

Hi, Larry.  Back dishonestly using yet <i>another</i> pseudonymn?  Why do you do it? Are you honestly so foolish as to think that your content-free, scientifically-illiterate, ignorant posts are not immediately recognizable?  Amazing.

<quote author="Larry le pissoir">You can say that again. Consider the following —

A Guardian article reported a recent UK public opinion poll that showed that 4 out of 10 think that ID should be taught in science classes. See http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,… .</quote> Unfortunately for you, you failed to even bother to read the article.  The poll was about <i>religious</i> alternatives.  And you've claimed that ID isn't religious.

Get a clue, Larry.  Your continual posting in ignorance and deceit is boring.

<quote>http://www.furl.net/members/bsgroup/Creationism%…) reports on the controversy in Australia, Eastern Europe, Germany, Finland, Turkey, and New Zealand.</quote> Misleading data from a creationist nutcase.  More Larry ignorance.

<quote>http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/03/C84… reports that a Russian schoolgirl has filed a lawsuit “demanding that the Russian Education Ministry rewrite biology textbooks to include the view of creationism — the belief that God created the universe and all living beings as described in the Bible. Teaching only the theory of evolution, she says, violates freedom of conscience and religious rights, and therefore runs counter to the constitution.” This article also reports a public opinion poll in Russia that shows strong support for creationism. Ironically, revulsion against the “godlessness” of communism was supposedly the motivation for permanently adding the motto “In God We Trust” to all US money in 1955 (the motto had appeared on various coins off-and-on dating back to 1864) and adding “under god” to the pledge of allegiance to the flag in 1954.</quote> But ID is not religion, Larry.  You've said so.

Do try to be consistent in your ignorance.  Thank you.

<quote>http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1188423… reported, *…..as in the United States, creation and evolution are political issues in Italy. In February[2004], Alleanza Nazionale, one of parties in Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s governing coalition, held a week long series of events to dispute the theory of evolution. In the course of a conference entitled Teaching Evolution: a Fairytale for the Schools, parliamentarian Pietro Cerullo linked Darwin’s theory to leftist thought.*</quote> There are a minority of nutcases everywhere.  So what?

<quote>ID is a raging controversy in the Catholic church. Cardinal Schonborn, chief editor of the Catholic catechism, supports it, while Father George Coyne, chief Vatican astronomer, opposes it.</quote> "Raging controversy"?  LOL.

Fortunately, the Church is far more informed that you are, Larry.  They're not ignorant.  And they have been debating the proper relationship of science and faith for well over a thousand years; all the way back to St. Augustine, in fact.  You'd know that if you knew anything about the Church or the history of Christianity.  But apparently you don't.

==============================

<quote>Thus, the notion that evolution theory is controversial only in the USA is utterly without foundation.</quote> Nobody ever said that; you're making up <i>strawmen</i> again.  Of course, since you claim that you <i>don't</i> make up strawmen, we see that you're being inconsistent, as well as dishonest and ignorant.

Why, Larry?  In the age of the internet, your ignorance is inexcusable!

<quote>This false notion is especially promoted by those who falsely claim that the USA’s controversy over evolution theory is going to hurt the country’s international technological competitiveness.</quote> It will.  Thank God you have nothing to do with science - you're a menace.
<quote>In any case, raising doubts about evolution theory need not be a problem, because scientists can use evolution theory even while believing that all or part of it is untrue.</quote> But they don't, Larry.  Another ridiculous strawman, written by someone without any knowledge or experience with science or any 'hard' discipline.

Scientists accept evolution as the best current explanation to fit the facts.  Only an ignorant fundie, such as yourself, would claim that scientists 'believe' or don't 'believe' in it.

And there <i>are</i> no doubts about whether evolution takes place, Larry.  Only arguments about the relative weight of mechanisms.  Of course, if you knew anything about evolution, you'd have known that.

But you don't.

Popper's Ghost

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:42   

Hey, Larry, what's with all the aliases?

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:42   

<quote>Thus, the notion that evolution theory is controversial only in the USA is utterly without foundation. </quote>


Follow the money.  Americans are behind each of these.  After all, YOU only know about them because of AiG or ICR, right?

Since they got pasted so bad in Dover, it's not surprising that the fundies have been forced to bother people in other countries instead.

Alas, they will do no better there than they have in the US.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:42   

<quote>Thus, the notion that evolution theory is controversial only in the USA is utterly without foundation. </QUOTE>


Follow the money.  Americans are behind each of these.

Since they got pasted so bad in Dover, it's not surprising that the fundies have been forced to bother people in other countries instead.

Raging Bee

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:44   

Kinda Sorta Important Notice: Johncabbreck, also posting as Larry Fafarman, Andy H., and possibly other names, has a well-known habit of repeatedly posting assertions and arguments that have been soundly refuted in other threads on PT. Such repetitive axe-grinding, combined with his intellectual dishonesty, arguments from ignorance and incomprehension, and explicit refusal to acknowledge any fact that he finds inconvenient, have proven that he is not arguing in good faith and is not interested in real adult debate, and may not even be capable of it.

In addition, he is a Holocaust-denier. (His views on the curvature of the Earth have not yet been ascertained.) And he has all but explicitly admitted that his purpose in posting here is to get attention, not to engage in adult discourse. Therefore, responding to his "arguments" is probably a waste of time, and it may be best simply to ignore them.

Arden Chatfield

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:54   

Wesley has said that the new PT policy is to delete the comments of people who have been banned, and to bounce the <i>responses</i> to banned people to the Bathroom wall. Apparently Larry has officially been banned. Thus, if 'Johncabbreck' is indeed Larry, as seems extremely likely, his post should be deleted and his latest IP address banned. If these policies are to be implemented at all, they need to be consistent.

[PT Rule 2, amended to "move" rather than "remove". - WRE]

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Mar. 13 2006,12:56

Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4502
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,06:59   

Arden,

There is no new policy. Someone under a ban has no expectation that any illicitly entered comment will be retained. Anyone responding to such a comment is engaged in a meta-site issue, and thus those comments fall under Rule 2, and may be removed entirely without notice.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,10:40   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 13 2006,12:59)
Arden,

There is no new policy. Someone under a ban has no expectation that any illicitly entered comment will be retained. Anyone responding to such a comment is engaged in a meta-site issue, and thus those comments fall under Rule 2, and may be removed entirely without notice.

Wesley:

Perhaps the policy isn't new, but lots of people seem not to be aware of the policy (PvM didn't seem to know), and the policy went largely unenforced until just the last few days. That makes it essentially a 'new policy'.

The more people who explicitly know of this policy, the better.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4502
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,10:50   

Quote

That makes it essentially a 'new policy'.


David Springer sets a bad example of behavior. There is no need to imitate his intransigence on receipt of facts contrary to a claim.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,10:57   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 13 2006,16:50)
Quote

That makes it essentially a 'new policy'.


David Springer sets a bad example of behavior. There is no need to imitate his intransigence on receipt of facts contrary to a claim.

Thanks for the insult, Wes.

BTW, Larry's posting again at Pim's thread. You might want to, um, do something about it.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
J. Biggs

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,11:09   

It is obvious that Johncabbreck is Andy H./Larry Farflungdung and debating him is an utter waste of time as he will constantly change his mind about the meaning of what he writes.  If you do, however, choose to debate him he will make several amusing analogies and continually make statements like, "scientists can use evolution theory even while believing that all or part of it is untrue." or something like, "I don't like the title Intelligent Design because it implies religion; irreducible complexity is better because it lacks that implication."  Nice try Larry.  Go trolling somewhere else.

J. Biggs

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,11:09   

<blockquote>There are doubts about whether random mutation and natural selection are sufficient to explain macroevolution.</blockquote>

Classic Larry.

Arden Chatfield

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2006,11:09   

PvM:

Larry is posting as Johncabbreck again. Delete and block his IP address, please?

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2006,18:27   

Hey Blast, every scientist you've ever talked to has told you that you're full of it.

Why is that?

ben

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2006,06:34   

Shut up, Larry.  No one cares what you think (shrug).

Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2006,07:19   

Uh oh, I wonder what name Whack-a-mole Larry was going by this time?

Nice to see he's finally banned.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2006,19:55   

I see both DaveScot and Davison are both posting in the 'Evolution for Kids' thread. Dave's posting under 'DaveS', which he's been posting under for a week.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2006,20:11   

Also, 'J Early' in the Nancy Pearcy thread at PT is Larry.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2006,06:49   

Wesley:

Larry has several comments at the Nancy Pearcy thread at PT that ought to be deleted.

Look for 'J Early' and the terribly clever 'J Nameless'.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 8936
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2006,06:54   

It doesn't matter if Larry is officially banned or not. He's still wrecking threads.

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2006,07:08   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 21 2006,12:54)
It doesn't matter if Larry is officially banned or not. He's still wrecking threads.

I think deleting his posts as soon as they appear and banning his IP addresses, as often as it has to be done, will help. Seems to me after they started doing that to him a week ago he disappeared for several days. If he doesn't get a reaction and if it's hard work for him to post there, he'll drift away.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Henry J



Posts: 4076
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 22 2006,07:06   

Old-World Primates Evolved Color Vision to Better See Each Other Blush, Study Reveals
Quote
PASADENA, Calif.--Your emotions can easily be read by others when you blush--at least by others familiar with your skin color. What's more, the blood rushing out of your face when you're terrified is just as telling. And when it comes to our evolutionary cousins the chimpanzees, they not only can see color changes in each other's faces, but in each other's rumps as well.
(Hair today, gone tomorrow? Butt at least the chimps can get to the bottom of things. :)  )

Henry

  
W. Kevin Vicklund



Posts: 68
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 22 2006,16:30   

Larry is posting as Noname in the Hunter's Distortions thread.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4076
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 23 2006,07:08   

Looks like talkorigins is back up again. I was about to post mentioning that it was down since last night, but it's back now. Was it server problems?

Henry

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4502
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 23 2006,07:50   

It seems to have been some sort of DNS glitch. Some people could not get to a variety of domains that have the same primary nameservers, but others had no such problem.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
stevestory



Posts: 8936
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 23 2006,07:50   

Quote
W. Kevin Vicklund



Posts: 18
Joined: Oct. 2005
 Posted: Mar. 22 2006,22:30    

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry is posting as Noname in the Hunter's Distortions thread.  
When one person can cause the system so much grief, the system needs to be modifed.

   
  19142 replies since Jan. 17 2006,08:38 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (639) < ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]