The more that I see a certain set of three moderators do here, the more respect that I lose for this forum. Spuriousmonkey, Skinwalker, and Bells are trying to tighten up on "woo-woo" information and links, and they're doing it in a way that no one who has alternative scientific theories can get any evidence in, unless it's in the Cesspool and the given moderator has already insulted them and been rude.

The more that I see them do, the more respect that I lose for them and for the forum. They are destroying the free exchange of information.

The more that I see a certain set of three moderators do here, the more respect that I lose for this forum. Spuriousmonkey, Skinwalker, and Bells are trying to tighten up on "woo-woo" information and links, and they're doing it in a way that no one who has alternative scientific theories can get any evidence in, unless it's in the Cesspool and the given moderator has already insulted them and been rude.

The more that I see them do, the more respect that I lose for them and for the forum. They are destroying the free exchange of information.

yes we all feel the pressure of air above us, my veins are soon to burst too. Or maybe I am just a stone without blood in veins...or maybe I do deserve to be crushed?

i still like you.

Yes, intellectual freedom and honesty are not encouraged here, so censorship results when the status quo is disturbed, nothing new.

IAC, may I censor you please?

i still like you.

Well, you should, but that doesn't explain why you think it's right to participate in a hostile takeover of these forums.

nobody ever said you had a freedom of speech here.
this is a private forum.

ps: its my duty to please that booty.

ps: its my duty to please that booty.

it is your duty to ctrl+C and ctl+V the same statement all over again.

Well, you should, but that doesn't explain why you think it's right to participate in a hostile takeover of these forums.

I'm sorry, I was asked to take over the biology subforum from nobody.

Peer reviewed by card carrying Darwinites who could find no other work if they lost their current gig.

it is your duty to ctrl+C and ctl+V the same statement all over again.

its my duty to please that booty.

You stole that line from Genji.

"Claim that there is no evidence that you are a fraud, kook, net-abuser, spammer, or liar. Refer to any actual proof of this as "spinning" or "disinformation." Post messages that the system administrators of every system your opponents post from are on the verge of killing their accounts for net-abuse, and that you're going to set things right, and get rid of all these cynical lying fact-spinners by sending one final massive complaint against them all."

http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html

Metakron,

Pseudoscience exists for a reason.
What you fail to realize is that pseudoscience used to be quite active and full of 'alternative theories'. But, most of the occupants of that forum eventually grew tired of being forced to be intellectually honest about their theories and fled to greener pastures of where sheep will graze on anything presented to them.

It's sad that you can't see the difference between science and pseudoscience. Your thread about the German court decision is a key case in point. Even when shown that the story was a complete fraud and fabrication you consistently refuse to admit it.

You have your areas of expertise, Metakron. Your contribution to Cato's microcontroller threads were outstanding.
But, in the field of biology you are lacking. Mostly due to bias. You fall prey to 'alternative theories' with far too much eagerness.

Lack of skepticism is one thing, but you eagerly devour these things like bread and butter.



IceAge,

card carrying Darwinites

Don't you ever get tired of using the same old strawman/red herring?
There is no such thing as a Darwinite.
Darwin contributed to the theory of evolution and some of his ideas are still in use today, but he is not the end all and be all of the theory of evolution.
Never has been.
Never will be.

Get the wax out of your ears.

You stole that line from Genji.

no, i stole it from Samuel L. Jackson.

Funny inverto that you admitted there's a difference between evolution and Darwinian evolution, and since the whole world thinks that Darwinian evolution is that goo supposedly morphed into you, you've got a real selling job to do to convince them that goo to you people are not really Darwinites.

, and since the whole world thinks that Darwinian evolution is that goo supposedly morphed into you, you've got a real selling job to do to convince them that goo to you people are not really Darwinites.


No, they don't. You think that.

he also thinks noah was a technophile caveman.

I know you are but what am I?

One of god's chosen ones.

(That was to spur.)

(i know)

(That was to spur.)

everything posted on this forum is directed at me.

didnt you know that?

and since the whole world thinks that Darwinian evolution is that goo supposedly morphed into you,

What Spurious said.

It's a strawman because you're arguing against a position that doesn't exist.

You admitted there's a difference between evolution and Darwinian evolution, thanks.

You admitted there's a difference between evolution and Darwinian evolution, thanks.

drinking your own pee isnt good for you.

You admitted there's a difference between evolution and Darwinian evolution, thanks.

Duh.
This is textbook stuff.
Stop being dense.

Inverto says:

"The idea that Darwinian evolution and evolution are not the same is a given."

Go Inverto.

And?

You said it all!

So now you'll stop tilting at windmills then?

Huh?

Tilting at windmills.
Attacking imaginary enemies.
Arguing against nonexistent positions.
Resorting to a strawman fallacy.

Who said this?

"The idea that Darwinian evolution and evolution are not the same is a given."

So exactly what is it you're trying to go on about?

The more that I see a certain set of three moderators do here, the more respect that I lose for this forum.

I'm sure the rest of the forum is all broken up. So Sciforums isn't a "good place" for woo-woos and kooks anymore. Somewhere, the tiniest violin is playing a dirge.

Spuriousmonkey, Skinwalker, and Bells are trying to tighten up on "woo-woo" information and links, and they're doing it in a way that no one who has alternative scientific theories can get any evidence in,

Sorry, bub. There is only one kind of science. "Alternative" science is called pseudo-science, a.k.a. fake science. Nor should pseudo-archaeology and pseudo-history be tolerated. If you want to discuss Holocaust and Aids denial or how your favorite god created us all 4,000 years ago, there are plenty of kook-sites to visit that will open their arms to you. That shit deserves the cesspool and pseudoscience sections, if that, in a board that is even remotely concerned with science as a topic of discussion.


The more that I see them do, the more respect that I lose for them and for the forum. They are destroying the free exchange of information.

So take a hint. Leave.

We'll have no such luck, however, since kooks and woo-woo's need "the man" and "the establishment of science" to rail their nonsense against and continue their silly pretense of oppression.

Adam and Eve were about 6,000 years ago, you can't even get that right.

And your empirical evidence is...?

Who said this?

"The idea that Darwinian evolution and evolution are not the same is a given."


Duh.
I did.
What I'm going on about has been repeated many times by myself and also by others.
You are constructing a strawman argument by attacking 'Darwinian evolution' when Darwin, as crucial to the field as he might have been in the beginning, has long been superceded.

Evolution, as taught today, is not Darwin's evolution.
Thus, there are no 'Darwinists' as everyone who knows anything about evolution knows that Darwin was rather quaint.
If you wish to attack evolution, then you should attack evolution as it is, not as it was 100 years ago.

Skin, you said the creation was 4,000 years ago, it's 6,000 years ago.

All the world thinks it's Darwinian evolution which is being force fed to students in schools, so you got a lotta splain'n to do.

Yes?

All the world thinks it's Darwinian evolution which is being force fed to students in schools

No.
You're wrong.
Darwin is merely a footnote.
You seem unhealthily obsessed with the man.
I suppose you need a specific figure to vent your vitriol upon, yes?
Sad, really.

I see this type of religious stupidity is a world wide plague. Our simple shack living rural folk still think like IAC.

Skin, you said the creation was 4,000 years ago, it's 6,000 years ago.

Surely you don't think yours is the only creation mythology in existence do you? Yet another example of close-minded attitude.

What creation story supposedly happened 4,000 years old, are you making that up?

The more that I see a certain set of three moderators do here, the more respect that I lose for this forum. Spuriousmonkey, Skinwalker, and Bells are trying to tighten up on "woo-woo" information and links, and they're doing it in a way that no one who has alternative scientific theories can get any evidence in, unless it's in the Cesspool and the given moderator has already insulted them and been rude.

The more that I see them do, the more respect that I lose for them and for the forum. They are destroying the free exchange of information.

This is hilarious.

Ok Meta. Show me where we have shut down your threads, deleted your links and basically tried to silence you?

That even YOU admit your information is "woo-woo" is telling. The threads in question are moved to the cesspool because they are so "woo-woo", by your own admission. You are rude to moderators and other members who disagree with you. Your comments about not having been given a blowjob from another member was not only rude, but it was also insulting and demeaning. You think I, or anyone else, will be nice and polite to you when you make such comments? Ya right.:rolleyes:

Now back to the "woo-woo" information you posted, resulting in the threads being moved to the cesspool. Have the threads been closed? Nope. Therefore they are still open to discussion. You can still participate in them. So your saying we are somehow attempting to stop you from getting evidence in, that is "woo-woo" by your admission, is completely false. You have a total lack of knowledge and understanding in regards to biology. Had you possibly attempted to post your "woo-woo" evidence in the Pseudoscience forum, it might possibly still have been there. But you chose to post it in the pure science forums and then throw a tantrum that it is moved to the cesspool.

You don't want your evidence to be shifted to the cesspool? The solution is simple. Stop posting information that even YOU admit is "woo-woo". They don't even qualify as being alternative theories because they are "woo-woo". You can't expect to post pseudoscience evidence in science and biology forums and think that because YOU posted them, that you should somehow get preferential treatment.

Or do you think you should be treated differently to everyone else?

Skin is like a little baby who got his marbles taken away.

Interesting that the woo-woos are generally the ones complaining. If only they did present some actual evidence from time to time...

The "woo-woos" are the only ones who get picked on.

IAC is bitching about something? Then somebody somewhere is doing something RIGHT.

Thanks for all the good work...

This is hilarious.

Ok Meta. Show me where we have shut down your threads, deleted your links and basically tried to silence you?

That even YOU admit your information is "woo-woo" is telling. The threads in question are moved to the cesspool because they are so "woo-woo", by your own admission. You are rude to moderators and other members who disagree with you. Your comments about not having been given a blowjob from another member was not only rude, but it was also insulting and demeaning. You think I, or anyone else, will be nice and polite to you when you make such comments? Ya right.:rolleyes:

Actually, genius, I don't talk like that before you and others start calling me a moron.


Now back to the "woo-woo" information you posted, resulting in the threads being moved to the cesspool. Have the threads been closed? Nope.


You've simply told the rest of the world that you have judged them to be the equivalent of urine and feces. The Monkey started that when I tried to reason out a definition of AIDS with sources.


Therefore they are still open to discussion. You can still participate in them.


Yes, in a place where they have already been consigned to oblivion by people who are playing authority games.



So your saying we are somehow attempting to stop you from getting evidence in, that is "woo-woo" by your admission, is completely false.


If by "completely false" you mean "completely true."


You have a total lack of knowledge and understanding in regards to biology.


That kind of comment is inaccurate with intent to bully.


Had you possibly attempted to post your "woo-woo" evidence in the Pseudoscience forum, it might possibly still have been there. But you chose to post it in the pure science forums and then throw a tantrum that it is moved to the cesspool.


There is no rule that states that these are "pure science" forums that exclude alternative interpretations of scientific theories.


You don't want your evidence to be shifted to the cesspool? The solution is simple. Stop posting information that even YOU admit is "woo-woo".


I usually put "woo-woo" in quotes, acknowledging that this is the label that you use for it. I consider this to be a label that you and others like you use to justify bulling others.


They don't even qualify as being alternative theories because they are "woo-woo". You can't expect to post pseudoscience evidence in science and biology forums and think that because YOU posted them, that you should somehow get preferential treatment.

Or do you think you should be treated differently to everyone else?

There is actually real scientific evidence from real scientists and you have decided, on an open forum without rules that allow for this, that you would only include certain real evidence in subforums that you control. Part of the fact that you are bullying people is evident in the names that you call people who protest their treatment. Bells, I have the right to protest the way that you have treated me and others. You are verging on libel sometimes with your remarks and you always start it.

I think that you, Spuriousmonkey, and Skincrawler should resign from this forum. You are three of the worst trolls that I have ever seen.

Skinwalker, in answer to what you pass off as a post a few messages back, I have decided that I will stay here to give you trouble whenever you make trouble again.

Whores for Darwinian/Lyellian orthodoxy say and do the craziest things, they are very insecure, and so, have a fortress mentality.

Whores for any sort of orthodoxy are like that. I think that Skincrawler, Monkey, and Bells want this forum to be a place where they dictate to everyone else what constitutes right and wrong, and I think that they have been sabotaging and attacking other moderators to get this done, too.

And Bells, what do you think I am going to believe? You and the Monkey put real science in the Cesspool, then you still troll the discussion and talk trash for weeks at a time. What are you, about 12?

Keep your day job.

Actually, genius, I don't talk like that before you and others start calling me a moron.

I see.

I said I found your stance immoral and you replied with hoping I am tarred, feathered and have disgusting substances you can't even name or mention fill my body. You then likened me to being worse than an animal. With another member who said that they liked you and usually agreed with you on most things but advised you that the article you had posted was wrong, you demeaned them about their not giving you a blow job so why should you bother listening to them. I could go on.

You've simply told the rest of the world that you have judged them to be the equivalent of urine and feces. The Monkey started that when I tried to reason out a definition of AIDS with sources.

You do realise there is still an AIDS thread open in the Biology forum where you have been posting, don't you?

The thread that was moved to the cesspool that you are still whining about was the one where the article you posted as your falsely reported a court case in Germany and blatantly lied. So it was moved to the cesspool and still remains open. If that was one of your 'sources', you really should not complain. Had you done the same at a university for example, the discussion would not even be open and you would have found yourself in a hell of a lot of trouble. You posted an article that was a downright lie as a source and used that article to open a thread about AIDS. Seeing it was a lie, it was moved to the cesspool.

Or do you expect that only YOU can post articles that are actual lies and force everyone to accept them as fact?

Yes, in a place where they have already been consigned to oblivion by people who are playing authority games.
Really?

Considering the cesspool is one of the most popular forums, I seriously doubt your claims.

Even the thread you started with the article that was a lie has been going for 9 pages and is still ongoing. Hardly 'oblivion'.

If by "completely false" you mean "completely true."

Is it? I remind you the threads discussing your theories about AIDS are still open and on-going. The thread you are complaining about that was moved to cesspool was the one where the article you opened the thread with was proven to be false. It was not closed. The article was not removed or deleted by any moderator. The thread was merely moved to the cesspool and allowed to remain open.

So please. You have been awarded more leeway that any other member on this forum. Your complaints are in short, a tad silly since you are complaining about having been silenced when your threads are still open and ongoing.

That kind of comment is inaccurate with intent to bully.
Mmm hmm. So how was that comment an attempt to bully you?

Yes Meta. I am trying to bully you by saying you don't have any expertise in the field of biology, something even you have admitted in the past.

There is no rule that states that these are "pure science" forums that exclude alternative interpretations of scientific theories.
I think you would find that on most forums where you attempted to post an article that was a complete lie and reported on something that never happened and tried to pass it off as fact, the thread would have been closed and deleted. You on the other hand posted such an article and it was not closed but merely moved to the cesspool. It was not an alternative interpretation of scientific theory. The article was a lie. It made up a story about a real case and you posted it as fact.

I usually put "woo-woo" in quotes, acknowledging that this is the label that you use for it. I consider this to be a label that you and others like you use to justify bulling others.
I see. So you think it is ok for YOU to bully others into telling them that they have to accept your theories as fact or you will keep nagging them and won't stop. But we can't move an article that was false and a lie into the cesspool? I see. Interesting.

I was literally begging you to let it go because you had made a mistake about that article. And your reply?

"On the day that you admit that HIV theory is a mistake."

And you accuse me of bullying?

There is actually real scientific evidence from real scientists and you have decided, on an open forum without rules that allow for this, that you would only include certain real evidence in subforums that you control. Part of the fact that you are bullying people is evident in the names that you call people who protest their treatment. Bells, I have the right to protest the way that you have treated me and others. You are verging on libel sometimes with your remarks and you always start it.
I read your scientific evidence. When I attempted to ask you questions, you were downright insulting and rude.

I called you immoral in a thread that was about how denying HIV and AIDS is immoral. I also call Mbeki immoral for his stance because it has resulted in the deaths of millions. You deny it has. Moot point. As I said, arguing with you on AIDS and HIV is like banging one's head against a brick wall. It is a lose/lose situation. I lose time and so do you.

Yes you have the right to protest. The fact this thread is still ongoing kind of proves that don't you think?

Have I attempted to silence you? LOL.. The fact you are still posting would kind of say no, don't you think? When you post an article that is a blatant lie and scream it is fact, you will lose the respect of those you are attempting to convince. And before you attempt to start on libel dear, I would tread very carefully if I were you. Especially when you make comments such as:

I think that Skincrawler, Monkey, and Bells want this forum to be a place where they dictate to everyone else what constitutes right and wrong, and I think that they have been sabotaging and attacking other moderators to get this done, too.

......................

And Bells, what do you think I am going to believe? You and the Monkey put real science in the Cesspool, then you still troll the discussion and talk trash for weeks at a time. What are you, about 12?
Did I? Monkey put a thread with an article that was false and a lie in the cesspool. I doubt anyone would say he had made the wrong decision considering the article was a complete lie and false. And I doubt anyone would say that something that was written falsely and lied about the results of a case was 'real science'. You might think it is, but it is not.

As for the trash talking. Who is the one that has kept going on and on about it, even after being asked, begged and pleaded to let it go because you had made a mistake? Shall I remind you of your reply when I virtually begged you to let it go since the article you posted was a lie and you mistakenly stated it as fact without knowing the true findings of the court case?

"On the day that you admit that HIV theory is a mistake."

Bells, you simply can't see that it's wrong when you start trashing someone. That's where your use of the term "immoral" comes in, it excuses an entire library of verbal abuse.

You got back what you put into it. I am sick of people who think that their dominance over some segment of the net gives them the right to abuse people.

The article that I posted was not a lie and it is easy to get confused about its meaning because it is a very bad translation. It was your side that decided to start the abuse.

Also, you used to be some kind of legal beagle. You know very well that honest expressions of opinion are not libel.

Bells, you simply can't see that it's wrong when you start trashing someone. That's where your use of the term "immoral" comes in, it excuses an entire library of verbal abuse.

But you excuse yourself of this of course? You are exempt from all the rules you think should apply to us?

You got back what you put into it. I am sick of people who think that their dominance over some segment of the net gives them the right to abuse people.
Yes we all reap what we sow. That includes you.

And how am I dominant over the net? I am a moderator of the Human Science forum and that is it. I moderate only that forum. So how have I dominated you in the other forums here? Have I given you an infraction? I do not believe that I have. Have I ever banned you? No. Have I ever closed your threads? No. I have only said that I disagree with your stance on the HIV issue and I have said that your total acceptance of the alternative 'myth' theories can be dangerous to your health and to the health of others and in following such a steadfast belief, beliefs such as yours can be deemed to be immoral. How is that an abuse? I stated an opinion. To which you replied that you hoped I be tarred, feathered and filled with disgusting substances you couldn't even name or mention.

I have no dominance over the net. My moderating in Human sciences is also discussed by others and I also must abide by the wishes of the administration. I have no powers outside of that particular forum. I cannot do anything to any of your threads or to you. The only thing I can do is to give you an infraction if you have over-stepped the mark and I don't believe I have even done that. So you are literally accusing me of doing something I not only have never done, but have no power to do and would never do.

The article that I posted was not a lie and it is easy to get confused about its meaning because it is a very bad translation. It was your side that decided to start the abuse.

My side? What exactly is "my side"?

You were advised on many occasions that the article had falsely reported on a court case in Germany and had blatantly lied about its outcome. It was moved to cesspool as a result. You then protested vehemently and attempted to personally attack anyone who disagreed with you in regards to the article itself. You had not interpreted it yourself and accused everyone of being against you.

When monkey commented he should have moved the thread to pseudoscience, you suggested he should have moved it up his backside. The thread is there for all to see. The meaning of the case was quite clear to anyone who understood German. Had you bothered to have it translated yourself, you would have realised the article had falsely reported on the ruling and had literally lied. But you refused and then lashed out. And you're still acting out. And you accuse us of being 12 year olds? Let it go Meta. You made a mistake. Instead of just letting it go, you keep dragging it out again and again and then complain when we point out your mistakes. Stop acting like a spoiled brat who thinks everything should go his way because he says so. You are not a child so stop acting like it. If you continue to act like a child, you shall be treated as such.

Also, you used to be some kind of legal beagle. You know very well that honest expressions of opinion are not libel.
Indeed.

Something YOU need to keep in mind also. And as for your accusation, I would advise you to actually check up with admin before you start mouthing off. In short, get proof before you start accusing others and myself of "sabotaging and attacking other moderators". As hilarious as that is, you really need to stop with the accusations because they are only making you look foolish.

Yes, Bells, you decided to disagree with my stance on the HIV issue, and you decided to characterize me as a "dangerous person." You expected exactly what in return?

There is a negative personality type that likes to take certain metaphors as personal threats. I notice that not a lot of people seconded your perception of that comment about what should be done with carpetbaggers. I said that this should be done to people who sell things the way that you do. You may be aware of the lack of success of prosecutions of people who use that kind of metaphor the way that I did. I'm quite certain that you use the perception of the personal threat as a passive-aggressive way to help further derail the discussion. Anything works as fuel for the fire that you like to set.

You also have no call to yell at me for getting out of line when you have not the slightest tendency to stay in line yourself.

Anyway, what I was objecting to is the tendency that some moderators have to remove anything that may support a theory that they don't believe in. The thing that set me off was Skinwalker's treatment of IceAgeCivilizations, which is pretty much like Spuriousmonkey's treatment of me, and that is to move the discussion off the subforum into a place whose label insults the person who promotes an idea. Skinwalker also deleted a lot of messages discussing this, and I thought he was really rude to IceAge. I think he really does badly need to go out and get sex, too, but that may be irrelevant to the discussion. He started with the threat to discard the thread of IceAge didn't show some kind of evidence, and he deleted the evidence that IceAge did present, not just moved it but deleted it, and he deleted IceAge's replies concerning this evidence.

Those two moderators are not just moving unsupported ideas out of the subforums that they control, they are also not allowing evidence to be presented. That's what the Monkey did to me. He claimed that the evidence was all false because it came from "dissident sources." Any moderator who supports the validity of this kind of claim should not be moderating a forum that exists for the purpose of free discussion of the sciences. That moderator is deliberately preventing the introduction of controversial theories, and this takes the science and the freedom out of it.

I am painfully aware that the one trick that you people have to make your "authority" stick is to act dirty, to screw around with people by calling them dirty names and insulting their intelligence and character. Then you pretend that you didn't start it. My irascibility is not the same thing as a tendency to substitute verbal abuse for rational discussion. However, with Bells, Monkey, and Skinwalker, I have seen the use of verbal abuse to deliberately upset people to excuse taking further measures against them.

No person who I have ever seen acting like this has ever admitted that it was wrong and they always did it worse when called on it.

Cue the jackasses.

Yes, Bells, you decided to disagree with my stance on the HIV issue, and you decided to characterize me as a "dangerous person." You expected exactly what in return?

Yes and?

I have always been open and honest in saying that people who deny HIV exists poses a danger to society at large, especially when they are in positions of power or influence, as is evidenced by the disaster that is HIV and AIDS in Africa. You may think that no disaster exists, but that is you.

There is a negative personality type that likes to take certain metaphors as personal threats. I notice that not a lot of people seconded your perception of that comment about what should be done with carpetbaggers.
Do you honestly think that I have that much control or power over what others think or believe? Do you honestly think I can actually dictate what people think or believe?

So you think that because some people may have agreed with me, that I somehow bullied them into it? You have proof of this of course?

I said that this should be done to people who sell things the way that you do.
Really? Because from where I was sitting it was directly addressed to me and about me.

You may be aware of the lack of success of prosecutions of people who use that kind of metaphor the way that I did. I'm quite certain that you use the perception of the personal threat as a passive-aggressive way to help further derail the discussion. Anything works as fuel for the fire that you like to set.
*Sigh*

Where, when and how have I ever threatened you?

Anything or anyone who says anything that disagrees with you and you start screaming 'threats' and that "we" are somehow trying to 'control' you.

For goodness sake Meta, stop being so paranoid. When you post 'alternative' views, you have to expect that others will disagree with you. Disagreeing with you does not mean that it is a personal threat against you. This whole thread is basically YOU saying that We are somehow out to get you. Get over yourself.

Any moderator who supports the validity of this kind of claim should not be moderating a forum that exists for the purpose of free discussion of the sciences. That moderator is deliberately preventing the introduction of controversial theories, and this takes the science and the freedom out of it.
So you are saying we should let you post up links to articles that are a blatant lie and misrepresentation of the actual case? Why? Why do you think you should expect special treatment.

Again, you haven't been shut down. The thread was moved to cesspool (because the article lied about the case) and left open. And it is still open.

You also have no call to yell at me for getting out of line when you have not the slightest tendency to stay in line yourself.
May I remind you that this is an internet forum. I have no power or ability to "yell" at you. You have so far accused me or so many things in this forum to date that it has become too many to mention. You have no proof of any of this of course and when I ask for proof, you start ranting that I am somehow after you.

You don't like Sciforums anymore? Boohoo. Somewhere a tiny violin is playing your tune. But before you start saying that I somehow attack or sabotage other moderators or even you, you had better had some proof because do not expect me to sit back and just let you spread your accusations just because you think you should. I am sick and tired of having to treat you with kid gloves. If you step up and make such accusations, you had better believe that I will call you out on them.

So where exactly have I threatened you, yelled at you, attempted to shut you down, closed your threads or deleted your posts and links, bullied and threatened others into agreeing with me, attacked and sabotaged you and other moderators? In short, prove it or shove it.

You may not be able to dictate what other people believe, Bells, but I feel that you would use such a power if you had it. Second best is to to disrupt attempts to dislodge entrenched false beliefs, and you are quite successful at doing that.

I'm a little tired of watching you deny the thing that you have spent so much time and effort doing, and I do not believe your protests that what I am doing is "dangerous." I've already plumbed the shallow depths of your knowledge of the subject matter and all you know how to do is repeat what someone else told you.

Like the people who attacked Socrates, Galileo, and Semmelweiss, you are exactly like them. Every time a group like yours attacks someone like them, they make the same mistakes, they tell the same lies, they deceive themselves the same ways. You also attack numerous people of lower stature and have an easier time getting away with it, but you still do the same things. You also always wind up being proven wrong, but you use every power you have to prevent that proof from seeing the light of day.

So where exactly have I threatened you, yelled at you, attempted to shut you down, closed your threads or deleted your posts and links, bullied and threatened others into agreeing with me, attacked and sabotaged you and other moderators? In short, prove it or shove it.

I expressed an honest belief. I do not have to prove such a belief.

Jackass #1 (me)

Apparently what is happening is that threads that involve what is commonly known as pseudo-science are being treated as such. Of course, those who have great admiration for their own theories do not consider them to be pseudo-science.

And evidence really is a sticky point here. I think what we're after is compelling evidence for non-mainstream ideas. It needs to be supported by more than your say so and other pseudoscientific links.

Definitely the opinion of a jackass.

You may not be able to dictate what other people believe, Bells, but I feel that you would use such a power if you had it. Second best is to to disrupt attempts to dislodge entrenched false beliefs, and you are quite successful at doing that.

You have proof of this of course?

What you think of me means nothing to me. But when you start to accuse me of things, you need to have proof of it. This is what you have said:

There is a negative personality type that likes to take certain metaphors as personal threats. I notice that not a lot of people seconded your perception of that comment about what should be done with carpetbaggers.

And when asked to prove it, you say basically come out with 'umm maybe you don't really do that but would if you could'. So if you didn't think I did do this, why accuse me of it? And now you say I would if I could? You of course have proof of this as well?

I'm a little tired of watching you deny the thing that you have spent so much time and effort doing, and I do not believe your protests that what I am doing is "dangerous." I've already plumbed the shallow depths of your knowledge of the subject matter and all you know how to do is repeat what someone else told you.
And I am sick and tired of seeing you accuse me of threatening you, shutting you down, threatening and attacking members and other moderators as well as sabotaging them, and then when asked to prove it, see you turn tail and say 'well no not really, it's a personal opinion'.

You haven't "plumbed" squat. What you have done is accuse me falsely of ridiculous things without any proof whatsoever.

Like the people who attacked Socrates, Galileo, and Semmelweiss, you are exactly like them. Every time a group like yours attacks someone like them, they make the same mistakes, they tell the same lies, they deceive themselves the same ways. You also attack numerous people of lower stature and have an easier time getting away with it, but you still do the same things. You also always wind up being proven wrong, but you use every power you have to prevent that proof from seeing the light of day.
So you place yourself on the same level as Socrates, Galileo, and Semmelweiss? Interesting.

You posted an article that lied and falsified information and claimed it as fact. When this was pointed out to you, you became personally abusive, even to those who were on your side.

Who exactly are you accusing me of attacking now? Short people?

We are all equal here Meta. I shall repeat again the question I had posed to you and which you have failed to answer:


"So where exactly have I threatened you, yelled at you, attempted to shut you down, closed your threads or deleted your posts and links, bullied and threatened others into agreeing with me, attacked and sabotaged you and other moderators?"

And your reply?

I expressed an honest belief. I do not have to prove such a belief.
Convenient. No. You accused me of being and having done the above and have nothing to prove it.

And if we are going to go by matter of "opinion" since that appears to be the line you wish to follow.. my "opinion" of you is that you are a hack, liar and a downright coward. Your actions and accusations in this thread have proven this without a doubt. You made the accusations to me and about me and when asked to back it up, you had none to show, instead hiding behind matters of 'personal opinion'.

If you cannot back up your accusations or claims about me, don't expect me to sit back and say nothing. Again, prove it or shove it!

Get rid of the Teflon, Bells, and live like human beings have to.

what is it with you metakron?
you seem to know your stuff when it comes to electronics.

let me get this straight, you believe the AIDS virus is a hoax right?
for what ends? so pharmaceutical companies to make money.
so all of the following is in on it:
center for disease control.
world health organization.
amnesty international.
all so the USA can make a buck.

you really don't want to know what i would do if i was a moderator.

I am an accredited scientist

>> Yes, intellectual freedom and honesty are not encouraged here>>>

Actively discouraged, yes no intellectual extensions of current knowledge can be entertained by this place.

As the Pope of old, the doctrine is written in stone... yes in their stone heads, and never likely to change. You can not teach a poisoned head new tricks.

Sad but true...... so guess what ?

Y'all discuss trivialities, no advances can be made and really text books are sooooooooooooooooooooo out of date.

Remove the moderation..... except for disrespectful conduct.

What right has a bunch of losers to stifle scientific discussion, and that includes flamers, trolls and censors, I call these people anti-scientists.

Show me who amongst y'all knows EVERYTHING and knows it all to be TRUE
and I will show you a very tragic person, definitely not a scientist, and not someone that budding scientists should aspire to become.

Let the children explore each other's minds with no restraint except respect.

Who gave these anti-scientists the right to blinker the interchange of thoughts that one day may save the world.

You of superior scientific knowledge, why are you so scared of your "woo woo" input. remember it was from this conjecture, postulation etc that all scientific theory and experimentation has been propagated.

I think this depressing mood is not just on sciforums...but in the world...there is a war coming up...and it creates a lot of tensions within.

I am an accredited scientist

>> Yes, intellectual freedom and honesty are not encouraged here>>>

Actively discouraged, yes no intellectual extensions of current knowledge can be entertained by this place.

As the Pope of old, the doctrine is written in stone... yes in their stone heads, and never likely to change. You can not teach a poisoned head new tricks.

Sad but true...... so guess what ?

Y'all discuss trivialities, no advances can be made and really text books are sooooooooooooooooooooo out of date.

Remove the moderation..... except for disrespectful conduct.

What right has a bunch of losers to stifle scientific discussion, and that includes flamers, trolls and censors, I call these people anti-scientists.

Show me who amongst y'all knows EVERYTHING and knows it all to be TRUE
and I will show you a very tragic person, definitely not a scientist, and not someone that budding scientists should aspire to become.

Let the children explore each other's minds with no restraint except respect.

Who gave these anti-scientists the right to blinker the interchange of thoughts that one day may save the world.

You of superior scientific knowledge, why are you so scared of your "woo woo" input. remember it was from this conjecture, postulation etc that all scientific theory and experimentation has been propagated.

So you would agree with him that an article telling a blatant lie about a court case should be treated as being scientific fact?

No one stifled his discussion. It was moved to cesspool when it was found to be completely false and a lie. It is still open and ongoing. Had he been stifled, it would have been shut down and deleted.

How would the scientific community treat any of its members who commented on and falsified the findings of, say, an experiment?

you really don't want to know what i would do if i was a moderator.

give him a big hug!

Get rid of the Teflon, Bells, and live like human beings have to.

its my duty....to please that booty.

give him a big hug!
if i thought it would help i would.

>> So you would agree with him that an article telling a blatant lie....

No, I was speaking in general (I did not even read the OP) from my treatment on various science forums on the net.... at least 5

Inhabited by clicks of the most nasty people I have even come across.
Even stalking became par for the course, from one forum to another. Such was their psychopathic state.
Of course I understand this, as a biochemist I know they are all very very sick... metal pois-oned out of their conscience with no empathy for each other.
This is the state of play in the world, and ??????? nobody notices??????????

Maybe the net's anonymity brings out their worst characteristics...

BUT the moderators went/go along with it.... if people flame you, you get banned and not the flamers, and of course science is trashed.

I refuse to talk science here anymore.... usually I just make a single comment when I am passing and seldom look for or answer in reply.

Made your bed, then you sleep in it.

I wonder if the flame-throw instigators here would say the same stuff face to face?

If you would think twice about saying it face to face, you probably shouldn't be saying on message boards.

Yes, I would. Yes, I have.

Last time was at a scientific meeting. During the poster session I told presenters of a certain poster that their data was bullshit. Later in during the talk of their groupleader I asked a critical question regarding that data.

They are still pissed off because of that.

I think it is time you stop living in your particular fantasy world where your views are allmighty and start realizing that you could be wrong.

I can still remember my very first scientific meeting and some senior researcher came by to tell me I was wrong. And he was right. It took me a few weeks to realize it, but he was.

You've cleaned up your act somewhat, but you said some things to me early on which I seriously doubt you would have said face to face, same with most of the rest of the Darwinite rowdies here.

No, I would tell you you are full of bullshit too.

I have done that to people like you in the past. There is no point in being reasonable to people like you face to face. Best just to have some fun instead.

Oh we would have some fun.

Well, if there is beer also.

You better drink alot.

Sure.

Promise you won't cry.

Promise.

thank you my friend.

My jesus light your way.

"My Jesus?" Hehehe.

you hve to py for 'a's in socilist ntions.

I wonder if the flame-throw instigators here would say the same stuff face to face?

If you would think twice about saying it face to face, you probably shouldn't be saying on message boards.

They have a myriad of excuses for stopping an investigation before it even gets started.

That's right, try to head 'em off at the pass.

They have a myriad of excuses for stopping an investigation before it even gets started.


We are so terribly sorry that we have to object to falsified court cases.

They have a myriad of excuses for stopping an investigation before it even gets started.

If I had ever tried to use a false case as a precedent in court, I'd have been crucified and fired, never, ever to work again.:bugeye:

Hell, if I did it at uni, I would have failed and possibly been kicked out and a nice little permanent record with a virtual black mark next to my name would have ensued.

Had the decision as reported in that article been real, it would have been a different matter. But the article was a lie. You cannot expect anyone to accept it as fact because you thought it was true and real. It wasn't an investigation. It was you attempting to hold it up like a trump card and it was shown to be false and a hoax. So instead of getting angry at us because monkey moved it to cesspool, maybe you should question why the site that reported it, was reporting a hoax as though it were fact.

And now if you will excuse me, I am craving celery and must satisfy said craving. Good bye.

I wonder if the flame-throw instigators here would say the same stuff face to face?

If you would think twice about saying it face to face, you probably shouldn't be saying on message boards.

im a very frank person.

on that note:
its my duty...to please that booty.

its my duty...to please that booty.
let me guess, it's your new catch phrase right?

If I had ever tried to use a false case as a precedent in court, I'd have been crucified and fired, never, ever to work again.:bugeye:

Hell, if I did it at uni, I would have failed and possibly been kicked out and a nice little permanent record with a virtual black mark next to my name would have ensued.

Had the decision as reported in that article been real, it would have been a different matter. But the article was a lie. You cannot expect anyone to accept it as fact because you thought it was true and real. It wasn't an investigation. It was you attempting to hold it up like a trump card and it was shown to be false and a hoax. So instead of getting angry at us because monkey moved it to cesspool, maybe you should question why the site that reported it, was reporting a hoax as though it were fact.

And now if you will excuse me, I am craving celery and must satisfy said craving. Good bye.

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick. When I mention Gallo's lies and can PROVE it you just let it slime right off of you. You deny it, you say it comes from a "dissident source" when it actually comes from one of the nastiest defenders of AIDS Inc., and then you have the hypocritical gall to bash on me like that because what I said about that court case might have been mistaken. What is wrong with you people? You are so completely dishonest.

So much for congeniality.

IceAge,



Don't you ever get tired of using the same old strawman/red herring?
There is no such thing as a Darwinite.
Darwin contributed to the theory of evolution and some of his ideas are still in use today, but he is not the end all and be all of the theory of evolution.
Never has been.
Never will be.

Get the wax out of your ears.

Speak for yourself. I worship Darwin, with my cock out and cocoa butter and everything.

The more that I see a certain set of three moderators do here, the more respect that I lose for this forum. Spuriousmonkey, Skinwalker, and Bells are trying to tighten up on "woo-woo" information and links, and they're doing it in a way that no one who has alternative scientific theories can get any evidence in, unless it's in the Cesspool and the given moderator has already insulted them and been rude.

The more that I see them do, the more respect that I lose for them and for the forum. They are destroying the free exchange of information.

Whoa, buddy. Cut them a little slack will ya? Theyre just here to entertain us with their ongoing nonsensical right to justify why their equatorial concession of truth and self-interest should be adopted.

Speak for yourself. I worship Darwin, with my cock out and cocoa butter and everything.

ohhh, I can see that. I can see that. And tell me Roman, when the cocoa butter slathered hands rub over your cock in contemplation of an old dead guy with a long, white beard, does it make you feel like a real man?

ohhh, I can see that. I can see that. And tell me Roman, when the cocoa butter slathered hands rub over your cock in contemplation of an old dead guy with a long, white beard, does it make you feel like a real man?

I think someone has a crush on someone!

Whoa, buddy. Cut them a little slack will ya? Theyre just here to entertain us with their ongoing nonsensical right to justify why their equatorial concession of truth and self-interest should be adopted.

I should cut them slack for that?

What kind of people can even stand to be seen the way that they are seen here, anyway?

I think someone has a crush on someone!

About as much as you, "too much love." ;)

I should cut them slack for that?

What kind of people can even stand to be seen the way that they are seen here, anyway?

Robots. Thats why theres so many products of the system here. If you want to know how well a forum is being moderated, look at its trolls.

Well, some of the moderators are being trolls, and giving me an infraction for "intellectual dishonesty" is just plain petty.

You never received an infraction by roman for intellectual dishonesty.

I know you are fond of lies but no need to fabricate them yourself.

Grow up, Monkey.

I'd rather not.

thank you my friend for considering to talk to me.

everything posted on this forum is directed at me.


Not everything, just the insults. :D

I asked the administrator to set up the system so that all infractions go straight to TDI.

thank you.

17000 posts... this monkeys been growing