Sciforums

What? You're tripping. I'm not vindictive like that. I could overlook an instance of that by mistake, but I assure you, if it is brought to my attention, I will deal with it. I might just delete it and not give an infraction. Such is my perogative as moderator. A first offense might just be deleted, but I noticed you have a problem with cursing, more than one post on just that one thread, and it's not the first time.

Here is an acceptable use of the term:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I jsut thought of something.

Maybe you could have a "member dispute" forum. If one member thinks another member has wronged him or her in some way, they can have their own thread, to talk out their problems. If one member chooses to not be reasonable, (s)he can be properly penalized. All of the comments in the thread would be limited to the parties involved, and possibly a moderator to keep it clean.

Make the banning/penalizing of the worst cases a public, as opposed to a private, affair. Get the plantiffs and defendants involved, and if one of the two members clearly shows a pattern of abbusive behavior, appropriate action can be taken. The moderators will still have the final say, but at least this way there will be a more public record of bannings and disputes.

Just a thought. Maybe it's too much trouble to have someone acting as a judge, but maybe not, because it doesn't have to be a real-time thing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ok leopold. I won't entertain your objections to reason anymore. I'll say one more time why you're wrong, and you can have the last word, as I am sure you will. then you and IAC can go dance in the land of faeries and wood elves, and leave the science to the scientists.

By definition, science seeks to go as far as it can in explaining the natural world without resorting to outside influences. Read Bacon, or any of the science philosophers---it was only when science decoupled from religion in Europe that the Enlightenment occured.

This being said, there is nothing wrong with believing that life cannot be formed in a lab. You must admit, though, that this isn't a scientific attitude. The scientist will say, "we just haven't figured out the process yet", and you will say "That's because you can't". All discussions will end this way, necessarily.

Accepting that science cannot do something signals the breakdown of logic. It means (necessarily) that there are things in this world which science cannot prove. If this is true, then there is no reason to accept any of the previous results of science---our logic is shown explicitly to be incomplete, and thus all of our logic is suspect.

One implies the other, and if you want to say that "producing life in a laboratory isn't possible", then you have abandoned science.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's irrelevent to this discussion. I didn't even remember he contributed to the origins thread until he mentioned it.

 

avatar,
there needs to be a rule that people like ben don't put words in posters mouths.
i have not objected to reason and ben should be forced to retract the above statement.

yes you are sure because of the garbage in this post.
i am not wrong when i say science has not solved the riddle of life.
you yourself stated that if that is the case then all possibilities are that, possibilities. but yet you go on to say . . .

nice double standard.

another statement i never made and you should be forced to retract it.

all i asked from you is a logical explanation of why life from lifelessness is logical.

 

???

 

this whole deal of the origins of life reminds me of the following:
12 people fille into a room.
a picture is passed down the line.
11 of the 12 say they see something that isn't there.
when the twelfth person looks at the picture he "sees" the same thing as the previous 11.

sorry guys, the picture isn't right.

 

and? so?
i stand by my statements.

 

another thing that needs to be done is to do something about skinwalkers nazi moderation style and his abuse of moderation powers.
i've already mentioned this to james, i've also pointed it out in a thread or two, i've also mentioned it to spidergoat by PM.

yet another thing that needs to be done concerns the following:

something similar pops up when religion is discussed.
skinwalker, hercules rockefeller, and numerous others are notorious for saying such things. this practice needs to stop.
yes, of course this is a science board. well in that case get rid of the religion forum then.

 

ooooooh.

 

Yes, they should get rid of the religion forum, since this is a science forum.

 

the mods and admins are asking for the posters input on shaping sciforums future and this is all you can offer?

 

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1416489&postcount=102

 

Hopefully, the "thread or two" you pointed out to James R is the one where you threw a hissy fit and announced you weren't returning to the Religion subforum anymore.

You know. The one where you have about 20 deleted posts. The one where I only deleted about 3 or 4 of your posts -each clearly off-topic; bickering; or meta-discussion that should have been in PM.

You made it seem like I deleted your posts, but they're each still there, soft-deleted and with a note that says, "post deleted by leopold99."

It's interesting how those that don't get to bicker, flame, & post their off-topic posts are the ones complaining about "nazi moderation."

I don't typically respond to the silly, childish nonsense complaints like this since it is clearly a continued form of trolling/baiting with an attempt to manipulate the moderator into caving on principles.

I don't care who you are: if you troll/bait/insult/post off-topic nonsense, I'm going to moderate it. I'll deleted the post or give an infraction. But I don't give two shits who you are. Naturally, since I'm also willing to be vocal against superstition and the paranormal, calling claimants out on their assertions and insisting that scientific claims be backed with science and not pseudoscience, the pseudos, nutters, zealots, and woo-woo's all figure this means I'm out to censor their "right to free speech" when I delete their trolling/baiting/insults.

I'm tempted to say, "dumb asses," but I won't.

This will, however, be the last word I have on the topic. Bitch and whine to whom you like. Don't forget that any post I've ever deleted is still there, Soft-deleted, and ready for review by James R. or Plazma.

 

But you did. Reported.

 

Administrator's Notice:

This thread went off topic. I'm sorry, but I have to close it.

Purpose of this thread was to announce our activities on SciForums policy in forthcoming days.

I hope that in days that come, good solution both for members and for forum will be found.

You'll have a chance to discus and to suggest additions for solution that will be exposed to you.