- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,19:38) Quote (t8 @ Aug. 26 2008,19:20) I also enjoy telling you why a singularity coming from nothing and transforming into stars, galaxies, life, and banana's is kind of funny. I mean it is good to have a laugh is it not.
I might feel the need to report you to a moderator for failing to stay on-topic. You can get kicked out of some areas of this site for that, you know.Stuart
Look at the explanation for this category.Chat, Feedback, Help...
Read here first before posting anywhere. Also the place for chit chat and a cup of tea.Then look at the explanation for the others.
Also the title to the discussion is “Boy Scouts even more insular now”. So it is really not that clear what the topic is to begin with, except to provoke some kind of reaction. So I am provoking a reaction. Seems to be keeping within the theme is it not?
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,20:11) But if you actually read what I write, I am quite happy to assume the existence of your castle in the air for the purpose of discussing it.
Maybe, but only disguise the real agenda which is to try and disprove God.Look up the word troll in the context of a forum.
A troll is a user that repeatedly and intentionally breaches
netiquette, often posting derogatory or otherwise inflammatory
messages about sensitive topics in an established online
community to bait users into responding, often starting
flamewars.Quote (t8 @ Aug. 26 2008,22:26) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,19:38) Quote (t8 @ Aug. 26 2008,19:20) I also enjoy telling you why a singularity coming from nothing and transforming into stars, galaxies, life, and banana's is kind of funny. I mean it is good to have a laugh is it not.
I might feel the need to report you to a moderator for failing to stay on-topic. You can get kicked out of some areas of this site for that, you know.Stuart
Look at the explanation for this category.Chat, Feedback, Help...
Read here first before posting anywhere. Also the place for chit chat and a cup of tea.Then look at the explanation for the others.
Also the title to the discussion is “Boy Scouts even more insular now”. So it is really not that clear what the topic is to begin with, except to provoke some kind of reaction. So I am provoking a reaction. Seems to be keeping within the theme is it not?
Can't see it myself. Will you censure yourself if I complain?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,20:03) What a load of rubbish. If you followed this logic you would kick off half the contributors to the trinity 'discussion'. A point about how patently political John 3:16 is a point about John 3:16, it has nothing to do with whether believers are so deluded that their imaginary friends seem real.
Not sure what you mean. A discussion on John 3:16 in the Believers Place should be for those who believe the scripture and not necessarily for those who have different opinions on it.Quote (t8 @ Aug. 26 2008,22:31) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,20:11) But if you actually read what I write, I am quite happy to assume the existence of your castle in the air for the purpose of discussing it.
Maybe, but only disguise the real agenda which is to try and disprove God.Look up the word troll in the context of a forum.
A troll is a user that repeatedly and intentionally breaches
netiquette, often posting derogatory or otherwise inflammatory
messages about sensitive topics in an established online
community to bait users into responding, often starting
flamewars.
Give me a single example of a flamewar I have started. The cry of 'agenda' is pathetic. Have you nothing constructive and supportive to say of the reality of your beliefs? Do you need to whine about people not having nice things to say about your potentially dangerous fantasy?What about your agenda? Why would your recent posts not qualify you as a troll, especially your intentional misrepresentations in the evolution thread?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 26 2008,22:35) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,20:03) What a load of rubbish. If you followed this logic you would kick off half the contributors to the trinity 'discussion'. A point about how patently political John 3:16 is a point about John 3:16, it has nothing to do with whether believers are so deluded that their imaginary friends seem real.
Not sure what you mean. A discussion on John 3:16 in the Believers Place should be for those who believe the scripture and not necessarily for those who have different opinions on it.
Read the rules you wrote.Stuart
Stu, we are not so strict as to not allow anybody at anytime to deviate from a subject at any time. I understand that deviation is sometimes necessary to prove a point that will be used for the subject at hand. I also realise that people tend to go off the topic and I always try and encourage them to get back to the topic if the divergence is big.
What is frowned upon are those who deviate from the topic to try and ignite flame wars and the like, or if the deviation is to long.
In the end it is better to stick to subjects because that kind of order makes it easier for people to find what they are looking for. Think of it as putting the library book in the correct place so it can be found easily.
But I am also realistic, and if I spent all my time making people stick to subjects then I would be more of a policeman than a member here.
So I encourage sticking to the subject and discourage flame wars and provocation.
I am only trying to be reasonable so that all things will flow. Because of that, I really only try to stop a deviation if it goes on too long as I think it would be better served in it's own discussion. I even go along with deviations as you have seen, as any conversation deviates. But as I said before, if the deviation is long, then I encourage it to be put in another or a new discussion. It's really just keeping things tidy, but not to the point that it is so immaculate that it is not homely anymore.
Thanks and I await your criticism of this post. I hope that I haven't given you anything that you can make a real meal out of.
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,22:40) Read the rules you wrote. Stuart
Stu a scripture in the Scripture and Doctrine forum is for those that believe that John 3:16 is scripture. That forum is also placed in the Believers category.Notice the words John 3:16, Scripture, Believers? It kind of says something, don't you think.
Anyway it seems obvious that your intention is to find fault in people. Have you heard the term “Accuser of the Brethren”? There are quite a number of people who seem to fit that characteristic and you can waste your whole life conversing and debating with such.
Instead of debating in the subject, there are some who resort to trying to finding fault in the person. You see this sort of thing in politics a lot too. Anyway thanks for the conversation, but I don't think that there is much benefit in continuing talking with you today.
But no hard feelings from me, it's just that I have other things to work on that are more productive for now. Will catch you again no doubt.
t8 you don't seem to understand the phrase play the ball not the man. I have no intention of finding faults in people, your perception is clouded by your inability. The point you are dodging is that you, of Nick, have moved threads from the general area to the Boy Scouts section. You still have not actually explained why, nor which rule I broke to be given a tile. Your 'justice' stinks as far as I can smell. Of course I have the option of not posting here, but why should anyone have respect for your moderation if you jsut keep changing the posting rights of people, which you have done. You have made some weak references to the topic titles, the status of which you changed yourself anyway, yet you cannot point to a single breach by me of any of the rules I agreed to when I signed up.
It really shows that most of the negative points I made about the nature of belief are true. It seems that with god anything is possible, and with Nick and t8 at the helm any old interpretaion will do.
Your patronising tone is not appreciated either.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,22:39) Give me a single example of a flamewar I have started. The cry of 'agenda' is pathetic. Have you nothing constructive and supportive to say of the reality of your beliefs? Do you need to whine about people not having nice things to say about your potentially dangerous fantasy? What about your agenda? Why would your recent posts not qualify you as a troll, especially your intentional misrepresentations in the evolution thread?
Stuart
Stu, it sounds like you are in a bad mood.Count to ten and breathe slowly.
I am really not your enemy. I don't have any bad feelings toward you at all. I mean that.
I will be honest with you Stu. All I can see is a person who is out to criticize others. You appear to have no interest in searching out the possibility of things but just have an agenda to derail the whole point of these forums. Never mind good morals and respect for others, I don't even see your behaviour as good science.
All I can say is that I hope you get better and I can tell you now that you will not stop anything that is happening here. If you keep trying to find fault in people, then you will just become a fly sort of buzzing around, but nobody really taking notice.
I think your contributions have been valuable to the degree that you do represent a sector of the human race who have similar questions, doubts, and criticisms as you do. And so for that reason I converse with you sometimes. But in reality I take very little of what you say that seriously because I know that your motives are not to help but to pull down.
Also I feel that you don't acknowledge good points when they are presented to you. You just ignore them and carry on as if they never happened. But that is not the way a person carries on if he is really looking for the truth. A truthful person considers what others say, and if what that person says stumps them, then they take the challenge on in order to become a better person. But I have to admit to you that you haven't stumped me in anything you have said.
I was once a person who believed the theory of Evolution and I understand it well. You haven't said anything new to me Stu. There is nothing confusing to me about that theory. I just don't believe it is correct.
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,23:14) t8 you don't seem to understand the phrase play the ball not the man. I have no intention of finding faults in people, your perception is clouded by your inability. The point you are dodging is that you, of Nick, have moved threads from the general area to the Boy Scouts section.
If what you say is true, then why use the term “Boy Scouts” section instead of the proper name. The only reason I can see is to provoke people to flame wars which is what Forum trolls generally do.But in truth your comments haven't made me angry, rather I think they are quite funny. But it really doesn't paint your motives in a good light. That is my opinion.
Thanks for listening.
I really have to go Stu.
Quote Stu, it sounds like you are in a bad mood.
Patronising tone not appreciated. Again.Quote Count to ten and breathe slowly.
And again. Can you help it?Quote I am really not your enemy. I don't have any bad feelings toward you at all. I mean that. I will be honest with you Stu. All I can see is a person who is out to criticize others..
NO. Read my posts. I criticise ideas. That is the whole point. You discriminate on the wrong grounds.Quote You appear to have no interest in searching out the possibility of things but just have an agenda to derail the whole point of these forums. Never mind good morals and respect for others, I don't even see your behaviour as good science.
Is part of ‘the whole point of these forums’ to tell lies about science? That is what you have done on the front page and elsewhere. I don’t think you would know good science if it tapped you on the shoulder and announced itself.Quote All I can say is that I hope you get better
..and again…Quote and I can tell you now that you will not stop anything that is happening here.
OK. As long as people are aware of your christian-style shifting of the goal posts because you find some questions inconvenient. It’s your site, but it’s faultlines are showing.Quote If you keep trying to find fault in people, then you will just become a fly sort of buzzing around, but nobody really taking notice.
Why do you keep replying then?Quote I think your contributions have been valuable to the degree that you do represent a sector of the human race who have similar questions, doubts, and criticisms as you do. And so for that reason I converse with you sometimes. But in reality I take very little of what you say that seriously because I know that your motives are not to help but to pull down.
You don’t know the first thing about my motives. I can only guess at your motives for lying about science.Quote Also I feel that you don't acknowledge good points when they are presented to you. You just ignore them and carry on as if they never happened.
You don’t actually read what I wrote, do you? You’ve just told me you don’t take it seriously, so why make such a fatuous and unfounded comment. I could find hundreds of points of agreement recorded here. Maybe it is just because few of them have been with you.Quote But that is not the way a person carries on if he is really looking for the truth. A truthful person considers what others say, and if what that person says stumps them, then they take the challenge on in order to become a better person. But I have to admit to you that you haven't stumped me in anything you have said.
You cannot explain the structure of the 4 billion year old fossil record.Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 26 2008,23:20) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,23:14) t8 you don't seem to understand the phrase play the ball not the man. I have no intention of finding faults in people, your perception is clouded by your inability. The point you are dodging is that you, of Nick, have moved threads from the general area to the Boy Scouts section.
If what you say is true, then why use the term “Boy Scouts” section instead of the proper name. The only reason I can see is to provoke people to flame wars which is what Forum trolls generally do.But in truth your comments haven't made me angry, rather I think they are quite funny. But it really doesn't paint your motives in a good light. That is my opinion.
Thanks for listening.
I really have to go Stu.
My reason for that name may be locked in an obscure post somewhere. It is a reference to the fact that the Boy Scouts ridiculously require their members to have belief in a god / higher power / whatever. Not even the anglican church requires that of its ministers!Stuart
Quote (kejonn @ Aug. 25 2008,22:15) Quote (treverend @ Aug. 25 2008,00:48) lol! Why would God send a Atheist to test Christians, that really makes no sence. God doesn't want to hurt our faith he wants us to build it up while we rely on Him even in our suffering.
Ever read Job?
I sure did………Scary !!!Quote Remember, one of us reserves a chink of possibility that the other is right. –stu.
So you're saying you believe I may be right, that there is a possibility.?
Quote (david @ Aug. 27 2008,14:50) Quote Remember, one of us reserves a chink of possibility that the other is right. –stu.
So you're saying you believe I may be right, that there is a possibility.?
If you remember, I estimated it at less than one billionth of a billionth of one percent. I think I was being generous. Yes you could be right. My provisional conclusion, based on the evidence, is that you are not.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 25 2008,19:56) I think you have nailed the point actually. No I do not respect beliefs, because they are just ideas and in my opinion religious ideas are very often loony ideas.
Except for your own beliefs of course, such as “The Singularity that did it all on its own” theory.Does that mean that you are intolerant of others?
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 27 2008,19:54) If you remember, I estimated it at less than one billionth of a billionth of one percent. I think I was being generous. Yes you could be right. My provisional conclusion, based on the evidence, is that you are not. Stuart
The chances of a singularity coming from nothing is impossible.Then couple that with the chances of a singularity that just started expanding and as a result galaxies, suns, planets, atoms, life, and bananas etc, is more than 1 billion billion billionth of a percent and each moment of time that increases because the singularity is still doing stuff. Actually it is also impossible for a singularity to do all these things on it's own.
I would say based on your own thinking, there is more chance that there is a creator from the odds you gave.
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 26 2008,23:50) My reason for that name may be locked in an obscure post somewhere. It is a reference to the fact that the Boy Scouts ridiculously require their members to have belief in a god / higher power / whatever. Not even the anglican church requires that of its ministers! Stuart
Hmm those Boy Scouts.They should teach that we are apes right?
They could start meetings with “We thank the primitive ape who is our descendant. We are indebted to that ape for all time. Praise to the original ape who walked upright.”
Yeah I can see it now. Scout membership would increase 5 fold.
Actually recognition of a creator is wise. The who ape thing is just plain funny.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
