Replies

It does look that the Mods-'boxing refs' have been bought off at times. There is plenty of material to back that view up. In this regard I think he has some legitimate observations (forget about mine here for sake of argument). Are you you aware how the threads seem to operate? Do you take a hands off approach to the threads? Are you okay with how the threads are 'moderated'? Are you aware as to the 'mod response' as far as what is perceived as personal attack, and the mod-response ratio to that? Are you okay with all the sac-religious imagery, mocking, ridiculing, etc that passes for debate in the 'name of science'? I tell you that even 'evolutionists' that show up on those threads and do not regurgitate the 'ping list koolaid' are taken to task. I know from experience that just taking some of the evolutionist's own text and bouncing it back to him (on the same thread!) will will result in a deletion of my post and a warning to myself, while his post stays up. And these guys I came back at are your serial /one line hit job wonders - not exactly rocket scientists/ on those threads.

That's pretty funny coming from the guy whose standard behavior on the "crevo" threads is stuff like this:

I have been caught doing what, exactly?

Well for starters.., being a demented nut-ball of a kookcase in some bizarre fantasy land LOL

Wolf
1,850 posted on 12/20/2005 3:29:58 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

...and who repeatedly refers to evolutionary biology as a "cult" and science-literate Freepers as "cultists".

I'll be glad to post endless examples of your puerile personal attacks from the "crevo" threads if you want to keep trying to play the "innocent" injured party.

In fact, after watching you in action for many months, I was surprised on this thread to learn that you were capable of writing in a calm and reasonable manner for a change, and in full complete sentences, when you chose to. Previously I had no evidence that you could do anything beyond this level of "discourse":

What an utterly dishonest attempt to shift the burden of proof.

Well.., only if before the demented court of a raging megalomaniac paraplegic.

Wolf

965 posted on 12/18/2005 2:36:57 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

And:

Once again you make no case for evo-cultism

CUS U CANT

Wolf

1,847 posted on 12/20/2005 2:51:25 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

And:

No.., you said

//Humans and monkeys share common ancestry//

You make this claim

//Humans and monkeys share common ancestry.//

So what is the common ancestry? Real and specific facts...

NOW.... pathetic LIAR!!

Wolf

1,852 posted on 12/20/2005 3:38:13 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

And:

Its the arrogance of blind ignorance and tiny little minds.

Wolf

1,062 posted on 12/18/2005 12:05:51 PM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

...and those are just from *one* thread... Hundreds more examples available upon request.

(Since I'm familiar with your tactics, I'm going to insist that if you try to play tit-for-tat and quote from my own posts, you do so by including the *entire* post, as I have done here with your posts, and not just take some passages out of context.)

So don't try to play innocent and complain about "personal attack", " mocking, ridiculing, etc that passes for debate", "serial /one line hit job wonders", when those phrases far better describe your own "contributions" than those of just about anyone else on the "crevo" threads.

You've gotten warnings and posts deleted because you've deserved them. And you've earned more than you've actually gotten, so count your blessings.

In closing, the "creos" and the "evos" both frequently feel that the moderators are being too tough on "their" side and too forgiving of the "other" side -- which to me is a good indication that the moderators are doing a fairly even-handed job.

Look I am not playing Innocent, but for the record I did not respond like that till after being taunted and provoked many many times with everything the ping-list threw at me. Or even worse, seeing the same thing happen to brand new people that showed up on those threads.

Why don't you post the context those posts came out of the threads they were in? Why don't you show where those posts by me were essentially 'to rescue' others that had wondered in to those threads and been swarmed upon by your compadres?

And BTW if that is an indoctrination of me, it pales in comparison to depth breadth and volume of the vitriol that flows out of those evo-ping list people in the name of science. And no real scientist ever behaves they way these people do, their behavior does indeed qualify as cultist (or at least gang) in that regard.

You have not posted any of the complements I gave you directly, Why is that?

But I guess already knew what your answer is although I thought you might be able to see beyond that a little bit. What I want to hear is his answer.

Finally here is just one example of what I speak of. The following is a long-term evos first reply ever to a brand new 'creo', and it was on a religion thread.

"Let me guess. You're a troll here to perpetuate the myth that conservatives are a demented bunch of ignorant anti-science psychopaths"

So I came back at the evo with his own statement, and left it all the same except I changed 'anti-science' to 'punk-evo'. That was enough to get my post deleted and a warning. That is just how warped and distorted the outfit operates on these threads. BTW his post is still there, along with his sac-religious imagery.

Wolf