2500+ posts, with numerous people jumping on the lady. Fine record "you"(collective) have. It started out with the "medved" charge. I have saved this thread. It is an object lesson in belittling, the epitome.
...and her and others jumping us.
It's a debate. It's not a tea party. If that offends anyone's delicate sensibilities, they should find another hobby. It's true that it shouldn't go overboard and everyone should attempt to be well-mannered, but continual whimpering about who was less genteel to whom first (or most) via some personal double-standard scorecard bespeaks of an unhealthy obsession.
If you think this is bad, you should see how rough professional "peer review" can get. Science, like the judicial system, is intentionally an adversarial system. You make your best case, then in effect everyone does their best to try to prove you a liar or an incompetent. If your work survives the onslaught, it's considered solid. If not, you slink out of the arena and vow to do better next time. People who propose "alternative" paradigms to mainstream science need to come to terms with that, and stop whining about how they're being abused when someone points out, "wait, that makes no sense and you don't understand the field you're trying to overturn".
Fine record "you"(collective) have.
On the whole, I approve of "our" (collective) record more than I do "yours" (collective). Furthermore, to my view our side has a lot fewer crybabies who fit the classic idiom, "can dish it out but can't take it".
It started out with the "medved" charge.
Oh, for PETE'S SAKE. First, one would have to be incredibly hypersensitive to find fault with that post. Even DittoJed2 took it as a compliment when she learned who Medved was. Second, it was an "inside" comment that DittoJed2 wouldn't have even realized was directed at her (nor known what it meant) until someone (*cough*) made a big bloody deal about it as if it were a deadly sin, which it was not. Finally, what in the heck is so supposedly wrong with pointing out that someone's views remind regulars of someone else's views? RELAX, please.
Additionally, it didn't "start" with that. Several posts earlier DittoJed2 had written:
I don't find evolutionists "amusing". I find them pathetically sad. I also find them angering because they willfully distort the record in text books to get kids to believe the lie of evolution while suppressing anything that even sounds like creation.So the namecalling didn't start with the Medved post (which was not actually namecalling anyway), it started with DittoJed2 calling evolutionists willful liars. But hey, I guess that got scored via the *other* side of the double-standard, and thus didn't rise to the level of uncivil...
I have saved this thread. It is an object lesson in belittling, the epitome.
See post #478 if you want to see the epitome of belittling, namecalling, and hypocrisy -- by a creationist.