The League of Reason censors Walter Remine

[Anachronous Rex]

You know, I was thinking you were just dishonest, but now I think that you might simply not understand what Hytegia said. He asked for an experiment that he could run. Did you not notice that part? Do you not know what an experiment is? What's the problem here?

I never saw the word "run." Maybe you could show me where he used that word. In case you didn't notice, I explained why I chose Remine's paper. I was being thoughtful of Hytegia. And as soon as he protested, I came through with a new paper as promised. You need to admit you were wrong to lock the thread.

So you focus on the word "run" and ignore the fact that he used the word "execute." How dishonest is that? Also, you do realize that even if you hadn't been trolling, I would have been obligated to lock the thread just because the user whom it was directed towards asked me to? You have to calm down and grow up.

An experiment that Hytegia could run, something that he could try to replicate the results thereof; you know, what he asked for. Don't accuse other people of lying until you learn to understand what they are saying.

Again, I did produce a paper he could run. Did you not read the thread?

Why don't you point out to me exactly where you provided an experimental methodology? Come back when you've got it.

Did it have an experiment in it? Do you know what that word means? What is your level of education in science?

Again, if you would have read the thread you locked, you would know the answers to your questions.

There was no creationist experiment in that thread. If you think there was you definitely don't know what the word means, and I'm guessing your level of education in science is non-existent.

Buddy, I'm about as afraid of you and Walter Remine as I am that Batman will swoop out of the sky and steal my kidneys. Now we've given you the reason several times. Your inability to acknowledge it does not change this.

And your inability to acknowledge that you had no reasonable reason to lock the thread does not change that fact either.

I had two, possibly three, so calm down and sod off.

 

[fightofthejellyfish]

The thread is still there, anyone who wants a chuckle can still view it, it still contains your link to ReMine's 'paper', and you're still free to spout absurdly untrue statements such as this. No one was censored in any way, shape or form. All that happened was that a discussion was brought to a close because you couldn't deliver as promised, despite your embarrassing overconfidence that you could.

What did I promise to deliver? (Hint: I delivered exactly what I promised to deliver, threefold.)

The challenge you accepted was to find any experiment, ever conducted, anywhere, that indicates the earth is around 6000 years old.

FAIL. That wasn't the challenge. Read again.

YesYouNeedJesus I'd give you a rebuttal but YesYouNeedJesus already did. Let me get out the highlighter.

YesYouNeedJesus[/color]"]Hytegia laid out this challenge for me in another thread.

I'm looking for something I can actually execute the testing outlined in the paper and replicate the results to suggest anything regarding a less-than 6000 year old Earth, man living with dinosaurs, or anything else outlined with Young Earth Creationist claims.
I don't care where it's from - this is what Peer Review is. If I can perform the tests and they have comparable results, along with similar conclusions that can be drawn from such evidence, then it's passed Peer Review. If not, then oh dear, that's just wrong!

My response to this challenge is a paper written by Walter Remine published in a creationist peer-reviewed journal. Link below. Good luck!

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j19_1/j19_1_113-125.pdf

:facepalm:

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

YesYouNeedJesus, if you would like, you can start a new thread solely for discussing ReMine's paper. All this whining is getting you nowhere. Do you really think you can picket a forum? The reasons for the thread being lock were explained to you, whether you agree with it or not it is done. Move on already, you are supposed to be an adult.

 

[brettpalmer]

YesYouNeedJesus, if you would like, you can start a new thread solely for discussing ReMine's paper. All this whining is getting you nowhere.

If you really believe that you are sadly mistaken. This sort of wailing and flailing is getting him exactly what he wants. Remember the "Michael Shermer said 'The sun is not a light'" fiasco? Remember how Enyart drags this up any chance he can get to misrepresent Shermer, and by extension, all critics of his special brand of creationism? Well, I've pointed out before that Will is a disciple of Enyart and he's learned from sitting at the feet of his Master. He's going to (and is) using this to promote the idea that atheists (and anyone who disagrees with him) are liars and cheats. He's pointing to his martyrdom here as further evidence that atheists (and anyone who disagrees with him) are afraid of "real" science and the "truth." He snuggles in bed at night, smug with the satisfaction that Christ is overwhelmingly pleased with his performance because, if he were not being persecuted, he would be doing something wrong. To have the atheists of the LoR forum close his thread is the greatest gift he could ever have received. It vindicates his faith and tells him he's on the right ("real" and "true") path.

 

[australopithecus]

Hey YYNJ; you seem to have conveniently missed this part:

Now, you also posted the same Remine peice in the Aron/Bob debate thread, so if you can muster the energy to discuss it like an adult then I suggest you do so.

If we're censoring his work out of fear then we're clearly not doing a good job of it.

 

[Frenger]

Wow, you all are more foolish than I thought. Don't expect me to believe your lies. LoR censored Remine out of fear. Regardless, I guess I'll waste my time responding the asinine arguments in this thread.

If I read correctly YYNJ, the thread was opened because Hytegia challenged you to present him with a testable creationsist hypothesis that he could then recreate. He offered to put in his own money and time to conduct the experiment and all you had to do was present him with a TESTABLE paper.

You didn't, you couldn't, you lied, the thread was closed.

Simples? I would have thought so.

You guys don't think mathematics is testable? ROFL :lol: I'm pretty sure I posted in the section of the website called "Science and Mathematics."

I think the mathematics in it were already refuted by @scalyblue when he said

"Why would the next generation have to have the 'same population' (i.e., same population size) as the previous? Is this a requirement of evolution?"

Or did you miss that part out?

 

[YesYouNeedJesus]

Oh, and don't think we don't know what you're doing, because we've seen this act before.

The creationist shows up and then goofs-off until the mods are forced to take action, and then they cry foul about how oppressed they are, how we're all afraid of the truth, and other such nonsense. It's a great way to claim victory without actually having to actually back up your claims with evidence or defend them against rebuttal (which, just so we're clear, you didn't do), but sadly no one but other young-earth creationists ever falls for it.

Forced to take action? That's laughable. You can't justify your decision to lock the thread. Just admit it. If the other members cared about truth, they would call you on it.

The only reason to cry oppression is when a forum locks threads with no justifiable reason.

 

[australopithecus]

You can't justify your decision to lock the thread. Just admit it.

Hytegia asked for the thread to be locked, he started it so it's his right to end it if he wants. We need no more justification that that the OP called time.

 

[YesYouNeedJesus]

Hytegia asked for the thread to be locked, he started it so it's his right to end it if he wants. We need no more justification that that the OP called time.

This is getting worse by the minute. Why do you think Hytegia started the thread? He didn't. I did.

 

[YesYouNeedJesus]

australopithecus, you should just stop trying to justify something that is not justifiable and reverse his actions. Then we can move on.

 

[YesYouNeedJesus]

A link to another thread on the forum?

duh.

Yes, but no need to play games. Did that link to another thread fulfill my promise to Hytegia? Yes or No?

 

[australopithecus]

Hytegia asked for the thread to be locked, he started it so it's his right to end it if he wants. We need no more justification that that the OP called time.

This is getting worse by the minute. Why do you think Hytegia started the thread? He didn't. I did.

He originally agreed to a specific set of criteria that you failed to abide by. The thread was dead from that point on, rather than let it descend into bullshit it was locked on the request of Hytegia, whose time you wasted and who was the protagonist of the thread.

But this too is a digression. Your claim we're censoring Remine is also bullshit. Firstly, the thread is still available to view along with Remine's paper. Secondly, you posted it in the Aron/Bob debate thread, which is still active. Your claim we are suppressing Remine's work is demonstrably a lie. Everyone who views this forum can see those threads, all that has happened is that one of those threads in unavailable to post in.

australopithecus, you should just stop trying to justify something that is not justifiable and reverse his actions. Then we can move on.

I'm not reversing anything. We've moved on, you're the one throwing toys out of your pram.

Now kindly grow a spine, put your big boy pants on and act like an adult. Failing that feel free to take your cry baby antics elsewhere. we're long past caring what you think.

 

[YesYouNeedJesus]

So you focus on the word "run" and ignore the fact that he used the word "execute."

I didn't bring up the word "run" and neither did Hytegia. You did.

How dishonest is that?

Nothing is as dishonest as locking a thread for no justifiable reason.

Also, you do realize that even if you hadn't been trolling, I would have been obligated to lock the thread just because the user whom it was directed towards asked me to? You have to calm down and grow up.

I'm calling your bluff. Can I get another moderator to peer review that statement please? So you mean to tell me that if someone starts a thread directed at me because they want to expose me for lying (or whatever reason they surmise), that I don't have to respond and if I ask that it be shut down, you'll do so? I don't believe that for a second.

Why don't you point out to me exactly where you provided an experimental methodology? Come back when you've got it.

I think you should have to at least read a thread before deleting it, don't you? You obviously didn't read it. If you would ever read the thread, you would see that once I realized Hytegia really wanted a paper that he could use a lab to test, I immediately promised I would give him one. I even gave myself a deadline and met that deadline. I even followed Hytegia's self-imposed rule that my next post had to be a new paper or he would ask that the thread be locked. You are a fool. Admit your error and then we can move on.

There was no creationist experiment in that thread. If you think there was you definitely don't know what the word means, and I'm guessing your level of education in science is non-existent.

Only people at LoR think mathematics is not scientific and that mathematics can't be replicated.

I had two, possibly three, so calm down and sod off.

You didn't have one. "Come back when you've got it."

 

[australopithecus]

I'm calling your bluff. Can I get another moderator to peer review that statement please?

Done. I agree with Rex.

So you mean to tell me that if someone starts a thread directed at me because they want to expose me for lying (or whatever reason they surmise), that I don't have to respond and if I ask that it be shut down, you'll do so? I don't believe that for a second.

If the thread veers wildly from it's intended purpose, by all means. However what you believe has no impact on reality, something you should have learned thus far.

Only people at LoR think mathematics is not scientific and that mathematics can't be replicated.

Mathematics isn't scientific, it's mathematical. Clue is in the name. You were asked methodology for arriving at the papers conclusion, a methodology you failed to provide, and I'm ignoring for a second that Remine's paper is gibberish.

 

[YesYouNeedJesus]

He originally agreed to a specific set of criteria that you failed to abide by.

I vote that any moderators that cannot comprehend a simple conversation should be removed as moderators, starting with you. What criteria did I fail to abide by?

The thread was dead from that point on, rather than let it descend into bullshit it was locked on the request of Hytegia, whose time you wasted and who was the protagonist of the thread.

Again, you need to be able to comprehend a thread to be a moderator. There was nothing dead about it.

But this too is a digression. Your claim we're censoring Remine is also bullshit.

Prove it, unlock the thread.

Firstly, the thread is still available to view along with Remine's paper. Secondly, you posted it in the Aron/Bob debate thread, which is still active. Your claim we are suppressing Remine's work is demonstrably a lie. Everyone who views this forum can see those threads, all that has happened is that one of those threads in unavailable to post in.

You didn't want to see the harsh truth of the math. Admit it.

I'm not reversing anything. We've moved on, you're the one throwing toys out of your pram.

Of course you've moved on. You're happy that the thread was stopped and you can't justify the decision.

Now kindly grow a spine, put your big boy pants on and act like an adult. Failing that feel free to take your cry baby antics elsewhere. we're long past caring what you think.

I'm the only that seems to be acting like an adult. Adults don't lock threads without justification.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Oh, and don't think we don't know what you're doing, because we've seen this act before.

The creationist shows up and then goofs-off until the mods are forced to take action, and then they cry foul about how oppressed they are, how we're all afraid of the truth, and other such nonsense. It's a great way to claim victory without actually having to actually back up your claims with evidence or defend them against rebuttal (which, just so we're clear, you didn't do), but sadly no one but other young-earth creationists ever falls for it.

Forced to take action? That's laughable. You can't justify your decision to lock the thread. Just admit it. If the other members cared about truth, they would call you on it.

The only reason to cry oppression is when a forum locks threads with no justifiable reason.

I have justified it. Either explain why my justification is lacking or kindly shut up. You are wasting everyone's time.

We could have done a whole thread on Remine by now if you weren't so busy playing martyr.

 

[Inferno]

Only people at LoR think mathematics is not scientific and that mathematics can't be replicated.

As has been pointed out to you, this is untrue. We accept that mathematics can be replicated, but that wasn't what was asked of you. Hytegia specifically asked for something that can be replicated in a laboratory. Is that so hard to grasp?
It was also debunked by someone, I think it was scalyblues, who said something along the lines of: "The assumptions are wrong, why should the 2nd generation be the same size as the parent generation?" Or something to that extent. 'Nuff said, really.

Now kindly give us what we asked for: A creationist paper, published in a peer reviewed scientific journal, that can be replicated in the laboratory.

 

[DukeTwicep]

Posting here on he_who_is_nobody's suggestion.

How does one overcome the cost of harmful mutation? Using the evolutionist's own mutation rates, published many times in refereed journals, each breeding couple the last 5 million years would have to produce 16,000 offspring just to keep from de-evolving. That's called an impossibility.

Define de-evolving.

I think this number comes from an equivocation.

If more than Inferno is not willing to admit that if I (or my buddy or Remine) can show that our supposed simian ancestor needed 16,000 offspring to keep from de-evolving, then the theory of evolution has a serious problem, then you are all just afraid. And you don't have any need to be which it makes it that much more hilarious.

This is a meaningless statement until you define what you mean by de-evolve.

This is a meaningless statement until you define what you mean by de-evolve.

Oh brother... Let me rephrase the question.

Are you willing to admit that it if it can be shown that our supposed simian ancestor needed 16,000 offspring per female to overcome the cost of harmful mutation, then that is a serious problem for the theory of evolution?

[/ShowMore]


I, for one, would like to hear from YYNJ - his definition of "de-evolve". The above sentence from YYNJ was not a definition of the word and it seems like YYNJ has been avoiding this question.
So, to get a response from YYNJ I will re-iterate this question once every post from YYNJ where he does not answer this question in this thread.




You are the best YesYouNeedJesus!
The above statement is a lie, and only meant to draw your attention YYNJ, and now that I have it, please answer this question:

Define "de-evolve".

 

[australopithecus]

I vote that any moderators that cannot comprehend a simple conversation should be removed as moderators, starting with you.

Your vote? :lol: We'll let you know when the Internet becomes a democracy.

What criteria did I fail to abide by?

A methodology for reproducing the paper's conclusion.

Again, you need to be able to comprehend a thread to be a moderator. There was nothing dead about it.

It died a sorry death with your inability to give a methodolgy for any of the papers you posted.

Prove it, unlock the thread.

Nope.

You didn't want to see the harsh truth of the math. Admit it.

Firstly, Remine's mathematics is based on faulty premises and ignorance of evolutionary theory. Any conclusion will be incorrect regardless of if the maths itself is technically accurate.

Of course you've moved on. You're happy that the thread was stopped and you can't justify the decision.

There's nothing to justify, least not to you. Remines paper can be found here, discuss it all you like:
http://www.leagueofreason.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9321&p=133627&hilit=remine#p133627

I'm the only that seems to be acting like an adult. Adults don't lock threads without justification.

Adults don't cry about things on the Internet.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

So you focus on the word "run" and ignore the fact that he used the word "execute."

I didn't bring up the word "run" and neither did Hytegia. You did.

Run and execute are synonyms. I'm actually embarrassed for you that I need to explain this.

How dishonest is that?

Nothing is as dishonest as locking a thread for no justifiable reason.

Really? Nothing? Lying to Congress? Denying the Holocaust? Nothing?

But you're right, locking a thread for no justifiable reason would at least be dickish (though still not dishonest). Good thing I didn't.

Also, you do realize that even if you hadn't been trolling, I would have been obligated to lock the thread just because the user whom it was directed towards asked me to? You have to calm down and grow up.

I'm calling your bluff. Can I get another moderator to peer review that statement please? So you mean to tell me that if someone starts a thread directed at me because they want to expose me for lying (or whatever reason they surmise), that I don't have to respond and if I ask that it be shut down, you'll do so? I don't believe that for a second.

If a thread is directed at a specific user, and that user does not wish to participate, the thread is locked. This is done to prevent harassment, and is also just good common sense.

And as I have said, you can create a general Remine thread at any point. No one is stopping you. Go on.

Why don't you point out to me exactly where you provided an experimental methodology? Come back when you've got it.

I think you should have to at least read a thread before deleting it, don't you? You obviously didn't read it. If you would ever read the thread, you would see that once I realized Hytegia really wanted a paper that he could use a lab to test, I immediately promised I would give him one. I even gave myself a deadline and met that deadline. I even followed Hytegia's self-imposed rule that my next post had to be a new paper or he would ask that the thread be locked. You are a fool. Admit your error and then we can move on.

You created a new thread, thus abolishing the need for the original (that would be the third reason I mentioned.) Coupled with the off-topic posts and Hytegia's request locking the thread seemed appropriate.

And you know what, I might have even unlocked the thread for if you if you had just PMed me and said something like, "I'm not quite through with this thread, could you unlock it so I may continue with people that aren't Hytegia." But instead you had to go and pull a infantile martyr complex on us. For shame.

There was no creationist experiment in that thread. If you think there was you definitely don't know what the word means, and I'm guessing your level of education in science is non-existent.

Only people at LoR think mathematics is not scientific and that mathematics can't be replicated.

No one here has said this. What we have said is that no experimental methodology was provided. Do you know what an experiment is?

I had two, possibly three, so calm down and sod off.

You didn't have one. "Come back when you've got it."

Denial is the most predictable of all Creationist responses.