Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

(Off Topic) Mr. Christopher is no longer with us

Dave S.
January 10, 2006
Intelligent Design
1
Categories
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

People writing things like this are not welcome here. The two-faced Mr. Christopher will fit right in at Panda’s Thumb.

Comments
.... The deal with this blog, since I’ve given it over to my friends, is to build community and “feel the love.” Unfortunately, that requires recalcitrant elements to be purged. That’s a price I’m willing to pay. Comment by William Dembski .... Many people who don't agree with ID leave comments on this blog and DO NOT get the boot. Disagreement with ID does not require hate speech rooted in arrogance. And those who can disagree without hate are welcome. The kind of comments made by Mr. Christopher over on Panda's thumb and by infamous here are offensive, probably libelous and have NO place in a debate. For all of you who might think Mr. Christopher and infamous have been treated unfairly, get over it. You have Panda's. Go there and have a field day. This blog is the ONLY one I know [please correct me if I'm wrong] where comments by ordinary people seeking understanding or offering thoughts and/or evidence in support of ID can be made without the writer suffering vicious personal attacks. What we are seeing culturally nationally from militant Darwinian fundamentalists is fear, anger, deliberate dishonesty, character aspersion.... In short, what we are seeing is hate speech. If you have ideas express them. If you have bigotry, arrogance, dishonesty and vitriol....PLEASE keep it to yourself.Red Reader
January 14, 2006
January
01
Jan
14
14
2006
02:58 PM
2
02
58
PM
PDT
I followed the links by Christopher to the Study Questions for the Fall 2005 Midterm Exam. Actually looks like a pretty good introduction to the philosophy of science and the intersection of science/faith. Glad to see the course is being taught -- many could benefit from such a course.Eric Anderson
January 11, 2006
January
01
Jan
11
11
2006
01:35 PM
1
01
35
PM
PDT
Thank you Bill. The whole house here has been a bit insane lately. Someone abandoned 7 German Shepherd puppies at my lake property. I found them Friday before last when I went out to do some work on my houseboat & dock. There they were at the shore getting a drink. The poor things were about 4-5 weeks old and were well on their way to starving. So I called the rescue squad (my wife & two daughters) who dropped what they were doing, drove out and collected them, took them to the vet, then home to the city. I finished my work the next day and went home too. I'm happy to say that 10 days later they're all wormed, got their first shots, are paper trained, plump, happy, and just as lovable as can be. We're keeping one and we have families ready to adopt the rest when they're old enough (another week or so). But like human babies they don't sleep through the night and need a lot of attention absent their real mom so it's been hectic. I've never had a batch of puppies before and these guys (6 males and 1 female) are BIG puppies. When I step outside the back door I get mobbed by 7 puppies all wanting attention. Talk about feeling the love. This has been a great experience. These are the kind of joyful things in life that I thank God for giving to me.DaveScot
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
10:23 PM
10
10
23
PM
PDT
Infamous: I just decided to do DaveScot a favor and boot you myself. The deal with this blog, since I've given it over to my friends, is to build community and "feel the love." Unfortunately, that requires recalcitrant elements to be purged. That's a price I'm willing to pay.William Dembski
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
09:10 PM
9
09
10
PM
PDT
I think DaveScot is an appropriate mitigator of this blog. Somehow, it all seems fitting.Feederbottom
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
08:51 PM
8
08
51
PM
PDT
wow davescot. you never cease to amaze me with your pigheadedness. once again you show that you have no real interest in debate or real discussion. you simply want to stroke your ego. you need to open yourself to the evidence and respect the opinions of others.infamous
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
08:00 PM
8
08
00
PM
PDT
Ocellated I don't presume to tell you how to manage your blog. I'd appreciate it if you returned the courtesy. To answer your questions, yes I do occasionally check up on commenters here to see what they're saying elsewhere and it will get you axed if you talk badly about this blog elsewhere then act all polite and kindly when here in order to participate. Such duplicity is unwelcome.DaveScot
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
03:31 PM
3
03
31
PM
PDT
Let's put it this way...Dr. David Heddle has been given the ability to author posts on this blog and he recently had this to say: "I have always said ID is not science. I think it is now defensible to say it differently: ID is as much science as String Theory is." Of course, he recently qualified that statement: "The truth is I am somewhat ambivalent about the evolution vs. ID debate. I freely admit that I have only gut feelings with absolutely no scientific expertise in the field of (biological) ID or evolutionary biology. That said, I think irreducible complexity, as I understand it, is interesting, worth studying, and worthy of discussion. I do not know if the examples given (e.g., the bacterial flagellum) truly represent discontinuities in the sense that there are no plausible evolutionary pathways postulated—either now or ever. I simply don’t know—although I would be nervous about staking my reputation on the claim that you’ll never be able to explain this. So, I am more or less a lurker in the debate. I root for team Behe, but I have nothing to say or contribute. In terms of the work of Bill Dembski, I have even less to say, and I don’t mean that in a disrespectful way—not in the least. Again, I am working from gut feelings. I have never read his theories. There are many theories that I have never bothered to learn simply from lack of interest. It has been my, once again, gut instinct that it is doubtful that one could construct a rigorous mathematics that could reliably detect design—with little or no false positives or negatives. Perhaps I am wrong—but not being interested in evolution, I have never felt motivated to dig into the details of either Professor Behe’s or Professor Dembski’s work—even though I appreciate their efforts. As for evolution—as I said I am ambivalent. I have written before that I think theistic evolution—in which God intervened as necessary to ensure His sovereign plan was not thwarted, is an acceptable option for a Christian. In this view, in some manner, God specially created Adam and Eve—they were truly and historically the first humans. This form of theistic evolution, I have argued in the past—is in fact a type of ID—it has God designing through genetic engineering. Am I a theistic evolutionist or a “classic” IDer? I really couldn’t say." Dr. Dembski has given us authority to control his blog but what Bill giveth he can taketh away. It must be reiterated that this place is not a democracy. Dave, Bombadill, crandaddy, and myself may not always agree but it's Dave who has been given the leading role. To avoid trouble among the admins we've agreed to not contest each other's decisions. Or as Dave put it: "I'd suggest the only rule for now is that anyone who has author rights also have banning rights, swing the axe at their own discretion, and the rest of the authors don't question it. If that doesn't work out we can always have some kind of democratic process but that's time consuming and I'd rather avoid overhead when practical."Patrick
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
10:59 AM
10
10
59
AM
PDT

Now I find this interesting DaveScot. I read Uncommon Descent from time to time as I consider it to be good entertainment. If I ever leave a comment, I make a point to be civil and respectful. At my own blog and elsewhere, I give my opinions more bluntly. My opinions happen to be the opposite of pretty much everything you guys post about here, with the exception that I share a Christian faith that many of your readers do.

Now, if I were obnoxious, used profanity, commented constantly, or used other poor etiquette techniques, you would certainly have a valid reason for banning me. I've watched Mr. Christopher with great amusement. He's been very tame here. Had he posted the same comments that he did at Panda's Thumb on this blog, well, you might have a case for booting him. Honestly, I think if he posted those comments here, he shouldn't be booted unless he's posting that stuff repeatedly and in a distracting manner. After all, we're all entitled to our opinions. Shouldn't it matter the way and the forum in which we give those opinions? I never saw Mr. Christopher act inappropriately on this blog.

Do you search the internet for other comments from your commentors to make sure they share your opinions? Will I myself be banned since I have spoken out against intelligent design on my own blog?

Just wondering how you guys go about allowing dissent, or if everyone that comments is expected to agree with what you say.

Ocellated
January 10, 2006
January
01
Jan
10
10
2006
09:31 AM
9
09
31
AM
PDT

Leave a Reply