Feedback wanted on the three links per week limit in the opt-in forums (and beyond)

Also, it does seem to be a complicated moral dilemma for the mods if they feel there is a more immediate and general threat re: COVID. I'm not sure how I would feel if I had to moderate the sub-forums and there was some topic I found not just distasteful but actively causing harm.

Well just think how you would feel if you lived in the UK! We face the same virus, and we behave normally unless we need to visit an NHS establishment.

Would you be scared to visit the UK?

Stan and I see that incredible contrast every day. I could certainly talk a lot about what I have learned from a blog run by an NHS doctor - I certainly do not want to spout dangerous ideas here - and I won't break the rules here unless the forum decides to lighten up about this issue.

I liked Alex's ideas about science my beef with him was about how he did his interviews, and the whole growing obsession with Satanic cults.

Science has become frighteningly corruptible and corrupt. I mean you only need to look at the orthodox scientific view of evolution by natural selection. Behe's book (among several others) blows the idea to smithereens, but "The Science" doesn't budge.

Well just think how you would feel if you lived in the UK! We face the same virus, and we behave normally unless we need to visit an NHS establishment.

I'm just expressing sympathy for the mods on this, not giving my opinion on COVID one way or another.

I think the whole policy of restricting alternative views about COVID is wrong-headed. I mean people (not necessarily here) call such posts "Anti-science" - but isn't most of what we post here anti-science when you think about it? Only those who support materialism here can claim that science always gives us the truth - and of course I am sure there are plenty of materialists who would not make that claim.

Dare I say I told you so?

I said that there are those here who feel kinship because Psi and also conspiracy theories, climate change denial and Covid hoax claims are all anti-science. I am not anti-science. Idealism has a long, long history and is embraced by many scientists. It is a philosophical position, not a scientific theory. Materialism is also a branch of metaphysics just like idealism - it is not science. When scientists, or anyone else, draws a conclusion from scientific reseach and then makes a claim that this proves materialism - that is not scientific proof, it is a personal view. 

The fact is that science is restricted by methodological naturalism which means that science can only investigate that which is deemed to be natural - not supernatural. So Psi and spirit are things deemed to be beyond the reach of scientific investigation. While that doesn't stop some scientists from applying the scientific method to research these phenomena, they are usually dismissed as being unscientific, often because of that methodological restriction. But let's be clear: those scientists are not being anti-scientific, but rather questioning (and testing) the extent of naturalism which has happened throughout the history of science. 

The things of this world which are deemed natural and which can legitimately be investigated by the scientific method are things which I, personally, would trust to scientists - yes, materialist scientists - to reseach. Again: I am not anti-science. Those scientists are better qualified to investigate these things than I am and I would prefer to trust them over Alex Jones or Steve Bannon. The danger we face with social media, incuding forums like this, is that misinformation is spread so easily to people who are hungry for confirmation of their own - often whacky - ideas. Jones and Bannon et al. prey on such people and feed them that misinformation. I will not be a part of that culture of deceit - I would rather cut my ties with this, or any other internet presence, which fosters such practices. That is not a threat - who am I threatening? - it is a personal and moral stand.

Dare I say I told you so?

I said that there are those here who feel kinship because Psi and also conspiracy theories, climate change denial and Covid hoax claims are all anti-science. I am not anti-science. Idealism has a long, long history and is embraced by many scientists. It is a philosophical position, not a scientific theory. Materialism is also a branch of metaphysics just like idealism - it is not science. When scientists, or anyone else, draws a conclusion from scientific reseach and then makes a claim that this proves materialism - that is not scientific proof, it is a personal view. 

The fact is that science is restricted by methodological naturalism which means that science can only investigate that which is deemed to be natural - not supernatural. So Psi and spirit are things deemed to be beyond the reach of scientific investigation. While that doesn't stop some scientists from applying the scientific method to research these phenomena, they are usually dismissed as being unscientific, often because of that methodological restriction. But let's be clear: those scientists are not being anti-scientific, but rather questioning (and testing) the extent of naturalism which has happened throughout the history of science. 

The things of this world which are deemed natural and which can legitimately be investigated by the scientific method are things which I, personally, would trust to scientists - yes, materialist scientists - to reseach. Again: I am not anti-science. Those scientists are better qualified to investigate these things than I am and I would prefer to trust them over Alex Jones or Steve Bannon. The danger we face with social media, incuding forums like this, is that misinformation is spread so easily to people who are hungry for confirmation of their own - often whacky - ideas. Jones and Bannon et al. prey on such people and feed them that misinformation. I will not be a part of that culture of deceit - I would rather cut my ties with this, or any other internet presence, which fosters such practices. That is not a threat - who am I threatening? - it is a personal and moral stand.

Quite a thoughtful post (to my read at least!).  Kam, we are of similar thinking on all of this.  Perhaps not fully overlapping, but a lot of commonality.  You also write quite well!

That is not a threat...

Do you feel threatened? Have I targeted you in any way? I think I tried to answer your question earlier in this thread even though you might not agree with my argument. 

I'll make an analogy for the sake of clarity. Let's say that I join the local astronomy club and attend the meetings. Sometime into my membership I notice that some of the other members are attending political rallies and distributing that literature among the club members. Some of the members even agree with the politics and it becomes part of the weekly agenda. I make a stand and say that I joined to watch stars and comets but not to listen to or be exposed to political ideology and activism. I say that if this is how the club is to proceed then I will end my membership. 

I would not be deciding for anyone else nor would I be levelling a threat at anyone to conform to my politics or worldview or else they will suffer the consequences. The "threat" is merely to remove myself from a club which is no longer the kind of club I thought I had joined. You might consider that a threat but I certainly don't. I don't see how anyone here is being threatened.

Do you feel threatened? Have I targeted you in any way?

Honestly... I doubt anyone here has a problem understanding the concept of someone who is 'threatening to leave'

Honestly... I doubt anyone here has a problem understanding the concept of someone who is 'threatening to leave'

Nor would they fail to see the irony of you in particular attempting to make an issue of someone potentially leaving the forum.

Anyway, I've done my best to try to explain my reasons and I'll leave it at that. You can come to your own conclusions - I don't really care what you think. I care about the forum that I was part of since its formation and I care that its original focus is being subverted but I always have the choice to leave if I don't like it, just as you did.

Nor would they fail to see the irony of you in particular attempting to make an issue of someone potentially leaving the forum.

Takes one to know one...

...I care about the forum that I was part of since its formation and I care that its original focus is being subverted...

I haven't seen any of subversion that you complain of - at least not until an attempt was made to throttle the hidden opt-in forums. These hidden opt-in forums appear to do a good job, providing a quick easy way of diverting the sort of subject matter you have complained of away from the public site, and completely isolating it from the main forums - without directly censoring the author, or the subject matter. I think it's been a clever, and elegant solution, and we've had this in place for a long time now.