Article ~ Why the Miller–Urey Research Argues Against Abiogenesis

Now why was it, when I read that, that I just knew you were about to twist everything beyond all recognition? 

Why not take a break this Sunday? I'm going to.

I provided a straightforward recap of what I had been discussing. If this was unrecognizable to you, it explains why you were acting like you disagreed with me, and why I was struggling to try to figure out just what it was you were objecting to. This has become an all too familiar pattern with you. Perhaps next time you think you disagree with me, you might consider checking with me first, or outlining just what it is you are arguing against.

Linda

I'll just comment that over the past couple of days I have been wondering whether fls was deliberately trying to get herself banned from this site, and coincidentally someone sent me a private message suggesting, in effect, that she should be. Actually, I don't think the site's policies would provide for that. But just in case it is suggested directly to the moderators, I'd like to say that I think it would be a mistake.

WTF??!! How is Chris, yet again, miscontruing something I've said, and me trying patiently to clarify my position even remotely something bannable?

Good grief. 

Or maybe ROFL? This is Candid Camera or something?

Linda

[Laird]

Just for clarity: there is no support amongst the founders for banning Linda (or any other current forum member). The proposition that she be banned was recently put to us privately, and all of the expressed opinions (including, for the record, my own) were universally opposed to that proposition.

Just for clarity: there is no support amongst the founders for banning Linda (or any other current forum  member). The proposition that she be banned was recently put to us privately, and all of the expressed opinions (including, for the record, my own) were universally opposed to that proposition.

And, also for the record, mine. Much as I dislike the game-playing, I have not called for her banning. I also declined the responsibility of moderation so any such decision is not in my hands anyway.

Just for clarity: there is no support amongst the founders for banning Linda (or any other current forum  member). The proposition that she be banned was recently put to us privately, and all of the expressed opinions (including, for the record, my own) were universally opposed to that proposition.

Good. Her antics help to teach us patience, if nothing else.

Just for clarity: there is no support amongst the founders for banning Linda (or any other current forum  member). The proposition that she be banned was recently put to us privately, and all of the expressed opinions (including, for the record, my own) were universally opposed to that proposition.

Lol. How kind of you.

Look. I'm a grown-up. I have no interest in "playing games". It might be something a twelve-year-old would enjoy, but to me it has all the intellectual appeal of a dead fish.

Chris comes in, misconstrues something I've said, and tries to pick a fight with me. He's been doing this over and over and over again for years now. Because I'm co-operative and optimistic, I've given him the benefit of the doubt and sometimes made the attempt to clarify seeming discrepancies for him, thinking (stupidly) that that was where the problem lay and my suspicions may be unfounded. 

I get that my failure to go along with these misconstructions has been spun as "game-playing", and some here are happy to go along with that and some don't. I doubt any of that is going to change. Don't expect me to be impressed that you aren't going to ban me for Chris' shenanigans, though. 

Linda

[Laird]

Don't expect me to be impressed that you aren't going to ban me for Chris' shenanigans, though.

The private proposal that you be banned, whilst relatively recent, was long before this current incident. You don't have to be impressed, I just thought you'd want to know, for your peace of mind if nothing else.

The private proposal that you be banned, whilst relatively recent, was long before this current incident. You don't have to be impressed, I just thought you'd want to know, for your peace of mind if nothing else.

Huh? It’s supposed to give me peace of mind to know that, even though I haven’t done something which would deserve banning or which contravenes the forum rules, unlike others here who have, that it was under consideration that I be banned?

Yeah, gee, I feel so much more confident in the moderation of this forum, now. </sarcasm>

Linda

[Laird]

It’s supposed to give me peace of mind to know that, even though I haven’t done something which would deserve banning or which contravenes the forum rules, unlike others here who have, that it was under consideration that I be banned?

Hmm. It's not supposed to give you peace of mind that somebody suggested that you be banned and thus that it was under consideration, but that the founding team thought - as you appear to - that the suggestion was unfounded. We don't control what's put to us, only how we respond.