Discussion about proponent-only ID thread outside ECP

This thread has been moved to this sub-forum, per the guidelines on posting about science and scientific controversies in the forum.

My reasoning for creating this forum in the Extended Consciousness Phenomena forum was that if the physical universe was designed then time and space and the first form of intelligent life in the universe (if not all life, and all species) was created by non-physical consciousness and there could be no better example of "extended consciousness" than that.


And there is already an intelligent design thread in the Skeptic vs Proponent Debate forum. I wanted this thread to be a place people could go to for evidence of intelligent design without having to wade through posts on debate since debates can go on and on endlessly with no one changing their mind, it can easily drown out the actual subject of the thread. The extended consciousness forum (which as I pointed out above is naturally a good fit for discussing how extended consciousness created time and space and intelligent life) also has the most restrictive rules on debating the premise of a thread.

[Ninshub]

Maybe we could tweak the title, and just make it clear it's supposed to be a thread about evidence for ID (e.g. "Intelligent Design (for proponents only)"), a proponents' only thread, and not an S v P debate, and we can moderate it accordingly. Just a thought.

Maybe we could tweak the title, and just make it clear it's supposed to be a thread about evidence for ID (e.g. "Intelligent Design (for proponents only)"), a proponents' only thread, and not an S v P debate, and we can moderate it accordingly. Just a thought.

On Skeptiko we had threads specifically marked "Resources" where the understanding was to make a new thread if one wanted to debate/discuss a particular resource.

Maybe that would work here?

[Ninshub]

That's an idea too. Although what I understand is Jim wants an ID thread where discussion is involved and evidence for ID, but not of the skeptic vs proponent debate type. Personally I'd prefer just putting a parenthesis and putting the instructions in the first post, maybe with an admin stamp of approval, but let's see what Laird and others think. I'm less in favor of dysregulating our science navigating rules which were complex enough to put together in the first place! But I'm not entirely closed to making exceptions.

discussion is involved and evidence for ID, but not of the skeptic vs proponent debate type.

I don't understand this unless you mean you just want to ponder evidence in favour of because you want so desperately to believe that evidence against cannot be allowed in the thread.  Personally, I think the SvP thrread is a copout to keep counter evidence away from the echo chambers.

[Ninshub]

I don't understand this unless you mean you just want to ponder evidence in favour of because you want so desperately to believe that evidence against cannot be allowed in the thread.  Personally, I think the SvP thrread is a copout to keep counter evidence away from the echo chambers.

I have no personal investment in this topic. This is purely to accommodate Jim's desire for the type of thread that would normally be in the ECP forum.

We know now that you seem to have a basic issue with the structure of the forum and the principles behind it. There will be no need for you to keep restating your position ad nauseam since it's a position regarding the forum's structure and philosophy and not a specific topic. 

It's obviously your right to not be in agreement with how the forum is structured or its rules. But I will you remind in case it wasn't crystal clear before that it's your repeated failures to abide by its rules that led to your short ban, and would upon further intentional infractions on your part lead to further (and presumably longer) ones.

I don't understand this unless you mean you just want to ponder evidence in favour of because you want so desperately to believe that evidence against cannot be allowed in the thread.  Personally, I think the SvP thrread is a copout to keep counter evidence away from the echo chambers.

I don't think skeptic sites even have a believer/proponent forum, not sure religious forums have skeptic/atheist sub-forums either?

Personally I don't value most pseudo-skeptic talking points so I don't see the need to read them over & over across all the forums. I think for a skeptical point or two it's fine - even I've expressed some skepticism on certain cases - but atheist-materialist pseudo-skeptics have takes I find dishonest to worthless.

SvP is a good balance in that regard so we don't get spammed by pseudo-skeptic trolls in every forum.

I don't understand this unless you mean you just want to ponder evidence in favour of because you want so desperately to believe that evidence against cannot be allowed in the thread.  Personally, I think the SvP thrread is a copout to keep counter evidence away from the echo chambers.

I post just about everything in SvP, mainly because I do want my ideas to be challenged, I can’t grow otherwise - not that anyone does. Lol.

Personally I don’t see any problem with that, one forum is fine for me, and other people have differing ideas, and this whole site was deliberately biased towards a proponent view.

The only problem is that I don’t use the site by coming in via the forums, I just look at threads with new posts, I haven’t got a clue which forum they are in. But then I’m not really interested in challenging other people’s ideas, unless they fall into my areas of interest. Neither am I interested in challenging the low hanging fruit.

I don’t see why you can’t post an ID thread on SvP, and challenge the ideas that are within the ID thread that you can’t post to, within your own thread in SvP - if it bothers you that much. Although I’d say it seems a waste of time to me… far better to develop and discuss your own ideas within SvP… than to waste your time deconstructing other people’s ideas on subjects like ID.

I don't understand this unless you mean you just want to ponder evidence in favour of because you want so desperately to believe that evidence against cannot be allowed in the thread.  Personally, I think the SvP thrread is a copout to keep counter evidence away from the echo chambers.

Brian,

I don't understand your motivation for being here. If you are convinced by materialist arguments, why do you feel such an urge to thrust them into our discussions? This is why I think you are strongly conflicted.

I mean most of the things we discuss here are also discussed elsewhere from a non-believer's perspective, so you can satisfy yourself by reading them. Alternatively, perhaps you want to goad us into making a super heroic effort to defend our views that will finally persuade you to believe them too.

The trouble with that is that it can easily become an itch that keeps returning - maybe the evidence isn't good enough - maybe I'm just kidding myself - what I need is still more evidence........

I decided long before I joined this forum - or indeed Skeptiko - that there was something dogmatic about the way orthodox science deals with the paranormal. As just one example, I watched a TV program about the paranormal which ended with a proper scientist assuring us all that there was "no scientific evidence for paranormal effects". That didn't wash on me because I had seen papers reporting positive results for certain paranormal experiments. It was then that I began to suspect science wasn't always honest. Maybe you need a few experiences like that?

David

[Ninshub]

My reasoning for creating this forum in the Extended Consciousness Phenomena forum was that if the physical universe was designed then time and space and the first form of intelligent life in the universe (if not all life, and all species) was created by non-physical consciousness and there could be no better example of "extended consciousness" than that.


And there is already an intelligent design thread in the Skeptic vs Proponent Debate forum. I wanted this thread to be a place people could go to for evidence of intelligent design without having to wade through posts on debate since debates can go on and on endlessly with no one changing their mind, it can easily drown out the actual subject of the thread. The extended consciousness forum (which as I pointed out above is naturally a good fit for discussing how extended consciousness created time and space and intelligent life) also has the most restrictive rules on debating the premise of a thread.

Hi Jim, I've gone ahead and re-labelled the thread and added a moderator note at the top of it to explain the rules governing it. We'll call this an experiment and see how it works.
https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-i...8#pid53078