Censorship by blogger Jason Petersen. He allowed me ONE response to a blog post which was partly ABOUT ME - and then censored all the rest, alleging that I was being 'emotional'.
See http://answersforhope.com/online-atheis ... /#comments
I take your point that you did not expressly state that the BCSE was an atheist organisation. However your blog post title clearly refers to 'online atheists' and in your opening paragraph you said "I chose their site [the BCSE site although your previous blog post earlier this week did not identify the site] as an example of the inefficiency the new atheist movement’s ineffectiveness at responding to Christians". Thus you certainly did NOT state that the BCSE is against creationism, not against religion or atheistic. For someone not familiar with it to wrongly assume that the BCSE is an atheistic site would be an understandable mistake for someone to make. You also did not quote the organisation's full name, which is why I suggested you were 'uninformed'.
Until recently a young Earth creationist (Marc Surtees) used to post regularly on the BCSE community forum. Peter Henderson and Michael Roberts are both Christians.
"What I would expect for an agnostic is to be neutral on the position of whether or not God exists, but that is not the position that you take on the BCSE forums. Labeling you as an atheist would be quite accurate as I have never seen you stick up for any religion or any gods." You will not find any posts by me there stating that God does not exist. You may find posts by me criticising how the Christian god, assuming he exists, behaves. The views expressed are personal and I do not represent the BCSE in any shape or form.
"I saw no libeling in his blog. Even after reading your timeline on the BCSE forums, I still agree with Bob".http://stormbringer005.blogspot.co.uk/2
Please don't tell me you approve of these!
(Some of Bob's libellous blog posts were subsequently taken down.)
The point is that whilst I have sometimes criticised young Earth creationists online, I do so with FACTS (as in my review of Jonathan Sarfati's book). Whereas Bob Sorensen is simply full of, frequently incorrect, insults.
At the end of December he accused me on Facebook at the Question Evolution Project page of having been banned from his Facebook page - despite me previously informing him that I had never posted there.
He wrote: "Note to all: Since Ashley Haworth-Roberts is a cowardly troll without the courage of his convictions, giving a "Like" to comments that are foolish, illogical, hateful and so forth, it is an automatic death sentence for the comments from now on. He said that he was banned from this Page, yet created his account *after* he made that lie. He cannot be bothered to actually comment himself." (Eventually, after I contacted Facebook, he removed the accusation. He has accused me of lying at least once, but has NOT substantiated his accusation as I showed at the BCSE community forum.)
There is plenty of what you call 'emotionally charged rhetoric' on Bob's Facebook page and in his many blog posts, in case you hadn't noticed.
I do NOT try to censor creationists. Nor does Eyeonthe ICR. I agree that Dawkins and Nye avoid debating them. However, whilst not a 'one on one', scientists HAVE recently debated creationists on UK TV (if you can access it, please enjoy): http://bcseweb.blogspot.co.uk/#!/2013/0
... ccept.html (blog entry dated 13 January referring to 'The Big Questions')
I'm adding this attempted reply to the BCSE community forum (which Alex has just visited) and also the thread at EyeontheICR. (I did the same with the comment which you failed in moderation.)
You write a blog which refers to me by name and then censor my replies to your claims. Unbelievable!
Young Earth creationists ALWAYS resort to censorship and bans whenever they are afraid of looking silly, dishonest or ignorant about science. I have been banned or censored by Your Origins Matter, Tas Walker, Tony Breeden and now you (as well as targeted in mostly untruthful hate posts by your friend Mr Sorensen - who clearly needs to grow up).
Thus your claims about me are permitted to 'stand' even though I dealt with them in my second post. And Sorensen is permitted by you to attack me and make assumptions about me once again - whilst I am denied the right of reply. Unfair. Of course, had I made an idiot of myself you would not have needed to apply censorship.
My first censored post also took issue with your claim about Bob Sorensen's blog posts that "I saw no libeling in his blog. Even after reading your timeline on the BCSE forums, I still agree with Bob". I gave THREE examples of his libel of myself and others.
As for Bob's ludicrous claim: "I have some things to point out from the “former Christian” (who has been described as a bitter apostate that cannot connect two logical thoughts”, or something like that, and we have seen the truth in that statement)". I put it to you Mr Petersen that I indeed did connect a number of very logical thoughts in my censored comments - and THAT is why you are censoring me.
Sorensen claims to have 'proven' his claims against me. He is lying (and you are abetting a liar).
For example, see here: http://stormbringer005.blogspot.co.uk/2 ... ecord.html
Where Bob claimed to have documented 'dishonesty' and 'irrationality' on my part, and supplied two links. However, as I said at the time: "Bob evasively lied about whales' vestigial bones and libelled the critic as a 'troll' in his blog of 11 Dec. My comment was correct. Also, I have never denied 'stalking' Bob a little during part of the autumn - he keeps mentioning my open admission of this! Yet in his further text ... he posts to links to places where he claims to have documented dishonesty on my part. So let's look at those links. On the FIRST link he accused me of 'spamming' and falsely accused me of 'blackmail'. He did NOT show any lies on my part. On the SECOND link he complained about me e mailing him, said I had made some assumptions, and referred to 'off-topic harassment' (at Amazon.com in the early autumn). Again, he did NOT show any lies or dishonesty on my part".
I showed this at the BCSE community forum - which Bob is trying to stop his fans accessing. I did so at 1.14 am GMT on 23 December: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3153&start=30
Read my post if you don't believe me.
Bob may not like me reading his blogs and so forth and sometimes criticising them but that does NOT make me a liar. I'm sure you would agree.
On 23 December I wrote at the BCSE (where Bob has been invited to post if he has something to say to me): "I have nothing to hide. If Bob has nothing to hide he will flag the BCSE community forum thread on his blog. If he has something to hide, he will not". I'm still waiting.
Of course, you will not publish this! Because young Earth creationists like you are AFRAID of the truth, afraid of losing face, and determined to mislead the followers of their blogs and online articles.
Thus I will publish this at the British Centre for Science Education (a place where creationists are NOT censored, should you wish to respond there).
Your claim that I show too much 'emotion' is utterly hilarious given that you have simultaneously published the following: "But, like he did at my Amazon book review, he decided to cry and whine, off-topic. Jason summed it up nicely, that is obsession with me is creepy" and "Ashley is so narcissistic, he made the claim that when a post on the Facebook Page was made and signed “Ashley”, that it was me taking pot-shots at him. Uh, no, not only do we have several Admins, but one is a woman named Ashley, and she signs some of her posts. Get over yourself".
Calm down dear.
Your final sentence sounds rather like blackmail and is to be pitied.
(I knew that this would be censored TOO - given the unjust censorship of the preceding post.)
I was also twice censored when I tried to inform Jesse Morton under this blog post that 'Lucy' is NOT a 'fraud' (like Piltdown man was), showing that Petersen is either totally ignorant or else allergic to facts when the people citing them aren't young Earth creationists (probably the latter):http://answersforhope.com/my-contributi ... -creation/
(Morton then corrected HIMSELF - but I was not allowed to do this by Petersen.)
I then tried to ask Morton the following and was AGAIN silently censored by Petersen:
Please inform us on what grounds 'Lucy'/Australopithecus afarensis should now no longer be regarded as a transitional fossil. What has changed?