Moderator: Moderators
a_haworthroberts wrote:Sorensen has a new blog post (with the ludicrous tabloid title 'Viking Bones Fight Carbon-14'):
http://radaractive.blogspot.co.uk/2018/ ... m=facebook
a_haworthroberts wrote:
Apart from the Attenborough point where it's a matter of interpretation, Sorensen repeats a number of tired lies about scientific evidence (he may be echoing the rest of that voluminous Grigg article - which I do not propose to read).
MisterGordons wrote:a_haworthroberts wrote:Sorensen has a new blog post (with the ludicrous tabloid title 'Viking Bones Fight Carbon-14'):
http://radaractive.blogspot.co.uk/2018/ ... m=facebook
The meat machine known as Ashley Haworth-Roberts is oblivious to his own irony. He hypocritically calls the title used by meat machine Cowboy Bob Sorensen as 'ludicrous tabloid", then titles his own threads 'YEC 'Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed', 'Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans', and others. He uses loaded terminology to poison the well here with 'A correction made by SCIENTISTS not YEC science deniers'. Then he wonders why the Cowboy has the good sense not to waste time in extended dialogue here.
a_haworthroberts wrote:I guessed wrong. Caldwell IS a censoring fraud.
http://rationalfaith.com/2018/05/hell-i ... /#comments
Instead of allowing my comments, reproduced above, he's tried to justify why he has hidden them - and posted a (polite) attack instead:
"Jesus said “”Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?” (Luke 12.14). I am happy to reply to comments on the topic of a given blog post here. But rationalfaith.com is not the place for me to judge an off topic debate, nor should comments be posted that continue disputes (particularly personal ones) that are off-topic that started elsewhere.
Thus “he said, she said” (or “he said, he said” as the case may be) type of off-topics comments and disputes will not allowed to grow and proper here. If your comment is not published, it is likely either because 1. There are comments too far off topic, or 2. There are personal attacks which are never appropriate. (Which I discuss here: Misguided attacks by evolutionists
Try reposting after narrowing it and staying on the topic of the blog post."
Caldwell is basically LYING to his readers by implying that my longer censored post (I have taken on-screen photos of it 'awaiting moderation') was all 'off topic' or 'personal attacks' (because it discussed Sorensen after he had a go at me without naming me). Whereas the post included content that was fully on topic. Such as: "On Duane’s first response to me, readers should view my post in full rather than simply relying on Duane’s (highly edited) extracts. I would also make clear that I was not accusing Duane (on the basis of the 1 May post) of lying about people who criticise claims of ‘biblical’ creationists – but of apparently sanctioning that others do so ...". And: "In fact I see that what I have already said also fully addresses Duane’s second response. It appears that he misunderstood what I was saying about him – as I was not suggesting that Duane breaks (or feels he can ignore) the ninth commandment – as Bob regularly does. (But it was odd that Duane’s article failed to mention Exodus 20:16.)" And: "I accept that Duane is not sanctioning that ‘biblical’ creationists break the ninth commandment. Something that Bob frequently does."
My longer post was not in the least bit confrontational towards Caldwell (I sought to contrast him with Sorensen) - but he has STILL censored it. Because I dared criticise a fellow 'biblical' creationist - who had STARTED the conversation.
Ironic that the author of a post entitled 'Hell is for Liars' should misleadingly claim: "If your comment is not published, it is likely either because 1. There are comments too far off topic, or 2. There are personal attacks which are never appropriate." He should have allowed the comment but warned that any further comments that were ENTIRELY off topic or personal attacks would not be allowed. Note that Sorensen called me a 'furious atheopath' - but my reply addressing Sorensen's conduct has been unfairly zapped, even though I did not make empty accusations but supported them with the link to this BCSE thread.
Funny how 'biblical' creationists are almost invariably high class bigots opposed to free speech and open discussion or criticism of THEIR frequently extra biblical claims.
Bigots who side with other dishonest 'biblical' creationists against honest critics (this thread shows Sorensen's serial dishonesty but doubtless Caldwell is 'turning a blind eye').
This thread is again being notified to Caldwell via his blog and via a (wide circulation) email.
Return to Conversations with Creationists
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests