Text 11301, 90 rader
Skriven 2007-02-02 00:58:32 av Amy Guskin (14739.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Cath0licism and Creati=nism
=======================================
>> On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 17:10:22 -0500, Vorxion wrote
(in article <45c2654e$1_1@news.iglou.com>):
> 
> Suffice it to say that almost everyone here has attacked not only me, but
> James.  Considering I've had "inflammatory" posts rejected in the past,
> I can only assume there's a double-standard going if you're an extreme
> regular that posts daily. <<

What double standard would that be?  Not letting your posts clear moderation? 
 Oh, that's right: you're not _on_ hand moderation.  So no double standard 
there.  Is it that you think there's some vast conspiracy here whereby the 
moderators e-mail people privately and exhort them to reply to a poster in a 
particular way?  Nope, we don't have time for that kind of nonsense, so no 
double standard there.

No, you post what you choose to post, and you take your chances with how 
people might reply -- whether positively or negatively.  You can't really be 
surprised that your post engendered a strong reaction: it contradicts what 
most of the science minds in the country are saying.

>> At any rate, everyone has reacted about as I'd
> expect the sheeple of the world to react--quite typically, mind mostly
> closed, adhering to dogmatic claims repeated often and loudly by our media
> and a scientific establishment whose credibility is questionable given
> commercial and governmental interests involved. <<

I take extreme objection to this statement.  To call the posters here who 
have disagreed with you "sheeple" makes an assumption about their experience, 
their knowledge, and the kind of research they've done on these very 
questions.  This is often the attitude of people who take an unpopular 
opinion on an inflammatory topic: just because people agree with the 
prevailing wisdom doesn't mean it's wrong, and doesn't mean they haven't 
reasoned it out on their own.  So please refrain from your ad hominem attacks 
in the future.

>> In short, I'm not surprised.  I'm also just giving up as a bad lot the
> entire attempt to open anyone's eyes to even the -possibility- that things
> aren't as some would have everyone believe.  Let someone else try to do the
> world a favour--someone that has more patience than I do.  <<

And you wonder why people reacted badly to you?  You've just basically said 
that your extreme magnanimousness has been rejected by the ignorant, unwashed 
masses here.  Gosh, I suppose we should be _grateful_, yes?

>> Congratulations, you've all been indoctrinated very well.  I'm sure you
> make excellent drones, devoid of critical thought. <<

Another ad hominem attack.  Those are prohibited on this newsgroup.  If you 
continue, you _will_ be put back on hand moderation.

>> And I don't know -where- one person got the idea James "got religion".
> Last I heard him say, James described himself as a lapsed aetheist.  I'm
> not sure he believes in any of the conventional organised religions or
> major dieties.  It seems he's open to I.D., but that (contrary to what
> people try to imply) does -not- necessitate the recognition of any specific
> diety, or even "a diety" in the conventional spiritual sense. <<

That's "deity."  The "e" is before the "i."

>> As it is, I got a few salient B5 questions answered in another thread, and
> I'm now more than happy to leave you folks to your closed-minded approach
> to the "facts" until I possibly have another B5 question sometime in the
> future.  I refuse to further discuss anything O.T. "while I wait" in this
> group ever again if I can help it, as I find the shallowness of thought,
> blind faith, and generally derogatory attitude towards anyone that even
> engages in critical thought to be most depressing.  It simply reaffirms for
> me exactly how we manage to get the leaders that are elected and how the
> system propogates itself ad nauseum.  You know your B5 stuff, and that's
> about all the credit I'd give you, from open-mindedness to common
> decency--two things extremely lacking in general here. <<

That's pretty funny stuff, coming from someone who popped in here for about 
five seconds after a very long absence, posted inflammatory comments on a 
hot-button topic, and then proceeded to repeatedly insult everyone here.  
It's also funny considering the wide range of political opinions here that 
you would blame us en masse for the elected officials currently in office.

>> Despite being personally maligned, <<

Where?

>> having had an author and friend whom I
> respect both personally and professionally maligned, <<

People are free to express their opinions, positive or negative, on any 
public figure who comes up for discussion here.

Amy
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)