Is it okay for Christians to post here?

[Jason Jarred]

*Jason chunders in the corner.*
*Jason wipes the orange and green chunks from his mouth and chin*

Sorry about that, too much rum

[solidsquid]

*Jason chunders in the corner.*
*Jason wipes the orange and green chunks from his mouth and chin*

Sorry about that, too much rum

[Pete]

How else would I refer to such people?

Sane.

This term is almost never used by people who accept evolution actually I've talked to several biologists and they say it's a idiotic term as well.

Like I said, you wouldn't call someone a gravitiationalist, atomicist or lable people just because they accept a theory.

Ouch! That's not very accurate in my opinion. Your biologist friends told you something quite misleading. As I said, the most well-known and most knowledgeable people in evolution is Ernst Mayr and he uses the term himself, in section headings even. I bet the term is used by others such as Stephen Gould, Richard Dawkins, and Paul Davies.

The terms chemistryist, geologyist, physicsist, biologyist all sound too weird to pronounce. That's why the terms are written otherwise. However the term evolutionist doesn't sound weird at all. What do you believe the analogous term for one who studies evolution should be? Many sciences have terms for the main sciences as well as the subsciences. That's why the term relativist is used so often. Its just not used in a relativity text. I have heard a term similar to gravitationist but I'm not too sure what it was (I forgot). But I know a very well known gravity expert called Robert Forward who referred to himself as such.

If you want to refrain from using it I don't see the problem with that. But please don't try to correct me regarding this since I'm correct in using it, I like the term, and I plan on using it, regardless of what your biologist acquantences say. I'm sure that there will be plenty of things for you to complain about in my posts in the future. This just isn't one of them.

I took the liberty of doing a web search on this term and found it used in some interesting places

http://richarddawkins.net/article,453,Th...rd-Dawkins
http://www.richarddawkins.com/
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/speakout/gould.html
http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/darwin/...awkins.htm

More obvious examples provided upon request.

Pete

---

Do you recall they actually put the word "Doh" - as used by Homer Simpson - in the Oxford English Dictionary? Yes, dictionary definitions are limited and should not be used as the definitive endpoint for your semantics.

We may not like the words that have been created but they become legitimate words when they are clearly defined in a dictionary. And this has nothing to do with semantics by any strech of the imagination. Its very well known term that is widely used. Whoever claims otherwise is simply wrong!

[Jason Jarred]

We may not like the words that have been created but they become legitimate words when they are clearly defined in a dictionary. And this has nothing to do with semantics by any strech of the imagination. Its very well known term that is widely used. Whoever claims otherwise is simply wrong!

So a word is a word only when it's in the dictionary? That's shaky.
Nothing to do with semantics under any stretch of your imagination? I'm under the impression that semantics is the definition we put on words, surely if you're talking about the meaning of a word you're talking semantics? Does that take a large stretch of the imagination? Even a rock could imagine that.

Is there something I'm missing? I'm happy to be corrected if I've been operating under a false concept for all this time.

[Tiberius]

I have never heard an Evolutionary biologist say they like the term "Evolutionist" other than Richard Dawkins, who has tried (and failed) to change the word into something nice rather than something nasty. Although he has also tried the same with the word "Darwinist" which is completely ridiculous as well seeing how no scientists believe what Darwin believed anymore.

The term Evolutionism and Evolutionist try to show the acceptance of Evolution as some kind of religion. The correct term is "Evolutionary biologist", or "supporter of Evolutionary theory". I think we should add this to the site rules once I get around to writing them up. That or I could simply filter the words "evolutionism" so it becomes "evolution"

[Pete]

I think we should add this to the site rules once I get around to writing them up. That or I could simply filter the words "evolutionism" so it becomes "evolution"

You have every right to do that of course. But when you start censoring language this won't be a place I'd want to post at anymore. But since I'm a theist, no great loss.

---

So a word is a word only when it's in the dictionary? That's shaky.

Why is that? What are you claiming consititutese a legitimate word?

I'm under the impression that semantics is the definition we put on words, surely if you're talking about the meaning of a word you're talking semantics?

Semantics is the study of meanings, the historical and psychological study and the classification of changes in the signification of words or forms viewed as factors in linguistic development. But you never mentioned anything to do with the meaning of the word "evolutionist" at all. All you said was that its a silly word.

[Tiberius]

But you never mentioned anything to do with the meaning of the word "evolutionist" at all

Actually we all did. We all said it wasn't a word that meant anything about evolution. It wasn't an accepted word used by scientists to describe themselves, and it was essentially an insult to use it.

[Edwardo Piet]

I have never heard an Evolutionary biologist say they like the term "Evolutionist" other than Richard Dawkins, who has tried (and failed) to change the word into something nice rather than something nasty. Although he has also tried the same with the word "Darwinist" which is completely ridiculous as well seeing how no scientists believe what Darwin believed anymore.

The term Evolutionism and Evolutionist try to show the acceptance of Evolution as some kind of religion. The correct term is "Evolutionary biologist", or "supporter of Evolutionary theory". I think we should add this to the site rules once I get around to writing them up. That or I could simply filter the words "evolutionism" so it becomes "evolution"

I think Dawkins is using the word "Darwinist" because that even though Darwin got a lot of stuff wrong...the basic understanding and foundations of evolution have come through Darwin.

Futhermore I have heard the world 'Darwinian' used more often than 'Darwinist'.

[bozo]

Hi folks

I just joined. First off I'm not an atheist, I'm a Christian. I wanted to introduce myself, let you know that and then see if anybody objected to me joining in on the discussions here. Does anyone mind?

Its not like I came here to try to convert anyone or try to convince you that its not possible to know that God doesn't exist. Christians have the bad reputation of going around trying to convery everybody they see to Christianity. I'm not one of those people. I believe that Jesus wanted us to spread the Word, not force it down people's throats.

You see, I belong to a Christian discussion forum. There is an atheist who joined and seems to post for the sole reason to convince Christians that God doesn't exist. I can't for the life of me figure out why he really posts there though. I figured that, at best, he might like a good discussion on the logic of the whole God exists/doesn't exist or perhaps he likes to think of himself as open minded or something along those lines. When I was thinking about all of this it occured to me that I really don't know what atheists think and perhaps it'd be useful to me to learn what their opinions are and what kinds of arguements they accept for the non-existance of God.

I also hate it when Christians give terrible arguements too. So I figured that I might even be able to contribute in that sense, i.e. I can hone my skills regarding evolution etc. I believe in evolution wholeheartedly. I'm also very into science so I think I might enjoy the conversations about science.

While I'm not here to convince anybody that God exists I wouldn't like to hide the fact that I'm a Christian.

If there are any objections to me posting here then I will respect your wishes and leave. Thank you for considering me.

Best wishes

Pete

Hi Pete. Personally speaking I welcome debate. Why don't you start by looking at the various posted topics ( you probably have ) and if you are accepted then you can respond to whatever takes your fancy.
I am happy to debate any of mine with you.

---

Hi folks

I just joined. First off I'm not an atheist, I'm a Christian. I wanted to introduce myself, let you know that and then see if anybody objected to me joining in on the discussions here. Does anyone mind?

Its not like I came here to try to convert anyone or try to convince you that its not possible to know that God doesn't exist. Christians have the bad reputation of going around trying to convery everybody they see to Christianity. I'm not one of those people. I believe that Jesus wanted us to spread the Word, not force it down people's throats.

You see, I belong to a Christian discussion forum. There is an atheist who joined and seems to post for the sole reason to convince Christians that God doesn't exist. I can't for the life of me figure out why he really posts there though. I figured that, at best, he might like a good discussion on the logic of the whole God exists/doesn't exist or perhaps he likes to think of himself as open minded or something along those lines. When I was thinking about all of this it occured to me that I really don't know what atheists think and perhaps it'd be useful to me to learn what their opinions are and what kinds of arguements they accept for the non-existance of God.

I also hate it when Christians give terrible arguements too. So I figured that I might even be able to contribute in that sense, i.e. I can hone my skills regarding evolution etc. I believe in evolution wholeheartedly. I'm also very into science so I think I might enjoy the conversations about science.

While I'm not here to convince anybody that God exists I wouldn't like to hide the fact that I'm a Christian.

If there are any objections to me posting here then I will respect your wishes and leave. Thank you for considering me.

Best wishes

Pete

Pete, hi again! WOW, I,ve just checked out that you've already got involved!
Two things, you say you believe God created everything. I don't. Pretty fundamental difference huh?
I subscribe to reason, not superstition, which is how I regard religious faith. When it comes to what/how about our existence, neither your side nor mine has the evidence yet to prove anything. Which leaves us as you with your faith and me with the poet Shelley, who expressed this question as follows:-

In a case where two propositions are diametrically oposite, the mind believes that which is least incomprehensible;- it is easier to suppose that the universe has existed from all eternity than to conceive a being beyond its limits capable of creating it: if the mind sinks beneath the weight of one, is it an alleviation to increase the intolerability of the burthen?


I.m not saying this is THE answer, but I prefer it to yours.

Secondly and I don't want to be rude to you...I'm not being.....but you have quite significant health problems. I am supposing you subscribe to the notion of praying to your God? Can he/she or it not help you?
I'm genuinely interested in your answer to this.

[StewartP]

I have never heard an Evolutionary biologist say they like the term "Evolutionist" other than Richard Dawkins, who has tried (and failed) to change the word into something nice rather than something nasty. Although he has also tried the same with the word "Darwinist" which is completely ridiculous as well seeing how no scientists believe what Darwin believed anymore.

The term Evolutionism and Evolutionist try to show the acceptance of Evolution as some kind of religion. The correct term is "Evolutionary biologist", or "supporter of Evolutionary theory". I think we should add this to the site rules once I get around to writing them up. That or I could simply filter the words "evolutionism" so it becomes "evolution"

I don't like this idea.

I know that in the best of worlds we would all be very civil and partake in polite, reasoned, rational debate. But we use words for their emotive force as well as for their powers of persuasion. Many atheists use words like "theistard" and "christard" or "morontheist". Personally I use "christer" a lot. I'll use derogatory terms for groups of faithful, but I doubt I'd directly insult an individual. Depends who's prodding me I suppose. I like to think I've got a thick skin and if someone refers to me as a Darwinian or an Evolutionist it's no skin off my nose. Helps me identify the mindset of my opponent if nothing else.

If you draw up a list of banned words, it will perforce get ever longer in order to be fair and inclusive and you'd spend your life moderating, warning and banning.

I think the best rules are fewer rules. You and the other moderators have to follow your conscience as you decide what does and doesn't break this forum's etiquette. I strongly suspect that breach of that etiquette is a lot like someones description of pornography - "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it".
So, rather than a list of rules just let the forum flow and warn and ban as y'all see fit. If you do a bad job the forum will let you know. If you do a good job the forum will grow.
A big responsibility, and one I wouldn't want.

So far you've all been doing fine.