Hi Pwcca,



Pwcca, please do not put words in my mouth. I am well aware of the insults from both sides. I reacted due to "absence" being exploited and used unfairly.

Look. I have seen this behaviour from both sides (myself included). I haven't exactly painted myself as an angel, I have admitted that I react as well and I know what I'm like. This is why I decided to opt out (as I do often) because I can see it resorts mostly to insults (from both sides) and does nt tend to bring out the best in anybody. However, when I see accusations that "absence" or "breaking from debate" means "running away from facts" I had to jump in. Because this is simply not true and most unfair. Is this forum not free for people to come onto if/when they wish? Tell me Pwcca, do you feel obligated to continually get involved and debate? Or do you, like myself, feel that you're free to read and jump in if/when you feel like doing so?

WOuld you and Linear (through absence or rest from debating) like to have that accusation thrown at you? RAZD was off here for a very long time quite sometime ago and I do not recall any creatonist saying that he was running away, nor using his absence to paint "most evolutionists". I find that insulting and unfair. Linear was off here for a long time at one point, I don't remember anybody using his temporary absence to do that either and I'm glad of it. He had a good excuse, but for goodness sake, did he NEED to give one? What is this school? Linda complained once that she felt the pair pressure on here because she felt quite isolated (until Linear and RAZD turned up). Should I have then taken the position of "well that's typical of evolutionists, they just run away or stay away from "facts"?

To me, that stinks. I am well aware of CTD being continually accused of doding and insulting etc etc. I have read the posts and frankly Pwcca, I have seen it from both sides. Provocations exist for anybody to react to on here. I too have been accused of insults and had words put in my mouth often on this forum and that eventually put me off. I just couldn't be bothered. It's really hard to type up a post when Linda criticises my every posting technique, when you and Linear jump onto everything, even going so far as to putting words in my mouth. Come on guys, can you not see that it's two sided here?



I wish I could agree, but you have continually (with Linear) jumped onto everything any creationist has said, and completely ignored the provocations of your own side. And they most definitely exist. I haven't seen CTD resorting to "childish tantrums"....that gets me, where on earth has he done that? I do indeed see that CTD is human and doesn't sit back and take sh*t without retaliating, but I'd do the same.



Hmmm, when the shoe is on the other foot? Pwcca, do you know the ongoing accusations on this forum against creationists go on and on? Of course I have accused "evolutionists always do that" (or something similar). Both sides have done the same. But how would you feel that your absense on here was being exploited? The fact you weren't even saying anything was also now being used in such a deceptive manner by Linda?

See, I realise now that it doesn't matter what I do. If I try and stay out of it and just read, Linda now uses that. If I debate, I know I'm in for what CTD puts up with. Dealing with 3 or 4 of you at once and then having my post put under a microscope, whether it's the "way" I've said something or words being put in my mouth, OR I'm "copying and pasting" (been accused of that even when I haven't done so). Or taking a long time over a post to get pictures up and having it all "pooed pooed". Whatever way I do things is never good enough. If I put it in my own words, I'm told to back it up or accused that I'm copying and pasting. If I put up a link, I'm told "why should I refute an entire website" (when Linda has put up links to "entire websites"). Seriously, after awhile, I just got too tired.

I don't have the knowledge of the complex terminology or ability to debate quickly. It takes me sometime when I answer a post because I do "try" to put content into it, but I find my post pretty much gets torn apart by criticism.

At any rate Pwcca, if you feel it's ok for Linda to use someone's absence to suggest this as running away from what she believes are "facts", even after the past posts on here and the work put into them (which took me more time than I care to admit) then I guess you're free to believe it. I find it pretty deceptive personally.