Banned from Uncommon Descent

Banned from Uncommon Descent November 1, 2007

Apparently I’ve been banned from posting on the Uncommon Descent blog. Disagreement and questioning is apparently unwelcome there.

Although my aim was to point out problems in their arguments and hopefully prevent some people who were as yet undecided from being deceived, this too says something about that blog. I don’t think I was ever rude (although I was sarcastic at times, as always). I just articulated a different viewpoint and tried to engage in intelligent discussion (perhaps that was my mistake). I’ve never seen anyone get banned from a science-related discussion forum for anything other than obscenity and other similarly inappropriate behavior. Can we take this as yet another piece of evidence that Uncommon Descent is not a site that, like Intelligent Design in general, is not about science?

"Agreed - there should be no issue. The question is how consistent a given author ..."

Bayesian Reasoning Making Inroads in Historical ..."
"I guess this highlights the difference between Subjecitve Probability and Objectibve Probability. Explanations of BT ..."

Bayesian Reasoning Making Inroads in Historical ..."
"To be sure, Heilig is explicitly clear that he is not claiming Bayes’s theorem is ..."

Bayesian Reasoning Making Inroads in Historical ..."
"> Mark would certainly have written several comparable stories previously, likely of a pagan nature, ..."

Methods of Historical Study (Reinventing the ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Boy! … pilloried in Evolution News & Views and banned at Uncommon Descent within 24 hours! You’re really building up your street cred, dude!

  • Welcome to the legion of the banned., there’s a list of folks who’ve been banned over at After the Bar Closes. They’re currently talking about your bannination now:;act=ST;f=14;t=1274;st=21060Cheers,-F.

  • J-Dog

    Congratulations! I am surprised you lasted as long as you did – you wern’t backing down from their usual nonsense from day 1, but I suspect that your moniker held back your bannation to an extent. The IDist’s may not want to Name The Designer That Shall Be Unnamed, but they are deathly afraid that Big Juju will smote them for dissing a Man Of God (or Religion Prof).Panda’s Thumb and ATBC of will of course welcome you.

  • Oh you aren’t alone. Several ASA ( members have been banned as well. For eg, see this note from David O. . Interestingly, Dembski is still a fellow ASA member (last time I heard).

  • Wow. That is fabulous. You know you’re moving up in the world when you get banned like that.You make me want to go get myself banned from just so I can say I did.

  • Congratulations, James!!Just as a side note . . . has anyone ever noticed that the flagellum pictured so prominently at the top of the UD site is technically a “noodly appendage”?Just a thought.Ó

  • Ian

    Can we take this as yet another piece of evidence that Uncommon Descent … is not about science?As Casey Luskin said, ID does not ask theological questions. UD is only for people with a serious academic interest in science, like DaveScot and Billy-boy. That’s the reason why they have to ban religious types like you. I’m sure it’s nothing personal.

  • BSM

    Many years ago I was expelled from the CARM forums. These days I tend to avoid the forums (or is it fora?) altogether. Regardless, I hope you add this achievement to your CV.-BCP

  • On Nov. 1, J-Dog said “…they are deathly afraid that Big Juju will smote them for dissing a Man Of God (or Religion Prof).”No, no, J-Dog. The present tense is “smite”: Smite, smote, smitten. The name “Smith” means one who smites, specifically one who smites metal, such as a blacksmith (iron) or a whitesmith (tin). Consult your friendly King James Version, which uses this verb correctly. They knew their irregular verbs back then, they did.As to your name, remember that the insomniac dyslexic agnostic lies awake nights wondering whether there is a Dog.