Re: TheologyWeb

From: wallyshoes <>
Date: Fri Jun 11 2004 - 11:07:15 EDT

Ringing your bell again, Glenn. You make it sooo easy ;-).

I would offer a different viewpoint (from Burgy) to ASAers. Twebb is place
worth going to --- but mostly as an observer. There is an interesting cross
section of people -- from atheist to YEC. Glenn and a few others are not
anonymous but they are the exceptions. As one might expect, everybody has an
agenda to push and nobody yields much to anyone. The owner is YEC and that
bias shows through. From what I have seen, the atheists and agnostics have a
field day there.

My primary purpose in joining Tweb was to see if YECs are bad as many here
have said that are. It has been an eye-opener. I see Christians who really
believe that stuff and are arrogant towards non-YEC Christians. I doubt that
I will defend YECs very often in the future.

Although I spoof Glenn, I actually admire him for how he attempts to turn
YECs around. (Don't tell him that.) I think that it is mostly futile but
there is least one person who dialogues with him and may be influenced. (He
-- like Glenn -- is one of the few who actually gives a real name. The
disadvantage of giving a real name is that other Twebbers then run out and
find out your real credentials. As a result, this person is put down by some
as lacking any significant scientific credentials.) If Glenn turns around
just one person then it is worth the effort. Besides, Glenn enjoys debate
just for debate's sake.

Is Tweb a waste of time for most people? Maybe it but is interesting to
observe that pool of people IMO


Wally wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> > [] On Behalf Of wallyshoes
> > Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 12:41 AM
> > Also one can be "anonymous' -- in that nobody would ever
> > recognize you.
> >
> > At first I signed up as " wallyshoes" but got rejected for reasons.
> >
> > Anyhow, I drop "clues" all over the place. Even Glen Morton
> > cannot figure out who I am under my pseudo name. He makes
> > guesses -- but to the wrong person.
> First off wally, you flatter yourself. I don't make any guesses and the
> one post you are thinking of I was commenting on the guy's similarity to
> your style of argumentation, which wasn't a compliment. I didn't think
> that person was you. Secondly, I was put on probation back in January
> for stating what everyone does know about a particular participant's
> identity. Since I wish to continue a dialouge with the YECs, I haven't
> even tried to guess who is who any more. So, don't think we are all
> waiting with baited breath to see who is behind nom de plume #3.
> >
> > Burgy also has to defend his view without knowing who
> > disagrees and here are many (sometimes including me)
> >
> > It it a bit of fun -- but I am a non-entity anyhow. Those
> > who are famous
> > can use any name at all, I guess.
> >
> > I drop "clues" and nobody has yet to "get them"
> >
> > . In fact I dropped clues of other personalities in ASA.
> >
> > It is fun! Burgy and Morton still fail to see that I may have
> > a "apple" also. Try it!
> Most people aren't out there TRYING DESPARATELY to figure out your
> pseudonym. I don't give a rats rear end what you call yourself on TW.
> And don't expect me to guess who is who publically. That is one of the
> biggest taboos on TW. Maybe you should read the rules.

Walt Hicks <>
In any consistent theory, there must
exist true but not provable statements.
(Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic
If you have already found the truth
without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
Received on Fri Jun 11 11:20:26 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jun 11 2004 - 11:20:26 EDT