The Issue Of Religiously Inspired Topics on ATS and BTS

Originally posted by Skyfloating


While many different groups and ideologies are welcome here, the core-target-group "Conspiracy Theorist".

Surprised?

[edit on 11-6-2008 by Skyfloating]

I hope they are all welcome where as this was started as a UFO and conspiracy site it has grown and the owners see this and have to adjust accordingly. It may not of been the intent but hey why stop progress I wish this housing crisis would end so my business can grow again

reply to post by jbondo


Nobody said BOTH SIDES weren't guilty. We've had issues with "Atheists" ganging up on "Believers" as well, it's just that the most recent issues have been the opposite.

The forums have been corrupted by BOTH SIDES arguing their theology or lack there of and that's NOT what the CONSPIRACY forums are for. That's exactly what the BTS Religion and Spirituality forum is for however and that's where threads like these will go.

@jhil, we limit the number of members we send the u2us to to preserve the db server. If you look at the current stats, you'll see we average thousands of active members each day.

Springer...

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Rockpuck

ATS seems to side with conspiracy theorist, irrational as it may be

ATS just happens to be a website for Conspiracy-Theories, Ufology and Fringe-Science.

While many different groups and ideologies are welcome here, the core-target-group "Conspiracy Theorist".

Surprised?

[edit on 11-6-2008 by Skyfloating]

Well, don't I feel like an ignorant little shcool boy?

I suppose, seeing as I tend to disagree with Conspiracy Theories, and, according to your, most astute logic.. I am "second rate" I might as well be packing my things and heading to a "discussion board" and not a "conspiracy board".

Would you say, sir, that my conclusions are accurate based upon the reasoning you provide?

Either way, such thought processes are not something I wish to be around, as cavscout said, ATS is pushing older members out the door.

Originally posted by Peepers
Religion, the most corrupt, destructive, evil, absurd, false, fable, ficticious mind control tale(s) ever devised by the mind of man.

Peepers, is that what this thread is about? No, sadly it is not.

This is what you defend, SO! He is just stopping by to flame Christians, couldn’t help himself! That is what atheists tend to do around here.

"What, I saw the word Christian, man I hate those guys! Better stop in and flex my superior intellect by telling them how dumb they are."

Oh, brand new member, I see. Like I said, SO, cater to your BASE!

Thank you Peepers for helping me out here.

BTW Peepers, I would have to say that it is science that has been the most evil and destructive force, not religion.

Did the bible give us the nuke?

How about the tech. for the artillery shells that killed tens of millions in the last century.

Think before you post bud.

reply to post by Springer


I have only ever seen ATS take the side of one side or the other.

Of course, it should also be noted that siding with certain groups did not start until the past year, a new development from the way things once where.

ATS growing pains, no doubt..

Excellent change and well thought out. It can't help but be an improvement. Thanks for doing this.

The opening post was revised with this statement:


Important clarification...

The initial message unintentionally appeared to focus too much on the "Christians' side" of the eternal debate, this was not, and is not the intent. We've had similar "decorum" problems with atheists, Muslims, and Wiccans (among others), some of which have unfortunately resulted in account terminations. This step to clarify the forums that typically contain debates inspired by religion(s) is our effort to better segment the various topics, and remind everyone that civility is expected, and most importantly prevent any future need to ban a member's account over these issues.

Good news.

However, I feel slightly...errm, slighted that psychology (the science of mind and behaviour) has been lumped in with philosophy and metaphysics (just a branch of philosophy).

Took a while to justify and consolidate the scientific credentials of psychology. Pity to associate it with non-science. Hey-ho.

Fantastic!

Despite the fact that they are some of my favorite subjects to read up on and discuss, I stopped reading the religious threads a while back because it just got too crazy. It was impossible to have a discussion with out it going off topic. This sounds like an excelent idea, and I cant wait to read some of the new threads. If it works as well as anticipated, I will enjoy bringing some of my thoughts, and findings to the table for discussion

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Thank you for the re-wording and clarification. It is always worrysome if a group, intentionally or not is targeted as "causing the problems". Even more so when people defend such reasoning (even lacking reason).

Demanding decorum where there is a lack of respect for opposing view points is perfectly reasonable and expected, there has been a flare of attacking behavior in every topic area on ATS, but it is understandable when people are in an uproar when one group above all others is, again, intentionally or not, blamed for causing the problems.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Wrong. While I agree with evolution, and science I do not for an instance assume that because I believe in science (yes science is a belief) that I am somehow intellectually superior to a Christian who believes in creationism.

Science is not a belief. It is the objective study, examination and usage of repeatable and consistent experiments and models. There is nothing to put your belief in, it simply is what it is. I don't have to believe in the hydrogen atom, it exists either way. Science is an accumulation of physical knowledge. Science is thus far growing and some of its laws are admittedly incomplete and subject to change through growth and addition, but the current models work fine and we construct our world around them. They are indeed facts as they currently stand. You cannot disprove hydrogen, it is not a belief. You can however, observe and learn about hydrogen. This is where the problem lies, many of you don't seem to understand science or the way it works and dig yourselves holes by making claims about something that you have no knowledge of, or only a small amount. Creationism is illogical and unscientific. Why? Big bang? Impossible. Why? Energy is eternal and space and time are one, there was no beginning and will be no end. Basic physics. I think there should be a science section created where people can go to learn about science because the mainstream media propaganda has taken over what science truly states.

It may lack logical foundation, but I can neither prove or disprove the existence of creationism or their God can I?

Well see. I can disprove it, but whenever I attempt to prove it, they deny it to be everything. If it is not ENTIRELY EVERYTHING because it is omnipresent, including sin, murder, etc. then it is not omnipresent. How can an omnipresent God not be a part of any of that? Simple, it's illogical to say that it could not be.

Double headed coin.

Not quite, just fighting ignorance with ignorance. Take time to go research and learn some facts, science, logic and intellect. See how this is turning out? This is what happens in the threads.

To be an Atheist you must recognize the concept that is God, and then to refuse belief in that concept. Only a man who has grown up in a situation and NEVER heard the concept of God can claim to be Atheist, otherwise you simply refuse to acknowledge.

You just contradicted yourself, which is illogical, which again represents what always happens in the threads. Read how the italicized and bolded texts contradict one another. You say that only a man that has grown up and never heard of God can be athiest, then you turn around and say to be an athiest you must recognize the concept, but deny it. It is your logic that is faulty. It's either one or the other or it's both. You can't contradict like that. Again, another prime example of what happens in the threads. It's pro-logic, pro-intellect, pro-science and an aggregation of the former knowledges combined against people who argue from ignorance of those knowledges.

Not so much not believing in anything, but rather refusing to believe in the established concepts that other people choose to follow.

I don't refuse to believe just because I don't want to believe; I refuse to accept ignorance. The concept of an eternally invisible God is completely illogical when in reference to a physical reality that is visible and tangible in all ways (yes, including the electromagnetic spectrum). If you research religions you'll understand how they formed and where they came from.

Logical, I think so.

Not at all.

Perhaps SO would be spending his time better describing what a debate is, instead of accusing innocent people of causing all these supposed "problems".

I don't consider people void of knowledge to be innocent. Having a debate against a logician or an intellect and using only ignorant emotional passion or preconceived dogma for what you believe won't change the facts of the matter. Emotions alone won't prove anything, neither will opinions. That's what a lot of people on this board need to start recognizing. THAT is the problem. Maybe there should be a board created where people can just share their opinions. In an atmosphere advocating the denial of ignorance one's opinion on a subject does not trump facts.

And in no way am I anti-particular group or person. I'd just like to clear that up. I'm just anti-ignorance, and that's what this site is for.

I am not anti-rock puck and I am not anti-christian, and from this day on I will also do my best to stick to the instrinisic facts of the debate rather than the people and the establishment.

Like JAK says: Go for the ball, not the player! I'm sure we can all relate to that in some way.

I've fallen off and had a few instances where I let someone else get the best of me, which is really just me getting the best of myself (in a bad way), and that is irresponsible of me. The blame can only be placed on me. The blame can only be placed on ourselves in this situation.

[edit on 11-6-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Well thank you SO, at least we aren’t being blatantly singled out for the blame anymore, right?

Politicians seem to have the same problems ATS owners do; you cant just go back and un-say something. We saw the original announcement; we know we are thought of as trouble causers.

I’m not going anywhere, not just yet. I know I have contributed very little relative to the site owners and staff over the years but I still feel like I have spent too much time, too much energy on ATS to abandon it that fast.

Lets see if the next year goes like the last…

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by Peepers
Religion, the most corrupt, destructive, evil, absurd, false, fable, ficticious mind control tale(s) ever devised by the mind of man.

Peepers, is that what this thread is about? No, sadly it is not.

This is what you defend, SO! He is just stopping by to flame Christians, couldn’t help himself! That is what atheists tend to do around here.

"What, I saw the word Christian, man I hate those guys! Better stop in and flex my superior intellect by telling them how dumb they are."

Oh, brand new member, I see. Like I said, SO, cater to your BASE!

Thank you Peepers for helping me out here.

BTW Peepers, I would have to say that it is science that has been the most evil and destructive force, not religion.

Did the bible give us the nuke?

How about the tech. for the artillery shells that killed tens of millions in the last century.

Think before you post bud.

Is firing back at Atheists what this thread is about? Sadly not.Making broad generalizations about Atheists? Nope not that either. Arguing over what is more evil, religion or science? Once again no. Oh and attacking the integrity of teh OWNER OF THE FREAKING SITE? Absolutely not.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

It seems an effort is being made to find a solution to this problem, however lacking some of us may find it, at least they're trying. What are you doing besides derailing the process?

reply to post by cavscout


You are a sensitive one aren't you? We are trying to accommodate the discussion of things most intelligent people avoid discussing in polite company while, at the same time, trying to AVOID slighting or censoring either side of this horridly emotional subject matter.

You think this is easy?

You think your side is the only right or correct side, so, for you it is easy, we don't have that luxury.

If we were to demand our personal beliefs (mine or Bill's) were the only views permitted we'd lose half of the members in one shot. We are trying to host ALL SIDES and yet you scream we are trying to run you off. That's just as ridiculous as it is insulting.

Springer...

Great-more navigating through the website to find things. LOL

ATS will never be able to make everybody happy as usual some will feel that they has been targeted.

Well get over it, at least I am happy with the chain of events and the effort ATS is making to clarified the intend of the threads in question.

"The Origins & Creationism Conspiracy Forum (ATS)
This forum on AboveTopSecret.com was established to discuss a spin-off hot topic from the Conspiracies In Religion forum, the effort by several groups (mainly evangelical christians) to mandate the teaching a religious belief as science. It is not a place to debate creationism -v- evolution. Threads discussing science (evolution) should be limited to the Science and Technology forum, and threads discussing religious beliefs (creation) should be limited to the BTS forum discussed below. "


This is the most whacked out, secular mind set, that you could possibly espouse. Why don't you just come out and say, Here at ATS we are officially, mainline, atheistic leaning, Evo-believing, conspirators!

teaching a religious belief as science

It just so happens that some scientific perspective coincides with what is written in the Bible. Sorry if that offends your sensibilities. The debate over Creationism and Evolution is a scientific debate! None of your (Dictates), can change that fact.
So as I've pointed out in other discussions. Evo's believe anyone that doesn't espouse evolution is religious (and a stereotypical Creationist). So your saying that their can be do debate or dissent form the proclamation of Evo's.
Your attempt to separate the two. Creationism (no certain definition) and Evolution (no certain definition). Is both asinine, and much like a civil judge, declaring what is scientific and what is religious. No one knows. Anyone who tries to set it in stone. Is making dogma.

All Hail the new Pope of ATS!

Originally posted by Springer
[You are a sensitive one aren't you?

Just noticing?

Yes, I guess I am. Sorry. You got me there, it is a fault of mine.

You think this is easy?

OK, again, point taken

You think your side is the only right or correct side, so, for you it is easy

Sorry, your wrong there. It isnt about my side being right it is about my side being singled out.

We are trying to host ALL SIDES and yet you scream we are trying to run you off. That's just as ridiculous as it is insulting.

Screaming? Really? Wow. By the norm on ATS I thought I was being pretty mild mannered.

And putting "you" in italics isn’t a fair representation. I am a low volume poster who tends not to get involved in too much religious debate. I dont think anyone is targeting me however by the initial announcement it looked like Christians and Freemasons were being targeted.


[edit on 11-6-2008 by cavscout]

I think this is awesome! I'll admit, I've been guilty of the gang issue a couple times, I'm sure... (although never on purpose... even some of the people I agree with most still have points I disagree with).

I know there have been a group of us that have, non-collaboratively, been getting into heated 'discussion' trying to push objectivity. It seems like most are members that have been registered with ATS for 2 or more years. Are some of these debates what pushed for this new decorum?

One thing I've always enjoyed, and learned to hone BECAUSE of ATS, is objectivity. A discussion is so much more pleasant when someone tries to see a discussion from all angles, and post his/her observations. These kinds of posts, alot of the time, end with "Personally, I believe (opinion/belief)", which seems fine to me. What that does, IMHO, is to 1) illustrate that person actually HAD tried to view a different perspective, and 2) show that particular person's ACTUAL bias. It seems like alot of posters that do this (I can speak for myself on this) are showing at least an attemp to view outside their box, as well as ask for opinions on their own bias.

Will those situations be reprimanded in any way? Or does the new decorum allow for this? I like to state my own bias after I try to view another angle... I just want to make sure that I, and others, won't be getting warnings, lol!

NEW FORUM: Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics
This new AboveTopSecret.com forum is for the discussion of a wide range of non-religious topics: Consciousness, Mind, Epistemology, Psychology, Philosophy, Metaphysics, Self-Empowerment, Knowledge and also fringe subjects such as Mind-Control and Psychotronic Manipulation. All in all this will be an "intellectual & philosophical cafe" with a focus on everything from mental relaxing and non-religious personal balance, to conspiracies and speculation related to influencing the mind.

I'm pretty much a lightweight in the intellectual dept. but am so looking forward to this new sub-forum to learn and grow!

Thanks Springer, SO and Skyfloating for creating this new forum! I'm sure a lot of us here will benefit from it immensely!