I am very grateful for this forum (Thanks Russ!) but now I see a tedency in birth that makes this forum something else than just Science.
I would like that the following should be the line of Science Forum:
(1) This forum is about science. Let it stay that way.
(2) This forum is not about religion. Religion is not science and there is a forum dedicated for religious matters, the Spiritual Forum.
(3) This forum should stay friendly. Personal attacks do not belong here. There are other forums where discussions can be heated, like the Debate Forum.
(4) Let's stay on topic. If a question merit another thread of its own, please start a new thread and bring the discussion there.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
Originally posted by FabianFnasWhy must there always be separation, or distinction?...the lines arent always clean...
I am very grateful for this forum (Thanks Russ!) but now I see a tedency in birth that makes this forum something else than just Science.
I would like that the following should be the line of Science Forum:
(1) This forum is about science. Let it stay that way.
(2) This forum is not about religion. Religion is not science and there is a forum dedic ...[text shortened]... tion merit another thread of its own, please start a new thread and bring the discussion there.
Originally posted by FabianFnasI agree wholeheartedly with the point that if it's in the science forum, it should be science. But all threads which tended towards non-science too much have been moved to the appropriate forums so I don't see a need to state it explicitly as it already seems to be understood.
I am very grateful for this forum (Thanks Russ!) but now I see a tedency in birth that makes this forum something else than just Science.
I would like that the following should be the line of Science Forum:
(1) This forum is about science. Let it stay that way.
(2) This forum is not about religion. Religion is not science and there is a forum dedic ...[text shortened]... tion merit another thread of its own, please start a new thread and bring the discussion there.
There are examples for instance of threads here which are less than science (the Nibiru debacle for instance) but I do think that that thread does have a place in this forum. Even if it's bad science it gives an opportunity for things to be cleared up.
Science is about open discussion of scientific ideas. If someone has a scientific idea which is poorly implemented (Nibiru again) then let it face peer review here rather than in a debates forum, even if it does get heated. Science is not free of heated discussions!
I see what you're doing, and it's a good thing in principle, but I see it as unnecessary.
Originally posted by agrysonSpeaking of which, where did the Nibiru thread go?!
I agree wholeheartedly with the point that if it's in the science forum, it should be science. But all threads which tended towards non-science too much have been moved to the appropriate forums so I don't see a need to state it explicitly as it already seems to be understood.
There are examples for instance of threads here which are less than science (the ...[text shortened]...
I see what you're doing, and it's a good thing in principle, but I see it as unnecessary.
PinkFloyd: "Being a free thinker, I cannot vote for your proposals, assuming you intended them to be voted on."
No, this is only my opinion. Nothing to vote about.
joe shmo: "Why must there always be separation, or distinction?...the lines arent always clean..."
Science is science and religious matters are religous. Then we have gray area in between. But gray areas tend sometimes to be religion anyway and for that we have Spiritual Forum.
agryson: "I agree wholeheartedly with the point that if it's in the science forum, it should be science."
...and you have understood me correctly. By defining some lines (1) to (4), then we can start somewhere. I don't think we should have a police that throws out everything that is not well accepted science. Borderline science can also be science if it is discussed in a scientific way.
The Nibiru discussion went to Spiritual Forum. It continues there. And there I can give religious aspects of it, because it is in its right Forum.
The (3) line is there because we had some personal attacks going, which I find totally off topic, and took focus from the threads purpose. Be frienly, and stay friendly. If not, use the mail system, or take it into the Debate Forum, where heated discussion are allowed.
Heated diskussions is allright, if conducted with respect. We don't have to agree of everything, but yelling is not friendly.
The (4) line is general etiquette, nothing more, nothing less.
Originally posted by FabianFnasThis is where I have a problem. Anything about the interface between religion and science seems to have deemed to be religion rather than science. I can see why you might not want it here, but why is the spirituality forum more appropriate?
Science is science and religious matters are religous. Then we have gray area in between. But gray areas tend sometimes to be religion anyway and for that we have Spiritual Forum.
...
The (3) line is there because we had some personal attacks going, which I find totally off topic, and took focus from the threads purpose. Be frienly, and stay friendly. ...[text shortened]... not, use the mail system, or take it into the Debate Forum, where heated discussion are allowed.
To be honest, I'm not sorry to see that stuff moved from here, but I do have problems justifying it.
I also don't see why personal attacks are more acceptable in the debates forum than any other. (Although I admit it's difficult to resist given some of the stuff that gets posted there 🙂)
Originally posted by agrysonI agree that the topic of another star in our system belongs in the science forum and not in the spirituality forum.
I agree wholeheartedly with the point that if it's in the science forum, it should be science. But all threads which tended towards non-science too much have been moved to the appropriate forums so I don't see a need to state it explicitly as it already seems to be understood.
There are examples for instance of threads here which are less than science (the ...[text shortened]...
I see what you're doing, and it's a good thing in principle, but I see it as unnecessary.
One of my references used a biblical passage to further substantiate the material in question. I have talked to Russ about this and I am going to repost the theme using different support from scientific teams.