Can Black Diamond Bay logon yet?
 

If so, would you please clarify this post?

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=2743099

[Cougarguard is] a board that is full of people
Author: Black Diamond Bay
Date: Jun 6, 2007 - 02:24am
Category: Chit Chat
Viewed 54 times

that believe themselves to be very smart. Some of them legitimately are...and many of them aren't.

******

I would love to see your list of not smart Cougarguard posters.

I'm quite certain I'd make most people's lists ... so I'll go ahead and nominate myself as the Cougarguard Dunce.

I believe that one is available. DetroitDad is the Resident Jackass and Il Padrino Ute is the Board Pinhead.

I am the only that can kick someone off, and I haven't done it, nor even considered it.

We disagree on many things, but I wouldn't say you're a dunce. Not at all.

Thick-headed and stubborn, but not a dunce.

I'll withhold judgment on Tex until BDB weighs in.

WHere does this "board full of people that think they are smart" stuff come from? SOme people here are arrogant, but they tend to be arrogant on CB too. DOes all of this come from the logo? Dos anyone really believe we are so smart? Why do so many people have this impression of our self-impression?

It is a rather odd remark.

I suppose it comes from Rocky's branding of "intellectuals" and some of the discussion topics.

What CBers fail to recognize is the range of topics may be broader due our age. Some of you guys are old, so you don't focus soley upon dating life and other banalities.

It is also apparent, if somebody tries to do something a little differently, others of the non-"different" group often complain, "What are they too good for us?" I don't understand it, except to cite the Japanese axiom, "The nail that sticks up will be hammered down."

Some of you guys? If some of us are "old" what does that make you, Tonto?

I drink from the Spring of Eternal Youth. The Spaniards never found it but I did.

BTW, that remark is directed mostly at you, Creekster, RC Viking, nonsequitur and PAC.

Gee, thanks for spelling it out, pal.

Well, at your age he wasn't sure you'd pick up on the implication. ;)

Some regulars here may think they're pretty smart but wouldn't have the hubris to come and openly reject the weight of scientific opinion about carbon dating. Now that takes a real smarty pants.

Good grief, man. Expressing doubts about the certainty of carbon dating is not tantamount to openly rejecting reason and scientific research in the world and calling for a return to the year 1100. She wanted more information on the matter before she accepted the process as reliable. Such an inquiry should be encouraged by a champion of "enlightenment" such as yourself.

If, in fact, she is being openly belligerent and willfully ignorant of the facts in order to maintain her view of the world (which I very much doubt), it establishes nothing regarding her status with the board, except that the two of you ought to go out sometime.

I'd pay to watch that date.

You know Seattle, this illustrates the point Lingo and Tex have tried to make. That in spite of the board's attempts to be a space for exchange of all viewpoints, those with conservative or perhaps less-academic positions are often demeaned/dismissed in rather condescending fashion.

It is one thing to point out the weaknesses in someone's position. It is another to resort to sarcastic insults.

But BDB is clearly capable of her own defense, so I will leave it to her (if she returns) to address your comment.

Carbon dating? I must have missed something.

check the polynesian chicken bones thread from yesterday.

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8833

This is has all grown pretty silly but FYI she said she'd stick to "educated guess" rather than resort to carbon dating. When I asked her, is that because you believe the world is 6,000 years old?, which in my experience is what makes people wholesale reject carbon dating, things got testy.

She'd probably post on CB that I was possessed by an evil spirit.

good point. I couldn't agree more. Rudeness is always worse than ignorance.

And you aren't?

Dang Utesholic and I have a bet with Trojan boy.

Seattle Ute's rudeness is endearing.

I'm laughing my FAO because 80% of the state of Utah thinks rude and ignorant (I should say "ingnernt") are synonyms. good one creek.

The internet was down at work this morning, but I am able to logon now.

So in response to SU...

There are ways of making an inquiry that would leave the person being questioned with the impression that you legitimately wanted to know whether or not I believe the earth is 6K years old, and that you will respect that opinion. Even if you don't agree with it. Then there's the approach you took of asking in such a way as to clearly indicate that in your mind there's a right and wrong answer (i.e. the rude route). It's almost like daring someone to express an opinion contrary to your own.

Since you seem so concerned as to why I don't have implicit trust in the accuracy of carbon dating, I'll just say that it has NOTHING to do with how old I do or do not believe the Earth to be. I don't know how old the Earth is. Like I indicated earlier, I sometimes wonder if perhaps time has elapsed at a different rate a thousand years ago. I figure it couldn't have within the last century because there are too many ruins that have astronomical symbolism (like the temple at Chichen-Itza where the stairs turn into a feathered serpeant during the spring equinox), and if the Earth were rotating at a different rate of speed it would also indicate that it was on a different orbital pattern, therefore I would think the astronomical line-up would all be skewed. Anyway, I probaby don't know what I'm talking about, doesn't really matter...

As for the comment on the board, I am sometime baffled at the way questions are posed that seem to me to be very cut and dry. Yet in some inexplicable effort to demonstrate an alleged ability to be a deep thinker the thread explodes into this convulted conversation that get so muddled down that I don't even think you know what you're talking about anymore. It's weird, like watching peacocks strutting around with their feathers out. In the end people usually wind up drawing the same conclusions that they would have if they had just looked at the question and answered it.

Sometimes it's really nice to talk to people that can take a question and then dissect it down for purposes of clarification, and understanding. In those circumstance I subsequently walk away with more information than I asked for, but feel like what I got was worthwhile. Then there are other times that I read threads on here I find myself thinking "What is going on? Stop trying to show-off, and just cut to the chase."

There are arrogant people here, there are arrogant people on the board, but imo there is a higher concentration of the intellectually arrogant on the Guard. I won't say more than that. Speaking as the slacker little sister of two intellectual overacheivers I know better than anyone what it feels like to be deemed the idiot of the group. For that reason I will refrain from making any comments as to who the individuals are on the Guard are that I don't believe possess anything beyond ordinary intellectual capabilities.

Did I miss anything?

Thanks for not blowing my cover.

My advice .... stop taking SU so seriously. He's like the Cougarguard class clown: funny enough during class to make things interesting and lively, but never someone you'd go to for help with your homework.

All I did is ask if you believed the earth was 6,000 years old. Was that unreasonable to ask? I note that Barbara couldn't find an article critiquing carbon dating that wasn't written by Evangelicals outside of a section of Wikipedia. Your response was to call me a bitter apostate, which, by the way, doesn't offend me at all. Then when Meanie rushed to your defense I said he had no credibilty with me because he said scientists are faith mongers.

Did I miss anything?

That's no fun.

My advice is for people to stop allowing him to degrade another's religious beliefs. I don't think it's funny, I don't think it's appropriate, and I get tired of reading his predictable little digs at the church that he manages to work into almost every conversation.

Tex, My advice...let BDB handle her own fights unless you've got something substantive here to add. (E.g., What do you think about carbon dating? scientists and faith?) She's shown herself to be plenty able to do so. Guys like you shouldn't try to appear gender-sensitive because you always wind up showing your true sexist colors despite your belief in your own good intentions.

So you said you have an educated guess as to how old the earth is. Care to share?

I think your posts are clownish regardless of who your target du jour is.

And no, I have nothing substantive to add (as usual, right?). I'm just my busy racist, sexist self today. Carry on.

Just bein' Texist.

Since we're making this personal I think I would bury you in a contest of wit and humor. I think I am able to be humorous in an area where humor is sorely needed and maybe the best means to teasing out the truth not to mention keeping things somewhat more entertaining than usual. In any event, I'm sure I don't take this stuff nearly as seriously as you do.

Class clown? Hardly. This board is an open forum for SU to personally use as his conduit for anti-LDS banter. I don't know about you, but I don't find that too funny.

In seemingly every post he can not help himself but to throw bait out, in almost any conversation, for what could be an invitation for standard, run of the mill anti-LDS crap. Controversial, sometimes unanswerable (by anyone let alone people of the LDS faith). It is tiresome and I totally skip your posts because I already know how it will end. (yet I caught myself reading this post!)

I did?

You said, "I'll stick with educated guess." Check it out.

You're sore because I poked a little fun at your belief in demonic possession. Many would not agree with you that that's making fun of LDS faith.