Read this, Zdenny, and read it very carefully.
This is my blog, and yet, I see nothing but YOU, everywhere, as the first post in my every thread. You comment three or four times in a row, answering none of the counterclaims, merely asserting again and again that your epistemological views are absolute truth and everyone else is deluded or wrong without a shred of evidence to back it up. You are the very definition of a troll. Your comments add nothing, they repeat themselves ad nauseum, and you are not an active participant, merely a foil to be kicked around repeatedly. You act as an infestation on my blog, jumping from one topic to the next, spewing venom and hatred in the guise of absolute love and impeccable morals, and yet, I see no evidence that you’re even a person, when your comments could as easily have been posted by a machine. You show a fundamental lack of critical thought and reasoning ability with those parts of your brain having apparently been surgically excised to make more room for Jesus. And today, you have tried my patience to the breaking point.
I do not censor people on this blog. I have not up until this point banned people, either. However, I have absolutely no obligation to provide you with a platform. I should follow your example and refuse to let any of your posts out of moderation, merely banning you without giving you a chance, but I will not do that, no matter how hard you try to prod at the hornet’s nest. Instead, I will take a cue from Pharyngula. I am giving you one chance to escape an ignominious fate.
I’d like you to explain two things for me. 500 words each. Each short-form essay must be in its own content.
First, explain the theory of evolution, relating specifically to speciation, how it has been observed, and give three examples of transitional fossils.
Second, explain some things about neurochemistry and how it can be proven that altering neurochemistry can result in different moods, including love and hate; and how if this neurochemistry is compromised it can result in a person doing some very drastic, morally unreasonable things that they would otherwise never do.
The rules for this are simple.
1) Each comment must be written from our side’s point of view. You are specifically disallowed from writing religiously-based caricatures of evolution or neurochemistry, you have to accurately and adequately explain our side. Include at least one source reference from a scientist who does not actively disagree with the theories.
2) You may not reference God, a designer, a creator, bible quotes, etc., in your short-form essays. You may not, in fact, write anything but that which a non-theist scientist would write on the subject. This is, again, to be written from our side’s point of view. You must prove that you actually understand what it is that you’re arguing against — and I mean, you must understand the actual topic, not merely what your religiously inclined information sources are willing to tell you about the topic.
3) All of the comments that you have made today that have gone unanswered will be put into Pending status and replaced temporarily with a short note from me saying so, until you comply with this demand. Any new comment you make that does not comply with this demand will likewise be set to Pending.
4) You have unlimited time to write these essays, and may make as many attempts as you wish. You also have the right to forfeit the contest and accept a permanent ban, at your discretion, should you decide that you cannot be bothered to actually learn what we understand about science today. If you choose to be banned, then the ban is permanent. If you’re ever caught posting here under a different name, or from a different IP, you will be banned and your comments deleted; avoiding this participating in these essays is identical, in my mind, to forfeiting and accepting a ban.
If you violate any of these rules, your comment will be edited to include big red X’s or some other appropriate marks indicating where you have messed up. Only comments that serve as entries for approval will show up from now on, excepting if you forfeit and accept a ban. If you’d like to ask for help, those might also be acceptable, and I will allow my readers to either attempt to help you or mock you as they see fit — this will probably have something to do with your tone when you ask, so remember you’re the one that’s on probation here.
You may cross-post any of these responses to your own blog, however any trash-talking of me, or of this challenge, may also (at my discretion) constitute forfeiting the challenge.
I will put any accepted entry up in its own post, and provide my readers with a poll that they can vote on, as to whether or not it proves that you have gained any level of understanding of the subject matter and are worth unbanning.
Good luck. And have a wonderful day.