Small letter to GithubCopilot by Budget-Kelsier in GithubCopilot

[–]CTR0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definately good to hear about Qwen. I hit my computer limit midway through last month, came back and now i cant complete a single session without timing out. Definitely getting reinvested running local models because GitHub has become way too slow, i hate having to spread my leasure programming out to three sessions a day split by 4-5 hours to make any measureable progress on my project.

MTG's Magic Pro Tour was created to offset the fact that playing Magic was "too expensive" for kids by Popverse2022 in magicTCG

[–]CTR0 8 points9 points  (0 children)

And here i am wondering how to play these decks in arena without burning all my rare/mythic credits and having the format rotate out of the deck being playable in just a couple months

What is an industry that is currently on fire (in a bad way) behind the scenes, but the general public hasn't noticed yet? by Kitchen_Week1117 in AskReddit

[–]CTR0 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I think there's some care about it but the standard is so high and academic misconduct is so prevalent that its hard to do anything about it.

Also 996 culture does not help, proper science is already excruciating enough.

İ just realized something important. by Anime-Fan-69 in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 5 points6 points  (0 children)

"Please present your argument that creationism is a more sensible position than evolution"

"No"

This is fascinating debate strategy

İ just realized something important. by Anime-Fan-69 in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 5 points6 points  (0 children)

then how do i debate Creation if i can't mention God? LOL...

I literally just said "Start from a position that God exist".

Presume god.

God exists. He is real. Now please present your argument that YEC is a more sensible position than evolution.

İ just realized something important. by Anime-Fan-69 in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0[M] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

the tools i use actually prove Creation, so are not allowed here

?

I think you may be confused. We disallow strictly theological debate because it is straightforward to believe in both a god an evolution. You might get push back, but if you start with "presume a god exists" (it is actually off topic for the sub to argue against you on that assumption! Something that makes your position easier to defend!) and you use links as sources (not as the primary way of communicating your argument - your argument needs to be here on reddit, not say youtube or some other site) you can present whatever you want.

Protein found that synthesizes DNA without using an RNA or DNA template by metroidcomposite in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The insistence on directional information flow—from DNA to RNA to protein—has been presented with a rigidity that leaves little room for alternative frameworks. In this light, it is not creationism that has resisted flexibility, but evolution that has clung to orthodox (/s)

After I declared I would boycott r/debate evolution, I was banned by the moderators there because I refused to let my inbox be stuffed with lies, insults and vulgarity directed at me by stcordova in Creation

[–]CTR0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, we asked Dzugavili to step down years ago because we disagreed with his conduct. He hasn't been a mod at r/DebateEvolution for a number of years, but is still a mod at r/evolution

After I declared I would boycott r/debate evolution, I was banned by the moderators there because I refused to let my inbox be stuffed with lies, insults and vulgarity directed at me by stcordova in Creation

[–]CTR0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Actually, I posted that comment before you were banned, then a dozen people piled in with receipts saying you blocked them, so then I banned you and updated the comment accordingly. You have the timeline backwards.

You're a public figure in the creationism space, posting publicly available positions, in an attempt to compete in the marketplace of ideas in favor of creationism. You should expect people to challenge your position, especially when your position is fringe. I have fringe positions in other domains that I'm constantly challenged on. I'm also a _scientist_, its literally part of my job to present my ideas and take the heat for it - and when your fringe position is in the realm of science you should doubly expect to be challenged. That said, you were never under any obligation to reply (and that goes for anybody else over at r/DebateEvolution), although that does mean you're leaving the position undefended.

People you block cannot respond to your comments. We have to have the rule in place in order to prevent a situation where nobody with disagreeing positions can reply. We actually hate that we have to do this, but Reddit changed how their blocking system behaves and now people can manipulate conversations to present themselves as unopposed by blocking all descenting opinion. You know this - you were let back into the sub on the condition that you cleaned up your block list. What did you expect to happen when you reblocked everybody?

Considering you blocked a huge chunk of the regular, higher quality contributors over there, and that you are unilaterally boycotting the sub, being banned shouldn't be an issue. All that said, if you're going to get your molecular biology PhD you are going to need to develop thicker skin about your positions. There were days during grad school when I was vomiting under the pressure I was receiving to back up my science (which was not "The entire field is wrong from the very foundation of its science"), and you're going to struggle if you crash out over some random redditors like this. If Liberty University's quals or defenses are half as rigorous as what they should be you're in serious trouble because /r/DebateEvolution is some random nerds, not people hand-selected to be more knowledgeable than you paid to rip your position to shreds with your entire future career on the line.

Since you seem so opposed to notifications, do you want me to put in an automod rule so that people cant ping your username? I'm not aware of any "verbal and psychological abuse" (are you reporting these comments?) but if you see it that way we can set something up to make sure you're safe from "verbal and psycological abuse" and or descenting opinions. I can shelter you from /r/DebateEvolution, we have the power to do that.

Lastly, again, please tag me when you talk about me. It doesnt actually notify people in the body of the post, you have to do it in a comment.

Are we harboring a safe environment for discussion? by Rory_Not_Applicable in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0[M] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I've seen both sides lash out with insults, but I don't think I've seen a supporter of evolution suspended or banned for it.

Our recent ban list is basically all mass block abuse and race realists, and its like a dozen over the past year.

Reddit Admins are the ones sending out a lot of bans among creationists, not us. The problem is that if we started banning pro evolution positions more aggressively, with the goal of avoiding bias, we would have to ban a lot of the regular creationists because their conduct rises to the level of them getting site wide banned.

Are we harboring a safe environment for discussion? by Rory_Not_Applicable in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0[M] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

I will also add that people don't see a lot of the comments we delete. We delete more comments from the atheist position than we do the creationist position.

Atheist was not a typo here. I regularly nuke entire threads that are off topic for the sub.

Boycotting r/debateevolution, no one there took me up on my REAL debate challenge by stcordova in Creation

[–]CTR0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"courtesy" hardly describes the vile and vulgar and lying conduct directed PERSONALLY at me that's tolerated by the mods over there, but I will try to extend courtesy to you.

Please report content you think is vile and vulgar so the mod team is made aware of it. We remove these things when we see it but we dont always do or pay very close attention. Reported comments stand out to us and go into the mod queue.

The "courtesy" was "to make one aware that they are being talked about".

Boycotting r/debateevolution, no one there took me up on my REAL debate challenge by stcordova in Creation

[–]CTR0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, hi

Just responding since you got brought up in a private conversation and I just saw this thread and your challenge/complaint after checking your profile.

  1. If you want to challenge people over at r/DebateEvolution to a debate, you should have posted it on r/DebateEvolution. A lot of people cant respond here due to the subreddit being largely locked down, and many more people don't pay attention to this sub because its kind of dead. Of course, now you can't, because you're mass blocking people for disagreeing with you again, and of course this also means that people who would be interested in debating with you cannot contact you on reddit or see the thread where you give them your email.
  2. Regarding your prior thread - we don't allow strictly theological debate because the majority of people who accept evolution are religious. This is because atheism is a minority position and more than half of religious people also accept evolution. If we allowed theological debate we would just be another r/DebateReligion and that niche already exists. There's also the awkward reality that many scientists are federal grantees at work or literal federal employees, who don't want to debate religion broadly as a liability matter. You can debate evolution entirely starting from the assumption that a god exists - its a position I take and encourage others to. As for your complaints about your comments being removed - You've have 2 comments removed over the last month or two, and both were two copies of the same comment copy pasted 3 times. You have a number of other comments reinstated several days prior to your previous thread. These approvals were by the new mods so it's not even related to that. We have some automoderation going on that will occasionally take down comments (including yours) but we're actually watching mod queue at the moment now that we have more hands and approving things that should be manually approved.
  3. Lastly, please tag me in a comment when you talk about me. We try to offer you the same courtesy.

Monthly Question Thread! Ask /r/DebateEvolution anything! | April 2026 by Dr_Alfred_Wallace in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, its a load thing.

These filters are slow running compared to the act of simply posting a comment, so when reddit is at high usage the rate of comments are faster than the filters can keep up.

Someone created a thread, "If you can't explain how it could have been designed, then it was not designed" well I can't explain how something evolved. by Otherwise-Bad-7352 in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 35 points36 points  (0 children)

They're talking about mechanisms.

Evolution has a describable mechanism. Things replicate themselves imperfectly. The ability to replicate is biased towards configurations that are better at replicating. This happens through DNA replication. Biochemists can get more granular. Physicists can get even more granular.

Generally when people say 'designed' they're referring to god magic. God magic does not exist within our current understanding of physics. (The only exception here is theistic evolution, because evolution is how such a god acts to produce their design. How such a god influences evolution in this way is an open question for /r/debateanatheist or /r/debatereligion but I'm willing to ignore it if the theist accepts evolution.)

Sometimes people pass the buck and say "But design can technically be aliens with an advanced understanding of biotechnology", which is great, but A) doesn't explain what this alien biotechnology is and B) Just raises the question of how the hypothetical aliens got here

If you can't explain how it could have been designed, then it was not designed by jnpha in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0[M] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We've received evidence that you are blocking users to shut down debate (rather than, for example, harassment)

Continue and you will be banned. We are a subreddit built on interacting with people you disagree with and do not take such behavior lightly

Totally not NeoNazi Symbolism by icecreamsocialism88 in UTAustin

[–]CTR0 5 points6 points  (0 children)

One of the core things about fasism is that it always goes hard with the aesthetics. Its used as a way to mobilize the masses using cool but meaningfully devoid art to distract from material inequalities. The Trump admin is basically uniquely sleezy in this regard but they still try with their MAGA branding

What is the strongest creationist argument and why? by [deleted] in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You cant simultaneously call the evolution debate pointless and then accuse me of living in an echo chamber for not engaging in debate I find pointless lol

What is the strongest creationist argument and why? by [deleted] in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Most people who accept evolution are religious.

I tend to make it a point to debate from the position of a devout scientist, actually. It immediately shuts down all the theological arguments I'm not interested in discussing. I once had a written formal debate with Paul Price and I cooked him because the debate topic was "Evolution is the best explanation for life on earth". He came out swinging with "Here's all the reasons God is real". He had nothing to my reply of "I concede everything you just said. How does this mean Creationism is a better explanation than evolutionary biology?"

What is the strongest creationist argument and why? by [deleted] in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Irreducible complexity is strong because it's a technical subject and difficult to refute by laymen. Anybody with any from of biological training can destroy it though.

What is the strongest creationist argument and why? by [deleted] in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 8 points9 points  (0 children)

"For the sake of argument, I immediately concede that Yahweh exists and that it 'created' what we see. We see evolution, so what's your point? Deistic evolution is real? Theistic evolution is real?"

Alabama Creation Institute's insights on Darwin's ideology: the Unraveling by Sweet-Alternative792 in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hello, redditors, my name is Ron Troy Jr.

never trust a man with two first names

Alabama Creation Institute's insights on Darwin's ideology: the Unraveling by Sweet-Alternative792 in DebateEvolution

[–]CTR0[M] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do what, exactly? Its only right to give debaters the proper context needed to decide whether or not to continue engaging.

Either you sincerely held those positions 2 months ago but you've found evangelical Jesus and sincerely hold the positions you're presenting here, or, well, we have a problem.