You shoudl be thankful that no such judge exists, at least officially. You would be banned, and then what would you do with your time?
Apparently you must think you are in a courtroom....given your responsiveness.... Too funny actually, sort of like watching a fish flopping on dry land....
Ahhh... but I'm not talking about the mods, who probably view your obsessive posting as a good thing, since page views are what this site thrives on. Sorry to tell you this, Z, but the mods aren't here to judge the content of your posts. They are here to make sure that TOU violations don't occur. Do you see the difference? Surely even you can understand it. You see, Z, there are good arguments to be made from your side of the argument. The problem is, you can't make them. Any group of intellectually honest ID'ers would judge your posts to be misleading and informed by superstition. They would censure your refusal to respond to challenges to your assertions. They would point out the lies like the one you told about the phrase 'like taking candy from a baby' and would conclude that your aim is not to further the debate but to rub your own G-spot. If there were an ET Supreme Court that ruled on ethical violations, you would have been banned from this site long ago, since you willfully engage in deceit and non-responsiveness as a dialectical method. All your threads are...Closed.
btw, Z...have you ever noticed that the most prominent proponents of arguments from the left here at ET suddenly disappear whenever you post one of your anti-right rants? Now why do you think that is?