Patrick and @swamidass, I’m positive that @Mung was making a joke, not instigating a fight or trying to improperly identify anyone. Joshua’s sentence about his belief included the following:
He was just putting the two highlighted words together and then capped it off with a smiley.
Thank you. I thought about pointing out that it was meant as a joke but thought it best to try to just let things de-escalate for a bit as Joshua and I had been having a bit of back and forth already. Took some time to cool down. I don’t mean to misrepresent Joshua or anyone else and apologize if I have done so.
It was the heat of the battle and you all were fully engaged. I benefit from the fact that I don’t understand what you all are talking about 3/4 of the time… so I can pay attention to tone, instead. 
Thanks @mung. We are just getting to know you. There are a lot of new people now, which is great. When that happens though we have to be a bit more clear about what our norma here. This is not a debate site. We are looking to see honesty in the context of common ground. We expect kindness.
You have done nothing egregious and I understand more what is motivating you. Just keep in mind that non-anonymous scientists have much more to lose than you. Treat that we respect. Let them define themselves. Don’t play around with labeling them in a way that could create real conflict.
I will ask you the same question I asked @Timothy_Horton. What is an ID-Creationist? Timothy didn’t say.
Perhaps I’m one. I’d sure like to know. I believe in God as Creator. And I believe in God as Designer. Does that make me an ID-Creationist?
Do you affirms common descent?
Do you think the scientific case for ID is strong?
You already a asked me the common descent question. My answer remains yes, I affirm common descent. 
I do not think the scientific case for ID is strong. But who knows what the future holds!
Then you do not sound like a ID-creationist in how @Timothy_Horton means it. Are you a Christian?
Absolutely. A life-changing conversion even though I grew up as a Christian and already thought I was a Christian. Somehow God managed to break through my mindset that I was a Christian and change my life anyways. So I am a born-again Christian in two senses.
Tell us the story.
What is an ID-Creationist? Someone who believes without evidence that the universe was created by an Intelligent Designer God. I personally reject such a hypothesis.
I don’t know what that makes you, but certainly not a scientist.
Wow, what an amazing story. 
I am sure you got it all together now and living your life with great purpose and meaning. 
Why do you lie about things like this Mung? I answered your question in the very next post.
Where "purpose and meaning’ is to troll Science discussion boards crapping on all pro-science conversations. it’s been his MO for years.
I think there is evidence that the universe was created by an Intelligent Designer God. So that leaves me out. And to think I so wanted to be an ID-Creationist.
I certainly agree with you that believing in God as designer is not what it takes to make someone a scientist. But it doesn’t disqualify anyone from being a scientist either.
Yes, you answered and I even quoted you. My mistake.
A person who thinks all biological life on Earth was designed and created is an ID-Creationist.
So according to you I am an ID-Creationist but according to Patrick I am not an ID-Creationist.
So confusing.
Really? What evidence?
It took me 10 minutes to figure out what @mung and @Patrick were saying to each other… and there is a chance that plenty of others left the thread with the wrong idea!
@Patrick erroneously defines a type of Creationist as someone who holds a belief “without evidence!” - - and @mung says that he must not fit the criteria because his Creationist beliefs are held BECAUSE OF EVIDENCE!
Why is my definition erroneous?
You know why.