RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (9) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Kris On Comments< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,21:35   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 20 2011,10:32)
The Discovery Institute's "Evolution News and Views" blog is taking a step into uncharted territory. They are permitting comments. Moderated, of course.

 
Quote

In order to maintain a higher level of discourse, we will
not publish comments that use foul language, ad hominem attacks, threats, or are otherwise uncivil.


This thread should be used to cache copies of comments left at EN&V, so that we can calibrate just how much dissent the DI is willing to publish.

Wesley, your MASSIVE hypocrisy is showing, and so is that of your sycophants. You posted your incredibly hypocritical remarks on Panda's Thumb, even though Panda's Thumb censors and moderates comments, and bans people who "dissent".

It is astounding to me that you won't see that you condone the exact thing that you're bitching about. The DI may be run by hypocritical people but you've got no room to condemn them unless you advocate completely open, free speech here and on Panda's Thumb, and everywhere else.

How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,21:39   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,21:58   

chunky old buddy old pal?

Quote
How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??


he said without fear of being moderated, censored, or banned.  what a maroon

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:04   

Lardy, lardy lardy- These creatos sur' do piss an' moan.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:12   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 20 2011,22:04)
Lardy, lardy lardy- These creatos sur' do piss an' moan.



Look who's talking. All you guys ever do is piss and moan about creationists.

And if you're implying that I'm a creationist, you couldn't be more wrong.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:15   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,21:58)
chunky old buddy old pal?

 
Quote
How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??


he said without fear of being moderated, censored, or banned.  what a maroon


Really? Then why is this in the lower right corner of every post here?

"Report this post to a moderator"

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:16   

your bullshit is too boring to report.  i wouldn't piss down your throat if your guts were on fire.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:22   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,22:16)
your bullshit is too boring to report.  i wouldn't piss down your throat if your guts were on fire.


Wow, aren't you the intellectual one. Is that all you've got? Even 3rd grade dropouts like you probably know a few more words. By the way, have you ever heard of a shift key or a capital letter?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:24   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,21:39)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

Prove it or retract it.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:28   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,23:22)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,22:16)
your bullshit is too boring to report.  i wouldn't piss down your throat if your guts were on fire.


Wow, aren't you the intellectual one. Is that all you've got? Even 3rd grade dropouts like you probably know a few more words. By the way, have you ever heard of a shift key or a capital letter?

obvious troll is obvious



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
sparc



Posts: 1712
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:31   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:15)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,21:58)
chunky old buddy old pal?

     
Quote
How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??


he said without fear of being moderated, censored, or banned.  what a maroon


Really? Then why is this in the lower right corner of every post here?

"Report this post to a moderator"

If you find the "report this post to a moderator" message offensive just use firefox and install adblock plus. You then don't have to see it anymore.

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:40   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,22:24)
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,21:39)
   
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

Prove it or retract it.


You must be kidding. Why should I retract the truth?

And why don't any of you bitch about the moderating, censoring, and banning on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and here? Is it only considered moderating, censoring, and banning when YOU'RE the ones who aren't allowed to say whatever you want, where and when you want?

Do any of you own a mirror?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:46   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,22:28)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,23:22)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,22:16)
your bullshit is too boring to report.  i wouldn't piss down your throat if your guts were on fire.


Wow, aren't you the intellectual one. Is that all you've got? Even 3rd grade dropouts like you probably know a few more words. By the way, have you ever heard of a shift key or a capital letter?

obvious troll is obvious



You're definitely living down to my expectations.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
sparc



Posts: 1712
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:49   

Quote (olegt @ Jan. 20 2011,10:38)
   
Quote
Of course, you might want to discuss it with the scientists and scholars themselves. To that end, comments will be allowed on selected articles. All comments are held for moderation. The debate over evolution and intelligent design attracts all kinds, including those who detract from the conversation by their obnoxious behavior. In order to maintain a higher level of discourse, we will not publish comments that use foul language, ad hominem attacks, threats, or are otherwise uncivil.


Emphasis in the original.



There will indeed be some discussion between Casey and Luskin in the near future:  
Quote
In two further posts I'll discuss additional off-base critiques of intelligent design in Synthese.
(emphasis not in the original)

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,22:49   



waaah i am freely bitching about being moderated and no one is moderating me

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,23:02   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,19:35)
(shorter version)

YOU WON'T LET ME SHIT IN YOUR LIVING ROOM!!! WHAAAA!!!! CENSORSHIP!!!! WHAAA!!!


--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,23:29   

i looked at about 20 of the posts over there and none seemed to have comments enabled.  maybe they're waiting to publish the new issue of ISCID or PCID or whatever the hell it was called in 2005 before they get around to it.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,23:29   

Quote (fnxtr @ Jan. 20 2011,23:02)
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,19:35)
(shorter version)

YOU WON'T LET ME SHIT IN YOUR LIVING ROOM!!! WHAAAA!!!! CENSORSHIP!!!! WHAAA!!!

Then why do you or anyone else here think you can shit in DI's living room, without them having a problem with it? In other words, what are you bitching about??

Is it ok for you to have double standards, but not for them? Did it ever occur to any of you that they get sick and tired of ad hominem attacks that are based simply on your arrogance and biases?

Have any of you ever considered that it you were to use actual, verifiable evidence in your arguments against them, instead of arrogant name calling and insults and a bunch of lame inferences, that you just might be able to make strong points that are hard to refute? If nothing else, you'd at least look like you're trying to use intelligent arguments instead of just looking like a bunch of monkeys throwing shit. You guys make science look real bad. No wonder so many people don't trust science.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2011,23:32   

no Kris no one ever thought of that.  gee thanks!  epic narrative, comrade!

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
DiEb



Posts: 238
Joined: May 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,02:18   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:15)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,21:58)
chunky old buddy old pal?

   
Quote
How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??


he said without fear of being moderated, censored, or banned.  what a maroon


Really? Then why is this in the lower right corner of every post here?

"Report this post to a moderator"

Ever heard of spam?

   
Seversky



Posts: 415
Joined: June 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,02:29   

We should thank Kris for proving our point.

What he has posted here already, if apparently coming from an evolutionist, would be sufficient to get him banned from Uncommon Descent. (Hi, Clive)

It wouldn't have been published at all in "DI's living room".

Yet he is still here.

So come right ahead, Kris.  Try and get yourself banned.

Every provocative comment you make here simply demonstrates how wide is the toleration gap between IDC and its critics.

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,02:30   

Quote (DiEb @ Jan. 21 2011,00:18)
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:15)
   
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 20 2011,21:58)
chunky old buddy old pal?

       
Quote
How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??


he said without fear of being moderated, censored, or banned.  what a maroon


Really? Then why is this in the lower right corner of every post here?

"Report this post to a moderator"

Ever heard of spam?

Have you read the posting rules? Here are a few that show that spam isn't the only thing against the rules.  If this site actually enforced its rules you would all have been banned long ago.

# MetaRule 1) DO NOT respond to inappropriate messages with a message.
# MetaRule 2) DO NOT enter inappropriate messages.

No obscenity or foul language. There is no need to express a message in vulgar language.

Messages which insult or attack an individual are not appropriate. As those messages should be regarded as inappropriate, it is also inappropriate to follow up such a message with a reply. Use email for such correspondence, or to register a complaint with the moderator(s). Pointing out gaps in fields of reference (otherwise known as "ignorance") is *not* an attack.

Messages making claims about the actions, beliefs, or intentions of identifiable participants are an implicit call for discussion. The claimant is responsible for such claims. Failure to retract unsupported claims about other participants is grounds for banishment.

*Supporting* or *attacking* religious belief is inappropriate on this discussion board. A variety of other fora are more appropriate for such discourse.

# :Annoying: The state of being a hindrance to harmonious, or even interesting, discussion. Repeatedly being annoying will be considered excessively annoying.
# :Excessively annoying: The state of being a hindrance to harmonious, or even interesting, discussion to such a degree that immediate termination of access is warranted or demanded.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,03:01   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,02:30)
If this site actually enforced its rules you would all have been banned long ago.

If my aunty had bollocks she'd be my uncle.

next!

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,03:29   

Quote
You guys make science look real bad. No wonder so many people don't trust science.


Not sure about that, Kris. I think what makes science (or rather any particular theory) look bad is if it turns out not to be true when tested by experiment.

I got interested by chance in ID about 6 years ago and, since then, have been banned at all but one (ARN - which has adopted the alternative strategy of not permitting new registrations) of the ID sites that I am aware of that actually permit comments. It seemed to me that asking simple questions about ID or correcting misinformation about evolutionary theory were the usual reasons for a ban (though not the pretext, if mentioned at all).

ID's problem (as regards to science rather than politics or apologetics) in my view is simply that there is no coherent ID theory and being asked for details seems to be upsetting for ID proponents.

Solution; get a testable theory of ID, unless you know where to find one already.

  
Occam's Toothbrush



Posts: 554
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,03:45   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:39)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

uncivil =  
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 11:31 AM)
You are one seriously stupid, chickenshit, big mouthed dunce.

ad hominem=  
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 6:56 AM)
You are a psycho chickenshit punk with a big mouth.

foul language =  
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 12:56 PM)
you’re a chickenshit punk to boot.

threats =  
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 6:56 AM)
You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?

What a mess you are Kris.  I hope you don't end up hurting anyone, but it looks inevitable.  Get help.

--------------
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
------
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,04:04   

Quote (Seversky @ Jan. 21 2011,00:29)
We should thank Kris for proving our point.

What he has posted here already, if apparently coming from an evolutionist, would be sufficient to get him banned from Uncommon Descent. (Hi, Clive)

It wouldn't have been published at all in "DI's living room".

Yet he is still here.

So come right ahead, Kris.  Try and get yourself banned.

Every provocative comment you make here simply demonstrates how wide is the toleration gap between IDC and its critics.


If I were commenting on the DI site I wouldn't say things like I do here. The reason being that they are much more likely to actually discuss something than to resort to name calling and other insults. On this site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites the vitriol is so out of control that the only way to get you guys to even pay attention is to be as blunt as possible. If you all would speak and discuss things in a reasonable way, and actually follow the posting rules here, a real discussion might be possible. A 'discussion' isn't just everyone agreeing on the same things and attacking other ways of looking at those things.

The DI site has likely received so many attacks, insults, and threats that they probably just figure it's best to not allow comments at all, and frankly, I don't blame them. Just look at the responses I've gotten here and then imagine what some people have said to the people at DI.

I was banned from Panda's Thumb and the Bathroom Wall and Pharyngula. Some of my comments were either removed or never posted. I was attacked and insulted over and over again simply because I don't worship science like religious zealots worship their God, and I gave people back the shit that they started.

The vast majority of the people who post on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites aren't really standing up for science. They're just haters who need something to hate and bash, and if it weren't religion it would just be something else. If all religious beliefs in the world were gone they would still hate something and still be looking for an internet site where they could vent their pathological anger and arrogance.

If science is as solid as some people say it is, it doesn't need anyone to constantly attack religion. Attacking religion doesn't make science stronger and it doesn't make scientists look better. In fact, when ALL people do is bash religion, in the name of science, it makes science look real weak and as though it has no credible foundation. You people are chasing more people away from science than you are attracting them to it. Why would anyone with any decency want to associate with any of you? I'd rather associate or be friends with a rabid Tasmanian Devil than any of you.

Rather than constantly and only bash religion, why don't you guys let good science speak for itself? If you know of some well done science that isn't full of inferences, mistakes, fraud, or just plain bullshit, use it as your arguments. If the science is well done but is still provisional or incomplete, don't be afraid to admit it. Stop acting like you know it all or that science knows it all. Acting like that makes you look as pompous and delusional as the most flagrant religious wackos.

If you all would spend more time making sure science is done well, you might find that more people would trust science and you might not feel the need to bash religion so much. Science's real enemy is badly done science and the people who promote science and scientists as though they're perfect and have all the concrete answers to every possible question.  

I care about science and that's why it bothers me to see so-called scientists or alleged science supporters fucking it up so much. You people are not doing science any favors. You come across like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh. Constantly spewing hypocritical, partisan anger, hatred, insults, and ridicule just makes the religious believers want to strengthen their beliefs and their defenses against you and science.

Many of you regularly argue that ID and creationism and religion in general don't have a satisfactory 'replacement' for the theory of evolution or just about any other aspect of science. You expect them to have that satisfactory replacement before you will even consider any of their theories or beliefs (take your pick). Well, what does science have that will satisfactorily replace all religious beliefs? For instance, does science have anything that will provide people the comfort and feeling of security they get from their religious beliefs? How about the companionship?

Most people in this country go to church mainly for the friendly fellowship. They like the fact that they're welcomed and treated nicely. Where can they go for that in science?

Yeah, you're likely thinking I'm religious and that I'm supporting religious zealots. I'm not. I'm simply thinking of how religious people must feel and why they believe what they do. If you guys (and science) were as smart as you think you are you'd be working at finding EFFECTIVE ways to get GOOD science across to the masses. It isn't going to happen if all you do is bash religion.

And what the fuck happened to enforcing the rule below? Why does such a phony rule even exist? All this board is meant for is attacking religious beliefs. Why should anyone believe a word of what any of you say when the so-called rules are constantly broken here and nothing is done about it? You all should think about cleaning up your own messes before condemning others for their behavior and belief system.

*Supporting* or *attacking* religious belief is inappropriate on this discussion board.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,04:10   

Quote (Occam's Toothbrush @ Jan. 21 2011,01:45)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:39)
   
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

uncivil =    
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 11:31 AM)
You are one seriously stupid, chickenshit, big mouthed dunce.

ad hominem=    
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 6:56 AM)
You are a psycho chickenshit punk with a big mouth.

foul language =    
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 12:56 PM)
you’re a chickenshit punk to boot.

threats =    
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 6:56 AM)
You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?

What a mess you are Kris.  I hope you don't end up hurting anyone, but it looks inevitable.  Get help.

Whatever you do, don't consider what was said to me or about me before I said those things.

I have limits and will not just take a lot of shit for nothing.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Occam's Toothbrush



Posts: 554
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,04:31   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,05:10)
 
Quote (Occam's Toothbrush @ Jan. 21 2011,01:45)
   
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:39)
       
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

uncivil =        
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 11:31 AM)
You are one seriously stupid, chickenshit, big mouthed dunce.

ad hominem=        
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 6:56 AM)
You are a psycho chickenshit punk with a big mouth.

foul language =        
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 12:56 PM)
you’re a chickenshit punk to boot.

threats =        
Quote (Kris @ December 28, 2010 6:56 AM)
You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?

What a mess you are Kris.  I hope you don't end up hurting anyone, but it looks inevitable.  Get help.

Whatever you do, don't consider what was said to me or about me before I said those things.

I have limits and will not just take a lot of shit for nothing.

Funny, I don't ever threaten anonymous people I argue with on websites with physical violence, no matter what they say to me.  I don't post their personal information online either, or make childish threats to call their spouses and tell them intimate details I think would damage their relationships.  I guess you have different standards.  That's why I suggest finding help before you hurt yourself or someone else.  

I also suggest finding a thesaurus, and looking up some synonyms for "chickenshit"; I think you've hit a vocabulary roadblock there.

--------------
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
------
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,04:59   

Kris:

 
Quote
Many of you regularly argue that ID and creationism and religion in general don't have a satisfactory 'replacement' for the theory of evolution or just about any other aspect of science.


"Creationism and religion in general" encounter difficulties when claims are made that contradict observed reality. Galileo's observations brought him into conflict with the Catholic church but his observations were real and repeatable. The Catholic church dogma had to change to accommodate reality. Similarly, the age of the Earth is fairly well established at around 4.5 billion years. Common descent has recently been reinforced by comparing DNA and observing the nested hierarchy of homologies. Make reality-based claims and you can expect to be challenged if they don't match the evidence.

(Some) ID proponents make claims about reality. One claim I want to test is whether there is a 'replacement' for any aspect of evolutionary theory. Is there a theory of ID?

ETA recently

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,05:01   

Kris,
I made you a thread now, to have the reasonable discussion you claim you want to have.

So, what do you want to talk about?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,05:17   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Jan. 21 2011,01:29)
 
Quote
You guys make science look real bad. No wonder so many people don't trust science.


Not sure about that, Kris. I think what makes science (or rather any particular theory) look bad is if it turns out not to be true when tested by experiment.

I got interested by chance in ID about 6 years ago and, since then, have been banned at all but one (ARN - which has adopted the alternative strategy of not permitting new registrations) of the ID sites that I am aware of that actually permit comments. It seemed to me that asking simple questions about ID or correcting misinformation about evolutionary theory were the usual reasons for a ban (though not the pretext, if mentioned at all).

ID's problem (as regards to science rather than politics or apologetics) in my view is simply that there is no coherent ID theory and being asked for details seems to be upsetting for ID proponents.

Solution; get a testable theory of ID, unless you know where to find one already.


Alan, I can't reasonably comment on why you were banned from those sites since I haven't seen what was said by you or anyone else. I have read some discussions on Uncommon Descent (UD), and have noticed that some of the ID proponents do argue fairly strongly at times but they're a LOT more decent about it than people typically are here, or on sites like Panda's Thumb and Pharyngula. I've also noticed that some of the ID proponents quote or cite scientific studies to support some of their claims.

I'm not an ID-ist or a creationist or religious, but the concept of ID or creation is somewhat intriguing. I don't usually put much thought into it and would enjoy and study nature just as much whether ID or creation were true or not. From what I've read about ID, especially on the UD site, I think I understand what they're getting at. If I do, I'd say the 'irreducible complexity' part is the most compelling. That doesn't mean that I necessarily agree with it or with any other part of the typical ID arguments, but I do find it interesting.

One of the problems with ID is that different people see it in different ways. Some people cram religion into it while others say religion isn't the basis for it and has nothing to do with it. Whether there's a 'testable' theory about ID or creation right now or not, I have an open mind about them. No one knows what's behind everything on Earth or in the universe. Science doesn't have all the answers and neither do religious people.

One of the problems with science is that it too is looked at in different ways by different people. There are lots of disagreements in science and people are just as likely to see what they want to see in science as others are in religious beliefs. There are zealots in both arenas.

It's not so much that ordinarily religious people are a problem for science. It's the zealots who are the problem. The ones who want to push their religious beliefs into everyone's mind and life. The same could be said about science zealots. They also want to push their beliefs into everyone's mind and life as though it were a complete replacement for religion. Most people don't take kindly to being forced and that's why sites like this one, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites are likely doing more harm than good when it comes to getting people to follow and trust science and scientists.

Try to imagine what a young person would think if they came here or to one of the other sites I mentioned and read all the vitriol against religion. What impression would it give them about science and scientists? Would they come away with more knowledge about science and nature or would they see science and scientists as obsessed religion haters with a HUGE chip on their shoulders?

Also try to imagine a face to face meeting where one side is talking like many of the people here do. Insults, name calling, arrogance, attacks, etc. wouldn't go very far in convincing someone that science is a good thing or that scientists are nice people, and especially if that someone already has a belief system that is anything contrary to science.

Try ordering a smoker not to smoke. Try ordering a drug user not to use drugs. Try ordering a hooker to stop having sex for money. Try ordering a religious person to give up religion. Try ridiculing, insulting, and attacking them and see how well it works.

There has to be a more effective way. Just think if sites like this and the other religion bashing sites were strictly devoted to educating people about science and nature. It could be interesting and fun, with healthy, honest, informative discussions that make people want to come back to learn more.

Kids are the future. If anyone wants them to like and trust science, science and scientists are going to have to appeal to them in a way that attracts them. The same thing goes for attracting adults. Simply bashing religion or anyone who questions science isn't going to accomplish that. It's just going to push people away.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
DNA_Jock



Posts: 5
Joined: June 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,09:13   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,05:17)
 
Quote (Alan Fox @ Jan. 21 2011,01:29)
     
Quote
You guys make science look real bad. No wonder so many people don't trust science.


Not sure about that, Kris. I think what makes science (or rather any particular theory) look bad is if it turns out not to be true when tested by experiment.

I got interested by chance in ID about 6 years ago and, since then, have been banned at all but one (ARN - which has adopted the alternative strategy of not permitting new registrations) of the ID sites that I am aware of that actually permit comments. It seemed to me that asking simple questions about ID or correcting misinformation about evolutionary theory were the usual reasons for a ban (though not the pretext, if mentioned at all).

ID's problem (as regards to science rather than politics or apologetics) in my view is simply that there is no coherent ID theory and being asked for details seems to be upsetting for ID proponents.

Solution; get a testable theory of ID, unless you know where to find one already.


Alan, I can't reasonably comment on why you were banned from those sites since I haven't seen what was said by you or anyone else. I have read some discussions on Uncommon Descent (UD), and have noticed that some of the ID proponents do argue fairly strongly at times but they're a LOT more decent about it than people typically are here, or on sites like Panda's Thumb and Pharyngula. I've also noticed that some of the ID proponents quote or cite scientific studies to support some of their claims...
snip

Kris,

I will agree with you that the tone at Pharyngula can sometimes be counter-productive, but all of these sites, especially PT, are paragons of tolerance compared with UD or TT.
If you are interested, I can review for you precisely why I was banned from UD. I am sure many others here can do the same. The data are in, respectful dissent is not allowed. It matters little whether the remaining contributors are polite to each other - the dialog has been stifled, leaving the echo chamber free to MISQUOTE and MISCITE scientific studies - no-one is left there to correct them.
To repeat, if you are interested, I can show you why I was banned. But I don't think you are interested, I think you are just a concern troll. I predict your reply will focus on my penultimate sentence.

--------------
I came to the conclusion in 2003 that entropy was the opposite of gravity,

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,09:26   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:40)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,22:24)
   
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,21:39)
   
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

Prove it or retract it.


You must be kidding. Why should I retract the truth?

And why don't any of you bitch about the moderating, censoring, and banning on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and here? Is it only considered moderating, censoring, and banning when YOU'RE the ones who aren't allowed to say whatever you want, where and when you want?

Do any of you own a mirror?

Ah the classic line.

Kris says "Of course I can't prove it, because I want it to be true.  The fact that it isn't true is not my problem.  I'll post this scree that it's 'obvious'."

Let's see... does anyone here, including Kris, think I'm a hypocrite.  If so, please post links to the places where I have shown my hypocrisy.  Please, I want to know... since I, more than anything else on Gaia's Green Earth, loathe hypocrites.

But you can't do it, Kris.  You can't show that I'm a hypocrite (because I'm not).  And you're too cowardly to admit that you are wrong.  

Whatever, if you ever want to have an adult conversation, let me know.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,09:38   

Kris, do you, perchance, know why there are three threads about 'Uncommon descent' on this page?

Do you know why, all the users from here, repost all their comments that they would have made there, here instead?

I'm saying this in all honesty, I really encourage you to read those threads here at ATBC.  I really want to know, if, after reading all of those threads, you think that UD allows 'discussion'.

BTW: What you started off with at PT, wasn't 'discussion'.  It was telling us all we are wrong.  Do you walk into a party and tell everyone that they are too drunk and they'll die?  Do you get offended when they tell you to 'fuck off'?

I know you think that you are a pargon of reason, but you come off to us as an arrogant little snot.  If you don't like the way that we treat me, you might consider acting a little nicer.

For example, proving to me that I am ahypocrite by posting the material that led you to this conclusion.

That being said, I fully admit that I have different moods and my response to you may vary depending on how I feel at the time.  However, I would never, ever publish contact information for someone without their express permission and would never threaten anyone with physical harm merely for disagreeing with me.  Defending myself, that's another story and I hope you don't have to find out what that story is.

Now, do you have something you want to talk about or not?  Can you do so in a reasonable manner?  I honestly don't know if you can or not.

I ask this question of creationists all the time, so I'll ask it of you as well.  Are you aware of the kind of reputation you have developed in your short time here?  Are you aware that we can't read your thoughts and that the ONLY information we have about you is what you post here?  Read ONLY the things you post here and ask yourself, "is this me?"  Would I show these posts to my mother (or someone else you greatly respect)?

If you answer honestly to those questions, then I hope you gain some wisdom out of it.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,09:54   

Kris complains of moderation... yet he now has 3 entire threads devoted to him.  Fascinating.

As an experiment, why don't you run over to UD or one of the other pro-ID sites and ask for your own thread or byline.  See how far you get... that would be the scientific method of determining who moderates more.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Robin



Posts: 1430
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,11:18   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,04:10)

Quote
I have limits and will not just take a lot of shit for nothing.


Ironically, that's exactly what you are doing.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,11:38   

Quote

Alan, I can't reasonably comment on why you were banned from those sites since I haven't seen what was said by you or anyone else.



It's not important but there is a dedicated thread listing and detailing some of the moderating shenanigans at UD.

The rest of your comment does not appear to be addressed to me particularly and you seem to have had other replies. I am all for the scientific approach. If you want to raise some scientific issue here why not just do it and see what happens. Unless the question is one of identifying European wildlife, you'll find commenters here, many of whom are working scientists, pretty knowledgeable. If you get abused, your hypothesis will be confirmed.

  
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,11:41   

JoeyKris is running true to form, which is kind of disappointing.

I'm just not getting a real high signal to noise ratio from him, and frankly if he has anything of importance to say, he's already set expectations in the other direction with his constant 'tu quoque' blather.

If we're nice, he's a jackass.
If we respond to his jackassery in like manner, that is proof that he's right.
If we bend over backwards to give him space to have a decent discussion, that's an excuse to accuse us all of being worse that the creotards and godbots he claims he isn't.

He is not acting and speaking in good faith, full stop.  His intent seems to be pointless monkey-wrenching for the sheer puerile joy of being a destructive little git.

I would prefer to see some strong evidence that my cynicism is misplaced, but prior experience says that this is not at all likely.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Robin



Posts: 1430
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,11:54   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,05:17)

Quote
Try ordering a smoker not to smoke. Try ordering a drug user not to use drugs. Try ordering a hooker to stop having sex for money. Try ordering a religious person to give up religion. Try ridiculing, insulting, and attacking them and see how well it works.


You're so funny, "Kris". Here's one for you: try actually making a valid argument that parallels what we actually rant about here.

See...here's the problem - what group of smoker has ever tried to get smoking taught in public schools by claiming it was science? What drug group has ever tried to get drug use taught in schools claiming it was science? What hooker has tried to teach prostitution or actually hook in schools claiming it was science? Hmmm...any? No? Then your request above is a non-sequitur; it has zero to do with why we bash ID/creationism and the institution of Christian fundamentalism that dishonestly promotes such tripe as science.

Try again.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Seversky



Posts: 415
Joined: June 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,17:58   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,04:04)
If I were commenting on the DI site I wouldn't say things like I do here. The reason being that they are much more likely to actually discuss something than to resort to name calling and other insults. On this site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites the vitriol is so out of control that the only way to get you guys to even pay attention is to be as blunt as possible.

I agree with you about the lynch-mob mentality that can erupt in the Pharyngula comments (although it's far from being just there) but isn't that the price you pay for free speech?  Free speech is not about just allowing what you personally find agreeable and inoffensive, it is in the quote (wrongly) attributed to Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

UD and DI are criticized because they are far less tolerant of dissent than PT.
 
Quote
The DI site has likely received so many attacks, insults, and threats that they probably just figure it's best to not allow comments at all, and frankly, I don't blame them.

Website administrators are fully entitled to impose whatever standards of moderation they choose and any visitors should expect to be held to them.  But if they do subject comments to draconian restrictions they cannot at the same time present themselves as champions of free enquiry and speech, not without being called on it.
 
Quote
I was banned from Panda's Thumb and the Bathroom Wall and Pharyngula. Some of my comments were either removed or never posted.

I was called a "moral monster" by Bully Arrington and later banned from Uncommon Descent.  Many years back I was also the victim of a pack attack on Pharyngula for arguing againt abortion.  The difference was UD banned me, PZ didn't.
 
Quote
The vast majority of the people who post on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites aren't really standing up for science. They're just haters who need something to hate and bash, and if it weren't religion it would just be something else.

I see them more as reactionary.  The wildebeeste infidels or gnu atheists or whatever they call themselves are a reaction to the centuries of oppression of non-believers by the various religions.  Even today there are many in this country that don't believe atheists should be citizens and that they rank below pedophiles in terms of respectability.  As for the chances of a self-proclaimed atheist being elected to public office they are usually calculated at a p-value of snowball-in-hell.  There is a Dark Side to religion that cannot be ignored.
 
Quote
If the science is well done but is still provisional or incomplete, don't be afraid to admit it. Stop acting like you know it all or that science knows it all. Acting like that makes you look as pompous and delusional as the most flagrant religious wackos.

Scientists are human just like everyone else so you will find examples who overstate their case for various reasons.  Mostly, though, they are well aware of the limitations of their knowledge, more so than the critics who are usually responsible for setting up the strawman of the arrogant boffin.  

Need I remind you that Newtonian mechanics were superseded by relativity theory, not as a result of lay critics pointing out holes that professional physicists were supposed to have missed, but because scientists understood in detail the problems with the old theory and therefore what its successor would need to do.  A number of scientists were groping towards a solution, Einstein managed to get there first.

Well-established theories are not overturned easily and that's as it should be.  If you have something that works reasonably well, you only give it up when someone offers something demonstrably better.  Science isn't about defending some dogma - if that were the case biologists would still be defending the inerrancy of every last word of On the Origin of Species - it is about hanging on to something that works until something that works better comes along.
 
Quote
You come across like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh. Constantly spewing hypocritical, partisan anger, hatred, insults, and ridicule ...

I'm glad to see we have the same opinion of those three.
 
Quote
Many of you regularly argue that ID and creationism and religion in general don't have a satisfactory 'replacement' for the theory of evolution or just about any other aspect of science. You expect them to have that satisfactory replacement before you will even consider any of their theories or beliefs (take your pick). Well, what does science have that will satisfactorily replace all religious beliefs? For instance, does science have anything that will provide people the comfort and feeling of security they get from their religious beliefs? How about the companionship?

Science isn't trying to replace religion as the "opium of the people", it is just trying to understand and explain the way the natural world works.  The problems arise when religions claim that their explanations of the world are better than those of science and that if science disagrees then science must be wrong.  If proponents of ID want it to be taken seriously as science then they need to get out into the lab and the field and put together a working, testable theory.  As for comfort and companionship, there is no reason why religion shouldn't keep on doing what it does best.  I would help,though, if they dropped some of the less savory bits.

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,22:55   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Jan. 21 2011,03:01)
Kris,
I made you a thread now, to have the reasonable discussion you claim you want to have.

So, what do you want to talk about?

Sigh.

Kris reminds me of someone online long ago who insisted he was being discriminated against because he was a straight, white, male. I pointed out to him that he was more likely being discriminated against because he was an obnoxious jerk.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,23:18   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 21 2011,07:26)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,22:40)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,22:24)
     
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,21:39)
     
Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 20 2011,10:49)
uncivil = questions

ad hominim = asking for evidence of assertions

foul language = saying something is illogical or a strawman

threats = posting as anything but a crebot

Look who's talking. Hypocrite.

Prove it or retract it.


You must be kidding. Why should I retract the truth?

And why don't any of you bitch about the moderating, censoring, and banning on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and here? Is it only considered moderating, censoring, and banning when YOU'RE the ones who aren't allowed to say whatever you want, where and when you want?

Do any of you own a mirror?

Ah the classic line.

Kris says "Of course I can't prove it, because I want it to be true.  The fact that it isn't true is not my problem.  I'll post this scree that it's 'obvious'."

Let's see... does anyone here, including Kris, think I'm a hypocrite.  If so, please post links to the places where I have shown my hypocrisy.  Please, I want to know... since I, more than anything else on Gaia's Green Earth, loathe hypocrites.

But you can't do it, Kris.  You can't show that I'm a hypocrite (because I'm not).  And you're too cowardly to admit that you are wrong.  

Whatever, if you ever want to have an adult conversation, let me know.

You wouldn't know what an "adult conversation" is if your life depended on it. Hypocrite. And you're the coward.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,23:23   

Wow...

Just wow...

I could say so many things right now.  But it's not worth the effort.  Goodbye Kris.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,23:27   

Quote (DNA_Jock @ Jan. 21 2011,07:13)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,05:17)
   
Quote (Alan Fox @ Jan. 21 2011,01:29)
       
Quote
You guys make science look real bad. No wonder so many people don't trust science.


Not sure about that, Kris. I think what makes science (or rather any particular theory) look bad is if it turns out not to be true when tested by experiment.

I got interested by chance in ID about 6 years ago and, since then, have been banned at all but one (ARN - which has adopted the alternative strategy of not permitting new registrations) of the ID sites that I am aware of that actually permit comments. It seemed to me that asking simple questions about ID or correcting misinformation about evolutionary theory were the usual reasons for a ban (though not the pretext, if mentioned at all).

ID's problem (as regards to science rather than politics or apologetics) in my view is simply that there is no coherent ID theory and being asked for details seems to be upsetting for ID proponents.

Solution; get a testable theory of ID, unless you know where to find one already.


Alan, I can't reasonably comment on why you were banned from those sites since I haven't seen what was said by you or anyone else. I have read some discussions on Uncommon Descent (UD), and have noticed that some of the ID proponents do argue fairly strongly at times but they're a LOT more decent about it than people typically are here, or on sites like Panda's Thumb and Pharyngula. I've also noticed that some of the ID proponents quote or cite scientific studies to support some of their claims...
snip

Kris,

I will agree with you that the tone at Pharyngula can sometimes be counter-productive, but all of these sites, especially PT, are paragons of tolerance compared with UD or TT.
If you are interested, I can review for you precisely why I was banned from UD. I am sure many others here can do the same. The data are in, respectful dissent is not allowed. It matters little whether the remaining contributors are polite to each other - the dialog has been stifled, leaving the echo chamber free to MISQUOTE and MISCITE scientific studies - no-one is left there to correct them.
To repeat, if you are interested, I can show you why I was banned. But I don't think you are interested, I think you are just a concern troll. I predict your reply will focus on my penultimate sentence.

I don't doubt that UD and some other sites are intolerant of some comments but that doesn't make it right for this site or any other religion bashing site to also be intolerant. This site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and some others are just as much an echo chamber as the sites you people condemn.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2011,23:39   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,21:27)
Quote (DNA_Jock @ Jan. 21 2011,07:13)
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,05:17)
     
Quote (Alan Fox @ Jan. 21 2011,01:29)
         
Quote
You guys make science look real bad. No wonder so many people don't trust science.


Not sure about that, Kris. I think what makes science (or rather any particular theory) look bad is if it turns out not to be true when tested by experiment.

I got interested by chance in ID about 6 years ago and, since then, have been banned at all but one (ARN - which has adopted the alternative strategy of not permitting new registrations) of the ID sites that I am aware of that actually permit comments. It seemed to me that asking simple questions about ID or correcting misinformation about evolutionary theory were the usual reasons for a ban (though not the pretext, if mentioned at all).

ID's problem (as regards to science rather than politics or apologetics) in my view is simply that there is no coherent ID theory and being asked for details seems to be upsetting for ID proponents.

Solution; get a testable theory of ID, unless you know where to find one already.


Alan, I can't reasonably comment on why you were banned from those sites since I haven't seen what was said by you or anyone else. I have read some discussions on Uncommon Descent (UD), and have noticed that some of the ID proponents do argue fairly strongly at times but they're a LOT more decent about it than people typically are here, or on sites like Panda's Thumb and Pharyngula. I've also noticed that some of the ID proponents quote or cite scientific studies to support some of their claims...
snip

Kris,

I will agree with you that the tone at Pharyngula can sometimes be counter-productive, but all of these sites, especially PT, are paragons of tolerance compared with UD or TT.
If you are interested, I can review for you precisely why I was banned from UD. I am sure many others here can do the same. The data are in, respectful dissent is not allowed. It matters little whether the remaining contributors are polite to each other - the dialog has been stifled, leaving the echo chamber free to MISQUOTE and MISCITE scientific studies - no-one is left there to correct them.
To repeat, if you are interested, I can show you why I was banned. But I don't think you are interested, I think you are just a concern troll. I predict your reply will focus on my penultimate sentence.

I don't doubt that UD and some other sites are intolerant of some comments but that doesn't make it right for this site or any other religion bashing site to also be intolerant. This site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and some others are just as much an echo chamber as the sites you people condemn.

Okay, let's start again. Please continue the exchange on the second thread started just for you (because, you know, we're so intolerant and all).

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,00:56   

Quote (Seversky @ Jan. 21 2011,15:58)
     
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,04:04)
If I were commenting on the DI site I wouldn't say things like I do here. The reason being that they are much more likely to actually discuss something than to resort to name calling and other insults. On this site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites the vitriol is so out of control that the only way to get you guys to even pay attention is to be as blunt as possible.

I agree with you about the lynch-mob mentality that can erupt in the Pharyngula comments (although it's far from being just there) but isn't that the price you pay for free speech?  Free speech is not about just allowing what you personally find agreeable and inoffensive, it is in the quote (wrongly) attributed to Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

UD and DI are criticized because they are far less tolerant of dissent than PT.
       
Quote
The DI site has likely received so many attacks, insults, and threats that they probably just figure it's best to not allow comments at all, and frankly, I don't blame them.

Website administrators are fully entitled to impose whatever standards of moderation they choose and any visitors should expect to be held to them.  But if they do subject comments to draconian restrictions they cannot at the same time present themselves as champions of free enquiry and speech, not without being called on it.
       
Quote
I was banned from Panda's Thumb and the Bathroom Wall and Pharyngula. Some of my comments were either removed or never posted.

I was called a "moral monster" by Bully Arrington and later banned from Uncommon Descent.  Many years back I was also the victim of a pack attack on Pharyngula for arguing againt abortion.  The difference was UD banned me, PZ didn't.
       
Quote
The vast majority of the people who post on Panda's Thumb, the Bathroom Wall, Pharyngula, and other religion bashing sites aren't really standing up for science. They're just haters who need something to hate and bash, and if it weren't religion it would just be something else.

I see them more as reactionary.  The wildebeeste infidels or gnu atheists or whatever they call themselves are a reaction to the centuries of oppression of non-believers by the various religions.  Even today there are many in this country that don't believe atheists should be citizens and that they rank below pedophiles in terms of respectability.  As for the chances of a self-proclaimed atheist being elected to public office they are usually calculated at a p-value of snowball-in-hell.  There is a Dark Side to religion that cannot be ignored.
       
Quote
If the science is well done but is still provisional or incomplete, don't be afraid to admit it. Stop acting like you know it all or that science knows it all. Acting like that makes you look as pompous and delusional as the most flagrant religious wackos.

Scientists are human just like everyone else so you will find examples who overstate their case for various reasons.  Mostly, though, they are well aware of the limitations of their knowledge, more so than the critics who are usually responsible for setting up the strawman of the arrogant boffin.  

Need I remind you that Newtonian mechanics were superseded by relativity theory, not as a result of lay critics pointing out holes that professional physicists were supposed to have missed, but because scientists understood in detail the problems with the old theory and therefore what its successor would need to do.  A number of scientists were groping towards a solution, Einstein managed to get there first.

Well-established theories are not overturned easily and that's as it should be.  If you have something that works reasonably well, you only give it up when someone offers something demonstrably better.  Science isn't about defending some dogma - if that were the case biologists would still be defending the inerrancy of every last word of On the Origin of Species - it is about hanging on to something that works until something that works better comes along.
       
Quote
You come across like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh. Constantly spewing hypocritical, partisan anger, hatred, insults, and ridicule ...

I'm glad to see we have the same opinion of those three.
       
Quote
Many of you regularly argue that ID and creationism and religion in general don't have a satisfactory 'replacement' for the theory of evolution or just about any other aspect of science. You expect them to have that satisfactory replacement before you will even consider any of their theories or beliefs (take your pick). Well, what does science have that will satisfactorily replace all religious beliefs? For instance, does science have anything that will provide people the comfort and feeling of security they get from their religious beliefs? How about the companionship?

Science isn't trying to replace religion as the "opium of the people", it is just trying to understand and explain the way the natural world works.  The problems arise when religions claim that their explanations of the world are better than those of science and that if science disagrees then science must be wrong.  If proponents of ID want it to be taken seriously as science then they need to get out into the lab and the field and put together a working, testable theory.  As for comfort and companionship, there is no reason why religion shouldn't keep on doing what it does best.  I would help,though, if they dropped some of the less savory bits.

There's no such thing as free speech at Pharyngla, Panda's Thumb, or here.

UD and DI may be less tolerant, although I can't judge that without seeing every comment ever submitted to them, but it shouldn't be a matter of who's "less tolerant". Selective censoring and banning on any forum does not allow or promote free speech. Just because censoring and banning may be done less here or on Panda's Thumb or Pharyngula doesn't make it any more right.

You said, "Website administrators are fully entitled to impose whatever standards of moderation they choose and any visitors should expect to be held to them.  But if they do subject comments to draconian restrictions they cannot at the same time present themselves as champions of free enquiry and speech, not without being called on it."

Yeah, and that applies to this site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and any other site.

You say you see the haters and bashers as "more reactionary". It's interesting that when I 'react' I'm accused of being all kinds of bad things. Apparently it just depends on who's being reactionary to what, or more accurately, whether someone is saying what others want to hear, or not, no matter who started it.

Being reactionary to what religion did in the past is like black people bitching about slavery. My ancestors were likely oppressed by religion and they may have been slaves too but I don't really care. They're all dead and that was a long time ago.

There's nothing wrong with being reactionary now about things that happen now, depending on what happens and the reaction of course. Some religious wackos should be reacted to and pressured to stop their holier than thou bullshit but that shouldn't be the job for science or scientists, and it doesn't make science look better if it's used simply as a weapon against religion. A lot of scientists spend a lot of time and effort trying to use science as that direct weapon and some do appear to be trying to replace religion with science as the opium of the people. Education about science and nature would probably be more effective, and especially with children.

I agree that religion, or at least some religions, get away with way too much, have unsavory bits, and are detrimental to society in some ways, but I'm not convinced that simply bitching about religion on a website is going to change anything for the better. There has to be a better way. Science and nature must be made interesting, accessible, understandable, and attractive to the masses, and especially to children.

Maybe it's time to 'outsmart' the religious zealots who want to cram religion into schools and every other aspect of life. There's a battle going on near where I live. Sea lions congregate below a dam and eat too many salmon, according to the 'authorities', even though humans have killed, polluted, and destroyed more salmon and their habitat than all the Sea Lions that ever lived could do in thousands of years. So, what's the remedy? Kill the Sea lions of course. Throw explosives into to the water too (which also kills salmon) and spend a fortune driving around in boats chasing the Sea lions away from the dam. Is that the best we humans can do? Can't we outsmart a Sea lion and come up with a better remedy? Can't science or scientists 'outsmart' the pushers of the unsavory bits and fairy tales in religion and find effective ways to get people interested in science and nature?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,01:37   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,23:27)
I don't doubt that UD and some other sites are intolerant of some comments but that doesn't make it right for this site or any other religion bashing site to also be intolerant. This site, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and some others are just as much an echo chamber as the sites you people condemn.

That's pronounced tu quoque, Kris.  It's a logical fallacy.  That seems to be all you've brought to the table this time, same as last time...and the seventeen times before that.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4505
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,04:22   

Making threats against other participants coupled with public release of personal information crosses the line into cyberstalking, a prima facie illegal activity. Looking back in my email archives, "Kris" was banned for cause on PT, with multiple people pointing out the cyberstalking incident. I hadn't recalled that when "Kris" started posting here. Usually, a ban in one forum I'm associated with gets carried over to the rest, and certainly there are signs that the belligerence behind the event on PT is being carried over here.

I've said it before, and it bears repeating: Those most in need of being moderated are also those least likely to acknowledge that plain fact. I have no compunction whatever in banning people who can't refrain from cyberstalking. "Kris" has gotten an undeserved second chance to make a point; right now it is up to him whether he blows it or not. In case that isn't clear enough, cyberstalking is "excessively annoying".

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,07:32   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 22 2011,02:22)
Making threats against other participants coupled with public release of personal information crosses the line into cyberstalking, a prima facie illegal activity. Looking back in my email archives, "Kris" was banned for cause on PT, with multiple people pointing out the cyberstalking incident. I hadn't recalled that when "Kris" started posting here. Usually, a ban in one forum I'm associated with gets carried over to the rest, and certainly there are signs that the belligerence behind the event on PT is being carried over here.

I've said it before, and it bears repeating: Those most in need of being moderated are also those least likely to acknowledge that plain fact. I have no compunction whatever in banning people who can't refrain from cyberstalking. "Kris" has gotten an undeserved second chance to make a point; right now it is up to him whether he blows it or not. In case that isn't clear enough, cyberstalking is "excessively annoying".


Tell you what Wesley, send all my posts from Panda's Thumb, and all the posts from other people leading up to mine, to any prosecuting attorney you like. Then come back and try to convince me that mine are illegal. Go ahead, do it.

Are you going to ban me? I thought someone said this was a free speech site (or words to that effect) and that I don't have to worry about moderation or banning.

What's really bugging you Wesley? Is it that I don't bash religious people in the vicious way you'd like me to? Is it that I noticed the massive hypocrisy of you and this site with the so-called rule against bashing religious beliefs, even though that's all you and this site ever do? Is it that I noticed the other so-called rules that are constantly broken, and never enforced on your fellow religion bashers here?

Ya know, if I'm as stupid and screwed up as some of you say I am it should be easy for you to deal with me. You should be able to make arguments against me with logic, truth, and evidence, and you should be easily able to respond to what I actually say instead of what you think I said. You guys do claim to be well educated scientists, don't you? If that's the case, you should know more than enough to argue against me or anyone else without any strain whatsoever and without resorting to name calling, insults, or threats of banning. Of course it would help you if you first lived up to the so-called rules here and presented yourselves in an honest way.

I doubt that you noticed it but a few people have responded to me in a reasonably decent way, and my responses to them are reasonably decent too. Most of you here are looking for a fight, but when someone gives you one you blame them for it. If you guys don't want a fight, don't incite one.

Try going into a church or a grocery store and talking to someone like you do here. See how long it takes for the cops to haul YOU away, even if someone in the church or store punches your lights out.

What many of you apparently don't understand is that every day it's the same old shit here and on Panda's Thumb and Pharyngula, etc., and you set an example every day with your hypocritical, hateful, arrogant behavior. Sometimes someone comes along and questions you or gives you back what you dish out. If you don't like it, make this a private forum for invited religion bashers only.

I want to tell you guys something, and this is the truth. Before I read anything on Panda's Thumb or Pharyngula or here I bashed religious beliefs pretty much the same way you guys do, although not on a daily basis. Now, after reading posts and comments here and on those other sites, and having arguments with some people, I have a different view of things and I'm more inclined to cut some religious people (but not all) a little slack, and I also now realize that some so-called scientists and science supporters are just as hypocritical, delusional, and arrogant as any power hungry religious zealots are.

I can't help but wonder how many people have been influenced, by the words and actions of religion bashers, to be more tolerant of religion and less friendly toward science. I'm still friendly toward science itself (good science that is), but I'm more critical and unfriendly toward some of the people involved in it now.

Here's something you all might want to consider: I am strongly scientifically inclined and I am not religious at all. If someone like me is turned off by some of the ways people act on sites like this or Panda's Thumb or Pharyngula, just think about how religious people (whether mildly religious or total zealots) must feel when they view this site or those others. Like I've said before, you guys may be doing science more harm than good.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
lkeithlu



Posts: 321
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,07:41   

You've had the floor now for several days. Are you going to make a scientific point sometime soon? Or are you just going to whine about PT? Being here isn't mandatory, you know. You don't like it, find another site to troll.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4505
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,07:45   

Kris:

Quote

Is it that I don't bash religious people in the vicious way you'd like me to?


You seem to be pretty vicious in bashing me, which contradicts your statement.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4505
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,07:55   

Free speech is something between you and the government. Commenting on a forum like this is a privilege, not a right. Nor is it my job to be finicky about stuff at the borderline between legal and illegal; if it looks dodgy, that's bad enough for me. The cyberstalker does not have legal recourse if his privileges get yanked, but the cyberstalker's victim quite possibly may have recourse if a forum fails to respond promptly to a problem. But thanks for encouraging me to take things up with authorities; I am checking into what your ISP and local authorities consider to be beyond the pale.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,08:12   

Wesley:

Quote
Looking back in my email archives, "Kris" was banned for cause on PT, with multiple people pointing out the cyberstalking incident.


Quote
"Kris" has gotten an undeserved second chance to make a point; right now it is up to him whether he blows it or not


So, there is a bit of history, there. Can Kris still comment here subject to the normal rules? There doesn't seem much point in posting further comments in this thread if not.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4505
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,08:25   

"Kris" is commenting and has had no specific restrictions imposed ... yet.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4505
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,08:31   

From "Kris"'s ISP's Acceptable Use Policy:

Quote

Threatening Material or Content: IP Services shall not be used to host, post, transmit, or re-transmit any content or material (or to create a domain name or operate from a domain name), that harasses, or threatens the health or safety of others. In addition, for those IP Services that utilize [X] provided web hosting, [X] reserves the right to decline to provide such services if the content is determined by [X] to be obscene, indecent, hateful, malicious, racist, defamatory, fraudulent, libelous, treasonous, excessively violent or promoting the use of violence or otherwise harmful to others.


Perhaps "Kris" hadn't read that far?

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,08:37   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 22 2011,08:32)
Here's something you all might want to consider: I am strongly scientifically inclined and I am not religious at all. If someone like me is turned off by some of the ways people act on sites like this or Panda's Thumb or Pharyngula, just think about how religious people (whether mildly religious or total zealots) must feel when they view this site or those others. Like I've said before, you guys may be doing science more harm than good.

Classic statement of concern trolling, there.

There are threads here that should attract the strongly scientifically inclined, threads with names like "Science Break". People post about science.

I predict that Kris is not very interested in the Science Break thread, because it is about science, not Kris.

So, Kris, what kind of science interests you? We know that Joe G has telescopes, does field experiments with watermelon rinds and ticks, what about you? To be clear, I'm asking for a few sentences about science, not yourself.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,08:53   

Any web site so bereft of civility is no doubt empty of true and thorough rationality and real intellectual honesty.

AMIRITE?  



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4505
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,09:00   

State law possibly relevant to "Kris":

Quote

Harassment. (1) A person commits the crime of harassment if the person intentionally:

(a) Harasses or annoys another person by:

(A) Subjecting such other person to offensive physical contact; or

(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words or gestures in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response;

(b) Subjects another to alarm by conveying a false report, known by the conveyor to be false, concerning death or serious physical injury to a person, which report reasonably would be expected to cause alarm; or

© Subjects another to alarm by conveying a telephonic, electronic or written threat to inflict serious physical injury on that person or to commit a felony involving the person or property of that person or any member of that person’s family, which threat reasonably would be expected to cause alarm.

(2) A person is criminally liable for harassment if the person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic device under the person’s control to be used in violation of subsection (1) of this section.

(3) Harassment is a Class B misdemeanor.

(4) Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, harassment is a Class A misdemeanor if a person violates subsection (1) of this section by subjecting another person to offensive physical contact and the offensive physical contact consists of touching the sexual or other intimate parts of the other person.


--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,09:25   

It would appear that concern troll is concerned.

Should we be concerned by his/her concern? Does it concern us? Hmmm. Not as far as I'm concerned.

What was that nice fraud perpetrated by a poster at Sheril and Chris's blog, The Intersection? Some chap named Tom Johnson or something wasn't it? Didn't he make claims that the tone of new atheists etc was actively turning people away from science, and that he's seen it in action and could prove all these so called big named people were nothing more than mockers and scoffers? Something along those lines, IIRC. I seem to remember it was bought hook line and and sinker by Sheril, Chris and like minded folks, and touted from the heavens as proof positive that PZ et al were hurting science (or some such). Now didn't it turn out that he'd made the whole thing up? Gosh! Why yes it did. Hmmmm. I wonder why my Spidey-sense is tingling with regards to Kris. This is all so.....familiar. I also wonder, where's the evidence behind this claim of ridicule turning people off science?*

Oh that's right, there isn't any beyond shrill shrieking, anecdote and hysterical cries of "won't someone PLEASE think of the children". Maybe Kris hasn't grasped the idea of praagmatic pluralism in communication (a position I think I could genuinely defend), i.e. using the technique most appropriate to the situation. Sometimes, ridicule works, and the productive effect is rarely aimed at the target of the ridicule.

Louis

*Waits for the inevitable: "But where's the evidence that mockery works?". The problem is, I'm not sure anyone claimed it does "work", or at least perhaps that it it is working towards a different goal. Didn't Thomas Jefferson say something about ridicule and coherent propositions once?

--------------
Bye.

  
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,10:37   

Annnnnnnnd more pointless whining by Kris.  You appear to be extraordinarily thick (and not in the way that women find appealing)* so I'll just take a chance and do something completely out of character by being blunt:

Kris, nobody here buys your male bovine excrement about being "scientifically minded" and "not religious".  You came in, guns blazing, just like every creationist assmunch who has come before you.  You have nothing of value to contribute, you have no salient point to make, and you are fucking boring as hell.  If you don't like PT (I'm beginning to get the feeling that this might, perhaps, be true), feel free to just fuck right off, then.  Seriously, you will NOT be missed and the vacuum you create (Henry?) will inevitably be filled by another not entirely unlike yourself, more's the pity.

Now, your diaper obviously needs changing.  Toddle off, then.  There's a good ookie-wookums!

--Wolfie

* It could be true that the female members of Kris' species do, in fact, find extreme skull density attractive.  To each her own, I suppose.

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,11:24   

Wolfie, you're a true poet after my own heart!

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,11:30   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 22 2011,12:24)
Wolfie, you're a true poet after my own heart!

...with a coil of rope, a roll of duct tape, and a carving knife.*

Mwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-HAAAAAAH!

*Just kidding.  I'd used a strong sedative and a stryker saw.

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,11:36   

Quote (Wolfhound @ Jan. 22 2011,17:30)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 22 2011,12:24)
Wolfie, you're a true poet after my own heart!

...with a coil of rope, a roll of duct tape, and a carving knife.*

Mwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-HAAAAAAH!

*Just kidding.  I'd used a strong sedative and a stryker saw.

Well, the easiest way to a man's heart is bellow the ribcage then a good stab up...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,11:40   

I already have Deadman's but I'm still hungry.  

*burp*

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,13:13   

Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10232
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,13:15   

I don't think we'll see Kris again, or his moral outrage.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,13:31   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 22 2011,13:45)
Kris:

Quote

Is it that I don't bash religious people in the vicious way you'd like me to?


You seem to be pretty vicious in bashing me, which contradicts your statement.

I've always been amused by the very unpleasant tone of most people who tend to complain about, well, someone's unpleasant tone.

Irony. I like it.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,13:31   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,13:47   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,13:31)
   
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

http://pandasthumb.org/bw/index.html#comment-244930

[Kris replied to comment from Dale Husband

Hmm, maybe I should give (wife's name) a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?]

(Kris posted a phone number that was later deleted by the PT admins.)

Oh, and the lunatic's favorite attack on me was:

{You’re a complete fucking loon, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.}

A clear sign of mental illness.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,13:57   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,08:47)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,13:31)
   
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

http://pandasthumb.org/bw/index.html#comment-244930

[Kris replied to comment from Dale Husband

Hmm, maybe I should give (wife's name) a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?]

(Kris posted a phone number that was later deleted by the PT admins.)

Oh, and the lunatic's favorite attack on me was:

{You’re a complete fucking loon, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.}

A clear sign of mental illness.

Yes, quite a bit of history!

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,14:02   

I read a small section of that thread.....impressive. Well, that's the word I'm going with. Wouldn't want to use a nasty word, might lower the tone, what!

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,14:26   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:47)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,13:31)
   
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

http://pandasthumb.org/bw/index.html#comment-244930

[Kris replied to comment from Dale Husband

Hmm, maybe I should give (wife's name) a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?]

(Kris posted a phone number that was later deleted by the PT admins.)

Oh, and the lunatic's favorite attack on me was:

{You’re a complete fucking loon, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.}

A clear sign of mental illness.

*reads thread*

Holy shit. What an asshole.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4365
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,14:28   

Dale - thanks for the link. It's a perfect sdemonstration that "Kris" has hoisted himself on his own petard.

So, in the future, rather than letting "Kris" post on the Bathroom Wall, perhaps we could send his future posts to the Bathroom Bowl where they belong?

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,14:54   

Oy.

And this is the guy who's major complaint seems to be "Scientist R MEEEN! Whaaah!"

At least, I think that's what he's trying to say.

Sometimes he's like a cross between Dennis Markuze and Robert Byers, i.e., a narcissistic nutjob.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,14:55   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 22 2011,09:24)
Wolfie, you're a true poet after my own heart!

I don't think it's your heart she's after, rock star.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,15:12   

Quote (fnxtr @ Jan. 22 2011,20:55)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 22 2011,09:24)
Wolfie, you're a true poet after my own heart!

I don't think it's your heart she's after, rock star.

Rhooo!!! You dirty you!

And after seeing Dale's linky and all, I can now totaly commit to insulting the shit out of Kris.

And there I was hoping for some interesting debate, silly me...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,15:16   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,20:26)
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:47)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,13:31)
     
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

http://pandasthumb.org/bw/index.html#comment-244930

[Kris replied to comment from Dale Husband

Hmm, maybe I should give (wife's name) a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?]

(Kris posted a phone number that was later deleted by the PT admins.)

Oh, and the lunatic's favorite attack on me was:

{You’re a complete fucking loon, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.}

A clear sign of mental illness.

*reads thread*

Holy shit. What an asshole.

Tut tut. You know Bill your tone is dreadful. Using naughty words like that and all. Why I am off to become a homepath just because of that, you see if I don't.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,16:21   

Quote (fnxtr @ Jan. 22 2011,14:54)
Oy.

And this is the guy who's major complaint seems to be "Scientist R MEEEN! Whaaah!"

At least, I think that's what he's trying to say.

Sometimes he's like a cross between Dennis Markuze and Robert Byers, i.e., a narcissistic nutjob.

Heck, we've been practically begging him to discuss... well... science.  But someone disagreed with him and he decided we were all... something bad.  I think he randomly picks insults from a book and applies them to user names.  It's the only thing I can come up with.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,16:59   

Quote (Louis @ Jan. 22 2011,16:16)
Why I am off to become a homepath just because of that, you see if I don't.

Louis

Going off down the homo path, are you?  We always figured that was the direction you were heading.

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,17:45   

Quote (Wolfhound @ Jan. 22 2011,22:59)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 22 2011,16:16)
Why I am off to become a homepath just because of that, you see if I don't.

Louis

Going off down the homo path, are you?  We always figured that was the direction you were heading.

Totaly uncalled for! We all know Louis is "straight"...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,18:48   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 22 2011,17:45)
Quote (Wolfhound @ Jan. 22 2011,22:59)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 22 2011,16:16)
Why I am off to become a homepath just because of that, you see if I don't.

Louis

Going off down the homo path, are you?  We always figured that was the direction you were heading.

Totaly uncalled for! We all know Louis is "straight"...

Is that algebraic straight, non-Euclidean, or Euclidean straight?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,20:19   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Jan. 22 2011,11:57)
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,08:47)
 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,13:31)
     
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

http://pandasthumb.org/bw/index.html#comment-244930

[Kris replied to comment from Dale Husband

Hmm, maybe I should give (wife's name) a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?]

(Kris posted a phone number that was later deleted by the PT admins.)

Oh, and the lunatic's favorite attack on me was:

{You’re a complete fucking loon, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.}

A clear sign of mental illness.

Yes, quite a bit of history!

Just a few things about the link and the "history": several posts at that link were not made by me, even though my name is on them. The history goes back further than that page.

Do you guys really want to see "psycho"? If so, take a good look at Dale's blog.

http://circleh.wordpress.com/

And then there's:

http://www.myspace.com/seeker_alpha

http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/profile.html?pid=112601330

http://www.opposingviews.com/users/dale-husband/comments_list

http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/dale-husband/muslims-get-life

http://twitter.com/Dale_Husband_HS

http://www.youtube.com/user/DaleHusband

http://www.iranian.com/main....thority

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,20:38   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 22 2011,07:00)
State law possibly relevant to "Kris":

 
Quote

Harassment. (1) A person commits the crime of harassment if the person intentionally:

(a) Harasses or annoys another person by:

(A) Subjecting such other person to offensive physical contact; or

(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words or gestures in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response;

(b) Subjects another to alarm by conveying a false report, known by the conveyor to be false, concerning death or serious physical injury to a person, which report reasonably would be expected to cause alarm; or

© Subjects another to alarm by conveying a telephonic, electronic or written threat to inflict serious physical injury on that person or to commit a felony involving the person or property of that person or any member of that person’s family, which threat reasonably would be expected to cause alarm.

(2) A person is criminally liable for harassment if the person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic device under the person’s control to be used in violation of subsection (1) of this section.

(3) Harassment is a Class B misdemeanor.

(4) Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, harassment is a Class A misdemeanor if a person violates subsection (1) of this section by subjecting another person to offensive physical contact and the offensive physical contact consists of touching the sexual or other intimate parts of the other person.

You might want to consider how (B) applies to you and others here.

What (B) is actually saying is that if you start shit, don't be surprised if you get worse shit back. The entire purpose of this site, Panda's Thumb, and Pharyngula is to start shit.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,20:42   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 22 2011,20:19)
Quote (Alan Fox @ Jan. 22 2011,11:57)
 
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,08:47)
 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 22 2011,13:31)
       
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,14:13)
Message to Kris:

Hey, bastard! Are you forgetting that you made references to my wife, who never before posted anything in PT before, to insult me? You even threatened to make crank calls to her after posting my home number for all to see! You are sick as it gets!

Linky? Or perhaps quoted material, minus the number and name.

http://pandasthumb.org/bw/index.html#comment-244930

[Kris replied to comment from Dale Husband

Hmm, maybe I should give (wife's name) a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?]

(Kris posted a phone number that was later deleted by the PT admins.)

Oh, and the lunatic's favorite attack on me was:

{You’re a complete fucking loon, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.}

A clear sign of mental illness.

Yes, quite a bit of history!

Just a few things about the link and the "history": several posts at that link were not made by me, even though my name is on them. The history goes back further than that page.

Do you guys really want to see "psycho"? If so, take a good look at Dale's blog.

http://circleh.wordpress.com/

And then there's:

http://www.myspace.com/seeker_alpha

http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/profile.html?pid=112601330

http://www.opposingviews.com/users/dale-husband/comments_list

http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/dale-husband/muslims-get-life

http://twitter.com/Dale_Husband_HS

http://www.youtube.com/user/DaleHusband

http://www.iranian.com/main....thority

Just because someone is worse than you, it doesn't mean you are a saint... or even nice.

It's a great attempt at a Red Herring though.  A few more years and I'm sure you'll convince someone.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,20:43   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 22 2011,20:38)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 22 2011,07:00)
State law possibly relevant to "Kris":

 
Quote

Harassment. (1) A person commits the crime of harassment if the person intentionally:

(a) Harasses or annoys another person by:

(A) Subjecting such other person to offensive physical contact; or

(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words or gestures in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response;

(b) Subjects another to alarm by conveying a false report, known by the conveyor to be false, concerning death or serious physical injury to a person, which report reasonably would be expected to cause alarm; or

© Subjects another to alarm by conveying a telephonic, electronic or written threat to inflict serious physical injury on that person or to commit a felony involving the person or property of that person or any member of that person’s family, which threat reasonably would be expected to cause alarm.

(2) A person is criminally liable for harassment if the person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic device under the person’s control to be used in violation of subsection (1) of this section.

(3) Harassment is a Class B misdemeanor.

(4) Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, harassment is a Class A misdemeanor if a person violates subsection (1) of this section by subjecting another person to offensive physical contact and the offensive physical contact consists of touching the sexual or other intimate parts of the other person.

You might want to consider how (B) applies to you and others here.

What (B) is actually saying is that if you start shit, don't be surprised if you get worse shit back. The entire purpose of this site, Panda's Thumb, and Pharyngula is to start shit.

You came here.  You're free to leave.  You're free to stay, until you cross a line.

BTW: You still haven't retracted or proven your statement about me being a hypocrite.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2011,21:02   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 22 2011,20:38)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 22 2011,07:00)
State law possibly relevant to "Kris":

 
Quote

Harassment. (1) A person commits the crime of harassment if the person intentionally:

(a) Harasses or annoys another person by:

(A) Subjecting such other person to offensive physical contact; or

(B) Publicly insulting such other person by abusive words or gestures in a manner intended and likely to provoke a violent response;

(b) Subjects another to alarm by conveying a false report, known by the conveyor to be false, concerning death or serious physical injury to a person, which report reasonably would be expected to cause alarm; or

© Subjects another to alarm by conveying a telephonic, electronic or written threat to inflict serious physical injury on that person or to commit a felony involving the person or property of that person or any member of that person’s family, which threat reasonably would be expected to cause alarm.

(2) A person is criminally liable for harassment if the person knowingly permits any telephone or electronic device under the person’s control to be used in violation of subsection (1) of this section.

(3) Harassment is a Class B misdemeanor.

(4) Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, harassment is a Class A misdemeanor if a person violates subsection (1) of this section by subjecting another person to offensive physical contact and the offensive physical contact consists of touching the sexual or other intimate parts of the other person.

You might want to consider how (B) applies to you and others here.

What (B) is actually saying is that if you start shit, don't be surprised if you get worse shit back. The entire purpose of this site, Panda's Thumb, and Pharyngula is to start shit.

That may or may not be, but I'm going to end it.

Some of us have jobs and cannot get here all the time to baby-sit.

If you want to end up on the BW from now on, you'll get your wish.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,00:04   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 22 2011,20:19)
Just a few things about the link and the "history": several posts at that link were not made by me, even though my name is on them. The history goes back further than that page.

Do you guys really want to see "psycho"? If so, take a good look at Dale's blog.

http://circleh.wordpress.com/

And then there's:

http://www.myspace.com/seeker_alpha

http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/profile.html?pid=112601330

http://www.opposingviews.com/users/dale-husband/comments_list

http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/dale-husband/muslims-get-life

http://twitter.com/Dale_Husband_HS

http://www.youtube.com/user/DaleHusband

http://www.iranian.com/main....thority

So I have a unique personality and opinions about lots of subjects. So fuking what?! I didn't know having a mind of my own instead of always nodding in total agreement with you was so offensive to you, Kris!

And of course, this is more proof that you HAVE been cyberstalking me.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,00:21   

Has Kris ever been banned from Pharyngula, the blog by P Z Myers? I found an entry at the long list of banned people that seems to be of Kris:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/plonk.php

Quote

Mr G

Insipidity, trolling, wanking

Tiresome pseudo-intellectual who popped into a thread about the mind-body problem and started insisting…what? Nobody knows. He was darned sure his opinion was superior to everyone else's, but we couldn't get him to explain what his position was. Maybe a few years in the dungeon will give him time to organize his thoughts.


Because Kris will say he is not religious and not Creationist, but then attack us for not being tolerant and respectful enough of Creationists, claiming that this somehow damages the ability of the public to understand and appreciate science.

Quote

Concern trolling
A particularly annoying form of trolling in which someone falsely pretends to be offering advice to favor a position they do not endorse; a creationist who masquerades as someone concerned about the arguments for evolution as an excuse to make criticisms.


--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,00:32   

someone remind me why this shit stain gets replies again?  i would like to see kris get fucked by a rhino.  to death.  or go away and troll for man meat somewhere else.  who cares

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,00:38   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Jan. 23 2011,00:32)
someone remind me why this shit stain gets replies again?  i would like to see kris get fucked by a rhino.  to death.  or go away and troll for man meat somewhere else.  who cares

Exactly. Kris flounced out. Enough rope, et cetera. Spare the poor rhino.  :p

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,01:52   

Welcome back, Kristine.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,02:37   

I think it's time to stop with the insults, Kris. You said you wanted a reasonable discussion, and now you're back to your shenanigans because you can't face the fact of being wrong or seing your own flaws pointed out.

It's not even fun anymore, it's just boring...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,02:54   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,02:20)
 
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 22 2011,22:04)
 
So I have a unique personality and opinions about lots of subjects. So fuking what?! I didn't know having a mind of my own instead of always nodding in total agreement with you was so offensive to you, Kris!

And of course, this is more proof that you HAVE been cyberstalking me.

Unique personality? That's hilarious Dale. You're a complete fucking loon.

By the way Mr. Paranoid, it took all of five minutes to look up those links. No "cyberstalking" was necessary.

You forgot the rest of your favorite insult at me.

"...and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one."

You mind must be slipping even faster than before.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:01   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,02:34)
Actually, I didn't make any reference to your wife, or at least not in the way you're implying. I asked you if she knows that you want to cheat on her. I didn't threaten to make crank calls to her either. I said, "Hmm, maybe I should give Cheri a call and let her know you want to cheat on her. Wadda ya think?" There's nothing "crank" about that. You're the one who says you have a desire for someone else on your blog and you're the one who says polyamory looks good to you.

Ya know Dale, if you're worried about your personal information, maybe you shouldn't spread it all over the internet. And if you're worried about your own words coming back to haunt you, maybe you shouldn't spread them all over the internet too.

By the way, You’re a complete fucking loon, a hypocrite, a bigot, and a pathological liar. Commit yourself to an insane asylum. You belong in one.

Hey Kris, do you want to date my (Circle H) avatar?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urNyg1ftMIU

Uh, I thought you hated being called a liar. So why did you lie just now?

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:08   

Well, at least I have consistent standards of honor and do my best to live up to them, no matter the cost.

You, on the other hand, seem to have NO standards whatsoever. All you ever have is hate for the rest of humanity.
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:03)
 
Aren't you the one who preaches tolerance and acceptance of, and friendship with, people from various groups?

"Part of my being honorable is refusing to paint the members of any group, whether political, religious, or national, with the same brush. My friends include all kinds of people, such as conservatives, liberals, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Athiests, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Austrailians, meat-eaters and vegetarians. That diversity I deeply treasure."

Aren't those your words Dale? Were you lying when you typed them? If you're so friendly toward religious people, why do you constantly bash religious Creationists, religious ID-ists, Muslims, Christians, etc.?

Let's take a look at your claim about how "honorable" you are:

"An Honorable Skeptic

This is my ethical philosophy that I always express everywhere I may go.

I am a skeptic by nature.  I question everything I see, not taking what I am told at face value, but demanding proof, evidence, and corroborations before I accept something as true. Thus, when I am told by liberals that there was a conspiracy of American government officials involved in the terrorist attacks of 9-11, I am skeptical. If I am told by liberals that atrocities were committed in either Afganistan or Iraq by American forces against civilians, I am skeptical. If I am told by conservatives that tax cuts are a way to help the economy grow and that tax hikes hurt the economy, I am skeptical. If I am told by conservatives that the War in Iraq was justified even though no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found there even after being told before that they were there, I am VERY skeptical of that!!! When it comes to skepticism, I don’t discriminate politically! I doubt everything!

Another thing I am adamant about is my sense of honor, which I hold more dear to me than my life. It allows for no exceptions whatsoever. So if I have lost friends or even made enemies for standing up for my honor, so be it. If I see someone who comes across to me as a liar, a bully, or just plain rude and stupid, then I usually try to fight back. If I see someone doing or saying things that damage the credibility of the causes I happen to believe in, I deeply take offense at that because I want those causes to be protected, even at the expense of picking fights with those who are unworthy to support those causes. I beleive in absolute standards of right and wrong and so I see no point in ever excusing something that is wrong because the wrongdoer is otherwise a friendly or nice guy. That’s how corruption sets in.

Part of my being honorable is refusing to paint the members of any group, whether political, religious, or national, with the same brush. My friends include all kinds of people, such as conservatives, liberals, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Athiests, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Austrailians, meat-eaters and vegetarians. That diversity I deeply treasure. Once I recognize that another soul is honorable, no matter what else may be true of that person, I embrace him as a brother. But if I discover a fellow American, a fellow agnostic, a fellow liberal, or a fellow chess player to be dishonorable in his behavior, he becomes my enemy, period. I distrust and shun him like I would a leper.

Because I am honorable, I sometimes willingly concede points made by my opponents in debates with them. This should never be seen as a sign of weakness. When I know I am right about something, I will fight like a pit bull to prove my case and defeat my opponent because in some cases I do see my battles here as a struggle between light and darkness, good and evil, ignorance and knowledge. But I am also willing at times to listen to my opponent and consider his point of view, especially if that person is known by me to be honorable. If we do not listen to others, how can we ever grow in knowledge?

No matter how great the pressure, I feel that one must never “sell out”. It is being able to stand up to the urge to conform to the shallow desires and priorites of others who have a limited vision that makes one truly heroic. I choose my friends according to my ideals; I never bend my ideals for the sake of keeping friends."

Your "ideals" are rooted in insanity, hypocrisy, dishonesty, malignant narcissism, and bigotry, and you're a legend in your own mind.

Oh, and I don't think your link to Pharyngula is about me. Better luck next time Mr. Dishonorable Wacko.


--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:17   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,09:13)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,00:37)
I think it's time to stop with the insults, Kris. You said you wanted a reasonable discussion, and now you're back to your shenanigans because you can't face the fact of being wrong or seing your own flaws pointed out.

It's not even fun anymore, it's just boring...


Oh, so it's ok for you and other people to insult me over and over but it's not ok for me to insult anyone back. I'm expected to be reasonable but no one else is. I see.

You and some others here should look at your own flaws.

Be nice, it's my birthday!

And you will get insulted if you insult. Let's see who started insulting who on this thread... My! It seems it was you, in the very first post.

Want to start it all again without calling people hypocrites (and not being able to back up your claims)?

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:22   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,03:17)
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,09:13)
 
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,00:37)
I think it's time to stop with the insults, Kris. You said you wanted a reasonable discussion, and now you're back to your shenanigans because you can't face the fact of being wrong or seing your own flaws pointed out.

It's not even fun anymore, it's just boring...


Oh, so it's ok for you and other people to insult me over and over but it's not ok for me to insult anyone back. I'm expected to be reasonable but no one else is. I see.

You and some others here should look at your own flaws.

Be nice, it's my birthday!

And you will get insulted if you insult. Let's see who started insulting who on this thread... My! It seems it was you, in the very first post.

Want to start it all again without calling people hypocrites (and not being able to back up your claims)?

So Kris is saying if ONE person insults him ONCE, that gives him the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?

Because that's what he's been doing since mid-December.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:27   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:18)
 
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:01)
 

Uh, I thought you hated being called a liar. So why did you lie just now?

I didn't lie about anything. You, on the other hand......

You said, "maybe I should give [Dale's wife] a call and let her know you want to cheat on her." That was indeed lying. You were lying to everyone else in PT and threatening to lie to her. I never said I wanted to cheat on her. You have a really strange mind to come to that conclusion after reading my blog entries on polyamory, prostitution, and statutory rape. I was discussing legal and philosophical matters, not personal desires, you @$$hole!

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:27   

see? You're not very reasonable. I'm honestly proposing to start this whole discussion over on clean basis, without insults, yet the only answer you manage is another tu quoque.

In the end, you are not really here to discuss science, are you? You're more here to complain and bitch around, which is a shame since there was potential for an interesting interaction.

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:38   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:22)
 
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,03:17)
   
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,09:13)
     
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,00:37)
I think it's time to stop with the insults, Kris. You said you wanted a reasonable discussion, and now you're back to your shenanigans because you can't face the fact of being wrong or seing your own flaws pointed out.

It's not even fun anymore, it's just boring...


Oh, so it's ok for you and other people to insult me over and over but it's not ok for me to insult anyone back. I'm expected to be reasonable but no one else is. I see.

You and some others here should look at your own flaws.

Be nice, it's my birthday!

And you will get insulted if you insult. Let's see who started insulting who on this thread... My! It seems it was you, in the very first post.

Want to start it all again without calling people hypocrites (and not being able to back up your claims)?

So Kris is saying if ONE person insults him ONCE, that gives him the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?

Because that's what he's been doing since mid-December.

You should quit while you're behind Dale, or you'll just get behind-er.

You really shouldn't try to put words in my mouth. Learn how to read and comprehend and then come back. See you in several years or so.

Actually, it's what you and some others started against me on Panda's Thumb back in December or whenever it was. The insulting that is. You and they just don't like taking your own medicine. Hypocrites.  

Are all creationists and/or ID-ists dishonorable to you Dale?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:41   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,01:27)
see? You're not very reasonable. I'm honestly proposing to start this whole discussion over on clean basis, without insults, yet the only answer you manage is another tu quoque.

In the end, you are not really here to discuss science, are you? You're more here to complain and bitch around, which is a shame since there was potential for an interesting interaction.

You like to play games, don't you? Have you ever heard of Eric Berne?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:47   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:38)
   
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:22)
 
So Kris is saying if ONE person insults him ONCE, that gives him the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?

Because that's what he's been doing since mid-December.

You should quit while you're behind Dale, or you'll just get behind-er.

You really shouldn't try to put words in my mouth. Learn how to read and comprehend and then come back. See you in several years or so.

Actually, it's what you and some others started against me on Panda's Thumb back in December or whenever it was. The insulting that is. You and they just don't like taking your own medicine. Hypocrites.  

Are all creationists and/or ID-ists dishonorable to you Dale?

I will rephrase the question to make it direct.

Are you saying if ONE person insults you ONCE, that gives you the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?

Because I think it doesn't. The only real hypocrite all along is, was, and will be YOU as long as you keep up the phony concern troll act! It fools none of us.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:55   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:47)
Philosophical matters??   ROFLMAO!

Your 'philosophy' is really fucked up.

I suppose you would think that if you were a Christian fundamentalist, yes. Uh, didn't you say on other occasions you were not religious? More confusion and inconsistency from the concern troll.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,03:55   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:47)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:38)
     
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:22)
 
So Kris is saying if ONE person insults him ONCE, that gives him the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?

Because that's what he's been doing since mid-December.

You should quit while you're behind Dale, or you'll just get behind-er.

You really shouldn't try to put words in my mouth. Learn how to read and comprehend and then come back. See you in several years or so.

Actually, it's what you and some others started against me on Panda's Thumb back in December or whenever it was. The insulting that is. You and they just don't like taking your own medicine. Hypocrites.  

Are all creationists and/or ID-ists dishonorable to you Dale?

I will rephrase the question to make it direct.

Are you saying if ONE person insults you ONCE, that gives you the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?

Because I think it doesn't. The only real hypocrite all along is, was, and will be YOU as long as you keep up the phony concern troll act! It fools none of us.

"Are you saying if ONE person insults you ONCE, that gives you the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?"

No.


I have another question for you Dale. If one ID-ist or one creationist says something you don't like, or believes something you don't believe, does that give you the right to insult every ID-ist or every creationist forever?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Quack



Posts: 1772
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,04:00   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,02:37)
I think it's time to stop with the insults, Kris. You said you wanted a reasonable discussion, and now you're back to your shenanigans because you can't face the fact of being wrong or seing your own flaws pointed out.

It's not even fun anymore, it's just boring...

To the extent that I've even bothered to scan the record of this sad and disgusting incident i can only express my own humble opinion:

WTF is the use of discussing who are the baddest: creationists, atheists, theists, Christians, scientists, non-scientists, pseudo-creationists, psychopaths, sociopaths, deranged, insane, cdesignproponentsists, or just plain idiots like, well ...?

I even believe the Bible contains some wise words attributed to the mysterious magical maestro himself, about not pointing the finger at others. The observation is quite correct; What/whom you dislike to a degree like some people go to such great pains to tell all the world, like f.i. the lead character in this here charade does, it reveals to the world what nice character he himself is.

Better not contaminate ourselves by playing in the pigpen.

Some people are incapable of introspection.

My first and last word on this display of much more than just bad manners.

--------------
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.
                                                                                               Richard Feynman

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,04:13   

Quote
Actually, it's what you and some others started against me on Panda's Thumb back in December or whenever it was. The insulting that is. You and they just don't like taking your own medicine. Hypocrites.


Hey, YOU invaded OUR space with your worthless crap, Kris! What the hell were you expecting? That we would simply say, "Hey, you are right, we should tolerate the Creationists' posting their misconceptions of evolution all over the Panda's Thumb."? No, of course not!

Any credibility you may have had was blown away by the arrival of  flowersfriend , a Christian fundamentalist who actually came to ask some good questions about science education. And what did you do to her?

http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-244226

{Kris replied to comment from flowersfriend

I’m curious about something and I would like to hear your feelings about it:

Why does “spirituality” have to include the fairy tales in the bible, like Noah’s Ark, Adam and Eve, the Tower of Babel, 6,000 year old Earth, etc.? Ya see, that’s where most of the disagreement is between science and Christianity. Does the belief in a god/creator have to include the trappings of a prescribed ‘religion’?}

You are really full of shit!

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,04:18   

Kris, one thing I'd like to understand is this:

If you are not religious or a creationist, why do you spend so much time and energy defending them? I think they are well enough capable of trying to defend themselves (which they do, even if most of thge time it's in clumsy, ineffective ways). It makes you come out as patronizing.

And if what you say is indeed true (our behavior towards the religious fanatics, liers-for-Jesus, creationist hacks... turns some people away from science), just keep in mind that the opposite is also true, on a much larger scale. A LOT of people end up rejecting religion because of the zealots' attitude. I don't know how many are turned away from science by some scientists'/atheists' behavior, but I've never met anyone who has been, whereas I've met quite a few ex-religious persons who left their faith because of the religious nutjobs...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,04:24   

"Are you saying if ONE person insults you ONCE, that gives you the right to insult EVERYONE FOREVER?"

No.

Then why the hell do you do just that???

I have another question for you Dale. If one ID-ist or one creationist says something you don't like, or believes something you don't believe, does that give you the right to insult every ID-ist or every creationist forever?
No, and I do not insult all of them. Just the ones who are delusional enough to invade the Panda's Thumb and pick fights with us.

I have to admit that it's hard to comprehend just how mentally deranged you are Dale. Where you could possibly get the idea that I'm a "Christian fundamentalist" or religious in any way is beyond me. You're the one who is religious. You're the one who goes to church. You're the one with religious 'faith'. You're the one who proselytizes. You're the one who modified a variety of religious beliefs into your own version of your religious beliefs. You're the one who has and needs a religion based crutch.  
Do you hate me for being insulting to Creationist bigots or do you hate me for going to a Unitarian Universalist church? Your wild inconsistency is just breathtaking.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,05:37   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 23 2011,00:48)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 22 2011,17:45)
Quote (Wolfhound @ Jan. 22 2011,22:59)
 
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 22 2011,16:16)
Why I am off to become a homepath just because of that, you see if I don't.

Louis

Going off down the homo path, are you?  We always figured that was the direction you were heading.

Totaly uncalled for! We all know Louis is "straight"...

Is that algebraic straight, non-Euclidean, or Euclidean straight?

So I work in a lab and do reseach science, do they call me "Louis the Scientist"? Nope.

So there was this one time I pulled two people out from an overturned car, do they call me "Louis the Lifesaver"? Nope.*

But you shag just one rugby team...**

Louis

*This really happened

** This didn't.

P.S. I meant "homeopath", as in the least thinkable thing anyone with even a basic undesranding of chemistry could become. But I'll be damned if the typo and subsequent gay jokes weren't funny. It stands!

--------------
Bye.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,05:54   

Kris,
If you are *all that* then why, when typing a bit of one of your comments into google, do I find that it's all boilerplate?



hahah.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,06:02   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,02:18)
Kris, one thing I'd like to understand is this:

If you are not religious or a creationist, why do you spend so much time and energy defending them? I think they are well enough capable of trying to defend themselves (which they do, even if most of thge time it's in clumsy, ineffective ways). It makes you come out as patronizing.

And if what you say is indeed true (our behavior towards the religious fanatics, liers-for-Jesus, creationist hacks... turns some people away from science), just keep in mind that the opposite is also true, on a much larger scale. A LOT of people end up rejecting religion because of the zealots' attitude. I don't know how many are turned away from science by some scientists'/atheists' behavior, but I've never met anyone who has been, whereas I've met quite a few ex-religious persons who left their faith because of the religious nutjobs...

I find it interesting that you think I'm "defending" religious people and creationists. That you and others think that way makes me realize that you're twisting what I actually say into something different than what I actually say because of your own biases.

Few to none of you seem to understand me. Of course you'll assume it must be my fault, but first take a look around this site. What do you see? I see a bunch of people with pretty much the same attitude about certain things they don't like. I also see a bunch of people with pretty much the same attitude about certain things they do like. In other words, clones.

Anything or anyone who doesn't fit into the belief system here is instantly and automatically attacked and treated as the enemy. They MUST be an evil creationist troll! Off with their head!

Hmm, that sounds just like the way some religions treat people who don't adhere to their belief system. In fact, it sounds a lot like Muslim extremists. Infidels! Off with their heads!

Think about it, and think about this too:

Everything said on this site, or on Panda's Thumb, or Pharyngula, etc., is available to read by anyone who wants to. When someone comes here and makes their first comment they likely have already read some or a lot of the stuff said here. Just because that person is new to you doesn't mean they're new to the site. What you people say here may make some people happy but it may also incite some people to respond in a way that you won't like.

Try putting a billboard in your front yard with something controversial or insulting on it. See what happens when your neighbors and the community see it or hear of it. Don't be surprised when some people respond in a way you don't like. This site is more accessible to more people than your front yard.

Ya know, if I were a creationist troll, as I've been accused of being, it would be real easy to cause all kinds of malicious trouble here. You people are so easy to figure out and you're very predictable.

In case you're wondering, I'm not a worshiper of science or religion. I like science, good science that is, a lot, but I don't see it as something to worship or believe 'in'. I'm practical and skeptical but I'm also open minded about some things. To me, being skeptical isn't just about religion. It's about science too and maybe even more so than religion. Religion is mostly pretty easy to figure out and it usually doesn't change much or very quickly. Science is a lot more complicated than religion and there are a lot of new claims and/or changes on a daily basis. Nature is a lot more complicated than science, so I'm skeptical about any claim science makes about nature. I don't just automatically believe anything or everything some scientist says, no matter who they are.

It's because I like science that it pisses me off when it's done badly. Some of the shit in science should never happen and I wish more scientists were more concerned with cleaning up the messes in science than they are in fighting against religion. If science were strong enough, and made more accessible, understandable, interesting, and enjoyable to the masses, religious zealots wouldn't be as big a problem.

Just one thing I'd really like to see:

TV stations/networks with good science and nature shows on 24/7, on free TV (not just cable or satellite) in as many countries, states, and cities as possible. Some of the shows could be aimed at children, in the appropriate time slots. Religious zealots have some of their shows on 24/7 on free TV (and on cable and satellite). Why can't science do the same thing? To reach a bigger audience requires a bigger effort.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,06:17   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,09:17)
[SNIP]

Be nice, it's my birthday!

[/SNIP]

No it's not! I distinctly remember you having that last year.

WHAT? You want ANOTHER one?

In my day we only got one birthday. And that was too many. Harrumph.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,06:29   



Just, you know, FYI. Because you're so "reasonable" and all.

Louis

(Meta to fellow AtBCers: Wasn't there a TV show called "Everybody Hates Chris"? It seemeth to me that someone with Photoshop and some skillz wiv compooters could make something of that if they had the time. I mean, if we're mocking fools, it might be worth doing so via the medium of the LOL-image. BRING FORTH THE LOLOCAUST!!*)

*Kris, sweetie, this, plus all the other mockey, should indicate to you that no one is taking you seriously. You appear to be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, old chum. Do be a good boy and shut up, you're disturbing the animals and children. If you don't want to be mocked, erm, well you could always be, you know, serious and rational. As you're not, well, the mockery will continue until such time as it becomes boring, which is likely to be soon, you're a one trick pony it seems.

--------------
Bye.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,06:34   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,06:02)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,02:18)
Kris, one thing I'd like to understand is this:

If you are not religious or a creationist, why do you spend so much time and energy defending them? I think they are well enough capable of trying to defend themselves (which they do, even if most of thge time it's in clumsy, ineffective ways). It makes you come out as patronizing.

And if what you say is indeed true (our behavior towards the religious fanatics, liers-for-Jesus, creationist hacks... turns some people away from science), just keep in mind that the opposite is also true, on a much larger scale. A LOT of people end up rejecting religion because of the zealots' attitude. I don't know how many are turned away from science by some scientists'/atheists' behavior, but I've never met anyone who has been, whereas I've met quite a few ex-religious persons who left their faith because of the religious nutjobs...

I find it interesting that you think I'm "defending" religious people and creationists. That you and others think that way makes me realize that you're twisting what I actually say into something different than what I actually say because of your own biases.

Few to none of you seem to understand me. Of course you'll assume it must be my fault, but first take a look around this site. What do you see? I see a bunch of people with pretty much the same attitude about certain things they don't like. I also see a bunch of people with pretty much the same attitude about certain things they do like. In other words, clones.

Anything or anyone who doesn't fit into the belief system here is instantly and automatically attacked and treated as the enemy. They MUST be an evil creationist troll! Off with their head!

Hmm, that sounds just like the way some religions treat people who don't adhere to their belief system. In fact, it sounds a lot like Muslim extremists. Infidels! Off with their heads!

Think about it, and think about this too:

Everything said on this site, or on Panda's Thumb, or Pharyngula, etc., is available to read by anyone who wants to. When someone comes here and makes their first comment they likely have already read some or a lot of the stuff said here. Just because that person is new to you doesn't mean they're new to the site. What you people say here may make some people happy but it may also incite some people to respond in a way that you won't like.

Try putting a billboard in your front yard with something controversial or insulting on it. See what happens when your neighbors and the community see it or hear of it. Don't be surprised when some people respond in a way you don't like. This site is more accessible to more people than your front yard.

Ya know, if I were a creationist troll, as I've been accused of being, it would be real easy to cause all kinds of malicious trouble here. You people are so easy to figure out and you're very predictable.

In case you're wondering, I'm not a worshiper of science or religion. I like science, good science that is, a lot, but I don't see it as something to worship or believe 'in'. I'm practical and skeptical but I'm also open minded about some things. To me, being skeptical isn't just about religion. It's about science too and maybe even more so than religion. Religion is mostly pretty easy to figure out and it usually doesn't change much or very quickly. Science is a lot more complicated than religion and there are a lot of new claims and/or changes on a daily basis. Nature is a lot more complicated than science, so I'm skeptical about any claim science makes about nature. I don't just automatically believe anything or everything some scientist says, no matter who they are.

It's because I like science that it pisses me off when it's done badly. Some of the shit in science should never happen and I wish more scientists were more concerned with cleaning up the messes in science than they are in fighting against religion. If science were strong enough, and made more accessible, understandable, interesting, and enjoyable to the masses, religious zealots wouldn't be as big a problem.

Just one thing I'd really like to see:

TV stations/networks with good science and nature shows on 24/7, on free TV (not just cable or satellite) in as many countries, states, and cities as possible. Some of the shows could be aimed at children, in the appropriate time slots. Religious zealots have some of their shows on 24/7 on free TV (and on cable and satellite). Why can't science do the same thing? To reach a bigger audience requires a bigger effort.

Congrats. It seems the only place you posted that particular post is here.

Way to go! Otherwise, people might start to think that you have a set of text you go round pasting at various sites just to see what reaction you provoke...

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,07:15   

Quote (Louis @ Jan. 23 2011,04:29)


Just, you know, FYI. Because you're so "reasonable" and all.

Louis

(Meta to fellow AtBCers: Wasn't there a TV show called "Everybody Hates Chris"? It seemeth to me that someone with Photoshop and some skillz wiv compooters could make something of that if they had the time. I mean, if we're mocking fools, it might be worth doing so via the medium of the LOL-image. BRING FORTH THE LOLOCAUST!!*)

*Kris, sweetie, this, plus all the other mockey, should indicate to you that no one is taking you seriously. You appear to be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, old chum. Do be a good boy and shut up, you're disturbing the animals and children. If you don't want to be mocked, erm, well you could always be, you know, serious and rational. As you're not, well, the mockery will continue until such time as it becomes boring, which is likely to be soon, you're a one trick pony it seems.

No one? Did you poll everyone who looks at this site? Just wondering.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,07:21   

What the fuck is he talking about? Well, a couple of posts ago he demonstrated that some of your rants are direct Copy/Pasta of some other rants you (or someone else) posted elsewhere.

That's very funny, I think.

And Kris, about the last paragraph in your quoted post: science never had very good PR. And you know what? Science doesn't give a flying fuck!

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,07:39   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:08)
Well, at least I have consistent standards of honor and do my best to live up to them, no matter the cost.

You, on the other hand, seem to have NO standards whatsoever. All you ever have is hate for the rest of humanity.
     
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:03)
 
Aren't you the one who preaches tolerance and acceptance of, and friendship with, people from various groups?

"Part of my being honorable is refusing to paint the members of any group, whether political, religious, or national, with the same brush. My friends include all kinds of people, such as conservatives, liberals, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Athiests, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Austrailians, meat-eaters and vegetarians. That diversity I deeply treasure."

Aren't those your words Dale? Were you lying when you typed them? If you're so friendly toward religious people, why do you constantly bash religious Creationists, religious ID-ists, Muslims, Christians, etc.?

Let's take a look at your claim about how "honorable" you are:

"An Honorable Skeptic

This is my ethical philosophy that I always express everywhere I may go.

I am a skeptic by nature.  I question everything I see, not taking what I am told at face value, but demanding proof, evidence, and corroborations before I accept something as true. Thus, when I am told by liberals that there was a conspiracy of American government officials involved in the terrorist attacks of 9-11, I am skeptical. If I am told by liberals that atrocities were committed in either Afganistan or Iraq by American forces against civilians, I am skeptical. If I am told by conservatives that tax cuts are a way to help the economy grow and that tax hikes hurt the economy, I am skeptical. If I am told by conservatives that the War in Iraq was justified even though no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found there even after being told before that they were there, I am VERY skeptical of that!!! When it comes to skepticism, I don’t discriminate politically! I doubt everything!

Another thing I am adamant about is my sense of honor, which I hold more dear to me than my life. It allows for no exceptions whatsoever. So if I have lost friends or even made enemies for standing up for my honor, so be it. If I see someone who comes across to me as a liar, a bully, or just plain rude and stupid, then I usually try to fight back. If I see someone doing or saying things that damage the credibility of the causes I happen to believe in, I deeply take offense at that because I want those causes to be protected, even at the expense of picking fights with those who are unworthy to support those causes. I beleive in absolute standards of right and wrong and so I see no point in ever excusing something that is wrong because the wrongdoer is otherwise a friendly or nice guy. That’s how corruption sets in.

Part of my being honorable is refusing to paint the members of any group, whether political, religious, or national, with the same brush. My friends include all kinds of people, such as conservatives, liberals, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Athiests, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Austrailians, meat-eaters and vegetarians. That diversity I deeply treasure. Once I recognize that another soul is honorable, no matter what else may be true of that person, I embrace him as a brother. But if I discover a fellow American, a fellow agnostic, a fellow liberal, or a fellow chess player to be dishonorable in his behavior, he becomes my enemy, period. I distrust and shun him like I would a leper.

Because I am honorable, I sometimes willingly concede points made by my opponents in debates with them. This should never be seen as a sign of weakness. When I know I am right about something, I will fight like a pit bull to prove my case and defeat my opponent because in some cases I do see my battles here as a struggle between light and darkness, good and evil, ignorance and knowledge. But I am also willing at times to listen to my opponent and consider his point of view, especially if that person is known by me to be honorable. If we do not listen to others, how can we ever grow in knowledge?

No matter how great the pressure, I feel that one must never “sell out”. It is being able to stand up to the urge to conform to the shallow desires and priorites of others who have a limited vision that makes one truly heroic. I choose my friends according to my ideals; I never bend my ideals for the sake of keeping friends."

Your "ideals" are rooted in insanity, hypocrisy, dishonesty, malignant narcissism, and bigotry, and you're a legend in your own mind.

Oh, and I don't think your link to Pharyngula is about me. Better luck next time Mr. Dishonorable Wacko.

You have "consistent standards of honor"?? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only things consistent about you are your insanity, hypocrisy, bigotry, malignant narcissism, dishonesty, lack of honor, and hatred of anyone who doesn't kiss your ass and agree with everything you say or believe in.

For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it. Think of that when you're showing your hatred of ID/creationists.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,07:45   

Quote
For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it. Think of that when you're showing your hatred of ID/creationists.


Sorry, but it doesn't mean they're right, and it certainly doesn't mean some of them can distort science and lie about science to serve a political agenda...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:00   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,13:15)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 23 2011,04:29)


Just, you know, FYI. Because you're so "reasonable" and all.

Louis

(Meta to fellow AtBCers: Wasn't there a TV show called "Everybody Hates Chris"? It seemeth to me that someone with Photoshop and some skillz wiv compooters could make something of that if they had the time. I mean, if we're mocking fools, it might be worth doing so via the medium of the LOL-image. BRING FORTH THE LOLOCAUST!!*)

*Kris, sweetie, this, plus all the other mockey, should indicate to you that no one is taking you seriously. You appear to be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, old chum. Do be a good boy and shut up, you're disturbing the animals and children. If you don't want to be mocked, erm, well you could always be, you know, serious and rational. As you're not, well, the mockery will continue until such time as it becomes boring, which is likely to be soon, you're a one trick pony it seems.

No one? Did you poll everyone who looks at this site? Just wondering.

Well of course I did. Don't you have an Insta-Universo-Poll-o-matic? Tchoh! You're behind on technology as well as, well, just being, you know, "behind".

Shape up, old boy.

Louis

P.S. Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously are most welcome to come forward and present "The Case for Kris: Why He Is Weally Weally Sewious and Should Be Tweateded Wike a Big Boy". Note to Kris: sock puppets don't count. This is Teh Intawebz, we are familiar with such fun tactics.

ETA: Interesting, by the way, that you would equivocate on the use of the word "no one" and read it in a global manner as opposed to a limited manner (i.e. "no one reading this site" vs "no one posting to your threads"). Gish, it's almost like you're not actually interested in a serious conversation but instead are concerned only with venting your bilious little spleen and pathetically trolling isn't it? Oops sorry, did you get exposed....again?

--------------
Bye.

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:06   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,05:21)
What the fuck is he talking about? Well, a couple of posts ago he demonstrated that some of your rants are direct Copy/Pasta of some other rants you (or someone else) posted elsewhere.

That's very funny, I think.

And Kris, about the last paragraph in your quoted post: science never had very good PR. And you know what? Science doesn't give a flying fuck!

Actually, he didn't show any such thing. I copied and pasted what Dale says about his alleged honorable skepticism. What's wrong with that? Dale's the one who says exactly the same thing on several sites.


It's funny that you say science doesn't give a flying fuck about PR. I guess that means that you and most of the people on sites like this one, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, etc., aren't representatives of science.

What is your motive for bashing ID/creationists here or anywhere else? Is it just so that you can vent your hatred of ID/creationists? Is it to promote science? Is it to get people to shun religion and become more interested in science?

Ya see, if you're not interested in the PR of science, then you must be here just to bitch about religion/creationism/ID. Apparently that's why most people must be here.

If scientists want the public to care about and trust science they should be concerned about PR. You guys are wasting your time if you think that just bitching about religion/creationism/ID is going to accomplish anything positive for science. With an attitude like yours it's no wonder that religion is more popular than science.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:10   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,05:45)
Quote
For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it. Think of that when you're showing your hatred of ID/creationists.


Sorry, but it doesn't mean they're right, and it certainly doesn't mean some of them can distort science and lie about science to serve a political agenda...

Did I say that they're right or that it's ok for some of them to have a biased or dishonest political agenda?

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:16   

Quote
For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it. Think of that when you're showing your hatred of ID/creationists.


Hatred? HATRED? Dear Sweet FSM, if mocking the excesses of a vocal, politically bent minority of a minority of a minority of religious people equates to hatred, then I think you need to pull your head delicately from the deeper recesses of your rectum and get out in the real world. Speaking purely personally, I haven't got it in me to hate anything or anyone. Mocking/ignoring =/= hate. Perhaps you should learn that.

It might also help you to note that There are millions of people who read Pharyngula/PT/such sites on the web, a tiny subset of that who comment and neither of these categories are a) homogenous nor b) in universal agreement. Teating them as such is....I'll be generous....an error. Treating them as their if their "worst" exponents* are the best expression of their argument is....again with the generous....an error.** You know, just FYI. Any chance of anything serious from you yet? Or is all you have more outrage and bluster?

Louis

*Said "worst exponents" at the most are guilty of being exceptionally rude and stupid. I've yet to see one fly a plane into a building or shoot a medical doctor or what have you. And so help me, if you bring up Zombie Stalin or similar you will get a very impolite instruction to learn some fucking history.

**Interestingly, chuckling funsters like yourself are fond of false equivalences, so let me head you off at the pass. Yes indeed there are muppets who treat religious folks as if they are all fundamentalists, guess what, they are wrong. Shock horror.

--------------
Bye.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:17   

Quote
Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously


bwaahahahahahaha

ahaha

No.

fuck off and die kris.  you aren't even an interesting piece of shit

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:20   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Jan. 23 2011,14:17)
Quote
Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously


bwaahahahahahaha

ahaha

No.

fuck off and die kris.  you aren't even an interesting piece of shit

Oh come on. There might be some. Well, one. Maybe. You never know. I mean, weirder things have happened.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:24   

Kris doesn't seem to understand that people can have opinions and still be strict scientists.

He also doesn't seem to understand that attitudes like his are the reason that science has poor PR.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:37   

Well if Kris wants to discuss science and PR, science itself, the "accomodationism vs Gnu Atheists" tone debacle (because it's rarely a debate), or any such thing, he is welcome to discuss it. I'm interested in all of them, for one. I'm sure there are also others here who would welcome a serious discussion to break up the LOLcats and dick jokes.*

I'm not sure Kris bouncing into the room and insulting everyone is the best way of achieving his stated goal of having this conversation, but then I remain unconvinced this IS his stated goal. He seems to me to be a GoP-like character, so convinced of his rightness, righteousness and chock full of false equivalences that it somehow justifies him acting like a moron. Still, I long for the day I am proven wrong about ostensible internet trolls like Kris. It's yet to come of course, but I still long for it.

Louis

*Guilty as charged, Your Honour....for the LOLcats and dick jokes I mean.

--------------
Bye.

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,08:57   

Quote

Hmm, I didn't realize that asking flowersfriend some questions in a nice, sincere way was such a bad thing.

 
You were being nice and sincere?!  I didn't think so.    
Quote


"OUR space"? "we"? Are you one of the owners of the Panda's Thumb website?

You say you don't paint the members of any group with the same brush and that you treasure the diversity of different people. You also say you have conservative, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim friends. Those people are all creationists, unless of course they have modified their belief system to accommodate the scientific theory of evolution, which also means that they're not really conservatives, Christians, Jews, or Muslims. I'm surprised that you have friends who have such contradictory belief systems. Why don't you think of them as dishonorable people? Is acceptance of the ToE your criteria for determining the honorable-ness of who may be worthy of being your friend?
What are you, FL in disguise? And since you obviously hate my standards, why continue to discuss them with you? Anything I say, you just throw it back at me with venom. That's what crazy people do.
 
Quote


Actually, I'm surprised that you have any friends at all. Frankly, I doubt that you do, for real.  


How many friends do you have?

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,10:04   

Quote
He seems to me to be a GoP-like character...


Yes, Loki-troll is a possibility! I thought of trying the Khrushchev telegram technique but I see SD has already chimed in.

Kris, you are definitely losing the attention of the regulars here. Your comments have become repetitive and boring. You are risking the ultimate indignity of being ignored. There's no worse fate for the attention seeker.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10232
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,10:09   

Meh. He's an idiot, says nothing of interest and strokes himself when getting attention.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,10:11   

Seriously, this "Wah, wah, wah, you're all big meanieheads" is very tiresome. Howzabout you go make your very blog where you can concern troll, kvetch, and otherwise not make your point to your heart's content?  What?  Not satisfying enough?

Most folks (who aren't terminally stupid, socially autistic, or just plain masochistic) have the good sense to leave the scene when they know their presence isn't wanted.

Which one are you, Kris?

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,10:24   

Kris,

For someone who claims to want rational conversation about things, you sure do run from any opportunity to engage in rational conversation.

I know, I know, big mean people are keeping you from doing what you really want to do.  It's terrible.  How about ignoring anything that's rude (actually rude, not just things you clam are rude to you know--avoid rational conversation) and starting a conversation on our terms?  It's what rational people the world over do.

Frankly, your behavior on this thread is your own worse enemy.  Prove me wrong by actually seeming to give a crap about conversation.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,10:31   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,14:06)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,05:21)
What the fuck is he talking about? Well, a couple of posts ago he demonstrated that some of your rants are direct Copy/Pasta of some other rants you (or someone else) posted elsewhere.

That's very funny, I think.

And Kris, about the last paragraph in your quoted post: science never had very good PR. And you know what? Science doesn't give a flying fuck!

Actually, he didn't show any such thing. I copied and pasted what Dale says about his alleged honorable skepticism. What's wrong with that? Dale's the one who says exactly the same thing on several sites.


It's funny that you say science doesn't give a flying fuck about PR. I guess that means that you and most of the people on sites like this one, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, etc., aren't representatives of science.

What is your motive for bashing ID/creationists here or anywhere else? Is it just so that you can vent your hatred of ID/creationists? Is it to promote science? Is it to get people to shun religion and become more interested in science?

Ya see, if you're not interested in the PR of science, then you must be here just to bitch about religion/creationism/ID. Apparently that's why most people must be here.

If scientists want the public to care about and trust science they should be concerned about PR. You guys are wasting your time if you think that just bitching about religion/creationism/ID is going to accomplish anything positive for science. With an attitude like yours it's no wonder that religion is more popular than science.

Speaking for myself, I basicaly do it for the lulz.

But nobody here bashes the IDists/creationists that act with civility. At best, we bash the stupidity they are spewing, but not the guys themselves.

But when they become uncivil, or clearly irrational (IBIG, Floyd Lee, JoeG...) because cornered and unable to answer to simple questions, then we start bashing them. Why would we do otherwise when they come here and crap all over the carpet?

This is one of the reasons I proposed you start this discussion again presenting your point or queries without getting all ad hominem and stuff.

And you failed to do that, you failed to show a tinsy bit of backbone by starting a real discussion. if you have issues with Dale, resolve them thru private messages, but you should in this here venue try and discuss what you said you wanted to discuss: science.

If you continue on this same line you've been holding so far, the shitstorm will continue and you will be sure to get nailed to the cross (if only by numbers alone).

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Doc Bill



Posts: 1006
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,10:49   

It took all night (that's what she said) but I finished a poll of every visitor to the Panda's Thumb in the last 6 months.

The qwestion was:  Do you take Kwis sewiouswy?

Drum woll pwease!!!!

NO:  7,284,443

YES:  0

It appears that Kwis voted against himself, pwobabwy because he didn't understand the question.

Poo widdle Kwis!

(Heh, heh, she said "widdle!"  Srsly, that's what she said.)

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,11:59   

well on the other hand he is good for something.

shit stains, blast them with piss

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,12:57   

Quote (Louis @ Jan. 23 2011,06:20)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 23 2011,14:17)
Quote
Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously


bwaahahahahahaha

ahaha

No.

fuck off and die kris.  you aren't even an interesting piece of shit

Oh come on. There might be some. Well, one. Maybe. You never know. I mean, weirder things have happened.

Louis

I have several conference abstracts on turds. They are far more interesting than krissy-poo.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
tsig



Posts: 322
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,13:19   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Jan. 23 2011,08:17)
Quote
Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously


bwaahahahahahaha

ahaha

No.

fuck off and die kris.  you aren't even an interesting piece of shit

I wouldn't use it to fertilize my garden.

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,13:42   

Quote
I find it interesting that you think I'm "defending" religious people and creationists. That you and others think that way makes me realize that you're twisting what I actually say into something different than what I actually say because of your own biases.


Or maybe we are reacting the way we do because we have normal minds and find your inconsistency just incomprehensible.

   
Quote
Few to none of you seem to understand me. Of course you'll assume it must be my fault, but first take a look around this site. What do you see? I see a bunch of people with pretty much the same attitude about certain things they don't like. I also see a bunch of people with pretty much the same attitude about certain things they do like. In other words, clones.

Anything or anyone who doesn't fit into the belief system here is instantly and automatically attacked and treated as the enemy. They MUST be an evil creationist troll! Off with their head!

Hmm, that sounds just like the way some religions treat people who don't adhere to their belief system. In fact, it sounds a lot like Muslim extremists. Infidels! Off with their heads!


We have a community here with shared values, yes. But I don't recall anyone saying they wanted to execute people for being Creationist. What stupid hyperbole!

   
Quote
Think about it, and think about this too:

Everything said on this site, or on Panda's Thumb, or Pharyngula, etc., is available to read by anyone who wants to. When someone comes here and makes their first comment they likely have already read some or a lot of the stuff said here. Just because that person is new to you doesn't mean they're new to the site. What you people say here may make some people happy but it may also incite some people to respond in a way that you won't like.

Try putting a billboard in your front yard with something controversial or insulting on it. See what happens when your neighbors and the community see it or hear of it. Don't be surprised when some people respond in a way you don't like. This site is more accessible to more people than your front yard.


You are merely stating the blatantly obvious. That's called empty rhetoric.

   
Quote
Ya know, if I were a creationist troll, as I've been accused of being, it would be real easy to cause all kinds of malicious trouble here. You people are so easy to figure out and you're very predictable.


You mean you'd be even WORSE than you are now?

   
Quote
In case you're wondering, I'm not a worshiper of science or religion. I like science, good science that is, a lot, but I don't see it as something to worship or believe 'in'. I'm practical and skeptical but I'm also open minded about some things. To me, being skeptical isn't just about religion. It's about science too and maybe even more so than religion. Religion is mostly pretty easy to figure out and it usually doesn't change much or very quickly. Science is a lot more complicated than religion and there are a lot of new claims and/or changes on a daily basis. Nature is a lot more complicated than science, so I'm skeptical about any claim science makes about nature. I don't just automatically believe anything or everything some scientist says, no matter who they are.

It's because I like science that it pisses me off when it's done badly. Some of the shit in science should never happen and I wish more scientists were more concerned with cleaning up the messes in science than they are in fighting against religion. If science were strong enough, and made more accessible, understandable, interesting, and enjoyable to the masses, religious zealots wouldn't be as big a problem.


Gee, you say all the right things, but your track record shows that you pick fights over the silliest things, like whether or not certain woodpeckers are extinct. Why not talk about really important issues like the misuse of science for military purposes?

I have written about the importance of peer review and skepticism in science.  It's standard procedure among scientists, including those who study evolution. You seem to think we believe the opposite, which is a falsehood.

Natural selection and the scientific peer review process.

So what the hell are you griping about???


   
Quote
Just one thing I'd really like to see:

TV stations/networks with good science and nature shows on 24/7, on free TV (not just cable or satellite) in as many countries, states, and cities as possible. Some of the shows could be aimed at children, in the appropriate time slots. Religious zealots have some of their shows on 24/7 on free TV (and on cable and satellite). Why can't science do the same thing? To reach a bigger audience requires a bigger effort.



Nice. So why aren't you working harder for that instead of bitching so much at us?

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2011,16:50   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 23 2011,18:57)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 23 2011,06:20)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 23 2011,14:17)
 
Quote
Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously


bwaahahahahahaha

ahaha

No.

fuck off and die kris.  you aren't even an interesting piece of shit

Oh come on. There might be some. Well, one. Maybe. You never know. I mean, weirder things have happened.

Louis

I have several conference abstracts on turds. They are far more interesting than krissy-poo.

I don't doubt it.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,00:28   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,07:39)
For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it.

Argumentam ad populam fallacy.  Reality, last time I checked, is not a consensual construct that changes if only enough people believes something.

If six billion people believe a thing that is counter to factual data, it is still counter-factual.  Popularity's got nothing to do with it.  No matter how hard you believe you can fly, gravity will win if you leap off a tall building.  Closing your eyes and wishing will not render the oblate spheroid into a flat surface, round or otherwise.  This is pretty basic stuff.

Try again, please, without using a red herring that is not actually under dispute.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,19:20   

Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 23 2011,22:28)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,07:39)
For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it.

Argumentam ad populam fallacy.  Reality, last time I checked, is not a consensual construct that changes if only enough people believes something.

If six billion people believe a thing that is counter to factual data, it is still counter-factual.  Popularity's got nothing to do with it.  No matter how hard you believe you can fly, gravity will win if you leap off a tall building.  Closing your eyes and wishing will not render the oblate spheroid into a flat surface, round or otherwise.  This is pretty basic stuff.

Try again, please, without using a red herring that is not actually under dispute.


The MadPanda, FCD

Nice try, but you quoted me out of context, which makes your comments irrelevant to what I said.

And hey, you might want to consider that Argumentam ad populam thing when you and others here think you're right just because you agree with each other.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,19:28   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,06:57)
 
Quote

Hmm, I didn't realize that asking flowersfriend some questions in a nice, sincere way was such a bad thing.

 
You were being nice and sincere?!  I didn't think so.      
Quote


"OUR space"? "we"? Are you one of the owners of the Panda's Thumb website?

You say you don't paint the members of any group with the same brush and that you treasure the diversity of different people. You also say you have conservative, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim friends. Those people are all creationists, unless of course they have modified their belief system to accommodate the scientific theory of evolution, which also means that they're not really conservatives, Christians, Jews, or Muslims. I'm surprised that you have friends who have such contradictory belief systems. Why don't you think of them as dishonorable people? Is acceptance of the ToE your criteria for determining the honorable-ness of who may be worthy of being your friend?
What are you, FL in disguise? And since you obviously hate my standards, why continue to discuss them with you? Anything I say, you just throw it back at me with venom. That's what crazy people do.
     
Quote


Actually, I'm surprised that you have any friends at all. Frankly, I doubt that you do, for real.  


How many friends do you have?

Did you sneak out of your padded cell and get online with the asylum's computer again Dale? Shame on you.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,19:39   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,20:28)
*snip*

Yawn.

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,19:48   

Kris, I'm just curious, why are you on this thread whining, when you could be on another thread talking about your notions (whatever it is that they are)?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,19:50   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,07:39)
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 23 2011,01:08)
Well, at least I have consistent standards of honor and do my best to live up to them, no matter the cost.

You, on the other hand, seem to have NO standards whatsoever. All you ever have is hate for the rest of humanity.
     
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,03:03)
 
Aren't you the one who preaches tolerance and acceptance of, and friendship with, people from various groups?

"Part of my being honorable is refusing to paint the members of any group, whether political, religious, or national, with the same brush. My friends include all kinds of people, such as conservatives, liberals, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Athiests, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Austrailians, meat-eaters and vegetarians. That diversity I deeply treasure."

Aren't those your words Dale? Were you lying when you typed them? If you're so friendly toward religious people, why do you constantly bash religious Creationists, religious ID-ists, Muslims, Christians, etc.?

Let's take a look at your claim about how "honorable" you are:

"An Honorable Skeptic

This is my ethical philosophy that I always express everywhere I may go.

I am a skeptic by nature.  I question everything I see, not taking what I am told at face value, but demanding proof, evidence, and corroborations before I accept something as true. Thus, when I am told by liberals that there was a conspiracy of American government officials involved in the terrorist attacks of 9-11, I am skeptical. If I am told by liberals that atrocities were committed in either Afganistan or Iraq by American forces against civilians, I am skeptical. If I am told by conservatives that tax cuts are a way to help the economy grow and that tax hikes hurt the economy, I am skeptical. If I am told by conservatives that the War in Iraq was justified even though no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found there even after being told before that they were there, I am VERY skeptical of that!!! When it comes to skepticism, I don’t discriminate politically! I doubt everything!

Another thing I am adamant about is my sense of honor, which I hold more dear to me than my life. It allows for no exceptions whatsoever. So if I have lost friends or even made enemies for standing up for my honor, so be it. If I see someone who comes across to me as a liar, a bully, or just plain rude and stupid, then I usually try to fight back. If I see someone doing or saying things that damage the credibility of the causes I happen to believe in, I deeply take offense at that because I want those causes to be protected, even at the expense of picking fights with those who are unworthy to support those causes. I beleive in absolute standards of right and wrong and so I see no point in ever excusing something that is wrong because the wrongdoer is otherwise a friendly or nice guy. That’s how corruption sets in.

Part of my being honorable is refusing to paint the members of any group, whether political, religious, or national, with the same brush. My friends include all kinds of people, such as conservatives, liberals, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Athiests, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Austrailians, meat-eaters and vegetarians. That diversity I deeply treasure. Once I recognize that another soul is honorable, no matter what else may be true of that person, I embrace him as a brother. But if I discover a fellow American, a fellow agnostic, a fellow liberal, or a fellow chess player to be dishonorable in his behavior, he becomes my enemy, period. I distrust and shun him like I would a leper.

Because I am honorable, I sometimes willingly concede points made by my opponents in debates with them. This should never be seen as a sign of weakness. When I know I am right about something, I will fight like a pit bull to prove my case and defeat my opponent because in some cases I do see my battles here as a struggle between light and darkness, good and evil, ignorance and knowledge. But I am also willing at times to listen to my opponent and consider his point of view, especially if that person is known by me to be honorable. If we do not listen to others, how can we ever grow in knowledge?

No matter how great the pressure, I feel that one must never “sell out”. It is being able to stand up to the urge to conform to the shallow desires and priorites of others who have a limited vision that makes one truly heroic. I choose my friends according to my ideals; I never bend my ideals for the sake of keeping friends."

Your "ideals" are rooted in insanity, hypocrisy, dishonesty, malignant narcissism, and bigotry, and you're a legend in your own mind.

Oh, and I don't think your link to Pharyngula is about me. Better luck next time Mr. Dishonorable Wacko.

You have "consistent standards of honor"?? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only things consistent about you are your insanity, hypocrisy, bigotry, malignant narcissism, dishonesty, lack of honor, and hatred of anyone who doesn't kiss your ass and agree with everything you say or believe in.

For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it. Think of that when you're showing your hatred of ID/creationists.

Here's the entire context of your post.  What context did MP conflate please?

Are you saying that we have to be careful because if we don't say the things they want to here, then they'll riot and kill us with overwhelming numbers?

Or is it something else?

I think you're wrong.  I'm pretty sure MPs statement of your fallacy is correct.

See ya.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,20:11   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,19:20)
Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 23 2011,22:28)
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,07:39)
For your information, most of humanity believes that a creator/designer is responsible for the universe and everything in it.

Argumentam ad populam fallacy.  Reality, last time I checked, is not a consensual construct that changes if only enough people believes something.

If six billion people believe a thing that is counter to factual data, it is still counter-factual.  Popularity's got nothing to do with it.  No matter how hard you believe you can fly, gravity will win if you leap off a tall building.  Closing your eyes and wishing will not render the oblate spheroid into a flat surface, round or otherwise.  This is pretty basic stuff.

Try again, please, without using a red herring that is not actually under dispute.


The MadPanda, FCD

Nice try, but you quoted me out of context, which makes your comments irrelevant to what I said.

And hey, you might want to consider that Argumentam ad populam thing when you and others here think you're right just because you agree with each other.

(eyeroll)

You really aren't very good at this, are you, son?


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,20:29   

obvious whore is obvious

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,20:48   

I'm sad that no one commented on my haiku about Kris.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,20:52   

In all candor, O Cybertank, such an effort is casting pearls before a brick wall...

Wait.  JoeyKris is even less appreciative and observant than that.  Hold on.  Let me get my thesaurus rex.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,20:55   

Quote (MadPanda, FCD @ Jan. 24 2011,20:52)
In all candor, O Cybertank, such an effort is casting pearls before a brick wall...

Wait.  JoeyKris is even less appreciative and observant than that.  Hold on.  Let me get my thesaurus rex.


The MadPanda, FCD

BTW: Post for you in the Science Break Thread.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,21:12   

Pour moi?  M'sieur is too kind...


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,22:47   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,08:31)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 23 2011,14:06)
 
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 23 2011,05:21)
What the fuck is he talking about? Well, a couple of posts ago he demonstrated that some of your rants are direct Copy/Pasta of some other rants you (or someone else) posted elsewhere.

That's very funny, I think.

And Kris, about the last paragraph in your quoted post: science never had very good PR. And you know what? Science doesn't give a flying fuck!

Actually, he didn't show any such thing. I copied and pasted what Dale says about his alleged honorable skepticism. What's wrong with that? Dale's the one who says exactly the same thing on several sites.


It's funny that you say science doesn't give a flying fuck about PR. I guess that means that you and most of the people on sites like this one, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, etc., aren't representatives of science.

What is your motive for bashing ID/creationists here or anywhere else? Is it just so that you can vent your hatred of ID/creationists? Is it to promote science? Is it to get people to shun religion and become more interested in science?

Ya see, if you're not interested in the PR of science, then you must be here just to bitch about religion/creationism/ID. Apparently that's why most people must be here.

If scientists want the public to care about and trust science they should be concerned about PR. You guys are wasting your time if you think that just bitching about religion/creationism/ID is going to accomplish anything positive for science. With an attitude like yours it's no wonder that religion is more popular than science.

Speaking for myself, I basicaly do it for the lulz.

But nobody here bashes the IDists/creationists that act with civility. At best, we bash the stupidity they are spewing, but not the guys themselves.

But when they become uncivil, or clearly irrational (IBIG, Floyd Lee, JoeG...) because cornered and unable to answer to simple questions, then we start bashing them. Why would we do otherwise when they come here and crap all over the carpet?

This is one of the reasons I proposed you start this discussion again presenting your point or queries without getting all ad hominem and stuff.

And you failed to do that, you failed to show a tinsy bit of backbone by starting a real discussion. if you have issues with Dale, resolve them thru private messages, but you should in this here venue try and discuss what you said you wanted to discuss: science.

If you continue on this same line you've been holding so far, the shitstorm will continue and you will be sure to get nailed to the cross (if only by numbers alone).

"But nobody here bashes the IDists/creationists that act with civility. At best, we bash the stupidity they are spewing, but not the guys themselves."

Yeah, right. You've got to be kidding.


"But when they become uncivil, or clearly irrational (IBIG, Floyd Lee, JoeG...) because cornered and unable to answer to simple questions, then we start bashing them. Why would we do otherwise when they come here and crap all over the carpet?"

You should look at a mirror when you say "uncivil, or clearly irrational". And you guys are real good at crapping on your own carpet. This site is craptastic.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,22:56   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,22:47)
"But nobody here bashes the IDists/creationists that act with civility. At best, we bash the stupidity they are spewing, but not the guys themselves."

Yeah, right. You've got to be kidding.


"But when they become uncivil, or clearly irrational (IBIG, Floyd Lee, JoeG...) because cornered and unable to answer to simple questions, then we start bashing them. Why would we do otherwise when they come here and crap all over the carpet?"

You should look at a mirror when you say "uncivil, or clearly irrational". And you guys are real good at crapping on your own carpet. This site is craptastic.

You just lied outright for the bazillionth time. Or did you forget once more about flowersfriend? You need treatment for that memory problem of yours.

And how many times must you be told that "tu quoque" is not a credible argument? We are acting consistently with our standards of logic and truth, which you reject. It is not hypocrisy to live up to what we stand for, just because you dislike it. In our minds, you, and the Creationists you defend, get no less than what they deserve, always and forever. Get over it!

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,22:59   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,23:47)
This site is craptastic.

Well, fuck right off, then!   :)

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,23:12   

Awwww, did widdle JoeyKris not like having his logical fallacies pointed out to him again?

You haven't got the feel for this at all, lad.  Now you're starting in with tu quoque to go with the argumentam ad populam from earlier and your usual weapons-grade projection.

I think perhaps you're a little too obsessed with the obsession you've projected onto us.  Also a little too quick to leap to the insults regardless of the person you're addressing and the topic on which you're pontificating, but I suppose you can't help yourself.

Fewer logical fallacies, at the very least, would lend you some credibility, and you need as much as you can get.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2011,23:53   

Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 24 2011,21:12)
Awwww, did widdle JoeyKris not like having his logical fallacies pointed out to him again?

You haven't got the feel for this at all, lad.  Now you're starting in with tu quoque to go with the argumentam ad populam from earlier and your usual weapons-grade projection.

I think perhaps you're a little too obsessed with the obsession you've projected onto us.  Also a little too quick to leap to the insults regardless of the person you're addressing and the topic on which you're pontificating, but I suppose you can't help yourself.

Fewer logical fallacies, at the very least, would lend you some credibility, and you need as much as you can get.


The MadPanda, FCD

Look who's talking about projection, and being obsessed and quick to insult.

The hypocrisy here is mind boggling.

Credibility? You don't have a clue about credibility.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:08   

Quote

I was nice to flowersfriend and simply asked her some questions.

Yeah, just like you have been "nice" to all of us. I could foresee where you were going with those questions and moved to stop you before you could esculate the situation and drive flowersfriend away from PT in disgust. And I'd do it again.
   
Quote

You are one sick, pompous motherfucker, Dale-boi. Take your hypocritical, dishonest "standards" and shove them up your tu quoque.

Thank you.
   
Quote

We, our, us; do you ever just speak for yourself you gutless punk? Does your gang mentality make you feel like a big man?

How big do you think you are?
   
Quote

You better get back to your padded cell before the guys in white suits find you.

Insanity such as yours cannot be covered up by calling others crazy.

   
Quote

Look who's talking about projection, and being obsessed and quick to insult.

The hypocrisy here is mind boggling.

Credibility? You don't have a clue about credibility.

Again, we thank you for the pointless outburst. Because that is all you got.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1492
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:11   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,23:53)
 
Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 24 2011,21:12)
Awwww, did widdle JoeyKris not like having his logical fallacies pointed out to him again?

You haven't got the feel for this at all, lad.  Now you're starting in with tu quoque to go with the argumentam ad populam from earlier and your usual weapons-grade projection.

I think perhaps you're a little too obsessed with the obsession you've projected onto us.  Also a little too quick to leap to the insults regardless of the person you're addressing and the topic on which you're pontificating, but I suppose you can't help yourself.

Fewer logical fallacies, at the very least, would lend you some credibility, and you need as much as you can get.


The MadPanda, FCD

Look who's talking about projection, and being obsessed and quick to insult.

The hypocrisy here is mind boggling.

Credibility? You don't have a clue about credibility.

Oooh!  Such a mean talking internet tough guy!  :D

It must be that time of the month again for you JoeyKris, right?  I bet your Maxipad's soaked clean through.

--------------
JoeG: And by eating the cake you are consuming the information- some stays with you and the rest is waste.

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:16   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,00:11)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 23 2011,06:17)
   
Quote
Any lurkers/non-lurkers taking Kris seriously


bwaahahahahahaha

ahaha

No.

fuck off and die kris.  you aren't even an interesting piece of shit

And I'm the one accused of being quick to insult??

Hey Dale-boi, why aren't you giving erasmouth shit for being so insulting and threatening? I mean, you've got all those "standards", right? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey erasmush, does FCD stand for Fuckfaced Cocksucking Dickhead or Fartbreathing Cuckold Dipshit? Just wondering.

Becuase you started it and only you can end it by never insulting anyone here again. But I know you won't. Instead, you will lie to everyone by claiming you are just throwing our shit back at us, which, even if true, only reduces you to the same level you claim we are at. Our "hypocrisy" is also yours and always has been.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:17   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,23:53)
Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 24 2011,21:12)
Awwww, did widdle JoeyKris not like having his logical fallacies pointed out to him again?

You haven't got the feel for this at all, lad.  Now you're starting in with tu quoque to go with the argumentam ad populam from earlier and your usual weapons-grade projection.

I think perhaps you're a little too obsessed with the obsession you've projected onto us.  Also a little too quick to leap to the insults regardless of the person you're addressing and the topic on which you're pontificating, but I suppose you can't help yourself.

Fewer logical fallacies, at the very least, would lend you some credibility, and you need as much as you can get.


The MadPanda, FCD

Look who's talking about projection, and being obsessed and quick to insult.

The hypocrisy here is mind boggling.

Credibility? You don't have a clue about credibility.

Why are you talking to that mirror, JoeyKris?

When I'm polite, you're abusive.  Therefore, there is no point in playing nice-nice with you.

Throughout this joyous ritual you have demonstrated a tendency towards being obtuse, mean-spirited, hypocritical (constantly), intellectually dishonest, and only too willing to commit fallacy after fallacy, all while insulting people who point out your errors.

One wonders why you insist on demonstrating your childishness at such lengths, and with such enthusiasm.  You certainly cannot be taken seriously.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:27   

Lest we forget how this started, with Kris equating free speech with a chaotic atmosphere in which rational discussion becomes impossible because trolls like him are able to come and go as they please. But while Kris was banned from PT, other Creationist bigots like FL and Robert Byers have not been. Kris got banned only when he posted my phone number and said he wanted to crank call my wife and tell her a lie about me.
 
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 20 2011,21:35)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 20 2011,10:32)
The Discovery Institute's "Evolution News and Views" blog is taking a step into uncharted territory. They are permitting comments. Moderated, of course.

     
Quote

In order to maintain a higher level of discourse, we will
not publish comments that use foul language, ad hominem attacks, threats, or are otherwise uncivil.


This thread should be used to cache copies of comments left at EN&V, so that we can calibrate just how much dissent the DI is willing to publish.

Wesley, your MASSIVE hypocrisy is showing, and so is that of your sycophants. You posted your incredibly hypocritical remarks on Panda's Thumb, even though Panda's Thumb censors and moderates comments, and bans people who "dissent".

It is astounding to me that you won't see that you condone the exact thing that you're bitching about. The DI may be run by hypocritical people but you've got no room to condemn them unless you advocate completely open, free speech here and on Panda's Thumb, and everywhere else.

How can you live with yourself? Why aren't you bitching about Panda's Thumb moderating, censoring, and banning??


--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:28   

Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 24 2011,22:17)
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 24 2011,23:53)
 
Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Jan. 24 2011,21:12)
Awwww, did widdle JoeyKris not like having his logical fallacies pointed out to him again?

You haven't got the feel for this at all, lad.  Now you're starting in with tu quoque to go with the argumentam ad populam from earlier and your usual weapons-grade projection.

I think perhaps you're a little too obsessed with the obsession you've projected onto us.  Also a little too quick to leap to the insults regardless of the person you're addressing and the topic on which you're pontificating, but I suppose you can't help yourself.

Fewer logical fallacies, at the very least, would lend you some credibility, and you need as much as you can get.


The MadPanda, FCD

Look who's talking about projection, and being obsessed and quick to insult.

The hypocrisy here is mind boggling.

Credibility? You don't have a clue about credibility.

Why are you talking to that mirror, JoeyKris?

When I'm polite, you're abusive.  Therefore, there is no point in playing nice-nice with you.

Throughout this joyous ritual you have demonstrated a tendency towards being obtuse, mean-spirited, hypocritical (constantly), intellectually dishonest, and only too willing to commit fallacy after fallacy, all while insulting people who point out your errors.

One wonders why you insist on demonstrating your childishness at such lengths, and with such enthusiasm.  You certainly cannot be taken seriously.


The MadPanda, FCD

You, polite??

Wow.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:31   

Quote (Kris distorting the truth @ Jan. 25 2011,00:25)
It's interesting that you're accusing me of being insulting or mean to flowersfriend, even though I wasn't, but the fact that some other people did give her a bad time apparently doesn't bother you. Why aren't you bitching at those people Dale-boi? I thought you said you have standards that never waver. Pfft.

In fact, once most of us realized that flowersfriend wasn't a fanatical bigot like FL or IBIG, things cooled down and she even returned later for more pleasant conversation. So once more, you have been dishonest. And to her credit, she totally ignored you, and thus disaster was averted.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:35   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,00:30)
Lest "we" forget, you are a lying nutcase.

State one lie I have EVER told about you, Kris. Just one. And please give us an example of us being hypocritical to you or anyone else here. Just one. Because merely calling me and others here hypocrites, liars or insane means nothing without evidence.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:37   

Thank-you, Kris, for being a true bastion of rational discussion.  Thank-you for proving that not everyone is fooled by the smoke and mirrors of trolling.  Thank-you, sir, for staying ever strong in your support for conversation and education.  Thank-you for not taking the bait of these evilutionists and remaining true to your ideals.  Thank-you for all you do to further the education of the truly interested lurkers.

Thank-you, Kris.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,00:50   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,00:28)
You, polite??

Wow.

Just because you have forgotten, or were not paying attention because it did not fuel your persecution complex, does not mean I have not at times been more civil to you than your conduct deserves.  Others here and back on PT have also been polite, even to the point of giving you the benefit of the doubt.  For this grandmotherly kindness, we have been rewarded with venom, bile, and threats of violence.

I am thus no less polite than you deserve, and probably a great deal more gracious than I ought to be, all things considered.  Unless, of course, what you mean by 'uncivil' is 'not agreeing with me'.

Odd double standard you have there, son.

I am uncertain whether to classify you as a fraud or a poser, although these are not mutually exclusive.


The MadPanda, FCD

--------------
"No matter how ridiculous the internet tough guy, a thorough mocking is more effective than a swift kick to the gentleman vegetables with a hobnailed boot" --Louis

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,01:29   

To illustrate for all to see how Kris slowly degenerated into the lunatic we know him to be now, let's look back at Panda's Thumb nearly two months ago.

http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-240311

 
Quote

Kris replied to comment from Lamar | December 3, 2010 9:40 PM

I think it’s reasonable to say that a scientific theory may be intended as a rejection of, or disagreement with, a religious belief. But, it’s also reasonable to say that many scientific theories are put forth without considering religious beliefs at all.
<snip>
In the commonly accepted sense I don’t think that faith in science is “religious”. However, I do believe that scientists and many laymen do have faith in science. I have faith in science but not to the extent that I automatically and unquestionably swallow whatever science cooks up.


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-240354

 
Quote

harold | December 4, 2010 10:08 AM
Kris -

You seem to take an interest in the discussion here, but you also seem to lack some background information about science and creationism.

Everyone makes mistakes and has things to learn. I have made plenty of mis-statements here and in other places. When someone points it out, I learn.

I’m going to give you a chance to do that right now.

Some people can learn and grow, others have artificially inflated yet fragile egos, and become defensive when challenged, even in a positive way. I only mention this because the latter sort of people are so common on the internet. I hope you belong to the former category. We will now find out.

There is no scientific theory that is intended as a rejection of a religious belief. Science ignores religious beliefs.

I noticed in my youth that I do instinctively hold certain assumptions. I assume the physical world exists, I assume my senses detect aspects of it, I assume other human beings exist, I assume that their senses detect aspects of the same physical world, and I assume that the axioms of logic, although having no physical existence themselves, should be used in evaluating physical reality. Therefore I prefer the scientific method for evaluating physical reality.

Scientific claims should always be viewed critically, with skepticism. No-one should “swallow whatever science cooks up”. To do so would be, in fact, unscientific. Sometimes scientific ideas initially get too much credit, because they are advanced by a prestigious source or seem especially exciting. But this is a mistake.

Having said that, please specifically explain which scientific observations, hypotheses, experimental results, or theories you dispute, and why.


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-240429

 
Quote

Harold, your responses have little or nothing to do with what I said.

Just one example: I was referring to the simplicity of the phrase “evolved from matter” in the sense that the phrase isn’t explanatory enough to necessarily describe how “evolutionists” (or any scientists for that matter) may feel about how the universe began. I was not referring to the concept or theory of evolution itself.

I think that Lamar’s comments are worth some consideration, as he stated them, and I tried not to read things into them that are not there. You might try to do the same with my comments.


Later....

http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241116

 
Quote

Kris | December 11, 2010 1:22 AM

harold said:

“There is no scientific theory that is intended as a rejection of a religious belief. Science ignores religious beliefs.”

Are you sure about that Harold? Would you like to revise those statements?


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241117

 
Quote

Ichthyic | December 11, 2010 1:42 AM

Are you sure about that Harold? Would you like to revise those statements?

no, he need not. It’s an absolutely accurate statement.

I think you might be confusing the intent and content of a scientific theory with whether or not the results of testing that theory provide evidence that contradict specific claims made of religions.

Evolutionary theory does not, and is not intended to, address any religious statement.

We have, however, in testing the theory over decades, found that many specific religious claims are unsupported.

likewise with relativity theory, the theory of gravity, the theory of heliocentrism, etc, etc, etc.

your understanding of science seems relatively poor to be trying to play “gotchya” games.


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241121

 
Quote

Kris replied to comment from Ichthyic | December 11, 2010 2:52 AM

It’s not a game, and you’re not Harold, or are you?

Just to be accurate, which one of Harold’s statements (that I quoted) are you referring to?


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241123

 
Quote

Ichthyic | December 11, 2010 6:22 AM | Edit

one, this quite obviously IS a game to you, and has been since you first started posting here.

two, you don’t get to control who responds to your posts.

three, it was quite clear to anyone with half a brain exactly what I was responding to, based on what I posted.

man, the nutters here are getting too damn thick.


You may read the rest of that thread, but I posted these bits here to show where I think the trouble with Kris got started.

BTW, I thought Harold's statement "There is no scientific theory that is intended as a rejection of a religious belief. Science ignores religious beliefs." was indeed obviously true. When Kris challenged it, I was astonished and also wondered what the hell he was doing. Soon, we all found out!

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,02:01   

Oh my FSM! He is a complete douche!

Well Kris, I've tried to be nice, polite, civil, so now I'm going for the other option:

Kris, go fuck yourself with a jackhammer!

Thanks.

Hugs.

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,02:14   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 25 2011,02:01)
Oh my FSM! He is a complete douche!

Well Kris, I've tried to be nice, polite, civil, so now I'm going for the other option:

Kris, go fuck yourself with a jackhammer!

Thanks.

Hugs.

I'd rather see Kris get hit with P Z Myers' Banhammer. Much more phunny, that.

--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,06:01   

I'd rather see him fellate a termite nest.

Kris I have never entertained any delusions about you being sane, rational or worth the shit on my shoe.  I've seen your work, tough guy.  I'm not insulting you to point out that you are a shit stain, I'm just understating the obvious.  

As far as threaten you?  

Sheeeeeeeyit boy.  Go out there and play on your swing set son, the grownups are talking.  You ain't done nothing here except cry really loud about your shitty diaper.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:14   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 24 2011,22:31)
Quote (Kris distorting the truth @ Jan. 25 2011,00:25)
It's interesting that you're accusing me of being insulting or mean to flowersfriend, even though I wasn't, but the fact that some other people did give her a bad time apparently doesn't bother you. Why aren't you bitching at those people Dale-boi? I thought you said you have standards that never waver. Pfft.

In fact, once most of us realized that flowersfriend wasn't a fanatical bigot like FL or IBIG, things cooled down and she even returned later for more pleasant conversation. So once more, you have been dishonest. And to her credit, she totally ignored you, and thus disaster was averted.

In other words, what I said is true. So, again, why aren't you bitching at and about the people who did give flowersfriend a bad time? You keep bitching about me but I never gave her a bad time in the first place, or ever. You lied about that.

You really like to call certain people liars. You call people liars on a regular basis, on your blog and elsewhere, just because they don't instantly and completely agree with you. You think you're a paragon of truth and honor, but you're really just a lying, hypocritical, bigoted, delusional, dishonorable, insane, retarded, impotent, narcissistic, punk-ass sack of rancid shit.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:16   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,08:14)
a lying, hypocritical, bigoted, delusional, dishonorable, insane, retarded, impotent, narcissistic, punk-ass sack of rancid shit.

I know what you are, but what am I?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:17   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,14:14)
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 24 2011,22:31)
 
Quote (Kris distorting the truth @ Jan. 25 2011,00:25)
It's interesting that you're accusing me of being insulting or mean to flowersfriend, even though I wasn't, but the fact that some other people did give her a bad time apparently doesn't bother you. Why aren't you bitching at those people Dale-boi? I thought you said you have standards that never waver. Pfft.

In fact, once most of us realized that flowersfriend wasn't a fanatical bigot like FL or IBIG, things cooled down and she even returned later for more pleasant conversation. So once more, you have been dishonest. And to her credit, she totally ignored you, and thus disaster was averted.

In other words, what I said is true. So, again, why aren't you bitching at and about the people who did give flowersfriend a bad time? You keep bitching about me but I never gave her a bad time in the first place, or ever. You lied about that.

You really like to call certain people liars. You call people liars on a regular basis, on your blog and elsewhere, just because they don't instantly and completely agree with you. You think you're a paragon of truth and honor, but you're really just a lying, hypocritical, bigoted, delusional, dishonorable, insane, retarded, impotent, narcissistic, punk-ass sack of rancid shit.

Tut tut, Kris.

Now is THAT good marketing?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:24   

sigh... it's so hard to find good opponents these days.

I half expect Kris to go "neener, neener".  Blah blah blah.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:34   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 25 2011,14:24)
sigh... it's so hard to find good opponents these days.

I half expect Kris to go "neener, neener".  Blah blah blah.

Half expect? Dude he's ALREADY DOING IT. Just with slightly longer words and more butthurt.

Louis

ETA P.S. I will point out that were we all playing some war game on an XBox (I don't own one but am familiar with the phenomenon) we would currently be standing over Kris' virtual corpse teabagging it. We are in his base, killing his d00ds. All his base belong to us. He is getting pwned at every opportunity. His noobishness is there for all to see and what have you.

--------------
Bye.

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:47   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 24 2011,23:29)
To illustrate for all to see how Kris slowly degenerated into the lunatic we know him to be now, let's look back at Panda's Thumb nearly two months ago.

http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-240311

   
Quote

Kris replied to comment from Lamar | December 3, 2010 9:40 PM

I think it’s reasonable to say that a scientific theory may be intended as a rejection of, or disagreement with, a religious belief. But, it’s also reasonable to say that many scientific theories are put forth without considering religious beliefs at all.
<snip>
In the commonly accepted sense I don’t think that faith in science is “religious”. However, I do believe that scientists and many laymen do have faith in science. I have faith in science but not to the extent that I automatically and unquestionably swallow whatever science cooks up.


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-240354

   
Quote

harold | December 4, 2010 10:08 AM
Kris -

You seem to take an interest in the discussion here, but you also seem to lack some background information about science and creationism.

Everyone makes mistakes and has things to learn. I have made plenty of mis-statements here and in other places. When someone points it out, I learn.

I’m going to give you a chance to do that right now.

Some people can learn and grow, others have artificially inflated yet fragile egos, and become defensive when challenged, even in a positive way. I only mention this because the latter sort of people are so common on the internet. I hope you belong to the former category. We will now find out.

There is no scientific theory that is intended as a rejection of a religious belief. Science ignores religious beliefs.

I noticed in my youth that I do instinctively hold certain assumptions. I assume the physical world exists, I assume my senses detect aspects of it, I assume other human beings exist, I assume that their senses detect aspects of the same physical world, and I assume that the axioms of logic, although having no physical existence themselves, should be used in evaluating physical reality. Therefore I prefer the scientific method for evaluating physical reality.

Scientific claims should always be viewed critically, with skepticism. No-one should “swallow whatever science cooks up”. To do so would be, in fact, unscientific. Sometimes scientific ideas initially get too much credit, because they are advanced by a prestigious source or seem especially exciting. But this is a mistake.

Having said that, please specifically explain which scientific observations, hypotheses, experimental results, or theories you dispute, and why.


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-240429

   
Quote

Harold, your responses have little or nothing to do with what I said.

Just one example: I was referring to the simplicity of the phrase “evolved from matter” in the sense that the phrase isn’t explanatory enough to necessarily describe how “evolutionists” (or any scientists for that matter) may feel about how the universe began. I was not referring to the concept or theory of evolution itself.

I think that Lamar’s comments are worth some consideration, as he stated them, and I tried not to read things into them that are not there. You might try to do the same with my comments.


Later....

http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241116

   
Quote

Kris | December 11, 2010 1:22 AM

harold said:

“There is no scientific theory that is intended as a rejection of a religious belief. Science ignores religious beliefs.”

Are you sure about that Harold? Would you like to revise those statements?


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241117

   
Quote

Ichthyic | December 11, 2010 1:42 AM

Are you sure about that Harold? Would you like to revise those statements?

no, he need not. It’s an absolutely accurate statement.

I think you might be confusing the intent and content of a scientific theory with whether or not the results of testing that theory provide evidence that contradict specific claims made of religions.

Evolutionary theory does not, and is not intended to, address any religious statement.

We have, however, in testing the theory over decades, found that many specific religious claims are unsupported.

likewise with relativity theory, the theory of gravity, the theory of heliocentrism, etc, etc, etc.

your understanding of science seems relatively poor to be trying to play “gotchya” games.


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241121

   
Quote

Kris replied to comment from Ichthyic | December 11, 2010 2:52 AM

It’s not a game, and you’re not Harold, or are you?

Just to be accurate, which one of Harold’s statements (that I quoted) are you referring to?


http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-241123

   
Quote

Ichthyic | December 11, 2010 6:22 AM | Edit

one, this quite obviously IS a game to you, and has been since you first started posting here.

two, you don’t get to control who responds to your posts.

three, it was quite clear to anyone with half a brain exactly what I was responding to, based on what I posted.

man, the nutters here are getting too damn thick.


You may read the rest of that thread, but I posted these bits here to show where I think the trouble with Kris got started.

BTW, I thought Harold's statement "There is no scientific theory that is intended as a rejection of a religious belief. Science ignores religious beliefs." was indeed obviously true. When Kris challenged it, I was astonished and also wondered what the hell he was doing. Soon, we all found out!

Hey Dale-boi, thanks for the plug, but you left out one of the most important posts of mine. You know, the one with the quote from Darwin. You're not trying to get people to take things out of context, are you? Nah, you'd never do anything like that. You're too "honorable" to do that. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!

Nice try at quote mining though. Too bad that it makes you look like a desperate douchebag.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,08:51   

Quote mines with links to the original in context quotes? That's....original as a method of quote mining.

That word you use, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:04   

Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 25 2011,00:14)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 25 2011,02:01)
Oh my FSM! He is a complete douche!

Well Kris, I've tried to be nice, polite, civil, so now I'm going for the other option:

Kris, go fuck yourself with a jackhammer!

Thanks.

Hugs.

I'd rather see Kris get hit with P Z Myers' Banhammer. Much more phunny, that.

I've already been banned from Pharyngula. PZ Myers is a malignant narcissist with delusions of Godhood, just like you Dale-boi. Neither of you are any different from the religious zealots who want to stifle or eliminate anything they don't want to hear.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:12   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,15:04)
Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 25 2011,00:14)
 
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Jan. 25 2011,02:01)
Oh my FSM! He is a complete douche!

Well Kris, I've tried to be nice, polite, civil, so now I'm going for the other option:

Kris, go fuck yourself with a jackhammer!

Thanks.

Hugs.

I'd rather see Kris get hit with P Z Myers' Banhammer. Much more phunny, that.

I've already been banned from Pharyngula. PZ Myers is a malignant narcissist with delusions of Godhood, just like you Dale-boi. Neither of you are any different from the religious zealots who want to stifle or eliminate anything they don't want to hear.

Under what online nickname were you banned from Pharyngula?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:18   

Does anyone remember this?

Put a Sock In It

 
Quote
Arguments we’ve heard many times before and don’t want to hear again.

If you insist on boring us with them you won’t be with us for long.


I'm pretty darn light with the stick (despite being "boss around here" which I am not), but I must admit that I now see this page in a new light.  :p

I am also reminded of a book of scenes for actors that I read when I wanted to become an actor, in which one character repeated, essentially, "I hate you, you suck, you're horrible, blah, blah," and then the director quizzed the actress on why she showed no emotional nuance in the scene. The actress replied, "Well, my character hates his character!" and the director replied, "No - if that were true, you would have walked out on him by now."  :)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:18   

Quote (Louis @ Jan. 25 2011,06:51)
Quote mines with links to the original in context quotes? That's....original as a method of quote mining.

That word you use, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Louis

The quotes he mined don't show the entire or accurate context.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3320
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:19   

You're absolutely right.  Neither myself, nor most of the people I know, want to hear ignorance being spewed forth as if it was divine inspiration.  

We don't like to be called hypocrites by someone who can't prove that it is the case.*

We don't like to have thousands of scientists and researchers who have devoted their lifes to learning and knowledge be told that they can't do their work anymore by a 2-bit internet troll.

So, you are right.

I'll note that these types of things are not based on us however, Kris.  They are based on you.

If you want to really affect change, then meeting people halfway, being tactful, polite, and arguing with logic and evidence is the best way to go.

And no, don't start squealing about how mean we are to you.  This is 100% about how you act.  You could rise above all this and present your arguments, present your evidence and if we don't like it, then you can go away with pride that you tried your best.

Or, you could act like a whiny 4-year-old (I know, I have one) and demand things for no reason, respond with vile accusations with no foundation, perform acts that are not polite in civil discussion and potentially illegal, and just generally be a jerk.

How you act is up to you.  There is nothing that we can do to change that.  You could take the high road, but you haven't yet.  I suspect it's because you have no argument, you just want to whine.  So far, you have doing nothing to show my assumptions about you are false.


*No, your whining about it doesn't mean we actually are.  There's a big difference between what YOU think and reality.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:31   

Quote (Kris @ Jan. 25 2011,15:18)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 25 2011,06:51)
Quote mines with links to the original in context quotes? That's....original as a method of quote mining.

That word you use, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Louis

The quotes he mined don't show the entire or accurate context.

They link to the originals, right? They link to the context, right? So anyone interested can follow back to the original full context and examine whether Dale has honestly reported your arguments and words or not. That is awfully ineffective quote mining, if indeed quote mining it is.

Which part of this escapes you? Or is your palpable hatred of Dale* and unfortunately obviously lacking intellectual gifts blinding you to this fact?

Louis

*Posting personal details, poor move whoever does it, and some clowns in the commentariat of Pharyngula have done it and I've spoken out against it there too, so this isn't about infantile "sides" before you misunderstand. It's a wanker move of the first water, marking you out as a troll and a moron of high scumminess...but I digress.

--------------
Bye.

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:34   

About The Author (Krissy)(from Encyclopaedia Britannica):

     
Quote
The person most vulnerable to a persecutory paranoid state is the tense, insecure, suspicious person who has little basic trust in other persons, who has always found it difficult to confide in others, tends to be secretive, usuallly has few close friends and is addicted to solitary rumination.  These characteristics are sometimes hidden behind a facade of superficial sociabiltiy and talkativeness.  Above all, there is a rigidity about such a person's thinking which becomes most obvious when he is under emotional stress.  This may give an impression of certainty and self-assurance, but actually it is based on profound insecurity, upon a need to be dogmatic because of an inability to tolerate suspended judgement.


Cue tu quoque in 3, 2, 1...

btw, Kris, in case you missed it the first million times, yes, there might be a "designer" (shrug). Bring in some evidence and we'll consider it. Meanwhile, the grown-ups have actual work to do, rather than sit around in Foreman's basement with you.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:39   

Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 25 2011,15:18)
Does anyone remember this?

Put a Sock In It

   
Quote
Arguments we’ve heard many times before and don’t want to hear again.

If you insist on boring us with them you won’t be with us for long.


I'm pretty darn light with the stick (despite being "boss around here" which I am not), but I must admit that I now see this page in a new light.  :p

I am also reminded of a book of scenes for actors that I read when I wanted to become an actor, in which one character repeated, essentially, "I hate you, you suck, you're horrible, blah, blah," and then the director quizzed the actress on why she showed no emotional nuance in the scene. The actress replied, "Well, my character hates his character!" and the director replied, "No - if that were true, you would have walked out on him by now."  :)

The UD stuff aside (which, since it is full of IDCist boilerplate nonsense is best ignored by decent folk)

Regarding Kris: Ah well this presumes Kris is:

a) interested in what he claims he is
b) is capable of discussing what he claims to be interested in
c) is more than a vacuous troll

The answers to a), b) and c) are "he's not". Kris is butthurt and wants to hurt in turn. He has failed to realise he is too ineffectual to hurt, he is just a laughable muppet. Hence: MOCKERY!

Personally, I am loving the "marketing lecture" and macho comment to Dale of "you wouldn't last a second in marketing buddy" (or words to that effect). I genuinely LOLed IRL. Unintentional irony like that is priceless. Kris can be our dancing monkey for a while can't he? Please. I'll clean his cage and feed him and everything.*

Louis

*Kris, you are being mocked. Ask yourself why. If the answer you come up with is anything other than "because I, Kris, am acting like a mockable fool" then you lack the self awareness to participate in adult conversation. Go to therapy for butthurt and come back when you've grown up a bit.

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:42   

Quote (fnxtr @ Jan. 25 2011,15:34)
[SNIP]

Meanwhile, the grown-ups have actual work to do, rather than sit around in Foreman's basement with you.

OI! Some of us grown ups are sat in the office as opposed to the lab today and are desperately trying to avoid work thank you. It's January, time to bloody do everyone's job reviews again. 4 times a year now. Now I don't like threats of violence, but whoever dreamt up this HR model needs a swift size 12 applied to their gentleman fruit. Possibly with repetitions.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:48   

Quote (Louis @ Jan. 25 2011,09:42)

OI! Some of us grown ups are sat in the office as opposed to the lab today and are desperately trying to avoid work thank you.
Louis

:D  Some of us must go to work and deal with people, ya slacker!  ;)

My reference to "Put a sock in it" was definitely for Kris, who is like the actress I described.

Be good, all! Time for me to clamp down on swear words and sunflower seeds, and tell the kiddies to make up their minds choosing between coloring, Uno, and checkers.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:50   

Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 25 2011,15:48)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 25 2011,09:42)

OI! Some of us grown ups are sat in the office as opposed to the lab today and are desperately trying to avoid work thank you.
Louis

:D  Some of us must go to work and deal with people, ya slacker!  ;)

My reference to "Put a sock in it" was definitely for Kris, who is like the actress I described.

Be good, all! Time for me to clamp down on swear words and sunflower seeds, and tell the kiddies to make up their minds choosing between coloring, Uno, and checkers.

PEOPLE!!!!!!??????

Ewwwwwwww.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:53   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 25 2011,15:19)
[SNIP]

....perform acts that are not polite...[SNIP]...and potentially illegal....

[SNIP]

{Ears perk up}

{Reads post in full}

I am Louis' painful sense of awesome disappointment.

;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Kris



Posts: 93
Joined: Jan. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,09:57   

Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 25 2011,07:18)
Does anyone remember this?

Put a Sock In It

   
Quote
Arguments we’ve heard many times before and don’t want to hear again.

If you insist on boring us with them you won’t be with us for long.


I'm pretty darn light with the stick (despite being "boss around here" which I am not), but I must admit that I now see this page in a new light.  :p

I am also reminded of a book of scenes for actors that I read when I wanted to become an actor, in which one character repeated, essentially, "I hate you, you suck, you're horrible, blah, blah," and then the director quizzed the actress on why she showed no emotional nuance in the scene. The actress replied, "Well, my character hates his character!" and the director replied, "No - if that were true, you would have walked out on him by now."  :)

If you're not the boss around here then why did you say you were "going to end it"? Did you think that just because you spoke that I would vanish?






"Arguments we’ve heard many times before and don’t want to hear again. If you insist on boring us with them you won’t be with us for long."

It's funny that you quoted the words above. Obviously it hasn't occurred to you or a lot of other people here that everything any of you argue has been argued by you and others many, many, many times. Apparently you think that your arguments are fresh and profound but any argument you don't want to hear is redundant and boring. You sound just like some of the religious zealots you complain about for not wanting your same old arguments for the zillionth time. And you wonder why I call you hypocrites.

If you don't like their closed ears, maybe you should think about yours too. Maybe you should find a better way of getting your message across to the public and the powers that be (government). Nah, a different way might work and then you wouldn't have religious intrusions to hate and bitch about.

--------------
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,10:02   

Quote
Cue tu quoque in 3, 2, 1...


Quod Erat...

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
khan



Posts: 1483
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,10:03   

Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 25 2011,10:48)
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 25 2011,09:42)

OI! Some of us grown ups are sat in the office as opposed to the lab today and are desperately trying to avoid work thank you.
Louis

:D  Some of us must go to work and deal with people, ya slacker!  ;)

My reference to "Put a sock in it" was definitely for Kris, who is like the actress I described.

Be good, all! Time for me to clamp down on swear words and sunflower seeds, and tell the kiddies to make up their minds choosing between coloring, Uno, and checkers.

I took an early retirement with a small pension because supervising fundies was literally making me sick.

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2137
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2011,10:09