RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (9) < 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 >   
  Topic: Kris On Comments< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
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: 1466
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: 3265
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: 3037
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

  
  249 replies since Jan. 20 2011,21:35 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (9) < 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]