RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (25) < 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... >   
  Topic: The "I Believe In God" Thread, You may know him from "Panda's Thumb"...< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,05:43   

Quote (skeptic reborn @ Nov. 17 2010,05:29)
Hate to let a potentially promising thread just whimper and die. †So, do you guys require an irrational YECist to kick around or would a semi-rational theist do?

[Captain Kirk Bad Acting Voice]

Must....Not....Make....Series....Of....Vicious....Jokes....Must....Attempt....Niceness....

Must....Not....Obliterate....Obliviot....As....Usual

[/Captain Kirk Bad Acting Voice]

Oh fuck it...

Dear Skeptic (Inappropriate moniker noted AGAIN),

Whilst I certainly cannot speak for everyone, and naturally welcome a diversity of views on the subject, here's my view.

1) If your suggestion for "semi-rational theist" is yourself, erm, how do I put this delicately? Self awareness isn't your strong point is it? The clue should lie in the fact that you were restricted to the Bathroom Wall after many trips round the same Mulberry Bush.* Despite everything anyone said, nice, nasty, evidence based, biased, unbiased etc you left with precisely the same erroneous views, making the same error strewn claims you entered with. The fact that you have had to morph identities (badly and blatantly, perhaps a point in your favour I suggest) to repost here suggests a certain unwillingness to learn. "RE"born? Hardly. Merely "STUB"born.

Why the powers that be at AtBC permit you to thumb your nose at their restrictions (lightly and justly applied in my view, after great tolerance of moderate to major ignorance on your part) is their own affair. I'll admit to being in two minds about it. I like freely allowing anyone to speak, but there comes a point where treating every person that walks through the doors as if they were a sane/rational/productive (delete as unapplicable) person is.....impractical. And that's me being diplomatic. There's a difference between being in favour of free speech as a principle and allowing every nutter free reign on limited platforms. The two are not necessarily in conflict.

2) If it is someone of your acquaintance who you think would be a fun/useful poster (as opposed to a chew toy**) then send 'em along. If they are a clone of you (or you in a slightly better disguise) then don't bother pretending they will emerge from any other box than the one marked "briefly interesting, blinkered chew toy".

3) Everyone, theist or atheist, agnostic or gnostic, any permutation of any viewpoint, worldview, politics, faith, lack thereof or anything else is semi-rational. It's the underlying fact of the human condition. This might have been pointed out to you before. Rationality is not something someone has or has not, it is something we can all only tend towards. Snide false dichotomies and divisions like this demonstrate quite clearly you have learned five eights of fuck all since you were restricted. Old Mulberry Bush circles will be made again.

YECs are not, per se, irrational. Partially so, like anyone else, but not necessarily globally so. They have (typically) been raised in a cultural environment where YEC is common, are unlikely to have been given any accurate information about the relevant science, and have generally been "told"/conditioned to fear questioning the very things their YECism is predicated upon. In those circumstances it is not irrational to be, or pretend to be, a YEC regardless of the rationality of the actual claims of specific YECisms. What these chaps and chappesses care about is manifestly not the science. That's no crime, billions of people across the world couldn't give a shit about the scientific data. However, when they advance their claims as science, or as being factual and in conflict with the current scientific consensus regarding consilient data, then it becomes problematic. That's when the line between holding a demonstrably (factually) irrational set of views for perfectly (personally) rational reasons blurs into  holding a demonstrably (factually) irrational set of views for potentially (personally) irrational reasons. Mulberry Bush circumnavigation number 3000.

4) Theism is not opposed to evolutionary biology (allegedly the topic of this board, although knob jokes and LOLcats are the main traffic, I take full responsibility for this and am justly ashamed). Some specific, narrow subsets of specific theistic religions define themselves out of sane consideration by opposing blatant, observable reality and attempting to hand wave away the inherent problems but this is far from a universal case. Amazingly, neither you, nor any "semi-rational theist", nor even pizza boys of Lenny's acquaintance speak for theists or theism. Deal with that. And that is a re-circle of yet another Mulberry Bush.

5) This is not a promising thread. Why the Fishers of TARD do what they do is their own affair, it's not for me to pass judgement, it's a question of personal taste. As far as it applies I think de gustibus non est disputandum is fine here. Sure a new participant is a good thing, a new chew toy is a fun thing for a while, but like a firework comprised of pure stupid, they burn out after a brief flare of glorious dumb. Call me an old pissy, cynical, curmudgeonly git (or worse if you like) but I predict these threads will miss vastly more than they hit. I also predict the sun will rise in the morning. Either way, the Fishers of TARD have the right idea and I don't. They are right that one has to heave a lot of bricks before one hits a duck though.

6) We don't require anything other than basic intellectual honesty. It'd be nice to have the occasional discussion with someone bordering on intellectually honest and capable. It's happened on this issue, but by fuck it's rare. Let me just assure you, you weren't a deliverer of such rare treasures, and unless something has radically changed you are unlikely to be so. Harsh? Yes. Fair? Probably not. Do I give a flying fuck? Difficult to say really. Yes and no.

Bloody interesting that you post with an obvious troll about our requirements/intentions and not, you know, any relevant bit of science/reasoning that would undermine this wicked rationalism and scientism we naughty atheists allegedly love isn't it though? Rather strongly suggests that, as I have said, you've learned nothing and are just being a stubborn prick, trying to be let back in where you are demonstrably unwanted.

Predicting your response (if you manage to vomit one forth), I'll use the words of Bill Hicks "Your denial is beneath you, and thanks to the use of hallucinogenic drugs, I see through you".

Hope this helps. Have a nice day.

Louis

* I am bored of Mulberry Bushes. I am bored of games. I am, in a word, bored. This makes me nasty. I dislike boredom. There are a few new people around who might enjoy/benefit from you/a clone of you/a suggested friend of yours, but I seriously doubt it. Weren't you setting up your own blog? How'd that turn out?

** Chew toys are fun and serve their purpose. What that purpose is is up to whoever wants to chew them. Personally, like most things I flatly refuse to take seriously, I find them best ignored or thoroughly taken the piss out of. I think this place needs yet another a chew toy like a hole in the head***. But then others think it needs another pun cascade or LOLcat like a hole in the head. We're both entitled to those views, let a thousand flowers bloom on this issue sayeth I. How judgementally or pissily those views might be expressed is perhaps a different matter.

*** Wouldn't it be nice for once, just once, to have someone actually capable and serious to play with? I've often thought of trying to take the creationist case for the simple reason that there is no way I could fuck it up as badly as most creationists do. I'd feel dirty doing the Gish Gallop and other rheotical gambits that creationists use to hide how shallow their claims really are though. Once you've seen the man behind the curtain it's really hard to pretend the show is real.

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

  
Seversky



Posts: 442
Joined: June 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,06:21   

Good try but you've still got a ways to go before you match outoffocus or lostitentirely for longwindedness.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,06:23   

Quote (Seversky @ Nov. 17 2010,12:21)
Good try but you've still got a ways to go before you match outoffocus or lostitentirely for longwindedness.

Haha! I wish. Longwindeness is a problem for me, I admit. Not one I'm working on, but...

Louis

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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,07:49   

Quote (skeptic reborn @ Nov. 16 2010,23:29)
Hate to let a potentially promising thread just whimper and die. †So, do you guys require an irrational YECist to kick around or would a semi-rational theist do?

Nah, it's only fun if they're irrational.

On the other hand, adult discussions, with a real back-and-forth dialogue... I don't know if I've ever had one of those...

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

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

   
skeptic reborn



Posts: 16
Joined: Nov. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,17:42   

Ahhh, Louis, some things never change.  I must admit, though, I was amazed at the volume of insight you were able to divine from two simple sentences.  Might I suggest that your next career be that of fortune teller?  Who knows, if you continue to hone your considerable talent you may end up on Oprah.

As to the name change, as I stated before, I reject the senseless restriction.  I simply did not and still don't have time for childish games.  My purpose here is to simply offer an alternative to the current doldrums.  Over the last few years I noticed increasing boredom and decreased actual discussion on this board so in sympathy I hoped to cheer some members up.  Take it as you will.  I have no interest in insulting generalizations but if any wish to discuss, that's just fine with me.

As a final note, I was intrigued by your professed tolerance of YECs.  Odd that we would disagree in this area, but I consider holders of those beliefs as competely irrational and ignorance is a poor defense.

As to actual content, I wonder currently as to the actual view of evo-devo within the scientific community and as an explanatory theory and whether it fulfills the promise of initial claims.  It's not my field so I'm interested in contemporary views.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,18:45   

As far as evo-devo, I'd suggest you get Dr. Carroll's book.  It's the best primer that I've seen for the lay person.  If you have something more specific than 'does it meet the promise', then I'll try to help.  But that's a little too generic.

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

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

   
sledgehammer



Posts: 533
Joined: Sep. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,18:56   

Yes, by all means, do float one of the promising "initial claims of evo-devo" so we have a bit of an exposed edge or something to get purchase on. †A good chew toy has to have a ripped seam or frayed edge before it can be diligently torn open, exposing the internal wadding, and then shaken violently until the stuffing is spread all over the living room floor, and all that remains is an unrecognizable, slobbered, empty shell of its former self.

--------------
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The terror of their tyranny is alleviated by their lack of consistency. -A. Einstein †(H/T, JAD)
If evolution is true, you could not know that it's true because your brain is nothing but chemicals. ?Think about that. -K. Hovind

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1692
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,19:10   

Seems like we won't see SR again, or at least until he finds a new sock...

--------------
"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: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 17 2010,19:24   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Nov. 17 2010,19:10)
Seems like we won't see SR again, or at least until he finds a new sock...

Fair enough.  I can't imagine being so inane to get banned from this forum, so he must be really nuts.

Hmmm... is that an example of ID (Intelligent Decisions)?

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

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

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,06:33   

Quote (skeptic reborn @ Nov. 17 2010,23:42)
Ahhh, Louis, some things never change. †I must admit, though, I was amazed at the volume of insight you were able to divine from two simple sentences. †Might I suggest that your next career be that of fortune teller? †Who knows, if you continue to hone your considerable talent you may end up on Oprah.

As to the name change, as I stated before, I reject the senseless restriction. †I simply did not and still don't have time for childish games. †My purpose here is to simply offer an alternative to the current doldrums. †Over the last few years I noticed increasing boredom and decreased actual discussion on this board so in sympathy I hoped to cheer some members up. †Take it as you will. †I have no interest in insulting generalizations but if any wish to discuss, that's just fine with me.

As a final note, I was intrigued by your professed tolerance of YECs. †Odd that we would disagree in this area, but I consider holders of those beliefs as competely irrational and ignorance is a poor defense.

As to actual content, I wonder currently as to the actual view of evo-devo within the scientific community and as an explanatory theory and whether it fulfills the promise of initial claims. †It's not my field so I'm interested in contemporary views.

Prediction confirmed. (BTW I know that Obliviot will read this even if he can no longer respond)

I got nothing from "two simple sentences". I got a great deal from interacting with you over a far greater period of time and {cough} "correspondance" here. I learned during that time it's better to shut your avenues of bullshit down early. You aren't interested in exploration or discussion (unless, like I said, something has changed. Fairly drastically in my opinion), you're interested in rationalising your preconceived notions about a variety of topics, evolutionary biology amongst them. Again, this was demonstrated by YOUR own conduct, posts and conversations, not by any presumption on anyone else's part. Those interested can hunt out the relevant threads. It's all there in black and white.

Also, the utter arrogance of your conviction that you of all people are some kind of conversational panacea is astounding. Yet again, you came in with certain views, spent a long time and a lot of electrons "discussing" them and left with those exact same views. You spent an awfully large portion of that time attempting to rationalise those views. Evidence and reason (such as was presented) didn't move you, neither did mockery or abuse, neither did kindness or any attempt at actual debate by anyone. You're an intellectual lightweight on a mission to validate his prejudices and you got found out. Why the dribbling donkey fuck would anyone care about your self aggrandising nonsense?

The comment re: YECs is a great case in point. You utterly missed the distinction between personal irrationality and the epistemological irrationality of a specific claim or method. The methods you've used to defend your claims in the past are precisely as epistemologically irrational as those the YECs use to defend their claims. The fact that your claims are ostensibly less in conflict with observable reality (less "irrational") than theirs is of interest only to you. It's a nice little narrative you can use to tell yourself that you are less personally irrational than they are. Well done you. The distinction here is between method of defense and the nature of the claim. I hope that's not too complex for you.

Oh and, as usual, reading for even basic comprehension escapes you, my "defense" of YECs was not based only on their ignorance. Ignorance is a factor but hardly the only one. And as is usual for shallow thinkers, you equate "understanding/explaining" with "justification/excusing". I think what YECs believe is understandable and explicable, I think how they defend it is also understandable and explicable. That doesn't justify what they believe or how they defend it. It also doesn't justify my pointing the finger and claiming these folks are horribly irrational, it's independent of both positions. Is does not equate to ought.

What does act as justification for condeming them (if that's what you're interested in, and it isn't what *I'm* interested in, even if I do it on occasion) is asking them about their views on honesty and morality and demonstrating that their defense of their claims, their chosen methodology, is at odds with their own claimed morals. It's possible to show the incoherent and logically fallacious nature of their own positions AFTER they claim to have a coherent and logically sound position, and to use their own moral/ethical standards as the measure by which they are to be judged. This is a distinction you have habitually missed in the past and miss now.

Back to denialism, the method here is what matters. A fact you have yet to understand, and let's be blunt there was an enormous thread where many people wasted a great deal of their time trying to get you to understand this. Mulberry bushes AGAIN. The point here is that it isn't simply the content of the claims being defended that matters, the methods used to defend them matters. Why "denialism" is a topic of study worth its own effort is because the same methods are used whether the topic is a tobacco company trying to deny the adverse effects of smoking, a Holocaust denier trying to hand wave away the atrocities of the Third Reich, an anti-evolution creationist trying to insert their deity into a classroom, a climate change denialist lobbying for no restrictions on emissions, a psychic trying to justify their claimed abilities, or a homeopath appealing to excerable testimonials to shore up their claims of efficacy, and many more examples from all realms of human endeavour. Why you are a worthless person to engage with on any issue is not because your claims are more or less irrational than those of a flat earther, the content is pretty irrelevant. It's because your methods of defending your claims are those of a dyed in the wool denialist.

I mean seriously, even your "offer of discussing actual content" is basically a request for someone to do your homwork for you. Pick a fucking book up. You claim to be a chemist, you should know something about how to search the literature. FInd a popular book or review article and work from there. It's what we ALL have to do, there's basically no shortcut to learning no matter how much we might wish there were. Why the hell would anyone who has encountered you here view your "request for substance" as anything other than a throwaway lazy self justification?

Lastly, you "reject the senseless restriction". Hahahahahahaha. Really? No time for childish games? REALLY? All you have ever done here is perform a series of childish games. You were restricted from posting here (IIRC you can post to the BW as Skeptic) because after years of effort you'd learned sweet fuck all! If that's not a childish game, nothing is. You are, quite blatantly, claiming that the owner of this website (Wes, and perhaps some other PT folks AFAIK) do not have the right to police a place they own and operate as they see fit. Erm, really? Are you that fucking stupid, blinkered and arrogant? Oh wait...I know the answer to that: Yes. We are all here at their sufferance...perhaps some of us cause more suffering than others! There is a whole internet out there for you to post on, just like there is a whole world out there for you to take a shit in. The fact that someone objects to you shitting on their living room carpet is no more a senseless restriction than them objecting that you post on a forum they own and operate. Fuck me but your sense of arrogant entitlement is nauseating.

Take my advice and stay gone. Find some other place to annoy people.

Louis

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

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2951
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,09:29   

Schroedinger's Dog should set that to music, Louis. :-)

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,10:26   

Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 18 2010,15:29)
Schroedinger's Dog should set that to music, Louis. :-)

I wouldn't poison SD's great music with my annoyance at Obliviot's bullshit. :-)

Louis

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

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1692
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,11:13   

Quote (Louis @ Nov. 18 2010,16:26)
Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 18 2010,15:29)
Schroedinger's Dog should set that to music, Louis. :-)

I wouldn't poison SD's great music with my annoyance at Obliviot's bullshit. :-)

Louis

I haven't mastered symphony-for-fart-sounds enough yet to do Louis any justice.

--------------
"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

   
JohnW



Posts: 3092
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,11:35   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Nov. 18 2010,09:13)
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 18 2010,16:26)
Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 18 2010,15:29)
Schroedinger's Dog should set that to music, Louis. :-)

I wouldn't poison SD's great music with my annoyance at Obliviot's bullshit. :-)

Louis

I haven't mastered symphony-for-fart-sounds enough yet to do Louis any justice.

There's this guy at a Texas bible school who can help you with that...

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
MadPanda, FCD



Posts: 267
Joined: Nov. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,12:53   

Bravo, Louis!

Imma put this in a file next to Dr. Lenski's retort to a certain other knucklehead who was "just askin' questions, man" as an example of relative diplomacy in the face of unrelenting willful ignorance.

Alas, I would have used far more of Brother William's seven classic four letter words and thus fueled someone's Worm Bucket*.

The MadPanda, FCD



* in reference to a campground song that goes something like 'nobody likes me / everybody hates me / I'm going to the garden / to eat worms'

--------------
"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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,14:27   

Quote (MadPanda, FCD @ Nov. 18 2010,18:53)
Bravo, Louis!

Imma put this in a file next to Dr. Lenski's retort to a certain other knucklehead who was "just askin' questions, man" as an example of relative diplomacy in the face of unrelenting willful ignorance.

Alas, I would have used far more of Brother William's seven classic four letter words and thus fueled someone's Worm Bucket*.

The MadPanda, FCD



* in reference to a campground song that goes something like 'nobody likes me / everybody hates me / I'm going to the garden / to eat worms'

Pfffffff hahahahaha.

I'm not laughing at you just at the idea that anything I have done thus far is in the same ball park as Lenski's efforts. Be it scientific or diplomatic! I fantasise about acheiving something on the order of what he and his group have done, or indeed being as diplomatic as he was to Schafly.

That was very kind of you, extremely generous, totally unnecessary and woefully inaccurate. Thanks very much! ;-)

Louis

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

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,14:48   

Modesty is supposed to be a virtue. There are situations in my life where I believe I should have been a little less virtuous, if that is the operative sense of virtue. I am no linguist.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,14:49   

Quote (Louis @ Nov. 18 2010,06:33)

Quote

Prediction confirmed.

(snipped- no repeat necessary)


I am SO getting this framed, Louis! Best read evah! Three pints on me and I'll pay for a lorry to take you home! Maybe even a taxi!

Ahh...must go wipe my eyes now... :D

--------------
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

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2951
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2010,22:24   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Nov. 18 2010,09:13)
 
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 18 2010,16:26)
Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 18 2010,15:29)
Schroedinger's Dog should set that to music, Louis. :-)

I wouldn't poison SD's great music with my annoyance at Obliviot's bullshit. :-)

Louis

I haven't mastered symphony-for-fart-sounds enough yet to do Louis any justice.



Well when you're done out-humbling one another... seriously: "reject the senseless restriction"... "No time for childish games"..."Pick a fucking book up"

Hawkwind would snap up this lyrical gold in a heartbeat.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2010,05:02   

Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 19 2010,04:24)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Nov. 18 2010,09:13)
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 18 2010,16:26)
†  
Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 18 2010,15:29)
Schroedinger's Dog should set that to music, Louis. :-)

I wouldn't poison SD's great music with my annoyance at Obliviot's bullshit. :-)

Louis

I haven't mastered symphony-for-fart-sounds enough yet to do Louis any justice.



Well when you're done out-humbling one another... seriously: "reject the senseless restriction"... "No time for childish games"..."Pick a fucking book up"

Hawkwind would snap up this lyrical gold in a heartbeat.

Except that I am far more humble than, well, anyone. In fact I'm so humble that if you look in the dictionary next to "humility" you'll see my photo. A small, modest photo that doesn't draw attention to itself of course.

Louis

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

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2010,07:10   

And with the Prize Money that comes with yourWinning Teh Internets Nobel, you can finally open that Home For Wayward Nymphomaniacs!

(Hint: †But don't piss off The Hitch)

edited for sp

--------------
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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2010,07:27   

Quote (J-Dog @ Nov. 19 2010,13:10)
And with the Prize Money that comes with yourWinning Teh Internets Nobel, you can finally open that Home For Wayward Nymphomaniacs!

(Hint: †But don't piss off The Hitch)

edited for sp

Only commited nymphomaniacs will be admitted. Surely wayward nymphomaniacs have strayed from the true path and become celibate?

I have a location for the centre picked out in the beautiful, relaxing, English countryside, near the coast for beach access during the summer*. I need job applications from people interested in becoming testers. Only the highest quality nymphomaniacs are to be admitted, rigorous testing standards will be applied.

Interviews begin on Monday, the end of the queue for applicants is currently in Moscow and working its way east at alarming speed.

Louis

*Actual summer may differ from that shown on the box.

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

  
phhht



Posts: 38
Joined: Oct. 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2010,22:44   

Quote (Louis @ Nov. 19 2010,07:27)
 
Quote (J-Dog @ Nov. 19 2010,13:10)
And with the Prize Money that comes with yourWinning Teh Internets Nobel, you can finally open that Home For Wayward Nymphomaniacs!

(Hint: †But don't piss off The Hitch)

edited for sp

Only commited nymphomaniacs will be admitted. Surely wayward nymphomaniacs have strayed from the true path and become celibate?

I have a location for the centre picked out in the beautiful, relaxing, English countryside, near the coast for beach access during the summer*. I need job applications from people interested in becoming testers. Only the highest quality nymphomaniacs are to be admitted, rigorous testing standards will be applied.

Interviews begin on Monday, the end of the queue for applicants is currently in Moscow and working its way east at alarming speed.

Louis

*Actual summer may differ from that shown on the box.


I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.

† † † † † † † † † † † † † † † † † † † †-- Jerry Lee Lewis

--------------
Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothese-la.
-- Pierre Simon Laplace, explaining the absence of any mention of God in his work

  
BWE



Posts: 1901
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2010,06:22   

Quote (IBelieveInGod @ Nov. 04 2010,16:21)
Quote (MadPanda @ FCD,Nov. 04 2010,18:12)
 
Quote
Are there any square circles?:)


Do you know why the answer to this question is what it is? †

Do you understand why this is not an intelligent question to ask?

Are you going to engage in any conversation here with the intellectual honesty your entire discourse from the Bathroom Wall lacked?


The MadPanda, FCD

I'm asking to see if you believe in absolutes or not. If there were no such thing as a square circle, then that would be an example of one absolute now wouldn't it.

Now let me ask you this, is the earth really a cube?

I believe in absolutes. In fact, I'm having a debate on another forum (with a forum member here I believe) where I am supporting the statement: There is a perfect truth beyonh humanity's ability to attain. And It looks like I might have the upper hand at the moment.

Here is the link if you want to read it. I think one day it will hold a featured position in creationists arguments.

Sorry to be a drive by creationist here. :)

http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=33218

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
BWE



Posts: 1901
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2010,06:38   

Quote (Louis @ Nov. 17 2010,03:43)
Quote (skeptic reborn @ Nov. 17 2010,05:29)
Hate to let a potentially promising thread just whimper and die. †So, do you guys require an irrational YECist to kick around or would a semi-rational theist do?


Hi Skeptic. Thanks for the best thread ever here for me anyway.
Quote (louis]
* I am bored of Mulberry Bushes. I am bored of games. I am @ in a word, bored. This makes me nasty. I dislike boredom. There are a few new people around who might enjoy/benefit from you/a clone of you/a suggested friend of yours, but I seriously doubt it. Weren't you setting up your own blog? How'd that turn out?
[/quote)
I got bored and upped the anti. How are you doing these days with the added weight?

[quote=loius]
*** Wouldn't it be nice for once, just once, to have someone actually capable and serious to play with? I've often thought of trying to take the creationist case for the simple reason that there is no way I could fuck it up as badly as most creationists do. I'd feel dirty doing the Gish Gallop and other rheotical gambits that creationists use to hide how shallow their claims really are though. Once you've seen the man behind the curtain it's really hard to pretend the show is real.

I moved on from creationists. (mostly). I went out and started searching the alternate physics theories and their proponents. I have a pretty good bag of woo now and I'm sorting out the fragile stuff by throwing it against scientists or otherwise bright people in debate-like formats. Quite a bit of it is serviceable enough. My rule is that I must concede lost points but I don't lose too many. Soon I will have a basket of indestructible woo.

I owe it to you, RBill and skeptic. Lenny really I guess. But I'd love to send you a copy of the manuscript to edit/read once work let's up on me for the holidays. Reciprocating bill too.

At any rate, it really biols down to the semi rational part you mentioned in this post but which i snipped. :)

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2010,22:04   

Quote (BWE @ Dec. 04 2010,07:38)
I owe it to you, RBill and skeptic. Lenny really I guess. But I'd love to send you a copy of the manuscript to edit/read once work let's up on me for the holidays. Reciprocating bill too.

Which I gather harkens back to discussions a couple years back.

Linky?

--------------
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

  
BWE



Posts: 1901
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 05 2010,02:05   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Dec. 04 2010,20:04)
Quote (BWE @ Dec. 04 2010,07:38)
I owe it to you, RBill and skeptic. Lenny really I guess. But I'd love to send you a copy of the manuscript to edit/read once work let's up on me for the holidays. Reciprocating bill too.

Which I gather harkens back to discussions a couple years back.

Linky?

Well, it hearkens back a little further, but drastically changed directions after a thread started by louis called something close to "no reason for a rift between science and religion? Skeptic has a chance to prove his claim." I don't have it bookmarked on this machine but it's easy to search I think. It was the thread where Lenny quit.

I'm not sure if there was a specific post or even specific idea in it that changed the direction of my thinking. It was my approach to the Gould's idea of non-overlapping magisterial domains that changed and I don't recall the topic being explicitly discussed (although we were talking about many of the same elements.). I'd never considered some of the overlaps that turn out to be plenty evident when we look,

But after a few days of thinking about it, my internal  paradigm shifted as I began to blur a bunch of what used to be discrete ideas. Before that discussion, I'd never tried to imagine how many sacred cows were grazing covertly in each others' magesteria...  A few weeks after it ended, I tried. I found thwm all in the same pasture.

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 05 2010,06:37   

Here is that discussion, from 8/07 through 12/07.

--------------
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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 13 2010,09:13   

I don't get it.  This clown fills up 400+ pages at PT and can't even get to eight here?

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

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

   
prong_hunter



Posts: 45
Joined: May 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 13 2010,21:28   

I can't believe it either.

I think he's morphed into flipper, or Kris, or AMDG, or darwinism.dogbarf()

I don't know, but I think after 400 pages he just can't keep his mouth shut.

What do you think?

  
  741 replies since Oct. 31 2010,16:04 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (25) < 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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