March 2012 Screwballs

[TolkienFan]

Still, do you still have those original archives stored? The historical manifestation of my persona with kin interest at historical documents and writs, I still recall many of your original articles. Are those still preserved? (Since at times, I might fancy reading some of those). For what I consider one of the greatest ministries in Christendom, it's evolution is of keen interest to me.

http://www.tektoonics.com/test/parody/lunacy.html

[One Bad Pig]

Why? You plan on a disappearing -- or some other deception to build the Legend of the Information Broker? You sure aren't going to do it with personal appearances; you have the stage presence of a sneak thief.

Calling what you do "riposte" is disingenuous. Why whitewash it?

Haven't you noticed you have taken it down a notch in those venues, too?



Like all those other Christian organizations you can't get to endorse your Insults for Christ paradigm? Prove it. You can't even get Licona to side with you.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, eh?

[Teluog]

Sarah either has tics, or is a robot programmed to repeat the same thing every post.

[jpholding]

Still, do you still have those original archives stored?

Yes. I have a folder set aside for them.

[jpholding]

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, eh?

I'll say. Only hell usually gets its facts straighter than the little girl does. (She thinks I've "taken it down a notch" in the other venues? What drugs is she taking this week?)

[Andius]

http://www.tektoonics.com/test/parody/lunacy.html

I was actually thinking about the ones that have been modified and no longer up. But yeah, glad the lunacy section is still alive and well. XD

[Andius]

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, eh?

Silly piggy, your assuming Sarah is even a woman. All I see is a whiny baby tot, so devoid of fury. ^^

[ukchristian28]

Is SarahB STILL going on about that? She's like a broken record! You're very boring Sarah. Why don't you advance the conversation beyond "Holding can't get another apologist to endorse his insults for Christ blah blah blah?"

[ukchristian28]

Dhorpatan declares Christian beliefs extraordinary and in need of extraordinary proofs. No reason as to why they should be considered so, it's just asserted. I asked, why they are extraordinary? Because Dhorpatan said so? Here are some replies from his ridiculous little fans:

atheistcommonsense:

"what a stupid comment. Have you ever seen anyone raise from the dead? Or that a 600 y/o man gathered 2 of every animal in a wooden boat he made? C'mon now."

In response to my statement that science can't say anything about the supernatural:

"umm you can measure both those things idiot. You could not have picked worse examples."

"yes b/c it [the supernatural] doesnt exist. Jump out of a window or spit in the wind, then tell me they cant be measured. The supernatural doesnt exist despite what you assert."

"yes b/c its REALITY, the supernatural is fantasy made up by religion to give them justification for their beliefs."

Arbfor:

Christian claims largely include extraordinary claims about human biology and a few other unlikely and bizarre events that don't really align with our current understanding of science. Sure, provide the evidence, that's what science is about. But the evidence needs to be of the right amount and the right type, history generally isn't.

[jpholding]

Is SarahB STILL going on about that? She's like a broken record! You're very boring Sarah. Why don't you advance the conversation beyond "Holding can't get another apologist to endorse his insults for Christ blah blah blah?"

BTW UK, I see Dumbass Palmer is working on his "days of Genesis" blather which I assume you incited him to create. You think you'll start a vid war with him on that?

[Teluog]

I hope my prayers for my li'l bro have been effective. Anti-screwball to his latest Facebook post:

A quote from John Adams that was apparently in The God Delusion:

"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."

Here's the actual quote in its full context:

"Twenty times, in the course of my late Reading, have I been upon the point of Breaking out, This would be the best of all possible Worlds, if there were no Religion in it. ! ! ! But in this exclamati[on] I should have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell."

Source: http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/...ffersoncor.pdf

Dawkins quoted out of context so that Adams was saying the exact OPPOSITE of what he actually said. If this is deliberate, it's prejudice. If this is accidental, it's incompetence. My copy is lacking this quote which makes me think he had it removed in later editions when he realized his blunder.

Here's something else from John Adams:

"The Christian religion, in its primitive purity and simplicity, I have entertained for more than sixty years. It is the religion of reason, equity, and love; it is the religion of the head and the heart."
http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/...ffersoncor.pdf
nationalhumanitiescenter.org

[ukchristian28]

BTW UK, I see Dumbass Palmer is working on his "days of Genesis" blather which I assume you incited him to create. You think you'll start a vid war with him on that?

That would be fun. Sometimes J.P the arrogance of these youtube really angers me a bit. They are so breathtakingly arrogant. I could deal with them not being knowledgeable but when they feel they are God's gift to reason (or science's gift I should say) they are infuriating.

[Rational Gaze]

Sometimes J.P the arrogance of these youtube really angers me a bit.

I had some guy called johnnyp76 (who has been featured on Debunking Christianity) who has a BA in Philosophy, and has written two (self-published) books, and frequently uses this to claim he is an expert at Kalam. Of course, aside from defending views which, by and large, most philosophers would reject (such as object conventionalism, mereological nihilism, materialism) he complained that Kalam commits equivocation. When I pointed out that Kalam does not commit the fallacy of equivocation, at great length I might add, he then said that he was arguing that Kalam uses equivocal language, not the fallacy of equivocation. In other words, he was equivocally using the colloquial definition of equivocation whilst complaining about equivocation. Equivoception.

[jpholding]

That would be fun. Sometimes J.P the arrogance of these youtube really angers me a bit. They are so breathtakingly arrogant. I could deal with them not being knowledgeable but when they feel they are God's gift to reason (or science's gift I should say) they are infuriating.

Even more fun ahead -- he says he's planning a series on "the empty tomb". Also on whether the flood was local, which may also interest you.

[Mountain Man]

Is stupidity increasing in the world, or has the internet simply made stupid people more visible?