For Gideon

add to del.icio.usdel.icio.us Digg itreddit Stumble It!

89 thoughts on “For Gideon

  1. Shit, SI, I thought you were really going to bust my chops, this is EASY, son!

    LOL! I dunno… see, this is what I’ve tried to do in the past, and I believe I’ve addressed every one of those points you’re trying to slay me on, but, you guys were too busy trying to run me off than listen. You DO have a listening problem, buddy…

    *Sigh* … but, we shall endeavor to persevere…

    Point by point:

    1. I don’t give a fuck about church history. I care about what the Bible, the inspired word of God, says. If the criteria for salvation meant being a theologian, practically nobody would be saved. If the Bible can’t be read and understood by the layman, by the lowest ditch-digger, it’s useless.

    2. I’d like to know what poll it was for establishing those stats I participated in… NONE! So, how in the hell do they establish their so-called facts from incomplete data? What, they polled seven or eight atheists, then arrived at their figures? Gimmee a break!

    3. I’m not into Glossolalia. Sorry.

    4. See, this is how well you listen. Show me where I’ve said that I believe in an eternally-burning pit full of infidels. Ask cl what I believe on that.

    5. Orthodox Judaism keeps meticulous genealogical records of their history, and you bozos still haven’t shown me any proof that the stuff you quote from your own prophets is any more believable than what I derive from mine. Get with it!

    6. I laugh at Hindu beliefs, because they have pagan/infidel roots that are established through history. I guess I wouldn’t be much of a Christian, either, if I promoted beliefs that my Bible says are anathema, would I? What, you want me to be a hypocrite, SI?

    7. I support the Muslims’ right to believe whatever they want, just as I’ve gone to the floor supporting your right to be totally ignorant of reality with your religion. And, even if God didn’t have a good reason for destroying a bunch of murdering infidel bastards in the OT, as Creator, He can do whatever the fuck He likes. You infidels love to dwell on this, though you TOTALLY ignore what those heathen sons of bitches did to the Israelites and other heathen tribes whenever the spirit moved them. Biased thinking, no more, no less.

    8. I’m not a Trinitarian. Another supposition on your part. I believe Christ was divine, and a member of the Godhead, but, I’m not sold on His eternal status. He was called a Son for a good reason, in my belief. This is where I draw fire from other Christians, but, I think for myself.

    9. We were created with a purpose in mind, not just the happenstance coalescing of particles banging around the universe, willy-nilly. We were given the honor of representing the Godhead in form and deportment. You see satisfaction being associated with lower life forms, even idolize the notion. You do yourselves and God a disservice and think nothing of it. Yet, you get all offended when I call you names? LOL!

    #10… and the easiest one of all: Those other religions (and I’ve said this a thousand times in the past, too) are cheap knock-offs of the one TRUE faith – Christianity. History books are slanted in the favor of humanists’ beliefs, and will not be allowed to tell the true story that only the Bible, protected by divine power, can. All other religions have either died out or have been modified throughout time to fit the whims and wants of human vice. God doesn’t pander to human arrogance and pride. He tells it like it is, not even sparing the faults and errors of His own followers, as is often revealed in scripture.

    Like I’ve stated, all of these issues you’re so fond of regurgitating, have been addressed by myself in the past. Hopefully, now, we can move on.

    Hopefully.

    🙄

    • That’s good, Giddy. A non-juvenile response. Keep it up.

      I didn’t expect you to agree with any of it, but it might give you a sense of what we see when we hear devout Christians.

      • You see what you damned well want to see. And, you can forget about me playing your games, anymore.

        I fully expected one of your idiot friends to jump in and scuttle things, and, not one, but two of them showed up right on cue. Then, on cue, you sided with them.

        It’s okay, SI. It’s good we both know where we stand.

        Me for truth… and you for bullshit.

  2. I always despise the claim: TRUE faith, TRUE Christianity, TRUE (insert whatever group label you want). Mainly because anyone can make that claim about anything and that person won’t hear anything different. Their version of the TRUE -whatever it is-, is the right one, and the only right one.

    And don’t tell me you don’t know that some of the stories in the bible, including the story of Jesus, was ripped from earlier fables. Unless you want to tell me that those earlier fables were false and this particular fable is the one event that actually did happen.

    I always think, you know, if I were to go one night and write an entire book in the language of the bible and went to a “bible-thumper” and said: “This was divinely inspired. It came to me from (whatever method you wish to choose). This is the one and only holy book. The TRUE word of God and it is what you should follow.” Would they believe it as they’ve come to believe in the Bible?

    Taking it a step further, those stories from the Bible were written 60 years and more later than the people who presumedly lived alongside Jesus. So, say I told a story of a prophet who was born to a virgin by divine intervention, and said that this was a historical event. Then that boy lived his life, told it to his children, and his children eventually grew to an age where they decided to write the aforementioned story down in the form of a “Holy Book,” along with every other story that was told in relation to the first one, would you believe it then?

    This was your second (or third, I don’t recall the exact number) coherent and somewhat reasonable post on your part. Congratulations. And when I say reasonable, that doesn’t imply rational, to clarify.

    • So, what you’re saying is that there really is no “right or wrong” view on anything, right, Shadow? You know, that’s why there are so many controversies in religion, because there are so many ‘right’ answers. I guess “thou shalt not kill” and “thou shalt not bear false witness” can be matters of perspective, too? Yeah, I’ve heard that one a lot. Makes less sense each time I hear it, too.

      The story of redemption wasn’t “ripped” from anywhere. Those others were “ripped” from the Bible manuscripts, and as I tried to say in my previous comment, but, again, was ignored, (as usual) your historical facts are wrong. The sacrificial system – the whole plan of redemption, has been bastardized and misrepresented since Cain offered the first pagan sacrifice on his own behalf. He is the original infidel, and he did things according to the way he saw fit, just like his modern counterparts. He had to do things his way, God be damned!

      The only fables are in Naturalism. The worship of nature has always been the grand apostate religion – the antithesis of Theism. Naturalists are nothing more than modern pagans, worshiping nature as their creator and sustainer. The big intellectual cop-out is that nothing seen can be proved. In whose opinion? Theirs. Whoopee! So what?

      Your one-night edition of scripture wouldn’t pass the test of authenticity that the Bible has endured throughout ages of persecution and critical analysis. For you to even claim that you could pass off something of equal veracity as the holy scriptures, is utter nonsense. Like many others before you, your works will be forgotten in only a couple of generations. Unlike scripture, you’re just not that significant on the stage of life, Shadow, sorry to break the news to you. Neither am I, but then I don’t claim to be, either.

      Written 60 years after the fact? Dead wrong! Not all of it was written down immediately, but, the works of Paul and John, as a point of fact, were written by them contemporaneously with their ministry. The rest was based upon eye-witness accounts, i.e. people that were THERE and SAW those events happen. That’s more than any infidel can say about his/her religion of gainsay and supposition over supposed events that happened billions of convenient years in the past! Your comment is mockery, nothing more, certainly not based upon sense and logic.

      Also, your facetious ‘compliment’ at the end of your comment doesn’t impress me, nor does your arrogant score-keeping. Call me an asshole and be done with it, because you’re only here to carry on the slander that you and your mocking brothers in Darwinism practice so eloquently.

        • Because their testimony was recorded well within their lifetimes, and your stupid-assed buddy, TOG, admits that!

          More credible than Dawkins stating emphatically that EVIL-ution MUST have happened by “some Darwinian means.”

          You know, for a lawyer, you don’t put two and two together, very well, do you?

          I guess the higher science of Christianity is just too much for the EVIL-utionary mind.

        • This is actually a response to Gideon, but you can only nest responses 3 deep.

          You are aware that at the supposed time of Jesus, human life expectancy was only between 30-40 years, right? You didn’t start seeing longer average lifespans until the elite of the Medieval Islamic Caliphate when it ranged from 60-75 years. So your assertion that the Gospels, which were written 65-100 years after the supposed birth of Jesus (and presumably the disciples as well) are written at a minimum 20 years after the disciples were likely dead.

          Not that I expect you to care, you’re too busy with your nose stuffed into your Bible to come up for a gasp of reality.

      • You do realize that there were other religions BEFORE Christianity, don’t you? Religions with many similarities within stories, right?

        And no, I didn’t say there was no right and wrong. I said that to offer TRUE (insert a /belief/ system), as a statement from authority is an argument that I despise. It usually follows that no one else, or only select few individuals, really know what it means to be Christian (or any other belief system).

        I don’t even see where you got all that about right and wrong. I never addressed that.

        You do realize that’s how most religions start, don’t you? Someone claiming that this one book is holy, persuading other people to follow it, and gaining a large following through propoganda.

        Yes, admittedly, it was arrogant to add in that compliment that was overshadowed by a slight. But, it was well deserved at this point.

        • “You do realize that there were other religions BEFORE Christianity, don’t you? Religions with many similarities within stories, right?”

          “I don’t even see where you got all that about right and wrong. I never addressed that.”

          Shadow… and I say this with all sincerity and civility, go back and re-read my response to SI’s post. READ it, this time, not just scan quickly over it while trying to formulate your next response to me in your head.

          That’s the only answer you’re going to get from me on this.

          I’ll teach you guys listening skills if it kills you!

        • I realize what you’ve said, Gideon. But I was responding to your response and not, as you suppose, your original post. Though, I might not have been clear enough: if there are stories that occurred before Christianity began and are as similar to the stories Christianity tells as they are… then who ripped off who? The one that came before, or the one that came after? That was my point. Maybe it’s better said: who did the modifying? relabeling, even?

          That, and your response to me, which is what I was addressing in the first place, where you made the statement: “So, what you’re saying is that there really is no “right or wrong” view on anything, right, Shadow?”

          That never appeared in my post or any of yours.

          Basically, I’m responding to what you said of my post, not your original post. I’m still not sure if that’s clear enough. I’ve just come off a 9 hour shift. So, let me know.

  3. I always did love that list. But far funnier to me is the fact that Gideon always sounds like an idiot, no matter if he’s being a trolling toolshed or if he’s talking with complete sincerity about his favorite book. I defer to David Cross on this one:

    I’ve read large parts of the Bible, I’m fascinated by it, almost obsessed to a certain degree. That and scientology… but yeah, I’ve read large parts, and I can say, honestly, that the Bible is the FUNNIEST book I’ve ever read. I mean it’s fucking funny, right out of the gate it’s funny! “And the all powerful… thingy… descended from heaven to cast a plague of FROGS” .. I mean come on, that’s the most middle-school D&D bullshit ever. “Let’s.. give him more powers, let’s roll the die! And then he was dead for 3 days and then ROSE up to heaven.”

    The Bible is so crazy, I mean, if you know the massive history of the Bible, and how it was written in these dead languages, and translated by these monarches based on their whims, and then translated, and retranslated into other languages. If you believe, if you sit there and still believe all this shit, and realize the Bible was written when people were even dumber than we are today. You know, go out, late at night as the bars empty, as they go home and watch some Fox News, and realize it was written by people dumber than all those motherfuckers.

    • LMAO!

      And, you know what’s even funnier, TOG? Seeing you and your fat-assed little buddy here stirring up trouble, again, and proving me right! Can’t resist it, can you? Great! I like it better this way, anyway!

      Of course, as funny as you could even think the Bible is, it can’t hold a candle to the witchcraft preached by that gay-assed, pasty-faced nitwit Dawkins, and his fat, pudgy, alcoholic, chain-smoking reprobate of a human being bum-buddy, Christopher Hitchens! It’s even funnier imagining you imagining that they are actually scientific, knowledgeable men!

      Here’s one for the fat-ass… hey, Chief? Does that squealing Pentecostal bring back memories of the squealing you do when you’re hunkered over a big fat bowl of chitlins and hog jowls? Or, the grunting and snorting sounds you make downing three triple-thick shakes and six bags of Cheetos, watching your favorite losing team, the Kansas City Chiefs?

      Oh, and TOG… there isn’t a SLUG on this planet that’s dumber than you, sonny, nevermind any human being. Revel in it, boy, you da man in da stoopid department, bro!

      😉

  4. TOG,

    Well, well.. finally an opinion out of ya. Now see, even though I disagree, I could respect your opinion on the Bible if it was reasoned, but I’ve not heard any reasoning that would sustain your opinion, and the only time I specifically asked for any, you declined (the bit about your alleged “Judas contradiction” at Chappy’s).

    What’s the difference between asserting, “The Bible is the Word of God” vs. “The Bible is a bunch of BS” ?

    It’s just the preference of one assertion for another.

    • Dude, honestly? Stop pretending I didn’t answer you. I copy-pasted my damn response here as well, learn to read.

      • Gee, quite the attitude there, TOG. A little upset, perhaps? I understand though, given your track record of making factually incorrect claims then resorting to internet-wide insult campaigns against those who dare to challenge your superior “rationalism.” To be quite honest, if you did actually support a claim with attempted arguments, it’s news to me. Why no links? Come on gang! Let’s hear TOG’s first actual claim he’ll attempt to support with evidence…… (drumroll)

        While you’re at it, provide your definition of a contradiction.

        • It is not my responsibility to direct you to arguments that you were either too dense or too lazy to read. I’m not going to be your link-monkey, you can find the thing your damn self.

          Oh, and, you’re not fooling anyone. I have no internet-wide campaign against anyone, I just have an issue letting your sanctimonious lying stand unchallenged. Cut that out and you’ll never hear from me again.

      • Too bad SI can’t read, eh, TOG? If he could, maybe he’d see what a troublemaker you are. He’s too afraid of you and fat Philly, though, isn’t he? You both make subtle threats to pull out, and he jumps like a frog in a pot of hot water!

        “That Other Guy” sounds like a fag name, TOG. You a fag, TOG? You write like one.

        • TOG,

          It is not my responsibility to direct you to arguments that you were either too dense or too lazy to read. I’m not going to be your link-monkey, you can find the thing your damn self.

          I checked back to that thread once a week for a month. Did it take you longer than a month to reply? Are you saying that you’ve actually replied on Chaplain’s thread? If so, I gotta see. I’m dying to hear what an argument from TOG actually looks like! But, why won’t you supply a link, if the argument really exists and it’s one you’re proud of?

          Oh, and, you’re not fooling anyone. I have no internet-wide campaign against anyone, I just have an issue letting your sanctimonious lying stand unchallenged.

          Isn’t too easy to simply make accusations though? And, who’s lying if it was you that ran immediately over to Chaplain’s to announce that I’d been caught sockpuppeting when in fact I’d let the dense with a carrot? See what happens when we’re all too eager to insult others?

          Look, I don’t know why you took to hating me so intensely at DD’s. It could be that you just don’t like having your own ass handed to you when you make factually errant claims. If all you’re going to do is take jabs with your pom-poms from SI’s sidelines, well buddy, I’d rather not hear it.

          However, anytime you’ve actually got an argument or a logical point to discuss reasonably, I’m game.

  5. What’s the difference between asserting, “The Bible is the Word of God” vs. “The Bible is a bunch of BS” ?

    They are both opinions. The former has nothing to substantiate it. I suspect most people could offer a lot to substantiate the latter.

    • Just like there’s no substantiating Evolution, either. It’s a religion for the intellectually stunted, at best.

      Piltdown man is a good example of the ‘science’ involved with Evolution… or, EVIL-ution, as Dawkins in his quaint, schoolgirl voice (and knickers, no doubt!) pronounces it. That’s what the smarter of the Evo-crowd knew they’d have to do in order to find their mythological “missing link.” Of course, the only missing link is in the chain of coherent thought in the evolutionist mind.

      Bible = common sense and truth.
      Darwinism = buffoonery and bullshit.

      Class dismissed!

  6. Gimme a break SI:

    They are both opinions. The former has nothing to substantiate it. I suspect most people could offer a lot to substantiate the latter.

    You offer nothing here except confirmation and advertisement of your own bias. Chew these facts: I’ve tried to substantiate the former, and you literally proved yourself unwilling or unable to understand one of the arguments. You now assert that “most people” could substantiate the latter, yet like PhillyChief, you offer nothing to support your assertion.

    What in the world leads you to believe that’s rationalism, or progressive thought? When believers make assertions without evidence, you object every time. Yet you exempt yourself from your own standard.

    Call me whatever you want, but I know I don’t come off to my readers as a Fundy who thinks they’ve got all the answers.

    • I’m not clear what you’re going on about here, cl, but it doesn’t matter. You asked:

      What’s the difference between asserting, “The Bible is the Word of God” vs. “The Bible is a bunch of BS” ?

      We agree that they are both opinions. Equally valid on their face with nothing more. The problem is that when one asks for something to substantiate them, there is nothing that substantiates the former, except circular logic, and a lot that substantiates the latter.

      I’ve tried to substantiate the former, and you literally proved yourself unwilling or unable to understand one of the arguments.

      When have you ever tried to substantiate that the Bible was the “Word of God”? Did I miss that one too? If you talking about the video game anecdote, how exactly does that substantiate that the Bible is the Word of God? And if that’s not it, how does one substantiate such a claim? With a notarized document signed by god?

      With regard to the latter, there is so much to substantiate it that a comment here wouldn’t give it justice. Start with the fact that it contradicts itself in so many ways. Why would the “Word of God” do that? And how about the atrocities related therein, from a so called loving and caring god? Then look at the biblical scholarship that proves the the “word” we have and rely on for scriptural truth could not possibly be the same “word” that was written down originally. And the so called miracles that only occur in the stories of the Bible, but never again? Those are just four, broad brush problems with the “word of God” that arguably substantiates that the “Bible is BS” (Shorthand for “not true”).

      As I said, opinions, both of them, but one can be substantiated, the other cannot.

      • SI,

        The problem is that when one asks for something to substantiate them, there is nothing that substantiates the former, except circular logic, and a lot that substantiates the latter.</blockquote

        No, SI. The problem is that what you offer here is the circular argument, and you simply refuse to honestly consider evidence presented for the Bible, preferring to hear yourself yammer on with plugged ears.

        With regard to the latter, there is so much to substantiate it that a comment here wouldn’t give it justice. Start with the fact that it contradicts itself in so many ways.

        Right: “The Bible contradicts itself in so many ways.”

        Why? “Because it would take too long to explain, but SI says so.”

        Nope, no circular logic there!

        Those are just four, broad brush problems with the “word of God” that arguably substantiates that the “Bible is BS” (Shorthand for “not true”).

        No, those are four, broad brush assertions without a lick of supporting evidence or logic. Anyone can parrot Bart Ehrman, but can you actually think your own way through the claims you make?

        Like your boy Philly, you conflate naked assertion and opinion with cogency.

      • “And how about the atrocities related therein, from a so called loving and caring god? Then look at the biblical scholarship that proves the the “word” we have and rely on for scriptural truth could not possibly be the same “word” that was written down originally. And the so called miracles that only occur in the stories of the Bible, but never again?”

        *Yawn* It is tiring working with the intellectually-inept, but, what the hey…

        See, SI, if you’d actually been interested in learning the answers to your infantile questions, you’d have seen my response to those very inquiries. You CONTINUALLY IGNORE the works of infidels in PERSECUTING, KILLING, TORTURING, HUMILIATING, AND OTHERWISE DOING NAUGHTY-NAUGHTY THINGS TO JUST ABOUT EVERYONE THEY ENCOUNTERED ON A DAILY BASIS, THROUGHOUT THEIR HISTORIES, BEFORE THEY ENCOUNTERED SOMEONE THAT THEY COULDN’T BULLY AND KILL – GOD! Is the hearing aid turned up, this time, son?

        And, WHERE are these ‘miracles’ of Abiogenesis NOW? WHY are they not happening NOW, or was it only possible sixty gadillion years ago, and safely out of sight of any historical account to verify it?

        Ask yourself those questions, lawyer-boy, before you go spreading your shit all over everyone else’s carpet!

  7. “When believers make assertions without evidence, you object every time. Yet you exempt yourself from your own standard.”

    Their mindless assertions are called “evidence” in infidel parlance, cl.

    • cl, I’m thinking the TOG’ster and fat-arsed Philly got on the email and read SI the riot act. “Either Gideon goes or we do.” That’s the reason for this post. SI doesn’t want to lose his traffic, so he placated them the best way he knew how.

      Must be tough being scared of your own shadow. Mind you, Philly throws a big shadow!

      😆

      • SI doesn’t want to lose his traffic…

        Come now, Giddy, you’re really stretching there. Why would I care about traffic? This isn’t a commercial site, I derive no income from it. It a personal blog in which I get to write and react. Nothing more.

        I told you why I choose to graciously allow you to continue to exist here. Because I’M GOD of this blog, and you are my servant. Every comment you make is simply another prayer to me.

        • No, I think I hit closer to home than you like, SI. You’re an aspiring big-time blogger (*chuckle*) wanting to make a name for yourself. Why else would you make such a big deal about your blog hits… most of those coming from your masters (a REAL God has no master/s) Philly & Co. and yourself. They’ve been in it longer than you, and got you started, now you give them the homage they require. You’re the servant, SI. I can tell them to fuck off any time I like, and you have to deal with the online bitching and the emails!

          You’re no god, you’re a toadie. In reality, you serve as a source of recreation for me… a place I can go to indulge my dark side, between visits to other reputable blogs where thinking people hang out. Overall, it looks more and more that you’re just everyone’s patsy, SI! Used and abused by everyone at their will and leisure!

          And, with that, thy humble servant begs thy leave, oh Great Legend In His Own Mind. I shall return, forthwith, to render my praise and adoration to thee and all of your bosses… especially the fat, stupid-looking ones!

          😆

  8. Why else would you make such a big deal about your blog hits…

    Apparently, you missed the self-deprecating humor of the post. You’re too blinded by faith to notice the obvious. oh well… 8)

    • Self-deprecating? 😆

      SI, self-deprecation (in your case, anyway) is a tool for diverting attention away from the blatant arrogance and malevolence underlying the intended message. You’re not fooling anyone, not even your blog masters.

      So typical of tyrants to use innocent children in their pathetic, sordid agendas. So willing to please, yet they end up exploited by the very ones that are supposed to be looking out for them. Like homosexuals that prey upon kids… you’re a literary homosexual, SI, seeking to bugger the innocent with your humanist religious doctrines!

      Your emerging profile keeps getting more sordid and sinister every moment!

    • Man, honestly, he’s just a troll. I doubt he believes a word he says, he just thinks it’s hilarious to drag everyone along by their chains, laughing into his sleeves that he’s getting people to waste their time on him. I can understand you wanting to let the Grand High Quibbling Equivocator stick around, because he actually at least seems to TRY to be cogent on occasion, but almost nobody extends the courtesy to blatant trolls that you’re giving Gideon. They’re trash, they go out with the rest of the garbage, like the people who try to sell you cheap Cialis and Levitra in blog comments.

      Oh and, stupid me, I only just realized another way in which cl’s a hypocrite: whines up a storm every time someone points out that he’s full of crap, but doesn’t say a thing about Gideon’s trolling. And to think I expected him to have some integrity, how naive was I.

      • “Oh and, stupid me…”

        I’ve never argued that fact with you, TOG. You’re every bit as stupid as you claim to be… and then some!

        Stupid enough to think that anyone’s fooled about your little clique you have going here, or SI’s complicity in it. Or, the fact that you and that other piece of shit, Philly, derailed my attempt to offer a civilized debate. Your type just can’t stand it when things don’t go the way that you think they should.

        cl sees you for what you are, and he doesn’t answer for me, or I for him. He’s disagreed with me before witnesses, and without the mocking insults that characterize your typical Spanish Inquisitor infidel. You get what you give and deserve, sonny, live with it.

        When you decide to play on the up and up,let me know. Till then, take your lumps like a man, and not like the sniveling little whiner you appear to be.

      • why does cl HAVE to say anything about gideon’s posts? i’ve seen plenty of mud slinging here by si’s compatriots with nary a word of complaint by si or any of the other regulars here. where’s the cries of hypocrite in those instances?

        • I’m not saying cl should condemn gideon. I’m saying he shouldn’t encourage him, as he has in the past. I can’t recall ever supporting anyone who had anything negative to say about anyone else here unless they were actually describing what was going on accurately. cl, however, pulled a “HURR DURR, IT’S FUNNY WHEN GIDEON TROLLS YOU GUYS, DERPDERPDERP” a while back.

          cl DOESN’T have to say anything about Gideon’s posts. He could do like everyone else seems to be doing and ignore them completely, and I would have no problem with that. He, however, came out supporting the troll, and that just isn’t cool.

        • jason,

          why does cl HAVE to say anything about gideon’s posts? i’ve seen plenty of mud slinging here by si’s compatriots with nary a word of complaint by si or any of the other regulars here. where’s the cries of hypocrite in those instances?

          Welcome to SI’s blog. That’s just how it goes: whatever is condemnable in theists is par for Team Scarlet A’s course. But, they can’t see it, because they’re on the inside.

          FYI, That Other Guy has been on a campaign to smear me for months. It extends to other blogs, and started when I began pointing out many of the false claims he makes when he actually does attempt arguments. I’d be more than happy to provide links, if interested, lest anyone think I’m just returning one false accusation for another.

          TOG,

          I can’t recall ever supporting anyone who had anything negative to say about anyone else here

          Ha! Does your own self count there? Aside from the occasional stroke to SI’s ego, all you do is say negative things about me and Gideon. You don’t make argument, you just whine and complain. It’s funny, too: you whine big and loud about trolls – as if Gideon’s interrupting some intelligent discussion here – yet your whining about trolls is exactly what feeds them. In fact, three of my four comments today had to address your whining. So you see, if you whine less, I’ll comment less.

          cl, however, pulled a “HURR DURR, IT’S FUNNY WHEN GIDEON TROLLS YOU GUYS, DERPDERPDERP”

          That’s correct, because it is funny. For reasons unbeknownst to me, you guys take yourselves pretty damn seriously, and it’s freakin’ hilarious to see Gideon dash that to pieces and piss on the lawn while a bunch of self-described “rationalists” struggle to contain their emotions like small children. You react like penguins to the presence of a seal. And you must like it; else, you’d get wise and stop talking.

          cl DOESN’T have to say anything about Gideon’s posts. He could do like everyone else seems to be doing and ignore them completely, and I would have no problem with that. He, however, came out supporting the troll, and that just isn’t cool.

          You DON’T have to say anything either, yet nothing seems to stop you from yammering on, right?

          Are you seriously deficient? How on Earth can you actually claim that “everyone else is ignoring Gideon’s posts” completely? THAT’S ALL YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT! And really, it’s no compliment to the subject matter of SI’s posts that each one sustains about three minutes of intelligent conversation followed by three weeks of this stuff.

      • Man, honestly, he’s just a troll…

        Yah, I know, and I’m just as guilty in feeding him.

        The best policy is to just ignore him, but I guess I asked for this by creating a post dedicated to him.

        At least he proved all of my points. 8)

        • “Yah, I know, and I’m just as guilty in feeding him.”

          Still trying to placate your masters, SI? They’re still calling the shots, I see.

          And, thanks for verifying your true motives, that you’re only interested in being an obnoxious infidel, not a seeker of truth. I always knew it, now everyone does.

          And, I’ll be interested in learning what those points I proved you were right about, are, too. Seems kind of vague to me, son. Wanna enlighten us before I correct you again?

          Just interested… how high of a success rate do you have as an attorney? You’re not instilling much in the way of confidence about your analytical and social skills, to me, with all of your ignorant comments and observations, SI. Maybe the ‘other side’ in the litigation welcome your presence, not having to work very hard for their fee?

          They likely look forward to yet another “open and shut case”, every time!

      • Hey “That Smart Guy” –

        I only just realized another way in which cl’s a hypocrite: whines up a storm every time someone points out that he’s full of crap, but doesn’t say a thing about Gideon’s trolling.

        Nice try, but the fact of the matter is that when I think Gideon’s acted out of line, I say so, which means you’ve made yet another false claim.

        You are correct about one thing, however: I’m not a whiny little pissant who cries troll – on anyone. That’s the one with the complex, buddy.

        Also, my concerns about ad hominems and juvenile debating tactics presume pre-existing intelligent discussion that could actually be disrupted, which is not what we have here. You know damn well there’s a difference between say, DD’s blog, and this one.

        • Gideon,

          And, thanks for verifying your true motives, that you’re only interested in being an obnoxious infidel, not a seeker of truth.

          Sad, but true: a mocker indeed!

          Just interested… how high of a success rate do you have as an attorney? You’re not instilling much in the way of confidence about your analytical and social skills, to me, with all of your ignorant comments and observations, SI.

          I’ve said the same thing before. Imagine if SI gave the other attorney’s evidence as scant a read as he gave mine (regarding the video game incident). I shudder to think of the perversions of justice that might ensue.

        • Nice try, but the fact of the matter is that when I think Gideon’s acted out of line, I say so, which means you’ve made yet another false claim.

          Bullshit. If that was the case, you’d have far more comments here than you do, because you’d have to admonish him on every comment he posts. 25 out of 57 so far. You have quite a few comments, but none of them admonish Gideon, and in fact one supports his “mockery”.

          On a side note, I am getting tired of getting sidetracked on these discussions about comments. Since you’ve started commenting here, it seems that we spend more time on these side-derailments than any reasonable discussion of any post. Waste of time.

        • Insect-Boy squeaked:

          “On a side note, I am getting tired of getting sidetracked on these discussions about comments.”

          Translation: “My logic blows, and my servitude to a fat, goofy-looking pseudo-Indian that conveniently deserts me when I need his help, and his sniveling little lackey, really grates on me, and I’m wondering just how GUTLESS they really are?”

          That, SI, and you’re equally as spineless for kow-towing to them in the first place. You know I’m right, even if you won’t admit it.

  9. Ever notice how the text becomes erratic and hard to understand whenever someone gets excited and pissed off – like with TOG, here?

    Hit a nerve, TOGGY? You KNOW what you are, don’t you? And, you HATE it when you’re exposed!

    You’re the troll, here, bozo. Stop trying to pin your label on me. And, quit being such a suck and trying to get everyone to ignore me. Your anger is very apparent, dipshit, you’re letting your guard down.

    Go take a pill.

    • If that was the case, you’d have far more comments here than you do, because you’d have to admonish him on every comment he posts.

      The operative words were when I think Gideon’s out of line. I don’t take what you refer to as “trolling” seriously. I just laugh at it, or ignore it. Like Exterminator, I don’t see why you guys get so uptight unless of course there’s some actual weakness in your belief syst — WHOOPS — in your “lack of a belief system.” Pretty recently, I recall scolding Gideon for some comments he made to jim that I felt crossed the line. It turned out I’d misunderstood Gideon’s context on that particular occasion.

      And yes – here at your blog – I do support Gideon’s mockery. Why? Because now you know what it feels like to have PhillyChief around. Only Gideon’s better; he can actually make a damned good argument when called to.

      On a side note, I am getting tired of getting sidetracked on these discussions about comments.

      Then quit dedicating entire posts to troll-feeding and mockery you dimbulb! Is it really that hard to see in the mirror?

      Since you’ve started commenting here, it seems that we spend more time on these side-derailments than any reasonable discussion of any post. Waste of time.

      That’s what happens when you avoid arguments. I’m more than willing to prove my ability to stay on topic. You have no right to complain about that which you invite. Write something cogent and amenable to a good discussion, and then treat your interlocutors with respect – if that’s what you want. You’re like the kid who got mad because the neighbor kid came over and kicked your ass when you were taunting him.

      • I don’t take what you refer to as “trolling” seriously.

        Good to hear. Hey everybody! cl’s invited us all over to The Warfare is a Mentalist for a little fun. Meet me over there, I’ve be there in a few minutes.

        Only Gideon’s better; he can actually make a damned good argument when called to…

        So what you’re saying is that he’s never been called to make an argument?

        • Good to hear. Hey everybody! cl’s invited us all over to The Warfare is a Mentalist for a little fun. Meet me over there, I’ve be there in a few minutes.

          Go ahead; the last thing I’ll do is whine about it and divert attention away from arguments. Exterminator implied you guys take “trolls” and/or yourselves too seriously. Is he crazy too?

          So what you’re saying is that he’s never been called to make an argument?

          No. I’m saying Gideon can and has made good arguments here, and he can and does make good arguments on his own blog. I’ve not seen TOG do anything of the sort on this blog, nor am I aware that TOG has a blog where he does this. He seems to think this is because I hold some fallacious belief that only the opinions of people with blogs count, but I hold no such opinion. Normally, when I see somebody interjecting vitriol into threads as TOG does, I’ll check out their blog to see what they’re about, to see if maybe what I’m seeing is just an anomaly from an otherwise intelligent and well-informed blogger. TOG, on the other hand, supports his arguments by erroneous and ridiculous claims, then has the nerve to act like he’s some restorer of truth around here. [YARF]

          I’d be willing to bet money (up to $50) that a classification of comments into categories of, “valid argument and/or refutation of erroneous claim” and “whining about cl and/or Gideon” would yield more rows in the latter category if the search criteria were, “TOG’s comments this week”.

          Lastly, I’m saying with the remaining but genuine modicum of respect I have for you that you’re simply out of your mind if you don’t understand why Gideon does what he does. You practically beg him for it. I see Gideon partly as karmic retribution for many of the things you’ve said to me. It’s hilarious. You’ve got a big mouth, and aren’t afraid to use it by cursing and swearing at others, then along comes Gideon with his mirror. The resulting “wriggling” is hilarious. If you really aren’t interested in the sort of things this thread embodies, then don’t ask for it by posting lame jabs like this one.

          All you who say he can’t make an argument are just showing your bias; though he’s left many more here than there, Gideon’s left quality, thoughtful comments at my blog, and he does so on his own, all with a wit and style that is uniquely his. That’s far more than I can say for some.

          Challenge: write a post that actually lays out an argument supporting one or more of your beliefs, or lack of beliefs, or whatever the hell it is you have or don’t have. Let your readers criticize and/or enamor it. Unless given reason to do otherwise, treat every response with equal respect and thoroughness. Actually read any of your commenters’ objections and be sure you understand them. Should agreement fail to ensue, respectfully agree to disagree. Don’t resort to cursing and harsh insult when things go awry.

          Surely, that’s not too much to ask, right?

        • Ha! You weren’t kidding. There’s something you didn’t take into consideration, though: at this blog, trolls get a harsh react, precisely because they disrupt an actual status quo of ideas. Let’s face it: this is a place where you and other atheist sheep graze. The commentary at my blog, on the other hand, is composed almost entirely of dissenters and actual freethinkers. It’s much harder to effectively troll where people don’t react predictably according to party lines.

        • Yo, Insect-Boy…

          I’ve left PLENTY of evidence for my beliefs, and you’ve left nothing but the musings of your idols Dawkins, et al, about their god Darwin’s gibberish. You can’t prove a fucking thing from anything extant in nature – something that can be verified NOW and by sight, not based upon theories of what might have happened zillions of oh-so-convenient years ago.

          You’re not mature or intelligent enough to be an attorney, fool, what are you, REALLY? A pool cleaner?

          The word professional moron comes to mind…

  10. You’re the troll, here, bozo. Stop trying to pin your label on me. And, quit being such a suck and trying to get everyone to ignore me. Your anger is very apparent, dipshit, you’re letting your guard down.

    Ain’t that the truth. TOG’s been commenting here for months, and with the exception of this feeble beginning, I literally have not heard one single attempt at making an argument from the guy. Aside from serving the needed function of cheerleader for Team Scarlet A, all he does is whine about what he doesn’t like.

    TOG,

    Don’t get me wrong; Gideon trolls. I know it, he knows it, we all know it. Yet, Gideon also has a blog where he makes real arguments, and Gideon also makes real arguments here. You – OTOH – don’t share blog posts, nor do you make actual arguments here. You whine & cheerlead – and that’s literally it.

    • Once again, O Grand High Quibbling Equivocator, having a blog is not a required prerequisite for reading and commenting on other blogs. Your whiny, bitchy petulance on that point continues to grate.

      Quite the contrary, what I do here usually consists of disputing erroneous or ridiculous claims. It is completely, 100% valid to do so, and the fact that you call it “whining” and don’t seem to understand it in the least is really rather sad, though not surprising in the least. Disputing erroneous claims is a cornerstone of science and discussion, and your attempts to reframe it as “complaining” and “whining” just shows how far over your head you are. Stop trying to play checkers on the grownups’ chessboards. It’s annoying, it’s depressing, and when you’re sanctimonious about it as you are, it’s insulting.

      • TOG

        Don’t get sucked into cl’s crap. He wants you to get pissed off. He wants you to start second guessing yourself. If you respond in anger, he’ll jump on it, and tell you that your argument ain’t worth shit.

        But does he have a problem with scatological ad hominems? Nope. Not at all. It suits his purpose.

        It’s what he does. He make s bald assertions, presents nothing of value, sounds like he’s a logician, then turns everything around as if you’re the one doing everything he does. When you present an argument, back it up with evidence, he’ll tell you that’s not good enough, then whine, constantly, because you don’t take his anecdotal “evidence” seriously. Ad infinitum.

        But when you get right down to it, he’s about the closest thing to a “True Christian” you’ll find here.

        • Don’t get sucked into cl’s crap. He wants you to get pissed off. He wants you to start second guessing yourself. If you respond in anger, he’ll jump on it, and tell you that your argument ain’t worth shit.

          SI, learn the meanings of the words you use. I don’t reject atheism on behalf of what I consider the genuine character defects in certain atheists here. That would be an ad hominem. If you mean to say that I talk brashly when people come at me, of course. What do you expect?

          It’s what he does. He make s bald assertions, presents nothing of value, sounds like he’s a logician, then turns everything around as if you’re the one doing everything he does.

          Yeah, right. What I really do is make cogent challenges to your arguments, which you then deny until the sun comes up. For example, “You are a waste of time, cl. A big fat black hole of bullshit sucking in everyone who comes into contact with you.”

          Ah, great argument! And this from a grown professional.

          When you present an argument, back it up with evidence, he’ll tell you that’s not good enough, then whine, constantly, because you don’t take his anecdotal “evidence” seriously.

          SI, you don’t present arguments and back them up with evidence. The last post is yet another proof: you claim theists are the bad guys for telling their kids life after death is “THE BIG LIE” yet you yourself said you’d have no problem telling them death is it. Now go and talk about hypocrisy some more.

          And yes, when two normal people are engaged in a debate, it’s a given that each are supposed to take the other seriously. You act like I’m somehow in the wrong for pointing out that you dismiss arguments you don’t even read. You said before that you were intellectually lazy; that is not an insult that I waged against you, just a concession of your own that I wholeheartedly agree with.

          We can have a productive discussion whenever you’re willing to, but we can never have a productive discussion if you’re simply going to dismiss that which you’ve not carefully considered like any other hasty inductor.

      • ..having a blog is not a required prerequisite for reading and commenting on other blogs.

        I didn’t say it was. However, it is required for me to take somebody like yourself seriously – and by “somebody like yourself” I mean somebody who’s probably a pretty cool guy to his buddies and those he approves of, but apparently has real problems accepting that not everybody else in the world shares his particular stripe of opinions. You’re just as much a Fundy as those you decry in that regard TOG, the sooner you swallow it the better.

        My comment was meant to undermine your attacks on Gideon by shining the light back on you: you claim he’s a “troll” – and I think we all know that many of Gideon’s comments are motivated by trolling, which he freely admits to enjoying – but the fact of the matter remains that as far as actual arguments are concerned, he’s got you licked. Every now and again you try to make an argument, then the same old thing happens: you supply a link or five instead doing your own work.

        Speaking of link-monkeys, that’s what you are: I finally found your so-called support for your Judas claim, and just as I thought, it’s not any semblance of a reasoned argument in your own words, just you pointing to some link written by some person who obviously has the same difficulties with induction that you do.

        How about this: if I take the time to actually do work and show why your argument and that of the link you offered fail – on my own blog – will you defend your claim in a reasonable and intelligent discussion with me? By “reasonable and intelligent discussion” I mean one in which neither of us make any references to past arguments, and in which both of us treat each other like they’d treat anyone else they respect. No insults, no BS, just a straight-forward discussion. Ball’s in your court.

        Quite the contrary, what I do here usually consists of disputing erroneous or ridiculous claims.

        Sorry buddy, but that is an erroneous and ridiculous claim, and I’m going to challenge you to supply some evidence in the form of links to erroneous and ridiculous claims you claim to have refuted. What you do here consists mostly of whining about me and Gideon. And the occasional stroking of SI’s ego.

        It is completely, 100% valid to do so,

        I know it’s completely, 100% valid to point out erroneous and ridiculous claims. That’s what got us into it in the first place – me disputing many of your erroneous and ridiculous claims. And, unlike in your case, you already know what I’m talking about. I don’t need to resupply those links.

        Disputing erroneous claims is a cornerstone of science and discussion,

        Again, I agree, but that’s not what you do. You assert personal opinions and apparently elevate that to the level of “disputing erroneous claims” in your own deluded mind.

        Folks, for the record, all this high talk about “disputing erroneous claims” is coming from a guy who has claimed that Joseph Smith never claimed to have received revelation from God; that “outside of creationist attempts to discredit science, there are no such things as macroevolution and microevolution;” and that OBE are “well-understood” among many others. As any college freshman studying biology or religion can hopefully tell you, the first two are patently false claims, and I’ll add that anyone who claims OBE are “well-understood” employs overly-simplistic reasoning at best.

        (cf. here)

        Keep talking, TOG, just keep talking.

        Stop trying to play checkers on the grownups’ chessboards. It’s annoying, it’s depressing, and when you’re sanctimonious about it as you are, it’s insulting.

        Do you even read your own comments?

  11. Oh, also, GHQE:

    “Are you seriously deficient? How on Earth can you actually claim that ‘everyone else is ignoring Gideon’s posts’ completely? THAT’S ALL YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT!”

    Yes, cl, we are talking ABOUT it. However, for the most part, people aren’t actually talking TO that creature. Just like two adults who are talking about their children misbehaving as said children jump up and down on the furniture, running around and screaming and acting like babies, desperate for any sort of attention or validation at all. Eventually, the temper tantrum ends, and the adults start acknowledging the kids again, to attempt to teach them that if you want to be taken seriously you have to act like a grown-up. This, apparently, was never taught to some people, and civilized discourse remains elusive.

    In short: yet again, cl, you are WRONG. Who this surprises is anybody’s guess, but it seems par for the course for me.

    • “In short: yet again, cl, you are WRONG. Who this surprises is anybody’s guess, but it seems par for the course for me.”

      No, widdle boy, being a vindictive, argumentative, controlling, infantile, pussy-assed widdle mama’s boy is par for the course with you.

      The only childish behaviour, here, is being perpetrated by the idjit in you see in the mirror, troll-boy!

      Btw, isn’t Philly wanting his blow-job about now?

      Just sayin…

      😉

      • “Who this surprises is anybody’s guess, but it seems par for the course for me.”

        ATTENTION: All atheists!

        TOG, here, says you’re too stupid to recognize what he’s fantasizing about. Smarten up, hear?

        😆

    • Yes, cl, we are talking ABOUT it. However, for the most part, people aren’t actually talking TO that creature.

      Face it though; you’re a troll-feeder. The weird thing I don’t understand is why you think troll-feeding is morally superior to trolling. If you don’t like Gideon, don’t mention him. It’s that easy. SI obviously likes him; he obviously enjoys taunting him, else he wouldn’t dedicate so much energy to him. If you don’t like it, tough! It’s SI’s blog; he can supplant argumentation with idiocy all he wants. Remember, rational people can see things for what they’re worth.

      Eventually, the temper tantrum ends, and the adults start acknowledging the kids again, to attempt to teach them that if you want to be taken seriously you have to act like a grown-up.

      Hey, take your complainin’ to SI: in your analogy, he’s the parent here.

      In short: yet again, cl, you are WRONG.

      What am I wrong about? That your input here consists mostly of whining about myself and Gideon, along with the occasional stroking of SI’s ego? Are you really going to dispute that and cling to delusions that you’re *actually* “disputing erroneous and ridiculous claims?”

      Let’s see the links to each “erroneous and ridiculous” claim you’ve disputed. I’m a thorough reader of SI’s and I’ve seen no such thing.

  12. No. I’m saying Gideon can and has made good arguments here,

    Sometimes I think you have no sense of humor. That is a stereotypical Christian trait, you know. No True Christian is able to laugh at his religion.

    • cl, notice how when the shoe’s on the other foot, it isn’t funny, anymore?

      Our ‘esteemed’ host doesn’t dare appreciate any other humor than the lowbrow insults his bosses, Philly-No-Willy and Philly’s favorite butt-lick, TOG, provide in their unique Neanderthal way.

      They keep on about how they don’t get evidence for faith, and that’s due, I’m sure, to their limited perceptional abilities. I’m thinking anything beyond their most basic bodily functions, i.e. eating, belching, and farting, are really too much for them to comprehend, before their brain shuts down to rest.

      Kind of like sticking a 5 amp fuse in a 30 amp socket.

      • Philly-No-Willy and Philly’s favorite butt-lick, TOG, provide in their unique Neanderthal way… Kind of like sticking a 5 amp fuse in a 30 amp socket.

        LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!!!!

        See? And they say I have no sense of humor! I just laughed so hard my girlfriend wondered if there wasn’t something wrong with me! And boy, did it feel good!!

        They keep on about how they don’t get evidence for faith

        I know, but when you start to give it to say, SI for example, he’ll resort to mockery, foul language and denial of your argument without actually reading it.

        What I wonder is if these things I’ve just pointed out actually matter to SI and he’s just hiding behind his pride, or if he’s actually really oblivious to the problems.

        • Well, like SI remarked about me, cl, he knows what Philly… I-I mean, what SI wants…

          … and, he’ll tell you so, in spades, too!

          (If Philly says it’s okay)

        • Hey Gideon – speaking of Philly, he’s challenged me to challenge your claim that he censors your comments. While we’re all having fun on a weekday, why don’t you go over there and try to leave a comment right now?

  13. Sometimes I think you have no sense of humor. That is a stereotypical Christian trait, you know. No True Christian is able to laugh at his religion.

    There has to be “humor” to get. I “got” that you intended the “not been called” comment as a humorous jab. It just wasn’t funny, and besides, you and I aren’t on the type of level that I’m willing to “ha-ha joke” with you. I find you to be rude, arrogant and proud.

    And again you speak on that which you don’t know. Anyone who knows me would say the exact opposite – that I tend to not take things seriously enough. How can I not have a sense of humor if I appreciate Gideon’s eloquent mockery of your position?

    Now, this thing’s run it’s course, you’ve made your point, we know you don’t like me and Gideon, now see if you can write a post that doesn’t involve the presentation of opinion as fact, or the mockery of those who believe differently than you, or the number of hits your blog has gotten, as if we care.

    • “Now, this thing’s run it’s course, you’ve made your point, we know you don’t like me and Gideon, now see if you can write a post that doesn’t involve the presentation of opinion as fact, or the mockery of those who believe differently than you, or the number of hits your blog has gotten, as if we care.”

      You just took away his main purpose for blogging, cl. He’ll likely go into a fit of depression, now… if Philly okay’s it, of course.

  14. You just took away his main purpose for blogging, cl.

    My gut feeling is that you’re correct, but anybody can change.

  15. Cephas: (aka. Feces)

    I get tired of repeating myself, Feces. Go back and READ my first comment CAREFULLY. You know, where I deal with that precise question?

    And, as for AVERAGE life-spans, the average is now about 80 years, or so. I personally know people that have exceeded that limit.

    Notice: Any further inane questions concerning what I’ve already touched upon, will be ignored. If you can’t read, you’ve no business being here.

  16. If you can’t read, you’ve no business being here.

    But then the whole blog would have to shut down, because SI himself is in that subset of atheists who either can’t or don’t carefully read their commenters’ objections.

  17. cl “Yet, Gideon also has a blog where he makes real arguments…”
    I assume that this blog of which you speak exists on some parallel bizarro-internet. Unless he’s gone through some radical change of which I am unaware, his blog (like the one before it) is like digging in to a mind salad of paranoia and Tourette’s. Sure, there might be a sweet peanut in there somewhere, but it’s still surrounded by shit.

    …and Gideon also makes real arguments here.”
    Piltdown Man? SCREAMING IN ALL-CAPS? A YEC (if he’s not one, he’s far enough away from reality’s neighbourhood that he might as well be) arguing forcritical analysis of the Bible? Real arguments, sure. Good arguments, not so much.


    And, to be roughly on-topic for a moment, this whole page leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Back in my day, trolls were seen but not replied to, and most certainly didn’t get posts dedicated to feeding them. Granted, my memory isn’t what it once was.

    • Well, if it isn’t the Wiki-wonder, itself! How’s it going, Moody? And, you’re here to… let me guess… talk about ME! 😆

      The only parallel universe, around here, is the one you rode in on the Event Horizon, from. If memory serves me, and it always does, Wiki-world is RIFE with trolls, one of which is here with us, today, in the form of yourself.

      Yes, Piltdown Man, “Chicken”, and a whole set of lame and DESPERATE attempts by CROOKED, UNSCIENTIFIC, asshole humanists to overthrow truth all show the nature and spirit behind Darwinism. Just because you’re too stupid to see that, Mood-swing, doesn’t mean it isn’t so!

      Oh, and as for my all-caps useage, THAT’S FOR EMPHASIS, BOY, I NEVER SCREAM! WHY WOULD I SCREAM AT IDIOTS, THEY’RE HARDLY WORTH MY TIME TO NOTICE?

      Awww, dis page leaves a bad taste in da widdle fella’s mouthy-wouthy, do it? So, get lost, then! No one invited you! If open, uncensored debate disgusts you, go back to that self-appointed censor-ridden Wiki-wallow you came from! Who the fuck needs you here, son?

      Now, go take your turn under Philly’s toga, Moodork, you’ll be #24 in the line, I believe, right behind SI.

      😉

      • “Yes, Piltdown Man, “Chicken”, and a whole set of lame and DESPERATE attempts by CROOKED, UNSCIENTIFIC, asshole humanists to overthrow truth all show the nature and spirit behind Darwinism.”
        Uh huh. Good luck with that.

        “Just because you’re too stupid to see that, Mood-swing, doesn’t mean it isn’t so!”
        That you deny the history in your own genes, doesn’t mean it isn’t so. Ignoring your inner fish doesn’t mean it’s not there.
        My ignorance tends to be accidental. Your ignorance is deliberate.

        “Awww, dis page leaves a bad taste in da widdle fella’s mouthy-wouthy, do it? So, get lost, then! No one invited you!”
        It’s not the conversation that bothers me. It’s the subject.

        “If open, uncensored debate disgusts you, go back to that self-appointed censor-ridden Wiki-wallow you came from!”
        “My” wiki is for humour. You aren’t funny. You’re anti-humour. Trolls are comedy cancer.

        “Now, go take your turn under Philly’s toga, Moodork, you’ll be #24 in the line, I believe, right behind SI.”
        Your talent for reaching for the lowest common denominator, then shooting way past it to plumb new depths of discourtesy, continues to lower the bar on public discourse. Kudos.

  18. As is my practice when dealing with blogs that practice undemocratic censorship through editing, I took a sceenshot of this conversation for reference and display later, should it be required.

    😉

    • Don’t forget to send it to the NY Times. I’m sure they’ll be fascinated.

      In the meantime, you will be censored. I warned you in my comment policy that it might happen. Remember?

      In the future, I’m seriously considering instituting a ban on trolls who post comments for the clear purpose of disruption, with the secondary purpose of stroking their overinflated egos.

      BTW, I think your church wants to revoke your membership for conduct unbecoming of a Christian. Make sure you show them all your screen-shots in your defense.

  19. “Don’t forget to send it to the NY Times. I’m sure they’ll be fascinated.”

    Yeah, I’m sure they will. But, I have other places in mind.

    Go rake your leaves.

Comments are closed.