The Bathroom Wall

With any tavern, one can expect that certain things that get said are out-of-place. But there is one place where almost any saying or scribble can find a home: the bathroom wall. This is where random thoughts and oddments that don’t follow the other entries at the Panda’s Thumb wind up. As with most bathroom walls, expect to sort through a lot of oyster guts before you locate any pearls of wisdom.

43315 Comments

There is a God!

And he is a plumber. The Bathroom has been flushed.

Thank you Reed.

Great!

Course, that still leaves what happens when the new plumbing acquires a big drip…

Wait, what am I saying?

Ingeborg Esbrandt said:

Hey, nice post :) - well, even though I came via Google searching for “justfaces spreadshirt” wondering why this post came up on top??? Greetings xoxo

Spammer alert!

To make one point about the previous thread. John Kwok wrote:

“Sorry Jim, but your invocation of the Ground Zero Mosque controversy is not helpful here. Incidentally there are many Muslims and Muslim Americans who oppose its construction, simply because they recognize that building it near Ground Zero is needlessly offensive to the families of the victims and the survivors of the 9/11 attack. Some of the most prominent critics - who are Muslim Americans - include Wall Street businessman Mansoor Ijaz (who tried to assist the Clinton administration in extraditing Osama bin Laden from the Sudan) and former United States Navy officer Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser.

[…]

If you are going to call Miss USA, a Muslim American, Rima Fakih, a bigot, then be my guest. Same is true for those two prominent Muslim Americans I had mentioned. Or other Muslim Americans who, like them, have spoken out against building the “Cordoba House” Islamic Center (Of course I am also against it, but am definitely not a bigot.).”

Unless YOU are a practicing Muslim your opposition to this cultural center is pure bigotry, so your saying that you’re “definitely not a bigot” is false. Your ruse of hiding behind the Muslim-Americans’ backs is the same as of the racists who think that using the n-word is OK because so many African-Americans use it. If you are a Muslim, well then, I find your views on the issue just silly, not bigoted.

Kris,

You can’t possibly know what I know.

mrg said:

DS said: Kris has certainly demonstrated that he doesn’t deserve anything more.

Actually, I was suggesting we all insult and abuse DH. If he wants to invite it, why not oblige?

We already tried that on Kris. You can only call someone an @$$hole, a bastard and crazy so many times before it gets tiresome. What’s the point of bashing me?

Kris has called me a liar for stating the obvious facts about him. We can all see what he has done, so why would he deny the stunts he has pulled? He is the one who invaded our space to attack the cause of the blog, yet he expects us to be tolerant and respectful of him no matter what he says? There is no law or principle I know that demands any such thing.

Kris said:

What you said about me is a complete lie. I didn’t start the insults and attacks. You and your asshole buddies here did. And trying to con FF with lies about me and that swill about respecting people you and they (“we”) don’t agree with is yet another one of your acts of deliberate dishonesty. You and most others here wouldn’t know what respect is if it hit you like a freight train going 60 miles per hour.

Since the statements you make about me are false, you’re a deliberate liar, according to your own standards for others. Of course your standards for yourself are completely different. How convenient for you.

The ONLY reason you and most others aren’t now viciously attacking FF is because she said she’s a woman. Even then, some of you have been pretty blunt to her, and especially rude before she said she’s a woman, even though she has been nice the whole time.

My questions to her are not an attack or a trap. They are sincere. You are grossly misrepresenting me and are just showing yourself to be the hypocritical, dishonest, delusional liar you are.

You are a seriously fucked up lunatic with delusions of godhood who needs a good ass kicking.

By the way, Mr. theological agnostic, unitarian, universalist, dis-honorable, bushido, liberal, un-scientific pseudo-skeptic, what are you going to add to or subtract from your self-created, self-serving, bogus religion tomorrow?

You just keep piling up your lies and hypocrisy Dale. You said “You do what you like, but I’m done with Kris for good.” yet you’re still bashing me and lying about me.

You also said you respect people with whom you disagree but then you say “I went after him anyway.” when you first saw me here. When I first came here I didn’t say anything that warranted you going after me.

Plus, you said you respect people with whom you disagree but then you say “I’d go after Ann Coulter if that bitch showed up here too.” So much for you respecting people you disagree with.

As usual the things you claim about yourself, and me, are false, which makes you a chronic LIAR, according to your standards for others.

You admit to slamming me a lot but of course you try to make it look like you’re a saint for doing so. Whether you or anyone else here ever accepts it or not, I’m just giving you and others shit back because you and/or they started it, either with me or someone else who didn’t or doesn’t deserve it.

I didn’t escalate the situation. You and your fellow, lying, arrogant hypocrites did.

It really cracks me up to see you guys acting exactly like some of the creationists you hate and condemn so much. You accuse and attack them for not listening and having closed minds, and for playing what you think are ridiculous games, but you do the same thing. Congratulations, you have become your enemy.

FODS

I haven’t lied about anything, you jackass! The simple fact is that you have invaded Panda’s Thumb and have been a disruptive force from the beginning and have played us like suckers. I’m not fooled by you and no one else is. Even if you were insulted by one or two people in the beginning, you could have ignored it and just responded to the ones who were being positive to you, like flowersfriend has been, but instead you started throwing shit at everyone who dared to reject your tactics. We insulted you because that seemed to be what you liked, but I get tired of that after a while. You don’t, appearantly.

If you seriously think you have made ANY positive contributions to this community here, you are even more delusional than most Creationists!

Dale Husband said: What’s the point of bashing me?

None whatsoever, but since any comments to a troll are going to produce nothing but bashing in response, that leads to what the point of the comments was.

John often fails to read for comprehension. A poor highschool education , no doubt.

Ghrom said:

To make one point about the previous thread. John Kwok wrote:

“Sorry Jim, but your invocation of the Ground Zero Mosque controversy is not helpful here. Incidentally there are many Muslims and Muslim Americans who oppose its construction, simply because they recognize that building it near Ground Zero is needlessly offensive to the families of the victims and the survivors of the 9/11 attack. Some of the most prominent critics - who are Muslim Americans - include Wall Street businessman Mansoor Ijaz (who tried to assist the Clinton administration in extraditing Osama bin Laden from the Sudan) and former United States Navy officer Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser.

[…]

If you are going to call Miss USA, a Muslim American, Rima Fakih, a bigot, then be my guest. Same is true for those two prominent Muslim Americans I had mentioned. Or other Muslim Americans who, like them, have spoken out against building the “Cordoba House” Islamic Center (Of course I am also against it, but am definitely not a bigot.).”

Unless YOU are a practicing Muslim your opposition to this cultural center is pure bigotry, so your saying that you’re “definitely not a bigot” is false. Your ruse of hiding behind the Muslim-Americans’ backs is the same as of the racists who think that using the n-word is OK because so many African-Americans use it. If you are a Muslim, well then, I find your views on the issue just silly, not bigoted.

Malchus said: A poor highschool education , no doubt.

Oh Bob, I can hear the howls now: “Set phasers to SLAUGHTER!”

Kris said:

Mike Elzinga said:

With a troll’s profile ready at hand, and with sufficient discipline on the part of the regulars, that could be cut to zero.

Profile ready at hand? What exactly does that mean Mike? Ready for what or whom? Do you have printed profiles of all the people you’ve labeled as trolls and hand them out to passersby on street corners? Or, do you create a profile file in your computer containing your intricate and exhaustive (LMAO!) calculations and determinations about each alleged troll and somehow send a copy of it to everyone on Earth to warn them of impending doom? Or, do you only dispense it to other regulars here who are able to contact you personally and who request a copy because they let you do their thinking for them?

Or, do you just think that your stupid ‘profiles’ actually matter, when in reality they actually don’t? Do you really believe that what happens on this website, or your asinine profiles, or what you do with them, matters one iota to the vast majority of the people on Earth? Get over yourself Mike.

Hey, if you have my profile handy, why don’t you post it here? I could use a good laugh.

Your “profile” is a person who needs attention and does not even try to get it by behaving in any consistent or coherent fashion. You are a manipulative jerk who takes ANY response from others and uses it as an excuse to attack. You bash us for not being tolerant enough of Creationists, while stating Creationist fallacies yourself. Then you turn around and deny being religious and question why certain others who are Creationist take their religion so seriously. Such strange behavior is pathological in the extreme.

Gee, this website seems VERY important to you, considering how much time you spend here.

You are either crazy or a fraud, Kris.

The fun thing about the BW is that the trolls either have to cave in and respond on the BW – which they don’t want to do – or pass up responding – which they REALLY don’t want to do.

Kris said:

Whatever you do, don’t even consider that when people come here and sincerely want to ask, discuss, debate, learn, and/or contribute in some way, that when they’re mercilessly insulted and attacked and erroneously lumped into your hated group of ID/creationists, they just might not like it and may fight back, and especially when they offer reasonable explanations of their words and the explanations (and the person) are ignored, misinterpreted, misrepresented, slammed, bashed, and ridiculed by you and the rest of the mindless haters here. Yeah, don’t even consider that for a second. You and the other haters and bashers here are way too perfect to have to consider such things. It’s never your fault.

Your track record is too well known here for us to consider that you are sincere about anything. You are even WORSE than the average Creationist troll because you keep going back and forth between acting non-religious and acting like a Creationist. You cannot be both, so you must be bullshitting us. Nobody here can take that seriously.

Expressed violent thoughts a number of times?? Yeah Mike, I would thoroughly enjoy kicking your ass and the asses of anyone else who has called me a liar, but I haven’t “expressed violent thoughts a number of times” in the way you’re implying. You’re the one who needs a psychiatrist, along with some others here. If you’re considered sane, I’d rather be considered crazy. And comparing me or anyone else you simply don’t agree with to a serial killer just helps show how paranoid and delusional you are.

If you don’t like being called a liar, stop being one. At least I have ALWAYS told the truth about YOU.

DH, a very minor issue here: the first part you cited above was addressed to me, and personally I find it amusing to watch such comments fall into a hole of resounding silence.

However, as far as the rest goes, carry on.

mrg said:

DH, a very minor issue here: the first part you cited above was addressed to me, and personally I find it amusing to watch such comments fall into a hole of resounding silence.

However, as far as the rest goes, carry on.

Oh, did you want to answer him here first? Be my guest. But I figured I’d just make a note of ANY inappropriate thing Kris says elsewhere and post it here, answer it here, and wait for Kris to take the hint and stop attacking us everywhere else and just slam people here.

Dale Husband said: Oh, did you want to answer him here first? Be my guest.

Why would I want to do that? But if my own rejoinder is indifference, I can at least politely ask that the effect not be spoiled.

Kris threatens: “I would thoroughly enjoy kicking your ass and the asses of anyone else who has called me a liar,…”

Lotsa bluster; everybody’s collective asses are exposed right here.

Mike Elzinga said: … everybody’s collective asses are exposed right here.

AARGH! I am so outa here!

Kris said:

Mike Elzinga said:

mrg said:

Serial killers are maybe a bit much of a comparison.

The point was the sociopathic needs of such an individual. This troll has expressed violent thoughts a number of times. But a psychiatrist would have a better handle on this that I.

I think people like attention; it’s just a question of what kind of attention. When I was the factory contact guy in my corporate life, a colleague in marketing told me that it was true I put up with a lot of abuse – I did – but added: “People thank you sometimes.”

And they did. I get thanks on occasion for my current efforts as well – not often, and maybe thanks aren’t the be-all and end-all of the effort … but on the other side of the coin, if nobody ever thanks me, what reason would I have to honestly believe what I was doing actually did anyone good?

Now take the negative mentalities that show up here … does anyone ever thank them for what they’re doing? It’s obvious it never happens, and just as obvious that they haven’t any expectation that it will.

They still want attention, and lacking any concept that they will ever be praised, they have no alternative but to be disruptive. If one cannot build, then they can only take satisfaction in destruction.

Yeah; you are pointing out common desires that nearly everyone has. But sociopaths also know this and manipulate these.

But I suspect most of us can simply walk away from these kinds of manipulations when we have other things to do that are satisfying; and I suspect most of the moderators here on PT do in fact have other things vying for their attention.

Hell, I’m retired and I can’t get through everything I want to get through in a week. The only reason I even show up here is that the PT topics are often very interesting, and I have a high speed connection that allows me to look in from time to time when I happen to be working on my computer. So most of the time I’m multitasking up a storm when I’m here.

Expressed violent thoughts a number of times?? Yeah Mike, I would thoroughly enjoy kicking your ass and the asses of anyone else who has called me a liar, but I haven’t “expressed violent thoughts a number of times” in the way you’re implying. You’re the one who needs a psychiatrist, along with some others here. If you’re considered sane, I’d rather be considered crazy. And comparing me or anyone else you simply don’t agree with to a serial killer just helps show how paranoid and delusional you are.

Whew! Glad I never called Kris a liar. I only called him a coward and a bully.

Mike Elzinga said: Lotsa bluster; everybody’s collective asses are exposed right here.

So it’s like “one of these days Alice, POW! To the mooning”?

Another collection of Kris’ delusional rants.

Kris said:

And of course your insulting comments, and the insulting comments by the other hypocrites here, don’t violate any of those rules you posted, eh?

Apparently, all that matters here is that any insults have to be aimed at creationists or anyone who doesn’t blindly and viciously attack them right along with you guys/gals.

Giving you back your own shit isn’t allowed. Questioning you isn’t allowed. Having a mind of my own isn’t allowed. Calling you on your bullshit isn’t allowed. Anything less than total devotion and obedience to you and your creationist hating ‘cause’ isn’t allowed. Hypocrisy, by you and your cohorts, is allowed, and encouraged.

Kris said:

And of course you and others going on and on about “trolls”, and repeatedly posting “DNFTT”, isn’t “SPAM”. Yeah, whatever.

Why do you think that a “dissenter” is automatically a “troll”? You’ve said you’re a Christian. Would your Christian God approve of your insulting, hypocritical, hateful behavior?

Kris said:

Maybe, just maybe the moderators are getting wise to the hypocrisy and other bullshit you and others are guilty of.

Now STFU spamming troll.

How do you like your own shit thrown back at you?

Panda’s Thumb is a blog made for defending evolution and promoting proper science education, and since Kris was the one who invaded the blog to spew both Creationist arguments that we were expected to “tolerate” (like we are supposed to tolerate falsehoods?) and then claim to be non-religious at other times, why shouldn’t we regard him as unwelcome, inconsistent and disruptive? Why shouldn’t we treat him like he is the enemy, when that’s all he has ever acted like since he arrived here?

An example of hypocrisy would be us invading and attacking ID promoters on Uncommon Descent. I’ve never done that, and never will. Maybe Kris can go over there and drive the ID people crazy for a while, to prove to us once and for all that he is an equal-opportunity critic, and not a bigoted Creationist concern troll.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/

Kris the creationist wrote:

“If, however, “descent with modification” is defined as showing that speciation (evolution) occurs and/or occurred, then that’s a different ballgame, and requires greater evidence. While a lot of evidence points to a persuasive probability that descent with modification, including divergence/speciation, occurred throughout(?) the history of life, there’s a lot more work to do to before it can reasonably be said that it has been established close to 100%, and I’m not sure it can be reasonably said that it can be established ‘empirically’. Many inferences have been and have to be made, and inferences are a matter of opinion.”

This is of course incorrect. I already posted a link to a web page entitled:

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

If Kris wants to discuss the point, he can do so here. Maybe someone will want to discuss it with him. Unless of course he is just plain chicken shit.

DS said: Kris the creationist wrote:

You might just leave a short bland note on the original thread to invite him to come to the BW for discussion. He’ll ignore it, of course, but that works too.

Yawn.

(Bored.)

All the spamming at The Immune System Cross-examination Still Burns, and other forums, is very unChristlike, don’t you think?

Makes you wonder if these anti-science creation-supporters are Christians? (Never known a real creationist who wasn’t.)

It’s funny how trolls stubbornly resist being prodded to direct their comments to the BW. They know that once they do, they don’t have any real nuisance value any more: “What’s the point of trolling, then?”

Kris huffs and puffs and squeaks “What are you afraid of?” hiding behind his mommy’s apron. Afraid to mix it up on the big kid’s playground, he’ll sit in the sandbox and cry.

Poor widdle Kwis! Mean old scientists call you out on your stupid shit? Maybe if we ignore the little wanker he’ll go back into the closet and play with himself.

Geeze, I’m beginning to miss FL! I tell you, the neighborhood is going to hell.

I knew the asshole was chicken shit. All he haas to do is come here and provide a better explanation for the 29 different independent data sets that are all consistent with common descent. Until he does, I guess he will just be someone who believes in evolution but not in common descent. Yea right.

Everyone should remember, he had his chance to discuss science, he chose to quote mine and insult instead. He can cry all he wants to now, but everyone is wise to his crap.

Over on the front page, Mike Elzinga refers us to a post at William Dembski’s blog titled Disillusion with Fundamentalism. Apparently even Dembski can no longer stomach the people like Flawd.

Over at cjonline, Flawd is still fulminating with hatred for gay marriage. He says

Ministers, you already know what the Bible says. Even the non-Christians know what the Bible says on this one. You already KNOW that the Bible does NOT endorse gay marriage, nor practicing gay ministers. So what are you doing officiating at a gay marriage? What are you, a minister, doing “coming out as gay”?

Desperate people in your hometown are looking to come to YOU for help, and find Biblical guidance (such as John 3:16 and 1 Cor. 10:13) to get themselves saved and healed through the incomparable Jesus Christ, and to overcome all same-sex temptations through His great power. So why sell your soul to the homosexual movement? Don’t you see that it just hurts people – and yourself as well?

Well Flawd, I can answer your desperate plea for help in understanding!

See Flawd, sane people do not care whether others are gay or not. They do not care what you think the bible says. They do not care who other people have sex with.

They DO care about ayatollah wannabes like you, Flawd, trying to tell others who they can have sex with.

That’s simply NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, Flawd. You need to get your hairy snout out of other people’s crotches.

Desperate people in your hometown are looking to come to YOU for help, and find Biblical guidance (such as John 3:16 and 1 Cor. 10:13) to get themselves saved and healed through the incomparable Jesus Christ, and to overcome all same-sex temptations through His great power. So why sell your soul to the homosexual movement? Don’t you see that it just hurts people – and yourself as well?

This is an example of the way FL passes reality through his mental filters and rejects most of it. In one part of this mind, he probably does think that “same-sex temptations” are to be overcome by calling on Jesus. But probably he is also aware, in another compartment, that calling on Jesus to “heal” homosexuality rarely works. For most gays, that treatment only hurts worse, and drives them further away.

FL can actually know the latter and still believe the former. Oh, he’ll come up with anecdotes about people who have been “saved and healed” of their “same-sex temptations” by this means. He may give details of the demons that were cast out, and all. Why, you can find the exorcisms right on Youtube. But even FL has to be aware that such conversions are a drop in the bucket. Call on Jesus all you want, mostly he’s out.

How FL reconciles fact and belief is beyond me. But then again, he doesn’t have to. When confronted with facts that run counter to his beliefs, for FL there’s no need to reconcile at all.

Does anyone know of any studies on why the ancient Israelites were so hung up about sex? There’s circumcision, masturbation, homosexual behavior, menstruation, etc.

Michael Fugate said:

Does anyone know of any studies on why the ancient Israelites were so hung up about sex? There’s circumcision, masturbation, homosexual behavior, menstruation, etc.

Is it possible that some of the impetus was tribalism: simply to set themselves off from surrounding peoples with very different attitudes toward sex?

(Circumcision always seemed to me the weirdest of weird things for a god to demand. If the purpose was to physically mark His People, why a mark that would normally be hidden? Why not a facial tattoo or a cicatrix on the hand or something? And why only men?)

phhht said:

Over on the front page, Mike Elzinga refers us to a post at William Dembski’s blog titled Disillusion with Fundamentalism. Apparently even Dembski can no longer stomach the people like Flawd.

“Fundamentalism, as I’m using it, is not concerned with any doctrinal position, however conservative or traditional. What’s at stake is a harsh, wooden-headed attitude that not only involves knowing one is right, but refuses to listen to, learn from, or understand other Christians, to say nothing of outsiders to the faith. Fundamentalism in this sense is a brain-dead, soul-stifling attitude. I see it as a huge danger for evangelicals.”

Ouch.

phhht said:

Over at cjonline, Flawd is still fulminating with hatred for gay marriage. He says

Ministers, you already know what the Bible says. Even the non-Christians know what the Bible says on this one. You already KNOW that the Bible does NOT endorse gay marriage, nor practicing gay ministers. So what are you doing officiating at a gay marriage? What are you, a minister, doing “coming out as gay”?

Desperate people in your hometown are looking to come to YOU for help, and find Biblical guidance (such as John 3:16 and 1 Cor. 10:13) to get themselves saved and healed through the incomparable Jesus Christ, and to overcome all same-sex temptations through His great power. So why sell your soul to the homosexual movement? Don’t you see that it just hurts people – and yourself as well?

Well Flawd, I can answer your desperate plea for help in understanding!

See Flawd, sane people do not care whether others are gay or not. They do not care what you think the bible says. They do not care who other people have sex with.

They DO care about ayatollah wannabes like you, Flawd, trying to tell others who they can have sex with.

That’s simply NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, Flawd. You need to get your hairy snout out of other people’s crotches.

Actually, that’s a good opening to say hello today. Hope your holiday weekend was okay.

I know you guys don’t keep up with church denomination news (other than the short snips Phhht spoonfeeds you, which may or may not be in context), but in fact I do try to keep up with it, especially the annual conventions/conferences. This month it was the Methodist.

If context matters to you, then read the whole thing. If not, then not.

http://cjonline.com/blog-post/contr[…]wn-long-road

Anyway, I enjoyed reading the previous page about you guys discussing God. Always interesting. Making a note of it.

But for me, mostly just working on DS’s stuff (at least the stuff that relates to my stuff; some of it does not.)

Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

That doesn’t answer everything, obviously but it’s the right way to BEGIN responding to DS (outside of Pandaville).

FL

Fuck off Floyd. I did not volunteer for anything. I am completely uninterested in atheism or the nonexistence of any imaginary gods. I am only interested in one thing, the evolution of the human eye. You claimed it could not evolve, you were wrong.

This was supposed to be my month, remember? You were supposed to answer all my questions. Well you’ve got eight hours left cream puff. Address the references I cited on the evolution of the eye or shut the fuck up. You’ve been ducking and dodging and throwing up smoke screens for three months now. Why is that Floyd? EIther address the relevant issues or admit you were wrong.

You already admitted that the burden of proof is on the one making the assertion. You have made many assertions, you have not provided any evidence to support any of them. You have failed to meet your burden of proof. Until you do, you lose.

FL said: Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

You did. We fisked. You offered no counter-arguments. IIRC those guys were yet another soporific version of the always yawn-inducing “you can’t philosophically prove its impossible” argument.

That doesn’t answer everything, obviously but it’s the right way to BEGIN responding to DS (outside of Pandaville).

Only a theology so destitute of evidence, so barren of support that it makes the Sahara look like the Amazon, would think “my belief is not philosophically impossible” is the right way to begin responding to criticism.

DS said:

Fuck off Floyd. I did not volunteer for anything. I am completely uninterested in atheism or the nonexistence of any imaginary gods.

Way too late to back out now, DS. You are using evolution to attempt to rescue Mr. Phhht’s weak and vulnerable atheist religion of “There Are No Gods.”

But I’m glad you’ve done so, because it is useful to know what to expect in future real-world discussions outside Pandaville. Helping me to get organized, honestly.

Like I said, the correct start-point against both DS and Phhht, appears to be to point out specifically what Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordon said, and put their links on the table.

****

I am only interested in one thing, the evolution of the human eye.

And you are interested in defending atheism, via the alleged (and ultimately false) claim of “evolution of the human eye.”

I’m not interested in your denial of that fact, however.

FL

It is amazing how FL manages to get everything exactly backwards.

eric said:

FL said: Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

You did. We fisked.

I did. You failed.

You offered the usual “Taint-So”, but didn’t actually refute what they said.

And the later Christian statements I provided, (sources other than Corduan-Copan and the atheists Varricella-Gordon), weren’t even challenged, perhaps not even read.

Now you’re not going to agree with my assessment, but that doesn’t worry me. That issue won’t get settled here in Pandaville anyway. The real issue remains what the mixed-company people OUTSIDE Pandaville, the people within various discussion forums, would say when confronted with the anti-atheist problems that have arisen.

So far I’m confident that defending atheism is a VERY tough assignment for you guys, especially in the public marketplace of ideas.

FL

FL said:

eric said:

FL said: Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

You did. We fisked.

I did. You failed.

You offered the usual “Taint-So”, but didn’t actually refute what they said.

And the later Christian statements I provided, (sources other than Corduan-Copan and the atheists Varricella-Gordon), weren’t even challenged, perhaps not even read.

Now you’re not going to agree with my assessment, but that doesn’t worry me. That issue won’t get settled here in Pandaville anyway. The real issue remains what the mixed-company people OUTSIDE Pandaville, the people within various discussion forums, would say when confronted with the anti-atheist problems that have arisen.

So far I’m confident that defending atheism is a VERY tough assignment for you guys, especially in the public marketplace of ideas.

All you gotta do, Floyd old loony, to depart the field in exalted triumph is to show us a god.

But of course you can’t do that. There are no gods.

phhht said:

All you gotta do, Floyd old loony, to depart the field in exalted triumph is to show us a god.

But of course you can’t do that. There are no gods.

Hey, I have a great idea for Floyd: Define “god” in such a way that you CAN show us one. Unambiguously. Empirically. Reproducibly. That will shut phhht up!

For instance (the idea came from Floyd), you could define god as “oatmeal”.

FL’s defense is “whatever the “public” believes is true, is true”. So FL, you are willing to go with that all the way or only when it backs your beliefs?

http://www.pewforum.org/2016/05/12/[…]ay-marriage/

55% of the US population now supports gay marriage and 71% of those born after 1981. Are you on board?

FL said:

DS said:

Fuck off Floyd. I did not volunteer for anything. I am completely uninterested in atheism or the nonexistence of any imaginary gods.

Way too late to back out now, DS. You are using evolution to attempt to rescue Mr. Phhht’s weak and vulnerable atheist religion of “There Are No Gods.”

But I’m glad you’ve done so, because it is useful to know what to expect in future real-world discussions outside Pandaville. Helping me to get organized, honestly.

Like I said, the correct start-point against both DS and Phhht, appears to be to point out specifically what Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordon said, and put their links on the table.

****

I am only interested in one thing, the evolution of the human eye.

And you are interested in defending atheism, via the alleged (and ultimately false) claim of “evolution of the human eye.”

I’m not interested in your denial of that fact, however.

FL

I’m going to say this one more time Floyd, so maybe it will penetrate your thick skull. I don’t care about any gods. I don’t care if they exist or not. I’m not trying to prove anything about any gods. I don’t care. I’m not interested. It doesn’t matter to me.

I have shown that the human eye could have evolved and in fact did evolve. You claimed that it could not. You were wrong. So far you have failed to offer any evidence at all that the human eye could not evolve. You have cited a paper that concluded that it could. You have not presented any other scientific evidence. Until you do, you should consider your baseless assertions refuted.

You can go on blubbering about imaginary gods for another three months, but it isn’t going to do you any good. You are wrong and you will continue to be wrong, unless you can provide some evidence to support your assertion. That is all.

FL said:

phhht said:

Over at cjonline, Flawd is still fulminating with hatred for gay marriage. He says

Ministers, you already know what the Bible says. Even the non-Christians know what the Bible says on this one. You already KNOW that the Bible does NOT endorse gay marriage, nor practicing gay ministers. So what are you doing officiating at a gay marriage? What are you, a minister, doing “coming out as gay”?

Desperate people in your hometown are looking to come to YOU for help, and find Biblical guidance (such as John 3:16 and 1 Cor. 10:13) to get themselves saved and healed through the incomparable Jesus Christ, and to overcome all same-sex temptations through His great power. So why sell your soul to the homosexual movement? Don’t you see that it just hurts people – and yourself as well?

Well Flawd, I can answer your desperate plea for help in understanding!

See Flawd, sane people do not care whether others are gay or not. They do not care what you think the bible says. They do not care who other people have sex with.

They DO care about ayatollah wannabes like you, Flawd, trying to tell others who they can have sex with.

That’s simply NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, Flawd. You need to get your hairy snout out of other people’s crotches.

Actually, that’s a good opening to say hello today. Hope your holiday weekend was okay.

I know you guys don’t keep up with church denomination news (other than the short snips Phhht spoonfeeds you, which may or may not be in context), but in fact I do try to keep up with it, especially the annual conventions/conferences. This month it was the Methodist.

If context matters to you, then read the whole thing. If not, then not.

http://cjonline.com/blog-post/contr[…]wn-long-road

Anyway, I enjoyed reading the previous page about you guys discussing God. Always interesting. Making a note of it.

But for me, mostly just working on DS’s stuff (at least the stuff that relates to my stuff; some of it does not.)

Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

That doesn’t answer everything, obviously but it’s the right way to BEGIN responding to DS (outside of Pandaville).

Poor old incompetent Flawd.

He can no more answer my charges that he is a theothug wannabe with his nose in other people’s panties than he can demonstrate the reality of his gods. He cannot say why he arrogates to himself the right to tell other people who they can have sex with, except that he wants to. That’s because he has no such right. He’s nothing but a socko cripple, made helpless by his religious disorder.

Say Flawd, what did you think about Bill Dembski’s apostasy?

Do you think FL actually believes there were no atheists before 1859? That if evolution were to go away, there would be no basis for unbelief? Does he actually believe Christian apologetics has any uses other than as rhetoric, its sole purpose to persuade not to establish truth?

Tarred with the Epithet Loony: An Intermittent Series

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called on Muslims to reject contraception and have more children. In a speech broadcast live on TV, he said “no Muslim family” should consider birth control or family planning. “We will multiply our descendants,” said Mr Erdogan, who became president in August 2014 after serving as prime minister for 12 years. His AK Party has its roots in Islamism and many of its supporters are conservative Muslims.

In Monday’s speech in Istanbul, the Turkish leader placed the onus on women, particularly on “well-educated future mothers,” to not use birth control and to ensure the continued growth of Turkey’s population.

According to RT News, Erdogan also said that “Nobody can interfere in God’s work. The first duty here belongs to mothers.”

While urging his compatriots to protect the family, the president insisted that “women are not equal to men.” “Our religion [Islam] has defined a position for women: motherhood,” the Guardian cited Erdogan as saying at a summit on justice for women in Istanbul. … “You cannot explain this to feminists because they don’t accept the concept of motherhood,” Erdogan added. Women and men are not equal “because it goes against the laws of nature” and [disregards] differences in their “characters, habits and physiques.” … In December last year, Erdogan dubbed birth control a form of treason threatening the nation’s bloodline. Moreover, he believes any married couple should have at least three children in order to boost the Turkish population.

“For years they committed the treason of birth control in this country, seeking to dry up our bloodline. Lineage is very important both economically and spiritually,” Reuters cited Erdogan as telling a couple after serving as a witness at their wedding.

Friendly Atheist

FL said:

eric said:

FL said: Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

You did. We fisked.

I did. You failed.

You offered the usual “Taint-So”, but didn’t actually refute what they said.

And this shows just how little you actually listen to the people you argue with. Because that is not what anyone says about the “you can’t prove my belief philosophically impossible” argument. What we said was: it is so. What they say ‘tis true. Its just not a warrant for belief because it’s true of practically anything anyone wants to say. Its true of Leprechauns. Its true of Zeus. So it provides exactly the level of warrant for Yahweh that we have for leprechauns and Zeus. Using this argument, we can arrive at the conclusion that belief in Yahweh is as rational as belief in leprechauns. If you find that a conclusion you want all mixed company outside pandaville to know, well…so do I.

Now you’re not going to agree with my assessment, but that doesn’t worry me.

Of course it doesn’t. For something to bother you, you’d actually have to listen and understand what others were saying, rather than arguing with the atheist caricature you have in your head. Given that after pages and page of our commentary you’re not just getting our position wrong, you have almost completely reversed it, no wonder our comments don’t bother you.

That issue won’t get settled here in Pandaville anyway. The real issue remains what the mixed-company people OUTSIDE Pandaville, the people within various discussion forums, would say when confronted with the anti-atheist problems that have arisen.

I agree. That’s why I fully endorse and encourage you to use your “Unsolved Mysteries” proof of God. I also hereby endorse and encourage you to use the “you can’t philosophically rule out my deity” argument everywhere. State it proud, state it loud, FL! Perhaps that is another point of agreement - we both want you to advertise to all the mixed-company outside pandaville that your arguments for God are (1) a miracle cure presented on the TV show Unsolved Mysteries, and (2) the philosophical argument that we can’t rule out the possibility of it existing.

So far I’m confident that defending atheism is a VERY tough assignment for you guys, especially in the public marketplace of ideas.

Yeah, that must be why the ‘nones’ are drastically decreasing in number every year.

eric said:

So far I’m confident that defending atheism is a VERY tough assignment for you guys, especially in the public marketplace of ideas.

Someone should keep score on how many times he goes from triumph (above) to “America’s gone to hell, and God’s going to splatter us you all soon.”

Just Bob said: Someone should keep score on how many times he goes from triumph (above) to “America’s gone to hell, and God’s going to splatter us you all soon.”

Well, both positions could be right at the same time: Chrisitians could be dramatically growing in numbers as atheist arguments fail to convince anyone, and the country could be completely going to hell at the same time. I just don’t think FL would particularly like the implication LOL.

FL said:

Now you’re not going to agree with my assessment, but that doesn’t worry me. That issue won’t get settled here in Pandaville anyway. The real issue remains what the mixed-company people OUTSIDE Pandaville, the people within various discussion forums, would say when confronted with the anti-atheist problems that have arisen.

FL

So let’s review what Floyd has learned about his fallacious arguments:

1) Don’t claim that there is evidence for the existence of god. Nobody is going to be fooled by that.

2) Don’t claim the human eye couldn’t evolve. Nobody is going to be fooled by that.

3) Don’t claim the human eye had to evolve in two hundred years. Nobody is going to be fooled by that.

4) Don’t claim that the supposed inability of the human eye to evolve is evidence for the existence of god. Nobody is going to be fooled by that.

In short, his entire line of reasoning has been defeated and it will be defeated every time he tries to pull it out of his ass and expose it to the light of day. No one at all familiar with the evidence, or basic logic, will be fooled by this bullshit, ever. Might as well just give up now and save yourself the humiliation.

FL said:

eric said:

FL said: Since DS volunteered to help defend Phhht’s claim of atheism, (“There are no Gods”), it’s important to bring in Corduan-Copan-Varricella-Gordonm, all four of them.

You did. We fisked.

I did. You failed.

You offered the usual “Taint-So”, but didn’t actually refute what they said.

And the later Christian statements I provided, (sources other than Corduan-Copan and the atheists Varricella-Gordon), weren’t even challenged, perhaps not even read.

Now you’re not going to agree with my assessment, but that doesn’t worry me. That issue won’t get settled here in Pandaville anyway. The real issue remains what the mixed-company people OUTSIDE Pandaville, the people within various discussion forums, would say when confronted with the anti-atheist problems that have arisen.

So far I’m confident that defending atheism is a VERY tough assignment for you guys, especially in the public marketplace of ideas.

FL

1) Straight lie! Corduan and Coplans argument was logically destroyed. You had no rebuttal apart from “taint so”. Their argument places the burden of proof on the negative claim which is a logical fallacy and leads to logical contradictions. This has been highlight dozens of times. It also contradicts your argument for the eye proving god, where you required that if you can’t prove it, it doesn’t exist/isn’t possible. Two completely contradictory arguments!

2) You highlight again that you aren’t interested in the truth, merely what you can sell to the populace.

So FL, do good Christians use lies and deceit? You have admitted not being interested in the truth and are happy to sell an argument you know is logically incorrect to the populace. Does this make you deceitful?

A little exercise for you FL so you can work out which team you are playing for.

Which of the following are honest and truthful and which are deceitful?

God

Jesus

The Devil

As stated before, you are a gift for atheists and a curse for moderate theists.

Leave a comment

About this Archive

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter