I just cannot see any other possibility.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 17 2008, 03:59 AM)
I just cannot see any other possibility.
QUOTE (gmilam+Jun 17 2008, 04:06 AM)
I can't say about Jeremy and Evans... but dad1 is serious.
http://geocities.com/heddidit/
Well okay, maybe dad1 is real, whew that scares me.
http://geocities.com/heddidit/
Well okay, maybe dad1 is real, whew that scares me.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 17 2008, 02:24 AM)
Well okay, maybe dad1 is real, whew that scares me.
Me too. Do you think dad1's religion should be given equal time in the classroom? (Especially a science class!)
Me too. Do you think dad1's religion should be given equal time in the classroom? (Especially a science class!)
QUOTE (gmilam+Jun 17 2008, 12:13 PM)
Me too. Do you think dad1's religion should be given equal time in the classroom? (Especially a science class!)
You know what? That might not be a bad idea.
Right after Science. Kids are NOT NEARLY as stupid as you think, and I think the suppressed laughter would give them a nice break from their studies. You know how much funnier something is when you are desperately trying NOT to laugh?
You cannot protect people from their own stupidity. STOPPING information flow is bad, ENSURING it is COMPLETE is better. Give the student both sides fairly, then make continued pursuit optional by the students themselves. How many would choose this silliness over science? And of any that actually did, how many of those could you have saved by not telling them in the first place?
Science need not be dictatorial. It is SUPPOSED to stand on its own merit, and modern science is PERFECTLY capable of doing exactly that. You stand the actual information next to this blather, and anyone worth educating can pick the right choice.
You fall into the most common human trap, and the one complained about LOUDEST about religion back then.
What if instead of Inquisition and torture, religion had just argued its case forthrightly and allowed the public to decide, with the scientists doing the same, and both respectfully?
You are just making yourselves into Little Atheist Torquemada's by persecuting his foolishness. If he is unconvinceable, you waste your breath, tend to the people that could benefit from your efforts and do it in a respectful and civil manner.
You know what? That might not be a bad idea.
Right after Science. Kids are NOT NEARLY as stupid as you think, and I think the suppressed laughter would give them a nice break from their studies. You know how much funnier something is when you are desperately trying NOT to laugh?
You cannot protect people from their own stupidity. STOPPING information flow is bad, ENSURING it is COMPLETE is better. Give the student both sides fairly, then make continued pursuit optional by the students themselves. How many would choose this silliness over science? And of any that actually did, how many of those could you have saved by not telling them in the first place?
Science need not be dictatorial. It is SUPPOSED to stand on its own merit, and modern science is PERFECTLY capable of doing exactly that. You stand the actual information next to this blather, and anyone worth educating can pick the right choice.
You fall into the most common human trap, and the one complained about LOUDEST about religion back then.
What if instead of Inquisition and torture, religion had just argued its case forthrightly and allowed the public to decide, with the scientists doing the same, and both respectfully?
You are just making yourselves into Little Atheist Torquemada's by persecuting his foolishness. If he is unconvinceable, you waste your breath, tend to the people that could benefit from your efforts and do it in a respectful and civil manner.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 06:14 AM)
Kids are NOT NEARLY as stupid as you think
Hence why a fair few grow out of the religion their parents put them in.
Hence why a fair few grow out of the religion their parents put them in.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 06:14 AM)
Give the student both sides fairly
So what's the 'other side' to science? Flying Spagehetti Monster? Islam? Or did you mean 'Christianity'?
I once had this discussion with a friend who said "We should teach both sides" and I asked him what the other side was. Without skipping a beat he said "Christianity". I asked which denomination or what about other countries where Christianity is not the provailing view. He said "We shouldn't care about them". Obviously he missed the bit about Christianity telling people to love they neighbour. He doesn't think it counts if your neighbour doesn't hold your views...
I once had this discussion with a friend who said "We should teach both sides" and I asked him what the other side was. Without skipping a beat he said "Christianity". I asked which denomination or what about other countries where Christianity is not the provailing view. He said "We shouldn't care about them". Obviously he missed the bit about Christianity telling people to love they neighbour. He doesn't think it counts if your neighbour doesn't hold your views...
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 06:14 AM)
Science need not be dictatorial. It is SUPPOSED to stand on its own merit, and modern science is PERFECTLY capable of doing exactly that. You stand the actual information next to this blather, and anyone worth educating can pick the right choice.
We have religious education for that. Sure, it doesn't concentrate on Christianity much but that's because there's so many views on 'the other side'.
Ironically, I got the highest mark in my class for my 3rd year RE classes, despite being the least believing in the class.
Ironically, I got the highest mark in my class for my 3rd year RE classes, despite being the least believing in the class.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 06:14 AM)
What if instead of Inquisition and torture
But it didn't. It's easy to play the 'What if' game. What if Jesus had been killed as a children due to an accident or by Herod? Would Christianity still exist? Would we all be living in prevailantly Muslim countries? What if your parents had been Jewish, would you be Jewish?
Hence why a fair few grow out of the religion their parents put them in.
Gee well my idea already works does it not?
So what's the 'other side' to science? Flying Spagehetti Monster? Islam? Or did you mean 'Christianity'?
Trick question, the real question is WHAT IS YOUR SIDE, it is not science but Atheism. In that case, the other side is VOILA christianity and your friend was right.
I once had this discussion with a friend who said "We should teach both sides" and I asked him what the other side was. Without skipping a beat he said "Christianity". I asked which denomination or what about other countries where Christianity is not the provailing view. He said "We shouldn't care about them". Obviously he missed the bit about Christianity telling people to love they neighbour. He doesn't think it counts if your neighbour doesn't hold your views...
We have religious education for that. Sure, it doesn't concentrate on Christianity much but that's because there's so many views on 'the other side'.
But the hidden lie is that your agenda smacks loudly of Atheism. Which IS the other side of christianity, and is treated in US law as EQUIVALENT TO RELIGION.
The first universities were predominantly about religion. Professors were members of the church, attending mass was compulsory. Even now my college's boat club is called 'First and Third'. The second boat team was for priests in training only. Now it no longer exists but the name remains.
Now is that not weird? Religion used to be considered science.
Over the years science became less about maintaining religous doctorine and more about examining the universe without your blinkers on. As our understanding of the universe expanded the old 'scientific' retraints of religion fell away.
Uh...no but thanks for trying. The "enlightenment" and scientific method removed religion completely from hard objective science. But Philosophy and soft science is no more authoritative than religion, and is every bit as subjective. If (as the "religion is stupid" thread displays so well) the anti-religion bias of Atheist scientists left religion INCLUDING ATHEISM and all philosophy out of the classroom, religion would have no place there or in science, and truthfully, most of the religious attacks would stop.
The truth is that Atheists try to use Science, the education system and the Legal System as a battering ram against religion. That is really what this is, Atheists hiding behind a banner of science.
Evolution DOES NOT CARE whether or not there is a God or intelligent designer. Atheists do.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 06:14 AM)
nd allowed the public to decide, with the scientists doing the same, and both respectfully?
They did. For instance, my old college in university was set up specifically to train members of the priesthood. Hence it's name 'Trinity'. You couldn't be a member of college for it's first few hundred years unless you were a member of the church. Even in the 1800s you had to go to Church every week, you didn't have a choice. Maxwell, of electromagnetic fame, after being told he had to attend churct at 6am said "I think I can stay up that late".
The first universities were predominantly about religion. Professors were members of the church, attending mass was compulsory. Even now my college's boat club is called 'First and Third'. The second boat team was for priests in training only. Now it no longer exists but the name remains.
Over the years science became less about maintaining religous doctorine and more about examining the universe without your blinkers on. As our understanding of the universe expanded the old 'scientific' retraints of religion fell away.
The first universities were predominantly about religion. Professors were members of the church, attending mass was compulsory. Even now my college's boat club is called 'First and Third'. The second boat team was for priests in training only. Now it no longer exists but the name remains.
Over the years science became less about maintaining religous doctorine and more about examining the universe without your blinkers on. As our understanding of the universe expanded the old 'scientific' retraints of religion fell away.
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Jun 18 2008, 06:00 AM)
Hence why a fair few grow out of the religion their parents put them in.
Gee well my idea already works does it not?
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Jun 18 2008, 06:00 AM)
So what's the 'other side' to science? Flying Spagehetti Monster? Islam? Or did you mean 'Christianity'?
Trick question, the real question is WHAT IS YOUR SIDE, it is not science but Atheism. In that case, the other side is VOILA christianity and your friend was right.
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Jun 18 2008, 06:00 AM)
I once had this discussion with a friend who said "We should teach both sides" and I asked him what the other side was. Without skipping a beat he said "Christianity". I asked which denomination or what about other countries where Christianity is not the provailing view. He said "We shouldn't care about them". Obviously he missed the bit about Christianity telling people to love they neighbour. He doesn't think it counts if your neighbour doesn't hold your views...
We have religious education for that. Sure, it doesn't concentrate on Christianity much but that's because there's so many views on 'the other side'.
But the hidden lie is that your agenda smacks loudly of Atheism. Which IS the other side of christianity, and is treated in US law as EQUIVALENT TO RELIGION.
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Jun 18 2008, 06:00 AM)
The first universities were predominantly about religion. Professors were members of the church, attending mass was compulsory. Even now my college's boat club is called 'First and Third'. The second boat team was for priests in training only. Now it no longer exists but the name remains.
Now is that not weird? Religion used to be considered science.
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Jun 18 2008, 06:00 AM)
Over the years science became less about maintaining religous doctorine and more about examining the universe without your blinkers on. As our understanding of the universe expanded the old 'scientific' retraints of religion fell away.
Uh...no but thanks for trying. The "enlightenment" and scientific method removed religion completely from hard objective science. But Philosophy and soft science is no more authoritative than religion, and is every bit as subjective. If (as the "religion is stupid" thread displays so well) the anti-religion bias of Atheist scientists left religion INCLUDING ATHEISM and all philosophy out of the classroom, religion would have no place there or in science, and truthfully, most of the religious attacks would stop.
The truth is that Atheists try to use Science, the education system and the Legal System as a battering ram against religion. That is really what this is, Atheists hiding behind a banner of science.
Evolution DOES NOT CARE whether or not there is a God or intelligent designer. Atheists do.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 04:29 AM)
Trick question, the real question is WHAT IS YOUR SIDE, it is not science but Atheism. In that case, the other side is VOILA christianity and your friend was right.
Bullshit. Islam, Judaism, Baha'i, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc, these are all as equally valid as Christianity.
This is exactly the point AlphaNumeric was making, and you failed to see it.
Trying to claim that Christianity is the only alternative to atheism is an incredibly arrogant and self-centered attitude to have, as it is patently false.
Bullshit. Islam, Judaism, Baha'i, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc, these are all as equally valid as Christianity.
This is exactly the point AlphaNumeric was making, and you failed to see it.
Trying to claim that Christianity is the only alternative to atheism is an incredibly arrogant and self-centered attitude to have, as it is patently false.
QUOTE (deadbeat+)
Evolution DOES NOT CARE whether or not there is a God or intelligent designer. Atheists do.
You're absolutely right, so stop bring up god as an argument against evolution.
You're absolutely right, so stop bring up god as an argument against evolution.
Whoa settle down a bit, perhaps I was not clear enough...
Bullshit. Islam, Judaism, Baha'i, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc, these are all as equally valid as Christianity.
Totally agree, did not mean to imply christianity was in any way the only or even best choice.
This is exactly the point AlphaNumeric was making, and you failed to see it.
You misunderstand me, mistaking ATHEISM as critical to science is just as wrong as mistaking religion as part of or needed for it.
Trying to claim that Christianity is the only alternative to atheism is an incredibly arrogant and self-centered attitude to have, as it is patently false.
Again, not my intention and you are right.
QUOTE (Dabeer+Jun 18 2008, 11:13 AM)
Bullshit. Islam, Judaism, Baha'i, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc, these are all as equally valid as Christianity.
Totally agree, did not mean to imply christianity was in any way the only or even best choice.
QUOTE (Dabeer+Jun 18 2008, 11:13 AM)
This is exactly the point AlphaNumeric was making, and you failed to see it.
You misunderstand me, mistaking ATHEISM as critical to science is just as wrong as mistaking religion as part of or needed for it.
QUOTE (Dabeer+Jun 18 2008, 11:13 AM)
Trying to claim that Christianity is the only alternative to atheism is an incredibly arrogant and self-centered attitude to have, as it is patently false.
Again, not my intention and you are right.
QUOTE (Dabeer+Jun 18 2008, 11:13 AM)
QUOTE (deadbeat+)
Evolution DOES NOT CARE whether or not there is a God or intelligent designer. Atheists do.
You're absolutely right, so stop bring up god as an argument against evolution.
I fully accept Evolution, and I reject ID and creationism.
SCIENCE, real objective HARD science amenable to scientific method should have NOTHING to do with ANY religion, philosophy or subjective concern.
The point I was trying to make is that objective SCIENCE also has nothing to do with ATHEISM or religion or philosophy of any kind.
I just complain about lumping ALL religion in with the nutty fuindies who think the earth is 6000 years old. It is only some of them, many mainstream religions fully accept hard science. Catholicism does, but it also does not restrict belief in creationism either. So you can be on either side and the church does not discriminate nor support either. But the Catholics I know are all smarter than that (in my opinion).
I apologize if I sounded like a fundie, that was certainly not my intention.
You're absolutely right, so stop bring up god as an argument against evolution.
I fully accept Evolution, and I reject ID and creationism.
SCIENCE, real objective HARD science amenable to scientific method should have NOTHING to do with ANY religion, philosophy or subjective concern.
The point I was trying to make is that objective SCIENCE also has nothing to do with ATHEISM or religion or philosophy of any kind.
I just complain about lumping ALL religion in with the nutty fuindies who think the earth is 6000 years old. It is only some of them, many mainstream religions fully accept hard science. Catholicism does, but it also does not restrict belief in creationism either. So you can be on either side and the church does not discriminate nor support either. But the Catholics I know are all smarter than that (in my opinion).
I apologize if I sounded like a fundie, that was certainly not my intention.
QUOTE (Dabeer+)
Bullshit. Islam, Judaism, Baha'i, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc, these are all as equally valid as Christianity.
And also but not nessarsarily all the religions mentioned but you will find that many are atheists towards each others Religions.. This is the hypocrisy of someone who proclaims that there religion is the only true way or whatever and still maintains a prejudice towards atheism.
And also but not nessarsarily all the religions mentioned but you will find that many are atheists towards each others Religions.. This is the hypocrisy of someone who proclaims that there religion is the only true way or whatever and still maintains a prejudice towards atheism.
QUOTE (deadbeat+Jun 18 2008, 12:14 AM)
Kids are NOT NEARLY as stupid as you think
Did I say kids are stupid?
That's a good piece of advice. I believe Jesus said it with a nice twist of sarcasm. "Do not throw your pearls to pigs." With that I bid you adieu.
Oh wait.. one more thing. On the respectful note... you may want to read the passage just before the one above. It also has a nice touch of sarcasm to it. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"
Did I say kids are stupid?
QUOTE
If he is unconvinceable, you waste your breath, tend to the people that could benefit from your efforts and do it in a respectful and civil manner.
That's a good piece of advice. I believe Jesus said it with a nice twist of sarcasm. "Do not throw your pearls to pigs." With that I bid you adieu.
Oh wait.. one more thing. On the respectful note... you may want to read the passage just before the one above. It also has a nice touch of sarcasm to it. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"
How does a blind man see how blind he is?
For give them Jerryme Fissure, 4 they no not wat they speeewwww.
So what are you doing posting on a science forum?
And another political problem with that is the fact that rpenner, someone who is apparently respected 'round here, has a bible quote as his signature! How are we to reconcile this?
g.
For give them Jerryme Fissure, 4 they no not wat they speeewwww.
QUOTE
SCIENCE, real objective HARD science amenable to scientific method should have NOTHING to do with ANY religion, philosophy or subjective concern.
So what are you doing posting on a science forum?
And another political problem with that is the fact that rpenner, someone who is apparently respected 'round here, has a bible quote as his signature! How are we to reconcile this?
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jun 18 2008, 02:57 PM)
And another political problem with that is the fact that rpenner, someone who is apparently respected 'round here, has a bible quote as his signature! How are we to reconcile this?
g.
Perhaps police departments should develop “Thought Squads” to arrest those with unpopular beliefs.
g.
Perhaps police departments should develop “Thought Squads” to arrest those with unpopular beliefs.
QUOTE (Derek1148+Jun 18 2008, 07:12 AM)
Perhaps police departments should develop “Thought Squads” to arrest those with unpopular beliefs.
Perhaps, Derek. This is why the new age of liberalism needs people like you, to stop it going out of control!
When I am ruler of the world, I'll put you in charge of the thought squad, ok? I'm gonna need some stooge for the zombies to shoot at!
Anyway, don't they already have those?
g.
Perhaps, Derek. This is why the new age of liberalism needs people like you, to stop it going out of control!
When I am ruler of the world, I'll put you in charge of the thought squad, ok? I'm gonna need some stooge for the zombies to shoot at!
Anyway, don't they already have those?
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jun 18 2008, 06:33 PM)
When I am ruler of the world, I'll put you in charge of the thought squad, ok? I'm gonna need some stooge for the zombies to shoot at!
g.
Dammit Gorgeous,
Now you’re making it personal.
g.
Dammit Gorgeous,
Now you’re making it personal.
QUOTE (Derek1148+Jun 18 2008, 07:47 AM)
Dammit Gorgeous,
Now you’re making it personal.
I thougt you were offering to help!
g.
Now you’re making it personal.
I thougt you were offering to help!
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jun 18 2008, 06:49 PM)
I thougt you were offering to help!
g.
Always willing to protect and serve. Do battle with the forces of evil.
g.
Always willing to protect and serve. Do battle with the forces of evil.
QUOTE (Derek1148+Jun 18 2008, 07:50 AM)
Always willing to protect and serve. Do battle with the forces of evil.
Quite right too!
g.
Quite right too!
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jun 18 2008, 01:49 PM)
I thougt you were offering to help!
g.
I hope that's not an unpopular thought....
(Ooh! I hope THAT's not an unpopular thought! )
g.
I hope that's not an unpopular thought....
(Ooh! I hope THAT's not an unpopular thought!
)QUOTE (gmilam+Jun 18 2008, 07:59 AM)
I hope that's not an unpopular thought....
(Ooh! I hope THAT's not an unpopular thought! )
Hey Derek, stop using words like 'dammit', there might be youngsters reading!
In fact, I think I will have to edit out all of the offensive parts of your last post...
dudbat, that isn't what you have said in other threads. Perhaps you are just exercising the perogative of the religious; hypocrisy.
Physfan
(Ooh! I hope THAT's not an unpopular thought!
) Hey Derek, stop using words like 'dammit', there might be youngsters reading!
In fact, I think I will have to edit out all of the offensive parts of your last post...
QUOTE (delboy+)
Always willing to and. Do with the of.
...there, that's better.
g.
...there, that's better.
g.
My first knowledge of Jeremy Fisher and Evans was when they gave me 'negs' - from this I'd guess they're both members of fivedoughnut's flock of hilarious sockpuppets.
QUOTE (Confused2+Jun 18 2008, 09:36 AM)
My first knowledge of Jeremy Fisher and Evans was when they gave me 'negs' - from this I'd guess they're both members of fivedoughnut's flock of hilarious sockpuppets.
Are you sure it's a 'flock', and not a School of fish-ers?
Don't worry, eventually everyone will die of old age, and there will just be you and me left.
g.
Are you sure it's a 'flock', and not a School of fish-ers?
Don't worry, eventually everyone will die of old age, and there will just be you and me left.
g.
QUOTE (Confused2+Jun 18 2008, 08:36 PM)
My first knowledge of Jeremy Fisher and Evans was when they gave me 'negs' - from this I'd guess they're both members of fivedoughnut's flock of hilarious sockpuppets.
Hey Confused2,
In defense of Evans and Jeremy Fisher, who gives a damn? My only point to them (him) was they (he) could be more effective in baiting people if they (he) appeared intelligent. Intelligent fanaticism is threatening to some people.
Hey Confused2,
In defense of Evans and Jeremy Fisher, who gives a damn? My only point to them (him) was they (he) could be more effective in baiting people if they (he) appeared intelligent. Intelligent fanaticism is threatening to some people.
QUOTE (Derek1148+)
Intelligent fanaticism is threatening to some people.
I seem to have missed out on the competitive gene thing .. does that make intelligent fanaticism a good thing or a bad thing .. or does it just depend on where you are standing at the time? Me, I just kinda stand where I stand .. what and why the others do what they do is a bit of a mystery to me.
-C2.
I seem to have missed out on the competitive gene thing .. does that make intelligent fanaticism a good thing or a bad thing .. or does it just depend on where you are standing at the time? Me, I just kinda stand where I stand .. what and why the others do what they do is a bit of a mystery to me.
-C2.
QUOTE (Confused2+Jun 18 2008, 09:59 PM)
.. does that make intelligent fanaticism a good thing or a bad thing ..
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -
Barry Goldwater
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -
Barry Goldwater
QUOTE (Derek1148+Jun 18 2008, 11:10 AM)
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -
Barry Goldwater
'ello, 'ello, 'ello... the thought police are at it again!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5LeLAELIxKY
g.
Barry Goldwater
'ello, 'ello, 'ello... the thought police are at it again!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5LeLAELIxKY
g.
If we accept that the lunatics have indeed taken over the asylum then (of course) we must find a Wellington for every Napoleon. I had rather hoped things hadn't quite reached that stage .. have I missed something?
QUOTE
Totally agree, did not mean to imply christianity was in any way the only or even best choice.
dudbat, that isn't what you have said in other threads. Perhaps you are just exercising the perogative of the religious; hypocrisy.
Physfan
QUOTE (Confused2+Jun 19 2008, 09:59 AM)
QUOTE (Derek1148+)
Intelligent fanaticism is threatening to some people.
I seem to have missed out on the Intelligent gene thing ..
Agreed
I seem to have missed out on the Intelligent gene thing ..
Agreed
QUOTE (Confused2+Jun 18 2008, 11:09 PM)
have I missed something?
Obviously having extreme problems locating its brain again.
Obviously having extreme problems locating its brain again.
QUOTE (Confused2+)
My first knowledge of Jeremy Fisher and Evans was when they gave me 'negs' - from this I'd guess they're both members of fivedoughnut's flock of hilarious sockpuppets.
Confused2: Bullseye! Here's fivedoughnut's confession:
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....65&p=2704#p2704
Ironically, fivedoughnut once told me that his username means "helper of retards". There must be some truth to that. After all, quite a number of "retards" have not only argued with these ficticious accounts, due to their lack of discernment, but some have gone so far as to leave them negative feedback. Better yet, some have even gone so far as to post their comments on FSTDT. [sarcasm]No need to worry, though...With all the "scientific integrity" and "morals" that these *AHEM* "intellectual superiors" possess, I'm quite sure that they'll admit their errors and post a retraction/an apology on the FSTDT site. It's comforting to have so many people that aren't easily duped like those dreaded creationists around me. I'm almost tempted to join their ranks.[/sarcasm] Well, I'm afraid that "the patients"(a.k.a. "the rational scientists) truly are running the asylum. Can't honestly say that I'm surprised. Well done, fivedoughnut!
P.S. Evans is actually a sockpuppet of Alpha's and so is <Max>.
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....97&p=1783#p1783
P.P.S. Fivedoughnut & Alpha...thanks for all of your negative feedback under your various usernames. I'm genuinely pleased that cowardly idiots like you view me as an idiot. Should I be expecting some from Fred A. Wolf anytime soon? Seems like you duped that other genius, Gorgeous, with that one. Once again, WELL DONE!
Confused2: Bullseye! Here's fivedoughnut's confession:
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....65&p=2704#p2704
Ironically, fivedoughnut once told me that his username means "helper of retards". There must be some truth to that. After all, quite a number of "retards" have not only argued with these ficticious accounts, due to their lack of discernment, but some have gone so far as to leave them negative feedback. Better yet, some have even gone so far as to post their comments on FSTDT. [sarcasm]No need to worry, though...With all the "scientific integrity" and "morals" that these *AHEM* "intellectual superiors" possess, I'm quite sure that they'll admit their errors and post a retraction/an apology on the FSTDT site. It's comforting to have so many people that aren't easily duped like those dreaded creationists around me. I'm almost tempted to join their ranks.[/sarcasm] Well, I'm afraid that "the patients"(a.k.a. "the rational scientists) truly are running the asylum. Can't honestly say that I'm surprised. Well done, fivedoughnut!
P.S. Evans is actually a sockpuppet of Alpha's and so is <Max>.
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....97&p=1783#p1783
P.P.S. Fivedoughnut & Alpha...thanks for all of your negative feedback under your various usernames. I'm genuinely pleased that cowardly idiots like you view me as an idiot. Should I be expecting some from Fred A. Wolf anytime soon? Seems like you duped that other genius, Gorgeous, with that one. Once again, WELL DONE!
creationists should feel bad about Jeremy and Evans because the arguments and statements put forward by the two so closely resemble creationist arguments. The people who argued shouldn't feel bad at all, I don't know why you fundies keep trying to make this into some sort of victory for your side when it so clearly serves to illustrate the absurdity of your ideas.
DuzmA: Actually, it "clearly illustrates " the ridiculous lengths that lying, evolutionist-duping(you're the ones who were duped) idiots will go to in order to attempt to make creationists look stupid. Doesn't surprise me in the least that you support such tactics.
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 01:15 PM)
thanks for all of your negative feedback under your various usernames.
Anytime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Ham
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_hovind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creationist_museums
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
Quotes by real creationists:
http://fstdt.com/fundies/latestcomments.aspx?archive=1
And now tell me Mr Thicky, how did we make creationists look stupid?
Anytime.
QUOTE
...to attempt to make creationists look stupid...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Ham
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_hovind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creationist_museums
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
Quotes by real creationists:
http://fstdt.com/fundies/latestcomments.aspx?archive=1
And now tell me Mr Thicky, how did we make creationists look stupid?
QUOTE (<Max>'s signature+)
Comments from FSTDT:
"This ignorant, deluded, pompous asshoIe Evans is really starting to make a name for himself here on FSTDT, isn't he?"
"Evans looks to be quickly becoming a gold mine of Fundy stupidity. "
<Max>: Actually, "the ignorant, deluded, pompous @ssholes", to use your words, would be those who believed the ficticious statements that you posted under this sockpuppet account. Like I said, WELL DONE!
"This ignorant, deluded, pompous asshoIe Evans is really starting to make a name for himself here on FSTDT, isn't he?"
"Evans looks to be quickly becoming a gold mine of Fundy stupidity. "
<Max>: Actually, "the ignorant, deluded, pompous @ssholes", to use your words, would be those who believed the ficticious statements that you posted under this sockpuppet account. Like I said, WELL DONE!
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 03:10 PM)
Actually, "the ignorant, deluded, pompous @ssholes", to use your words, would be those who believed the ficticious statements that you posted under this sockpuppet account.
Poe's law, jackass.
Poe's law, jackass.
QUOTE (<Max>+)
Poe's law, jackass.
<Max>: YOU are calling me a "jackass"? Let's see now:
YOU got banned from this forum...
YOU, being the infantile imbecile that you obviously are, have come back under different sockpuppet accounts...
YOU managed to dupe the "intellectually superior" atheists on this forum and elsewhere...
And I am the "jackass"? You might want to reconsider that, but I trust that you won't.
Have a nice day, won't you?
Back to my vacation...
<Max>: YOU are calling me a "jackass"? Let's see now:
YOU got banned from this forum...
YOU, being the infantile imbecile that you obviously are, have come back under different sockpuppet accounts...
YOU managed to dupe the "intellectually superior" atheists on this forum and elsewhere...
And I am the "jackass"? You might want to reconsider that, but I trust that you won't.
Have a nice day, won't you?
Back to my vacation...
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 01:15 PM)
QUOTE (Confused2+)
My first knowledge of Jeremy Fisher and Evans was when they gave me 'negs' - from this I'd guess they're both members of fivedoughnut's flock of hilarious sockpuppets.
Confused2: Bullseye! Here's fivedoughnut's confession:
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....65&p=2704#p2704
Ironically, fivedoughnut once told me that his username means "helper of retards". There must be some truth to that. After all, quite a number of "retards" have not only argued with these ficticious accounts, due to their lack of discernment, but some have gone so far as to leave them negative feedback. Better yet, some have even gone so far as to post their comments on FSTDT. [sarcasm]No need to worry, though...With all the "scientific integrity" and "morals" that these *AHEM* "intellectual superiors" possess, I'm quite sure that they'll admit their errors and post a retraction/an apology on the FSTDT site. It's comforting to have so many people that aren't easily duped like those dreaded creationists around me. I'm almost tempted to join their ranks.[/sarcasm] Well, I'm afraid that "the patients"(a.k.a. "the rational scientists) truly are running the asylum. Can't honestly say that I'm surprised. Well done, fivedoughnut!
P.S. Evans is actually a sockpuppet of Alpha's and so is <Max>.
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....97&p=1783#p1783
P.P.S. Fivedoughnut & Alpha...thanks for all of your negative feedback under your various usernames. I'm genuinely pleased that cowardly idiots like you view me as an idiot. Should I be expecting some from Fred A. Wolf anytime soon? Seems like you duped that other genius, Gorgeous, with that one. Once again, WELL DONE!
Extremely well done newguy
With only 51 search engines, 18 months and a complete fukkbrain you've just now actually managed to discover stuff which is so ridiculously unconcealed it's got 27kw neon lamps on it.
Excellent achievement for a Jesus's cocksucking idiot - and I mean that most sincerely.
Me and max forecast dad1 will cotton-on in around 40 trillion years, as he sucks harder than even you - much to Christ's pleasure.
If you had any intelligence whatsoever, then you would realize that by not only using Dr. Wolf's name, but also "Dr. Quantum" which is associated with his name, those who search under these names on a search engine will now read your drivel and most probably associate it with him. Anyhow, like I said, I emailed Dr. Wolf earlier...we'll see how he reponds...I doubt it will be favorably. I see that you've added your "disclaimer" as your signature...I still doubt that he'll view it favorably.
- couldn't heal his horrendously damaged brain though.
What brain?
Confused2: Bullseye! Here's fivedoughnut's confession:
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....65&p=2704#p2704
Ironically, fivedoughnut once told me that his username means "helper of retards". There must be some truth to that. After all, quite a number of "retards" have not only argued with these ficticious accounts, due to their lack of discernment, but some have gone so far as to leave them negative feedback. Better yet, some have even gone so far as to post their comments on FSTDT. [sarcasm]No need to worry, though...With all the "scientific integrity" and "morals" that these *AHEM* "intellectual superiors" possess, I'm quite sure that they'll admit their errors and post a retraction/an apology on the FSTDT site. It's comforting to have so many people that aren't easily duped like those dreaded creationists around me. I'm almost tempted to join their ranks.[/sarcasm] Well, I'm afraid that "the patients"(a.k.a. "the rational scientists) truly are running the asylum. Can't honestly say that I'm surprised. Well done, fivedoughnut!
P.S. Evans is actually a sockpuppet of Alpha's and so is <Max>.
http://saposjoint.cjb.net/Forum/viewtopic....97&p=1783#p1783
P.P.S. Fivedoughnut & Alpha...thanks for all of your negative feedback under your various usernames. I'm genuinely pleased that cowardly idiots like you view me as an idiot. Should I be expecting some from Fred A. Wolf anytime soon? Seems like you duped that other genius, Gorgeous, with that one. Once again, WELL DONE!
Extremely well done newguy
With only 51 search engines, 18 months and a complete fukkbrain you've just now actually managed to discover stuff which is so ridiculously unconcealed it's got 27kw neon lamps on it.
Excellent achievement for a Jesus's cocksucking idiot - and I mean that most sincerely.
Me and max forecast dad1 will cotton-on in around 40 trillion years, as he sucks harder than even you - much to Christ's pleasure.
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 03:36 PM)
And I am the "jackass"
Not quite, more a cocksucking version.
Not quite, more a cocksucking version.
So the fact that I'm an evolutionist makes me a con artist. I thought Evans and Jeremy were humerous. I never go out of my way to make creationists look stupid.
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 03:36 PM)
And I am the "jackass"?
Yes. You got it right this time.
I repeat once again, they reacted to Evans' posts the same way they react to other creationist's posts because due to the nature of Poe's law, Evans is indistinguishable from a real creationist. Should I rephrase my post with smaller words or you got the picture?
Yes. You got it right this time.
QUOTE
YOU managed to dupe the "intellectually superior" atheists on this forum and elsewhere...
I repeat once again, they reacted to Evans' posts the same way they react to other creationist's posts because due to the nature of Poe's law, Evans is indistinguishable from a real creationist. Should I rephrase my post with smaller words or you got the picture?
QUOTE (DuzmA+Jun 22 2008, 03:41 PM)
So the fact that I'm an evolutionist makes me a con artist. I thought Evans and Jeremy were humerous. I never go out of my way to make creationists look stupid.
Quite so DuzmA - however it's sheer joy giving them a taste of their own fukked-up medicine.
Quite so DuzmA - however it's sheer joy giving them a taste of their own fukked-up medicine.
QUOTE (Delia+)
With only 51 search engines, 18 months and a complete fukkbrain you've just now actually managed to discover stuff which is so ridiculously unconcealed it's got 27kw neon lamps on it.
Delia/onedoughnuttoomany: Once again, I'm not the one who was duped...that would be the "intellectually superior" atheists. Gets you "right there", doesn't it? Additionally, when you've finished "playing with yourself" with this sockpuppet, you might want to throw away your other sockpuppet, Dr Fred A Wolf. I emailed him a little while ago and informed him of what's taking place here in his name. Oh, by the way, in regards to your "helper of retards" moniker...
I'd just like to remind you, as I did once before, that charity begins at home.(Would somebody please explain that to him?)
In the words of dad1(your intellectual superior, even though he's an idiot):
"Work on that!"
Have a nice day living a "fantasy life", won't you? I bet you will.
Delia/onedoughnuttoomany: Once again, I'm not the one who was duped...that would be the "intellectually superior" atheists. Gets you "right there", doesn't it? Additionally, when you've finished "playing with yourself" with this sockpuppet, you might want to throw away your other sockpuppet, Dr Fred A Wolf. I emailed him a little while ago and informed him of what's taking place here in his name. Oh, by the way, in regards to your "helper of retards" moniker...
I'd just like to remind you, as I did once before, that charity begins at home.(Would somebody please explain that to him?)
In the words of dad1(your intellectual superior, even though he's an idiot):
"Work on that!"
Have a nice day living a "fantasy life", won't you? I bet you will.
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 03:52 PM)
you might want to throw away your other sockpuppet, Dr Fred A Wolf. I emailed him a little while ago and informed him of what's taking place here in his name.
spewguy,
wee al relly fink yuor a stoopid wankher - comprehend now?
(feelingfully converted to religious idiot syntax)
wee al relly fink yuor a stoopid wankher -
comprehend now? (feelingfully converted to religious idiot syntax)
QUOTE
you would have noticed this anyway, in say 24 years - so here's a special treat!
Disclaimer
Disclaimer
If you had any intelligence whatsoever, then you would realize that by not only using Dr. Wolf's name, but also "Dr. Quantum" which is associated with his name, those who search under these names on a search engine will now read your drivel and most probably associate it with him. Anyhow, like I said, I emailed Dr. Wolf earlier...we'll see how he reponds...I doubt it will be favorably. I see that you've added your "disclaimer" as your signature...I still doubt that he'll view it favorably.
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 04:34 PM)
[/Quote]you would have noticed this anyway, in say 24 years - so here's a special treat!
Disclaimer[/Quote]
If you had any intelligence whatsoever, then you would realize that by not only using Dr. Wolf's name, but also "Dr. Quantum" which is associated with his name, those who search under these names on a search engine will now read your drivel and most probably associate it with him. Anyhow, like I said, I emailed Dr. Wolf earlier...we'll see how he reponds...I doubt it will be favorably. I see that you've added your "disclaimer" as your signature...I still doubt that he'll view it favorably.
The guy's a genius - he'll be biting your sorry assoff too - idiot!
Disclaimer[/Quote]
If you had any intelligence whatsoever, then you would realize that by not only using Dr. Wolf's name, but also "Dr. Quantum" which is associated with his name, those who search under these names on a search engine will now read your drivel and most probably associate it with him. Anyhow, like I said, I emailed Dr. Wolf earlier...we'll see how he reponds...I doubt it will be favorably. I see that you've added your "disclaimer" as your signature...I still doubt that he'll view it favorably.
The guy's a genius - he'll be biting your sorry assoff too - idiot!
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 04:34 PM)
If you had any intelligence whatsoever,
Says an idiot who believes in faith healing.
Says an idiot who believes in faith healing.
QUOTE (<Max>+Jun 22 2008, 04:46 PM)
Says an idiot who believes in faith healing.
- couldn't heal his horrendously damaged brain though.
- couldn't heal his horrendously damaged brain though.
QUOTE (Dr Fred A Wolf+Jun 22 2008, 04:48 PM)
- couldn't heal his horrendously damaged brain though. What brain?
QUOTE (<Max>+Jun 22 2008, 04:55 PM)
What brain?
- I laugh corrected!
- I laugh corrected!
Since we're on the topic of sockpuppets, I might as well expose another one(not that most of you "intellectual superiors" seem to care)...
MjolnirPants is none other than "BigDumbWeirdo".
Just as an FYI.
Let the schoolyard games continue...
MjolnirPants is none other than "BigDumbWeirdo".
Just as an FYI.
Let the schoolyard games continue...
It doesn't take much "intellectual superiority" to figure these things out. Speaking of schoolyard games...
Shall I close the Joint to guests, or can you diapered little boys behave?
Shall I close the Joint to guests, or can you diapered little boys behave?
QUOTE (Sapo+Jun 22 2008, 08:14 PM)
It doesn't take much "intellectual superiority" to figure these things out. Speaking of schoolyard games...
Shall I close the Joint to guests, or can you diapered little boys behave?
By all means, do so.
Shall I close the Joint to guests, or can you diapered little boys behave?
By all means, do so.
QUOTE (newguy+Jun 22 2008, 07:34 PM)
MjolnirPants is none other than "BigDumbWeirdo".
Wow, really? - I'll wager he borrowed a brain cell to figure that one out.
Any more 'dynamite' disclosures fukkwit?
Wow, really?
- I'll wager he borrowed a brain cell to figure that one out. Any more 'dynamite' disclosures fukkwit?
Nobody really cares if someone got banned, then made a sockpuppet to continue (and hopefully learned to be nicer...BDW)
What I personally object to is people who have an account in good standing, just making a sockpuppet to pretend to be something they are not, just in order to heap ridicule on those they disagree with.
If you actually have to CREATE somebody stupid enough to make fun of, you need to do some self-examination.
What I personally object to is people who have an account in good standing, just making a sockpuppet to pretend to be something they are not, just in order to heap ridicule on those they disagree with.
If you actually have to CREATE somebody stupid enough to make fun of, you need to do some self-examination.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.