Peanut Gallery

Ah, yes, human "stupidity" as defined by riverrat is cause for reinforcing belief in the existence of the Christian God.You know, calling this thread "stupid shit" totally reinforces my faith in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. His Holy Noodliness warned us that there would be "mockers and scoffers" like you....hey, subjective reasoning is fun! I can say anything I want and "prove it" when people make fun of my retarded conclusions! No wonder you Christians love it so much! Don't let the door hit ya!

This is pitiful, rat. That's your argument? That if I mock someone, it means I'm an idiot? 1) Not everything needs to "accomplish" something.
2) People like String/tesla/etc are beyond the sort of "help" I could give. It's more "productive" to mock them. Best case scenario, lurkers see how utterly ridiculous their claims are. Worst case, I get a good laugh.
3) I haven't actually mocked string so far. A brief look at his posts suggests that its all just discussion of some "hidden meaning" that was revealed to him in a "vision" of sorts, but he's in the "faith and belief" forum where personal subjective experiences can be regarded as "evidence." I certainly think he's barking up the wrong tree, but I don't see the point in engaging him in debate or even wasting enough time to make fun of him effectively. And riverrat is the sole arbiter on what is or is not "stupid," of course. I see. Says the pot to the kettle. Do you have anything better than the tired old Christian "you'll be sorry when you see the Truth" bullshit? Do you have any idea how many times I've heard that? Do you realize how utterly absurd it is to claim eventual victory in such a way withotu actually having shown that you have any connection to "truth?" Somehow I doubt it.It's rather amusing to me how frequently the FSM/IPU goes compeltely over the head of Christians. So let me spell it out for you:You said: I mocked the statement with:

quote:

---

You know, calling this thread "stupid shit" totally reinforces my faith in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. His Holy Noodliness warned us that there would be "mockers and scoffers" like you.

---

I mocked you - as in, I copied your statement to illustrate its absurdity. This apparently was beyond your comprehension.People doing "stupid shit like this" (and note that "stupid" is a subjective judgement on your part - "stupid" to you could be "highly amusing" to others, as it's a matter of opinion) has no bearing whatsoever on the existence or nonexistence of any deity, whether that be the Flying Spaghetti Monster or your YHWH. There is no rational reason for your belief to be reinforced. Stating that your faith has been strengthened by something so entirely unrelated to actually lending support for your beliefs is personally amusing to me. It's like saying that your irrationality somehow lends support for my belief in Last Thursdayism. Your conclusion does not follow. I find that funny.Please, feel free to continue posting, rat. You're providing far more entertainment than string at this point.

He's ignored my responses (and those of others) in the "Prisoners of sin" thread as well.Cedre's not interested in debate. He's i\preaching.[/i] he views himself as a shepherd reaching out to a flock that's mostly gone astray. There's no real conversation with him, he just repeats his same position over and over while ignoring those points he finds inconvenient. He ignores challenges to the Bible's authority of God's existence, and returns to quoting scripture.It's rather like trying to argue with an actual Bible. It never addresses your points, and just says the same thing no matter how many times you read it, inconsistencies, self-contradictions and all.

It's a perpetual stalemate. The debate has gone on for so long (and at this point it's gotten so downright nasty) that it's difficult to point to what some positions actually state at this point.All I know is that I agreed with Straggler at the beginning, and none of the posts I've seen from RAZD have been at all convincing that Straggler's position is fallacious.

Perhaps the prediction came to him as a non-empirical "experience" while he was awake and conscious. This shows that non-empirical "experiences" of an undefined nature can have predictive qualities, and can be used to draw conclusions about objective reality! They don't count as a sixth sense, though. Definitely not that.Or, maybe Percy just made an incredibly accurate assessment of where the debate would wind up.Who can say? In the absence of evidence, I suppose I'm forced to be agnostic on the matter

The other problem being RAZD's ambiguity. As Straggler has pointed out, RAZD has never told us what "non-empirical evidence" is. He's only said what it isn't (dreams don't count, for instance, and he agreed that a conscious and aware but totally insensate individual would be able to gain no actual information about the world).I've seen Straggler's conception of what RAZD has been saying as justified, but the ambiguity of RAZD's position (by not specifically and directly stating what he is talking about, rather than pointing out what he is not) means that misunderstandings are virtually inevitable.It also doesn't help that half of their posts could each fill a small novel.I'd love to see the debate continue, with emotions running less high. Neither Straggler or RAZD strike me as immobile zealots for their respective causes - both are among the best posters we have on this board. I don't see a stubborn refusal to concede after being refuted. I don't see dishonesty. I see aggravation, frustration, and some partially-defined concepts that are causing miscommunication.

I agree completely.And opposing RAZD in a debate is challenging, to say the least. And not in the head-meets-brick-wall manner that Creationists can be challenging.

This guy is rich: THE INTERNET WORDS! THEY FRIGHTEN AND HURT ME!Seriously. Threatening lawsuits? Accusations of mental disorders for calling him an idiot? Equating simple internet searches to identity theft and stalking?Clearly a troll. I'd suggest banning if he weren't so amusing.

I made a nice and topic-related post about two pages back. Didn't reply to that one either. Whole thing was driven off-course when he started appealing to the authority of his allegedly-fictitious Theology degree, as if that would even help his argument.He doesn't want to debate. He wants to bait, and stir up shit. Personally, I think it's rather amusing, though I regret now spending the time on a well-reasoned post and wasting it on a troll like him.

Are you kidding? The ones we get here are relatively tame, and the few genuine crazies we get don't stick around long. Have fun with that one. He seems to be coherent enough to read and write English clearly, so while his lunacy is worse than tesla's, at least his posting is easier to understand.The only reason i;m not playing with the chewtoy is the temptation to bait his racist, white-supremacist garbage just to try to get him banned. Better to sit back and laugh at the idiot than sink to a level still significantly above his and get myself a suspension. My ex-stepdaughter is half black, and my current girlfriend is 25% Japanese/25% Native American. Most of my friends have been nonwhite. Stormfront assholes really bother me - they're the internet version of the KKK and the Nazis all rolled into one giant shitball.

RCH claimed to hold a degree; Dr. A alleged that the specified university offers no such degree. Therefore the degree to whose authority RHC appealed is allegedly fictitious.

I hereby nominate RCH for the "Most Whiny Debater" and "Thinnest Skin Ever" awards. His exemplary performance in the field of taking legitimate criticism as personal assaults demonstrates the absolute best in persecution-complex-debating style.Edited by Rahvin, : No reason given.

As Admin begins to crack down on the poor posting practices of our resident racist and geocentrist, the hilarity continues.Apparently SO thinks that beign asked to produce the calculations that support his argument means he has to redo all of the work his source originally performed...as opposed to simply copy/pasting the numbers his source presumably provides and explaining how they support his position.Or, you know...just conceding that he has nothing at all to base his wacky beliefs on.This, of course, has inspired a temper tantrum from SO, such that he has instructed Admin to ban him.

quote:

---

Thou shalt not tempt Percy thy Admin.

---

I anticipate his request to be granted very shortly. I'm not sure if I'm more happy to see the little racist disappear, or sad at the loss of the constant stream of humor as the forum's favorite target practice is taken away.

Doesn't have to be. All it has to be is a plausible explanation for the observed phenomenon. Parsimony takes care of the rest.Just like with the origin of life. If abiogenesis is proven to be a plausible mechanism for the rise of life from non-life, parsimony dictates that we should prefer that explanation rather than extra-Universal aliens, god(s), or the Matrix.

Actually, Percy is a Deist - he does believe in God.That simply doesn't stop him from recognizing logically fallacious arguments.