Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9174 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,605 Year: 4,862/9,624 Month: 210/427 Week: 20/103 Day: 0/9 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Peanut Gallery
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 126 of 1725 (517117)
07-29-2009 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Rahvin
07-29-2009 1:05 PM


Re: RevCrossHugger
I think the best thing to do now would be to totally ignore any of his posts.
I am not trying to be cruel but I detest liars. It was actually comical because I had previously attended that school and I got really suspicious when he started naming bogus degrees. He probably thought it was safe to pick a religious college in the local area where he could state he garnered a theology degree from. He picked the wrong one.
I am done with RCH though. I put forth the evidence and will let him have fun with whatever is left of his thread. However, I doubt anyone would want to play with him after he threw his temper tantrum.
Is it me or is this website just a magnet for the bottom feeders of religious fundamentalism/extremism and pseudoscience?
Now onto my next challenge, 'Smooth Operator' and his geocentrical banter!

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2009 1:05 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2009 4:09 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 133 of 1725 (517484)
08-01-2009 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Rahvin
07-30-2009 2:50 AM


Re: RevCrossHugger
Rahvin writes:
RCH claimed to hold a degree; Dr. A
Actually Dr. A and myself are two different people, but I could see how you got us mixed up.
Rahvin writes:
Dr. A alleged that the specified university offers no such degree.
That and I looked him up in my college's online alumni database. Which BTW is not illegal, since he plastered his name on public forums all over the internet. It actually only took me a couple of minutes of discovering his name since he posted it along with his mailing address in several other forums because he was soliciting donations for his 'charities'. I was actually generous enough not to post this name or address on this forum.
BTW, challenging one's credentials on an online debate forum using legal means is NOT illegal and does not constitute slander/libel or anything else he wants to call it.
If he hadn't have brought up the topic of himself having a theology degree at a college I personally attend than I would have never had challenged him on it.
Sorry just had to correct the account. Will leave this topic alone now since it is now past and opening.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Rahvin, posted 07-30-2009 2:50 AM Rahvin has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 134 of 1725 (517619)
08-01-2009 10:25 PM


I believe Smooth Operator is a Troll
Here is my most recent discussion with Smooth Operator and some of his replies:
SO writes:
Myself writes:
I also mentioned the Sun or are you going to argue that the Sun is less than 91 million miles from the Earth?
It probablly is, but I'm not sure. I'm accepting this distance for now.
I am so glad we have to run all our scientific theories and research through your exhaustive knowledge. What would ever do without you?
LOL, you do realize that the same scientists that determined the Earth to be on average 91 million miles from the Earth are the same ones that accept the heliocentric model of the solar system?
SO writes:
Myself writes:
How do you explain that Venus is never more than 46 degrees away from the Sun and Mercury even a small degree angle from the Sun? Or how do you explain how the phases of Venus, the Moon and every other planetary body in the solar system fit perfectly in a heliocentric model of the solar system? How does that fit into your geocentric model?
I already told you. With a Tychonic model where all the planets orbit the Sun except for Earth, and it's moon. The Sun with the other planets than in turn orbits the Earth.
Or it can be explained in Ptolomaic model, using epycicles.
LOL, you are a troll and just doing this for kicks aren't you! You even admit you have no fucking clue what you are talking about! You can't even agree upon a single model of the solar system.

Signs of a troll:
The term 'Internet troll', originated in a comparison with the angler who 'trolled' a trailing bait to catch a fish. But for non-anglers, the mental image of a troll is the slabby, thick, moss-laded creature of Scandinavian folk lore, further popularised by Terry Pratchett in the Discworld novels, and J. K. Rowling in the Harry Potter books. This sad figure of fun lived under bridges and stratles the unwary, but is easily outsmarted by anyone with any intelligence, or a small dog.
The truth is somewhere between the two.
Habitat

The Internet doesn't have ancient slimey stone bridges, but trolls lurk around in quiet corners of the internet; while they can pop up almost anywhere, they thrive in distant relatively uninhabited corners.
Social Interaction

Trolls don't have friends. On the internet, because they interact with human beings, they can convince themselves that they are important, the centre of the universe - that, to them, is better than any friendship. Don't foget, the troll thinks he is always right, and therefore better than other folk. In real life, exactly the opposite applies. the troll has no friends and virtually no interaction with other people.
If he's a teen (many are), then he lives in his bedroom, trolling, playong computer games with 'friends' (who he doesn't know at all), and joining roleplay sites, where - of course - he is a hero, or a powerful villain, who is respected in an inverse ratio to the respect he feels for himself.
If he's an adult, then he has serious social issues. He may work, where people think he's a weirdo, and avoid him, he may sponge off his parents or be 'looking for work', which means he blames everyone for his problems. Except himself.
Most people who are out of work are nothing like the stereotype; most want to work, and gain their self respect through work and being part of the world; but the troll IS the stereotype whining scrounger, to whom the world owes a living.
Mental Health

It would be easy to dismiss trolls as mentally ill. Easy and wrong. Most would not score significantly on mental illness assessments. But most are simply immature. Fair enough in a teenager, and they have a chance of growing out of it (though the longer they leave it, the harder they may find it to break the habit). But in adults, it's simply sad.
Once upon a time, they would have been called 'inadequate psychopaths'; attention seeking loners, forever feeling sorry for themselves, but too bone idle to lift themselves out of their self-selected mire. Some live in a fantasy world, and find it hard to concentrate on real life; they can't make eye contact, and will say just about anything, frequently contradicting a previous statement.
Intelligence

Most trolls are pretty thick. Let's face it, it doesn'ttake much intelligence to sus out that the troll life is a pretty pathetic one, and given the choice, even a gerbil would choose a more rewarding lifestyle.
Technique

You don't have to be highly intelligent to be an angler, though some would say that it's difficult to be a successful angler without intelligence. Trolls have all the basic skills, and some are successful, though this is often due to negligence by their victims.
Bait

Trolls lay a variety of baits. The real idiots go for single lines, such as religious bigotry in religious groups, overt misogynism in nurses' groups, and mind blowing subtly, such as "BILL GATES SUCKS" in microsoft support groups. Darwin tells us that if they get a response at that level, then why would they bother to expend what little brain power they have on a better post?
If basic bait fails, then the troll may use a variety of techniques, from sheer twaddle to mild insults, from a controversial view to completely irrelevant questions. Anything to get a response. The human flaw in a troll is a failure to tell the diference between "any response" and "approval". So insulting them merely encourages them. Invariably.
Playing the Fish

The skilled troll will then focus on a key responder; possibly the rudest, possibly not - but the one the troll thinks is most likley to keep responding. At this stage, other responders may be ignored. But if the original target drops out, then troll may turn to others. few trolls bother to play more than one sucker at a time. They can always come back later.
Tickling the Trout

Experienced trolls do not respond at random. Once they have a sucker in their sites, they control the conversation. One post may elicit a long, detailed and perfectly reasonable response, but that is not what the troll wants. So they'll often complete ignore the main argument (which they started!), and focus on one careless detail - a date wrong, a misspelling ofr their next attack. And then the same trick again. And again, so long as the sucker responds.
Explosives

When all else fails, the troll will do just what lazy anglers do: they'll drop explosives in the water, clean up and go home. The failed troll can be very abusive indeed.
Weaknesses

Trolls have no life, no power; but by manipulating others, even if for just a couple of exchanges, they have control.
If they can catch an acknowledged expert, so much the better for them.
There's no need ever to get caught by a troll, though it is amusing to see Mensa members frothing at the mouth.
Exploit their weaknesses, as they'd exploit yours.
Attention Need

Trolls are nothing without attention, just a monster under the bed. While the first post may be camoflaged, it really doesn't take rocket science to identify an active troll. The best response from fellow members of the group is simply to ignore it. And the best response from moderators is to delete their membership; quickly and cleanly, with no negotiation or second chance. The group is more important than one idiot.
Socially Inept

Trolls have no self respect and low self esteem, and cannot cope with normal human interaction; start with a bit of flattery, and they may be stuck for a response. Even if they recover, they will not able to react appropriately, which should convince everyone of their trollism.
Trolls foucus on their target, not the issue; additonally, most trolls can only pick on one person at a time. This leaves them wide open to paralysis when you talk about them, but not to them.



Do not feed the troll!



For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 08-02-2009 12:00 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 135 of 1725 (517639)
08-02-2009 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by DevilsAdvocate
08-01-2009 10:25 PM


Re: I believe Smooth Operator is a Troll
BTW, I know I said do not feed the troll but I am trying to ensure that SO really is a troll first.
I am not 100% though. Anyone want to venture a guess?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 08-01-2009 10:25 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by cavediver, posted 08-02-2009 4:12 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 147 of 1725 (518281)
08-04-2009 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Percy
08-04-2009 9:27 AM


Re: ICANT in the KCA thread
LOL,
I do the same thing with my 4 year old daughter until she says DAAADDYY, STOP IT!!

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Percy, posted 08-04-2009 9:27 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 224 of 1725 (539129)
12-13-2009 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by Bolder-dash
12-13-2009 1:30 AM


Re: Shedding light on non-existant light:
Its not possible that all the cosmos and consciousness, and symmetry of the universe all have a divine underpinning, just by the fact of their existence?
I, an agnostic atheist (and I would venture to guess most atheists), believe this (a reality outside the reality we experience aka the supernatural) to be possible the problem lies in the fact that we don't see conclusive evidence confirming this to be true. The question lies with the support of emperical evidence.
What evidence do you have to convince you that there could NOT be a God?
This is a logical fallacy, appeal to ignorance (argumentum ex silentio litteraly 'argument from silence'). The burden of proof lies with the one attempting to prove the existence of something (whether it be God or anything else) not the other way around.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection
"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-13-2009 1:30 AM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-13-2009 9:37 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3183 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 229 of 1725 (541119)
12-31-2009 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by Bolder-dash
12-13-2009 9:37 AM


Re: Shedding light on non-existant light:
Bolder-Brain writes:
Me writes:
This is a logical fallacy, appeal to ignorance (argumentum ex silentio litteraly 'argument from silence'). The burden of proof lies with the one attempting to prove the existence of something (whether it be God or anything else) not the other way around.
This is kind of a funny point. Their is no burden of proof on anyone. It is not an issue of someone else needing to convince you. it is for you to convince or not convince yourself.
This is a debate site. I am not here to 'convince' myself of anything. I am here to learn from others that provide supporting evidence and rational and to express my own knowledge and experiences with others.
If you claim that I have to provide evidence to show that God does not exist I am going to wave to the bullshit flag like I did above. Your attempt to weasel out of this is ridiculously stupid.
The belief is entirely internal, not external.
What the heck does this mean? Internal/external to what?
There is not going to be empirical evidence.
Than we are at an impass. Because basically you are saying God exists but you have no way of showing that he exists and I have no way of determing that he exists. I will stick this belief in the closet of past believed fairy tales with my former beliefs in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Abominable Snowman (actually I am more inclined that he existed than your god) and Linus' Great Pumpkin.
If the evidence was empirical, it wouldn't be a spirit, it would be a man or a dog.
Show me the 'spirit' exists. And while you are at it. Define what this 'spirit' is in scientific terms.
That is why it is called faith, and not observation.
I have this holy water I would like to sell you. Just have faith and send me $50 and this holy water will heal all your diseases and illnesses and give you miraculous wealth.
What!?! You don't have faith in me or my holy water?!? You are going to hell!!
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection
"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-13-2009 9:37 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024