Periodic Table of Swearing

Old subthreads
CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15211

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Marcotte now implies Justin sees women as "sex objects".
MarcotteCrazy.JPG
(10.98 KiB) Downloaded 255 times
You couldn't make this shit up.

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15212

Post by LMU »

As a tangent to the Mars vs Venus discussion, I wonder why nobody has mentioned epigenetics and genomic imprinting. I worry if it could be because I am misremembering my genetics or it is out of date or I heard something false and am misattributing the source, so if someone knows better than I please speak up.

If I remember my genetics prof correctly, he was of the view that generally genes imprinted by the father, if they affected growth, would cause a fetus or infant to grow more quickly at the expense of the mother while genes imprinted by the mother would slow down growth. The thinking was that the father's genes were best served by creating an infant that grew as fast as possible no matter the cost in order to get the next generation breeding as soon as possible, while the mothers genes were better served with a little more restraint so that no particular child would create too much of a burden and "break the bank". The point being that male and female evolutionary strategies can be in competition even at that small scale.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15213

Post by CommanderTuvok »

real horrorshow wrote:Meanwhile, the mortuary attendants have wheeled Ophelia in so she can croak out:
That's a falsehood. I didn't say anything about Abbie Smith at any conference. It's also a falsehood that I call people "gender traitors" or "sister punishers" or "chill girls." You recycle that falsehood a lot, C Tuvok. Please note that it's not true.
Funny stuff.

If Ophelia could read properly she will have seen that I said she allows her commentators to call people those slurs.

Oh, and there is a video with Greg Laden proudly stating how he got Abbie shut down. The rest of the Baboons and the gormless audience applauded.

So, Ophelia is wrong - TWICE.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15214

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Speaking of which...
MayhewComment.JPG
(9.97 KiB) Downloaded 238 times
The Baboons won't like that!!!

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15215

Post by Badger3k »

CommanderTuvok wrote:You'll notice that on that thread by Emily, one user (LeftSidePositive) really does go to lengths to downplay Greg Laden's behaviour, and exaggerate the behaviour of Justin and the The Pitters.

He/she is also really concerned about doc-dropping, except when it comes to PZ, Queen Bee and Scurvy.
That LSP person is really sick, and needs to seek professional help. I considered saying something, but there is nothing you can say to a crazy person. LSP is one of the baboons who epitomizes the ends-justify-the-means-if-they-are-my-ends standards of the baboons. You can't win, unless she (or he, I forget which they are) flounces off in tears of rage.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15216

Post by AndrewV69 »

CommanderTuvok wrote:Marcotte now implies Justin sees women as "sex objects".
MarcotteCrazy.JPG
You couldn't make this shit up.
But it is very true. I have one word of advise for JV. Pay attention now:

http://www.lionsdenu.com/wp-content/upl ... kq_400.jpg

vandelay
.
.
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:10 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15217

Post by vandelay »

LMU wrote: (seems like we have more registered than actively post which I'm curious about because guests are allowed to post too)
I registered because some of the media posted here isn't viewable unless you're registered and logged in. Don't know if that's the case for anyone else.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15218

Post by Steersman »

Badger3k wrote:
CommanderTuvok wrote:You'll notice that on that thread by Emily, one user (LeftSidePositive) really does go to lengths to downplay Greg Laden's behaviour, and exaggerate the behaviour of Justin and the The Pitters.

He/she is also really concerned about doc-dropping, except when it comes to PZ, Queen Bee and Scurvy.
That LSP person is really sick, and needs to seek professional help. I considered saying something, but there is nothing you can say to a crazy person. LSP is one of the baboons who epitomizes the ends-justify-the-means-if-they-are-my-ends standards of the baboons. You can't win, unless she (or he, I forget which they are) flounces off in tears of rage.
Seems LSP has self-identified some time back as a woman, although she has an affectation for using ze & zir and the like. And she’s sensitive to “gender traitor” as it is supposedly used against trans people; guess it’s ok to use against your enemies but not against your friends ….

But I think she isn’t particularly honest in her argumentation which is probably consistent with the foregoing ….

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15219

Post by CommanderTuvok »

LeftSidePositive is a great example of how the Baboons seem to think they are the arbiters of word usage.

She got schooled over the meaning of the term "slur", and then complained about "a dictionary defence" (quote: OOooooohhh! A "Dictionary Defense"!) She sounds a bit like a dishonest Creationist.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15220

Post by Badger3k »

AndrewV69 wrote:
CommanderTuvok wrote:Marcotte now implies Justin sees women as "sex objects".
MarcotteCrazy.JPG
You couldn't make this shit up.
But it is very true. I have one word of advise for JV. Pay attention now:

http://www.lionsdenu.com/wp-content/upl ... kq_400.jpg

I was tempted to make a shirt in honor of the social justice warriors (although it may already be made). It would be "I'm with stupid" and an arrow pointing up. Damn, just realized it could be taken to mean some god, even though I mean it to point at the wearer. Back to the drawing board.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15221

Post by Badger3k »

CommanderTuvok wrote:LeftSidePositive is a great example of how the Baboons seem to think they are the arbiters of word usage.

She got schooled over the meaning of the term "slur", and then complained about "a dictionary defence" (quote: OOooooohhh! A "Dictionary Defense"!) She sounds a bit like a dishonest Creationist.
They are great at that - words mean what they want them to mean, and they are the only ones to decide that. I'm not sure if it started with PZ's ridiculous "dictionary atheist" post or if it existed before, though. When you can't win an argument, change the definitions - and yeah, they have many similarities with creationists and other cranks (as Abbie pointed out). But they are the "Social Justice Friends" and so we must be the ones that are wrong (boy, that screams photoshop to me, but I have no photoshop or skills).

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15222

Post by AndrewV69 »

LMU wrote:As a tangent to the Mars vs Venus discussion, I wonder why nobody has mentioned epigenetics and genomic imprinting. I worry if it could be because I am misremembering my genetics or it is out of date or I heard something false and am misattributing the source, so if someone knows better than I please speak up.
Speaking for myself, I tend to not babble on about stuff on which I do not think I have an acceptable (to my standards anyway) comprehension.
LMU wrote:If I remember my genetics prof correctly, he was of the view that generally genes imprinted by the father, if they affected growth, would cause a fetus or infant to grow more quickly at the expense of the mother while genes imprinted by the mother would slow down growth. The thinking was that the father's genes were best served by creating an infant that grew as fast as possible no matter the cost in order to get the next generation breeding as soon as possible, while the mothers genes were better served with a little more restraint so that no particular child would create too much of a burden and "break the bank". The point being that male and female evolutionary strategies can be in competition even at that small scale.
Interesting but at this point in time, given my other interests I do not have the time to get into it at this point. But it is on my list.

I had put around 60 hours into microbiology around the time Abbie did her magic trick on Dr. Judy, smacked her one in the kisser, and convinced everyone at that point that Dr. Judy was full of shit.

I do not think it was a coincidence BTW that the roof collapsed on Dr. Judy at that point. Although to the best of my knowledge only one paper cited Abbie, I would not be surprised if that post was in fact the Rubicon, and all others who delivered a subsequent Coup de grâce were in part directly and indirectly prompted to do so from it.

Congratz again Abbie!

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15223

Post by LMU »

AndrewV69 wrote:
Speaking for myself, I tend to not babble on about stuff on which I do not think I have an acceptable (to my standards anyway) comprehension.
That is a good point and maybe I should have restrained myself until I had something more concrete to share :oops:

mordacious1
.
.
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:33 pm

The Terminator

#15224

Post by mordacious1 »

@reap
I too missed this
GO JERRY! Funny - who'd a thunk Jerry Brown, a skinny hippie, could beat the living fuck outta Arnold. They should make an action movie outta this shit
I'm not sure what you mean by the "Arnold" jab. Governor Schwarzenegger married (Governors can perform marriage ceremonies) two same sex couples while in office.

Baron

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15225

Post by Baron »

WoolyBumblebee talks about Zvan, Greta, Vacula, petition to ban Vacula
[youtube]Q0327PnsIlI[/youtube]

Baron

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15226

Post by Baron »

http://secularwoman.org/farewell_Bridget_Gaudette

Bridget Gaudette resigns from Secular Woman following her comments about Vacula on Twitter and Emily's blog.

Baron

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15227

Post by Baron »

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/ju ... nd-burned/

A voice for men

Justin Vacula loves Satan and eats kittens

Baron

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15228

Post by Baron »

http://manboobz.com/2012/10/02/why-is-t ... -position/

Manboobz

Why is the Secular Coalition for America giving Justin Vacula — online bully, A Voice for Men contributor — a leadership position?

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15229

Post by JackRayner »

Michael K Gray wrote:
JackRayner wrote:How then, do you explain reluctance to mate from the females (or, hell, even just the female half of hermaphroditic species) of many other species? :think: I fully admit that I haven't looked at the rates of child-birth related deaths in other species, but I'm sure they happen... And something tells me that, in the great majority of these, there is no cognitive process comparable to "I saw Molly die due to her pregnancy, so I'm going to avoid becoming pregnant as best I can!"

What do you think about this?
I can see why you raise it, but to amplify your speculation:
One MUST refer to species who are cognitively able to recognise that they are female "put themselves in another female's place" and imagine that what other females experience is likely their fate.
They MUST cognitively connect the act of copulation with the risk of pregnancy, of course.
Those who regularly accidentally die in giving birth.
And those who have mutually cryptic ovulation.
(To name but 3 of scores of necessary caveats by which to make any sane comparison with homo sapiens.)
This dramatically reduces the pool of species down to at most a handful, more more realistically: just one.
And for that putative residue that has been previously mentioned I, and others have already comprehensively dismissed them.
Mate choice, and the reluctance to mate in the sex with the higher parental investment have been selected for for hundreds of millions [billions, maybe?] of years before any cognitive abilities of significance developed. I guess I'm having a hard time believing that something that can happen at random would make much of a blip as far as naturally selected behavior goes.

Or rather; can you explain how exactly reluctance to mate out of fear of pregnancy related death would be selected for? Any ideas? It almost seems like this reluctance is something that would be selected against. If women A, B, and C are afraid of becoming pregnant out of fear of death, and women X, Y, and Z recognize that this is a possibility [or, Hell, aren't even aware that it could happen] but don't let it inform their behavior, which group do you think is more likely to pass on their traits into the future?

From what I've been reading about the way some of these still surviving hunter-gatherer tribes function, punitive rape/gang-rape for women who are frigid is not at all uncommon, so it is even a possibility that women far in our ancestral past never had such a choice in the matter.

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15230

Post by Michael K Gray »

JackRayner wrote:Or rather; can you explain how exactly reluctance to mate out of fear of pregnancy related death would be selected for?
I have never proposed such a thing.

Butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15231

Post by Butters »

Baron wrote:http://secularwoman.org/farewell_Bridget_Gaudette

Bridget Gaudette resigns from Secular Woman following her comments about Vacula on Twitter and Emily's blog.

Her twitter feed, @bridgetgaudette, appears to be gone.

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15232

Post by Michael K Gray »

Michael K Gray wrote:
JackRayner wrote:Or rather; can you explain how exactly reluctance to mate out of fear of pregnancy related death would be selected for?
I have never proposed such a thing.
To elucidate on that remark:
Not every behaviour has to be adaptive.
There are scores of examples of maladaptive behaviours that persist because they hitch a lift in the package that does confer benefits.
The most widespread of these maladaptive behaviours is religious practice, which hitches a free ride on the fact that infants must trust their elders in order to reach reproductive age.

If 'reluctant mate choice' had to be adaptive in order to persist, then celibate Nuns (for but one example) would have died out after a generation.
But the behaviour has persisted for many thousands of years.

It is a mistake to assume that all behaviours must be positively selected for.

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15233

Post by JackRayner »

Michael K Gray wrote:
JackRayner wrote:Or rather; can you explain how exactly reluctance to mate out of fear of pregnancy related death would be selected for?
I have never proposed such a thing.
I misread you here then;
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months.
Did I take "instinct" too literally?

Butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15234

Post by Butters »

Baron wrote:http://secularwoman.org/farewell_Bridget_Gaudette

Bridget Gaudette resigns from Secular Woman following her comments about Vacula on Twitter and Emily's blog.
Can someone expand upon this?

I hadn't really followed her, so I do not know much about Bridget. But I did see the tweets where she wasn't falling in line concerning Justin Vacula.
So this sudden departure seems more than odd, and possibly something that needs to be more well known.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15235

Post by Steersman »

AndrewV69 wrote:
justinvacula wrote:***
Also, Emily Dietle has offered a very reasonable blog post concerning my SCA nomination and the controversy which ensued. The comments are building up, too, including Greg Laden, Watson, Karla Porter and others.
http://emilyhasbooks.com/second-chances/
***'
... and at risk of another debate here on tone, language, I would request to not heap abuse on my detractors no matter what they say. Attack ideas, not persons has been my mantra for a great majority of time when considering public disagreements. Take it or leave it...and thanks again.
Yes I see the usual suspects commenting there. My only comment is that one can only hope they do not breed if one believes as I do, that they are genetically incapable of being decent human beings.
Careful of the collateral damage there mate! There’s at least several of us in the trenches over there too! :-)

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15236

Post by Michael K Gray »

JackRayner wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:
JackRayner wrote:Or rather; can you explain how exactly reluctance to mate out of fear of pregnancy related death would be selected for?
I have never proposed such a thing.
I misread you here then;
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months.
Did I take "instinct" too literally?
No, you did not.
I was in complete error using that word! Sorry.
(I kinda knew it was wrong, but was hoping to get away with not wracking my brain in order to come up with a better term.)
If I replace "instinct' with 'habit', would that clarify matters at all?

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15237

Post by AndrewV69 »

LMU wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:
Speaking for myself, I tend to not babble on about stuff on which I do not think I have an acceptable (to my standards anyway) comprehension.
That is a good point and maybe I should have restrained myself until I had something more concrete to share :oops:
Oh I was not taking a shot at you, just explaining why I said nothing on the subject.

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15238

Post by JackRayner »

Michael K Gray wrote:
JackRayner wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:
JackRayner wrote:Or rather; can you explain how exactly reluctance to mate out of fear of pregnancy related death would be selected for?
I have never proposed such a thing.
I misread you here then;
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months.
Did I take "instinct" too literally?
No, you did not.
I was in complete error using that word! Sorry.
(I kinda knew it was wrong, but was hoping to get away with not wracking my brain in order to come up with a better term.)
If I replace "instinct' with 'habit', would that clarify matters at all?
I think that would clarify it some. If what you're saying is that part of the difference in female psychology is caused by a consciously acquired awareness of the fact that pregnancy can lead to death, then I've got less of an interest to press for more information on that thought.

Also, I'm aware than adverse/neutral [to survival and reproduction] traits can be passed on. [By, essentially, "piggybacking" through with a trait that is far more beneficial to survival and/or reproduction, as I understand it.] I was just wondering, under my prior misunderstanding, how that would work with regards to the specific fear of pregnancy related death.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15239

Post by cunt »

Drama bomb incoming.

Matt Dillahunty tests out the A+ forums under a different name. Gets treated like shit and banned.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... p=887#p887

Sceencapped the whole lot.

Verified by his twitter just now
@Matt_Dillahunty

Ahahaha. Praise satan!!

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15240

Post by cunt »

Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#15241

Post by Michael K Gray »

JackRayner wrote:I think that would clarify it some. If what you're saying is that part of the difference in female psychology is caused by a consciously acquired awareness of the fact that pregnancy can lead to death, then I've got less of an interest to press for more information on that thought.
And I would have got away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15242

Post by Michael K Gray »

cunt wrote:Drama bomb incoming.

Matt Dillahunty tests out the A+ forums under a different name. Gets treated like shit and banned.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... p=887#p887

Sceencapped the whole lot.

Verified by his twitter just now
@Matt_Dillahunty

Ahahaha. Praise satan!!
Perhaps he might realise that we have been perfectly correct these past years?
These folk are mentally ill.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15243

Post by cunt »

Are you going to ban this one, too?

This is the account I created when the site first went live. I don't have time to participate on the forum, but I've been out there supporting Atheism+ at every opportunity. As such, I've come across a number of people who have said "Hey, if Atheism+ was what you say it is, I'd have no problem with it...but that's not what it is."

I laughed at that, because it's a fledgling movement that isn't governed by anyone and hasn't even been well-defined. I pointed out that, as it stands right now, it's a forum. In response to that, people kept complaining about what went on at the forum and I didn't have the time or energy to investigate. Because I'm friends with the people who started this, I trusted (and still pretty much do) that the complaints were exaggerated. After all, I was on the back-channel list when the name was suggested, I was posting videos clarifying the subject, I was talking-up Atheism+ alongside PZ and Greta at the Denver AAA convention.

And then, I someone sent me a link to a post where someone had objected to some points Greta had made. The individual got some things right and some things wrong...and could have been corrected on it. Instead, they wound up banned - after some rather frustrating conversation.

I wanted to post about that, but I didn't want to post under my own name - because I wanted to prove that ANYONE could point out what was right and wrong about a post and make suggestions on improving our image and reaching the people who WOULD BE in agreement with us, if it weren't for the confusing and constant misinformation that is out there.

As it turns out, I was wrong. My post was deleted, unread, based solely on the opinion of a single moderator.
When I tried to point out the problem in this process - as anyone would who was surprised to have their post deleted...well, you can see what kind of response I got.

And I'm an ally - who wrote as an ally. Hell, I'm out there, despite the suspicions of SubMor defending and promoting this.

I am stunned.
Yes Matt, it sucks when you actually pay attention.

Butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15244

Post by Butters »

cunt wrote:Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502
This has info as well
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... nty#p21767

I was kind of hoping I would see Matt say this whole atheism plus stuff is bollocks after seeing this, but I guess he may just be apolgizing for having a sock account on the atheismplus forums.

http://oi48.tinypic.com/16lcuc0.jpg

TheMan
.
.
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15245

Post by TheMan »

vandelay wrote:
LMU wrote: (seems like we have more registered than actively post which I'm curious about because guests are allowed to post too)
I registered because some of the media posted here isn't viewable unless you're registered and logged in. Don't know if that's the case for anyone else.

Yeah pretty much the same reason...other than to join in every now and then.

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15246

Post by JackRayner »

Wonder what this is all about. Anyone know?

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... yWrong.png

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15247

Post by rayshul »

Butters wrote:I wonder how members of Atheism+ who are not privileged white women think about her take of the LAPD?
I have no idea who the audience of her tweets is meant to be. Who the fuck would read those and not think, wow, what a fucking fuckbag. She's doing this shit for attention. Amy is a special cookie.

butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15248

Post by butters »

Butters wrote: snip

Hmmm...didn't see his full post on Atheismplus yet. I would like to be proven wrong in my skepticsm. (lol)
If Matt does see he wasn't as skeptical as he should have been regarding some of the actions by supporters of atheismplus, that would be impressive. But having it turned on him directly is one way to take a new look at the problems expressed by others.

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15249

Post by JackRayner »

Butters wrote:
cunt wrote:Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502
This has info as well
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... nty#p21767

I was kind of hoping I would see Matt say this whole atheism plus stuff is bollocks after seeing this, but I guess he may just be apolgizing for having a sock account on the atheismplus forums.

http://oi48.tinypic.com/16lcuc0.jpg
Damn. Nevermind. Late to the game. Was watching some Walking Dead and forgot to refresh before posting. :popcorn: (They've got season 2 up on Netflix.)

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15250

Post by Steersman »

SPACKlick wrote: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:24 am
Steersman wrote:And a tendency to believe in things for which there is not the smallest shred of tangible evidence – and in spite of a great amount of circumstantial evidence against them – really doesn’t seem to qualify as “beneficial”.
Believing the tales and warnings of the elders of your society without question is of great benefit, because it means ech individual doesn't have to learn the rules for themselves and so society can improve quicker with fewer needless deaths and lifes devoted to re-inventing the wheel.
Yes, quite agree with that – at least as long as those “tales and warnings” actually correlate with the true state of affairs, with what is actually real; probably quite pathological otherwise.

But that latter case is at least what some scientist, I think, argued some time back was the operative process with most religions, at least the anthropomorphic ones: bronze age goat herder tales passed on from generation to generation without there being too many potential “extincition level events” [ELE] associated with the model being wildly at odds with actual reality. Not quite the same kettle of fish these days ….

Reminds me of, I think, the preface in the book The Limits of Growth many years ago which was presented in the form of a puzzle: if the lily-pad cover of a pond doubles every day – exponential growth, more or less – and if a completely covered pond is an ELE for the rest of the pond’s biosphere and if the pond is currently half-covered then how much time do you have to make changes in that growth process? The answer, of course, being one day.

I kind of see that uncritical acceptance of religious dogma – those hoary tales and warnings for which there is not a shred of evidence – as being a serious liability and potentially the same type of ELE process …. Hitchens’ wasn’t far wrong in arguing that “religion belongs to the childhood of our species”, particularly since we’ve allowed the children to get their hands on some very destructive weapons ….

TheMan
.
.
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15251

Post by TheMan »

Baron wrote:WoolyBumblebee talks about Zvan, Greta, Vacula, petition to ban Vacula
[youtube]Q0327PnsIlI[/youtube]

Wow.... I have a woolly woody....

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15252

Post by JackRayner »

cunt wrote: Matt Dillahunty tests out the A+ forums under a different name. Gets treated like shit and banned.

Ahahaha. Praise satan!!
This is AWESOME! :lol:

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... LOL001.png

TheMan
.
.
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15253

Post by TheMan »

cunt wrote:Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502

Just wow... Matt was being sneeky but for good reasons...he was testing the fairness and objectivity of the forum. He could have only done that under a different name. Congrats Matt...good onya.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15254

Post by Steersman »

AndrewV69 wrote:
Steersman wrote:Apart from wondering just what it is that is the essence of your case, what it is that you’re trying to sell, particularly as I think you mentioned you were atheist in our discussions about Islamic Awakening, it seems to me that that problem is such for me only if what you say is in fact true. But it seems to me that the crux of your argument is the “heritability of religion” which I think is too vague and unsupported to properly assess.
The proper term is Heritability of religiosity; my apologies for any confusion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity
Thanks for the information and links; should keep me out of the pool-hall for a little while at least …. :-)

Baron

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15255

Post by Baron »

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... and-abuse/

Zvan - "forgiveness and abuse"

This one's a doozie.
followcrime
retweetcrime
tweetcrime

twitterharassment
probation

Tristan
.
.
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:29 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15256

Post by Tristan »

cunt wrote:Drama bomb incoming.

Matt Dillahunty tests out the A+ forums under a different name. Gets treated like shit and banned.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... p=887#p887

Sceencapped the whole lot.

Verified by his twitter just now
@Matt_Dillahunty

Ahahaha. Praise satan!!
Take the red pill. The red pill.

:popcorn:

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15257

Post by Steersman »

TheMan wrote:
cunt wrote:Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502

Just wow... Matt was being sneeky but for good reasons...he was testing the fairness and objectivity of the forum. He could have only done that under a different name. Congrats Matt...good onya.
Yea, far out; could be some serious shit to hit the fan over that exchange. Would love to be privy to what’s happening in the back-channel on FfTBs [aka “tantrum central”] ….

Time to lay in some more popcorn ….

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15258

Post by rayshul »

Let's see if he comes here, next.

DownThunder
.
.
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 8:10 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15259

Post by DownThunder »

Epic. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Wasn't matt the one who totes was practising A+ before it was called A+?

What I am curious about most of all is when someone like matt is burned by his own faith, how he will proceed. Im curious to see who's a charlatan and opportunist, and who is a genuine deluded fool.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15260

Post by rayshul »

Steersman wrote:
TheMan wrote:
cunt wrote:Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502

Just wow... Matt was being sneeky but for good reasons...he was testing the fairness and objectivity of the forum. He could have only done that under a different name. Congrats Matt...good onya.
Yea, far out; could be some serious shit to hit the fan over that exchange. Would love to be privy to what’s happening in the back-channel on FfTBs [aka “tantrum central”] ….

Time to lay in some more popcorn ….
I feel that, much like that-bloke-who-FtB-were-considering-beating-up-on-but-thunderf00t-told-on-them whose name I can't remember, the FtB team will squirrel him away into a corner and tell him everything is fine and no hard feelings mate.

Butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15261

Post by Butters »

rayshul wrote:Let's see if he comes here, next.

I assume not. He would have nothing to gain by doing so and much to lose.

But I hope he no longer cheerleaders a group that puts skepticism on the back burner, and just becomes a regular old atheist and skeptic again. And realizes that not supporting Atheism+ ≠ being OK with sexual harassment/misogyny.

If he does, I will watch his videos again.

Butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15262

Post by Butters »

rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote:
TheMan wrote:
cunt wrote:Whoops, wrong thread. Here's the actual link.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1502

Just wow... Matt was being sneeky but for good reasons...he was testing the fairness and objectivity of the forum. He could have only done that under a different name. Congrats Matt...good onya.
Yea, far out; could be some serious shit to hit the fan over that exchange. Would love to be privy to what’s happening in the back-channel on FfTBs [aka “tantrum central”] ….

Time to lay in some more popcorn ….
I feel that, much like that-bloke-who-FtB-were-considering-beating-up-on-but-thunderf00t-told-on-them whose name I can't remember, the FtB team will squirrel him away into a corner and tell him everything is fine and no hard feelings mate.
That would piss me off because no one else would be given that chance. Just FAMOUS WHITE CIS GENDER MALES. And he should realize this.

TheMan
.
.
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15263

Post by TheMan »

Steersman wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:
Steersman wrote:Apart from wondering just what it is that is the essence of your case, what it is that you’re trying to sell, particularly as I think you mentioned you were atheist in our discussions about Islamic Awakening, it seems to me that that problem is such for me only if what you say is in fact true. But it seems to me that the crux of your argument is the “heritability of religion” which I think is too vague and unsupported to properly assess.
The proper term is Heritability of religiosity; my apologies for any confusion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity
Thanks for the information and links; should keep me out of the pool-hall for a little while at least …. :-)

I could be talking out my arse but Christopher Hitchens in God is NOT Great suggests your "authority" is more likely to swing you towards a religion (whether from birth or later as a "Born again"). If I read it correctly (and my memory isn't awesome) and authority could be your Grand Mother, Peers and/or even the country you were born in.

As a real life example with an online discussion I was having with a born again christian (who argues there is no hell...and Jesus isn't divine according to the bible) I made a point that it was unlikely, while I presumptuously and smartarsely assumed he was shopping around for a religion to feel safe in, that he would have chosen anything other than one of the Christian ones (albiet one he has made up for himself). Digging further, because he couldn't see my point, I asked him why he didn't born again into an islamic based faith and he pointed out his pre-bias towards Christianity from the one time his Grand Mother forced him to go to Church one Sunday when he was a kid. I then pointed out that his Grand Mother was his "authority". He still didn't get it.

I could be digressing though....

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15264

Post by rayshul »

Butters wrote:
rayshul wrote:Let's see if he comes here, next.
I assume not. He would have nothing to gain by doing so and much to lose.
Bloke could always do it incognito. Investigate. See if we're truly evil! (We are.)

Butters

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15265

Post by Butters »

rayshul wrote:
Butters wrote:
rayshul wrote:Let's see if he comes here, next.
I assume not. He would have nothing to gain by doing so and much to lose.
Bloke could always do it incognito. Investigate. See if we're truly evil! (We are.)
Well, that's true.

John Greg
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15266

Post by John Greg »

This Dillahunty / A+ story is just fucking hilarious, fucking hilarious. Double thumbs up all around.

Now we have to wait and see how they're all going to cover their asses and make up -- and you just know they're either going to find a way to do that, or they're going to find a way to successfully and deeply memory-hole it. Remember, room 101 is their living room, the fucking lot of them.

:dance:

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15267

Post by Steersman »

TheMan wrote:
Steersman wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:
Steersman wrote:Apart from wondering just what it is that is the essence of your case, what it is that you’re trying to sell, particularly as I think you mentioned you were atheist in our discussions about Islamic Awakening, it seems to me that that problem is such for me only if what you say is in fact true. But it seems to me that the crux of your argument is the “heritability of religion” which I think is too vague and unsupported to properly assess.
The proper term is Heritability of religiosity; my apologies for any confusion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity
Thanks for the information and links; should keep me out of the pool-hall for a little while at least …. :-)
I could be talking out my arse but Christopher Hitchens in God is NOT Great suggests your "authority" is more likely to swing you towards a religion (whether from birth or later as a "Born again"). If I read it correctly (and my memory isn't awesome) and authority could be your Grand Mother, Peers and/or even the country you were born in.

I could be digressing though....
No, I think you’re in pretty much the same ballpark as my previous post to SPACEKlick ….

You might know of this but if not you might take a look at the article on conventional wisdom, something that the economist John Kenneth Galbraith dreamed up or at least popularized which is along the same lines …

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15268

Post by rayshul »

Well... on the subject of religion...

I really hope that someone is going to research and study this little A+ phenomenon. It's about as close as I've seen to an actual cult spring up out of virtually nothing. (Well, with associations with social justice and feminism. But generally.) There's a whole group of people who are WTF about it from the very start, some who promote it without fully understanding it, some who use it for financial gain, some who are very "live and let live" about it, and some who get right on into the koolaid and start sharpening their pitchforks. I suppose it demonstrates that skeptics aren't always that skeptical and that even atheists can take on crazy, socially perverse dogma... which is why it'd be even more interesting to see research on it.

TheMan
.
.
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15269

Post by TheMan »

John Greg wrote:This Dillahunty / A+ story is just fucking hilarious, fucking hilarious. Double thumbs up all around.

Now we have to wait and see how they're all going to cover their asses and make up -- and you just know they're either going to find a way to do that, or they're going to find a way to successfully and deeply memory-hole it. Remember, room 101 is their living room, the fucking lot of them.

:dance:

Well he kind of has left the door open for that to happen...he'll sleep on it but I can't see how he could accept any olive branch.

I find it odd that some of them are putting up an argument that "curious" was banned because it was a sockpuppet when it was matt that fessed up and he wasn't believed before "curious" was banned". Now some of them are being licky crawly....

Reap
.
.
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#15270

Post by Reap »

Forgiveness and Abuse
October 2, 2012 at 9:36 pm Stephanie Zvan
The petition about Vacula is trying to remove him from a position in which he would be representing the interests of atheists and secularists for an entire state, which isn’t a matter of choice.

Hello?? What state do you live in Stephanie? Oh, not PA? Gee then maybe YOU SHOULD SHUT THE HELL UP. I'm so sick of people being dicks 'just cause'. Isn't there something else you have to do in MN? Are all the issues you care about IN YOUR STATE all wrapped up? If you say yes then you need to check again. I hardly think Justin Vacula is going to begin campaign to remove the rights of any group. Do you even know him? Do you know anything about him other than what you have heard from other people and seen on the internet? What the fuck? Worry about your own shit. Why don't you do somethin about the republicans FROM YOUR STATE who are doing stupid shit that effects the entire country?

Locked