Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[welch]

So am I the only one that is amused that Abbie appears to have, in 2013 alone, exceeded PeeZus' scholarly output for the entire millenium?

[sacha]

I could go into detail about the psychology here, but instead let me just tell you that it is a rare man who understands what I want. Many exhibit submissive behaviour in response to my confidence.

http://i.imgur.com/aG0RY8b.jpg

Is that you, ConcentratedH20? Your own little Bukkake fantasy?

[d4m10n]

I like this part of Swan's post:

On January 22, I sent a four-and-a-half-page letter to Ron Lindsay. Four pages of that letter (plus an additional 11 pdfs) documented the parts of the policy on hostile conduct that Vacula had already declared open contempt for, both with respect to speakers at the conference, potential attendees, the conference itself, and secular conferences in general. Unlike Reinhardt, I’m perfectly comfortable putting my own name on my work.

What the actual fuck? I'm totes hiding my identity here in the 'Pit. No one will ever figure out that “D4M10N” is actually “DAMION” (elite uncrackable code!) or be clever enough to click the links in my sig, or realise that I'm using the same damned profile pic in every fucking forum. I'm a fucking master of disguise, you guys.

Oh and as to *hostile* conduct, there is exactly zero evidence that JV has threatened anyone, unlike, say, Francisco B., Greg L., Josh S., or any of the other frenzied wielders of porcupines and torches. Not to mention their unsubtle threats of employer-doxxing directed at Abbie and Mykeru. The sheer chutzpah on these guys could power a wind-farm for a year.

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

This is a bit embarrassing...feel free to read or ignore. I need to rant for a bit and this is the only place in my life that I feel I can do it.

My lady and I have been together for 15 years next month. Neither of us has much college education, .................
N.

No advice to give about acquiring clams. You may be ahead of me here, but don't let the stress get to you and find some pleasurable outlets. Nothing exacerbates a bad situation like stress, tiredness and self-esteem issues. Don't skimp on the sleep.

[Aneris]

Here is a (public) reply in my recent twitter exchange with my somewhat-namesake Eristae:

[...]

oh yeah. I'm having fun with that on misplaced grace, where now, Oolon is the SME on...me. It is quite interesting to watch "skeptics" completely shit on the concept to gain feminist cred from their group.

You know John, "you would only contribute negative energy to the situation and all you would achieve is escalation of the conflict."*, like you are disturbing some chakra, or break the ley lines from flowing with your presence. Perhaps atheist should shut up as voicing their opinion might upset the religious people (actually, that line of reasoning is behind some blasphemy laws)...

For those wondering:

Why stoop to his level and try to make him uncomfortable right back, when he’s clearly only going to make others uncomfortable and score points with his supporters and our detractors? Why not simply tell him he’s not wanted when/if he approaches you, and watch him get thrown out on his ear if he persists despite your wishes?

The link goes to a lengthy story where some 13 year old and his girlfriend break up. But they are both invited to a party where friends of both are attending. She doesn't want him around, but he doesn't care, making her feel uncomfortable. He sticks to the rules (not talking to her), but still harasses her in some way.

The moral of the story is: FfTBs, who are now hanging out together (PZ is posting there, too), have found out with their mind reading abilities that Vacula cannot be interested in the conference itself, thus they think his attendance is about annoying them. They think this as "women in secularism" is their turf, i.e. their territory and moral high ground they have claimed for themselves, therefore others are the intruders. A neat trick they keep using. Monopolize a topic, demand of others to show submission, demonize anyone who doesn't comply, and defend monopoly against intruders.

[John Greg]

Ophie the Mad Woman of FfTBville, goes to town on how Vacula's frequent invitations for her to appear on his show are harassment. Really, she is bonkers; stark raving bonkers.

And the hatred in the comments is searing; amazingly vitriolic. And, of course, no proofs, no links, no citations, no quotes are offered to back up the many amazingly hostile Vacula denunciations.

Link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ning-time/

I do not have much respect for him, but the level of evisceration going on at Ophie's Cesspool of Hate is just beyond the pale.

[Dick Strawkins]

I like this part of Swan's post:

On January 22, I sent a four-and-a-half-page letter to Ron Lindsay. Four pages of that letter (plus an additional 11 pdfs) documented the parts of the policy on hostile conduct that Vacula had already declared open contempt for, both with respect to speakers at the conference, potential attendees, the conference itself, and secular conferences in general. Unlike Reinhardt, I’m perfectly comfortable putting my own name on my work.

What the actual fuck? I'm totes hiding my identity here in the 'Pit. No one will ever figure out that “D4M10N” is actually “DAMION” (elite uncrackable code!) or be clever enough to click the links in my sig, or realise that I'm using the same damned profile pic in every fucking forum. I'm a fucking master of disguise, you guys.

Oh and as to *hostile* conduct, there is exactly zero evidence that JV has threatened anyone, unlike, say, Francisco B., Greg L., Josh S., or any of the other frenzied wielders of porcupines and torches. Not to mention their unsubtle threats of employer-doxxing directed at Abbie and Mykeru. The sheer chutzpah on these guys could power a wind-farm for a year.

Svan doesn't use her own name for her work.
She is, in addition to working as an IT analyst, a writer of SF/fantasy novels.
Just try searching for these under her name.
Nothing.
Even her maiden name produces nothing so presumably she is using a pseudonym.

[Steersman]

I like this part of Swan's post:

On January 22, I sent a four-and-a-half-page letter to Ron Lindsay. Four pages of that letter (plus an additional 11 pdfs) documented the parts of the policy on hostile conduct that Vacula had already declared open contempt for, both with respect to speakers at the conference, potential attendees, the conference itself, and secular conferences in general. Unlike Reinhardt, I’m perfectly comfortable putting my own name on my work.

What the actual fuck? I'm totes hiding my identity here in the 'Pit. No one will ever figure out that “D4M10N” is actually “DAMION” (elite uncrackable code!) or be clever enough to click the links in my sig, or realise that I'm using the same damned profile pic in every fucking forum. I'm a fucking master of disguise, you guys.

Oh and as to *hostile* conduct, there is exactly zero evidence that JV has threatened anyone, unlike, say, Francisco B., Greg L., Josh S., or any of the other frenzied wielders of porcupines and torches. Not to mention their unsubtle threats of employer-doxxing directed at Abbie and Mykeru. The sheer chutzpah on these guys could power a wind-farm for a year.

Looking like a whole pile of “he said; she said”. I realize that, to coin a phrase, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, but I can’t say that all of the drama is really helping all that much, except maybe to bring things to a head.

However, it would be nice to know precisely what evidence Zvan has for that supposed “hostile conduct” and “open contempt” that Justin is supposedly guilty of. One hopes that Lindsay in effect laughed in her face on viewing that “evidence”.

But I really have to wonder at her “update”:

Update #2: Reinhardt has posted this “solicitation”. Apparently one solicits attendees to complain by mentioning to two non-attendees and the conference organizer in a side conversation most people will never see that if speakers and attendees had concerns that it would be better they be made before Vacula raised a bunch of money and bought his ticket. One does not broadcast said solicitation to, say, people in an actual position to make a complaint.

Apart from wondering how she would have known that Spokesgay and company were “non-attendees” some 4 months ago, one has to ask whether she knows how many people they retweeted, e-mailed, posted, gossiped, or otherwise communicated that message to - speaking of "stochastic terrorism". As for her last sentence – which really doesn’t scan all that well – one has to assume she means Melody who didn’t seem particularly sympathetic to Justin’s right to be at that conference. One might reasonably wonder how Lindsay would view actions that don't look all that "impartial".

Although I have to wonder at this as well:

Also contrary to the story Reinhardt is telling, I didn’t ask for Vacula to be banned. Here’s the last half page of my letter:

Out of curiousity and as a point of reference, did you do so and what evidence did you have if you did?

[curriejean]

This is a bit embarrassing...feel free to read or ignore. I need to rant for a bit and this is the only place in my life that I feel I can do it.

Been lurking for a long time, paid attention to the dramariffics since E-gate. Finally created an account to respond to you because being broke sucks.

I don't know how much this will help (it's not a quick fix), but I recommend looking into http://www.constant-content.com. Judging by your post you're a capable writer, and you mentioned blogging, but in my experience making money from that is a much steeper uphill battle than outright freelancing.

Constant Content lets you set your own prices and takes 30% of your earnings. There's no cost to write for them, and they have a good editing team. I've only made a bit over a thousand bucks total writing casually for them over the last few years, but that's writing about what I want when I feel like it, rather than writing to their requests and needs. There's a lot more earning potential in that site than I've utilized.

[Guest]

oh yeah. I'm having fun with that on misplaced grace, where now, Oolon is the SME on...me. It is quite interesting to watch "skeptics" completely shit on the concept to gain feminist cred from their group.

so I heard "Just in case you missed John’s point: Women ain’t shit and deserve rape threats, harassment and slander/liberl because women ain’t shit. This is all John ever says. Anywhere. At any time."

IS THIS AS TRUE AS IT TOTALLY SOUNDS?????????

[sacha]

Fuck me running. What I carry:

laptop
ipad
power supplies for both.
a couple of cables
a mifi
business cards
a pen or three
headphones

and that's only when I'm going somewhere I'll need computer gear. If not, then I'm carrying:

phone
wallet
keys

What the fuck kind of paranoid life do you have when you're ALWAYS carrying a tool to break glass with.

haha! and a Police baton!

I've never understood womens' fascination with a purse, or handbag. Why the fuck carry around a bag of crap everywhere?

I carry my phone and keys plus a few business cards and some cash in my pocket. sometimes a lip sunblock.

That's it.

really who needs anything else? Emergency medicine (like an inhaler for people with asthma) is all I can think of.

[Aneris]

Posted it wrongly into the false thread. Here it goes...

I began with the #FTBIrony hashtag, anyone who likes might add his favorite exploit of our favorite bloggers.

[sacha]

not at all uncommon. Many successful and powerful CEOs are known to spend time with a Dominatrix.

I could go into detail about the psychology here, but instead let me just tell you that it is a rare man who understands what I want. Many exhibit submissive behaviour in response to my confidence.

Never quite understood that.

which? or both?

[Steersman]

Posted it wrongly into the false thread. Here it goes...

I began with the #FTBIrony hashtag, anyone who likes might add his favorite exploit of our favorite bloggers.

Liked this comment of yours, although I wonder what led up to it:

Aneris F. Nord ‏@Aneris23 41m "Calling someone an idiot is ableist, you moron!" #FTBIrony

So hard to keep up with the changing catechism over there. For instance, Jadehawk recently took me to task for arguing that “idiot” was “ableist”:

Well, my impression is that, at least according to the cant and catechism of Pope Myers and his merry band of deluded clowns, “idiot” – which you called me – qualifies as an “ableist” slur.

a)your impression is wrong.
b)this is not FTB, nor is it pharyngula; nor is it e.g. Finke’s blog, which is why “stupid” is fine. Disagreements about the extent of splash damage do not however invalidate the concept any more than disagreements about mechanics of a speciation event invalidate evolution.

Do note also, for extra lolz, the equating of the “theory” of “splash damage” with that of evolution and speciation.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Where is the positive evidence that Eusebius made up Christianity? The fact that we don't have the documents that he says he references isn't evidence as we don't have a lot of documents about anything prior to that time.

The early christian fathers had no compunction against interpolations, deletions, or making up stuff out of whole cloth, and there are ample examples of each. This makes all early christian writings suspect. But as you note, we can't just reject the personages and works Eusebius mentions without a compelling reason. (We only know of Celsus via Origen, and no one doubts that Celsus existed.)

The trouble is, what seem to be prima facie corroborating witnesses often are not. So we have Eusebius telling us about Ireneaus telling us about Polycarp. This merits caution, though not rejection out of hand.

It seems implausible that Eusebius' history of the church is a complete work of fiction, even conceding that he may have included some fictional figures who he assumed were real. So, pace Michael Gray, the existence of (real) early church fathers, so upset with the heresy of (a real) Marcion that they wrote at length against it, indicates the existence of a Markan gospel no later than the 2nd Century.

What did all of these Bishops believe before Eusebius made up Christianity? Why did they just meekly agree to go along with the fiction?

From what I understand, fragments of gnostic manuscripts predate the canon. Many competing cults existed; the trinitarian cult in Rome eventually eradicated the others. The mysterious fact that early christians were known as "followers of Chrestus" (i.e. 'the good', not 'the anointed one') may hint at an original cult alien to what we now conceive of as 'christianity.'

Also with the manuscripts. Not only do modern scholars have to be either incompetent or part of a vast conspiracy, the scribes who wrote the mss hundreds of years after they are currently dated had to be smart enough to write using the correct style on the correct material of the time (why not write in the style of 60AD?). Not only that they had to make sure that fifteen hundred years later would have the number of documents we would expect to find as Christianity grew.

Not entirely sure what you're asking here. Some general observations:
1) As the majority of biblical scholars are believers, one could well describe them as forming a "conspiracy" to date the gospels & mss to fit their a priori conclusion re. the timeline of the Jesus narrative;

2) Interpolations are usually detected precisely because the scribes did not write in the style & vocab of the original author;

3) Michael Gray correctly noted that interpretation of mss via letter forms, etc. is subject to bias. My understanding is, skeptics, using the same tools & methods, date the extant mss later than believers, placing their origin just a little after the Nicene merge/purge, or even centuries later;

4) Modern discoveries of purged, heretical gospels have undermined the neat, orthodox timeline of the evolution of christianity;

5) Before the Council of Nicaea, there was a profusion of gospel versions and assorted apocrypha, befitting a fluid and diverse agglomeration of christian sects. The number of documents we have today is far fewer than we'd expect.

[Aneris]

[...] {something about 'cunt', again} [...]

You seem desperate to escape the point that in Britain 'cunt' has a different definition. You slipped the US definition in and hoped nobody would notice.

I wonder why this is important for anyone. Sure, the "other side" is quite anal about it. However look at it this way: Let's say tomorrow everyone agrees that its really one of the bad werdz. Meanwhile in the parallel universe everyone agrees that it's merely an insult. Alright and then? Whatever comes out, neither of it says anything about the mindset of a person (which I thought is kind of the point, dealing with idiots that take everything as a character test to draw wild assumptions in order to demonize and feed their own narrative). But, there is certainly a correlation between vocabulary and milieu and it might be one of those terms that indicate (in some cultures) that a person belongs to a particular one.

I think you sort of answered your own question: to cut the legs out from under those “wild assumptions” used to demonize others and feed their own narratives. For instance, Jadehawk is quite sure that “cunt” and the like qualifies as a “slur” which is, apparently, defined in her and the FfTB lexicon as being automatically applicable to an entire class, even though there’s not a shred of evidence for the claim in any dictionary I’ve looked through. The only type of word that I know that that mechanism might apply to are ones like “murder”, and “rapist” where the opprobrium is, by definition, applicable to every individual in the class.

Yet she, and Zvan and many of her ilk, use that as some sort of carte blanche to insult their interlocutors while denying others the right to return the favour. Bunch of gutless wonders.

I agree. Before it became a trench war with sides getting stuck in the mud, their wordplay looked all about "being right" and not at all about any social issue. When I still discussed at FfTB/Pharyngula, I noticed several language games that came across as a power fantasy of them. In essence, they invented ever new allegations with the clear intention to have the target show submission to them (alternatively, get them ejected). They would attack on the mildest reason and blow it out of proportion, and then extort apologies and the like from their targets. Otherwise, if a new user would approach already submissive, ideally with a sexist confession story, they would welcome them.

But you know my pet theory about Pharyngula. They are people who want to be right, and want to show off their knowledge. The way to do that was historically to find a Creationist (i.e. someone who is wrong by default) to use as a foil in order to peacock with biology knowledge, to get positive strokes from peers, and thereby improve social standing within the ingroup. When that dried up, and the topic shifted towards social justice issue, they had to find a new way to achieve the same. Ultimately, in my opinion it doesn't matter how they identify a usable foil.

Someone set that idea, and others have picked it up since then, and yet others disagreed and continue to disagree. Because it is arbitrary and a game, I don't really see how this can be resolved. Nobody will change their mind about the issue, because, in my opinion, there is no issue. It's a game.

In my native language, the word is only used by the rather uneducated teenager idiots, wanna-be machos and the like and is clearly sexist. No matter if the person itself is a sexist or not. Odds are they are sexists, as male counterparts (i.e. the equivalent of 'dick') are not used.

I’ll certainly agree that there are cases where the use of those words is “clearly sexist” or “clearly racist” – e.g., “all men are pricks”. And I’ll concede that there does seem to be some rather problematic levels of misogyny out there, frequently manifested in using “gendered epithets” in a categorical sense. But it seems a stretch to argue that every use of those and similar epithets as insults always qualifies as sexist, racist, or misanthropist.

Law of Fives and such, I heard the term 'Cunt' several times now and don't think that the meaning is quite the same as in my native language.

There are good atheists and bad atheists. There are good believers and bad believers. A cunt is a cunt and no god has ever changed that.

Do note also, for extra lolz, the equating of the “theory” of “splash damage” with that of evolution and speciation.

I do get the idea, but equating it with TOE is nonsense of course. Basically, if you take some description of a person, say "ginger" and use it as an insult, the people who are ginger get "splash damage". But as you see it doesn't make sense in the context of 'cunt'. However, there is also an issue Pinker called "euphemism threadmill" which you see with words like idiot, retard, moron. Each of them was a clinical description but was then used as an insult. After some time, usage of that term was condemned (since it was then considered an insult) and a new term was made up. Of course, the new term quickly was also used an insult...rinse and repeat.

[Hunt]

From the post Thibeault based his anti-vacculation post on:

http://outofthegdwaye.wordpress.com/201 ... mment-2345

Did I purposely do things in an attempt to force her hand? Yes. Did I do things with the intention of making her look silly? Yep. Was I enacting a calculated and methodical plan to ruin her experience and try to get her to do something irrational and blameworthy? You bet I was. Not just that, but I was manipulating friendships and social conventions to make other people complicit in my passive-aggressive vendetta.

Sorry to break this to you, George, but this was harassment per se. You were intentionally trying to create a hostile environment for her, you were trying to punish her as best as you could while still maintaining a pretense of moral superiority. Direct confrontation isn’t a necessary condition of harassment.

How is this really any different than the environment that PZ, Benson, Thibeault, (and who's next?) are attempting to create for Justin Vacula? The more I think about this situation, the more ridiculous it seems to try to exclude any type of interpersonal frisson from a convention. Isn't that what conventions, the best of them, have always been driven by? Think of some of the great scientific rivalries that locked horns at academic gatherings. Think of the Oxford evolution debate with Huxley. (Well, maybe that's elevating this a bit, but you get the idea.) What a bunch of pansies we've become when what basically boils down to intellectual differences become the basis for physical fear and loathing of "harassment." These days people would probably be imploring Huxley and Wilberforce to have convention security wrestle their respective opponents to the ground and physically eject them from the lecture hall.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Yep, this people are jokes. I'm starting to really enjoy living in a place where they're most likely not to go.

Still, Ireland is only a few hours' flight away. I am Schrodinger's AI attendee...

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Also, Hunt, from that post you link to, we get this gem:

Oolon, thanks for the info. I’m aware of the name Vacula but I’ve tried to steer clear of the whole flame war and I’ve avoided going anywhere near the Slymepit. I got enough of a whiff of what’s been happening from PZ, Rebecca, Greta, Ophelia and the rest of the crowd at FTB. Not much interested in hearing from the Slymepit or learning the names and histories of the denizens.*

[Hunt]

I saw that one too. Well, if they're getting their info from PZ, Rebecca, Greta, and Ophelia, then I guess you can't blame them. It's kind of like in Ringu, if you come to the Slymepit YOU WILL DIE SEVEN DAYS LATER!

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

If your comment starts with "Oolon, thanks for the info", it's a very bad start indeed. And getting your info from one single group of people without further inquiry won't help you understand what's going on. Skepticism 101.

Whatever happened to real skeptics? Oh, right, they either don't give a clam, or they come to the Pit. Or they don't gice a clam and still come to the Pit (hi!)

[windy]

For those wondering:

Why stoop to his level and try to make him uncomfortable right back, when he’s clearly only going to make others uncomfortable and score points with his supporters and our detractors? Why not simply tell him he’s not wanted when/if he approaches you, and watch him get thrown out on his ear if he persists despite your wishes?

The link goes to a lengthy story where some 13 year old and his girlfriend break up. But they are both invited to a party where friends of both are attending. She doesn't want him around, but he doesn't care, making her feel uncomfortable. He sticks to the rules (not talking to her), but still harasses her in some way.

"Grade 13", actually, so practically adults.

So how do you think she reacted?

She got mad.

She cried.

She had to be consoled by several other guests, she made a scene, and then she left.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 869154.jpg

Even if the guy was arguably acting a bit dickish, this is the girl getting mad that she couldn't win at the game she herself set up. She was the bigger dick by far. And this warrants "sharp pangs of guilt" from the guy several years later? Infantilization of women, that's what it is.

[BarnOwl]

Yes, 1st author, and the other two are PIs. I did ALLLLLLLLL that. All of it. X10000 times I fucked it up before I got the protocols down. Gonna have 'Nam flashbacks thinking about the flow-- Just getting the protocols down for the competitions probably should have been its own methods paper.

And Bossman wrote the funding section, lol I dunno, I am a 'Miss'-- not a Dr. yet ;)

So awesome, Abbie, well done! Congratulations!!!

And this has to be one of the funniest descriptions in virology EVAH:

The envelope protein-- The one many vaccines are trying to target-- Has no problem derping around sequence space. Its like that kid in college who was literally out partying every night, but still somehow managed to get good grades. Env is a fucking douche.

:lol:

[Zenspace]

Here is a (public) reply in my recent twitter exchange with my somewhat-namesake Eristae:

[...]

oh yeah. I'm having fun with that on misplaced grace, where now, Oolon is the SME on...me. It is quite interesting to watch "skeptics" completely shit on the concept to gain feminist cred from their group.

You know John, "you would only contribute negative energy to the situation and all you would achieve is escalation of the conflict."*, like you are disturbing some chakra, or break the ley lines from flowing with your presence. Perhaps atheist should shut up as voicing their opinion might upset the religious people (actually, that line of reasoning is behind some blasphemy laws)...

For those wondering:

Why stoop to his level and try to make him uncomfortable right back, when he’s clearly only going to make others uncomfortable and score points with his supporters and our detractors? Why not simply tell him he’s not wanted when/if he approaches you, and watch him get thrown out on his ear if he persists despite your wishes?

The link goes to a lengthy story where some 13 year old and his girlfriend break up. But they are both invited to a party where friends of both are attending. She doesn't want him around, but he doesn't care, making her feel uncomfortable. He sticks to the rules (not talking to her), but still harasses her in some way.

The moral of the story is: FfTBs, who are now hanging out together (PZ is posting there, too), have found out with their mind reading abilities that Vacula cannot be interested in the conference itself, thus they think his attendance is about annoying them. They think this as "women in secularism" is their turf, i.e. their territory and moral high ground they have claimed for themselves, therefore others are the intruders. A neat trick they keep using. Monopolize a topic, demand of others to show submission, demonize anyone who doesn't comply, and defend monopoly against intruders.

Exactly right. The resemblance to the behavior of the priest/clerical class is stunning.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Yes, 1st author, and the other two are PIs. I did ALLLLLLLLL that. All of it. X10000 times I fucked it up before I got the protocols down. Gonna have 'Nam flashbacks thinking about the flow-- Just getting the protocols down for the competitions probably should have been its own methods paper.

And Bossman wrote the funding section, lol I dunno, I am a 'Miss'-- not a Dr. yet ;)

So awesome, Abbie, well done! Congratulations!!!

And this has to be one of the funniest descriptions in virology EVAH:

The envelope protein-- The one many vaccines are trying to target-- Has no problem derping around sequence space. Its like that kid in college who was literally out partying every night, but still somehow managed to get good grades. Env is a fucking douche.

:lol:

Now for a challenge: how many apostrophes can we count in this paper?

(disclosure: i think I didn't understand a word of it, beside "the" and "and". I'm dumb, like that)

[Michael K Gray]

I owe all of you an apology for my intemperate post, regarding the origins of the Christian church.
But I owe a most profound apology to the inadvertent target of my exasperation toward an utterly unrelated episode.
(Matt, was it? I forget)
I had just recieved some more devestating personal familial news, and had acquired a throbbing stress head-ache not four hours before.
I now recognise that I should not have pressed [SEND].
Although I stand by the substance of my message, my animosity toward an undeserving target was unforgivable.

I also see mentioned that someone raised "Meggido", which I had deliberately omitted.
(It introduces quite unnecessary complications)

My didactic method is to challenge my interlocutor's bold pronouncements, and get them to fetch the evidence for me.
For that is the very path to their personal discovery, rather than reliance on received "wisdom".

This is despite the fact that I know damn-well exactly what it is going to be.
Exactly what every Uni lecturer does.
(And if it turns out that I am incorrect, I will hail the independent discovery in neon lights!)

"Show me your evidence for your claims."
What could be simpler?

P.S.
I was genuinely fascinated when at least one poster suggested that they were actually interested in this arcane and off-topic subject!

[BarnOwl]

Ophie the Mad Woman of FfTBville, goes to town on how Vacula's frequent invitations for her to appear on his show are harassment. Really, she is bonkers; stark raving bonkers.

And the hatred in the comments is searing; amazingly vitriolic. And, of course, no proofs, no links, no citations, no quotes are offered to back up the many amazingly hostile Vacula denunciations.

Link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ning-time/

I do not have much respect for him, but the level of evisceration going on at Ophie's Cesspool of Hate is just beyond the pale.

Her behavior is certainly bonkers, but there appears to be a method to her madness. I'm perplexed by her ability to attract sympathizers and supporters, because from my perspective, she hasn't done much of anything constructive. She has no visible means of significant income, yet seems to live quite comfortably in a city that has a high cost of living. By comparison, she makes Myers, whose approach to his current teaching seems at best lackadaisical, look productive and hard-working. That Ophelia can stir up so much hostility and clueless toadying on her behalf is mind-boggling. It's not as if she's an inspiring, interesting, or lucid speaker at conferences, either ... she just drones on in those imperious upper-class East Coast tones.

[d4m10n]

Also contrary to the story Reinhardt is telling, I didn’t ask for Vacula to be banned. Here’s the last half page of my letter:

Out of curiousity and as a point of reference, did you do so and what evidence did you have if you did?

Did I say that Stephanie and Melody were asking their friends to write to CFI to get Justin banned? Yes, I said that.

What is the evidence for that? Much of it may be found on Twitter: http://t.co/gMIrBnOWXC

[Michael K Gray]

I have heard time and time again from women that rather than external looks, it is "what is on the inside" that really counts.
Then they complain about men who try to get inside them.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

91 apostrophes (not counting references) in the paper, 9 being actual apostrophes, and not quotemarks.

Abbie paper, all right. :lol:

[BarnOwl]

Now for a challenge: how many apostrophes can we count in this paper?

(disclosure: i think I didn't understand a word of it, beside "the" and "and". I'm dumb, like that)

Not dumb at all. Scientific papers, and meeting abstracts for that matter, have a constraining style and jargon that at times border on the shibbolethic. That's one of the reasons that I ask students in one of my graduate courses to produce some "out-of-the-box" writing for non-scientists, rather than just asking them to write yet another mock poster or mock proposal (like all my colleagues do). The pamphlets they create (directed towards patients and their families) on birth defects and genetic disorders are fantastic - I wish I could share them.

Incidentally, in the context of my extended family, I am defective in musical ability. I love music and appreciate many genres, and I'm not tone deaf, but I have no facility for music knowledge, creativity, or playing an instrument. I have minimal ability to play the piano, but only because I had years of lessons as a kid. I think the main problem is that I'm rhythmically-challenged. This is an embarrassment and a disappointment at family gatherings and other social functions at which everyone else seems to be making music spontaneously.

[Hunt]

Ophie the Mad Woman of FfTBville, goes to town on how Vacula's frequent invitations for her to appear on his show are harassment. Really, she is bonkers; stark raving bonkers.

And the hatred in the comments is searing; amazingly vitriolic. And, of course, no proofs, no links, no citations, no quotes are offered to back up the many amazingly hostile Vacula denunciations.

Link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ning-time/

I do not have much respect for him, but the level of evisceration going on at Ophie's Cesspool of Hate is just beyond the pale.

Her behavior is certainly bonkers, but there appears to be a method to her madness. I'm perplexed by her ability to attract sympathizers and supporters, because from my perspective, she hasn't done much of anything constructive. She has no visible means of significant income, yet seems to live quite comfortably in a city that has a high cost of living. By comparison, she makes Myers, whose approach to his current teaching seems at best lackadaisical, look productive and hard-working. That Ophelia can stir up so much hostility and clueless toadying on her behalf is mind-boggling. It's not as if she's an inspiring, interesting, or lucid speaker at conferences, either ... she just drones on in those imperious upper-class East Coast tones.

She doesn't seem too eager to stop her readers from giving sympathy donations after her (so-called) harassments, which was a pattern begun when some here criticized Greta for buying designer shoes after soliciting funds for her treatment. (And I donated to her and was happy to do it.) It's kind of funny how they think that every donation is a friggin dagger through slymepitter's hearts, while I personally don't give a shit how much money Benson juices out of her sycophants, and I doubt many people here do. Let her exist on caviar and champagne; the more she depletes her readers of their money, the better. She's probably getting soc. security, she gets some coin from her writing, some royalty, speaking honorariums, etc. And then there's her donate button. Who the hell knows how much she's raking in from that. (Keep up that harassment, slymepitters!) She's probably doing okay. You never know about people's personal finances. I myself know people who are just buying crap after crap after crap. Have no idea where their money is coming from. They might be robbing banks for all I know. Other people who appear to be flush are on the brink of bankruptcy. You just never really know from surface appearance. For all we know, Benson might be an independently wealthy millionaire.

[guest]

http://debunkingdenialism.com/2013/04/3 ... tatistics/

I noticed it's starting to trend on Twitter. Why not raise its SEO in other ways too?

[Hunt]

I have heard time and time again from women that rather than external looks, it is "what is on the inside" that really counts.
Then they complain about men who try to get inside them.

I think they're talking about what is mental.

In other words, you're thinking with the wrong head.

"Ba dum bump"

[Michael K Gray]

I think that this debate has lost its skepticism. I think that some Atheists so want to rubbish Christianity that they become like Creationists who turn the tiniest disagreement into a reason to throw out Evolution.

I, too, used to think that very thing.
I am most certainly not an atheist who wishes to rubbish Xtianity for the sake of it.

When I was 12 or thereabouts, I accepted that "obviously" a Jesus existed, even if he was not "magical".
I mean: so many elderly and respected scholars told me so, as had scholars before them.
It seemed like a solid building on concrete foundation stones two millenia old.
It quite simply can't be a conspiracy!
(As you allude)

But: I set out to find for myself that of which these scores of scholars knew as inviolable "truths".
I worked backwards.
I read in my New testament the "ages" of the Gospels, and the scholars who had dated them.
Then found that almost all of them were relying on the dating of two or three 19thC "scholars", but successfully amplifying their effect by virtue of that reality that so many of their brethren also relied on these "scholars".
(These few 19thC scholars did not detail their sources for their supreme revelation as to the dates of non-existent mss)

So, by a magical incestuous fairy circle-jerk of references to 2 or 3 unreliable and biased Christian ignoramuses, these scholars had set up an edifice of echoes, which were printed in the frontispieces of my bibles, presented as incontrovertible fact, whereas they are nothing more than wild 19thC wishful thinking, based on ludicrous mis-translation! (Of Hebrew, Aramaic, as well as Syriac)
(I shall exempt most of the German scholars in the late 19thC who, almost to a man, arrived at the conclusion that the NT was substantially a fabrication²)

So, yes: it IS a conspiracy of sorts.
A conspiracy by those who's employment relies on perpetuating the lie.

____________________________
² 'Tis from the German scholars that we get the meaningless abortion of a word: "Jehovah".
10 Slymepoints for the first correct answer.

And yes: "Mountain Man" is a lone nutter, as one might know from my dusty responses to him in USENET.

[Michael K Gray]

I think they're talking about what is mental.

You might be correct.

[CommanderTuvok]

Could you provide a link, or at least a date range, for the Becky Whatnot/CLS debacle? I remember it, but would love to re-read the Pit from that time.

I think it was the middle of 2012. Search "cuntgate" on the Slymepit, and there are some posts about it.

[Scented Nectar]

Making this was probably a terrible idea, posting it here is probably worse.
in my defence I made it on the toilet.



Sorry.

Your youtube name gives me a nice nostalgia! This used to be one of my favourite songs when I was a kid. Totally psychedelic even before I discovered drugs. :)

[youtube]liWIbE1gQTk[/youtube]

[Scented Nectar]

Re: Queen Bee lying through her teeth again.

Remember when she lied about Coffee Loving Skeptic, and then clumsily justified it by searching through his tweet history (AFTER SHE WAS CAUGHT LYING) and then using the excuse that CSS said something she didn't like a year previously? You STILL fucking lied, Twatson!

It will be more difficult for her to hide this lie.

Yes. I remember that. She also sent him an uninvited, sexually graphic (erect cock), sexually violent (sharp claws grabbing a penis), bestiality containing, ascii picture of a "penis bird". You see, it's totally ok when she does the type of sexual harrassment which she's always pretending people are doing to her. She included quotes of things Coffee Loving Skeptic had said in the past which she didn't like, followed by the penis bird which was her response to it - sending sexually graphic and violent imagery uninvited to someone!

Anyone who doesn't remember it, can read about it at:
Rebecca Watson Lies Again & PZ Swallows It Whole and
Update On The "Cunt" Lie

It's totally ok when Twatson does it. She must have borrowed some of Ophie's parallel logic.
http://coffeelovingskeptic.com/wp-conte ... .27.18.png

[Scented Nectar]

Abbie, I'm curious about something. I've read that some people consider viruses to be alive and some don't. I'm inclined (in a layman's kind of way) to think of them as alive, since they reproduce and pass on their (RNA?). What do you think of the whole alive vs not alive thing?

[Submariner]

Also contrary to the story Reinhardt is telling, I didn’t ask for Vacula to be banned. Here’s the last half page of my letter:

Out of curiousity and as a point of reference, did you do so and what evidence did you have if you did?

Did I say that Stephanie and Melody were asking their friends to write to CFI to get Justin banned? Yes, I said that.

What is the evidence for that? Much of it may be found on Twitter: http://t.co/gMIrBnOWXC

I don't remember what Zvan is referring to here:

szvan
Stephanie Zvan@szvan
@JlnFrancisco @MelodyHensley @SpokesGay @ingdamnit The part where he demanded my silence to stop harassment? You know, what I just said?

Anyone know what the hell she's talking about?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Yes. I remember that. She also sent him an uninvited, sexually graphic (erect cock), sexually violent (sharp claws grabbing a penis), bestiality containing, ascii picture of a "penis bird". You see, it's totally ok when she does the type of sexual harrassment which she's always pretending people are doing to her. She included quotes of things Coffee Loving Skeptic had said in the past which she didn't like, followed by the penis bird which was her response to it - sending sexually graphic and violent imagery uninvited to someone!

I hope you're being hyperbolic there. "Violent imagery"? Really? Come on, let's not stoop to the SJW level. (and yes, I'm almost sure you are being hyperbolic).

[Hunt]

Abbie, I'm curious about something. I've read that some people consider viruses to be alive and some don't. I'm inclined (in a layman's kind of way) to think of them as alive, since they reproduce and pass on their (RNA?). What do you think of the whole alive vs not alive thing?

Not addressed to me, but you can consider them either, both or neither. I prefer neither, since I consider the question non sequitur and a holdover from past "elan vital" distinctions of matter that were (or should have been) destroyed by the advent of organic chemistry (synthesis of urea by Wohler, etc.) There is no distinction between living and dead matter. Even dead bodies are still potentially "alive" far longer than once thought. This is actually a very active area of emergency medicine.

[Tigzy]

I don't remember what Zvan is referring to here:

szvan
Stephanie Zvan@szvan
@JlnFrancisco @MelodyHensley @SpokesGay @ingdamnit The part where he demanded my silence to stop harassment? You know, what I just said?

Anyone know what the hell she's talking about?

I think it refers to JV saying, at sometime or another, that if you don't like being criticised for what you write, then don't write. It was something along those lines, anyways. In any case, it was contorted by the FC brigade to mean, in essence, that if you don't want to be harassed, then shut up.

[Submariner]

I think it refers to JV saying, at sometime or another, that if you don't like being criticised for what you write, then don't write. It was something along those lines, anyways. In any case, it was contorted by the FC brigade to mean, in essence, that if you don't want to be harassed, then shut up.

Ok, So it's a "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" kind ot thing. Got it.

[d4m10n]

I don't remember what Zvan is referring to here:

szvan
Stephanie Zvan@szvan
@JlnFrancisco @MelodyHensley @SpokesGay @ingdamnit The part where he demanded my silence to stop harassment? You know, what I just said?

Anyone know what the hell she's talking about?

I think it refers to JV saying, at sometime or another, that if you don't like being criticised for what you write, then don't write. It was something along those lines, anyways. In any case, it was contorted by the FC brigade to mean, in essence, that if you don't want to be harassed, then shut up.

Sounds about right.

If I had to guess, she might mean this post: http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2012 ... -internet/

[Tigzy]

I think it refers to JV saying, at sometime or another, that if you don't like being criticised for what you write, then don't write. It was something along those lines, anyways. In any case, it was contorted by the FC brigade to mean, in essence, that if you don't want to be harassed, then shut up.

Ok, So it's a "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" kind ot thing. Got it.

I think it's more along the lines of: 'Our ideas are so wonderful and we are such good people, that pretty much all critcism is unwarranted. Therefore, those who are criticising us and our ideas aren't really criticising at all, because there is nothing to criticise. They are just bad people who are harassing us.'

[Submariner]

I think it's more along the lines of: 'Our ideas are so wonderful and we are such good people, that pretty much all critcism is unwarranted. Therefore, those who are criticising us and our ideas aren't really criticising at all, because there is nothing to criticise. They are just bad people who are harassing us.'

Actually, after reading the link provided by D4m10n above, it's more like: advising women how to take preventative measures to minimize their chances of being raped is called "victim blaming".

[Metalogic42]

I think that this debate has lost its skepticism. I think that some Atheists so want to rubbish Christianity that they become like Creationists who turn the tiniest disagreement into a reason to throw out Evolution.

I, too, used to think that very thing.
I am most certainly not an atheist who wishes to rubbish Xtianity for the sake of it.

When I was 12 or thereabouts, I accepted that "obviously" a Jesus existed, even if he was not "magical".
I mean: so many elderly and respected scholars told me so, as had scholars before them.
It seemed like a solid building on concrete foundation stones two millenia old.
It quite simply can't be a conspiracy!
(As you allude)

But: I set out to find for myself that of which these scores of scholars knew as inviolable "truths".
I worked backwards.
I read in my New testament the "ages" of the Gospels, and the scholars who had dated them.
Then found that almost all of them were relying on the dating of two or three 19thC "scholars", but successfully amplifying their effect by virtue of that reality that so many of their brethren also relied on these "scholars".
(These few 19thC scholars did not detail their sources for their supreme revelation as to the dates of non-existent mss)

So, by a magical incestuous fairy circle-jerk of references to 2 or 3 unreliable and biased Christian ignoramuses, these scholars had set up an edifice of echoes, which were printed in the frontispieces of my bibles, presented as incontrovertible fact, whereas they are nothing more than wild 19thC wishful thinking, based on ludicrous mis-translation! (Of Hebrew, Aramaic, as well as Syriac)
(I shall exempt most of the German scholars in the late 19thC who, almost to a man, arrived at the conclusion that the NT was substantially a fabrication²)

So, yes: it IS a conspiracy of sorts.
A conspiracy by those who's employment relies on perpetuating the lie.

____________________________
² 'Tis from the German scholars that we get the meaningless abortion of a word: "Jehovah".
10 Slymepoints for the first correct answer.

And yes: "Mountain Man" is a lone nutter, as one might know from my dusty responses to him in USENET.

As far as I'm concerned...while the age of Christianity/the gospels might be an interesting historical question, for the purposes of debates about religion, it doesn't really matter. Even the earliest ages for Mark (c. 70 A.D.) are still pretty far after the supposed time of the crucifixion (c. 33 A.D.), and when we're talking about something as weak as eyewitness testimony*, in the context of the length of a human life, 40ish years is a long time. People tend to forget or misremember important details of even dramatic events after that long. At that point, it doesn't even matter whether Jesus existed**, the testimony is still unreliable.

____________________________________________

* To demonstrate the weakness of eyewitness testimony, just look at all the instances of it we have for UFO sightings. Thousands (at least) of people, in all kinds of conditions, many independent events. And it has an additional hurdle to jump when "supernatural" or otherwise amazing events are on the table. Eyewitness testimony that you had a sandwich for lunch last Tuesday? That's fine. Eyewitness testimony that you had a sandwich for lunch exactly 3 years and 47 days ago? Not so much, but maybe. Eyewitness testimony that you had real ambrosia for lunch exactly 3 years and 47 days ago? Throw that shit out, you're either lying or crazy (but you can still be an otherwise good person, Mr. Lewis :lol: )

**Assume he existed, for the sake of argument. Dead people still don't come back to life, and God still doesn't exist.

[Scented Nectar]

Yes. I remember that. She also sent him an uninvited, sexually graphic (erect cock), sexually violent (sharp claws grabbing a penis), bestiality containing, ascii picture of a "penis bird". You see, it's totally ok when she does the type of sexual harrassment which she's always pretending people are doing to her. She included quotes of things Coffee Loving Skeptic had said in the past which she didn't like, followed by the penis bird which was her response to it - sending sexually graphic and violent imagery uninvited to someone!

I hope you're being hyperbolic there. "Violent imagery"? Really? Come on, let's not stoop to the SJW level. (and yes, I'm almost sure you are being hyperbolic).

Yes. I'm referring to it in the extreme over-reaction that they would have if a man did it to a woman. :D

[Dick Strawkins]

New from Taslima: To hell with democracy, dictatorship is the way forward!

http://i.imgur.com/onCYVkJ.png

[Scented Nectar]

Abbie, I'm curious about something. I've read that some people consider viruses to be alive and some don't. I'm inclined (in a layman's kind of way) to think of them as alive, since they reproduce and pass on their (RNA?). What do you think of the whole alive vs not alive thing?

Not addressed to me, but you can consider them either, both or neither. I prefer neither, since I consider the question non sequitur and a holdover from past "elan vital" distinctions of matter that were (or should have been) destroyed by the advent of organic chemistry (synthesis of urea by Wohler, etc.) There is no distinction between living and dead matter. Even dead bodies are still potentially "alive" far longer than once thought. This is actually a very active area of emergency medicine.

Good points. It's a problematic word.

[halophilic]

I don't agree at all but I see where she's coming from. Part of me thinks that the curriculum for all children in the US should just be handed down by the National Academy and followed without question. Some things just shouldn't be put to a vote because there are vast populations of assholes with money.

I would rather that rationality would organically triumph over time though.

[Tony Parsehole]

New from Taslima: To hell with democracy, dictatorship is the way forward!

http://i.imgur.com/onCYVkJ.png

Honest dictators would solve a lot of problems but then again so would magic wands and genie lamps.
It's a shame none of those things exist.

[Aneris]

New from Taslima: To hell with democracy, dictatorship is the way forward!

http://i.imgur.com/onCYVkJ.png

preferably 'well equipped' since only then they are mentally stable enough (and attractive), according to Taslima.

[Tigzy]

New from Taslima: To hell with democracy, dictatorship is the way forward!

http://i.imgur.com/onCYVkJ.png

So just replace one totalitarianism with another. Ri-i-ight...

Or is it replacing one form of theocracy with another?

A totalitarian state is in effect a theocracy, and its ruling caste, in order to keep its position, has to be thought of as infallible.

In any case, Taslima elaborates:

But I can not totally wipe out my thoughts, that, it would be ultimately good for Muslim countries if they get dedicated and honest, non-corrupt and super-strict atheist or secular dictators.

Good luck with finding such dictators, Taz. Perhaps you'll find them in the irradiated wasteland of Chernobyl, currently earmarked as a safe haven for social justice warriors with issues.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

I owe all of you an apology for my intemperate post, regarding the origins of the Christian church.
But I owe a most profound apology to the inadvertent target of my exasperation toward an utterly unrelated episode.
(Matt, was it? I forget)

My didactic method is to challenge my interlocutor's bold pronouncements, and get them to fetch the evidence for me. For that is the very path to their personal discovery, rather than reliance on received "wisdom".

No worries. It's way too easy for us to misspeak or misread on the interwebs, and it was obvious we'd just crossed wires. Apologies are such a rare thing these days. I truly appreciate yours, though it was hardly necessary.

I heartily enjoy an impassioned discussion with the forceful exposition of ideas and challenging of assumptions, something incompatible with chronic butthurt.

And yes, the origin of christianity and the Jesus narrative timeline is a topic of great interest to me, one I've been investigating as best I can for a few years now. As a youth, I received extensive RC catechism on the subject, then rejected it as not making any sense. Now, I feel compelled to return to it, to figure out to my satisfaction how and why it makes no sense. I'm very excited to be able to connect with others to share information and insight.

[Aneris]

Let's see if the magicks work...

[jjbinx007]

Feminist posts rape threats. Turns out she wrote them.

http://laramielive.com/meg-lanker-simon ... shes-post/

[Matt Cavanaugh]

As far as I'm concerned...while the age of Christianity/the gospels might be an interesting historical question, for the purposes of debates about religion, it doesn't really matter.

1) And my own interest is primarily from an historical perspective;

2) As you say, the supernatural claims like resurrection are enough to reject the entire premise. Still, debunking the historicity of Jesus is useful, as christians rest much of their case on that. By asserting that the gospels are more or less the actual accounts of a real preacher/philosopher/wise man inspired by God, they can continue in their faith while leaving expansive wiggle-room to accept or dismiss this or that miracle.

When the seemingly factual details of the Jesus story are exposed as nothing more than relatively late midrash embellishments, the christian can no longer claim that his or her Jesus differs substantively from the other 39,999 deities us humans have made up.