Periodic Table of Swearing

[Tigzy]

Hey. Any of you looking for work?


http://i.imgur.com/7LnTi.png

Must not be fond of Peperamis or Slim Jims.

[EdgePenguin]

Hello again :)

Well, the important thing to remember when discussing tax policy with Norwegians is that we currently have a total tax level of about 70 % of our income. In 'Mmerica I believe your have quite a lower total rate. Note: I include VAT and other levies in the total tax level. For example:

- In Norway gasoline are taxed at approximately 88 % (one litre of gas costs 5 bucks, i.e. one gallon costs about 21 bucks here).

This is a regressive tax; if you spend more of your income on petrol (e.g. if you are a low paid worker who commutes in a car) you get hit harder by this tax. I'm puzzled as to why this is a plank of your opposition to progressive tax?

- Alcohol is taxed at around 70 %. One bottle of middle-of-the-road red wine costs 28 bucks at the state monopoly alcohol outlet

Unless being rich affords you a few dozen extra livers, this is going to again hit the poor proportionally harder than the rich. Again regressive.

- All merchandise are taxed at 28 %. So, for example, a bottle of coke's gross price is maybe 1 dollar. But then you have to add 28 % VAT (1,28), then you have to add the sugar tax (no joke) making the price about 2 bucks. Then you have to add the CO2 tax, making the price about 2,3 bucks.

VAT normally has some lip service to being progressive (i.e. exemptions on essential items such as food) but it is basically flat (or arguably regressive, as rich people can often avoid it, or spend their money on things it doesn't apply to such as financial instruments)

- Income tax starts at 28 % (everyone have to pay this), then increases progressively up until 49 % (when you earn $132 000 and above). The exception is capital gains, which is always taxed at 28 %. So the truly rich only pay 28 % (this was introduced by our socialist PM in 1993).

You are now complaining that the progressive taxation in Norway is not progressive enough!

So you can understand us Norse dudes may (again, I assume) have a bit more gripe with the tax-issue than the average North-American.

But to your argument of 'earn more- pay more, earn less- pay less'. Is 28 % of 1 million dollars more or less than 28 % of 100k dollars? I do not buy the 'they can afford it, so they should pay' argument. In Norway we do not have a deficit. We have an annual surplus of about 1 BILL dollars, and we're only 5 million people. I am far more sympathetic to the tax policies of left-wingers in the US considering you have a huge deficit to deal with. But I would still argue that mayhaps you should start with reducing your military costs by half before you start taxing everyone, but I do not live in your country; so I understand that my opinions regarding this are worth diddly-squat.

I should've thought Norway is going to want to keep running a healthy surplus for when the North Sea oil runs out? My impression is that your government was far wiser investing that windfall than ours in the UK was.

[Eucliwood]

Hello again :)

Well, the important thing to remember when discussing tax policy with Norwegians is that we currently have a total tax level of about 70 % of our income. In 'Mmerica I believe your have quite a lower total rate. Note: I include VAT and other levies in the total tax level. For example:

- In Norway gasoline are taxed at approximately 88 % (one litre of gas costs 5 bucks, i.e. one gallon costs about 21 bucks here).

This is a regressive tax; if you spend more of your income on petrol (e.g. if you are a low paid worker who commutes in a car) you get hit harder by this tax. I'm puzzled as to why this is a plank of your opposition to progressive tax?

- Alcohol is taxed at around 70 %. One bottle of middle-of-the-road red wine costs 28 bucks at the state monopoly alcohol outlet

Unless being rich affords you a few dozen extra livers, this is going to again hit the poor proportionally harder than the rich. Again regressive.

- All merchandise are taxed at 28 %. So, for example, a bottle of coke's gross price is maybe 1 dollar. But then you have to add 28 % VAT (1,28), then you have to add the sugar tax (no joke) making the price about 2 bucks. Then you have to add the CO2 tax, making the price about 2,3 bucks.

VAT normally has some lip service to being progressive (i.e. exemptions on essential items such as food) but it is basically flat (or arguably regressive, as rich people can often avoid it, or spend their money on things it doesn't apply to such as financial instruments)

- Income tax starts at 28 % (everyone have to pay this), then increases progressively up until 49 % (when you earn $132 000 and above). The exception is capital gains, which is always taxed at 28 %. So the truly rich only pay 28 % (this was introduced by our socialist PM in 1993).

You are now complaining that the progressive taxation in Norway is not progressive enough!

So you can understand us Norse dudes may (again, I assume) have a bit more gripe with the tax-issue than the average North-American.

But to your argument of 'earn more- pay more, earn less- pay less'. Is 28 % of 1 million dollars more or less than 28 % of 100k dollars? I do not buy the 'they can afford it, so they should pay' argument. In Norway we do not have a deficit. We have an annual surplus of about 1 BILL dollars, and we're only 5 million people. I am far more sympathetic to the tax policies of left-wingers in the US considering you have a huge deficit to deal with. But I would still argue that mayhaps you should start with reducing your military costs by half before you start taxing everyone, but I do not live in your country; so I understand that my opinions regarding this are worth diddly-squat.

I should've thought Norway is going to want to keep running a healthy surplus for when the North Sea oil runs out? My impression is that your government was far wiser investing that windfall than ours in the UK was.

Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing here EdgePenguin... but I wasn't sure if I was interpreting his point right.

Ditto to this.

[dougal445]

okay, so its over 48 hrs since I put the video up, ~50k views and a 95 % approval rating,

and yet this is greeted by complete silence from baboon central. That's unprecedented!

Do they realize that they have been damned by their own words and the best thing they can do is ignore it and hope no one sees their stupidity/ hypocrisy?

Or are they saving it up for some devastating ad hominim 'we must drive TF out of the community like a pariah' type shit? FYI the last time they plotted as a group to do that... where they all conspired to release their blogs at the same time to be as devastating as possible, it resulted in me losing ~300 out of 150 000 subscribers. Wow, that blogging network is soooo powerfully influential!

Hmmm, kobolds, the one creature who everyone can laugh at without fear of reprisal!
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivat ... 486800.jpg

I'm going with "don't give it oxygen and it will go away". It will be interesting to see who cracks first - someone will.

i've not seen the vid' yet (on phone / low bandwidth) but i understand thunder invites people to mirror? Hopefully many will thus providing plenty of oxygen making the convo (even if only on youtube) impossible to ignore. I really hope finally something will give, the baboons will have to listen.
Hoorah Thunder!

[Oneiros666]

Oh okay. Well, don't use the term "anti socialist" everywhere cos Ive never seen that definition of anti socialism in my life. As for progressive tax... are you saying you're vehemently against taxing people for their wealth? It certainly helped here, with clinton... and then when bush wanted that shit undone....

Crash.

I am totally for that. If we're going to tax people, why not tax them for money they don't really need? Tax people who make less, well, less. Makes sense to me. If I made a great amount of money I wouldn't mind being taxed more. I don't understand being for taxes but being against taxing people who make more, more.

Hello again :)

Well, the important thing to remember when discussing tax policy with Norwegians is that we currently have a total tax level of about 70 % of our income. In 'Mmerica I believe your have quite a lower total rate. Note: I include VAT and other levies in the total tax level. For example:

- In Norway gasoline are taxed at approximately 88 % (one litre of gas costs 5 bucks, i.e. one gallon costs about 21 bucks here).
- Alcohol is taxed at around 70 %. One bottle of middle-of-the-road red wine costs 28 bucks at the state monopoly alcohol outlet
- All merchandise are taxed at 28 %. So, for example, a bottle of coke's gross price is maybe 1 dollar. But then you have to add 28 % VAT (1,28), then you have to add the sugar tax (no joke) making the price about 2 bucks. Then you have to add the CO2 tax, making the price about 2,3 bucks.
- Income tax starts at 28 % (everyone have to pay this), then increases progressively up until 49 % (when you earn $132 000 and above). The exception is capital gains, which is always taxed at 28 %. So the truly rich only pay 28 % (this was introduced by our socialist PM in 1993).

So you can understand us Norse dudes may (again, I assume) have a bit more gripe with the tax-issue than the average North-American.

But to your argument of 'earn more- pay more, earn less- pay less'. Is 28 % of 1 million dollars more or less than 28 % of 100k dollars? I do not buy the 'they can afford it, so they should pay' argument. In Norway we do not have a deficit. We have an annual surplus of about 1 BILL dollars, and we're only 5 million people. I am far more sympathetic to the tax policies of left-wingers in the US considering you have a huge deficit to deal with. But I would still argue that mayhaps you should start with reducing your military costs by half before you start taxing everyone, but I do not live in your country; so I understand that my opinions regarding this are worth diddly-squat.

28% of 1 million dollars is more than 28% of 100k dollars. Are you saying you do not approve of taking 28% of 1 million dollars as you take of 100k dollars or what? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. And if the country needs more help, hell, take even MORE from 1 million dollars. No guilt on my chest.

Hi :)

I am in favour of a reasonable level of taxation. But it should be flat. It shouldn't be progressive. If the flat tax level was applied rigorously, the truly rich (the 1 %) would actually pay more (in Norway) than they do today due to the many loopholes that exist today. I am not against taxes (I am no Ron Paul fan), but I am against punishing those who make more than others just because they do. Everyone should pay the same rate and imho this is fair as, again, 28 % of a million is more than 28 % of 100k.

But I totally get that people have differing views, I just happen to disagree with most of them ;-)

Back to my anti-socialism comment: Norway has been ruled by socialists for 8 years now and it's mainly due to our huge oil- fortune that we are doing well. Also, politics is not just about 'don't rock the boat' policies. It's about principles and I disagree with almost all of the Norwegian socialists' platform; hence I call myself anti-socialist.

[dougal445]

okay, so its over 48 hrs since I put the video up, ~50k views and a 95 % approval rating,

and yet this is greeted by complete silence from baboon central. That's unprecedented!

Do they realize that they have been damned by their own words and the best thing they can do is ignore it and hope no one sees their stupidity/ hypocrisy?

Or are they saving it up for some devastating ad hominim 'we must drive TF out of the community like a pariah' type shit? FYI the last time they plotted as a group to do that... where they all conspired to release their blogs at the same time to be as devastating as possible, it resulted in me losing ~300 out of 150 000 subscribers. Wow, that blogging network is soooo powerfully influential!

Hmmm, kobolds, the one creature who everyone can laugh at without fear of reprisal!
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivat ... 486800.jpg

I'm going with "don't give it oxygen and it will go away". It will be interesting to see who cracks first - someone will.

i've not seen the vid' yet (on phone / low bandwidth) but i understand thunder invites people to mirror? Hopefully many will thus providing plenty of oxygen making the convo (even if only on youtube) impossible to ignore. I really hope finally something will give, the baboons will have to listen.
Hoorah Thunder!

[Scented Nectar]

okay, so its over 48 hrs since I put the video up, ~50k views and a 95 % approval rating,

and yet this is greeted by complete silence from baboon central. That's unprecedented!

Do they realize that they have been damned by their own words and the best thing they can do is ignore it and hope no one sees their stupidity/ hypocrisy?

Or are they saving it up for some devastating ad hominim 'we must drive TF out of the community like a pariah' type shit? FYI the last time they plotted as a group to do that... where they all conspired to release their blogs at the same time to be as devastating as possible, it resulted in me losing ~300 out of 150 000 subscribers. Wow, that blogging network is soooo powerfully influential!

Hmmm, kobolds, the one creature who everyone can laugh at without fear of reprisal!
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivat ... 486800.jpg

Sometimes, when certain people have pwned them too well, they close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears, and go "lalalalallalaala you're not really there".

[Eucliwood]

Oh okay. Well, don't use the term "anti socialist" everywhere cos Ive never seen that definition of anti socialism in my life. As for progressive tax... are you saying you're vehemently against taxing people for their wealth? It certainly helped here, with clinton... and then when bush wanted that shit undone....

Crash.

I am totally for that. If we're going to tax people, why not tax them for money they don't really need? Tax people who make less, well, less. Makes sense to me. If I made a great amount of money I wouldn't mind being taxed more. I don't understand being for taxes but being against taxing people who make more, more.

Hello again :)

Well, the important thing to remember when discussing tax policy with Norwegians is that we currently have a total tax level of about 70 % of our income. In 'Mmerica I believe your have quite a lower total rate. Note: I include VAT and other levies in the total tax level. For example:

- In Norway gasoline are taxed at approximately 88 % (one litre of gas costs 5 bucks, i.e. one gallon costs about 21 bucks here).
- Alcohol is taxed at around 70 %. One bottle of middle-of-the-road red wine costs 28 bucks at the state monopoly alcohol outlet
- All merchandise are taxed at 28 %. So, for example, a bottle of coke's gross price is maybe 1 dollar. But then you have to add 28 % VAT (1,28), then you have to add the sugar tax (no joke) making the price about 2 bucks. Then you have to add the CO2 tax, making the price about 2,3 bucks.
- Income tax starts at 28 % (everyone have to pay this), then increases progressively up until 49 % (when you earn $132 000 and above). The exception is capital gains, which is always taxed at 28 %. So the truly rich only pay 28 % (this was introduced by our socialist PM in 1993).

So you can understand us Norse dudes may (again, I assume) have a bit more gripe with the tax-issue than the average North-American.

But to your argument of 'earn more- pay more, earn less- pay less'. Is 28 % of 1 million dollars more or less than 28 % of 100k dollars? I do not buy the 'they can afford it, so they should pay' argument. In Norway we do not have a deficit. We have an annual surplus of about 1 BILL dollars, and we're only 5 million people. I am far more sympathetic to the tax policies of left-wingers in the US considering you have a huge deficit to deal with. But I would still argue that mayhaps you should start with reducing your military costs by half before you start taxing everyone, but I do not live in your country; so I understand that my opinions regarding this are worth diddly-squat.

28% of 1 million dollars is more than 28% of 100k dollars. Are you saying you do not approve of taking 28% of 1 million dollars as you take of 100k dollars or what? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. And if the country needs more help, hell, take even MORE from 1 million dollars. No guilt on my chest.

Hi :)

I am in favour of a reasonable level of taxation. But it should be flat. It shouldn't be progressive. If the flat tax level was applied rigorously, the truly rich (the 1 %) would actually pay more (in Norway) than they do today due to the many loopholes that exist today. I am not against taxes (I am no Ron Paul fan), but I am against punishing those who make more than others just because they do. Everyone should pay the same rate and imho this is fair as, again, 28 % of a million is more than 28 % of 100k.

But I totally get that people have differing views, I just happen to disagree with most of them ;-)

Back to my anti-socialism comment: Norway has been ruled by socialists for 8 years now and it's mainly due to our huge oil- fortune that we are doing well. Also, politics is not just about 'don't rock the boat' policies. It's about principles and I disagree with almost all of the Norwegian socialists' platform; hence I call myself anti-socialist.

It's not a "punishment" on the wealthy for them to pay more... and they indeed would be paying more if everyone was taxed the same percent by income anyway, as you said.

It's silly to even be against them paying more % imo. It doesn't hurt anyone, while your rigid "flat tax" plan doesn't always work. What if the flat rate proposed isn't enough??? If they have to raise it, what if it's just TOO MUCH for people who don't make as much money to pay? Why not just tax more those making tons of money? I don't see what the big deal is or how it's a punishment. Poor, poor wealthy people? Nah.

[BarnOwl]

Off to my mother's to see what the fuck is wrong with her TV. God forbid she should miss any reality TV shows :roll:

Hundreds of channels, and still nothing but crap on TV. How did that happen? /first world problems

I'm glad I didn't upgrade my Uverse so that I could get the Planet Green channel. Foolishly, I thought there would be programs about recycling, green homes, renewable energy, gardening, climate change, etc., but instead the offerings seem to be A Haunting and American Hot Rods. WTF?

[Oneiros666]

Hello again :)

Well, the important thing to remember when discussing tax policy with Norwegians is that we currently have a total tax level of about 70 % of our income. In 'Mmerica I believe your have quite a lower total rate. Note: I include VAT and other levies in the total tax level. For example:

- In Norway gasoline are taxed at approximately 88 % (one litre of gas costs 5 bucks, i.e. one gallon costs about 21 bucks here).

This is a regressive tax; if you spend more of your income on petrol (e.g. if you are a low paid worker who commutes in a car) you get hit harder by this tax. I'm puzzled as to why this is a plank of your opposition to progressive tax?

- Alcohol is taxed at around 70 %. One bottle of middle-of-the-road red wine costs 28 bucks at the state monopoly alcohol outlet

Unless being rich affords you a few dozen extra livers, this is going to again hit the poor proportionally harder than the rich. Again regressive.

- All merchandise are taxed at 28 %. So, for example, a bottle of coke's gross price is maybe 1 dollar. But then you have to add 28 % VAT (1,28), then you have to add the sugar tax (no joke) making the price about 2 bucks. Then you have to add the CO2 tax, making the price about 2,3 bucks.

VAT normally has some lip service to being progressive (i.e. exemptions on essential items such as food) but it is basically flat (or arguably regressive, as rich people can often avoid it, or spend their money on things it doesn't apply to such as financial instruments)

- Income tax starts at 28 % (everyone have to pay this), then increases progressively up until 49 % (when you earn $132 000 and above). The exception is capital gains, which is always taxed at 28 %. So the truly rich only pay 28 % (this was introduced by our socialist PM in 1993).

You are now complaining that the progressive taxation in Norway is not progressive enough!

So you can understand us Norse dudes may (again, I assume) have a bit more gripe with the tax-issue than the average North-American.

But to your argument of 'earn more- pay more, earn less- pay less'. Is 28 % of 1 million dollars more or less than 28 % of 100k dollars? I do not buy the 'they can afford it, so they should pay' argument. In Norway we do not have a deficit. We have an annual surplus of about 1 BILL dollars, and we're only 5 million people. I am far more sympathetic to the tax policies of left-wingers in the US considering you have a huge deficit to deal with. But I would still argue that mayhaps you should start with reducing your military costs by half before you start taxing everyone, but I do not live in your country; so I understand that my opinions regarding this are worth diddly-squat.

I should've thought Norway is going to want to keep running a healthy surplus for when the North Sea oil runs out? My impression is that your government was far wiser investing that windfall than ours in the UK was.

I think I may have addressed your main point in my post above, but since you are cool and took the time to make a decent reply to me; I want to respond to you directly :)

I listed all of the levies and VAT not to claim these as progressive taxation. I know they're not. I did it to illustrate the total high tax level and for then to point out that I am against the progressive income taxation due to 1) the state has enough money as it is 2) it's unjust imho and 3) the state would arguable only get slightly less income from flat taxation than what it currently gets with it's progressive system that only targets the middle class.

I want Norway to have a healthy surplus, sure. But we don't have it thanks to progressive taxation. We have it thanks to huuuge profits from oil companies. I am not for gutting the huge capital fund (the Norwegian Pension Fund).

[cunt]

Everyone should pay the same rate and imho this is fair as, again, 28 % of a million is more than 28 % of 100k.

Does everyone in Norway earn above 100k? Whats 28% out of the minimum wage?

[katamari Damassi]

However, I can’t help but notice – “sore thumb” caliber – that Brayton still seems to be unclear on a concept or two which sort of belies his disputing that he hasn’t actually “started a cult”:

While we’re at it, can we also stop with the constant and moronic references to witch burnings and inquisitions? Michael Shermer is not a poor persecuted soul being chased by villagers with torches and pitchforks, he’s a guy who said something very sexist and stupid and is being criticized for it. He had an opportunity to say, “Yeah, that was really dumb and sexist. I’d like to apologize for that and work with others to see if we can come up with a solution to make secular communities more inclusive and welcoming to women.” He chose instead to double down on the problem and make it considerably worse.

The thing is Ed, you haven’t actually proven that Shermer’s comments qualify as sexism. They may appear to be that way to you, but to insist that everyone else has to accept that interpretation – particularly when there is a notable dearth of evidence – tends to qualify as peddling dogma – sort of a salient attribute of cults. Q.E.D.

Ed does have a point here. I don't think anyone said that Shermer should be drummed out of the community and made forever a pariah, ergo the witch hunting allegations are silly.

[Oneiros666]

Everyone should pay the same rate and imho this is fair as, again, 28 % of a million is more than 28 % of 100k.

Does everyone in Norway earn above 100k? Whats 28% out of the minimum wage?

Hi there :)

Um, no? Of course not everyone makes more than 100k. What's the point you are trying to make here? 28 % of 50k is less than 28 % of 100k. Again, I am for a flat tax rate.

We don't have minimum wage as the US does (you can, in theory, get paid 1 dollar a year, but the average income is about 75k dollars annually). We have lots of welfare support systems for those that have very limited income. Also, and I realise I should have pointed this out, there is a cut-off point at 'the bottom'. You can earn about 15k dollars tax-free before the 28 % kicks in.

[real horrorshow]

Off to my mother's to see what the fuck is wrong with her TV. God forbid she should miss any reality TV shows :roll:

Hundreds of channels, and still nothing but crap on TV. How did that happen? /first world problems

I'm glad I didn't upgrade my Uverse so that I could get the Planet Green channel. Foolishly, I thought there would be programs about recycling, green homes, renewable energy, gardening, climate change, etc., but instead the offerings seem to be A Haunting and American Hot Rods. WTF?

Allow me to assist. This should hold you for a bit:

http://i.imgur.com/LFpb1.jpg?1

[franc]

Poor dear was threatened -

http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2012 ... -751893734

Cheers Joe, I also skimmed the video and in text the sheer ridiculousness of it is laid bare. I also missed Al mentioned me, or I think he did as I'm the only person who went to the pit and was threatened with physical violence.
"They warn everyone that they never should go there, and at least one person who has gone there was rewarded with threats of physical violence."

Should point out that the 'threats' were from Mykeru, he was non-obviously 'joking' about it - I only knew this as I'd been to his blog and seen his technique boasted about in detail there. So yeah I knew it was a 'joke', but when is it ok to 'joke' about killing people? Weird set of principles at the pit...

This bit made me laugh in the original video
"The people who post there are skeptics. They’re students of critical thought who refuse to accept anything they are told at face value and that nothing should go without careful examination."

In the comments below Als video just one pitter, Pitchguest, nicely refutes Al with his constant twists and turns and belief in anything that makes FtB'ers look bad contrary to any evidence. As long as a bit of the poo they throw sticks then they are happy. I wouldn't recommend anyone spends much time at the pit but it is a good lesson in how not to critically evaluate evidence - at least whenever anything that could look bad for a FtB'er/Skepchick comes in. Generally they believe first, then when its obviously bull say well it could be true if... Look for ways for any smear to stick basically.

[BarnOwl]

Off to my mother's to see what the fuck is wrong with her TV. God forbid she should miss any reality TV shows :roll:

Hundreds of channels, and still nothing but crap on TV. How did that happen? /first world problems

I'm glad I didn't upgrade my Uverse so that I could get the Planet Green channel. Foolishly, I thought there would be programs about recycling, green homes, renewable energy, gardening, climate change, etc., but instead the offerings seem to be A Haunting and American Hot Rods. WTF?

Allow me to assist. This should hold you for a bit:

http://i.imgur.com/LFpb1.jpg?1

SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!11!!!!11!!

[EdgePenguin]

I think I may have addressed your main point in my post above, but since you are cool and took the time to make a decent reply to me; I want to respond to you directly :)

I listed all of the levies and VAT not to claim these as progressive taxation. I know they're not. I did it to illustrate the total high tax level and for then to point out that I am against the progressive income taxation due to 1) the state has enough money as it is 2) it's unjust imho and 3) the state would arguable only get slightly less income from flat taxation than what it currently gets with it's progressive system that only targets the middle class.

I want Norway to have a healthy surplus, sure. But we don't have it thanks to progressive taxation. We have it thanks to huuuge profits from oil companies. I am not for gutting the huge capital fund (the Norwegian Pension Fund).

Right, I get you, and thanks for replying separately. The important thing I think is to stop thinking of progressive taxation in terms of 'justice' or 'punishment'. Progressive taxation rejigs the economy to be more equal, and thats a good thing (so long as it works; tax loopholes need to be addressed obviously)

Seen this book?

Its based on peer-reviewed work by the two authors and by others. It got predictably slammed by people who oppose the central thesis for political reasons, including a think tank guy who published this book: - but having heard the opponents present their case (published directly without bothering to go through peer-reviewed channels) the book ends up looking pretty convincing.

[Altair]

The A+ guys are getting angry at a site called PotentialProstitutes.com

(The site is down right now so I'm assuming the linked articleat the Examiner's is accurate. Are they a reputable source?)

In October 2012, a website called Potential Prostitutes was created to allow any anonymous user to submit a photo, phone number, address or any other identifying information about any woman they choose and label that woman as a prostitute. In a December 28, 2012 article on Huffington Post, it states that women who are found on this site and wish their names to be taken off must first pay an exorbitant fee to do so.

The mission statement of Potential Prostitutes that they “operate based on the efforts from motivated members of their local community who have at one point or another come into contact with a potential prostitute online and feel they can be a threat."

While I agree that posting addresses and phone numbers will almost certainly lead to harassment, so it's a :naughty: , I am again in awe at the hypocrisy displayed by the SJW's.

Despite being a scam, the name of the site, PotentialProstitutes, and their description, ties so nicely with the Schrodinger's Rapist idea and the rape switch, that it should be obvious to them that complaining about the site and its shaming of women would at the same time show S's Rapist for the idiotic attempt at shaming and control it is. But they don't realize or choose to ignore (I'm still undecided about they being stupid or malicious).

Shorter SJW: labeling men Potential Rapists = OK, labeling women Potential Prostitutes = OMFG they are shaming teh womynz!

(Disclaimer: I am not defending the site or their extorting policies, just pointing the Hypocrisy+)

[Oneiros666]

Right, I get you, and thanks for replying separately. The important thing I think is to stop thinking of progressive taxation in terms of 'justice' or 'punishment'. Progressive taxation rejigs the economy to be more equal, and thats a good thing (so long as it works; tax loopholes need to be addressed obviously)

Seen this book?

Its based on peer-reviewed work by the two authors and by others. It got predictably slammed by people who oppose the central thesis for political reasons, including a think tank guy who published this book: - but having heard the opponents present their case (published directly without bothering to go through peer-reviewed channels) the book ends up looking pretty convincing.

Hi again :)

Yes, I have read quite a bit about (but have not read it) The Spirit Level. It's an interesting thesis, but I don't think you should dismiss legitimate critique of it. Yes, countries that have high levels of equality (Norway, Sweden, etc.) do much better than countries with low levels of equality (USA, China). But I am skeptical to the manycorrelations the Spirit Level claim. But again, I haven't read it; so I probably shouldn't have too many opinions about the book.

[jjbinx007]

Meanwhile I know this link has appeared before but my goodness it's worth it to read again. It's a beautiful fucking thing. A+ refusing to help woman with project about sexism.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3370

Holy fucking shit! I can't stop laughing at how quickly that descended into fucking madness. Monty Python couldn't have written a more insane sketch.

[Mykeru]

Glorious, glorious. Finally some sane fucking people.

I tried to join the Atheism+ forum. Why? Because I have seen the YouTube drama regarding these people and I wanted to see for myself if things were as bad as most of the YT vids criticising claimed. Boy oh boy was my initial impression (from YT) not only verified, I am now pissed off and feel a nice, burning hatred towards Atheism+.

Here is what happened:

I lurked on their forum for a day. Reading thread after thread concerning all topics except atheism. Oh, they have a little section called atheism, but it's almost inactive and mostly dedicated to bashing Dawkins and Hitchens. That's right, bashing the very people who have made atheism great in the 21st century West. But, by far, the most activity is seen on their "Atheism Plus" section, dealing with what these people actually want to deal with: Feminism and socialism. There are so many fucked up threads in there dealing with made- up problems it's laughable. Here is an example:

They spent several pages of discussion on which letters should come first when using the GLBT acronym. Why? Because putting 'G' first (Gay) somehow implied that being a gay man was better than being a lesbian. Seriously, page after page of discussion.

They also have a long FAQ section where you are basically told that unless you are there to agree with the leaders' opinion and the virtues of radical feminism; you can fuck off. Great, innit? But I thought I couldn't just leave. No, they are doing too much harm to the cause of atheism and secularism. Had they called their movement 'Moral Atheism' or 'Progressive Atheists' or something like that, I wouldn't have bothered as much. But they don't call it that and they insist on hijacking the entire atheist community (for verification of this: Rebecca Watson's campaign to ban her critics from attending TAM). So I wrote a lengthy critique of Atheism + where I politely (yes, politetly) told them my concerns regarding what they are doing. The result?

[mung]http://i.imgur.com/qCSXH.png[/mung]

I fucking hate Rebecca Watson, Greta Christina, PZ Myers, Melody Hensley and all the rest of those fuckers. They are ruining atheism for the rest of us and I sincerely hope that enough rational people can stand up to those fuckers and make them seize and desist.

Have a good new years and I leave you with this cool image I stole from the awesome MykeruMedia:

[minge]http://i.imgur.com/5kZ7k.png[/img][/minge]

I was thinking about my previous post. That little pissing match between someone who wanted to come in and do something that immediately turned into a "why isn't about me" discussion shows just what a bag of toxic inertia Atheism Plus is. Whether or not you think the original poster was going to do something with merit, which is questionable when you solicit people's anecdotes, it's just such a missed opportunity to do something.

And SubMor, exactly what does that prattling neckbeard do but point people to the FAQ which is designed for no other reason but to either turn people into fingerprint-less pod person producing the same cookie cutter approved posts, or just be vague and contradictory enough so that no one can escape unscathed tip-toeing through the minefield.

The more you watch the Atheism Plus clowns, the incestuously related Skepchicks and FTBers in action, the more compelling is that what they are most interested in is the latter. Their warped brand of Social Justice© gives them an excuse for their personal failure and a means to drag everyone down to their level.

If you haven't seen it already, I recommend Welch's piece How to take down New Media Douchebags like Rebecca Watson. Welch is right on when it comes to subverting their need to be taken so seriously regardless of how ridiculous they are.

As you have seen though, you can't mock them on their home turf. I have never posted jack on FTB and the A+ forum as I think engaing them there is a huge waste of time, unless you want to prove what's been proven time and gain, that they will ban you for having three brains cells to rub together.

You are right that they attempt to co-opt and control the Atheist and Skeptical movements, at least the slacktivist parts that happen on the internet. Otherwise no one would care. When Watson, McCreight, Benson, Roth and the rest of the horn-honkers in the clown car are presented as somehow representative of the movment, it's time to go scorched-earth with satire. Not only is it shit-loads of fun, but really, as long as Ophelia Benson is fixated on the Twitter POE (who isn't me) they less time she has to fuck things up.

Thanks for the "awesome" rating. This is going to be a good year for beating back the baboon because, by now, I think everyone has gotten the last tiny urge to accommodate these fuckers out of their system. Thunderf00t's recent video that really presented a concise version of what we have been saying for a long, long time now, seems a hint of things to come this year.

So, welcome to the SlymePit. Have fun storming the castle. What's left of it.

[tfoot]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'


.. and this was one of PZ last blogs about me.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... rous-hack/

"Thunderf00t/Phil Mason, treacherous hack"
Keywords: Admin, Crime, Fuckbrained assholes
"Yes, we want to make Thunderf00t/Phil Mason a pariah in the atheist movement, and for good reason: he’s a dishonest scumbag. The nice thing for us is that he’s making it easy: Phil Mason is destroying his own reputation with his sleazy behavior. Who in their right mind would ever trust that guy with any confidence at all?"

errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?


PS. Extra douche points there PZ for gratuitous smeary use of 'thunderf00t/Phil Mason'. Naturally publicizing someones real name once they've had their docs dropped is a perfectly fair and non-douchy tactic (/sarcasm). Im sure PZ would have no problem with thinking this was perfectly fair and valid if it happened to some of FTBs pseudonym bloggers.... yknow the ones who flounced because I DIDNT drop their docs.
Doc dropping is cheap, to the point where I make a point of not knowing who people are IRL. Dont need to know, dont want to know.

(FYI I never actually paid any attention to that sort of shit while I was on FTB. It was only afterwards when Nat. Reed was swooning that I even realized that she was writing under a pseudonym (or that she even existed!). Turns out she had taken every precaution to keep her identity secret including USING HER FULL REAL FULL NAME AND BIRTHYEAR as her email address. Professionally dumb doesnt quite cover it.)

[welch]

Here's Oneiros666's post that earned the permaban.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 063#p60063

He/she seems pretty reasonable to me. That was probably the problem.

when I bitch (*Mod Note: Casual gendered slur. Hmm. Gosh folks, why is this atheism+ thing needed again? I just cannot tell...) and moan: I do something about it.

LOL did he seriously cross out the verb form of "bitch"??? And call it a gender slur? BITCHING AND MOANING. A COMMONLY ACCEPTED PHRASE. Even amongst people that don't approve of "bitch" being used as a name-call. What a lunatic.

It's like we said all along, atheism leads to socialism.

In your prediction of what they'd say, are you implying that socialism is /bad/, or just saying that christians who don't like it will have an excuse to say that atheism leads to socialism?

They certainly are attempting to hijack atheism though... with some radfemtheist bullshit. They should call themselves Femtheist+. The + can stand for additional assholery.

And you say you're anti-socialist... well, if you are ANTI socialist going to a socialist board... of course you'll be banned. I would completely agree with the ban if it was just about the fact that you called yourself anti-socialist. I'm disappointed to say that I actually agree with a ban that A+ did. Not for all the reasons they did it, but still, nonetheless.

Hehe. Hi there :)

I didn't notice that my little critique was actually posted (I only got the permaban message when I opened A+, and frankly I have had enough of reading that shitty shit they have there).

Okay, so a few things you bring up:

Yes, she crossed out the word 'bitch'. It's amazing how fucked up these cunts are. And I mean that in the most derogatory anti-women way possible =P

I didn't say that atheism leads to socialism. I said that Republicans/Christians/Apologists/etc would use that argument with double force now that A+ tries to link atheism to socialist isssues. My whole point is that atheism is not about socialism. Or capitalism. Or squirrels. Or bagels. It is about a disbelief in god(s). End of fucking story.

And I wasn't surprised about being banned. Nope, I even started my critique with it as I had read enough to know that my critique would probably lead to bannage. I am, as my dear old folks used to say, not angry; merely disappointed.

Here is why I am disappointed with them: They (the AtheismPlus folks) do not wish to engage in critique. They try to label critique as 'trolling'. It is not. Trolling is someone posting provocative shit just to be provocative. That was not my intention. My intention was to be vocal about my concerns about AtheismPlus. I was very honest about my own standpoint, what I believe and what I think. They claim my points have been addressed before, but they haven't. Not to any level of satisfaction anywhere anyhoo. For example: The name. How can they not understand that their hijacking of the term atheism is fucking provocative? It is beyond me.

Anyhoo, thanks for all the replies :) I am starting to really dig this place.

Lemme guess, they responded with the Courtier's Reply, along with lots of fuck offs, privilege, ableism...

[Gefan]

*snip*

I didn't say that atheism leads to socialism. I said that Republicans/Christians/Apologists/etc would use that argument with double force now that A+ tries to link atheism to socialist isssues. My whole point is that atheism is not about socialism. Or capitalism. Or squirrels. Or bagels. It is about a disbelief in god(s). End of fucking story.

I'm confused how you got started on socialism. What the fuck has Atheism+ got to do with socialism? At one point between screaming at people for tone trolling and swinging the ban hammer and anybody who disagrees with them are they going to even advocate (let alone work towards in any real sense) securing control of the means of production for the masses? You think even the most shameful, unreformed Socialist Worker trot would be seen dead with these clowns?

Here is the thing with 'social justice'. There IS injustice in the world. Deep, horrific injustice that kills millions through preventable disease, dirty water, and starvation (poverty, basically). A socialist would concern themselves with this injustice, and seek ways to rectify it by redistributing money and/or economic control on a global scale. Many do just that. I concern myself with this, even though I only roughly accept the label 'socialist' as it tends to come with some baggage that doesn't apply to me.

Even within western societies, there is actual injustice. Despite the economic crisis we all live in incredibly wealthy civilizations, experiencing a plenty that would've seemed utopian fantasy a century ago - and yet we have homelessness, malnutrition, and disease in our midst. A socialist would be concerned with these things, as am I.

However, the social justice warriors that currently infest the atheist movement do not care about any of this. They care about the terrible, crushing injustices visited upon well-fed, middle class, university educated women who've been asked for coffee in elevators.

I don't necessarily disagree with any of the above. The whole problem with the "S" word is a public relations one. In the US (the core of PZ's audience) secularism was very successfully and cynically welded to the red menace back in the fifties and we were well into a new century before the damage was even partially fixed. Cue Dear Leader giving a interview where he explicitly claims a desire to see the US adopt socialism and that the communists were misunderstood. This elevates him to the public relations equivalent of David Duke for the Republicans twenty years ago (ie. before the party more or less came out of closet as bark-at-the-moon fruitloops). I suspect Myers had a beady-eyed smirk going when he said that, reveling in how he was pissing all over the painstaking work of The Horsemen, Shermer, Jillette et al.

[katamari Damassi]

From what I have read, vasectomy reversal it is closer to a 98% or 99% success rate with the surgical technology of today, but instead of linking numerous sources, perhaps Skeptickle or Barn Owl or other person more qualified to answer the "easily reversed" question would do so.

I guess I'm not current on this. Still, better safe than sorry. Something could always go wrong.

better safe than sorry? There are seven billion people on this planet.

Hey I'm not the one who wants a kid. He may one day and it would suck if he was unable to especially if it was because he failed to take an additional but easy step.

[cunt]

Everyone should pay the same rate and imho this is fair as, again, 28 % of a million is more than 28 % of 100k.

Does everyone in Norway earn above 100k? Whats 28% out of the minimum wage?

Hi there :)

Um, no? Of course not everyone makes more than 100k. What's the point you are trying to make here? 28 % of 50k is less than 28 % of 100k. Again, I am for a flat tax rate.

We don't have minimum wage as the US does (you can, in theory, get paid 1 dollar a year, but the average income is about 75k dollars annually). We have lots of welfare support systems for those that have very limited income. Also, and I realise I should have pointed this out, there is a cut-off point at 'the bottom'. You can earn about 15k dollars tax-free before the 28 % kicks in.

So you can earn $16,000. The government takes out $280. Leaving you with $15720 or £9,722 in real money. The millionaire earner, gets $280,000 taken from their pay check, leaving them with a paltry $720,000 per year to play with.

The $280 for the poor sod low earner might be the difference between eating lunch on a thursday or not, while the $280,000 for the millionaire might mean they have to save up an extra year for that Bentley with the heated seats. Hey though, least it's fair.

[mutleyeng]

Poor dear was threatened -

http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2012 ... -751893734

Cheers Joe, I also skimmed the video and in text the sheer ridiculousness of it is laid bare. I also missed Al mentioned me, or I think he did as I'm the only person who went to the pit and was threatened with physical violence.
"They warn everyone that they never should go there, and at least one person who has gone there was rewarded with threats of physical violence."

Should point out that the 'threats' were from Mykeru, he was non-obviously 'joking' about it - I only knew this as I'd been to his blog and seen his technique boasted about in detail there. So yeah I knew it was a 'joke', but when is it ok to 'joke' about killing people? Weird set of principles at the pit...

This bit made me laugh in the original video
"The people who post there are skeptics. They’re students of critical thought who refuse to accept anything they are told at face value and that nothing should go without careful examination."

In the comments below Als video just one pitter, Pitchguest, nicely refutes Al with his constant twists and turns and belief in anything that makes FtB'ers look bad contrary to any evidence. As long as a bit of the poo they throw sticks then they are happy. I wouldn't recommend anyone spends much time at the pit but it is a good lesson in how not to critically evaluate evidence - at least whenever anything that could look bad for a FtB'er/Skepchick comes in. Generally they believe first, then when its obviously bull say well it could be true if... Look for ways for any smear to stick basically.

I take it that is that idiotic muppet Ooolon?
He thinks Al was talking about him and not Justin Griffith?
Oh the perils of not listening to what the fuck someone has said

[Mykeru]

Here's Oneiros666's post that earned the permaban.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 063#p60063

He/she seems pretty reasonable to me. That was probably the problem.

I read it, the mod anger is priceless:

Mod Hat: Yawn. You bore me. If you'd actually read anything like you claim to, you'd notice all of your words had been said by others before. Also, I like how you tried to post this exact message twice in different places, as though your words were so interesting in your own mind you thought the whole community would care. I don't care.

I like making people happy, and today is your lucky day, my friend. Because you know what? You want a self-fulfilling prophecy? You can go ahead and have one. Free. On the house. Enjoy your ban! Be sure to write in your journal about how right you were with your predictions.

I mean, Jesus Fucking Christ the Savior on a Stick, what do they think they are accomplishing?

When I was on Reap's radio show I described the Atheism Plus forum as a kind of douche-bag Masada, where they will inevitably run around banning each other, and then the last person bans themselves. Then we can all look at the ruins of Atheism Plus and recount in song and story how they bravely sacrificed each other for the sacrament of butt-hurt.

[Karmakin]

Ed does have a point here. I don't think anyone said that Shermer should be drummed out of the community and made forever a pariah, ergo the witch hunting allegations are silly.

See, this is one of my big beefs with the whole thing. I DON'T want outright sexists in the skeptic community. I think that generally speaking they're acting in a toxic fashion and as such only do harm to the community as a whole. I'd like to think that most people feel, generally speaking, somewhat the same way. Otherwise, people wouldn't care when someone calls them sexist/misogynist or whatever.

So when A+'s come and say, as they so often do when they're trying to softpeddle this stuff, that they're actually OK with people who they've called sexist remaining in the community, that tells me that they don't take sexism as seriously as most people do. That goes along with what I see, where I think the whole Social Justice Warrior movement is not really about the Social Justice but about the Warrior part of it. Toxic people looking for acceptable ways to be toxic. What they're actually fighting for is a secondary (or even tertiary) concern.

[d4m10n]

Off to my mother's to see what the fuck is wrong with her TV. God forbid she should miss any reality TV shows :roll:

Hundreds of channels, and still nothing but crap on TV. How did that happen? /first world problems

I'm glad I didn't upgrade my Uverse so that I could get the Planet Green channel. Foolishly, I thought there would be programs about recycling, green homes, renewable energy, gardening, climate change, etc., but instead the offerings seem to be A Haunting and American Hot Rods. WTF?

Network decay http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NetworkDecay is a fairly apt metaphor for those parts of the skeptical movement which now feature ideologically driven science denialism as part of the lineup.

[Altair]

And since Thunderf00t is around, here's a recent tweet-versation between Ophelia and Aratina that proves that TF has now become the standard used to judge every l33t haxx0r around

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/2768/hackh.png

[Oneiros666]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'


.. and this was one of PZ last blogs about me.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... rous-hack/

"Thunderf00t/Phil Mason, treacherous hack"
Keywords: Admin, Crime, Fuckbrained assholes
"Yes, we want to make Thunderf00t/Phil Mason a pariah in the atheist movement, and for good reason: he’s a dishonest scumbag. The nice thing for us is that he’s making it easy: Phil Mason is destroying his own reputation with his sleazy behavior. Who in their right mind would ever trust that guy with any confidence at all?"

errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?


PS. Extra douche points there PZ for gratuitous smeary use of 'thunderf00t/Phil Mason'. Naturally publicizing someones real name once they've had their docs dropped is a perfectly fair and non-douchy tactic (/sarcasm). Im sure PZ would have no problem with thinking this was perfectly fair and valid if it happened to some of FTBs pseudonym bloggers.... yknow the ones who flounced because I DIDNT drop their docs.
Doc dropping is cheap, to the point where I make a point of not knowing who people are IRL. Dont need to know, dont want to know.

(FYI I never actually paid any attention to that sort of shit while I was on FTB. It was only afterwards when Nat. Reed was swooning that I even realized that she was writing under a pseudonym (or that she even existed!). Turns out she had taken every precaution to keep her identity secret including USING HER FULL REAL FULL NAME AND BIRTHYEAR as her email address. Professionally dumb doesnt quite cover it.)

First off: Z0MG! It's really tf00t! w007 W007 (fanboy alert)

Second: It is amazing to me that the fuckers over at FTB and AtheismPlus claim they don't want to hijack atheism in general, they just want to create a subset; when their Dear Leader PZ Myers blatantly says this in the profile video:

Modern atheism has to do more than just the anti-theism and science side of things. We have to broaden our scope to include significant social issues.

It makes me so fucking angry. As soon you add politics to atheism, it divides us and makes us have to argue politics as well as reason when debating the enemies of atheism.

[Rawrsome]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'


.. and this was one of PZ last blogs about me.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... rous-hack/

"Thunderf00t/Phil Mason, treacherous hack"
Keywords: Admin, Crime, Fuckbrained assholes
"Yes, we want to make Thunderf00t/Phil Mason a pariah in the atheist movement, and for good reason: he’s a dishonest scumbag. The nice thing for us is that he’s making it easy: Phil Mason is destroying his own reputation with his sleazy behavior. Who in their right mind would ever trust that guy with any confidence at all?"

errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?


PS. Extra douche points there PZ for gratuitous smeary use of 'thunderf00t/Phil Mason'. Naturally publicizing someones real name once they've had their docs dropped is a perfectly fair and non-douchy tactic (/sarcasm). Im sure PZ would have no problem with thinking this was perfectly fair and valid if it happened to some of FTBs pseudonym bloggers.... yknow the ones who flounced because I DIDNT drop their docs.
Doc dropping is cheap, to the point where I make a point of not knowing who people are IRL. Dont need to know, dont want to know.

(FYI I never actually paid any attention to that sort of shit while I was on FTB. It was only afterwards when Nat. Reed was swooning that I even realized that she was writing under a pseudonym (or that she even existed!). Turns out she had taken every precaution to keep her identity secret including USING HER FULL REAL FULL NAME AND BIRTHYEAR as her email address. Professionally dumb doesnt quite cover it.)

Just like pcs, ray comfort, that crazy muslim guy, the dude with the giant head phones ( yeah I'm bad at remembering names and also I blame the scotch) you weren't able to convince them with evidence based arguments nor will you these people.

[ERV]

Hey. Any of you looking for work?


http://i.imgur.com/7LnTi.png

Must not be fond of Peperamis or Slim Jims.

After her comments towards Sara Mayhew, the list also includes:

-- Must not be prettier than me
-- Must not dress nicer than me
-- No dykes*


* Not an anti-homosexual slur, its just that lesbians do not exist. All women everywhere are interested in men, and all of their behaviors are geared towards gaining that male sexual attention.

[welch]

Glorious, glorious. Finally some sane fucking people.

I tried to join the Atheism+ forum. Why? Because I have seen the YouTube drama regarding these people and I wanted to see for myself if things were as bad as most of the YT vids criticising claimed. Boy oh boy was my initial impression (from YT) not only verified, I am now pissed off and feel a nice, burning hatred towards Atheism+.

Here is what happened:

I lurked on their forum for a day. Reading thread after thread concerning all topics except atheism. Oh, they have a little section called atheism, but it's almost inactive and mostly dedicated to bashing Dawkins and Hitchens. That's right, bashing the very people who have made atheism great in the 21st century West. But, by far, the most activity is seen on their "Atheism Plus" section, dealing with what these people actually want to deal with: Feminism and socialism. There are so many fucked up threads in there dealing with made- up problems it's laughable. Here is an example:

They spent several pages of discussion on which letters should come first when using the GLBT acronym. Why? Because putting 'G' first (Gay) somehow implied that being a gay man was better than being a lesbian. Seriously, page after page of discussion.

They also have a long FAQ section where you are basically told that unless you are there to agree with the leaders' opinion and the virtues of radical feminism; you can fuck off. Great, innit? But I thought I couldn't just leave. No, they are doing too much harm to the cause of atheism and secularism. Had they called their movement 'Moral Atheism' or 'Progressive Atheists' or something like that, I wouldn't have bothered as much. But they don't call it that and they insist on hijacking the entire atheist community (for verification of this: Rebecca Watson's campaign to ban her critics from attending TAM). So I wrote a lengthy critique of Atheism + where I politely (yes, politetly) told them my concerns regarding what they are doing. The result?

[mung]http://i.imgur.com/qCSXH.png[/mung]

I fucking hate Rebecca Watson, Greta Christina, PZ Myers, Melody Hensley and all the rest of those fuckers. They are ruining atheism for the rest of us and I sincerely hope that enough rational people can stand up to those fuckers and make them seize and desist.

Have a good new years and I leave you with this cool image I stole from the awesome MykeruMedia:

[minge]http://i.imgur.com/5kZ7k.png[/img][/minge]

I was thinking about my previous post. That little pissing match between someone who wanted to come in and do something that immediately turned into a "why isn't about me" discussion shows just what a bag of toxic inertia Atheism Plus is. Whether or not you think the original poster was going to do something with merit, which is questionable when you solicit people's anecdotes, it's just such a missed opportunity to do something.

And SubMor, exactly what does that prattling neckbeard do but point people to the FAQ which is designed for no other reason but to either turn people into fingerprint-less pod person producing the same cookie cutter approved posts, or just be vague and contradictory enough so that no one can escape unscathed tip-toeing through the minefield.

The more you watch the Atheism Plus clowns, the incestuously related Skepchicks and FTBers in action, the more compelling is that what they are most interested in is the latter. Their warped brand of Social Justice© gives them an excuse for their personal failure and a means to drag everyone down to their level.

If you haven't seen it already, I recommend Welch's piece How to take down New Media Douchebags like Rebecca Watson. Welch is right on when it comes to subverting their need to be taken so seriously regardless of how ridiculous they are.

As you have seen though, you can't mock them on their home turf. I have never posted jack on FTB and the A+ forum as I think engaing them there is a huge waste of time, unless you want to prove what's been proven time and gain, that they will ban you for having three brains cells to rub together.

You are right that they attempt to co-opt and control the Atheist and Skeptical movements, at least the slacktivist parts that happen on the internet. Otherwise no one would care. When Watson, McCreight, Benson, Roth and the rest of the horn-honkers in the clown car are presented as somehow representative of the movment, it's time to go scorched-earth with satire. Not only is it shit-loads of fun, but really, as long as Ophelia Benson is fixated on the Twitter POE (who isn't me) they less time she has to fuck things up.

Thanks for the "awesome" rating. This is going to be a good year for beating back the baboon because, by now, I think everyone has gotten the last tiny urge to accommodate these fuckers out of their system. Thunderf00t's recent video that really presented a concise version of what we have been saying for a long, long time now, seems a hint of things to come this year.

So, welcome to the SlymePit. Have fun storming the castle. What's left of it.

Another point I'd like to make, and note: ONLY DO THIS IF YOU HAVE A LEGITIMATE TOPIC. (I *completely* get off the bus if you're talking about trolling a conference.) If you see a conference calling for speakers, AND you think you have a decent topic to talk about and might do a good job, submit. There's no better way to be able to alleviate the influence the dipshits have than creating your own. Again, don't do this just to be a tit. But if you have something topic appropriate to talk about, submit a session. If you're accepted, give a talk on your topic, do a good Q&A, and if you feel like it, submit again.

Demonstrate the difference between idiots like benson et al and good speakers by being one.

For example, for many years, I felt Macworld Expo didn't have enough IT content. My solution? submit sessions. The first year I spoke, I had three sessions, and I just kept submitting, and talking to the powers that be. I got friends who were in the business to also submit, and eventually, we had our own track. We kept working on it, and now, MacIT is its own show, only loosely affiliated with Macworld (now Macworld/iWorld). We weren't trying to be tits or troll anything, but we realized that if we wanted to get content for us in the show, and we wanted to have more influence, the way to do it was by hard, steady work.

It wasn't fast, (I started talking in 1999), but it did work. Same thing. If there's a skeptic/atheist convention near you, and you think you can offer something to contribute, do so. Ignore the current bitchfests, and talk about something serious. I'm actually considering working up a couple sessions based on my experiences with the *complete* lack of skepticism and critical thinking in the computer press, (or ANY thinking, critical or not.) If I submitted, I'd not only ignore all the FTB-troversies, I'd ignore them as well. They don't wish to talk to me online, fuck talking to them in real life. If they were to come up to me to talk to me, I'd tell them point blank:

"No. That's now how it works. You don't get to be a hypocritical wanker to me on your site, and ban me because you don't like who I associate with, etc., then come up and want to talk to me in person. I'm not going to accept some moronic pretense of "good feelings" and "buddy buddy" just because i'm in the room. PeeZus' rule six does not apply for me. If I'm not "good enough" for the internet, I'm not "good enough" for person to person, and as far as I'm concerned, *you* certainly are not good enough to talk to in person. As well, based on how continuously dishonest you are with regard to editing comments, etc., if you think i'm going to talk to you *at all* in a situation where you have editorial control, or where I cannot record said conversation, you're stupider than you think I am. Now, I'm trying to have a nice time here, and you're completely harshing my mellow. Run along and play with your friends, I'm talking to grownups."

Then I'd turn my back on them, and ignore the precious little shits.

There is no reason to allow these idiots to dominate anything. It won't happen fast, but if you create a reputation as a good speaker, who is easy to work with, doesn't demand a handjob and first class, and you present talks on pertinent issues, you would be surprised at what you can eventually accomplish.

[Mykeru]

Poor dear was threatened -

http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2012 ... -751893734

Cheers Joe, I also skimmed the video and in text the sheer ridiculousness of it is laid bare. I also missed Al mentioned me, or I think he did as I'm the only person who went to the pit and was threatened with physical violence.
"They warn everyone that they never should go there, and at least one person who has gone there was rewarded with threats of physical violence."

Should point out that the 'threats' were from Mykeru, he was non-obviously 'joking' about it - I only knew this as I'd been to his blog and seen his technique boasted about in detail there. So yeah I knew it was a 'joke', but when is it ok to 'joke' about killing people? Weird set of principles at the pit...

This bit made me laugh in the original video
"The people who post there are skeptics. They’re students of critical thought who refuse to accept anything they are told at face value and that nothing should go without careful examination."

In the comments below Als video just one pitter, Pitchguest, nicely refutes Al with his constant twists and turns and belief in anything that makes FtB'ers look bad contrary to any evidence. As long as a bit of the poo they throw sticks then they are happy. I wouldn't recommend anyone spends much time at the pit but it is a good lesson in how not to critically evaluate evidence - at least whenever anything that could look bad for a FtB'er/Skepchick comes in. Generally they believe first, then when its obviously bull say well it could be true if... Look for ways for any smear to stick basically.

Yes, my bad. I made a sarcastic remark about ice-picking Oolon, the approved mafia-style way of dealing with a rat bastard. When I did it I realized we would never hear the end of it, but on the other hand, as Ophelia Benson pulled a claim that I intended to shoot Rebecca Watson right out of her cobwebbed ass, making a joke or not really doesn't seem to make a difference. They will invent their preferred narrative even if they don't have anything to form it around.

I should also note that I don't have an ice-pick. I lent it to Sacha.

[real horrorshow]

The A+ guys are getting angry at a site called PotentialProstitutes.com

Why? It's the lamest attempt at extortion I've seen in a good while. Perhaps they were hoping people would post them something porn-like or they could get some ad revenue traffic off the shock value, but to do what they propose has got to be illegal in just about jurisdiction. The site is indeed currently down. I wouldn't be surprised if it stays that way. I got a quick sneer out of the A + proposal of some sort of DDoS attack, from people who clearly wouldn't have a clue how to conduct one.

[EdgePenguin]

Right, I get you, and thanks for replying separately. The important thing I think is to stop thinking of progressive taxation in terms of 'justice' or 'punishment'. Progressive taxation rejigs the economy to be more equal, and thats a good thing (so long as it works; tax loopholes need to be addressed obviously)

Seen this book?

Its based on peer-reviewed work by the two authors and by others. It got predictably slammed by people who oppose the central thesis for political reasons, including a think tank guy who published this book: - but having heard the opponents present their case (published directly without bothering to go through peer-reviewed channels) the book ends up looking pretty convincing.

Hi again :)

Yes, I have read quite a bit about (but have not read it) The Spirit Level. It's an interesting thesis, but I don't think you should dismiss legitimate critique of it. Yes, countries that have high levels of equality (Norway, Sweden, etc.) do much better than countries with low levels of equality (USA, China). But I am skeptical to the manycorrelations the Spirit Level claim. But again, I haven't read it; so I probably shouldn't have too many opinions about the book.

The critique of it isn't valid; I've read samples of it which are full of deliberate misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the subject matter. The critic is not someone working in a relevant field; he is a writer for a think tank who cut his teeth shilling for the tobacco industry. He has also declined the challenge by the authors to confront them in peer-reviewed literature. His end of the debate frankly stinks.

As for the book itself; I find it hard to judge the science myself. Its not the standard you would expect to see in physics, but then again I doubt much social science is by the very nature of the discipline. Humans are not quite Newtonian in their movements!

[welch]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'


.. and this was one of PZ last blogs about me.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... rous-hack/

"Thunderf00t/Phil Mason, treacherous hack"
Keywords: Admin, Crime, Fuckbrained assholes
"Yes, we want to make Thunderf00t/Phil Mason a pariah in the atheist movement, and for good reason: he’s a dishonest scumbag. The nice thing for us is that he’s making it easy: Phil Mason is destroying his own reputation with his sleazy behavior. Who in their right mind would ever trust that guy with any confidence at all?"

errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?


PS. Extra douche points there PZ for gratuitous smeary use of 'thunderf00t/Phil Mason'. Naturally publicizing someones real name once they've had their docs dropped is a perfectly fair and non-douchy tactic (/sarcasm). Im sure PZ would have no problem with thinking this was perfectly fair and valid if it happened to some of FTBs pseudonym bloggers.... yknow the ones who flounced because I DIDNT drop their docs.
Doc dropping is cheap, to the point where I make a point of not knowing who people are IRL. Dont need to know, dont want to know.

(FYI I never actually paid any attention to that sort of shit while I was on FTB. It was only afterwards when Nat. Reed was swooning that I even realized that she was writing under a pseudonym (or that she even existed!). Turns out she had taken every precaution to keep her identity secret including USING HER FULL REAL FULL NAME AND BIRTHYEAR as her email address. Professionally dumb doesnt quite cover it.)

First off: Z0MG! It's really tf00t! w007 W007 (fanboy alert)

Second: It is amazing to me that the fuckers over at FTB and AtheismPlus claim they don't want to hijack atheism in general, they just want to create a subset; when their Dear Leader PZ Myers blatantly says this in the profile video:

Modern atheism has to do more than just the anti-theism and science side of things. We have to broaden our scope to include significant social issues.

It makes me so fucking angry. As soon you add politics to atheism, it divides us and makes us have to argue politics as well as reason when debating the enemies of atheism.

Or not. Shermer's a libertarian. So what? I don't tend to like that philosophy, for a number of reasons. But he's written, and said a lot of smart stuff. So I ignore the libertarian shit, and pay attention to the stuff I consider smart. As long as that outnumbers the dumb, life is good.

You don't HAVE to argue politics at all.

[John Brown]

Apparently, Justicar and Thunderf00t are now responsible for the views of the people who subscribe to them.

http://elevatorgate.wordpress.com/2012/ ... um=twitter

[ERV]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'

...
errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?

Dont take it personally. Myers is in denial over everything. When the 'Dear Muslima' thing happened, I sent him a series of emails trying to get him to come to his senses and salvage his relationship with Dawkins. His response was essentially 'EVERYTHING IS FINE. LOOK AT HOW FINE IT IS!' while I was conversing with Dawkins, and things were most definitely not 'fine'.

There are a list of Big Names who he has burned bridges with, and there countless of Average Joes and Janes who used to love his blog, who will now never go back for one reason or another.

*shrug*

And Im sure they will get to posting a response to your video right after Watson gets around to honestly discussing what she did to Stef McGraw.

[xinit]

Hey. Any of you looking for work?

http://i.imgur.com/7LnTi.png

"Must be pleasant to be around"

So that someone in the office will be?

[EdgePenguin]

Hey. Any of you looking for work?


http://i.imgur.com/7LnTi.png

Must not be fond of Peperamis or Slim Jims.

After her comments towards Sara Mayhew, the list also includes:

-- Must not be prettier than me
-- Must not dress nicer than me
-- No dykes*


* Not an anti-homosexual slur, its just that lesbians do not exist. All women everywhere are interested in men, and all of their behaviors are geared towards gaining that male sexual attention.

I saw those bitchy (ooo sexism!) comments. There is a lot of resentment in Melody isn't there?

[cunt]

Bridges haven't been burnt. If you stick your tounge riiight up there and find that lovely little sweet spot...

[Eucliwood]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'

...
errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?

Dont take it personally. Myers is in denial over everything. When the 'Dear Muslima' thing happened, I sent him a series of emails trying to get him to come to his senses and salvage his relationship with Dawkins. His response was essentially 'EVERYTHING IS FINE. LOOK AT HOW FINE IT IS!' while I was conversing with Dawkins, and things were most definitely not 'fine'.

There are a list of Big Names who he has burned bridges with, and there countless of Average Joes and Janes who used to love his blog, who will now never go back for one reason or another.

*shrug*

And Im sure they will get to posting a response to your video right after Watson gets around to honestly discussing what she did to Stef McGraw.

Oooo. Please tell me how you converse with Dawkins? And he's outright lying to say that because he doesn't even like Dawkins anymore.

Right? Okay, was he saying Richard Dawkins or Charles Dawkins was a misogynist? I just realized I keep "remembering" back and forth.

[Oneiros666]

Or not. Shermer's a libertarian. So what? I don't tend to like that philosophy, for a number of reasons. But he's written, and said a lot of smart stuff. So I ignore the libertarian shit, and pay attention to the stuff I consider smart. As long as that outnumbers the dumb, life is good.

You don't HAVE to argue politics at all.

Hi, good to hear from you :)

I probably didn't express myself clearly enough. What I meant is that when debating, f.ex. guys voting for Mike Huckabee, they now have extra fodder to throw at us thanks to the fuckers over at AtheismPlus. If they get big enough, you can bet your ass they're going to go '"Look at Atheism+; atheism decidedly lead to ev0l socialism- your own people are proof of it! Go Jesus!" and then I will have to explain that these people aren't representative of atheism as a whole and atheism is still non-political and blah blah blah. I hate that I will have to do that. I fucking hate it. We almost got over the whole 'Atheism leads to Stalinism' argument, only to have it come right back with these fuckers over at FTB and AtheismPlus.

[real horrorshow]

Now that we have both Thunderf00t and Richard Reed posting here, can I have a resolution to a question that's been bothering me:

http://i.imgur.com/Gvl3u.jpg
Thunderf00t

http://i.imgur.com/WH6eh.jpg?1
Richard Reid AKA The Shoebomber.

Separated at birth? I think we should be told!

[EdgePenguin]

Now that we have both Thunderf00t and Richard Reed posting here, can I have a resolution to a question that's been bothering me:

http://i.imgur.com/Gvl3u.jpg
Thunderf00t

http://i.imgur.com/WH6eh.jpg?1
Richard Reid AKA The Shoebomber.

Separated at birth? I think we should be told!

I'm going with the evil twin hypothesis.

[Altair]

Now that we have both Thunderf00t and Richard Reed posting here, can I have a resolution to a question that's been bothering me:

http://i.imgur.com/Gvl3u.jpg
Thunderf00t

http://i.imgur.com/WH6eh.jpg?1
Richard Reid AKA The Shoebomber.

Separated at birth? I think we should be told!

I think it goes beyond being separated at birth.

Have you ever seen them in the same room?

Also, Reid is known as the ShoeBomber.
And the other guy is know as ThunderF00t. Thunder, as bombs, goes Boom!. And a f00t goes inside a shoe :shock:
Very devious way of hiding in plain sight!

[Mykeru]

PS. Extra douche points there PZ for gratuitous smeary use of 'thunderf00t/Phil Mason'. Naturally publicizing someones real name once they've had their docs dropped is a perfectly fair and non-douchy tactic (/sarcasm). Im sure PZ would have no problem with thinking this was perfectly fair and valid if it happened to some of FTBs pseudonym bloggers.... yknow the ones who flounced because I DIDNT drop their docs.
Doc dropping is cheap, to the point where I make a point of not knowing who people are IRL. Dont need to know, dont want to know.

Well, the "cat is out of the bag argument" is a poor excuse considering I just read that and asked myself "And who in hell is Phil Mason? ...Oh"

Greg Laden has pretty much done the same to me, using my given name after he waved the world's most insincere white flag. That it's out there means they will keep circling back to it, the doxxer's option being their go-to in a tight spot.

And since Thunderf00t is around, here's a recent tweet-versation between Ophelia and Aratina that proves that TF has now become the standard used to judge every l33t haxx0r around

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/2768/hackh.png

Well, T-f00t, after Ophelia being convinced I was her POE tweeter and her earlier prognostications based on the idiot's way of knowing that I was going to shoot Rebecca Watson, it's nice to see she's attempting to multi-task her paranoia.

[John Brown]

Now that we have both Thunderf00t and Richard Reed posting here, can I have a resolution to a question that's been bothering me:

http://i.imgur.com/Gvl3u.jpg
Thunderf00t

http://i.imgur.com/WH6eh.jpg?1
Richard Reid AKA The Shoebomber.

Separated at birth? I think we should be told!

I'm going with the evil twin hypothesis.

Pfft. Everyone knows that the "evil twin" is the one with the goatee. Since both of these gentlemen have facial hair, it is obvious that your hypothesis is incorrect.

Science, motherfucker.

[welch]

Now that we have both Thunderf00t and Richard Reed posting here, can I have a resolution to a question that's been bothering me:

http://i.imgur.com/Gvl3u.jpg
Thunderf00t

http://i.imgur.com/WH6eh.jpg?1
Richard Reid AKA The Shoebomber.

Separated at birth? I think we should be told!

I don't think Tf00t would have used such a sketchy system. Clearly he's the smart twin.

[Zenspace]

Actually, you might enjoy this one:
In his latest video appearance he states that he 'there are no bridges that have been burnt'

...
errr, really, that doesn't class as burning bridges as far as PZ is concerned? so what would it look like if he was trying to burn bridges?

Dont take it personally. Myers is in denial over everything. When the 'Dear Muslima' thing happened, I sent him a series of emails trying to get him to come to his senses and salvage his relationship with Dawkins. His response was essentially 'EVERYTHING IS FINE. LOOK AT HOW FINE IT IS!' while I was conversing with Dawkins, and things were most definitely not 'fine'.

There are a list of Big Names who he has burned bridges with, and there countless of Average Joes and Janes who used to love his blog, who will now never go back for one reason or another.

*shrug*

And Im sure they will get to posting a response to your video right after Watson gets around to honestly discussing what she did to Stef McGraw.

That would explain a lot. When I re-engaged with the community in an attempt to figure out what the hell was going on, I recall getting the very distinct impression that the FtB etc. bunch really, really believed their own hype that they were a big enough presence to actually take down the likes of Dawkins - with the unstated but clearly implied goal that they would fill the resulting vacuum. Yeah, right. When I made the suggestion to think that course through a bit more, they just dumped on me. Apparently logic and a broader awareness are not welcome when it contradicts your preferred narrative. I predicted then that they were digging a serious hole for themselves, and while it is playing out more slowly than I would prefer, the trends seem consistent. What they are learning, as reality slowly does its inevitable work, is they are a small, if vocal, minority. If they do not adjust, they will just fade away. I just wish it would happen faster, although the massive traffic thunderf00ts newest video is getting is a really welcome indicator.

I think a lot of the attacks on the higher profile personalities - most recently OB/Shermer by way of example - are just attempts to repeat the RW/Dawkins effect: trash a celebrity directly, gain followers. OB's obsessive twitter pursuit of Shermer, which he wisely ignored, belies everything she stated afterwards when she tried to edit her story.

Feh.

[Al Stefanelli]

http://i.imgur.com/F5902.jpg

Your payment of one thousand words has been deposited to your account.

[Dilurk]

I've blogged a summary of the business with PZ Myers and the GravityLight (lumengate?)

http://edgepenguin.com/content/enlightenment.html

If I've got anything wrong I'd appreciate it pointing out.

The 132nd word should be "They"

I'm not rising to this :P

ho hum...you can lead a horse to water.....

seriously though, the idea behind you blog was a nice idea.
You should see if you can rekindle your google plus interest. Now they have communities, you can pimp your work to a wider audience, and theoretical astrophysics is pretty popular interest over there.

I am on google+ with my other persona. For what it is worth I found it much quicker to find myself in a decent sized community than I am with twitter. Plus the 140 char limitation of twitter. Plus the quick to suspend nonsense of twitter. About all I can see twitter useful for now is pointing folks at blogs and g+ entries!

[Al Stefanelli]

okay, so its over 48 hrs since I put the video up, ~50k views and a 95 % approval rating,

and yet this is greeted by complete silence from baboon central. That's unprecedented!

Do they realize that they have been damned by their own words and the best thing they can do is ignore it and hope no one sees their stupidity/ hypocrisy?

Or are they saving it up for some devastating ad hominim 'we must drive TF out of the community like a pariah' type shit? FYI the last time they plotted as a group to do that... where they all conspired to release their blogs at the same time to be as devastating as possible, it resulted in me losing ~300 out of 150 000 subscribers. Wow, that blogging network is soooo powerfully influential!

Hmmm, kobolds, the one creature who everyone can laugh at without fear of reprisal!
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivat ... 486800.jpg

Perhaps NSC is re-loading?

[Stretchycheese]

I'm not a photoshop expert, but here's a site with plenty of Soviet propaganda posters that Jan Steen and others can play with, should they so wish. :P

http://www.allposters.com/-st/Russian-P ... 98225_.htm

[Al Stefanelli]

Hey. Any of you looking for work?


http://i.imgur.com/7LnTi.png

Must not be fond of Peperamis or Slim Jims.

Maybe she can get Jen's masturbating homeless guy?

[CommanderTuvok]

Apparently, Justicar and Thunderf00t are now responsible for the views of the people who subscribe to them.

http://elevatorgate.wordpress.com/2012/ ... um=twitter

Guilt by association (however tenuous) is a standard Baboon practice. Has been for a long time.

[CommanderTuvok]

So, Melody is requesting an intern. Is that paid/unpaid?

Internships give a huge advantage to middle class people, and discriminate against working class people. Melody really should CHECK HER PRIVILEGE.