It's actually really easy (the word game).
Next clue: KEN
Simply a martial arts style...
Bone breaking... (if that helps)
Last edited:
A Request Directed to Sciforums' "Atheists"
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
- Status
Next clue: KEN
Simply a martial arts style...
Bone breaking... (if that helps)
Geez, now I have to know...OK, it's almost 3am here...and, I'm on serious meds.
You mention cage fighting, KA and JU... First thing that pops up in my tired, doped up mind is, Karate, and JuJitsue. But, I'm sure I'm way off here...
OK ETA... Now I see KEN...Kendo stick, or Kenpo Karate?
I have to ask... what? How is that even close to playing the victim? If anything, that's pretty much a call out...
She's claiming clueless has been taking shots at her. If that claim is good for the gander, it's good for the goose.
More accurately she was claiming that Clueless has been taking pot-shots at many people... though I hesitate to label that as a "claim" when it is more of a simple observation.
Bells
Staff member
I am stating a fact.
What? You miss the part where he makes snide little comments about people and then disappears or acts all innocent and tries to claim it was all a big fat joke when he's caught out on it? The telling part in this thread is when he commented how he was really not saying how he really felt, because you know, calling me a witch with fake balls, a bitch and apparently a male was not enough. Then he switched to Randwolf.
It's not a claim. It's a fact. Now show me where I called him any name in that conversation? I commented on his obvious lack or refusal to acknowledge that I was being sarcastic after I responded to the first insult he lobbed at me and after his flurry of name calling an insults, I decided to call him out on his behaviour. It's not playing the victim. It's telling him I'm sick of his bullshit. Many people are. And he's not fooling anyone with the game he's playing here. And he has the cheek to demand civility when he is incapable of providing even an ounce of it?
His spelling for one. He claims he writes as he speaks. But he does not spell the sounds he would make or makes the same way. He can spell "unfounded" but cannot spell "think" or "you're" or "your"? Really? Then he claims that he is not a native English speaker. Ermm okay... He forgets that the role he has decided to play on this site has him speaking like a hillbilly hick who's snorting moonshine up his left nostril. Last I checked, the Appalachian region was still a part of the United States.
I won't even touch on how much he feeds on any issue that arises on this site. When it starts to die down, he starts threads to discuss things like how civility is needed on this site and apparently trying to find ways to make this site a better place... All while stoking the fires to make sure the issue stays alive and well flamed, then he blames it on everyone. My favourite is when he invited moderators to take part in a discussion and became offended when we did take part, he became insulting and snide while demanding civility and again made spurious and insulting comments about people.
@ Bells
Do you want discussions here at Sciforums to be civil... an this civility woud aply to posters AN mods.???
Do you want discussions here at Sciforums to be civil... an this civility woud aply to posters AN mods.???
Oh, you don't like that kind of assertion. I see.
GeoffP, you're poking the bear with a pointy stick, and without any sort of reasonable reason. Seriously, why do you insist on trying to prolong this ire between you two? Were it a simple jousting of wits and fencing of thoughts, that would be one thing; instead, you two seem to wish for each others head on a post!
What I'm seeking is the same as always: a little equivalence. Bells has laid out this whole nonsensical "you just want to be a victim" shit a couple times; I think even Tiassa has partaken once. What I'm hoping is that maybe the lesson will sink in: you know, maybe you should play nicely. There's nothing, no prolonging; even the bear isn't there. Cross fingers.
Birds of a Flappy Feather
My only question is why people rally to the obviously disingenuous. Those who really are concerned about the state of this community, be they member or moderator, serve ourselves and our neighbors better by not bandwagoning for the hell of something to do.
If there is an arguable seed, people all too often ignore that. Much like a recent dispute, in which some expressed disgust at certain actions taken by the staff. It's not that the action itself was bulletproof, but, rather, that any consideration of the arguable seed was subordinate to people's pride. It was the damnedest thing to watch, when the "rational" argument became one of illiteracy, hubris, and fantasy. I mean, I know some of these people just flat don't like us, but what sort of rational argument is, It can't be something that simple, it must be something evil, and this is true despite the observable record because I say so?
And look at who stands for this brand of excrement. There is always a bandwagon to ride behind such irrationality because such complaints are more about self-empowerment against the Sisyphan Absurd than any actual semblance of fact. I mean, look what happened the last time I tried to take Clueluss seriously. Message received and noted; I won't bother again.
But there is always a crowd waiting at the stop for the next bandwagon. And there is no shortage of drivers around here, it seems.
Bells said:
My only question is why people rally to the obviously disingenuous. Those who really are concerned about the state of this community, be they member or moderator, serve ourselves and our neighbors better by not bandwagoning for the hell of something to do.
If there is an arguable seed, people all too often ignore that. Much like a recent dispute, in which some expressed disgust at certain actions taken by the staff. It's not that the action itself was bulletproof, but, rather, that any consideration of the arguable seed was subordinate to people's pride. It was the damnedest thing to watch, when the "rational" argument became one of illiteracy, hubris, and fantasy. I mean, I know some of these people just flat don't like us, but what sort of rational argument is, It can't be something that simple, it must be something evil, and this is true despite the observable record because I say so?
And look at who stands for this brand of excrement. There is always a bandwagon to ride behind such irrationality because such complaints are more about self-empowerment against the Sisyphan Absurd than any actual semblance of fact. I mean, look what happened the last time I tried to take Clueluss seriously. Message received and noted; I won't bother again.
But there is always a crowd waiting at the stop for the next bandwagon. And there is no shortage of drivers around here, it seems.
Really? Do you not interact with him elsewhere? Somehow, this is your wakeup call?
Bad spelling is funny.
Chef's crack. Heh Heh
Chef's crack. Heh Heh
Well, I think that instead of calling out all atheists, Tiassa should have started a topic on how to reduce the effect of misinformation and maybe offered possible solutions to the backfire effect. Unlike the confirmation bias, when your actively seeking information, the backfire effect is a defense mechanism that causes you to reject facts and dig your heals in even more.
I find cranks fascinating. I follow a few of them for the same reason that I follow the man who is living a year without God. I’m curious to see if facts will dissuade them or produce a backfire effect. Some of them are so outlandish that you'd think they were parodies, but they're not. I've written to a few and have tried several different angles. I've tried to be nice by framing it in a way that is less threatening to their worldview. I've tried to keep it simple, to tiptoe around their ego, humor, and sarcasm, but nothing seems to work. It’s all met with nothing but avoidance or hostility. They won’t budge. They are certain and there’s no room for doubt.
Everlasting life and good over evil, how can you compete with that, eh? But what are the two main themes here that make religion so persuasive? They are scarcity and perfectionism. People want more of what they can’t have, e.g. time, but how much time is wasted? They want an all-knowing, all-loving, and an all-good God, but how much love is wasted? They are dying for perfection. They want to live a good life, but not everyone agrees, or even knows how to live. Most people believe in the laws of nature, and in refining human nature, but they want to be what they’re not…immortal and perfected through their gods.
Atheism can’t be forced. It’s a journey of personal discovery. However, what the new atheist movement does offer is a source of experts, people who know about physics, biology, atheism, religious history, and religious apologetics. Rather than relying on our own ability to persuade others, we can point to what many others are already doing. Am I right, Tiassa? :shrug:
I find cranks fascinating. I follow a few of them for the same reason that I follow the man who is living a year without God. I’m curious to see if facts will dissuade them or produce a backfire effect. Some of them are so outlandish that you'd think they were parodies, but they're not. I've written to a few and have tried several different angles. I've tried to be nice by framing it in a way that is less threatening to their worldview. I've tried to keep it simple, to tiptoe around their ego, humor, and sarcasm, but nothing seems to work. It’s all met with nothing but avoidance or hostility. They won’t budge. They are certain and there’s no room for doubt.
Everlasting life and good over evil, how can you compete with that, eh? But what are the two main themes here that make religion so persuasive? They are scarcity and perfectionism. People want more of what they can’t have, e.g. time, but how much time is wasted? They want an all-knowing, all-loving, and an all-good God, but how much love is wasted? They are dying for perfection. They want to live a good life, but not everyone agrees, or even knows how to live. Most people believe in the laws of nature, and in refining human nature, but they want to be what they’re not…immortal and perfected through their gods.
Atheism can’t be forced. It’s a journey of personal discovery. However, what the new atheist movement does offer is a source of experts, people who know about physics, biology, atheism, religious history, and religious apologetics. Rather than relying on our own ability to persuade others, we can point to what many others are already doing. Am I right, Tiassa? :shrug:
Last edited:
Oh, C'mon now Trooper-Skippy... Don't be tellin' ol Gremme-Skippy, you don't be findin' this all amusin' now?
Holy shit, I love this place. Sometimes, it reminds me of senior year in college...
Other times, recess in 2nd grade. Ya gotta admit, never a dull moment.
Thanks to Enmos and Bells, I have that freaken "Skippy" song stuck in my head...
Hey Trooper,
I like you hope we get back on track. What we may be looking at though, is a total derailment of a conversation that is much needed. IDK, maybe others feel nothing else can be accomplished with further discussion of the New Atheist movement and how some of its tactics are counter productive. Carry on Trooper!
- Status