I took one look, and facepalmed. I’m not even going to try to plow through this mess, but in case you were bored and looking for a chew toy, take a look at this guy.
Who am I? Around 2007 upon arising from higher states I started awakening this strange innate ability for argumentation logic that I have which surpasses even Aristotle and William of Ockham. I started unintentionally getting involved in lots of arguments and debates. This happened when I entered into higher states and started seeing all arguments in systematic patterns.
…
I don’t really know what’s going to happen next in course of the future…but now I can finally share and preserve my thoughts online with this blog.
With the highest innate ability for argumentation logic (probably the highest that ever existed), high intelligence, high intuition, and high originality I wonder how much of my knowledge I should share with the world…and how much I should keep secret…
I don’t think there’s much point in addressing that level of arrogance and obliviousness, and if you venture there, give up any expectation of convincing him of anything.
For example, have fun with The threat that atheists pose to science.
Throughout history atheism and atheists have always been detrimental to scientific progress and advancement. It’s time that someone speaks out against what atheists are doing.
Atheists and atheism have been given a free pass for far too long. Everything atheists touch and take over immediately becomes ruined and destroyed. Atheists are just like uncivilized animals, it’s up to Theists to civilize these uncivilized savages.
Since atheists don’t seem to understand what science even is it’s up to Theists to teach them.
The worse thing that ever happened to society was atheists taking over science. Theists have to make science become scientific again now that atheist animals are trying to ruin science and turn it into a pseudo-scientific joke.
Yeah, this is the same guy who also claims that Nazis are a “left-wing liberal movement”.
In my world science is what made me an atheist, not the other way around.
Modern science has always been atheistic, of course.
As for this ignoramus, here’s how he “reasons”:
Gee, I don’t know, is it because string theorists don’t try to have their ideas taught as science–especially not at vulnerable ages–prior to the accumulation of the quantity and quality of evidence that string theory can be considered to be reasonably supported by that evidence?
While ID is nothing but “Santa Claus made all life” except with Santa Claus being labeled either as “God” or as “The Designer.” And it’s supposed to be taught as science to grade schoolers, or the ersatz “critical thinking” that these yahoos dream up is to be taught to undermine actual science.
Again the completely shitty “analogies” of these fuckwits are flushed from their toilets into the internet.
Glen Davidson
Highest
Highest
High
High
High
I think nobody ought to stop getting high for a while.
I do not see the point of this post. It is doubtful that itsnobody receives much traffic, there is only seven responses in that “Nazis are left wing liberals” thread. Shit, you probably gave that fool a brief uptick in traffic with that link.
This person has no followers and little say in any debate. If a crank is powerless, best to leave the crank be. Go after the likes of Jonah Goldberg and Alvin Plantinga. They pump out a similar bilge and have more sway.
janine – Shit, I don’t have 7 responses on my entire website. I’m starting to feel like a crank. That’s OK though, because I’ve felt like that all my life.
I’m going take a wild guess at untreated bipolar disorder, manic phase.
Are you sure this isn’t a hoax? It sure sounds blithely chain yanking.
Not even as amusement for those of us who don’t give the slightest damn about some sort of ball game being played somewhere?
Glen Davidson
I think I’m going to get a little high before checking out nobody’s site. Since the free pass atheists have been getting all this time is about to expire and all, I might as well enjoy myself while I can.
I wonder if this fellow should let the RCC know what we’ve been up to? They’ll be positively mortified that their policy of live and let live towards other religions has backfired so catastrophically.
Why is it that some people, when they run into arrogant stupidity, insists that the arrogant stupid person is just play acting.
I’m still not clear on why schizophrenia is funny.
Yeah, the guy’s both an asshole and a moron. It’s patently obvious trolling.
I’ll have a black helicopter pop by and finish off this joker. God bless the NWO!
“I wonder how much of my knowledge… I should keep secret…”
Ooh! Ooh! I know this one: All of it.
Chigau, perhaps this person is schizophrenic, perhaps this person is just a fool. But one thing can be said about this person, the person does not know what what xe is talking about; German companies were not nationalized. Many of Hitler’s biggest supporters were the owners of these businesses and they profited greatly from the destruction of Jewish owned businesses and followed the Wehrmacht to plunder the businesses of conquered nations.
About his modesty he says nothing.
janine
I know I should not diagnose typing on the intertubes but usually when this kind of missive is posted it is very familiar.
(a plurality of my family is crazy)
I didn’t follow the link, but judging from the attitude, I assume the blogger in question is Steven Wolfram?
I propose a cage (sound-proof Faraday cage) match between this guy and Vox Day.
I have no training in clinical psychology, but just as you don’t need to be an MD to “diagnose” high fever, this sounds to me like a very bad case of some delusional psychiatric syndrome. Could some more qualified people expound on that angle?
Why does that sound like psychotic delusion?
If they’re qualified, I doubt they’d be willing to diagnose over the internet. That’s more of a the-untrained-rest-of-us kind of thing.
A funny thing about psychiatric syndromes and delusions: the correlation isn’t as strong as people like to think.
I’m not going to his sight.
Someone please let me know if this super-mega-genius, with his “highest innate ability for argumentation logic (probably the highest that ever existed)”[dramatic chord] provides an actual argument for this crap or leaves it as unsupported assertion. Thanks.
Better idea: three-way battle between the fuckheads who insist that all deranged assholes are just play-acting, the fuckheads who insist all deranged assholes are crazy/young/undereducated/autistic/otherwise THE OTHER, and the fuckheads who insist that attributing destructive, irrational behavior to mental illness and/or blaming people for the way they victimize others is NEVER appropriate. To the death. Then boil the winners in their own vomit. >.>
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!
Oh god make it stop. My sides hurt.
itsnobody has some serious potential, comedic potential. A Loon or troll, it doesn’t matter, this is some funny shit. He really has a way of making his point. The logic is so clear…….
The internets certainly allows everyone to get out and air their SMRTs. Why in my day, if you wanted to get the unfettered spew of someone’s whattafu, you had to wait to have pamphlets shoved into your hand or under your windshield wiper at the mall. No, wait…that was last year.
But it’s good to see atheism is having an impact. Why someday, who knows, maybe gnu atheists will be good Christians, in the sense that, in the 300s(CE or AD, it makes no difference, the Christians pooped here too), the Christians were called atheists by the Roman Olympian pantheists because the Christians ran around saying the Olympic gods were not real. That snark about “you stopped one god short of where I did in my disbelief” has an ancient pedigree.
People certainly seem to be getting desperate to reinforce the highly negative connotations of ‘atheist’. I wonder if there’s a tipping point coming in public perception? Seems like I see more and more disgust with religious zealot tactics in comment sections of news pieces. Or maybe I just frequent places where that’s likely.
Maybe it looks familiar because a whole lot of creationists sound a lot like this. Dembski and Berlinski know how to parade their narcissism slightly more carefully, but I can’t say that they’re any less narcissistic than this guy (guy? PZ seemed to think so, but I can’t say anything I saw on the site pins it down).
I don’t know, I suppose someone knows if the frank espousal of supremely great thinking is more indicative of mental illness than the more nuanced arrogance/ignorance of Dembski and Berlinski (all the iDIot fellows are arrogant and ignorant, but I think these two stand above most of the rest), but it’s not obvious to myself.
To me it just looks like normal creationist narcissism of the more outspoken members (basically, it’s needed for public espousal of such rot), just with a less sophisticated understanding of how it comes across.
Glen Davidson
I got through a sentence. The stupid hurt.
I see that Dr. rer.cub. Gene Ray, the wisest human, has taken on a disciple. Truly, we are all educated singularity stupid, and will easily fall to his mastery of argumentation logic.
This is not a chew toy. This is a popped balloon.
I got this far:
Then I went, “Big whoop, I independently re-derived quantum entanglement with a high schooler’s knowledge of the theory of relativity. That doesn’t mean I’m some sort of prophet or revolutionary.” And then I stopped reading.
not being an expert in debate or logical argument I would have to say that for nobody it is mostly assertions beginning to end spiced with derogatory statements and insults. Is he real or not I have no idea. He is nuts regardless if he believes all of that BS he is not in touch with the same reality as commonly understood by most people. If he is being “funny” and just making a act I would say that his sense of humor is off and he is too nuts. Being “nuts” for a humorist is not the same as needing to be under doctors care.
I do not find it interesting enough to give it a second read though. It just ain’t funny enough if it is supposed to be funny and too stupid if it is serious.
uncle frogy
why don’t they voice any opposition to things like the string theory?
I thought Lee Smolin’s whole book “the trouble with physics” was an interesting read – and it was all about string theory and the many problems with it… But he probably doesn’t read actual books by other people.
More amazing knowledge:
Yeah, too bad about technology since we took over science. Said on the internet with vastly superior, but relatively cheap, computers. And gee, no cures in 40 or 50 years, which I suppose means I should take my Mom off of all of her modern meds (no Mom, I said it to make a point).
Why yes, we’d know that the Designer made life. Not how, nothing useful, but we’d at least be told again and again that life was designed.
As for why this nobody is suddenly noticed, I don’t know, but he wrote a post noting a sudden upsurge in hits on his site a few days back. Whatever caused it seems to have worked its way to Pharyngula–although that doesn’t obviously make it a good decision to give him more publicity.
Glen Davidson
I suppose because the Nazis went about liberally killing everyone who disagreed with them, and anyone they just didn’t like for any reason, that makes them Communists, eh?
Why is it that a science class in high school made me realize what BS my previously held religious beliefs were, and started me down the path to full on atheism? I have a biology teacher and Charles Darwin to thank for that.
Is this guy crazy or a troll? I think he doesn’t have to be either. He sounds a lot like the students I see in my classes every day, 18 year old undergrads who come into Biology class with the expectation of explaining to the experienced professional teaching their class why Big Bang Theory can’t be true (and if it can, then it must be God); why evolution violates all the laws of physics, including some we haven’t discovered yet; and why global warming is impossible and misguided. Never mind that these people have never done one lick of research on the topic (except one student, who went to the trouble of sending me articles from the Daily Mail); they know. Like itsnobody, it just popped into their head, I guess, and they know it.
I never dismiss rambling like this as crazy or fake, because I see it every day in papers written by semi-literate college students who are fully functional, show no signs of psychosis, but simply have a worldview that isn’t compatible with scientific knowledge.
It’s possibly because a video of his was taken down due to Youtube’s policy against hate speech that brought this moron to the internet’s attention.
A title of one of his posts: “Why society should not accept atheists/racists as human beings.”
He’s not just another arrogant ignoramus, but is at least competent enough to go to college, if his claim is to be believed–and I don’t see any reason to doubt that claim. Fully sound he seems not to be (not the same as saying that he has a mental disease), but, at the least, I see no reason not to hold him accountable for his ignorance and prideful hatred.
Glen Davidson
Wow this post and the comments here are funny.
It’s just ad hominems from atheists. I guess atheists are just no match for me.
Atheists should stick to throwing ad hominems and creating straw man, but then again atheists don’t even understand what an ad hominem or straw man is.
It’s my duty to teach atheists about logic and science since they don’t understand anything about either.
In their world saying “Newton was a crackpot” is equivalent to refuting Newton’s geometric proofs…right?
Just face the facts atheists, you’ll never be any match for me…I can already predict your responses “I say he’s an idiot, and a troll, and he’s wrong, yeah, he’s wrong, and an idiot, yeah and I’ll get some other atheists to agree with me that he’s wrong and that he’s an idiot”
LOL Thanks for the laughable responses.
Wow, what a fucking idiot and liar you are, dumbass.
If you were even knowledgeable and intelligent enough to write coherent non-simplistic arguments, I’d consider engaging them. But since you’re more ignorant and trite than even William Lane Craig, there’s little to say other than that you’re a whopping fuckwit.
Glen Davidson
Alright, lets hear it then. Present your logical, scientific proof for god.
I am guessing hir response, if there ever is one, will disregard where the burden of proof lies.
Evidence for theism, please.
No one was saying Newton was a crackpot, and no one was claiming to have refuted his proofs.
Also, saying that your statements are stupid or loony is not an ad hom. Saying “you are crazy, and therefore nothing you say has to be considered” would be an ad hom. In contrast, we are heaping scorn on you because what you wrote. “Your statements are ridiculous, therefore you are not to be taken seriously.” Kind of the reverse of an ad hom.
By the way, your statements are ridiculous. For that reason, I can not take you seriously.
Although now that I think about it, Newton was a bit of a nutter, wasn’t he?
Uncle Frogy,
You’re right. He offers nothing but a bunch of assertions, at least in the bits quoted by PZ and the comments – I’m not about to go to his site. Apparently he is blissfully unaware that argument by assertion is considered a logical fallacy. Or maybe, because he is so very grand, it isn’t when he does it, and anyone who suggests otherwise is wrong.
For someone who claims «the highest innate ability for argumentation logic», his comment at 38 is nought but
a tu quoque* putting his thumb to his eye and saying “And you!”*gives him too much credit
I already pointed out that you were wrong about the Nazis nationalizing German companies. You did not bother to try to correct me, instead, you whined that no one said anything substantive. This is not an impressive game you are playing here.
You are nowhere near as intelligent as you think you are. You are just a bottom dweller that a biiger fish just happen to spot. Soon, your traffic will go back to the level you have already established.
In many ways, yes. And when he ran the Royal mint, he was quite ruthless. He was brilliant enough to create ridges on the edge of the coins so it was easy to tell if the coins were shaved. Those who were caught were hung.
Well, now that I’ve seen itsnobody up close, I don’t see any need to go and read its blog. Is that really the -best- ‘e can do? Whining about ad-hominem while making it clear to everyone as s/he does that s/he doesn’t have any clue what ad-hominem actually means?
Thanks, nobody! You’ve saved me valuable time that would otherwise have been a total waste.
itsnobody:
Kindly define “ad hominem” and “straw man.”
Azkyroth:
Oh, if you’re someone like nobody, it’s easy peasy:
ad hominem: an insult.
Strawman: any criticism or disagreement with my ever-so-special unique snowflake argumentation logic.
There’s no need at all to actually understand logical fallacies, not when you have argumentation logic, it’s a super power…you know, magick!
I don’t see what the big deal is about this guy.
I see a few possibilities. Either he really believes what he writes or he does not. If he really believes it, then he is mentally challenged and making fun of his disability is not very kind.
If he does not believe it, then he is either playing a joke on everyone or simply deprived of attention and fishing for replies. That is, he is either sadly failing to be funny, or Trolling to get the attention he lacks elsewhere.
It is sad to point it out when someone’s jokes are not funny, so in that case the kindest thing to do is leave him alone, believing he is funny. He’ll get a smile out of it and we’ll all be happy.
It is counterproductive to feed a troll’s craving for attention with more replies. It only makes him continue down the same path, and prevents him from finding a more positive way of getting attention. The kindest (and easiest) way to help him is to stop replying, leaving him alone to deal with his own issues.
So, whether he is insane, unfunny or craving attention, the answer in all three cases is the same. Best to be kind and leave him alone. He has his own issues to deal with.
If there’s one thing I’ve noticed about really smart people, it’s that they rarely tell you how awesomely intelligent they are. On the other hand, individuals who brag about their superior intellect almost invariably turn out to be a huge disappointment.
[OT]
Duke Nukem:
What makes you imagine there’s a big deal to be seen?
That’s not exactly what you’re doing with your speculation about this specimen, is it?
Your implicit premise may not be shared by others, you know.
Apparently, so do you, with your speculative internet diagnosis and unsolicited advice.
(You think I should leave you alone to deal with your issues?)
Vizzini: I can’t compete with you physically, and you’re no match for my brains.
Man in Black: You’re that smart?
Vizzini: Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons.
Methinks ‘brain the size of a walnut’ has certain issues of Atheism which he deals with by projection.
At best a troll at worst mentally challenged…which amounts to the same thing really.
Theists tend to inherit all the crocked & twisted genes in the tar pit…the unmistakable conclusion being they were designed that way!
Just another ‘doofus for jeebus’…nothing to see here…so moving on…
His Top 10 Questions for Swedes are especially entertaining for me as a Swede.
At first his concern about the xenophobia and islamophobia here is a little touching, but then you realize he’s just saving his bigotry for women:
His ten questions are basically variations of this one:
Here’s his solution for Sweden:
No, that’s not violent at all. Just like the mafia aren’t violent when they come to your place and say “nice place you got here, it would be a shame if something happens to such a fine establishment”.
The narcissism and over the top arrongace reminds me of this strange guy a few months back who went on and on with this bizarre rant about how superior his programming skills were to everyone else’s, before he started spamming German song lyrics… on the other hand, that guy was sane and non-evil compared to this itsnobody person.
I re-derived Occam’s razor when i was about 3 years old. It’s called ignoring the stupidly impossible. If that is his idea of “highest intuition” then I have only pity.
Keep your “secrets” safe inside honeybun. I fear they will evaporate in sunlight… and I hate to see a grown-up cry.
Wow. Is bro’ trying to win some sort of award for hyper-elevating Dunning-Kruger effect to an artform? Or maybe he’s just a Poe wanting to troll up some hits on his website, albeit in a ham-handed and bull-meets-china-shop fashion.
Oh look. A crazy person on the internet. Hold the front page.
Perhaps he derived his Ockham’s razor by carving it out of chert ? That could explain the large time delay and the total misunderstanding of what it is good for.
Does not compute. Shouldn’t you descend from higher states?
Wow. Somebody’s humble.
Just a guess, but it could be because you’re an arrogant asshole, and an idiot.
Top 10 Questions for Atheists
Gosh! He’s really got me on the ropes with that one! I just hope he doesn’t ask me if I’ve stopped beating my wife.
Yeah, this guy is pretty low hanging fruit to be posting about and bothering with. He’s probably about as influential as I am. He’s a long ways from being a Ken Hamm or a Worldnetdaily, who actually have audiences and have some small level of influence on US culture.
evilDoug #18 FTW.
CuervodeCuero #25, thank you for your concern.
Nah. Wolfram is an arrogant arsehole, but at least has something to be arrogant about.
Dr. rer. cub. h. c. sounds appropriate…
Agreed. He’d almost certainly benefit from professional help.
Argumentum ad hominem?
Agreed. “Look at the midget/freak/mentally ill person, hurr durr.”
Yes, I know he brought it unto himself by making his thoughts freely available on the Internet, but I still don’t find it all that much fun.
(Commenting on it probably makes me a hypocrite and/or tone troll, though. Oh well, can’t win them all.)
Bragging about your intelligence always reveals the depths of your ignorance.
He’s got to be a troll. If he’s not…well…I just don’t know what to say.
I’m picking up a ~young male, socially isolated, community college, “I read Logic for Dummies”~ vibe from him.
Glenn Beck’s anonymous blog?
He has slashed logic’s throat with Occam’s straight razor.
I suspect it’s more “doodling in the margins of someone elses copy”, than actual reading.
I could be wrong, but xe seems like a /b/-level troll. If this wasn’t a poe, I’m going to an hero myself at work through performing software rebuilds until my brain ‘splodes all over the office.
Anyway, my guess would be personality disorder rather then psychosis, but I’m not an expert. Just known a few people who meet the diagnostic criteria.
I don’t think it’s tone trolling so much as pointing out that there’s not much sport in taking potshots at such a large target.
“…..arising from higher states…..” it always begins.
What a world we’ve made for ourselves. Dayum.
Can we please stop using “left-wing” and “right-wing” to refer to modern political movements? We aren’t living in 18th century France and there aren’t only two possible political philosophies.
Sounds more like “Wile E Coyote, super genius” to me.
Beep, beep!
I say he’s an idiot, and a troll, and he’s wrong, yeah, he’s wrong, and an idiot, yeah and I’ll get some other atheists to agree with me that he’s wrong and that he’s an idiot
#79 lago – since we’re talking US politics you’re correct. We should be talking center right wing and extreme right wing. Most US Americans wouldn’t know a real socialist if one bit them on the ass.
lago,
the labels left-wing and right-wing are still used in a useful way in most of continental western Europe. Often together with “centre” (or centre-left, centre-right).
“Who am I?”
An asshole with a laptop and a God complex
“the labels left-wing and right-wing are still used in a useful way in most of continental western Europe. Often together with “centre” (or centre-left, centre-right).”
So what do you call someone that mixes views from both the far left and far right? Magenta? Extra-spectral?
Wow all these responses are laughable. I guess I’ll refute them one by one to teach atheists about logic.
It’s my duty to teach atheists about logic, why? Because logic is useful for determining the truth.
First to the initial post by PZ Myers:
– This entire article is just ad hominems (personal attacks without refutations)
– He quotes parts of the article and intentionally leaves out all the arguments in the articles
– The verifiable statements I made in the About section were defining Ockham’s razor as meaning “making the least possible amount of assumptions” and claiming that all logical fallacies are a simply violation of Ockham’s razor, both statements have remained un-refuted, just like all my other statements
– He does the same with the “The threat that atheists pose to science” article, just quotes a passage and intentionally leaves out all the arguments
Atheists should just stick to throwing ad hominems at people, they know that since other atheists are gullible they’ll really believe that personally attacking someone is equivalent to refuting an argument.
I don’t really blame atheist for throwing so many ad hominems, they can’t refute any statement, so that’s all they can do.
Thanks for the laugh, PZ Myers
Well then now to refute some comments made here, but I’m not going to respond to the substance-less ad hominem comments.
@Glen Davidson: What are you talking about? The string theory is taught in many Universities. Are you saying that if the string theory was taught in high schools you would oppose it?
In the US Intelligent Design is not taught in virtually any public school, yet atheists voice opposition regardless.
The string theory is not science and there is no empirical evidence that 1-dimensional strings exist. It is considered science simply because it is a mathematical model, but a mathematical model that cannot be empirically tested is not scientific. You can do lots of mathematics that have absolutely no correlation to this physical reality.
Having a mathematical model doesn’t make something scientific like atheists foolishly believe, having empirically testability does.
So in reality the string theory really is just as un-scientific as ID even though ID-advocates don’t have a mathematical model because a mathematical model isn’t what makes something scientific, empirical testability does.
I actually don’t have any problem with string theorists, I just have a problem with people considering string theorists as scientists rather than as mathematicians.
@janine: You’re just using a straw man, I never claimed that the Nazis nationalized German companies, I claimed that the nationalization of associated industries was part of the NSDAP 25-point program. Even without nationalization the Nazis were fiscally liberal regardless, just face the facts. How can anyone argue that controlled wages and prices aren’t far-left? lol.
The government restricting employment and destroying businesses is a far-left pro-government control idea. In a free-market far-right economy the market would determine whether or not a business succeeds or fails, not the government.
The Nazis were anti-capitalist and pro-government control. They believed in big government and lots of government involvement, not in small-government. Just face the historical facts.
@Glen Davidson: Networking existed in the late 1960s and early 1970s, so I don’t really view the internet as that much of a growth in technology.
The rest of your rant about “Intelligent Design” is just a laughable straw man.
@Markr1957: The government killing people is also far-left fiscally. The far-left believes that the government should have control over the people, far-right believes that the government should have very little power over the people.
@you_monster: God is an empirically untestable hypothesis so by definition I cannot gather scientific proof for God. I am not sure if it will ever be possible to gather scientific evidence of a personal God. An afterlife on the other hand should be relatively easy to experimentally prove once someone finds a way to test that hypothesis. An impersonal God should also be relatively easy to prove. I’m not sure if I will prove those things, but they would be a lot easier to scientifically prove than a personal God.
@myeck waters: I didn’t claim that any of you here claimed that Newton was a crackpot, I used “Newton was a crackpot, therefore Newton’s geometric proofs are wrong” as an example of what an ad hominem is to explain to atheists how personally attacking me doesn’t refute any argument that I made.
Claiming that my statements are stupid without explaining wouldn’t be an ad hominem, it would just be a baseless statement or statement without reasoning. It would actually be an argument from personal incredulity if by incredulity you concluded that my statements were stupid.
To give an example of why it’s illogical it’s just like someone saying “I think General Relativity is stupid, ridiculous idea, so I don’t take Einstein seriously”
Which one of my statements is ridiculous? Oh wait you don’t have a reason, because atheists don’t use reasoning, just ad hominems, incredulity, baseless statements, and straw man.
@evilDoug: So which argument of mine is an argument by assertion? Why not point out which argument is instead of just asserting so, lol.
@Azkyroth: Sure, here’s my definitions of an ad hominem and straw man:
ad hominem: an attempt to refute an argument by throwing personal attacks instead of actually refuting the argument
straw man: misrepresentation of someone’s argument, claiming someone said something that they did not say
@Caine, Fleur du Mal: What a great straw man.
@Erulóra Maikalambe: Arising as in awakening from.
@SWAT: Why would I read informal logic books? It’s much more fun to independently reason things yourself instead of just copying like atheists do.
Well I feel bad for entirely ruining and destroying all these atheists’ arguments. I probably injured their emotions or something.
I hope this was a very educational experience for atheists.
If anyone is interested in refuting an argument I made it’s better to post on my article page.
If atheists are interested in posting personal attacks and ad hominems, you should post the comment here.
So, IG Farben was forced by the Nazis to build a compound at Auschwitz and use slave labor. And Krupp was very reluctant to be the arms manufacturer for Germany. An Hitler had no corporate sponsors from the time he took over the Nazis until the time he shoot himself.
For a person who he so impressed by his own logic, you have little regards for facts.
Laughable.
Facts are stupid things. While it is illegal to teach ID, it is still taught in many schools. It takes students to tell their parents and having those parents care enough about educational standards and are willing to face off against social pressures to stop this.
You complained about strawmen? You are using one here. It is not just atheists who are against the teaching of ID in publicly funded school, it is anyone who cares about science. One of the most authoritative voices against ID happens to be Catholic. His name is Ken Miller. Look him up.
Also, if it is not taught in public schools, why the Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling? And why to the fundamentalist groups keep challenging this ruling and keep trying to introduce bills that get around this.
You are as logical as you are knowledgeable.
itsnobody reminds me a lot of george schollenberger.
Redefining logic, redefining science. Redefining whatever he or she feels they need to in order to support their idiocy..
P.R.A.T.T
“The string theory”
Which one is that again? There were several (well, actually lots) last time I looked.
Yawn, just another string of strawman arguments…
Oh, the basic pigeon strategy in chess.
@Weed Monkey
Pooping on the board and then running away?
We Are Ing, pooping on the board and flying away to brag to hir peers, I think.
From the blog about atheists being sub human,
Trollolol
God damn PZ, why are giving him attention? He is now bragging about how his blog went from 100 hits a week to 2000. It’s true what those ‘accomodationist’ say: you extremist just feed off each other.
…there comes a point occasionally where you just realize the other person is not talking; rather they are farting the wrong way.
Get back to me when it’s over 9000
Such a deep insight you show, dmu111. Please explain those people who express a similar line of thought as this nitwit an have more sway. Say, does Fox News depend on the likes of this blog?
Besides, within a week or two, his numbers will be back to the level it was before PZ overturned the rock.