Strawman arguments?

[DaveDodo007]

i think you way overestimate Fallible's sway over the mod team. I am pretty sure they could figure it out without having Falliible point it out to them. But in any case, Jerome Gnome is much better at trolling than you.

Jerome is a Christian whom believes in Christianity, he could have been indoctrinated at birth then throughout his life, why should the atheist 'community' consider that he is trolling. Though it just goes to show how intolerant the atheist community is to different views than its own. Sort of like a mirror image of any religious 'community' well whoopie the enlightenment.

Could not agree more. If Atheists (and I identify them with a capital "A" because Atheism is a religion, just like Islam or Catholicism, ran the world, there would definitely be the Second Inquisition...as if there already isn't. Dare to even argue theology and you're branded and pilloried, much less actually be a believer. Take the whole gay cake thing for example. If a cake artist doesn't want to make a cake for a gay wedding, it's a criminal offense, but if a lesbian cake maker refuses to make a bible-shaped cake with anti-gay bible references on it, it's "refusing to participate in hate speech" not blatant discrimination based on religion and/or creed.

RatSkep is a giant circle-jerk of the most absolutely intolerant, bigoted and mindless fuckwits I've ever had the displeasure to encounter, and I include the KKK and Aryan Nations, along with the New Black Panthers and Islamic radicals in that. At least the other bigots in the club admit they are bigots. Atheists deny they are intolerant bigots to the grave.

I will have to disagree with you here Seth as atheists such as myself considered that the position on: if god or god exists is a philosophy one eg, there is no evidence for a god or gods. My point is how ready atheists are (not all of them mind, by a long shot) Are ready to jump in with any ideology no matter how extreme or barbarous and murderous it is at a drop of a hat. I used to argue that communism had nothing to do with atheism and I was right in that regard. though it is depressing how quick the lefty authoritarians take over a movement. I honestly don't know which is worse. The left use of witchhunts and public shaming and the right use of laws of the land. A pox on both their houses, I guess.

[pErvinalia]

i think you way overestimate Fallible's sway over the mod team. I am pretty sure they could figure it out without having Falliible point it out to them. But in any case, Jerome Gnome is much better at trolling than you.

Jerome is a Christian whom believes in Christianity, he could have been indoctrinated at birth then throughout his life, why should the atheist 'community' consider that he is trolling. Though it just goes to show how intolerant the atheist community is to different views than its own. Sort of like a mirror image of any religious 'community' well whoopie the enlightenment.

This is a fair point, in amongst all your other nonsense. Unless he's changed totally, Jerome is no troll.

[DaveDodo007]

i think you way overestimate Fallible's sway over the mod team. I am pretty sure they could figure it out without having Falliible point it out to them. But in any case, Jerome Gnome is much better at trolling than you.

Jerome is a Christian whom believes in Christianity, he could have been indoctrinated at birth then throughout his life, why should the atheist 'community' consider that he is trolling. Though it just goes to show how intolerant the atheist community is to different views than its own. Sort of like a mirror image of any religious 'community' well whoopie the enlightenment.

Bullshit. He is a troll because he behaves like a troll. His religion has fuck all to do with it. I had no idea he was a theist until you mentioned it, and frankly, I don't take your word for it. He is an idiot climate change denier,,birther libertarian who jizzes in his pants whenever he reads Ayn Rand.

So what, you're a an idiot Warmist stooge, religion-bashing Marxist useful idiot who jizzes his pants whenever somebody mentions collectivism.

He's entitled to his opinions just as much as you are entitled to yours. He's even entitled to make philosophical arguments that may not actually reflect his own personal values or ideas.

So fuck off you intolerant asshole.

Erm.. I might have caused some confusion here as i was talking about Jerome(sp) the mod of ratskep. Sorry about that.

[Scott1328]

Erm.. I might have caused some confusion here as i was talking about Jerome(sp) the mod of ratskep. Sorry about that.

So, I took a brutal lashing from Seth for nothing? You bastard. Although, it's kind of an honor to be called a collectivist Marxist just like some of my favorite users here and over on RatSkep. My next goals are to have Gallstones be disappointed in me and Scumple to call me the fourth rider of the apocalypse,

And then of course goal of my life: Mr Samsa to say to me: "you were right, I am a contrarian"

[pErvinalia]

There is only one Jerome that I know of. He's been around since rdf days. There is also the count of Monte christo, or whatever title he goes by these days, but he's no troll either.

[laklak]

There's Jerome da Gnome also, different dude from Jerome the Ghost Hunter.

[DaveDodo007]

Erm.. I might have caused some confusion here as i was talking about Jerome(sp) the mod of ratskep. Sorry about that.

So, I took a brutal lashing from Seth for nothing? You bastard. Although, it's kind of an honor to be called a collectivist Marxist just like some of my favorite users here and over on RatSkep. My next goals are to have Gallstones be disappointed in me and Scumple to call me the fourth rider of the apocalypse,

And then of course goal of my life: Mr Samsa to say to me: "you were right, I am a contrarian"

Hay, don't let me stop it as I was enjoying the fight, can I sell tickets?

Edit: Mr Samsa would never use so few words.

[surreptitious57]

I do not speak for Rat Skep only for myself but can assure any one reading this that I do not like the idea of it becoming an echo chamber. Also I am on record on more than one occasion saying that it needs more feminists and philosophers and theists [ for they are the three most distrusted types over there ] Now Mick was banned for one reason and one reason only and that was because hackenslash threatened to leave if he was not. So his departure was not that problematic for most because he is after all theist though he did not actually break any rules as such. By complete contrast the departure of hack would make the forum a lesser place which was why the mods banned Mick instead. But no one member has the right to force them into making such decisions. And so was a complete abdication of responsibility on their part
Strontium Dog is easily the most unliked member over there because of his political opinions. For it is true he does post a lot of nonsense but because he has unpopular views I fully defend his right to express them just like anyone else. Because a rational forum dedicated to critical thinking where everyone thinks the same is a rational forum in name only. I shall also unequivocally defend without prejudice the right of all the other undesirables that hold unpopular opinions : people such as james who has take fifteen years of abuse from materialists online but still refuses to think differently in spite of that. And UndercoverElephant also an idealist. Dave too who has not one good word to say about feminism. Rat Skep needs more people like that not less. So it does not matter if they talk bollocks. Since what does is that alternative voices are not silenced. As we all talk bollocks from time to time anyway myself included so no one has a monopoly on wisdom. And so logically someone else has to be right when we are not. And they have as much right to heard as anyone. The fact that they may not be popular is completely irrelevant long as they abide by the rules

I do not care if anyone agrees with anything I post or not. My job is not to convince anyone of anything because that is only something which can come from within not without. My job is to listen to others to see if it can be demonstrated where I am wrong and then change my mind so becoming a better moral being as a result of such consciousness raising. And it does happen albeit on an infrequent basis. But if everyone thinks the same then it is far less likely to happen so even if no one else wants unpopular opinions being expressed at Rat Skep I certainly do. Absolutely so. I may not agree with them but that in no way means they have less of a right to be heard

Most of us over there are both atheist and left wing and so there is a danger of it becoming an echo chamber. I would think that applies to rational fora in general so is not something exclusive to Rat Skep. So I will always champion the rights of alternative voices even if no one else does. So please do not think that just because I am a member over there that I think like everyone else because I most certainly do not. So I am saying all this as Seth has a tendency to think of Rat Skep as one huge circle jerk but as I have demonstrated that is obviously not true. If I posted this over there it would undoubtedly attract much criticism. Yet I stand by every single word I say

[JimC]

Erm.. I might have caused some confusion here as i was talking about Jerome(sp) the mod of ratskep. Sorry about that.

So, I took a brutal lashing from Seth for nothing? You bastard. Although, it's kind of an honor to be called a collectivist Marxist just like some of my favorite users here and over on RatSkep. My next goals are to have Gallstones be disappointed in me and Scumple to call me the fourth rider of the apocalypse,

And then of course goal of my life: Mr Samsa to say to me: "you were right, I am a contrarian"

There is only one Jerome that I know of. He's been around since rdf days. There is also the count of Monte christo, or whatever title he goes by these days, but he's no troll either.

Both Jeromes were interesting posters in their own right, and definitely not trolls...

[rainbow]

Both Jeromes were interesting posters in their own right, and definitely not trolls...

So typical. Defending trolls again. You don't care one bit that they live under bridges and attack defenceless travellers.

If you weren't so charming and good looking, I wouldn't be your friend at all.

...and another thing - you're a towel.

[Svartalf]

Well, at least he's the hoopy frood's friend

[Seth]

I do not speak for Rat Skep only for myself but can assure any one reading this that I do not like the idea of it becoming an echo chamber. Also I am on record on more than one occasion saying that it needs more feminists and philosophers and theists [ for they are the three most distrusted types over there ] Now Mick was banned for one reason and one reason only and that was because hackenslash threatened to leave if he was not. So his departure was not that problematic for most because he is after all theist though he did not actually break any rules as such.

Yup. As I thought. That's exactly what happened to me. They had to violate their own principles to get rid of me.

By complete contrast the departure of hack would make the forum a lesser place which was why the mods banned Mick instead. But no one member has the right to force them into making such decisions. And so was a complete abdication of responsibility on their part

Indeed.

Strontium Dog is easily the most unliked member over there because of his political opinions.

He appears to have taken my place.

For it is true he does post a lot of nonsense but because he has unpopular views I fully defend his right to express them just like anyone else. Because a rational forum dedicated to critical thinking where everyone thinks the same is a rational forum in name only.

Oh yeah, baby! You got that right.

I shall also unequivocally defend without prejudice the right of all the other undesirables that hold unpopular opinions : people such as james who has take fifteen years of abuse from materialists online but still refuses to think differently in spite of that. And UndercoverElephant also an idealist. Dave too who has not one good word to say about feminism. Rat Skep needs more people like that not less. So it does not matter if they talk bollocks. Since what does is that alternative voices are not silenced. As we all talk bollocks from time to time anyway myself included so no one has a monopoly on wisdom. And so logically someone else has to be right when we are not. And they have as much right to heard as anyone. The fact that they may not be popular is completely irrelevant long as they abide by the rules

How about me?

I do not care if anyone agrees with anything I post or not. My job is not to convince anyone of anything because that is only something which can come from within not without. My job is to listen to others to see if it can be demonstrated where I am wrong and then change my mind so becoming a better moral being as a result of such consciousness raising. And it does happen albeit on an infrequent basis. But if everyone thinks the same then it is far less likely to happen so even if no one else wants unpopular opinions being expressed at Rat Skep I certainly do. Absolutely so. I may not agree with them but that in no way means they have less of a right to be heard

You don't even have to be wrong or change your mind if the polar opposite argument causes you to think about and refine your arguments. That's what it does for me. I've seen every Atheist argument for the non-existence of God there is, a thousand times each, but each iteration brings with it the possibility of some nugget of wisdom or some new fallacy I can dissect, thereby honing my own arguments and thoughts. I've always maintained that its the journey to enlightenment that's important, not the ultimate destination.

Most of us over there are both atheist and left wing and so there is a danger of it becoming an echo chamber.

It's not a danger, it's a known fact.

I would think that applies to rational fora in general so is not something exclusive to Rat Skep. So I will always champion the rights of alternative voices even if no one else does. So please do not think that just because I am a member over there that I think like everyone else because I most certainly do not. So I am saying all this as Seth has a tendency to think of Rat Skep as one huge circle jerk but as I have demonstrated that is obviously not true. If I posted this over there it would undoubtedly attract much criticism. Yet I stand by every single word I say

I am happy to grant you status as one of the very, very few exceptions to the rule, long may you rabble-rouse.

[Seth]

Both Jeromes were interesting posters in their own right, and definitely not trolls...

So typical. Defending trolls again. You don't care one bit that they live under bridges and attack defenceless travellers.

...not to mention intellectually bereft.

By the way, "trolling" is related to fishing, as in "trolling for an argument." At least that's the kind of trolling I engage in. I suppose there are two definitions, the other being someone who pops out from under a bridge just to be nasty without any intent of forwarding the debate.

But for me, it's dangling the lure of a provocative comment in hopes of hooking someone into a debate. And I'm really quite skilled at that.

[hackenslash]

Now Mick was banned for one reason and one reason only and that was because hackenslash threatened to leave if he was not.

Factually incorrect statement. Mick was banned because he's a bully and a troll. Unbeknownst to me, there was already a protracted discussion in progress long before I started going after him. I had nothing to do with it, despite appearances.

[piscator]

Both Jeromes were interesting posters in their own right, and definitely not trolls...

So typical. Defending trolls again. You don't care one bit that they live under bridges and attack defenceless travellers.

...not to mention intellectually bereft.

By the way, "trolling" is related to fishing, as in "trolling for an argument." At least that's the kind of trolling I engage in. I suppose there are two definitions, the other being someone who pops out from under a bridge just to be nasty without any intent of forwarding the debate.

But for me, it's dangling the lure of a provocative comment in hopes of hooking someone into a debate. And I'm really quite skilled at that.

"Big hitter, the Lama."