Off topic but I thought you might be interested. Just been reading up on Gamergate and their problems with ethics in journalism (there isn't any.) It seems you are using facts and research and even providing sources (the horror.) In the current climate these are so last century, In the age of the Internet and instant news then clickbait is all the main stream media(msm) and smaller news sources (lol) care about. So unless to are going to lie, smear whilst following the current narrative your due diligence has been in vain, sorry you had to hear about this kiddo but integrity is for losers. It does seen unbelievable but just look at the anti Dawkins shit that gets published in the Guardian for example. Adam Lee isn't fit to kiss your arse yet he can lie, smear and promote his insane version of anti Dawkin narrative (and atheism in general) to the cows come home (just one example.) So unless you are going to claim Dawkins raped and/or sexually assaulted you and provide no evidence for your claims then you are currently going to be ignored. It is a sad day(s) for civilization as a whole and you are just one more person interested in the truth that will be overlooked. Feelz before realz is the order of the day.lordpasternack wrote:This is also likely why I haven't received a Cease and Desist, and am unlikely ever to receive one. It isn't just because Dawkins and RDF are not litigious - it's because I'm telling the truth and have evidence - and in such circumstances litigation can backfire horribly.
For Reason and Science?
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
Re: For Reason and Science?
More like you're a hot bit of crumpet and ol' Dickie still hasn't given up hope you'll be his - body and soul - one day..lordpasternack wrote:This is also likely why I haven't received a Cease and Desist, and am unlikely ever to receive one. It isn't just because Dawkins and RDF are not litigious - it's because I'm telling the truth and have evidence - and in such circumstances litigation can backfire horribly.
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
I have a lot of time for Richard Dawkins as I have been a 'militant atheist' all my life. outspoken atheist I'm more than cool with. Though people torn too quickly from their comfort blanket usually need an ideology to cling to. Hence we get atheism+ and their need tack on something that has nothing to do with the position on whether god/s exist.Śiva wrote:More like you're a hot bit of crumpet and ol' Dickie still hasn't given up hope you'll be his - body and soul - one day..lordpasternack wrote:This is also likely why I haven't received a Cease and Desist, and am unlikely ever to receive one. It isn't just because Dawkins and RDF are not litigious - it's because I'm telling the truth and have evidence - and in such circumstances litigation can backfire horribly.
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
-
- "I" Self-Perceive Recursively
- Posts: 7824
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:57 am
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
Hah! I haven't been back there in years. Just had a look, and it's all very flash these days, but I can't say I'm impressed. From the FAQ:
They always did want it to be a bit more preachy rather than give people the opportunity to ask awkward questions. Like "What does seamen taste like?" and "What have you done with all the money?"Q: What happened to Discussions?
A: The Discussions feature is being discontinued on the new website. We are shifting the focus of the website to become a source of information from renowned, credible and popular bloggers and writers in the science and secular community. However, we are keeping an active archive of previous discussions. You can find the Discussion Archive under the ‘Community’ drop-down in the main menu or by clicking here.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
Re: For Reason and Science?
PsychoSerenity wrote:Hah! I haven't been back there in years. Just had a look, and it's all very flash these days, but I can't say I'm impressed. From the FAQ:
They always did want it to be a bit more preachy rather than give people the opportunity to ask awkward questions. Like "What does seamen taste like?" and "What have you done with all the money?"Q: What happened to Discussions?
A: The Discussions feature is being discontinued on the new website. We are shifting the focus of the website to become a source of information from renowned, credible and popular bloggers and writers in the science and secular community. However, we are keeping an active archive of previous discussions. You can find the Discussion Archive under the ‘Community’ drop-down in the main menu or by clicking here.
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
Who the fuck cares anymore, new atheism has been dead since it allowed the entryism of feminism, SJW and cultural Marxism into its fold. Lefty/liberalism has been a fucking clown shoe ever since it embrace Islam and muslims into it's fold. A religion that is totally antithetical to all the views it once held. Richard Dawkins is nothing but a dribbling wreck since his stroke. Doesn't the fact that media outlets that hate Richard Dawkins with a passion wouldn't touch anything you give them tell you something. I admire your fortitude but is it really healthy to totally focus on all our yesterdays. I admit I'm a total cunt and never claimed otherwise but I would never lie to you or anybody else for that matter. I like you lordpasternack and have enjoyed looking at your nude pictures though in the words of that awful Disney song you really need to 'let it go.'lordpasternack wrote:This is the new and improved version of "RD.net to be re-revamped".
I'll post a re-cap of some important substantive issues, and stuff, tomorrow.
Continued from here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... start=1020 - KLR
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
Re: For Reason and Science?
To be fair this is a pretty old thread that I have resurrected.DaveDodo007 wrote:Who the fuck cares anymore, new atheism has been dead since it allowed the entryism of feminism, SJW and cultural Marxism into its fold. Lefty/liberalism has been a fucking clown shoe ever since it embrace Islam and muslims into it's fold. A religion that is totally antithetical to all the views it once held. Richard Dawkins is nothing but a dribbling wreck since his stroke. Doesn't the fact that media outlets that hate Richard Dawkins with a passion wouldn't touch anything you give them tell you something. I admire your fortitude but is it really healthy to totally focus on all our yesterdays. I admit I'm a total cunt and never claimed otherwise but I would never lie to you or anybody else for that matter. I like you lordpasternack and have enjoyed looking at your nude pictures though in the words of that awful Disney song you really need to 'let it go.'lordpasternack wrote:This is the new and improved version of "RD.net to be re-revamped".
I'll post a re-cap of some important substantive issues, and stuff, tomorrow.
Continued from here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... start=1020 - KLR
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
Note to self, look at the date of the post you are responding to before posting a reply.
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
Yes I have just noticed.devogue wrote:To be fair this is a pretty old thread that I have resurrected.DaveDodo007 wrote:Who the fuck cares anymore, new atheism has been dead since it allowed the entryism of feminism, SJW and cultural Marxism into its fold. Lefty/liberalism has been a fucking clown shoe ever since it embrace Islam and muslims into it's fold. A religion that is totally antithetical to all the views it once held. Richard Dawkins is nothing but a dribbling wreck since his stroke. Doesn't the fact that media outlets that hate Richard Dawkins with a passion wouldn't touch anything you give them tell you something. I admire your fortitude but is it really healthy to totally focus on all our yesterdays. I admit I'm a total cunt and never claimed otherwise but I would never lie to you or anybody else for that matter. I like you lordpasternack and have enjoyed looking at your nude pictures though in the words of that awful Disney song you really need to 'let it go.'lordpasternack wrote:This is the new and improved version of "RD.net to be re-revamped".
I'll post a re-cap of some important substantive issues, and stuff, tomorrow.
Continued from here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... start=1020 - KLR
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
- Brian Peacock
- Tipping cows since 1946
- Posts: 38047
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
- About me: Ablate me:
- Location: Location: Location:
- Contact:
Re: For Reason and Science?
It wouldn't happen these days. The plug was pulled on the Dawkins forum just before people started to really twig what social media was all about and how powerful it could be. Definitely missed the boat there I think.PsychoSerenity wrote:Hah! I haven't been back there in years. Just had a look, and it's all very flash these days, but I can't say I'm impressed. From the FAQ:
They always did want it to be a bit more preachy rather than give people the opportunity to ask awkward questions. Like "What does seamen taste like?" and "What have you done with all the money?"Q: What happened to Discussions?
A: The Discussions feature is being discontinued on the new website. We are shifting the focus of the website to become a source of information from renowned, credible and popular bloggers and writers in the science and secular community. However, we are keeping an active archive of previous discussions. You can find the Discussion Archive under the ‘Community’ drop-down in the main menu or by clicking here.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests