Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by HectorDecimal, Feb 18, 2012.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I know, I know. All that about how being enlightened is tough, so tough.
Which is why you are conducting yourself on this forum as you are?
Then why do you participate in it?
In this thread and others, you have been quite insulting to people and yes, you have flamed and trolled other members.
I beg your pardon?
You started this thread because you were offended at a thread which asked atheists on this forum how and why they stopped believing there was a God. Since then you have told several people to get their head's scanned because you felt they could be suffering from a mental illness. You also said to one that he could be brain damaged for being an atheist.
At no time was the thread in question saying that atheism or atheists in question were asking for a beating. You are doing nothing more than being disingenuous and a troll.
Then I would suggest you start acting like it.
No one cares who or what you pray to or do not pray to. Members on this forum have every right to discuss atheism as they so choose without having you insulting and abusing them because you disagree with atheism.
Do you understand now? If atheism offends you so much, then I would recommend you find a religious forum where you may feel that your "human right" is not being infringed upon because you feel that we are infringing upon your rights to troll this forum with insults and nonsense.
Which has what to do with this discussion?
So here we have you, a person who has managed to tally up to nearly 100 posts in two days, telling people that "cyberspace" and gaming causes mental problems, without any proof whatsoever that the people you have been insulting and abusing in the last couple of days are even gamers or even post here as much as you do?
To quote Wynn.. 'physician, heal thyself'..
A thread about atheists discussing how and why they stopped believing in God hurts your feelings?
How about the complaints we have received about your behaviour and your insults on this forum? Or dos your 'another human' story only apply to you and no one else?
Again, another insult. My, you are just full of them, aren't you?
You have suggested to several members now that they should check to see if they are not brain damaged or mentally ill because they happen to disagree with you. Considering you have posted nearly 100 posts in a matter of days, one would be correct in questioning your "contact with humanity".
You consider that to be 'nasty and mean'?
Considering your behaviour in the few days you have been posting here, I don't think it would be fit for me to respond to that seriously or to take you seriously.
When someone joins a forum and then immediately demands that a thread discussing why atheists stopped beleiving in God be moved to the Cesspool because you found it offensive and it hurt your feelings that atheists could dare voice such opinions and because you felt atheists discussing their lack of beliefs here were somehow infringing on your human right to believe in God and then going on a bit of a spray insulting and abusing several people... I do question whether this site is the best fit for you.
No thank you. As a moderator, I have found that it is best that discussions such as this be kept in the open.
Very few moderators have the ability to moderate this particular sub-forum and it is usually left up to the more senior moderators to close down threads in this sub-forum. But do not worry, I will be seeking a senior review this thread and in particular your posts.
Thank you for your input. I will apply it duly informed...
That one's getting old, wynn.
@ HD - were you actually offened by the "How you became an atheist?" thread? I thought that only the "Need for the debasement of religion" could be offensive to anyone at all.
Really? So a person who is an atheist couldn't compare their experiences of atheism to their experiences of theism?
Do you think that comparing a philosophy (for lack of a better label) to a religion is off topic?
I suppose you'll be complaining about any threads discussing budhism next?
You don't see the contradiction here?
You seem to be implying that Atheists are a subspecies of human - is that the case?
My children, both under 5, use this kind of chop logic.
I had a German Shepherd, I domninated her, and convinced her that I was the pack alpha. I didn't have to be in the room to instruct her, and as long as I was in line of sight I could direct her with hand gestures.
And there are atheists who imply that theists are not only a subspecies, but an inferior species of humans -
Your premise is flawed, because it is predicated on the assumption that anybody with a genetic mutation is a subspecies of human.
Or to put it another way - that's not what Fraggle Rockers statement implies - unless you're suggesting that people with Down's Syndrome are an inferior sub-species?
This contrasts with HD's statement:
"...and of course some threads don't apply to people at all, but a sub species."
I think the mutation would need be debilitating and reverse thinking to low level emotions and low level logic.
So then you're saying people with Down's Syndrome are a subspecies?
Read the OP and the first page. This thread was started as a 'request' that the "How you became an atheist?" be moved to the Cesspool. He also specifically quoted comments from other members that were posted in that particular thread and then goes on to give an option that could have been used as to why someone may have become an atheist.. the option he provided was quite insulting to be honest.
HD - this nonsense your spouting about atheists and brain structure, is that related to the work done by Owen et al in March 2011?
It seems to me that the question of the thread was resolved by the time it got to post #4, where HectorDecimal said he didn't want any action after all.
Bells or Trippy: please feel free to close the thread when you're done.
Science has no such limitation. It's just that a scientific examination of religion goes by so quickly that you probably missed it.
Let's see, here's a graduate thesis by a student who claims that there is an invisible, illogical supernatural universe, and the creatures and other forces within it pop out at random intervals and use their magic powers to make weird things happen that violate the laws of nature.
Wow, that's certainly an extraordinary assertion, since it claims to falsify all of science, which is predicated on the principle that the natural universe is a closed system whose behavior can be predicted by theories derived from empirical observation of its past and present behavior.
The Rule of Laplace says we don't have to treat an extraordinary assertion with respect unless it's supported by extraordinary evidence, or else the finite resources of science will be dissipated in the examination of every crackpot hypothesis that comes out of the woodwork.
Okay then, let's see what kind of evidence this student has provided to support his extraordinary assertion.
Still looking for evidence. Hell, at this point I'd like to see some ordinary evidence. If these gods can do all these amazing things, there must be libraries full of eyewitness accounts. That Jesus fellow for example. He lived in the Roman Empire and the Romans were consummate recordkeepers. Surely their chronicles are full of detailed reports of Jesus's miraculous deeds.
This guy has got to be kidding. I just came to the last page of his paper, and even his footnotes don't cite any evidence to support his assertion!
What a dumb jerk! He doesn't understand science at all!
I'm giving him an F on his thesis and recommending to the committee that he be expelled because he'll give our university a bad name. I'm sure Ambassador College would be happy to take him. Or he could get a job as a tour guide at the Creation Science Museum.
You haven't answered the question: what do you mean by "subspecies?" You seem to be claiming credentials as a scientist so I'm sure you know the scientific meaning of that word. There are no living subspecies of Homo sapiens. Since the invention of the first primitive transportation technologies (large, powerful domesticated herbivores and the wheel), human populations have been interbreeding so the notion of a "subspecies" is impossible. The last surviving isolated Paleolithic tribes have already been visited by emissaries from civilization--often not very friendly visits--and their gene pools have lost the purity that is an absolute requirement to qualify as a subspecies.
The primary definition of "religion" in any dictionary mandates a belief in something supernatural. Atheism specifically rejects that belief. You have to scroll down to definition #4 or #5 where people colloquially say things like "shopping is my religion, but my husband's is baseball."
I find that hard to believe, since here you are, so deeply mired in it that it's gotten you two official warnings! Why are you jeopardizing your future ability to discuss the things you really want to talk about, by yammering on about something that isn't very important to you?
Sorry I took all the fun out of that for you by summarizing the entire examination in a short list.
You must have led a pretty sheltered life in your adolescence if you never had the experience of loving someone who didn't love you back. Life just doesn't work that way.
This is the same shit-for-brains government that says marijuana is more dangerous than tobacco or alcohol. The same one that bombed Iraq and Afghanistan for a terrorist attack that was planned, funded and carried out by Saudi Arabians. The same one that has spent trillions of dollars to fight terrorism, which kills approximately the same number of Americans every decade as peanut allergies. Surely you don't expect us to believe anything they say, do you?
Feeling a little pedantic today? Come joust with the real word jockeys on my Linguistics board and see how long you last.
The image of the witch was created by the leaders of the phallocratic Christian churches. Since war was rampant in the Middle Ages, most of the people who were old enough to have accumulated a lot of knowledge and wisdom were women. People started asking them for help instead of the priests. So the priests had to find a way to discredit them, and the "witch" image was it. Look carefully at the traditional picture of a witch: wrinkled skin, thinning hair, toothless mouth--this is simply the way any old woman looked back in those days!
Modern medicine did not start with witchcraft. Witchcraft started with modern medicine!
A poorly worded question since it does not speak to third-generation atheists like me. I didn't know what religion was until I was seven, and I laughed my head off when some other little boy explained it to me. I thought he was joking.
Any rational discourse about their absurd little fairytale tends to anger Christians.
The billions of religionists on this planet have the other twelve zillion websites on which they are free to discuss their idiotic crap. This one is ours. No one's going to lock them out, but their preposterous notions comprise a 500-lb gorilla in the room and they can hardly expect us to pussyfoot around it.
No one's asking you to abandon it. If you spend half an hour a day on SciForums that leaves 23.5 for prayer. Isn't that enough? Why do you have to get in our face with it? Even then we're not asking you to abandon it. But you do have to put up with rational challenges.
I'm a dog breeder too and that little rant didn't make a bit of sense to me. Does that mean that our Lhasa Apsos are atheists?
As I have explained to you more than once, this is a place of science and scholarship where religion is merely tolerated but not respected. You know this, at least you certainly do now. If your feelings are so fragile that you find this kind of milieu literally painful, then you probably came to the wrong website.
I get very stressed out by images of war, so I don't go to those websites. Hell, both opera and rap give me a headache so I carefully avoid both.
Life is like that.
Sorry, we don't do that on SciForums. We have the "About the Members" subforum where the members greet each other. The moderator staff is rather small and we find our time gets taken up with things like this thread.
Members don't get to decide when a thread should be closed. That's one of our duties.
But it continues to be, unfortunately, pertinent.
Separate names with a comma.