Monday, November 8, 2010

In Vain Pains

previous post: Wins to Start the Week



  1. @rogue


    –verb (used with object),-chised, -chis·ing.
    to deprive (A PERSON) of a right of citizenship, as of the right to vote.
    to deprive of a franchise, privilege, or right.

    From Merriam Webster

    transitive verb
    : to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote

    From Oxford English Dictionary
    a. trans. To deprive of the rights and privileges of a free citizen of a borough, city, or country, or of some franchise previously enjoyed.

    1. trans. To deprive of civil or electoral privileges;

    From Google.Com
    1. Deprive (someone) of the right to vote.
    2. Deprived of power; marginalized.

    From Wikipedia

    Disfranchisement (also called disenfranchisement) is the revocation of the right of suffrage (the right to vote) of a person or group of people, or rendering a person’s vote less effective, or ineffective. Disfranchisement may occur explicitly through law, or implicitly by intimidation or by placing unreasonable registration or identification impediments in the path of voters.

    You say the I’m the immature one but you continue to call people childish names such as cunt.

    You say I don’t know the what the definition of the word, but clearly it is you who does not know the definition.

  2. Yeah fair play, this post is getting hard to find now… unless i’m missing something or some way to find posts easily. It’s like page 22 or something …

    @Patton. What you described isn’t irony you stupid bastard. A better example of irony would be your describing us as childish for having a meaningful philosophical discussion. Are we children, or adults? Are we skimming the surface like children or going deeper, like (sexy) adults?

    In intellectual terms, you’re more Custer than Patton really aren’t you…?

    This is going nowhere now. Much like the global debate. People that choose to ignore reason cannot be reasoned with. I’m off to watch Sam Harris debates on youtubes… ‘night. (And this time, I REALLY AM LEAVING etc. etc. etc.)


  3. @Aries, keep back pedaling, buddy. :p Your words show the truth in your motives. And statistics, once again, are not indicative of an entire population. They are based on tiny groups that typically fit the mold the statistics takers are looking for to prove their point. Doctor Spock had statistics too, yet has been largely discredited. If you base all your argument on statistics, you’re closed-minded and ultimately wrong. But of course you’re used to being wrong…

    Also, congratulations on quoting a wiki as reference material. In other words, “HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!” Oh wait, “HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!” I love it how a narrow-minded, no-proof-having, do-anything-to-try-to-be-right, religious zealot will finally resort to citing a wiki. Sorry, kiddo, but I can go edit a wiki to say that God is a cat and Jesus Christ sucked Julius Caesar’s balls for beer money. That’s why your grade school teacher told you to look up words in the dictionary. No no no, not urban dictionary you silly little boy. 😐

    Anyway, back to the point, a theory is always a theory otherwise they’d use a new word for it. It means they don’t know. Not a fact. Buy a dictionary that works. And talk about it any way you want, but your silly misinterpretation of the word “so” doesn’t apply to the given context. The two sentences don’t mean the same. Get it through your “I Don’t Use My Brain Unit” hat. I weep for the future when a thing like you will pollute the human gene pool.

  4. @thehater

    Back pedaling? You really believe that personal anecdotal evidence outweighs statistical evaluations on 1000s of people? If you really believe that I got some beach front property in Florida I’d love ya to take a look at. Also, I would love you to quote where I said that you only knew your family’s kids because I honestly have NO idea what the fuck you’re talking about.

    Just because something is on a wiki, doesn’t mean it is automatically untrue. For example, the wiki link for disenfranchise says the same thing in different words as the oxford English dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and so we know that it’s correct. Scientific theory is another one where some people edited with atheistic undertones that give no help to the definition of the word, but the definition was still correct. Also, Newton’s Theory of Gravitation is still considered, “just a theory,” but no reasonable person would argue that gravity doesn’t exist, no would they? But, If you don’t like the wiki link here are some more:

    The first one is from the University of California, at Berkeley. A very reputable university.
    evolution (dot) berkeley (dot) edu/evosite/misconceps/IIAjusttheory (dot) shtml

    Some Others:
    notjustatheory (dot) com/
    amazon (dot) com/Just-Theory-Exploring-Nature-Science/dp/1591022851
    badphysics (dot) wordpress (dot) com/2010/04/09/just-a-theory/
    thefreedictionary (dot) com/scientific+theory
    religioustolerance (dot) org/ev_stat (dot) htm

    There are some terms that hold different meanings in different educational fields.

  5. I’m also not a religious zealot. Far from it. I haven’t once condemned anyone to an eternity in hell or called people heathens. Despite being called names such as cunt, I have tried my best (even if I haven’t always succeeded) to not call the same kinds of pathetic names. I have debated with pastors who go outside university and yell at people that they know for a fact they are going to hell and wear sandwich signs that say things like I know you touch yourself at night, you’re going to hell with the same kind of passion. I don’t support fire and brimstone preaching at secular institutions and yelling at people they are going to hell anymore than I agree with categorizing religion as child abuse. I am not a religious zealot. In this case I’m defending religion because quite frankly, some of the comments on this thread were as unacceptable to me as my comments were to the people who made them. I don’t think religion is child abuse nor do I think that religious people need to be disenfranchised. For the record, I think people should live and let live. I don’t support religion being taught in schools, nor the intelligent design curriculum.

  6. @Aries, if my personal eye-witness evidence is of a thousand kids then yes, it is indeed as valuable as “statistical” “evidence” of a couple thousand cases. After all, you’re the guy who believes that Jesus Christ lived and was the son of some deity based solely on the alleged eye-witness accounts of only a few people sa reported hundreds of years after the deaths of the man and said alleged eye-witnesses. In the real world we call that hearsay, but you call it proof. I (and countless others) have actual, factual, eye-witness accounts of kids who don’t don’t have the attention spans of a typical A.D.D. sufferer, yet you discount it. You’re about as bassackwards as it gets, kid.

    Also, I already quoted where you IMPLIED my only examples were my family members, so learn to read and stfu, El Retardus Maximus.

    Just because something is on a wiki doesn’t automatically make it true. Just because one thing on one wiki is true doesn’t mean all things on all wikis are true. Yet you seem to think otherwise. Get your head off the intertubes and learn from life, Asstard Menagerie.

    Newton’s theory of gravity is indeed a theory because of the nature of it. He says two bodies just attract by some magical force. That’s the theory. Other theories are that it’s due to magnetic fields. Those are also called theories. So since many scientist believe the gravity theory over Newton’s does that make it a fact? So both theories are fact now? How does that even work, Mental Superpower?

    You are clearly a Text Book Wizard with no real-world experience (i.e. you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about). Get your face out the book and live a little. You MIGHT, MIGHT, MIGHT learn something.

  7. @thehater

    But you didn’t mention a personal eye witness account of a thousands of kids, did you? Nope. Also, one person’s experiences do not statistical trends make. The fact of the matter is, kids do not have the same cognitive abilities as adults. They have shorter attention spans, and less judgement abilities. The average child compared to the average adult will lose in almost every comparison mentally. That is why it is up to adults to guide and protect them and raise so they can reach their full potentials. That is also why they are not subject to the same punishment under the law as an adult, even holding everything else equal.

    I did not imply that your only example was your family. I said just because the people in your family are x, doesn’t mean y. That doesn’t mean only the people in your family are x, it simply mean that is a false corollary. I think I know what I meant to say better than you do, why don’t you take your own advice.

    I didn’t say that just because something is on a wiki, that made it true. I said that just because something is on a wiki, it doesn’t automatically make it false. I told you to compare other sources to determine the validity of the wiki’s statement. In this case, though it appeared on a wiki you can see that what the wiki said about Scientific Theory being different than just a theory in the more common usage of the term was correct. You’re the one that got all preachy because I used a wiki the first time to illustrate my point.

    I didn’t say that Scientific Theory=fact. I said that Scientific Theory was the pinnacle of scientific knowledge. Theory is held to a much higher level, so the term theory is not as fast and loose as you claim it is. Hell, the Earth rotating around the sun is considered “Heliocentric Theory,” but no reasonable person would assume that Sun rotates around the earth at this point, now would they? So your whole, “just a theory,” simply does not hold water. It is being presented to children as the pinnacle of scientific knowledge. It makes no references to the fact that not everyone thinks it’s true and have competing, feasible claims. It doesn’t say, we believe x, but there is a good chance that it could be false. Why? Because it’s irrelevant to the teaching of evolution. They teach elementary children in school that the Wright Brothers were the first to fly an airplane. Why? Because those are earliest one it’s easy to attribute these “facts,” too even though there is strong evidence to support that this may or not be true. But do they say we BELIEVE that the Wright Brothers flew the first airplane? No, a little kid doesn’t need to know about the controversies surrounding the 1902 flight race.

  8. @Aries, sure I did. I even quoted it again for you. You know, how I said, “…around kids all my life…” I guess it’s not obvious to the obtuse? And there you go changing your argument again. Cognitive ability does not equal attention span. You are really bad at this, kiddo. It’s no wonder you seem to not know what you’re talking about. I get it now. You have A.D.D. and can’t stick with an argument. Just remember, the world is not like you. No two people are alike. Kids in general don’t have short attention spans. Adults in general don’t have long attention spans. See, I made my sentences short so you can take them all in. You’re welcome.

    You implied I only had a few examples. Then you lied about your arguments. Then you backpedaled You still are. Short sentences goo for Aries. Short paragraphs even better.

    You quoted the wiki. Then you defended its validity wither other wiki facts. You’re confused. You’re also the preachy woman, not me. You also love some dead guy you think may have been names Jesus. And he wasn’t even Hispanic. Excellent. Shorter sentences! Good good good!

    Maybe you don’t know what pinnacle means. I know it’s long, but try to read it in steps. You might get it. A theory is the beginning, not the highest achievement. Think about it. I know it’s hard for you. Do it anyway. The scientist has an idea. It’s called a theory. If he’s right he might prove it. That would be the pinnacle. Get it now? Ask Jesus to help you. Never mind. That’s obviously where you learned this crap. From the imaginary dead guy. Even a child knows that a theory isn’t a fact. Are you a child? No. Because then you’d know too. You’re just a Jesus freak. But that’s just a theory. Or to you a fact. Short. Sentences. Did that help?

  9. @thehater

    “been around kids my whole life,” does not necessarily mean that you’ve been around 1000s of kids. My little brother has been around kids his whole life too, his classmates. It could easily just mean that because you have a large family, someone at one point or another always seemed to have a child. Like I said, I don’t know how old you are, I don’t know you from Adam. Why you think someone should assume you’ve been around 1000s of kids just because you’ve been around them your whole life is beyond me.

    Once again, I didn’t say that kids in general have ADD or super short attention spans. I said that kids have shorter attention spans than adults. Adults in general DO have better cognitive abilities than children. This includes attention span (being able to focus is a cognitive ability), judgement, reasoning, etc. All of these are true because a child’s brain is not fully developed yet. This is why even kids who are big enough to sit behind the wheel of the car, and who lacks the motor skills to drive, still are not allowed to drive cars. They don’t pay attention to the road. Yes some adults have adult onset ADD, and yes some kids have better cognitive abilities than some adults. But in general adults > children in cognitive abilities. This is why the law protects them the way it does.

    YOu do only have a few examples. You haven’t been graphing and testing children’s attention spans for each child you’ve met. You’re basing it on things like, “have you ever seen a kid play a video game?” That is not science. And even if you had, one person’s life experiences are not enough to determine general trends for populations of people based off age.

    I am not preachy. Go back and read my first posts. Just because I choose to defend religion in the context of the debate (child abuse or not, disenfranchise them or not) doesn’t mean that I go around screaming at people to convert or else. You can be preachy about other things besides religion, and you’re the one that jumped on the soapbox about wikis.

    A hypothesis is the beginning, theory is the end. Also, this is not a wiki, this is a university website aimed at teaching people about evolution: evolution (dot) berkeley (dot) edu/evosite/misconceps/IIAjusttheory (dot) shtm From a prestigious university. I didn’t cite any other wikis but the first one. I cited a university page, a book, some random webpages and a dictionary. That some webpage information is unreliable is irrelevant, the fact of the matter is if you test the validity of these cites against things from more established sources, such as Berkeley University educational pages and the information is the same you can reasonably infer that the information on those websites is valid.

    By the way, as I said before theory is the pinnacle of scientific analysis. It goes like this: Think of a question you want to investigate, do some background research, form an hypothesis, test, analyze results, if hypothesis is true report those results, if hypothesis is wrong back to testing. Wash, rinse, repeat. After a enough tests are done, and enough information has been gathered and held true repeatedly, then a theory is formed. C’mon man, this is elementary school science.

  10. Dukey Smoothy Buns

    -Gods investment in you (His son!) was SO great, he could never abandon you!-

  11. @Aries, you sad little child, if you really think a theory is the end then that explains why you are a religious zealot. You obviously never got past “elementary school science.”

    And once again, cognitive abilities have nothing to do with attention spans. Maybe now you should look up the word “cognitive.” This is getting to be a trend with you, kid. You use words you don’t understand a lot don’t you? And until you meet and test every kid and every adult on Earth you can’t say that, in general, kids have shorter attention spans than adults. Statistics aren’t rules of a species. When you grow up you might understand this.

    And yes, you are preachy. Looks like you also don’t know what the word “preach” means. I’m not surprised. See definition 2 under verb: you are most certainly urging your ideas in a tiresome manner.

  12. @Aries, tell the slow and useless moderators of this site to get off their butts if you wish to find out how stupid you are.

  13. @Aries, you sad little child, if you really think a theory is the end then that explains why you are a religious zealot. You obviously never got past “elementary school science.”

  14. Aries, once again, cognitive abilities have nothing to do with attention spans. Maybe now you should look up the word “cognitive.” This is getting to be a trend with you, kid. You use words you don’t understand a lot don’t you? And until you meet and test every kid and every adult on Earth you can’t say that, in general, kids have shorter attention spans than adults. Statistics aren’t rules of a species.. When you grow up you might understand this.

  15. @Aries, yes, you are preachy. Looks like you also don’t know what the word “preach” means. I’m not surprised. See definition 2 under verb: you are most certainly urging your ideas in a tiresome manner.

  16. @thehater

    Okay, you clearly don’t understand the scientific method. Here you go. If I really need to put up a little illustration from you than I will. I even picked one of a university, because I know how much you hate wikis.

    A study on cognitive abilities, particularly how the complexity of commercials affected a child’s ability to focus. (by the way the length of time and ability to focus is your, Attention Span.)

  17. @thehater

    Okay, you clearly don’t understand the scientific method. Here you go. If I really need to put up a little illustration from you than I will. I even picked one of a university, because I know how much you hate wikis.

  18. A study on cognitive abilities, particularly how the complexity of commercials affected a child’s ability to focus. (by the way the length of time and ability to focus is your, Attention Span.)

  19. @thehater

    You don’t know anything about me besides this lamebook posting. It doesn’t make me a preachy person. Sure the whole thread can be seen as preachy, as can certain comments from everyone on here. But that doesn’t make ME preachy. You don’t know anything about ME as a person. In fact, I’m generally pretty quiet and try to take a neutral position. But, I cannot take a neutral position on religion=child abuse. That doesn’t make me preachy, just passionate about advocating for people’s rights. No matter how small a change, I wouldn’t want to sit back and let someone be accused of something as heinous as child abuse when they did nothing to warrant it. Besides that, I’m a generally quiet person and to be honest this is the longest I’ve ever spoke on the issue. Probably because the format doesn’t allow for you to chat so responses come days/hours at a time. You on the other seem to be just arguing for the sake of arguing.

  20. @Aries, once again you change your argument. You said, “Theories are the pinnacle of scientific knowledge.” No they’re not. Again, try to figure out what “pinnacle” means so you don’t look like a fool for the rest of your pointless life.

  21. @Aries, wow look at that, you changed your other argument again. How dumb do you have to be to not realize that cognitive ability is no the same as attention span? Pretty dumb would be my guess.

  22. @Aries, I know you are either stubborn or stupid. I know that you’re preaching on this forum. That, by definition makes you preachy. What’s wrong, kiddo, you can dish it out but you can’t take it? And you are clearly arguing just to argue, so what’s your point here? You’re obviously not trying to get anything out of the discussion because your mental disability and/or A.D.D. prevents you from absorbing the information repeatedly posted. No, you’re just preaching.

  23. @thehater

    You really need to learn the definition of changing an argument. Adding new information is not changing your argument.

    I provided that journal to show whether you personally agree or not there are scientific studies that focus on attention span as a cognitive ability. Congitive skills are skills that are used in the process of gaining knowledge, being able to focus on the information being given so that you can absorb it is a necessary tool in gaining knowledge. Therefore, attention span is a cognitive ability.

    You obviously didn’t look at the illustration. It said the same thing as I have been saying. Or are you too stupid to realize that the point that all the other steps lead to is the pinnacle of the process. I know what pinnacle means. The pinnacle is the highest or culminating point. Culminating means to arrive at the final stage. The final stage is Theory. Scientists observe something, develop a hypothesis, test that hypothesis, and report results. If those results hold true in numerous tests over time a theory is formed. Since the theory is the culmination of all that work, it is the pinnacle of scientific knowledge. I don’t know how posting a chart somehow changes my argument when it puts in colorful arrow form exactly what I have been saying, but I suspect you throw out a lot of phrases you don’t understand.

    Being a preachy person, and preaching are two different things. For a word to describe a person, it has to hold true in more than one encounter. Doing something one time doesn’t mean that you are that thing. For example, a person who runs really fast because a lion is chasing them. Just because aderanline allowed that person to run fast that one time, it doesn’t mean they are a fast runner in general. Or the lady that lifted a truck off her kid. Just because adrenaline allowed her to lift an object as heavy as that it doesn’t mean that she is Hercules and could so on a regular basis, now does it? Of course not. So, just because I was forced to get preachy on this site, doesn’t mean i’m a preachy person. You cannot tell anything about a person from such a short time period unless they say something about their core beliefs. For example, you can safely say that I’m a Christian. You can’t call me a zealot though, because someone who is defending their religion from an attack on it, is of course going to defend it with a lot of passion. That doesn’t mean that in general that person does things like go around protesting at funerals. I assure you I do no such things. As I said before, I’m a generally quiet person. But that doesn’t mean that I’m going to sit back and let someone accuse others of child abuse without having anything to say on the issue.

    I have gotten something out of the discussion though. Just because you haven’t changed my mind and converted me into an atheist/agnostic that thinks preaching is lying child abuse and that religious people should be disenfranchised, doesn’t mean I haven’t gotten anything out of it. I found a new source of information, google books! I also learned that I don’t particularly care if someone thinks I’m a cunt, or retard or whatever when it comes discussions like this. What have YOU gotten out it? You’ve taken no discernible side on the original debate, and all you’ve done is call a bunch of names and throw out dictionary definitions of words that you still proceed to use incorrectly.

    You on the other hand, while admitting to be agnostic and claiming you put religous zealots and hardline atheists in the same boat decided to single me and masterprop out for unknown reasons. You have a less problem with an atheist calling someone who is religious a cunt who abuses children and should have their rights taken away than a religious person who uses a bible quote in two of their 100+ comments and never as a justification of their comments but only in instances when someone is making a direct reference to the Christian belief structure. (which if you read my first post was what I too was saying, only difference I backed up what I was saying by not singling out a single person. Just because sweetpea never replied back to me doesn’t mean I wouldn’t have told her the same kinds of things, only that would have been a more biblical debate.)

    My point is and has always been Live and Let Live. I never said that religion was better, only that it wasn’t child abuse or lying. Religious people don’t deserve to be disenfranchised. If replying to other people’s posts that they shouldn’t throw out those kinds of names and that religious people are equal to everyone else is preaching to you, than whatever. I don’t care. But i sincerely doubt you are being genuine since you seem to claim that you put hardline atheist in the same boat as religious zealots but you don’t. If you did you would take exception to someone campaigning to strip religious people of their rights or supporting the removal of children from their homes. You would probably also be able to understand why religious people would take exception to that kind of rhetoric, and how it could piss them off. If you were neutral you’d be able to empathize with both sides and wouldn’t want either side to attempt to disenfranchise the other. But you don’t. Instead you’re like, well you have a point atheists, religious people are a bunch of liars. I honestly respect Alan and even childish Rogue more because at least they practiced what they preach. You claim that we should live and let live but then don’t practice what you preach. Now, maybe something I and MasterProp said really just lit a fire under you so much so that you were blinded to anything anyone else was saying. I don’t know, maybe you aren’t like that in life in general. However, considering your screen name I’m suspecting you do just argue for the sake of arguing, and hate on others because it’s fun for you. I don’t know for sure, I don’t know you from Adam.

    What I do know is, all your childish name calling is annoying. And you annoy me. Dish it out but can’t take it? Name one instance of me calling everyone else heathens who are surely going to hell. Name one instance of me calling someone a cunt? I assure you, that you cannot. As for a mental disability, I have none. Just because someone doesn’t believe the way you doesn’t mean that they are mentally disabled, immoral, etc. In fact, if you actually bothered to read my posts you would see that I took the same kind of exception to someone saying an atheist shouldn’t teach their children nothing happens after they die. I even said that satanists (despite my dislike for them as people) shouldn’t automatically have their children taken away. I’m not campaigning for Christianity, I’m saying that we should live and let live. That no one is better than anyone else. That raising your kids within a belief system isn’t child abuse. That no one should be disenfranchised. You on the other hand, are just hating on religious people for no discernible reason. It’s not like you are an atheist who believes that religion is child abuse and thus you must attack the religious, at least not according to you. So then why are you name calling so much? What point besides “I’m right, everyone else is wrong, and you religious people are a bunch of liars” are you trying to make.

  24. @Aries, no you need to learn how to stop changing your argument. First you say all kids have shorter attention spans than all adults. Then, since I crushed that ridiculous argument, you change it to all kids have a lower cognitive ability than all adults.

    Also, you first said that theory is the pinnacle of scientific knowledge. After I (once again) crushed that ridiculous argument, you change it to theory is the end of scientific method. Either you have A.D.D. of you’re at least mildly retarded.

  25. @Aries, if you honestly think that COGNITIVE ABILITY is the EXACT SAME THING as ATTENTION SPAN then you definitely are at least mildly retarded.

    If you think the PINNACLE OF KNOWLEDGE is the SAME THING as SCIENTIFIC METHOD then you definitely are at least mildly retarded.

  26. @Aries, I singled out no one. I responded to the atheist who confused the meanings of atheism and agnosticism. I also pointed out how they can’t prove a deity doesn’t exist. You’re (at least) mild retardation apparently prevented you from comprehending that. They apparently realized I was right and declined to argue further. You being (at least) mildly retarded continue to preach away like the preachy, retarded, lying child you are.

    My point is that you’re an uneducated, closed-minded, lying douche. My point is that you should be euthanized before you get some chick drunk enough to date rape her and pollute the gene pool.

  27. @the hater

    no you need to learn how to stop changing your argument. First you say all kids have shorter attention spans than all adults. Then, since I crushed that ridiculous argument, you change it to all kids have a lower cognitive ability than all adults.

    I said that attention span falls under cognitive abilities and maintained my position that children (in general) have lower cognitive abilities/attention spans than adults. I even linked an article studying cognitive abilities and specifically attention span. I did not change my argument, merely expanding on it and if you had any reading comprehension skills you would see this is not a change of argument. You didn’t crush anything, you completely failed to prove that scientific analysis in the form of statistical analyzation of the human brain > your personal life experience. You also failed to provide any proof that attention span isn’t a cognitive ability.

    “Also, you first said that theory is the pinnacle of scientific knowledge. After I (once again) crushed that ridiculous argument, you change it to theory is the end of scientific method. Either you have A.D.D. of you’re at least mildly retarded.”

    Pinnacle is defined as culmination is defined as end result. I You didn’t crush anything and I continued to use the word pinnacle in my posts. I guess to you, using synonyms for clearer understading is changing your argument. Synonym Use=mental retardation. LOL

    “Aries, if you honestly think that COGNITIVE ABILITY is the EXACT SAME THING as ATTENTION SPAN then you definitely are at least mildly retarded.”

    Once again, I did not say they were the same thing. I said that attention span was a cognitive ability. I used cognitive ability as a category of which several things fall. Specifically I defined cognitive ability the way’s subsite defined it, and the way many sites define it. I said and I qoute my earlier qoute, “Congitive skills are skills that are used in the process of gaining knowledge.” But since you don’t believe me, here is yet another definition for you.

    I said that the end result of all that knowledge derived from using the scientific method (aka the culmination) is Theory. Since Pinnacle is defined as the highest OR CULMINATING POINT by the dictionary, and theory is the culmination of many studies conducted using the scientific method and the highest point of scientific knowledge as illustrated by the flow chart explaining the scientific method then we know that Science is the Pinnacle of the scientific method. Once again, your reading skills are wanting. I never changed my argument, just the way I phrased it. Since you refused to believe those sites explaining the “just a theory myth,” I encouraged you to google the scientific method. Not because Theory and The Scientific Method are exactly the same. I already fully illustrated I know the steps of the scientific method and have said the them over and over again. I was merely pointing out that at the end of the flow charts that explain the Scientific Method you will see a little thing called Theory. Since Theory is the end/culminating point of all that work, that makes it the pinnacle. Theory is a step, the all important final step, but a step none the less in the larger process known as the scientific method. Scientists don’t come up with theories and then test them. They make observations, form hypothesis, test, and if successful report results. If after a while and numerous tests the results are the same then and only then is theory formed.

    My point is that you singled me out for the special name calling like uneducated, lying, douche, date rapist, etc. You claimed that Masterprop wasn’t a Christian and proceeded to try to attempt to argue with him and tried to tell him what HE believed. Just because you may have disagreed with someone else on the forum doesn’t mean you didn’t single people out as primary targets. I don’t see you being anywhere as close to as nasty to others as you are to me. They didn’t stop arguing because you convinced them too, they stopped because they got tired of rehashing the same debate and realized they weren’t going to change my mind anymore than I was going to change their. Because, and to qoute Alan, “…like global debates this going nowhere…” They decided to leave.

    My point is that you’re annoying me with all the petty name calling and only proving my point even if you think you are being clever. Name calling is the best defense of the people who aren’t smart enough to use evidence, such as the numerous sites I have posted as evidence, to win a debate. They just think because they can call names, they are crushing someone in a debate. It’s tiresome and laughable. Also, if you really believe I am mentally retarded lying child then it makes you an evil person if you think I should be euthanized because I believe things that only a retarded person would. So either you know full well that you are lying through your teeth when you throw out insults like that, or you are terrible person in the inside. The kind of which laws have to be written against so they don’t go around trying to execute mentally retarded people. Which one is it?

  28. @Aries, no matter how much you babble on and how many times you repeat your idiocy, cognitive ability is not equal to attention span and does not “fall under” it. Two separate things, kiddo. Stop the stupidity already.

    And yes, you’re fully wrong about theories being the “pinnacle” of scientific knowledge. And that’s exactly what you said. I’ve quoted it a few times. You don’t want to accept it though because you know how stupid you look. Denial much? Retarded much? :p

    Read, boy. Read. Then you’ll see why it is you think you’re singled out. The other never argued against what I said because they know I’m right. You know I’m right too, but you’re too stubborn and childish and (at least) mildly retarded to admit it.

    I’m name calling because, first off, you started it, and secondly because I’m done being smart with stupid people like you. You want to argue on and on when it’s been proven that you’re wrong. You’re being childish so I call you a child. You’re being stupid so I call you stupid. You’re acting retarded so I’m calling you a retard. Facts is facts, kiddo.

    Finally, yes, you should be euthanized. Not executed. Euthanized. For your own good and the good of humanity. You’re a liar, you condone child abuse, and you’re (at least) mildly retarded. You can’t possibly be of any use or good to this world.

  29. @thehater

    No matter how much proof I present, you’re going to call it babbling and have a “I’m right, your wrong,” mentality. But the fact of the matter is I’ve got universities, scientists and dictionaries all saying the same thing. I’ve posted link after link after link. You’re clearly just too afraid to click them because you’re afraid you’re going to be proven wrong. But anyone who bothers to click them will see that you are so throughly wrong that it’s weird there is even an argument about this. I bet next you’re going to tell me that penultimate means the best. It’s funny actually.

    They did argue against what you said, Alan didn’t agree with your clearly uneducated views about science anymore than I do. He just chose not to argue about it because unlike you instead of picking fights about random things he is capable of having a debate where he sticks to the subject.

    You were never smart if you honestly think name calling does anything to prove your point. Give me one good reason anyone should believe you, when you have provided no references for your view point (I have) and have instead chosen to call names. If someone asks two different people what a word means, and one person consults a dictionary and the other person just calls them a retard, who do you think any rational person would believe? I’ll give you a hint, it’s not the one calling someone a retard just because they disagree.

    Executed, Euthanized, both=killing somebody. Why don’t you understand synonyms? You yourself in other posts claimed that preaching isn’t child abuse, and now you are claim that I condone child abuse because I said preaching isn’t child abuse? By the way, preaching isn’t lying. You’ve given no proof whatsoever that it is. You’re true colors have finally revealed themselves though. You are not the “live and let live agnostic,” that you claim to be. You have the dangerous mindset that people who believe in religion should all be executed. And who anyone disagrees with you and is different than you is a retard who should be executed. That’s the kind of dangerous mindset that allowed the holocaust to happen.

    NO, you started it in post 153 when you accused me of being unable to carry on a conversation about bible quotes and in post 188 you started saying btw, you’re god and I’m going to put feces in your mothers mouth in direct response to me (and the religous people on the board in general) asserting that there is a god and that just because you can’t see him doesn’t mean he doesn’t exist. The first time you just started name calling which was 198 prior to which I had not called you a single name. Besides the hater, which is your screen name.

    And for your information, I’ve already done a lot of good for this world. I’ve saved a kid’s life by pulling him out of the way before he was hit by a car, I’ve furnished apartments for Hurricane Katrina victims and was even recognized by the city council for which I live in for my efforts, I’ve helped build orphanages in Belize, I’ve gathered and given away toys for children in poor homes for Christmas, I’ve helped provide many thanksgiving meals for poor people, I’ve helped renovate the middle school I attended (right before I graduated actually) by fixing and painting all the bathrooms so they kids who came after me had something nice to look at. I’ve helped build a playground in a park for children in a poverty stricken area, I’ve helped staff blood drives numerous times, and I have volunteered at soup kitchens numerous times as well. I’ve done a lot of charity work, and all of this before the age of 25 and much it before I could even drink. None of this was through a church, I might add. Although I have participated in church activities as well. By the way did you know that Christians have donated more time and money than any other modern group (and by group I don’t mean countries) and that the Catholic Church is the world largest charity? I’m personally not a Catholic, but considering that is only but one branch of the Christian religion I’d have to say that these “lying, child abusers,” have done plenty of good for this world.

    Oh, and by the way I haven’t had my IQ tested in recent years, but when the school had me tested in middle school 6th grade I had a 124. Certainly not a genius, but that certainly isn’t retarded either. Not even a little bit. I don’t know what makes you think I’m retarded. Probably the fact that as a member of the spelling and grammar check generation, I didn’t care as much about proof reading my punctuation before hitting submit. But I can assure you that I am not even a little bit retarded.

    At any rate, even if someone doesn’t do charity work, or even if they are mildly retarded, a human being’s life isn’t measured by how much they can be used by society. I nor anyone else is here for your benefit. No innocent person deserves to be executed or euthanized. You have a very dangerous, evil and sickening outlook on the world. I will pray for your soul.

  30. @Aries, wow you sure typed a lot of crap didn’t you? I actually didn’t read any of it because I’m sure it’s just more lies and (at least) slightly retarded babbling. Instead I just interpreted it as, “Blah blah babble babble lie blah blah.”

    The only line I actually read was the last one. Feel free to pray to your pagan homosexual deity, you vile date rapist. At least it’ll keep you out of trouble. Pray long and hard. Like the erection you imagine on your pagan homosexual deity. The long, hard, gay pagan erection you long to have jammed into your waiting anus.

  31. @thehater

    I knew you wouldn’t read it, just like you didn’t read any of the links. You’re afraid of being proven wrong, that’s what you claim to be agnostic when you’re clearly an atheist. You’re so afraid of learning that you’re wrong that when you are proven wrong you devolve into a twelve year old. Shame.

    Don’t worry though, I’ll pray for you. I don’t care if you make baseless accusations about Jesus or myself. When you call all these childish names it just makes YOU look bad. Don’t worry though, this just makes me want to pray for you even more. You’re clearly a very lost little soul, may God have mercy on you. 🙂

  32. @Aries, no, stupid boy, I read all your links. That’s how I pastes quotes from them. That just proved AGAIN that you never full read anyone elses’ posts. Because you have A.D.D.

    Have fun praying to your homosexual deity. In fact, you should pray with the priest you frequently have anal sex with. Pray long… and hard… together. Is he the one who taught you how to date rape children, you sick bastard?

  33. @thehater

    Nope, you didn’t read them. Just because you may have copied or pasted a line of two out of them doesn’t mean you read them. There is no way in hell any sane could possibly read a dictionary and come to the opposite definition of the word unless they didn’t really read it. They all clearly state the same thing I have been saying ad nauseum. Since I’m working under the assumption that you are at least semi-sane, I highly doubt you actually read them. Or am I just giving you too much credit?

    I don’t date rape children. However the fact that you have devolved into a five year old is exceedingly sad.

    Also, I’m not a boy.

  34. @Aries, you mentally challenged little girl (you said you’re not a boy), just stfu and stop chugging your grandfather’s spoog. You are apparently literate, but your A.D.D. and (at least) mild retardation are getting tiresome.

    It’s now clear why you condone date rape and child abuse (mentally and sexually). You were abused in much the same ways by your father and/or grandfather as a child, so now you think it’s ok, you sick freak. Now bend over so your priest and put his manhood in your pooper.

  35. @teaching your children about your religion isn’t child abuse. I don’t condone child abuse. Let’s not bring family into this, I haven’t talked trash about YOUR family, now have I. I said they were probably more advanced than other kids, but that is hardly an insult. Also, my grandfather is dead.

    “Fools show their annoyance at once, but the prudent overlook an insult.”

  36. @Aries, you evil abuser. Stop mind raping kids and touching their no-no places. It’s not ok.

    “Gay men like it in the butt.”

  37. @thehater

    Jesus, Prince of Peace,
    you have asked us to love our enemies
    and pray for those who persecute us.
    We pray for our enemies and those who oppose us.
    With the help of the Holy Spirit,
    may all people learn to work together
    for that justice which brings true and lasting peace.
    To you be glory and honor for ever and ever.

    This, may be a Catholic prayer (and I’m not catholic) but I think it’s apropos. Since you have devolved into gibberish, I have decided to replace bible qoutes for my replies in the hopes that someone can at least learn something. I will not however simply call you names that have no basis in reality. I’m better than that, and I’m sincerely hoping as a mother and/or father that bullying and name calling someone who you suspect is mentally retarded and thus incapable of understanding your point of view isn’t the solution. (I’m not, but you seem convinced that I am which should be enough of a reason not to post things like your last post.) Remember, it takes all kinds to make a planet. I’m sure you’re a great parent (not being sarcastic here, in fact being very sincere) as you seem to be pretty passionate about things like fostering Independence, critical thought, and defending your belief system. I encourage you to not let defending your belief system though not lead you to promote close mindedness or refusal to except that you can be wrong sometimes. That sometimes it’s better to allow neutral third parties mediate discrepancies in two people’s views on certain things, like the definition of a word. For example, the dictionary or a medical journal. It’s okay to be wrong sometimes thehater, it doesn’t make you stupid. Nor does it make someone mildly retarded. You should also present facts and evidence when making a provable claim, not just belligerently hammer your point across. I might have listened to your definition of the words if you had provided some kind of proof that attention span is a cognitive trait or that the “just theory” concept is fact rather than myth. You didn’t provide such links however, you just belligerently stated your opinion over and over again.

  38. @Aries, so when you and your priest “pray” together, does he just diddle your bum with his finger or do you let him go all in with his holiness? Did he rape you first or did you actually initiate this inappropriate behavior? Has he had his way with all the “men” in your family or just you? Does you boyfriend know you also get it on with you priest? I bet Jesus would love your story, you know, being that he’s gayer than a love child between Boy George and Elton John. Oh sorry, I’ve brought up two more of your fantasy flames.

  39. What man is there who desires life and loves many days, that he may see good? Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking deceit. Turn away from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it. The eyes of the Lord are toward the righteous and his ears toward their cry.

    Psalm 34:12-18

  40. Jesus Christ was a gay man named Mustafa. He changed his name to Jesus because he thought he was Hispanic. He liked to lick balls of his boyfriend named Bumbata. His god was a c0ck as big as the Titanic.

  41. 11 For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. 12 Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. 13 You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.

    Jeremiah 29:11-13

  42. 1 Cor. 6:9-10, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

    OMG I’ve fornicated loads of times. What can I do? The bible says I’m not inheriting the Kingdom of God? Is there any hope for me? Can the sweet cleansing love of Jesus wash the dirty face of even such a wretch as I?

    Nah, just kidding Aries, this religion is still fucking stupid. I’m guessing the ‘plans’ in Jeremiah for prosperity don’t include gays. God has entirely different ‘plans’ for them, huh? The whole system is a sick joke, and people like you only further exacerbate the problem.

    If you’re guna pray for something, perhaps you could pray that history forgives the ignorance of people like yourself, and the way you help to hold back human progress.

  43. @Alan,

    Believe or don’t, I’m not trying to convert you nor anyone else. All of the quotes are in direct response to the hater’s absurd accusations that I have raped people, and was raped by family and priests. Certainly, if you were was as moral as you claim to be you wouldn’t seek to attack my religion for using them in such a manner. You yourself admitted that theoretically speaking you would not exclude the possibility that God might exist, but you believe that he does not because you find no proof. You also take exception to the Christian God and really don’t believe that Christianity could possibly be true. That is fine. I wasn’t hear to debate whether or not God exists, and I have advocated for religious rights that are incredibly offensive to me. Not because I like those religions, but because I believe all people should be treated with respect and human dignity. I don’t think my religious beliefs should be the only ones allowed in America.

    I’m not going to accuse you of raping little children, and I’m not going to claim you were raped by your family and priests in incestuous relations. I wouldn’t make fun of something like that, even if it were true. You seem to be making the case the claim that Christianity is holding the world back. But certainly you can see that is hatred and fear that holds people back, not religion. It is just one of many things people exploit for power, money, resources or land. That is the true root cause of every war, whatever the people starting the war try to justify it with. When you have such blind hatred of someone that you feel more of a need to comment on harmless bible verses then someone attacking people the way thehater is, including bringing in people’s deceased family members that have nothing to do with the situation. You don’t further advance your cause at all. When we look at the people in the world who we admire for brining about positive social change, like Ghandi, do you know what we find? Someone who may not agree with what their opponent is doing, but still realizes that all people are deserving of basic human decency. If you truly want to make an argument that the best thing for mankind is atheism and science, if you want to prove the moral atheist viewpoint, then as Ghandi said you should, “Be the change you want see in the world.” That includes letting go of your prejudices and fighting for what you consider to be your truth and knowledge, but at the same time hanging around people who you shouldn’t want to associate yourself with, people who promote hatred. You don’t have to be rude to them or anything of the sort, just don’t aid them in their spreading of hatred or you will end up in the same position they are in. As far as I can tell, you’re not the same as the hater. You have been (mostly) the most reasonable person for your viewpoint’s camp.

    Don’t lose that. Don’t let your hatred of bible verses cloud your view of what’s really going on. I’m not posting them to convert anyone, or to “hold back humanity.” I’m posting them because I refuse to dignify thehater’s venom and hatred with a rebuttal against the obviously false things that he says. I won’t let him/her push me away or around. I’m not going to dignify his charges that I rape people, or was raped by family members and by the pastors of my church with a proper rebuttal. It’s obvious lies, disgustingly petty insults and borderline cyber bullying. Instead, I will just post bible verses to give people something else to look at.

    Oh yeah, and he/she started that particular line of posting because he/she thinks that a theory is the same as a hypothesis. He thinks scientists form a theory, and then conduct research and tests to see if it’s true. Seriously, go back and read his last few posts if you don’t believe me. This had nothing to do with religion.

  44. @Aries, when your priest puts his “holiness” inside your butt do you imagine it’s Jesus “The Gaylord” Christ making you squeal like a pig? Remember, no means no. Stop the lying, child abuse, and date rape. Stop Aries.

  45. No,I dont accept that these bible verses are ‘harmless’, they incite human beings to commit the most disgusting acts of barbarism and brutality. You say that they don’t do this any more- take a look at the situation in Uganda and tell me that.

    The so-called ‘harmless’ texts that incite genocide of unbelievers, hatred of homosexuals and eternal torture of those that do not comply with the heavenly dictatorship are in fact entirely harmful.

    thehater is just trolling you. Seriously, it’s not difficult to work that out, is it?

    It is not in any way immoral to ‘attack your religion’. Any concept or belief should be open to critique. It is the common stance of those who believe unsupportable nonsense to start crying when it is criticised. The reason for this is that sustained criticism shows the belief for what it is. Childish, nonsensical and ultimately very dangerous.

    You can’t see that, because you are so steeped in the system which is designed to stop you seeing that. And to indoctrinate children from a young age is abuse. I dunno if you’ve ever raped anyone, and frankly don’t care. Your belief in this BS is bad enough.

    I don’t need your lecture about hanging around with people who spread hatred. thehater can answer for what he or she writes (trolls) to you. I answer for myself, and to myself.

    Finally, I do not admire M. Gandhi. History has whitewashed him into something he certainly was not. He was an able politician, knew a good soundbite when he heard it- but in fact, his insistance on including tenants of Hinduism at a political level in India has contributed to great suffering for countless people on the subcontinent and beyond. Just another deluded religious crackpot who put his own proud belief system above the good of everyone. Sound familiar?

  46. Dukey Smoothy Buns

    Why say 22 years and 75 months instead of 28 years and 3 months

  47. Whoa. Stop trying to prove god exists. It will never happen. Stop trying to disprove god exists. You can’t disprove things.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.