New Testingstan

demonic possession

happened when he was ghost writing armageddon??+

ironic isn't it

he had the power to save earth from the devil

but not himself

I'm not good at Internet sarcasm, guys

'audatious'

phant i think you just successfully trolled the fuck out of a bunch of people

without even the appearance of effort

Nietzslime wrote:phant i think you just successfully trolled the fuck out of a bunch of people

without even the appearance of effort

phant for pro-est troll

but i hope that dave is being sarcastic too

i don't want to live in a world where i interact with people who think r/atheism is cool, interesting, or anything but annoying and stupid

i tried to like r/atheism, since i did the atheist activism thing for a while, but it is terrible. nothing but smugness and "look at what i posted on my facebook" posturing

except for the doctors without borders donation drive, that's cool

i'm feeling out of the loop here

what's with the "r/"?

Zod wrote:i'm feeling out of the loop here

what's with the "r/"?

to designate it as a subreddit

edit: wait, fuck you, that's terrible

oh

i don't use reddit so whatevs

Zod wrote:oh

i don't use reddit so whatevs

whoops, thought you were making a horrible, horrible joke. but you should be ashamed of yourself anyways. just, in general.

can starglider's post be improved in any way

Nietzslime wrote:phant i think you just successfully trolled the fuck out of a bunch of people

without even the appearance of effort

i think people are taking him seriously

i love it

nah, seriously, i don't use any of those big aggregator sites whatsoever

i stay away from digg, slashdot, reddit or any of those other things

and someone link me to phant's troll so i don't have to read a buncha shit

recent polling shows a majority appeal of chikka chikkaaaah~

Losonti Tokash wrote:can starglider's post be improved in any way

St. Arglider wrote:Is that seriously the most stinging criticism you could think of? That's great, it's nice to know that no that no one will be coming after me for writing software that skims millions from pension funds or doing research on self-improving AI. If they do I'll tell them that I make games as a hobby so there's no way I could be guilty of anything more serious.

Man, talk about missing the fucking point. But I'll see what I can do.

Accurate wrote:Is that seriously the most stinging criticism you could think of? That's great, it's nice to know that no that no one will be coming after me for sticking my dick into an ostrich or attempting to masturbate a robin. If they do I'll tell them that I make video games as a hobby so there's no way I could be guilty of molesting animals.

Zod wrote:nah, seriously, i don't use any of those big aggregator sites whatsoever

i stay away from digg, slashdot, reddit or any of those other things

and someone link me to phant's troll so i don't have to read a buncha shit

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 1&t=152467

new atheism's loud abrasive and public stance meaning vast numbers of loud abrasive stupid followers converting to atheism because it makes them feel superior, more intelligent, and more special than their peers just like any religion would

who knew

Happiness is bullshit since it is an entirely subjective psychological construct.

oh stas

Nietzslime wrote:

Happiness is bullshit since it is an entirely subjective psychological construct.

oh stas

i don't know if i can work it up to reply to that thread in the minimum level to not get moderator attention between that, feil obviously not reading anything beyond my first post before jamming down the reply button, and purple.

you made a mistake by trying to focus on the faulty math of utilitarianism since while that's a criticism the calculator-obsessed might understand, it's more importantly one they can misunderstand and try to outmath

i focused on stuff like 'goals' 'minds' and 'definitions of words' and no one has even attempted to rebut me even though it would require far less specialized knowledge

new atheism's loud abrasive and public stance meaning vast numbers of loud abrasive stupid followers converting to atheism because it makes them feel superior, more intelligent, and more special than their peers just like any religion would

who knew

atheist activism is pretty diverse in its tactics though, it's not all loud and abrasive. you have people like pz who play around with communion wafers, and there was that smug, annoying "you KNOW it's a myth" billboard. but there are some groups who just put "you can be good without god" on bus ads, and other groups that just have social gatherings and aren't really that public. when i interned for a secular lobbyist group a few years ago, they teamed up with liberal religious groups all the time. i never saw even a hint of the "all religious people are stupid" vibe that you see with internet atheists.

p.s. even the "good without god" bus ads are met with acrimony and lawsuits. i can't think of a less abrasive message than "secular people can be ethical".

i don't want to imply that any public atheism is bad of course

when i speak of 'new atheism' though i'm generally thinking of stuff like the four horsemen, and the evangelical sort of atheism popularized by the above that posits atheism as not just an option but as superior to theism

we may be working from different definition

EDIT: also, i don't want to imply even that those folks are bad per se, just that it shouldn't be unexpected that their message would attract more stupid and abrasive people who want to feel superior into atheism

Nietzslime wrote:new atheism's loud abrasive and public stance meaning vast numbers of loud abrasive stupid followers converting to atheism because it makes them feel superior, more intelligent, and more special than their peers just like any religion would

who knew

if you take atheism to mean anything more than "i don't believe in this shit" you're probably doing it wrong

Nobody interfere with Phant's pro-troll.

I want this to play itself out.

i don't want to imply that any public atheism is bad of course

when i speak of 'new atheism' though i'm generally thinking of stuff like the four horsemen, and the evangelical sort of atheism popularized by the above that posits atheism as not just an option but as superior to theism

we may be working from different definition

ah, sorry for getting defensive then. the horsemen tend to show up at the same conventions and in some of the same organizations as more conciliatory/pluralistic atheists, so it's hard to know what people are referring to when they say "new atheism" -- anyway thanks for clarifying

EDIT: also, i don't want to imply even that those folks are bad per se, just that it shouldn't be unexpected that their message would attract more stupid and abrasive people who want to feel superior into atheism

yeah, sometimes the primary message is "i'm right, you're wrong," and then you just attract people who also enjoy being right

i mean i love being right

but jeez

Metatwaddle wrote:ah, sorry for getting defensive then.

you'll never make it on the smartest board on the internet with that attitude!!! :evil:

the horsemen tend to show up at the same conventions and in some of the same organizations as more conciliatory/pluralistic atheists, so it's hard to know what people are referring to when they say "new atheism" -- anyway thanks for clarifying

it may be just that the superstars of the movement like dawkins and hitchens are some of the most combative, and most well known organisation involved, the american atheists guys, is also a pack of dicks

yeah, sometimes the primary message is "i'm right, you're wrong," and then you just attract people who also enjoy being right

i mean i love being right

but jeez

there's also that weird 'we're a clubhouse of the free-thinkers' attitude that creates a group mentality and then group polarisation