First rule of atheist club…don’t talk about atheist club! 
3 Likes
But can I tell you I have a piano on the left of my room with a picture of the queen in a red frame on the right side of it?
Makes complicated hand gesture and claps thrice
2 Likes
Well…I cannot confirm, nor can I deny, knowledge of the existence of various relevant accoutrements, which have not been shown to exist, virtually, or actually…as well as the purported unanimous decisions regarding the dispensation of adherence requirements related to my personal fealty for civility and decorum.
It is my fervent hope that recent, apparent “intrusions” devised and contrived by
disingenuous operators can be unanimously recognized as aberrations, and thusly regarded with the disdain and disregard so abundantly deserved…
Any further requests, for demonstrations of evidences of invisibilities or purposeful obfuscation or vagueness, will be treated as petulance…
.
.
Edit ( cleverly dialing various knobs and wheels on visually obscured mechanical contrivance )
2 Likes
Well, damn, Sherlock. I cannot believe I am actually having to grudgingly consider that speculation as a potential consideration on the cosmic scale of unknown extraterrestrial existence. Personally, I thoroughly enjoy speculating about such matters. I even hope there may come a day before I depart this earthly realm that I might actually have the truth of such matters revealed to me in some form or fashion. Along those same lines, who’s to say that there may come a day in the distant future when we humans gain the ability to venture beyond or minuscule solar system and plant seeds or our own among distant planets? It will then be us that the later generations on those planets might speculate about their existence and their origins. Just think… We could be their gods! 
Alas, I KNOW I will never see that, though. Still, it’s a nice thought, nonetheless. Be that as it may, please bear in mind that all of that fanciful “mind candy” has yet to reach the level of any reliable evidence for the existence of aliens. (Despite how our “government” recently revealed their long-kept “secrets” to the nation and world.) Still fun to think about it now and then, though. 
I’m sorry, but I can neither confirm nor deny having possession of any type of card that denotes my atheist status.
Yeah, I’m feeling a bit left out myself. Let me know if you finally get yours. Meanwhile, I will be filing a formal complaint of my own. And I better not hear any lame excuse of, “Wow, sorry, Tin-Man. Yours must have got lost in the mail.” Next thing you know they will change the damn handshake without notifying us. Sheesh! 
(Edit to obsessively check mailbox several times a day.)
1 Like
Was it something I said?
It’s ok…you have “people” who care…
And why they continue allowing you to take up so many threads with your dishonest bullshit is beyond me. You’re lucky I am not in moderation. I would restrict your ass to one thread and ban you the next time you did not answer a direct question. There will come a point when people just find your bullshit game of manipulation annoying.
Oh that was 7 months ago when he started this irrational game of double standards, where science is decried as not capable of answering questions based on the limits of our current knowledge, but his deity, how it exists, where it came from, how supernatural power is possible, how a deity is possible, how it used supernatural power to create anything are all given a free pass.
Basically, science doesn’t (currently) know = a deity did it.
Yet the questions where did a deity come from = I don’t know.
Anonymous hearsay in the gospels written nearly a hundreds years after the events they purport to describe, making unevidenced claims about magic that defies natural and scientific facts = eyewitness testimony.
And all without a hint of irony.
2 Likes
I’m guessing all the times you lied, along with your relentless irrational assertions, your incorrigible and dishonest intent to address them, your relentlessly dishonest evasion, your sententious tone, the dishonest way you compare irrefutable scientific facts, with subjective unevidenced archaic superstition, and probably a bit more, since you ask.
You’re damned lucky I’m not in moderation, all the uncivil personal insults and attacks is clearly a rule violation and you’d be barred for repeatedly engaging and even supporting such outrageous behavior:
Right there is an open abuse of the rules, but nobody cares about rules except when they can be used to silence those who disagree with you.
Oh I doubt this has anything to do with luck.
Not to be too technical, Sherlock, but Cog was not insulting you. He was simply describing you. Just sayin’…
Oh, I’m aware Sherlock is currently on a brief hiatus at the moment. However, I thought it would be nice to have a “Welcome Back” message waiting for him upon his return. You know, just to let him know we missed him. I’m very thoughtful like that. 
(Edit to pat myself on the back for a job well done.)
3 Likes
Actually, I think Cog was describing what Sherlock was saying not Sherlock himself. There’s a big difference between saying a person is shit and saying what that person wrote is shit.
6 Likes
Exactly so, the same as pointing out lies in posts, and simply calling someone a liar are different.
2 Likes
Quite frankly, I don’t have much of a problem with character descriptors as long as the person has clearly demonstrated their descriptor. 
1 Like
Thank you for noticing. I think I generally tried to stay to commenting about his comments. The most - I think I did, without reviewing, was call him dishonest. I may have slipped up, (Not wanting to review my own bullshit posts.) but my general focus was on the ignorance of the comments and not on Sirlock himself. At least that was the intent. I admit, I am not always successful, and I do let things slide… I can be a baaaaad little monkey.
3 Likes
Ahhh… Got it. 
Nevertheless, I confess I still find it “interesting” how/why some folks get so bent out of shape by “insults” directed at them. Yes, yes, I know there must be “rules” in place to keep conversations civilized and keep things from getting out of control. I do understand that. Still, I personally find it hilarious if somebody gets to the point where they think their only option for a response is to hurl derogatory remarks at me. Lets me know I must be doing something right. 
Literally makes me giggle, especially if the insults are lame. And if the insults are particularly creative and “intelligent”, then I might actually be impressed and flattered. But, hey, that’s just me. I recently bought a shirt that has on the front, “You find it offensive? Well, I find it funny. That’s why I’m happier than you.” Generally speaking, that’s pretty much my mindset in regards to such things. Reminds me of something I’ve said on here a couple of times before, but it’s worth repeating. (Paraphrasing the quote I saw a long time ago.)…
“Why get mad or offended if somebody makes a derogatory remark about you? If the remark is not true, then the remark can be discarded as foolishness. (Especially - often times - if you consider the source of the remark.) But if the remark is accurate, then you have no business getting angry over somebody telling you the truth.”
Anyway, just my two cents on the matter.
(Edit to sharpen my fangs.)
1 Like
You worthless hunk of tin! You think I don’t know you are talking about ME! HA! You heartless, empty chested, clinking clanking clattering collection of collagenous junk!
1 Like
Well it is only a subjective opinion of course, but I am fairly sure some posters are looking for things to take offence at, so they can use it as an excuse to avoid addressing anything they know they have no rational or reasonable response to. Ironically they are often baiting atheists almost from their first post, hoping to get a reaction, so they can label posters or even atheists in a generic way. I don’t know what they get from that, perhaps there’s nothing on the telly?
Excellent point, projecting faux outrage because someone has dared point out that their posts are evasive and dishonest is pretty hilarious, when everyone can see their posts are relentlessly evasive and dishonest. Some apologists do seem to want to have their magic cake, and eat it.
One example that made me laugh was when I described the “gospel myths” as anonymous hearsay, and sherlock leaped on it, and immediately tried to claim it was bias and a closed mind to assume they were myths a priori. When I asked him which part of “a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events” didn’t apply to the gospels, he refused to even acknowledge his claim after that, and I asked several times, confirming each time he didn’t know what the definition of a myth was, and had made an assumption, before checking. I have had very similar (over)reactions to the word superstition, and again when the actual definition is offered, it all goes quiet. Ironic really, given it has never been easier or quicker to check the definition of a word, there’s not really any excuse for making such simple errors. I always assumed they avoided acknowledging such errors out of embarrassment, but then they go and do it again completely unabashed. so who knows.
1 Like
I agree with this whole heartedly. Specifically when dealing with creationists in my experience. The pearl clutching is just the most infuriatingly cringy thing to me. Their religion has become a person, religion is an innocent defenseless character to them. It becomes this weird imaginary child they need to protect. Once you have questioned or mocked their “child” they throw themselves into this hammed up routine. Like some soccer player rolling on the field pretending his leg is snapped in half to garner some sympathy from the imaginary referee. I would swear it is part self aggrandizing. It’s like their own weird display of mental martyrdom for their imaginary god referee thingy, that they think is watching them at all times.
Maybe off topic, but does anyone think some of these people misplace their own inner mental dialogue (whatever the more scientific terminology is) as divine? That their intrusive thoughts are seen as a message from something divine.
3 Likes