For Reason and Science?

A forum to talk about other sites and things you've found in the jungle that is the internet.

Please take a moment to read the rationalia guidelines: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3449
Post Reply
User avatar
lordpasternack
Divine Knob Twiddler
Posts: 6459
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:05 am
About me: I have remarkable elbows.
Contact:

For Reason and Science?

Post by lordpasternack » Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:35 pm

This is the new and improved version of "RD.net to be re-revamped". :cheer:

I'll post a re-cap of some important substantive issues, and stuff, tomorrow. :tup:

Continued from here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... start=1020 - KLR
Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep,
And go the fools among.
Prithee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie: I would fain learn to lie.

User avatar
charlou
arseist
Posts: 32503
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:36 am

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by charlou » Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:36 pm

:tea:
no fences

User avatar
Svartalf
Offensive Grail Keeper
Posts: 35350
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: Paris France
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by Svartalf » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:16 pm

:coffee: :pop:
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug

PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 64097
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by JimC » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:26 pm

Will there be links to articles such as "I was Richard Dawkin's love child"?
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
klr
(%gibber(who=klr, what=Leprageek);)
Posts: 32964
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:25 pm
About me: The money was just resting in my account.
Location: Airstrip Two
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by klr » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:27 pm

JimC wrote:Will there be links to articles such as "I was Richard Dawkin's love child"?
I think LP would prefer to replace "was" with "had". Or at least, that's they way it used to be. :hehe:
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion. - Superintendent Chalmers

It's not up to us to choose which laws we want to obey. If it were, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed! - Rex Banner

The Bluebird of Happiness long absent from his life, Ned is visited by the Chicken of Depression. - Gary Larson

:mob: :comp: :mob:

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 32214
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by Tero » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:52 pm

So you still did not answer why RD bothers to respond to your e mails. I would not. If I were RD. It seems a bit persistent and stalking like.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
coronavirus worldometer https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
lordpasternack
Divine Knob Twiddler
Posts: 6459
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:05 am
About me: I have remarkable elbows.
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by lordpasternack » Tue Sep 10, 2013 12:41 am

Tero wrote:So you still did not answer why RD bothers to respond to your e mails.
How the fuck am I supposed to answer that question definitively on Richard Dawkins' behalf? What a silly thing to say...

Maybe because I've sent him nice emails in the past for which he's praised me? Maybe because he liked me from way back when, and shook my hand the first time he met me - and he still hangs on to some of those impressions of me? Maybe because he senses that deep down I'm actually quite sane and rational? Maybe just because he's stupid and naive? Or maybe because he and/or Cornwell thought that humouring me would be a good way to keep me sweet, and weaken the threat that I pose to him and RDF, with the information that I've been unearthing?

But to the point - he responded on that particular occasion, I think, because I'd just taken him to task for him telling someone that my claims were "ridiculous lies", when he knew full well that I had been telling the truth - and that I've always been honest... I think he was badly flustered and he desperately wanted to try to talk his way out of the awkward situation.
I would not. If I were RD. It seems a bit persistent and stalking like.
Persistent, yes - but there is obvious reason and justification for said persistence, for anyone who has had any kind of investment (emotional or financial) in the Richard Dawkins Foundation. Richard Dawkins is well aware of some of the substantive reasons for my persistence. He knows that I'm being justifiably persistent, and he doesn't like it. The same goes for Robin Elisabeth Cornwell - only more so.

Donors deserve to know if there is conflict of interest, if there are hidden agendas, and if any members of staff on the board are persistently dishonest and manipulative to the point of being sociopathic.
Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep,
And go the fools among.
Prithee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie: I would fain learn to lie.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 32214
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by Tero » Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:35 am

Thanks.

I know nothing of the UK atheist community.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 64097
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by JimC » Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:41 am

Tero wrote:Thanks.

I know nothing of the UK atheist community.
Neither does RD, apparently... ;)
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Horwood Beer-Master
"...a complete Kentish hog"
Posts: 7061
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:34 pm
Location: Wandering somewhere around the Darenth Valley - Kent
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by Horwood Beer-Master » Tue Sep 10, 2013 12:58 pm

lordpasternack wrote:This is the new and improved version of "RD.net to be re-revamped"...
We are all very excited...
Image

User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 37285
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by Rum » Tue Sep 10, 2013 5:55 pm

'Important substantive'. :hehe:

User avatar
lordpasternack
Divine Knob Twiddler
Posts: 6459
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:05 am
About me: I have remarkable elbows.
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by lordpasternack » Tue Sep 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Rum wrote:'Important substantive'. :hehe:
What? :ask:
Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep,
And go the fools among.
Prithee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie: I would fain learn to lie.

User avatar
lordpasternack
Divine Knob Twiddler
Posts: 6459
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:05 am
About me: I have remarkable elbows.
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by lordpasternack » Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:04 am

Okay - I'm tired - but I just want to make one remark for the time being: the interesting thing about this issue having blown up on Freethought Blogs, is the way in which all the anti-FtB people have cast me into the deepest cynicism, and are interpreting everything I have ever said with the least charity possible - and not really grasping that there are epistemological issues involved here, which are independent of me and/or my personality. Sure, you may doubt me because of what you perceive to be my personality - but are you going to attempt to falsify my statements, or just ad-hom the hell out of me, and leave it at that?

It's fascinating reading the rampant speculation, and the gossip, and shitty ad hominem arguments from all camps… Ultimately, though, this is an issue that will boil down to subtantive evidence - substantive evidence about the issues that are actually important. I may be a complete bastard, and that's quite irrelevant to whether my claims are ultimately grounded in reality, and bolstered by evidence. I don't care what people think of my personality, or anyone else's, generally - I'll do my best to make all my data publicly verifiable (yeah, private emails are difficult to verify unless they are loaded up in front of you, sorry) - and you can reach your own interpretations. I don't care if I get harassed and/or completely misconstrued - I have always been honest, and I intend to be substantive. That is what is ultimately important to me, here. Even Dawkins knows as much.

PS. I have never claimed to be male, and have corrected people everytime they have made that assumption. The only reason that my old profile on RD.net states that I'm male is because that was the default option on the profiles of the (then) newly revamped site in 2010, on which I never participated, and so never "reassigned" my profile. I am shown clearly as female on a number of sites which pre-exist my involvement in the atheist community.

[/vague-and-generalised-gripe]
Last edited by lordpasternack on Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep,
And go the fools among.
Prithee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie: I would fain learn to lie.

User avatar
charlou
arseist
Posts: 32503
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:36 am

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by charlou » Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:09 am

I admire your tenacity, candour and bravery, lp. I'm no fan of the frequent encroachment into emotionalised/personalised areas of analysis, but overlooking that aspect of your approach to delivery, this investigation is intriguing.
no fences

User avatar
lordpasternack
Divine Knob Twiddler
Posts: 6459
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:05 am
About me: I have remarkable elbows.
Contact:

Re: For Reason and Science?

Post by lordpasternack » Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:13 am

Yes, I do think I need to change my tact. I have been changing a lot, even just over the past couple of months or so - and have been coming to realise that a lot of my behaviour has been well-meaning, but completely counterproductive, and not the best way to make my points. There's been a nudging of conscience, and awareness, which wasn't there before. There's very little guilt, but there's regret, about making people shut down before they've even assessed my basic claims…

This stuff's serious to me, and I regret that I've caused the evidence to look 'tainted'… On the other hand - I'm not the only one possessing the evidence, the evidence itself is unambiguous, I know where I stand on it, and this issue is bigger than me and any of my personal issues.
Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep,
And go the fools among.
Prithee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie: I would fain learn to lie.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests