The God Hypothesis according to New Scientist

[Blind groper]

To Seth

I do not want to insult you, and the comments below are not intended to be offensive.
However, with all due respect, I have to say that what I have seen of your writing does not seem to be the thing to engender friendly debate.

The Law of Reciprocation requires that what you give is what you get. Most of the time, in my communications, I manage to keep on reasonably friendly terms with people, even if we are debating opposite sides of a question.

I would suggest that you might like to put a little more effort into keeping your comments friendly, and thereby receiving friendly comments back. My own experience is that most atheists or other non believers are good people, and good to talk with. You have told us that you, too, are a non believer. As such, it would seem a pity if we cannot discourse on friendly terms.

[Santa_Claus]

The term "Wanker" was polite for CUNT.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You guys are making our pet troll very happy.

[Santa_Claus]

He's not a Troll - iz too boring for that.

FACT.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

He's not a Troll - iz too boring for that.

FACT.

Contrarian, but not a good contrarian, but he does make a nice "thin blue line" and sig fodder.

[trdsf]

He's not a Troll - iz too boring for that.

FACT.

Contrarian, but not a good contrarian, but he does make a nice "thin blue line" and sig fodder.

Nah, he's just another self-absorbed troll. Not even a particularly entertaining one. My preferred way to deal with that kind of self-blind irrationality is the plonk, specifically definition 5. I got better things to read, and better things to reply to, than his tortured nonsense.

[Ronja]

He's not a Troll - iz too boring for that.

FACT.

Contrarian, but not a good contrarian, but he does make a nice "thin blue line" and sig fodder.

Nah, he's just another self-absorbed troll. Not even a particularly entertaining one. My preferred way to deal with that kind of self-blind irrationality is the plonk, specifically definition 5. I got better things to read, and better things to reply to, than his tortured nonsense.

The Force it is strong in this one. Cottons on quickly he does.

[mistermack]

It's my personal experience that Seth is poisonous, disrespectful, rude, arrogant, annoying, pedantic, opinionated, bigoted and not all that smart.

[Seth]

Seth, the reason why you get no respect here is that you are a troll.

And you are trollbait. Of the two, the troll is the intellectually and emotionally superior one, and the trollbait is the inferior intellect that can be easily manipulated emotionally merely by saying something that they don't like but can't figure out how to respond to with any signs of intelligence.

You say you want to keep your private life separate from everybody here because you fear that people will come and accost you where you live.

It's a rational fear, given the fact that it's happened in the past.

That's typical trollish behaviour, you just want to be able to act like a cunt, hiding in your bunker from real life.

Meh. If you're such a braveheart, why don't you publish your full real name, address, phone number and date of birth here?

You are a loser, and always will be, with a hatred towards those who enjoy a feeling of community with like-minded people.

Nah, I just like pointing out how ridiculous Atheists can be in their ideological blindness and bigotry.

You will never belong anywhere. You will always be on the outside looking in. Good news for you though: They want you in Ethiopia! As a source of protein.

You are desperately trying to make circle-jerk mutual-masturbation ego-stroking among Atheists into a virtue, but it's still just wanking.

Oh, I've also reported your personal attack, not that there's any real point in it since the mods will never give you a vacation because they are themselves biased.

[Seth]

To Seth

I do not want to insult you, and the comments below are not intended to be offensive.
However, with all due respect, I have to say that what I have seen of your writing does not seem to be the thing to engender friendly debate.

That's likely because most of the time the lackwits who respond to my posts engage in routine ad hom argumentation rather than addressing the actual subject of the debate.

The Law of Reciprocation requires that what you give is what you get.

Indeed. I've said the same thing many times, including in my welcome thread. So long as the debate remains reasonable and is not directed at personalities, I'm happy to oblige and reciprocate. But, as is common here, because I refuse to capitulate and kowtow to popular opinion, and because I choose to be provocative and steadfast in my arguments, people get frustrated that they cannot "win" the debate and turn to personal attacks, as seen here. They take generalized statements personally and they have difficulty controlling their emotions, so they lash out. But at the same time, the very same people have no compunctions whatsoever about viciously attacking people of faith and religion in ways practically identical to the very worst of radical evangelical theistic religious zealots and they expect to be allowed to publish these sorts of calumnies and insults directed at people who do not deserve their opprobrium without being called on their bullshit and without being subjected to the same sort of broad-brush vilification and insult themselves.

Well, I'm here to defend the good people of faith who do not deserve such treatment and the only way I can do that is to make sure that I do unto the Atheist bigots here what they do unto others every single day.

If you want a Golden Rule here, then let it begin with Atheists.

Most of the time, in my communications, I manage to keep on reasonably friendly terms with people, even if we are debating opposite sides of a question.

Glad to hear it, and I'll reciprocate in like kind when you do.

I would suggest that you might like to put a little more effort into keeping your comments friendly, and thereby receiving friendly comments back.

I do, when friendship and amity are offered. But as I've said before, I'll give better than I get when the rhetoric turns hateful. I can insult Atheists and atheism just as rigorously as Atheists can insult theism and will continue to do so when the occasion calls for it. It's how I choose to defend the billions of people who deserve some measure of respect and dignity against the viciousness and callous disregard for their rights and their feelings shown by people here an in other Atheist fora.

If the religious Atheist bigots and hatemongers don't like it, tough shit. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. All that's required to stop this cycle is for Atheists to start acting like rational adults and give up their hatred and bigotry towards people of faith.

My own experience is that most atheists or other non believers are good people, and good to talk with. You have told us that you, too, are a non believer. As such, it would seem a pity if we cannot discourse on friendly terms.

No reason we can't, as long as you are able to distinguish between a reasonable discourse and an ill-mannered attack on people undeserving of hatred and bigotry, and between a reasoned debate and personal attack. Control your emotions and remember that this is just a discussion forum and not real life, and that a sign of a superior intellect is the ability to entertain a thought (or argue a position) without believing it (or subscribing to the ideology) and that I very often choose to argue controversial points from adversary positions that may, but most often do not reflect my true beliefs, and that I do so for the purposes of stimulating vigorous debate and the critical examination of other people's arguments and beliefs. It's never personal, it's always just a debate.

Keep that in mind and we'll get along fine. Sadly, too many people here are unable to remain intellectually separated from their emotions and they allow themselves to become emotionally invested in the debate and they resort to personal invective as a tactic. Don't fall into that trap. Remember it's just a debate.

[Seth]

He's not a Troll - iz too boring for that.

FACT.

Contrarian, but not a good contrarian, but he does make a nice "thin blue line" and sig fodder.

Nah, he's just another self-absorbed troll. Not even a particularly entertaining one. My preferred way to deal with that kind of self-blind irrationality is the plonk, specifically definition 5. I got better things to read, and better things to reply to, than his tortured nonsense.

Have a nice trip into your colon, hope to never hear from you again.

[Santa_Claus]

I think Seth may be grooming me.

[tattuchu]

It's my personal experience that Seth is poisonous, disrespectful, rude, arrogant, annoying, pedantic, opinionated, bigoted and not all that smart.

Except for the last bit (I don't think he's stupid), he certainly did describe himself to a t, didn't he?

[hadespussercats]

Fellow ratz! The tone in this thread is getting unnecessarily personalized and confrontational. Please keep the Play Nice and the No Personal Attacks rules in mind in the future.

Thank you!

[surreptitious57]

Well I for one do believe in the Golden Rule and so do not engage in ad hom : worst I will do is
mild non malicious sarcasm : then not very often : Seth is absolutely right in what he states
You attack the idea which is there to be taken apart : but you never attack the individual
This is not exactly hard to under stand though may be hard to implement in the heat of
debate but the way round that is to leave emotion at the door and just bring logic in
instead : what you think of Seth is neither here nor there : you are not required to
like him but you are required to respect him : this is not him getting any special
treatment as every one should be treated like that both on and off line : only
problem with Seth is that one never knows what ever position he is taking
is genuinely his own or not but if I can not handle robust criticism of my
own take on a certain issue without referencing some ulterior motive
something is wrong : it does not matter what Seth s position is but
what does matter is whether it and any others can be defended
using reason and logic : every thing else is superfluous : now
remember this the next time you feel like attacking him or
anyone else on this forum : thank you for taking the time