I'll show you a real Christian

[ThePinsir]

It shows the number of people who adamantly keep all 9001 commandments. Gjdm.

[Whateverist]

Argumentum ad hominem is when one part knows a personal detail about the other and uses that to refute an argument. For example: You don't shower regularly so I don't believe the conclusions of your doctoral thesis. Or, "You haven't got your BS degree yet so I don't believe you."

Man, and to think I could have majored in BS. I would have rocked that subject. Wait .. is philosophy a polite name for bullshit? If so, I already did major in BS.


Look, BlackMason, we see what you're saying. However, your remarks are misguided because Kitanetos was coming from a humorous direction.

[BlackMason]

Did you intentionally omit the concept of relevance form your definition of ad hominem because it destroys your argument, or are you simply fucking ignorant?

In this case your post amounts to an ad hominem because you're running away from the issue at hand and focusing on my post number. The truth of what I'm saying is being ignored over something as trivial the number of posts I got.

I guess I gave you too much credit.

---

*Sniff sniff*

What's this I smell? A scrub talking about how this forum should operate?

Smells like bullshit.

With a hint of vanilla...

Easy there. I don't only post here. On the other site I post in serious stuff gets posted in the serious sections (this area would be serious). The jokes go in more casual areas. My mistake was thinking this area was more for mature discussion. I took things for granted since I assumed there was order here too.

[Cato]

In this case your post amounts to an ad hominem because you're running away from the issue at hand and focusing on my post number. The truth of what I'm saying is being ignored over something as trivial the number of posts I got.

I guess I gave you too much credit.

So now you just gloss over the fact that your characterization of the forum is demonstrably wrong and that your short amount of time and limited participation is a reasonable explanation for your mischaracterization.

Your posts betray an exaggerated sense of intellectual self worth.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

FWIW I thought the message behind the OP was pretty obvious.

Puppies are indeed great.

[Bob Kelso]

I think someone needs a nice tall glass of chill the fuck out.

Is this place a haven for confirmation bias for atheists? Lets put the shoe on the other foot: If a theist posted something directed at atheists in a similar manner, a whole swat team of atheists would come out right? So where's the consistency men? Or is this site a place for jokers? Lets use this incident to do a little introspection. It seems that some people here are becoming the very thing they claim to be against. They're just using a different name.

I expect all you guys to call me out if I ever started writing bullshit. What example are we setting here? Its bullshit that this type of thing is a joke just because one of our own did it. But had it been a theist it would be unacceptable.

I suspect that someone *looks at BlackMason* didn't understand the joke, fired off what he or she thought was a scathing retort to some imagined intellectual dishonesty and is now back-peddling wildly, all the while lashing out and making a scene over nothing to cover up his or her idiocy.

Am I in the ballpark here sweetness?

Though I could be wrong, you could also just be that much of a serious nitwit, or a troll.

Hmm... *glances at troll alarm*

Nah, I'll hold off for now.

[BlackMason]

I just find it ironic to see people swanning in with this kind of intellectual posturing and then stumbling when presenting the core of their issue.

A typo is stumbling? Your standards are at perfectionist levels!

That and, as a writer, spelling and grammar is kinda my jam. If you don't like it, then I invite you to shove it, because I find it even more ironic that you'll play off your spelling error as something I'm making too big a deal of in one sentence, and then in the very next sentence you'll proceed to make an even bigger deal out of what you just got through characterizing as me being a piffling pedant.

Writing may be your jam and all but clearly common sense isn't. I'm typing on a cell phone not a key board. I've even got the cell phone logo on my posts. You're trying to draw too much blood from an insignificant typo. You look like a god damn ass clown for it. Can it bro. You are a piffling pedant who's claiming not to be one. How's that for irony?

Again this is purely based on your interpretation of the OP. I have no issue with this. Perhaps you are Kitanetos' spokesman. If so then great. But I want Kitanetos to speak for himself because I do believe he was trolling christians. Don't be bias and choose a favourable interpretation simply because he is one of your own. Be consistent! Bullshit is bullshit regardless of who speaks it.

Ah, and here you presume to speak for me and from where I derived my interpretation from. That's interesting, that the person downplaying my contribution here because it's my interpretation will then expect me to bow to his interpretation of my thought processes.

Could it be that perhaps I came up with my position on this on my own? Is there the slightest possibility that the way you interpret the OP isn't so blindingly obvious and clearly true that everyone else must be thinking it too? Maybe, just maybe, those of us that are disagreeing with you on this aren't doing so due to some bias (which is itself a catch cry of the religious when we disagree with them, to add yet another layer of hypocrisy to this whole mess) but because we genuinely disagree?

I swear, the further you go the more presumptive and petty you show yourself to be.

Are you kidding me? Are you denying that members of the same group see each others' transgressions through rose tinted glasses? No comparison to the religious will change this. Now your appeal to the number of people that disagree with me is some sort of proof? Like I said bullshit is bullshit no matter how many people endorse it. Your comparisons of me to the religious do very little to make me see my error. The longer Kitanetos takes to respond the more I think my interpretation is correct and I called him out rightly. He's busy hiding behind the kudos system instead of being a man and telling me that I'm wrong about him. Why not keep yourself busy with that.

Also, is my message wrong? Interpretations aside, am I wrong? I think you're ignoring the larger issue here to save one of your own.

Another typically theistic perspective, where disagreeing positions are just interpretations, but yours are objective facts.

Utter bullshit! The very fact that I'm calling out one of my own should be testament to my fairness. You be a fool to ignore that.

I find it quite ironic that my contributions would be treated with such contempt. These kind of forums are usually aimed at enlightenment of a corrective nature. It's a poor display that we expect theists to be so receptive of our correction yet we spit venom when corrected ourselves.

Being corrected based on the presumptuous claims of a newbie who seems to think he knows better than us how our forum is run is more than a little grating.

So it's not so much that I'm wrong but it's because I'm new? Wow that's pretty pathetic. Who's petty now?

A simple, "Look, BlackMason, we see what you're saying. However, your remarks are misguided because Kitanetos was coming from *this* direction."

This discussion would only have been 3 posts long.

I did that at the outset: all you did was dismiss my words as an interpretation. It must be very easy to talk the talk when you're unaware of how you're failing to walk the walk.

If I remember correctly you were excusing Kitanetos' actions by appealing to the general behaviour of christians. We're not playing in the sand box anymore. This isn't kindergarten.

[Foxaèr]

you were excusing Kitanetos' actions

I doubt they are defending me so much as they are retaliating against your obvious overreaction to the original post.

[BlackMason]

Is this place a haven for confirmation bias for atheists? Lets put the shoe on the other foot: If a theist posted something directed at atheists in a similar manner, a whole swat team of atheists would come out right? So where's the consistency men? Or is this site a place for jokers? Lets use this incident to do a little introspection. It seems that some people here are becoming the very thing they claim to be against. They're just using a different name.

I expect all you guys to call me out if I ever started writing bullshit. What example are we setting here? Its bullshit that this type of thing is a joke just because one of our own did it. But had it been a theist it would be unacceptable.

I suspect that someone *looks at BlackMason* didn't understand the joke, fired off what he or she thought was a scathing retort to some imagined intellectual dishonesty and is now back-peddling wildly, all the while lashing out and making a scene over nothing to cover up his or her idiocy.

Am I in the ballpark here sweetness?

Though I could be wrong, you could also just be that much of a serious nitwit, or a troll.

Hmm... *glances at troll alarm*

Nah, I'll hold off for now.

You were going good until you started talking bout back peddling. I guess you haven't read all the posts. I didn't back pedal. It seem to me that there's been some confusion. I took this to be a serious area of discussion as it would have been on another site I post in.

I'm also far from being a troll.

I'm willing to apologise as soon as someone tells me that this area of this site is play play. I'm a reasonable guy. I admit when I'm wrong.

[Foxaèr]

I took this to be a serious area of discussion as it would have been on another site I post in.

Your problem is in expecting one forum to be like another.