Well, since johan the loon raise the topic, here is the thread he references.

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=28142

Be warned, it contains reference to his child abuse.

Amusingly, he accuses me of "running away" which is rather difficult given that I am not a member of that site. And by then he was banned on ISF and SGU so there was nothing to respond to or run away from.

But that does not prevent Johan having these wild fantasies.

Alas, like the proverbial bad penny, he turned up on another site I frequent.

I have to say, my response when he rocked up here was "Not this shite again".

This rodeo, I will not invest the same level of time and research. His victims have suffered enough without me opening old wounds.

I think that is in part his motivation. To vicariously solicit further harassment for his victims. He cannot do it himself due to court judgments, so he seeks to get others to do so.

Well, just no. I have sufficient information to know that he is a wingnut and a violent one at that. I have no desire to inflict further pain on his victims.

(May 30, 2020 at 2:19 am)Johanabrahams Wrote:

Quote:Telling me what I know is impolite. A bit like picking your nose and eating it.

Nope.  this is far from it.

Pretty much the same really.

Quote:

Quote:Which churches? They all seem to believe in different People. They don't seem entirely trustworthy.

I can see you are totally unsure of this.

How does that nose gold taste?

Every church has a different "god", each smaller than the last. Most of them are hateful little beasts that no self-respecting person would believe in.

Quote:

Quote:Oh well, if you can't even be bothered to describe your imaginary friend then it's going to look even more pointless than usual.

I never said this.   What i actually said is that there is a lot said already.  And you can just built on it without starting from the beginning again.

I'm starting from the beginning because you failed to. Provide evidence for your deity. Once you've established its existence we can debate its attitude toward our silly little species.

(May 30, 2020 at 6:36 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: I'm starting from the beginning because you failed to. Provide evidence for your deity. Once you've established its existence we can debate its attitude toward our silly little species.

Sure. That has been his challenge on every site he has infected. And he has failed to do so at every turn. He is so utterly disgusting that even christian webs ban him on sight because he is so toxic. Christian websites. Links if you wish, but I doubt those are needed at this point. He has revealed his nature quite well here.

In any event, this site got kudos elsewhere since nobody bought his BS. That is a credit to this site and it's members. Most of them.

(May 30, 2020 at 6:36 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

Quote:I never said this.   What i actually said is that there is a lot said already.  And you can just built on it without starting from the beginning again.

I'm starting from the beginning because you failed to. Provide evidence for your deity. Once you've established its existence we can debate its attitude toward our silly little species.

I think I've asked him this a couple of times already.

His only responce to me innitially was (And I paraphrase) "I had a feeling."

So... so far other than a subjective, personal event, he's not provided anything objective.

Cheers.

Not at work.

Well if he can't even demonstrate that his "deity" exists then the rest is just blathering on about unicorn genetics.

I personally feel that unicorns must have branched DNA with 8 nucleobases rather than the standard 4. That would let you decrease from 3 bases per codon to 2 while still maintaining both the current data density and degeneracy and would allow bidirectional frame reading. The branching would allow for switching on or off entire process lines rather than doing it gene by gene. Much more efficient than this ugly little set-up that we inherited from the apes.

Isn't it against the forum rules to come here and proselytize without contributing anything toward a meaningful and honest discussion? 

(May 31, 2020 at 4:01 am)Gwaithmir Wrote: Isn't it against the forum rules to come here and proselytize without contributing anything toward a meaningful and honest discussion? 

Technically yes. Normally, I would agree with such. In this case, I would not.

In this case the spousal abuse needs exposure
The child abuse needs exposure.
The neighbourhood abuse needs exposure. 
The church/temple/whatever abuse needs exposure.
The sheebeen/ semi-legal booze emporium needs exposure.

This religious insanity only persists for as long as we allow it to fuck people up.

Turns out that Johan is intentionally fucking people up to somehow shore up his peculiar delusion.

Evil people can do whatever they want so long as good people do nothing.

Most here are indeed good people, but this cunt? Pure evil.

And he revels in that evil. 

You have not the history of all his wingnuittery. I understand that. You are in effect "noobs" to this nonsense. 

But it remains wingnuttery.

You, of course, can challenge my opinion, or can you?

At this point you have two threads elsewhere on other sites in which he proudly boasts of his spousal abuse and child abuse.

That alone is sufficient for me to call a loon a loon. 

Of course there is also the ongoing stream of lies. Bit of a clue, no?

Now at this point, some might suspect that I have some vendetta against this wingnut.

Nope. I do have a vendetta against the abject lies he posts, however.

Such dishonesty should never be allowed to stand unchallenged.

---

(May 31, 2020 at 4:01 am)Gwaithmir Wrote: Isn't it against the forum rules to come here and proselytize without contributing anything toward a meaningful and honest discussion? 

Are you suggesting that our current moronic chew toy should be removed?

god is shit

(May 31, 2020 at 10:18 pm)masoni Wrote: god is shit

You really are right, especially in Catholic churches because Catholics love to worship shit, although human shit




And in some other religions like in Hinduism, they worship cow's shit...

(May 30, 2020 at 6:36 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(May 30, 2020 at 2:19 am)Johanabrahams Wrote: Nope.  this is far from it.

Pretty much the same really.

Quote:I can see you are totally unsure of this.

How does that nose gold taste?

Every church has a different "god", each smaller than the last. Most of them are hateful little beasts that no self-respecting person would believe in.

Quote:I never said this.   What i actually said is that there is a lot said already.  And you can just built on it without starting from the beginning again.

I'm starting from the beginning because you failed to. Provide evidence for your deity. Once you've established its existence we can debate its attitude toward our silly little species.

Quote:Pretty much the same really.

Opinions differ.   You have yours and I have mine.

Quote:How does that nose gold taste?

That is your story, remember.  So you have to tell me. 

Quote:Every church has a different "god", each smaller than the last.

Don't listen too much to the Babies of God that do not know much.

Quote:Most of them are hateful little beasts that no self-respecting person would believe in.

The Babies of God Love their Father.  But seems you don't know why?

Quote:I'm starting from the beginning because you failed to. Provide evidence for your deity.

You just miss it.  Read again.  

Quote:Once you've established its existence we can debate its attitude toward our silly little species.

I am existing.  Or did you miss me?