RE: In UK atheists considred more moral than theists.
September 6, 2018 at 4:07 pm
(This post was last modified: September 6, 2018 at 4:38 pm by Angrboda.)
(September 6, 2018 at 11:10 am)Drich Wrote:(September 5, 2018 at 5:03 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: You're a fucking dishonest piece of shit. The very entry you quoted said that it was not the basic meaning of the Latin word. Do you not fucking speak English? What do you think it means to say that something is not the basic meaning of the word? You said it was the Latin for baby. That it sometimes was used figuratively to mean a baby does not change the basic definition of the word. Fetus is Latin for "the bearing, bringing forth, or hatching of young." That's the common usage of the word in Latin. And if you can't see that that is different from baby, then you're fucked in the head. That you actually think you were right just shows what a fucking moron you are. Please, explain to me what it means to say that something is not the basic meaning of a word. Go on, explain it.
You even repeated your error:
But this is about what I expect from you. Lies and dishonesty. You misrepresented your source here, and you misrepresented your source in your thread citing scientists predicting a mini-ice-age. You're a fundamentally dishonest person, in addition to being an ignorant twat.
Seeking atonement is in addition to not wanting this sin, so it is not "just" not wanting this sin. The two are separate things and you can have one without the other. If I do not want this sin, but I do not believe that Christ dies for my sins, I'm still going to not want this sin, yet I am not going to believe. Believing requires an additional step so just wanting isn't enough. If I want to live to be 100, I'll need to exercise and eat right. Just wanting not to die young is not enough to actually accomplish that feat. So, no, you're wrong here as well.
.....
Fair enough. I was wrong and you were right. And I apologize for calling you an ignorant twat regarding this issue. But since you ask, I'll take some time to explain myself on the questions you raised. Speaking in general, I don't spend as much time constructively engaging with you anymore, and frequently resort to insults largely because of your own behavior. I've engaged constructively with you on multiple topics this year, and not only did you not acknowledge your errors, you even bragged about how you'd been right so many times in the recent past, and insulted me, claiming that the quality of my arguments had deteriorated. Even in this thread, although we haven't really finished discussing it, you haven't responded to my point about atonement. In other cases, it's pretty obvious that you were wrong. At the very least, you didn't bother to provide any sensible counter-arguments, all the while bragging about "kicking people's teeth in" and calling people "sport" and "alpo" and bragging about shit. You were wrong about the evidence for a brain as receiver hypothesis. You were wrong and hypocritical about the ad hominem arguments in that thread. You were wrong about the liar's paradox. You were wrong about Hitler claiming to be God (though you dispute it, you never actually produced anything beyond mere suspicions based on Rosenberg). You were wrong about the mini-ice-age, and even your own source (Wikipedia) showed that you were wrong. You were wrong about David Barton's lies. In all these cases, not only did you not acknowledge your errors, you continued to brag about your superiority, insult people with pet names and other demeaning behaviors, and even brag about how you had been right so often in your engagements with me. And while it's probably not the best thing for me to treat you unkindly for being wrong and stupid and delusional and egotistical, it's very human. People who act like shit and walk around with their head in the clouds because they're deluded, lack insight into their behavior, and have outsized egos which their behavior and accomplishments don't merit are going to get shit on for those behaviors. It's an evolutionary thing. People treat good and successful behavior well, and they shit on people who behave like you do. Occasionally you do get things right, so it's not all negative. However, for as often as you get things wrong, your attitude is way out of line. I'm a bit biased because I don't tend to engage you much anymore unless you've said something really questionable. Maybe you get things right more than people are willing to admit, but the fact is, you believe yourself right more often than you actually are. That's nothing but ego talking, combined with the fact that you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. So if you're wondering why things have changed between us, it's basically because I've written you off as a deluded, ignorant, and egotistical twat -- a reputation that you've earned through your own behavior. So if you want to know why I treat you like I do, go look in the mirror. You're treated like shit because you act like shit. There's nothing particularly wrong with being ignorant or not too bright, but combine that with an unjustified ego and delusions about your effectiveness, and you're gonna get shit from people. Now of course, I'm probably wasting my breath in explaining this to you because you're not going to believe a word of it BECAUSE you're egotistical, deluded, and not too bright. So ask yourself this question. If everybody on the forum treated Tizheruk like he was ignorant and stupid and egotistical, which would be the safer bet -- that a bunch of people were wrong about him, and his brains and his accomplishments were simply unrecognized through no fault of his own, or is it more likely that his reputation is deserved? Of course you don't think these things apply to you, but that's your ego and other weaknesses talking. So I've spent a good bit of time answering your question and the answer is threefold. a) You've earned such treatment by your own behavior, b) I've given up on you and so am less inclined to engage you substantially (although in spite of your lies, the past six months will show that I did engage with you most of the time), and c) talking to you about these things and engaging constructively with you has been shown to be pointless (you're a lot like Little Rik in that regard. I engage him a lot, but it's really futile because he's not smart enough to understand that his arguments are flawed and he's too egotistical to even consider himself wrong; you and Little Rik are a lot alike in that regard, even if he's somewhat worse than you are, you're both cut from the same cloth; so if you want to see why other people treat you the way they do, maybe spending some time reading and arguing with Little Rik might offer you some needed perspective).
Now, I've acknowledged my error, apologized for the insult in this case, and explained what you've got wrong about the situation between you and me. I might choose to omit some of the insults in future, then again, I might not. There's some of that which is strictly up to me and what I expect of my own behavior, but there's also a large part that's up to you. If you continue to be dismissive, egotistical, bragging about your accomplishments when you shouldn't, calling people "sport" and "alpo" and "jorgie" and so forth, then you reap what you do sow. The choice is up to you. It would probably be too much to ask you to acknowledge your errors in the discussions above, but that's alright. If you wish to discuss those issues further, I'll more than likely respond to your renewal of those discussions. Whether I'm going to stop insulting you or not, well, that's my own cross to bear. That you don't like it is understandable, unfortunately, in large part, you've earned the reputation you have, and you'll only underscore that point if you dismiss my concerns and criticisms here out of hand. The rest is up to you.
(September 6, 2018 at 11:10 am)Drich Wrote: You've got to be smart enough to know I don't lead with my strongest material by now. I start off with weak sauce to draw people out, have some back and fourth, and then hammer them home once they blow their load on the weak stuff. however you have found a new dishonest approach to even that. I will make a unsupported statement like the fetus comment, and then when I move to support, you start in with calling me a liar. there is no room for discussion with you. you only want to destroy my character, your mission seems to have shifted in that you only want to destroy the me by twisting what I say. you have little to no concern with the truth.. Example the fetus definition.. you know I start with a claim, then moved to the etymology of the word and then you tried to twist the etymogical use of the word. You had to know I was going to the dictionary next... so why then throw out your own integrity on a etymological description when you know I was going to a primary source next? That the dictionary description would trump anything you could twist around
This is just your ego talking again. Maybe you do such things, but when you post a source which contradicts you, as you did here, and as you did in the thread about science, then you're going to get an extra helping of shit for it. You don't want to be called a liar? Then don't misrepresent your sources. You do that and you have only yourself to blame when you catch shit for it. And for the most part, your "strategy" hasn't been particularly successful as often you end up wrong anyway. But beyond that, if you're not leading with your strongest material, then you're being underhanded just in order to set someone up for a "gotcha!" moment. If you don't think there's anything ethically wrong with that, then I've got news for you. If you are purposely trying to set people up that way, then you deserve shit for that alone. I generally dismiss your claims about it because A) you tend to end up losing the argument anyway, and B) I've seen you brag about your cleverness in arguing, and knowing you and your ego, I make the smart call and dismiss it as bullshit. Maybe if you were a little less concerned about shaming other people and more concerned about having productive conversations, I'd give a shit about your "technique" here. But since being mean and unpleasant to other people seems to be your goal in that, I really am not all that interested. You end up being wrong despite whatever research you do. I didn't research the Latin question before I posted and was going from memory. You, in spite of any research you did, still posted a source which contradicted you.
(September 6, 2018 at 11:10 am)Drich Wrote: It makes you look like a stupid whore who does anything for a win, when you play with word or ideas that can be vetted. I don't like kicking in your teeth like this over and over. I don't like doing this to anyone. that is why I stopped with minnie, it's not that I can't t's just not right/fair for him.. you are fast approaching the same limit for me. meaning for your sake I might have to limit my responses to you so that you do not over extend yourself as you did here. (and the last few times we went at it.) I don't like being this... mean I don't like reflecting this much rage and anger back on to you even if you are the source of it all.
I'll survive you thinking I'm a stupid whore. If you want to think that, well, knock yourself out. I have a reputation which I've earned, just as you have. Regardless of how you think my insulting you looks, your delusions about me and yourself make it appear to be something it likely isn't. I HAVE engaged you constructively more often than not over the past six months. You just remember the insults and forget the rest because your selective memory kicks in to protect your ego. Ultimately, I don't blame you for not being very bright or for being wrong a lot, we hold you accountable because you're that and additionally you've got ego and attitude problems.
(September 6, 2018 at 11:10 am)Drich Wrote: I miss debating Alpo someone who was researched and had a direction.. Jorgie is mean and only looks to assassinate the messenger any which way she can, which makes her look like cnn with the president... nothing is true little to none of it has merit, you just mud slinging for the purpose of hoping something sticks. I don't know what happened to you or what I said that lite a fire under your dark 1/2, but i do think about it alot.
See, even when you are on a positive note, being right about the Latin word fetus, you drag it down by calling me "Alpo" and "Jorgie" and bragging about yourself -- brags which EVERYBODY AND THEIR GRANDMOTHER can see aren't merited. You've lived a good life. You have some very commendable accomplishments, between your business, your family, and your ministry. But you erase all those positives by behaving like a self-satisfied twat who believes himself to be better than he is. Even if you were as good as you think you are, humility is a virtue, and you don't have it. I know in the past that you've compared yourself to Paul and Jesus in that regard, but neither of them behaved like you do, and you're not Paul or Jesus. Comparing yourself to them is an insult to both men, and you ought to be ashamed of yourself. But nevermind, your ego will save you, and you'll find some way to ignore or rationalize away what I've said.
(September 6, 2018 at 11:10 am)Drich Wrote: With minnie I know why. if i'm right his whole life =shit. with a shit storm to come. so it is better to try and kill the messenger rather than address the message.
More lies and lack of insight on your part. I've mentioned 5-6 discussions in which I engaged you constructively in the past year. During that time I've dismissed you 3 or so times. So, your perspective on the matter is distorted. But then, that's what we've come to expect from you.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
