There's Reddit Atheists and there's Reddit Believers.
I have vowed to avoid BOTH.
"Reddit Atheism"
by botchtowersociety 57 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
King Solomon
BTS said:
At a certain point you have to ask: Has hate ever led to anything progressive? Do the Reddit Atheists actually think they’re changing the world? Judging by their arrogance I wouldn’t doubt it. There’s an effective way to spread knowledge, and this isn’t it. Obviously the r/atheism brotherhood is mostly harmless, but I think I speak for everyone else in the world when I say: Guys, shut the fuck up for a second, please. Whatever problem you think you’re solving by your shitty rage comics and rants, you’re not.
Nothing like asking a question, and then answering it yourself....
Where'd you get the idea anyone HATES you? That comes off as a tad arrogant, don't you think, think what you or anyone else believes warrants such a strong emotion? If anything, I find people trapped in their beliefs and violently defending them even at the expense of obvious reality to be rather sad, as they're either intentionally ignorant, or intellectually lazy. And YES, that's how compelling the evidence against creationism is.
Speaking of the Creation Museum (since you brought it up, and it's the subject of the original discussion), I was talking to a friend the other day who was an Illuminati (sharp guy otherwise: a bit of a kook), and in talking about evolution I asked him to name a creation scientist he respects: he named "Doctor Kent Hovind".
I just about fell out of my chair, as Hovind's a biggie in creationism; in fact, Kent built/ran the Creation Museum. He's also been mentioned in a recent thread about the "water canopy" (something that JW's STILL believe accounts for Noah's Flood, BTW).
Soooo, WHO is Kent Hovind, the founder of the Creation Museum, and a Young Earth Creationist? What kind of credentials does he have to edumacate (sic) on creation science? What kind of moral figure is he, to be a Pastor for Christ?
For one, he's in Fed Prison serving a 10 yr prison sentence for tax evasion, right now (Kent argued that Jesus' "pay Caesars things to Caesar" doesn't apply to him). Hovind's apprently an Illuminati, and tax evasion seems to be a part of their beliefs. I'll let you read about the way he funneled money off the Museum business, but the fact is he makes the WTBTS' GB look like a bunch of choir boys in comparison.
Note his science credentials (hint: he's got NONE).
Heck, here's his educational credentials from Wikipedia:
From 1972 to 1974, Hovind attended the non-accreditedMidwestern Baptist College and received a Bachelor of Religious Education. [ 3 ]
In 1988 and 1991 respectively, Hovind was awarded a master's degree and doctorate in Christian Education through correspondence from the non-accredited Patriot University in Colorado Springs, Colorado (now Patriot Bible University in Del Norte, Colorado, which no longer offers this program). [ 7 ] Having a website called "Dr. Dino" has provoked some academics to look closely at how Hovind presents his education and credentials. Chemistry professor Karen Bartelt has said that it is "very unusual for a person with a Ph.D., even a real one, to list oneself in the phonebook as "Dr Hovind", as Hovind has done." [ 8 ] [emphasis in original]. Barbara Forrest, a professor of philosophy, expert on the history of creationism and activist in the creation-evolution controversy, wrote that Hovind's lack of academic training makes it impossible to engage him on a professional level. [ 9 ]
Other critics of Hovind have pointed out that Patriot Bible University is a diploma mill, as it has unreasonably low graduation requirements, lack of sufficient faculty or educational standards, and a suspicious tuition scheme. [ 6 ] [ 10 ] The school's current policies allow students to attain bachelor's degrees, master's degrees, and even "Doctor of Ministry" degrees in months, rather than years, for as little as $25 per month. Currently Patriot offers a monthly fee, unlike most universities, which only charge per-credit fees. [ 11 ]
Bartelt has stated that Hovind's doctoral dissertation is evidence of the poor requirements at Patriot and that Hovind lacks knowledge of basic science. [ 8 ] Bartelt noted that Hovind's dissertation is incomplete (it contains four chapters totaling 101 pages, but Hovind's introduction claims the work is 250 pages with 16 chapters), of low academic quality, with poor writing, poor spelling, and poor grammatical style. Bartelt asserts that pages are repeated, references are absent, and it is not an original work with original ideas. [ 8 ]
In the past, when questioned about his education and qualifications, Hovind has said his critics use ad hominem arguments, [ 7 ] and Patriot has issued similar comments. [ 12 ] In 2010, Patriot responded to Wikileaks' claim to have revealed Hovind's dissertation, writing that the Wikileaks file was not the "finished" product, but because they do not "retain ownership to student thesis’ [sic] or dissertations, as is commonly practiced by many schools", they "cannot release student work to the public". [ 13 ] Patriot will not send copies of Hovind's doctoral dissertation, which is unusual for an institution to do since dissertations are made available to the public. [ 8 ] As a general rule, doctoral dissertations are published by the associated university and made available to the public, so that other students conducting research in similar areas may use the information in the dissertation as a reference. [ 8 ] Bartelt wrote that the copy she viewed is on file at the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), but the organization cannot distribute it due to copyright restrictions. [ 8 ] The NCSE's copy was received from Skip Evans, who obtained Hovind's dissertation from Patriot with Hovind's permission in March 1999. [ 8 ]
Here's a link to his Wikipedia page: I'll leave the matters of public record (his tax trial and defense) over there.... It's gruesome.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind
So sorry, Dude, but as long as BSers feel free to operate, I'm going to exercise my right (and actually, my RESPONSIBILITY) to expose the frauds, scammers, etc.
-
NewChapter
Of course there is such a thing. All humans inhabit a full spectrum of attitudes and the way they express themselves. Some are angrier than others, and some that are new to an idea will be more fervent than those who have mellowed a bit. I get that you were commenting on the creation museum, and not on Christianity, but I really don't think you should have expected the general public to separate the two. Some people view that museum as a crime against young minds---an enforcement of pure ignorance. They don't call them the formative years for nothing. And if they view it as such, there will be more anger. Brilliant young minds being stunted before they even had a chance to investigate their world. Tragic.
As far as telling an atheist you will pray for them, well this is a kind of insult. It is disregarding the atheist's will and enforcing your own. I personally don't care if people pray for me. Depending on my mood, I may find it silly and amusing, or just a ritual that makes the person feel better but does absolutely nothing positive for me. Just don't tell me about it, and I won't tell you not to. what is the motive for telling me anyway?
Let's switch it up. Is it respectful for me to tell a believer, "I will not pray for you." I think so. It's unnecessary. I won't pray for them, but they don't need to worry about it.
So what do we do now? Call the elders, priests, pastors, rabbis, and shaman to get these people in line? Atheists are not organized that way. Most of us aren't interested enough to try to temper the behavior of other atheists, because that kind of goes against our inclination. We don't answer to each other. We can talk to each other, and offer an opinion, and in fact, you don't know that this hasn't already happened with the posters you highlighted.
If you don't welcome snarky comments or opposite opinions, then the internet is probably not the best place to post. Disable the comments capability if it causes you to be upset. You are speaking to the WORLD---and it only takes a few people in the entire world to express some negative views to set a tone. It's a tough gig, but that's what it is.
And also don't dismiss the idea of trolls. Some people simply like to stir up emotions, and it reallhy doesn't matter what the issue is. They get a kick out of it.
As far as their own forum where they express angry opinons---oh well. It happens. Look at punk rock. Groups of people who express their anger. It's not for everyone. Think about cliques in real life. They can be quite snarky too. It's what humans do. If you are offended by what you find on their sites, just don't click. Or click. And then bitch about it. That can be fun too. But really, what are you going to do about it? Nothing. This is not particular to atheists, and it is not new, and it is not going anywhere. In fact, we all do it to some degree.
-
botchtowersociety
Whoopsies!!!
All is forgiven.
-
botchtowersociety
BTS said:
No I didn't.
Where'd you get the idea anyone HATES you?
Again I didn't. You need to work on your comprehension. I linked to something I did not write.
And the rest just goes downhill from there.
Must be Friday night?
-
Farkel
: Is there such a thing as what this article describes?
I've never seen it, but that is only anecdotal. I have many atheist friends, a number of them being ex-Dubs who as we all know are among the biggest crusader-types there are. None of my friends give a rat about "converting" believers, but they DO give a rat when true believers waste their time trying to convert them.
All in all, I'm still certain that are crusader/freaks in the atheist community (if there is such a thing). There are crusader freaks for everything else, you know.
Of course, this could all be turned back on me when people ask, "well, then. Why have you spent so much time and energy trying to get dubs to quit their reigion?"
My answer? "Fuck off!"
Farkel
-
palmtree67
NC:
If you don't welcome snarky comments or opposite opinions, then the internet is probably not the best place to post. Disable the comments capability if it causes you to be upset. You are speaking to the WORLD---and it only takes a few people in the entire world to express some negative views to set a tone. It's a tough gig, but that's what it is.
Yup. My hubby put a survey on facebook some years ago (when you could do such a thing) about his passion - Canadian football, the CFL. He was inundated by nasty, swearing American NFL fans telling him to F**K OFF! etc.....etc.....etc....He took it down and never did another one.
And also don't dismiss the idea of trolls. Some people simply like to stir up emotions, and it reallhy doesn't matter what the issue is. They get a kick out of it.
Haven't we had our share of that here?
-
botchtowersociety
NC, you are in my prayers.
-
botchtowersociety
And also don't dismiss the idea of trolls. Some people simply like to stir up emotions, and it reallhy doesn't matter what the issue is. They get a kick out of it.
I don't believe a word of it.
-
King Solomon
BTS said:
No I didn't.
Where'd you get the idea anyone HATES you?
Again I didn't. You need to work on your comprehension. I linked to something I did not write.
And the rest just goes downhill from there.
Must be Friday night?
Maybe you r drinking? What was supposed to go in the empty quote box?
Next time set your own comments apart from those of the article you're quoting (either using bold, or quotes).... I know you dragged it from Salon, but didn't know what/if you were asking (i.e. the trailing question? The last part?).
Yeah, it's a tad more work (and often why I go back to edit: sometimes the auto-HTML makes all words bold, when they all shouldn't be), but it makes it easier for readers to untangle which comments are yours vs the ones you've cut-and-pasted. You put a post asking why someone hadn't answered your questions, so I picked whichever....
At any rate, you should be willing to support the position of whatever opinion you drag here from somewhere else, if you're trying to make a point (such as you clearly intended). It's chicken-shit to post something but then not be willing to 'own it' (i.e. tacitly state that you agree with the position, but then not be willing to defend the opinion, esp if it's an ad hominem disguised as "opinion" simply an excuse to say, "Atheists, shut up!"). Dragging an "opinion" from somewhere else that is that biased IS an appeal....
