h1

Goddidit Really Is Easier

6 February, 2010

I should have put this up at the beginning: the graphic is found (it is off the internet from years ago and I wasn’t able to find it again) but the frame and text is my contribution.

Advertisements

117 comments

  1. In regarding the equations man uses to describe the reality created by God, the mathematics based upon Biblical teachings provide a view into the actual workings of our miraculous universe that is far superior to physical observations. Mathematics describes creation. The physical world is flawed, but mathematics is as close to perfection as a fallen creation can come. Consider that dark matter has certain fluid slower and colder properties which is in accordance with the writtings such that extant a formless and void earth with darknesss there was not light at that time. Therefore, since the wavelength of dark matter was mentioned, one could understand that these events may speak to a Spiritual Celestial Bodies such that darkness was separated right away as lesser light to rule the night or lucifer. Given the inifinite ways in which God’s Holy Word has proven true in physics, biology, mathematics, cosmology, geology and the other sciences which study the reality of Gods creation, I will not be surprised when glacierists find that prayers really have been controlling the ebb and flow of the glacier.


  2. Jack David: What the fuck are you talking (writing) about? According to the Bible, pi=3. Does that sound like reality?


  3. Given the inifinite ways in which God’s Holy Word has proven true in physics, biology, mathematics, cosmology, geology and the other sciences which study the reality of Gods creation, I will not be surprised when glacierists find that prayers really have been controlling the ebb and flow of the glacier.

    Oh, yes! This is the funniest comment I’ve read all week. Well done, Jack David.

    Oh, wait. You weren’t being serious, were you?


  4. I missed that. Glacierists? What the hell is a glacierist? And what does that have to do with the illegible equation on the blackboard?


    • I studied to be a Glacierist… would you like that on the rocks?


  5. How come the guy in the photo looks like a Mormon elder?

    By the way, what’s the opposite of a glacierist? I’m guessing that it’s someone who still roots for the Titanic.


  6. Uh, Larry? The Titanic hit an iceberg, not a glacier. Glaciers are on land (and limited littoral areas) and, though they can give birth to icebergs, they are not icebergs.

    And as for the resemblence? Maybe the formula helps him keep track of the ages and cycles of his wives.


  7. they can give birth to icebergs

    Ooh – that’s gotta hurt.


  8. Oh, you’re right. But I didn’t realize you’d take my comment littorally.

    Anyway: Iceberg, Wallberg, what’s the difference?


  9. Chappie: The ice keeps the swelling down.

    Larry: Well, I’m learning how to be pedantic from a certain Peeved Pussy.


    • And annoying too, you young punk.

      And by the way, about that picture up there, that weirdo in the funny beard plagiarized my blog to get that stuff. I want him to shave, immediately.


  10. I have a physics degree, but Jack David’s knowledge must be far beyond mine. For instance this:

    … dark matter has certain fluid slower and colder properties which is in accordance with the writtings such that extant a formless and void earth …

    to my limited abilities merely sounds like a random grouping of words and word-shaped collections of letters.

    I should probably have thrown a few [sic]s in that quote, but I’ll leave that to y’all.


    • desert,

      I don’t have a degree in physics, but it seems perfectly straightforward to me.
      Dark matter, which is potable if warmed… er… hang on, hang on – I’ve got it. Potable if warmed but if ingested after the sell-by date causes botox-like symptoms and diarrhea.


  11. The ice keeps the swelling down.

    As if that would help.


  12. Why use the complicated maths invented by non-Christians to describe the reality around us. Just accept the Love of God as expressd through the Sacrifice of His only begotten Son through the Crucifixion and Ressurection which gives us sinners the only way to avoid eternal damnation as it is recorded in the Holy Bible.


  13. Desertscope: Thanks for joining in. Hope to hear from you more often. His pseudo-scientific woo word salad, in different itterations, shows up about three times a year. And it never makes sense.

    Chappie: It’d make me feel better.

    Matthew: Again, the Bible says pi=3. The reason we use math is that math actually works to describe reality. Physical reality.


  14. Get real. NOBODY back than had measured pi to anything closer than three. It wasn’t until Christians began developing math to understand Gods Creation that the number was refind to what we used today. The Bible is Realiyt. The only Reality we as sinful flawed humans need in order to understand our place in God’d Holy Creation.


    • bzzzt, wrong! The Babylonians and the Egyptians already had more accurate measurements, and Archimedes got as close as 3.142715 over two hundred years before your bff Jesus was even a twinkle in Big Daddy’s eye.

      Facts have never gotten in the way of your polemic, though, have they?


      • Facts get in your way all the time. You won’t even recognize th e Truth of the Holy Bible. Atheists all they ever to is deny Truth.

        And as God-hater’s are so fond of saying around here: citations please. prove it. Or shut up.


    • I have to jump in here, though I know I’m about a week late. The Egyptians used 22/7. When I read about that, I began to use that for all my back-of-the-envelope calculations. An error of 0.04% is really close for all but high-precision purposes. I am not sure when they arrived at that number, but it may well have been before the young-Earth creationists even claim Jeebus (or Yahweh, or Madonna, or whoever) crapped the universe into existence.

      But other than that, I agree with you. The Bible is Realiyt.


  15. citations please. prove it. Or shut up.

    There are these things called ‘search engines’ that are quite remarkable little inventions: googling ‘history of pi’ brings up tons of hits, but if that is too much of a challenge you can search for ‘pi’ in wikipedia.org to learn more than you ever wanted to know about it. Here is a shorter summary: A Brief History of π

    A Chinese mathematician (Zu Chongzhi) also beat the Europeans by about 1300 years.


  16. Matthew: Pointing and laughing. Really hard.

    Ildi: Thanks.


  17. (((Billy))):

    Tell us again why you seem to have adopted Matthew… the pathetic little creep is not going to be happy until someone nails him to a cross, sticks a shiv in his side, and worships him. He has the brains of a curling stone, the wit of Nixon’s five o’clock shadow, and a desperate desire for martyrdom (why else hang out here…)

    Hell, whenever I feel the need to get aggravated I come to iambilly.wordpress.com, because I know little Matthew will be hanging out, spewing nonsense, and slavering to get bashed about. I can’t help it – he brings out the AntiChrist in me.

    (Actually, I suspect he’s a demon, but that’s in another comment I smacked him with.) (Doesn’t do any good, of course, but us old guys got to get our jollies somehow – might as well beat up on martyr wannabes.)


    • Grumpy,

      I had a friend in the Army named Josh. That is Joshua. Joshua Jericho. As in the famous ridiculous Bible story. His brothers were (not kidding) Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. I get the idea this is the kind of “Matthew” we are looking at here.


      • I think you’re right. Fascinating crew, those guys. None of them were alive during the whole Jebus affair, they don’t even agree on what happened or who was there, and yet the believers take what they say as unvarnished truth. Truth is, the church did a lot of varnishing over the centuries.


  18. Rec, happiness comes in the personal surrender tothe Love of the One True God as expressed through the Sacrifice of His only Begotten Son. Christ was crucified by the Jews so that we as sinful and fallen human beings could be Saved. Being Saved is the only way to happiness. Jesus died so that I will not.

    As to why I am here, I dont know. I try very hard to be understanding of the ignorant and foolish rantings of God haters, Satan worshippers, Darwinists and other anti-American anti-Christian advocates of devil worship.

    Here are some questions for you:

    Why do you hate God?

    Why do you abuse those who recognize the reality of God?

    Why do you abuse yourself by refusing to accept the Love of God?

    When will you accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?

    Think carefully about these questions. They mean the difference between Heaven and Hell.


    • Why do you hate God?

      I don’t. Can’t hate what doesn’t exist. I just can’t stand pathetic, mindless little creeps like you who blither and blather superstitious nonsense.

      Why do you abuse those who recognize the reality of God?

      Because you act like brain-dead zombies; because you’re arrogant and ignorant – a bad combination; because you don’t have the good grace or sense to go away when you’re not wanted.

      Why do you abuse yourself by refusing to accept the Love of God?

      Because I don’t have a girlfriend, so I have to do it myself. There’s no god in the equation.

      When will you accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?

      Well, let’s see, how about next Wednesday? Have him meet me at Hooter’s for lunch. Then we can take in the strip club next door, maybe get a couple of broads to bang. Poor bastard’s been celibate longer than I have.

      BTW, did you miss the memo that said Jesus was a Jew, living in a Jewish community? The Romans crucified the simple fool at the behest of his fellow religionists. That’s assuming the dude existed at all.

      Heaven and Hell? Sonny, maybe you’d be better off just thinking of me as the AntiChrist. Makes your life a lot simpler.


      • Why do you hate God?

        I don’t. Can’t hate what doesn’t exist. I just can’t stand pathetic, mindless little creeps like you who blither and blather superstitious nonsense.

        All humans believe in God; it is part and parcel to how we were Created. To pretend atheism is a form of hatred toward God. Try again.

        Why do you abuse those who recognize the reality of God?

        Because you act like brain-dead zombies; because you’re arrogant and ignorant – a bad combination; because you don’t have the good grace or sense to go away when you’re not wanted.

        I am not arrogant; I am sharing the Truth and spreading the greatest Joy the Earth will ever know. And I know that I am wanted. The Golden Rule says that I should treat others the way that I want to be treated. If I suffered in the wilderness and poverty without the the Love of God I would want someone to witness me and bring me the Good News of Jesus’ Sacrifice for all mankind. Try again.

        Why do you abuse yourself by refusing to accept the Love of God?

        Because I don’t have a girlfriend, so I have to do it myself. There’s no god in the equation.

        I did not mean tat sexually though God-haters tend toward taht. I meant ‘why do you mistreat and damage yourself by not letting God’s Love into your life?’

        When will you accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?

        Well, let’s see, how about next Wednesday? Have him meet me at Hooter’s for lunch. Then we can take in the strip club next door, maybe get a couple of broads to bang. Poor bastard’s been celibate longer than I have.

        You joke about this, but it really is as simple as you think it is. One must only accept the personall intersession of Jesus into one’s life in order to fully be included in th eLove of God. Try again.

        Jesus was crucified by the Jews because He had the Truth. As has been seen here again and again the Truth is not accepted by those who hate God and pretend to be atheists. Jesus brought Good News which was and still is not accepted by the Jews. they can never accept anything good.

        And you are not the AntiChrist. The AntiChrist will or is someone who really thinks they are doing God’s work while actually tearing down the work of God. The AntiChrist will be power hungry, sauve, well-spoken, seemingly kind, eloquent and ready to lead America to perdition. Someone like Obama. Not you.


    • Wait a minute. All of this “Why do you hate god” stuff is suddenly sounding very familiar. Matthew, have you been naughtily commenting over at my place as “Anonymous”?


      • Can you convince him to stay there?


  19. Good fucking Christ, Matthew, you are pathetic. And a waste of breath.


  20. Whi is it that when someone takes down your so-called logic and reality and shows the deeper Truth which underlies the God-given reality we call the earth you resort to swearing and cut off the conversation? You remind me of a seven year old boy who plays a game and then, when he realized he is losing, dumped the game on the floor and stomped out while hurling childish insults at the others he was playing the game with. Grow up and atually answer with your heart. When you do, you will find God waiting there.


    • I did answer with my heart, you twit.

      You’ve been fed enough.


      • But you still hide behind insults and temper tantrums from the Love of God. Ask yourself why?


  21. Krefnela gotha zentli!


    • Channeling Cthulhu?


      • Being Cthulhu. I’ve been taking lessons from the Teaching Company.

        By the way, did you notice that Matthew is a Jew-hating bigot? To wit:

        “Jesus was crucified by the Jews because He had the Truth. As has been seen here again and again the Truth is not accepted by those who hate God and pretend to be atheists. Jesus brought Good News which was and still is not accepted by the Jews. they can never accept anything good.”

        Good little Christian, isn’t he? Squeezed some truth out of the little snotnose, eh?


      • No, I hadn’t caught that. Racist, bigotted, assholish, you name it, he is.


  22. God Bless you. Take care of that cold. 🙂


  23. Come on, Ric, how can you resist gems like this?

    As to why I am here, I dont know. I try very hard to be understanding of the ignorant and foolish rantings of God haters, Satan worshippers, Darwinists and other anti-American anti-Christian advocates of devil worship.

    and

    And you are not the AntiChrist. The AntiChrist will or is someone who really thinks they are doing God’s work while actually tearing down the work of God. The AntiChrist will be power hungry, sauve, well-spoken, seemingly kind, eloquent and ready to lead America to perdition. Someone like Obama. Not you.

    Oooh, snap!

    It’s like he’s channeling Sarah Palin (except she’s not dead – well, maybe brain-dead counts? The supernatural realm is a mysterious place…)

    He’s tons more amusing than some of the trolls I’ve encountered. Think of it, the more time he spends trolling blogs, the less time he spends with that poor wife of his!


    • Someone married the clown? So sad. Maybe we need to do an intervention…

      As for resisting Matthewian gems, it’s just that there are so many of them. And I don’t know why he won’t accept me as the AntiChrist. I’m power hungry, definitely suave and well-spoken, kind to small animals and willing women, certainly eloquent (have you read my blog?), and I could absolutely lead America to progressive perdition. And how does the little twit know I’m not doing god’s work? After all, he doesn’t have a clue about anything else. Maybe it’s because I’m not black. Or Jewish. He doesn’t like Jews, sounds like he doesn’t much care for black presidents.


      • I don’t think ‘Easy Rider’ rakish good looks count as suave in his world. Shave the beard, get a tie… is it really worth it, though? What is the job description for AntiChrist, anyway?

        Pity that hating others seems to be part and parcel of Matthew’s religion.


      • Easy Rider? Puh-leeze! That’s a noble British Triumph I’m riding. But very astute of you to notice the rakish good looks.


      • If you read it closely, he said (wrote?) sauve, not suave. I know what suave is (a shampoo), but what, oh wordsmith extraordinaire, is a sauve?


      • It’s a misspelling of suave. Whassamatta you?


      • Oh. I thought he might be speaking in tongues. The way he types, I think English is his second language. And he doesn’t have a first.


      • Reading it closely is your first mistake… you have to let the crazy just flow over you, like smoke from a hash pipe. Then you will experience inner troof.


      • Ildi, thou art surely wise in thou pipe. The Lion will never be as wise: the smoke makes him cough and his eyes tear.


      • ((()))-

        He’s typing? Damn, I thought he was speaking ildian troof directly into the internet pipes and tubes. Wouldn’t his holiness allow him to do that? I mean, jeez, even I can do that.


      • …and I’m evil.


      • Perhaps “sauve” is short for “Sauve qui Peut”. Save yourselves, people.


      • I doubt he would lower himself to French. After all, if English was good enough for Jebus, it’s good enough for him.


      • Bite your tongue, (((Billy)))! Jebus spoke American, not English.


      • Sorry. Forgot about “My Fair Lady”:
        There are even places it has completely disappeared;
        In America, they haven’t spoken it for years.


  24. Ric: I have not adopted the twit. He is a monument to my open commenting policy. I will admit, though, that Matthew makes me reconsider. However, as long as he doesn’t discover the copy/paste function like Abe did, he’s free to make a fool of himself. And he’s making the most of that freedom.

    Ildi: Oddly, he sounds an awful lot like Abe who did get banned. Different computer, though.

    How does on channel a brain-dead still living zombie?


    • I’m such a hateful troglodyte that I’d ban him in a minute. He’s just too stupid to bear. And he appears to be a racist bigot.


  25. […] the Atheist posted this terrific graphic that is every-so-worthy of […]


  26. I am not racist or bigoted, I am honest. I am honest about people and about God — unlike so-called atheists.

    I try to add something useful, a realistic point of view, and get insulted. Maybe Abe was right and this rally is a hate site. None of you seem the least bit interested in hearing the Good News of Salvation, or even debating hte gaping wholes in your professed relgioin.

    And Ric has apparently already banned me as I cannot comment there to disagree with his hate filled diabtibes. Open and free? Only with Christ in your Heart. Atheists? If you agree wth them they let you speak otherwise we are either banned or ridiculed. Luckily America’s Founding Fathers used Christianity as ahte basis for law which is why we have freedom of speech.


    • Oh, puhleeze! America’s founders did not use Christianity as the basis for law. In fact they specifically refused to reference any religion when they cobbled together the Republic, and they did that to prevent fundo freaks like you from imposing your ignorance and arrogance on others.

      As for honesty, spare me. Your comments on the Jews mark you as a bigot. Period. As for banning you, I don’t remember if I did or not. If you showed up, I’m sure I did. Free speech isn’t about going onto someone’s blog and spewing your peculiar mix of stupidity, arrogance, ignorance, and religious pus and not reaping consequences.

      Nor have you ever added anything useful in all the posts I’ve seen, and your point of view certainly isn’t realistic (unless you live in an insane asylum).

      Maybe you should take a clue that when people don’t want to hear your nonsensical good news of salvation perhaps you should shut up and go away to find a more willing audience. Blowing the same smoke out of your ass around here time after time and expecting a different result is a textbook definition of insanity.

      You’re a fruitcake, Matthew. You’re ignorant, you’re uninformed, you’re gullible, you’re not very bright on the evidence you’ve presented, and you’re determined to be a victim.

      You talk about logic and reason and then prove over and over again that you have no idea what those words mean, what they require, and how much work they actually entail. You parrot religious dogma and call it logic and reason when your noise amounts to squawks in the night from an untutored mind ignorant of logic, devoid of reason.

      You talk about your god and then spit on everything and everyone who disagrees with you.

      You call atheism a religion, which it most assuredly is not, and yet most atheists probably know more about your religion than you do, which is one reason they reject it, and when you go on and on about it in that arrogant manner you have, in the midst of a den of unrepentant, committed atheists, that is why they reject you.

      And trust me on this, you’d be one of the first to sign up as a guard at a Nazi concentration camp so you could make the world a better place for people like you, and you wouldn’t have a clue when finally the inmates ripped you apart and stuffed your holy book down your throat. You’re one of the good Christians, Matthew, one of the real curses on the backs of humanity.

      You’re obviously not going to piss off and go away, but are intent on remaining both a joke and a curse on any blog that allows you free rein. Which is too bad, because you’re an unpleasant little pissant and pretty much stain everything you touch. Why don’t you go open your own dumbass blog and see how that works out for you? It’s not as much fun trash-talking you when you’re hanging around and mewling your wounded vanity whenever someone chews you up and spits you out.


      • To add to what Ric said, the Founding Fathers were mostly NOT Christians. I actually did the research once (but I’m too lazy to look for it) and found that the first (five or six, I don’t remember) U.S. Presidents were basically deists. Hell, Jefferson even made his own version of the New Testament, removing all the magical bullshit.


      • NO. Although there were a few deistss among the founding fathers, most were Christians. No Catholics. No Jews. No atheists. No Muslims. No Buddhists. No Shintos. No Jews. Just Christians. And they formulated a Christian document based on Christian principles and Christian teachings.


      • Wrong again, Matthew. You must have been home-schooled. Or institutionalized in the Baby Jeebus Home For Really Pathetic Children. With all the information sources available to you, in libraries, on the net, hell, in your daily newspaper, you can’t get anything right. No wonder you babble on forever that pus-laden dogma your religious books feed you. A person would have to either nuts or just like you to take you seriously. Except maybe a psychiatrist – definitely, a shrink would take you seriously. What a case study he’d have in you!


  27. Laws are based on the earlyiest laws known to man the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were handed down from God to the Jews who were the Womb in which the world was prepared for the Good News of Jesus Christ. Therefore our laws are from God. The Constitution recongizes this in the very wording used. Why are the Bill of Rights numbered one through ten? Same reason there are Ten Commandments.

    Honesty is only attainable through God. You deny God and thus cannot be honest.

    maybe I will start a blog. I garuntee that I won’t ever ban anyone even someone as filled with hatred as you.


    • Like I said, you’re full of shit.


      • I know you are but what am I is the best you can come up with? You are sad adn pitiful.

        Goodbye.

        And God Blesses You. Every day. Please recognize His kindness.


    • The Constitution recongizes this in the very wording used. Why are the Bill of Rights numbered one through ten? Same reason there are Ten Commandments.

      Awesome logic! Why did I never see this? Look, I have ten fingers, that must mean something, too! (wiggles fingers…)

      Wait, what was I saying?

      Oh, yeah, should I bother pointing out my man Hammurabi’s code? The Ham-meister would not be pleased at being dissed in such a fashion… His laws were written on a stone tablet standing over eight feet tall! Take that, Moses! Babylonians rock! They figured out pi and had laws and everything way before those pussy Christians!

      Oh, yeah, and that there are actually 67 or 14 or 113 or 613 or 252 commandments, depending on who’s counting?

      (starts wiggling toes…)


      • Sorry, Ildi. Can’t help. I can only count to 21. And didn’t Ham’uraibi’s code predate the fictional ten commandments of Moses?


      • ildi rocks!


  28. Sigh. I really should ban the twit but that just strikes me as wrong. Are his assinine theosadistic rantings really that bad?

    Honesty is only attainable through God. You deny God and thus cannot be honest.

    He makes a good case for it.


    • You gotta face it, (((B))), some people aren’t fit to be heard. Maybe you’re inured to him from long suffering, but he’s not even amusing. Actually, he’s pretty disgusting. He’s the kind of guy who hurts people through his words, and actions, and lays the responsibility for the pain he causes onto his god. Sick puppy. And boring.


      • I usually ignore his delusional, bigoted religious non sequitors, but unfortunately I suffer from
        SIWOTI syndrome on occasion (causes sleep deprivation, but it’s usually not fatal), so I can’t resist presenting a closer approximation to the truth whenever he tries to vomit up a ‘fact.’


      • Ric: I respectfully disagree. Everyone has a right to be heard. Hearing someone and actually listening to them are (to me) two different things. “I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Voltaire had it right.

        The best ideas can only rise to the top through an exchange of ideas. If I find those ideas (and (in this case) the way those ideas are presented) repellent, it is up to me to either disregard (if I know (as in this case) that arguing would be pointless) the idea or present my counter argument. Sometimes one argument wins, sometimes the Marxist dialectic kicks in and we end up with a synthesis (rare, but it does happen). Maybe I’m just young and naive (well, young compared to some).

        Ildi: When I first began commenting and then blogging, I suffered from sever SIWOTI syndrome and it took me a while to realize that I cannot, while retaining my sanity and marriage, deal with even a tiny fraction of the idiocy found on the internet.


    • Go ahead and ban me. You want a sight where everyione agrees with you. The only way to stop the spread of the Gospel is banning.


      • Your gospel is that feeble? Wow! It’s got you fooled.


  29. SIWOTI!! That’s wonderful. I’m laughing and I haven’t had my morning coffee yet.

    As to the free speech dilemma that (((B))) is experiencing, even the Supreme Court, when it was more rational and less corrupt, recognized that free speech is not an absolute right. “Fire” in a theater and so on.

    I see a blog’s comment area as a place to have some fun, to banter, to engage in serious critical argumentation through the application of critical thought, depending on the blog, depending on the subject.

    But when a commenter demonstrates no capacity for any of those things but opts to parrot dogma in an attempt to sell his own brand of stupidity, then he’s earned the right to be booted from the conversation.

    That’s particularly true of the fundogelical freaks like Matthew. There cannot be a serious argument that relies on critical thought with people like that. I doubt there’s anyone who visits this blog who doesn’t know that from experience.

    Nor can there be fun or banter with them. They either don’t know how, or they’ll use it to push their religious agenda at the first slight opening.

    Matthew’s right about one thing. I’m a hater. I despise people like him, I despise what they stand for, I despise what they do. In a perfect world they would wall themselves up in monasteries and drive each other insane.

    So, should Billy ban the Matthews? Or at least the current version? Obviously I would on Grumpy Lion, if I haven’t already. Billy has a wider appreciation of humanity than I do and is more willing to let the crazoids in. I think that’s admirable, but unpleasant and unnecessary and useless for the purposes of a blog. I see the Matthews as unpleasant and useless in that they contribute nothing to the conversation. They don’t even make good blogpets.

    I think it’s an interesting question: Where do you draw the line, if you do draw the line?

    Thoughts?


    • As I said above, I’m rather vehement about defending free speech for all, especially those with whom I disagree. Matthew may be a special case — I disagree with his world view, his politics, his theology, his theocratic paradigm. No question there. Is this a valid outlet for his stream-of-consciousness rantings? For me, it is a qualified yes.

      I say qualified because he still may piss me off enough to warrant a ban. So far, I have banned two people, both for the same offense: cut and paste hammer-commenting. Both Mickey and Abe dumped multiple (30+) editions of the same comment on 30+ posts. I guess that, right now, that is where I draw the line.

      I will continue to put down what I see as poor arguments. I will continue to call out right-wing propaganda. I will continue to ridicule those who will not or cannot understand what a theory is. I will continue to, when I feel it is necessary, insult commenters in return.

      I have seen too many blogs (mostly on the right, but some on the left) who seem to cull the comments so that everyone agrees with the blogger. If I wanted to do that, I’d sit in the bathroom with a megaphone and talk to myself. That’d be boring. Half the time, I’d know what I was going to say next.

      I have to admit I’m a little sensitive on this. I have been accused, by a couple of commenters, of deleting comments. I do not, nor will I in the future, delete comments. The way I look at it, if someone wants to be a total rapidly-oxidizing rectum, that is their right.

      I don’t view this as a black-and-white, right-or-wrong situation. Each person has his or her own comfort level. As a part-time blogger who occasionally rises above the ordinary (not often enough, obviously), this rather unmoderated policy works for me. For now.


      • We don’t disagree all that much, actually. But I’m not sure there is a difference between your cut-and-paste attackers and a Matthew who essentially pastes the same bits of his mind over and over, leaving the conversation at a dead end whenever he opens his mouth/keyboard.

        As for rising above the ordinary, I think you may have done so with the phrase ‘total rapidly-oxidizing rectum’, though I’m not sure what it means. Sounds like it hurts, though.


      • The difference I see is that he actually responds (in his demented fashion) to either the post or the comments. The cut and paste shit was verbatim repetition.

        “Total rapidly-oxidising rectum” equals “total flaming asshole.” (And I bet that Babelfish would translate that in an interesting manner.)


      • To be pedantic, as is my wont, ‘verbatim’. Wait a minute, let me put that up on the scoreboard…

        Apparently my morning coffee failed me, or I really am really old, because I missed the whole translation of ‘tr-or’.

        M’s responses aren’t legitimate though. They’re bits of dogma he pulls out and pastes. They may not be verbatim repetition, but it’s always the same old shit. Fine line, I guess.


      • Fixed the verbatim.

        Regarding the TR-OR, fire is rapid oxidation. Make sense now?

        I’ll agree that 90% of Matthew is variations on the whole love God or He will punish you theme. But the bit about burning babies is original. Wait. Old Testament. Never mind.


      • Yeah, my day isn’t complete unless I’ve cooked at least one baby on the barby.

        I got the r-o thing. It just took a bit for my high school chemistry to come back to me. I’m actually quite bright for an old guy (after I’ve had my coffee).


      • They had fire back then?


      • Fire. An alphabet. Wimmen. Spears. Toyotas. We wuz right in the thick of high tech.


      • Yeah, but back then the Toyotas actually came to a stop before running up the ass of the next car.


  30. Well, now that I have been thouroughly trashed and insulted by the welcoming, free speech respecting, tolerant atheists, I guess I should apologize. I’m sorry. I’m sorry I thought that our host’s welcome to new commenters meants omething. I’m sorry I thought that free speech meant anything to lefty athiests anything more than I respect your right to say what I agree with. I’m sorry that your tolerance of my different ideas is non-existent. I’m sorry that none of you here are willing to even entertain the idea that God may exist. I’m sorry that you are narrow-minded anti-Christian bigots who are only interested in hereing yourselfs talk. You will probabley hear from me again, but, given this level of abuse and hatred, hatred stated outright by Ric, I will do so less often. An d I will be very careful not to break Billy’s free sppeech rules about responding only to the what he hsas written, not what others have sasid in response. If I feel I can agree which is not likely, I will.

    God Bless all of you. I hope you find the Good News of Salvation before the Day of Judgement. God Loves you. All you need to do is accept His love.


  31. (((Billy))): Did the evil troll who shall remain nameless (first letter G) not infest your blog? He was scary, like find out who you are and where you live and stalk you personally scary. His twisted, pornographic posts were depressing. I prefer to pretend men like that don’t exist, though the fact that he was a Xian didn’t surprise me at all. I think even SI finally either started to monitor his posts or banned him outright, I’m not sure what happened to him there.

    I’m all about free speech, i.e., government not controlling your speech. A blog is like your home, though, and I think it’s up to the individual blogger to set tolerances. Now, if you don’t mind people spilling their beers and knocking over lamps and pissing on your TV (true story), then let them stay. Others have such fine china and white carpets and ‘proper’ language that I don’t want to hang out there.


    • Ildi, remember that free speech is a Christian ideal. We all hav e the freedom to spread the Word of God to those who cry out for His intercession. So called atheists the ones who lie to themselbes about God are the ones who try to ban Christians from government and the school and contrl what people can say.

      Please note that I am responsindg to comments. I hope that this is acceptable beavior on my part.


      • Wrong again, on all counts. Come on, Matthew, if you’re going to hang around here and annoy people, at least show some smarts, get some facts straight. For chrissake, do or say something intelligent.


      • You mean like these evil people in North Carolina?

        Effort to Remove Atheist From City Council

        Oh, wait, ’cause you know, the frigging North Carolina Constitution still contains language disqualifying officeholders “who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”

        They have pretty good meds nowadays for controlling paranoid delusions. You should consider checking into that.


  32. Ildi: Oddly, the G-man never hit my spot. Not sure why.

    I used to subscribe to the ‘blog as home.’ I’ve changed my thinking on that. My blog is an informal newstand or coffeehouse. People stop by to read or talk. Some are assholes. Most aren’t. I think each one of us has a different tolerance level within our coffeehouse — for me, the line-crossing comes, as I said above, in the copy-paste in multiple places ad nauseum.

    And at the very least, a blog is easier to clean up then a coffeehouse. Or a pissed-on TV.


  33. I’m sorry, guys, but this thread has been hilarious. Except for the dangerous vein obviously throbbing in Ric’s temple, that is.

    I am sad, though, that I found it less comical as time went, and I began to fantasize about punching Matthew really hard in whatever organ produces spelling and grammar.

    Please, Matthew, for the love of your invisible friends, quit using the phrase “so-called.” If you had a handful more IQ points, you would understand how you are embarrassing yourself.


    • des –

      I don’t do temples. Or cathedrals.

      In another vein, though, I do enjoy dishing out a good verbal pounding, though. I mean hell, why blog if you can’t hurl nouns and verbs at the hapless? It is of course more fun when the object of abuse has the wits and brains to fight back. In that regard, Matthew is unarmed. Attacking him is like kicking a Cabbage Patch doll to death. But attacking him is also an act of defending the realm of sanity and reason against the psychogelicals. They can’t be allowed to run loose, or they will throw food on the floor, kick the cat, and piss on the television, the radio, and the computer, and knock down the house.


      • So far you, Ric, are the biggest abuser here. I feel sorry for your cat.


      • You really are as dumb as I think you are. It’s amazing. But least you reaffirm my faith in the stupidity of psychogelicals.


      • Seriously, Matthew. Give it a break.

        And to everyone else: does anyone know a good exterminator? I need one on my blog.

        Larry?


      • Do you think anyone other than Matthew will think less of you if you ban the twit, banning being the moral equivalent of exterminating?

        Man up, (((B)))! Get your inner Schwarzenegger fired up and ready to go! Terminate! Terminate! Terminate!

        Actually, you’d probably be doing M a favor, as he seems so desperately to want to be martyred. It might be the nicest thing you could do for him, fulfilling his religious and psychic fantasies.

        🙂


    • (((B)))

      I over-thoughed the first sentence of the second paragraph. Could you do me a favor and strike the second one? It might mess up my reputation with the pedantic old grammarians.

      Thanks.


      • You overthought the first of the second but want me to strike the second of . . . what?


      • ‘though’, not ‘thought’ — I put two ‘though’s in the sentence. I offended myself and the gods of grammar. Not to mention the stellar quality of your fine blog.

        [BTW: inchoherent] 🙂


      • shit. incoherent… no fairsies, I haven’t had my coffee yet…


  34. Ric: I have no inner Schwarzenegger. Never have, never will.

    As far as barring him, it takes a lot. Threats would do it (not the ‘you will burn in hell if you don’t believe in my magical skydaddy exactly the same way I do’ kind). So does the copy/paste phenomenon. Other than that, if he wants to be an incoherant ass, by all means, he can.


    • Damn, and here I was hoping you’d go all Predator and Commando on his ass. Ah, well, so much for cheap thrills.

      🙂


  35. Creation vs. evolution:
    Creation= Intelligent Designer=all existence is planned.
    Evolution=random selection=innumerable atomic and sub-atomic accidents.
    Science is not exclusive to either evolutionists or creationists.
    Evolution=presently considered by a perceived (since it can not be determined either way) majority as the truth. This change in perception can be attributed, in large part, to the work of Charles Darwin in the mid 19th century, Albert Einstein in the 20th century, and many other scientists past and present. A main tenet of evolutionists is that science and creationism are incompatible.
    Creation=with the exception of ancient Greeks who considered science an intellectual exercise, not a practical application, from around 600 B.C., science originated in the 16th-17th century A.D.. A main tenet is that science is a means of identifying the creator. Here are some examples:
    Francis Bacon- considered the father of modern science—said “There are two books on which we should read. One was Scripture, the other the book of nature.”
    Johannes Kepler- Celestial Mechanics — said scientists are “thinking God’s thoughts after Him.”
    Sir Isaac Newton, arguably the greatest scientist of all time,-calculus and dynamics— is quoted as saying…”this most beautiful system of sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all and account of His Dominion He is wont* to be called Lord God.” And,
    “Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance.”
    Other creation believing scientists include:
    Louis Pasteur- bacteriology.
    Lord Kelvin-energetics
    Blaise Pascal-hydrostatics
    Charles Babbage-computer science
    Lord Joseph Lister-antiseptic surgery
    Robert Boyle-chemistry
    James Simpson-anesthesiology
    Samuel Morse-telegraphy
    Belief doctrines for the beginning of all existence:
    Creationists believe in the formation of all things by The Almighty God, in 6 literal days.
    Evolutionists currently believe that nothing exploded nothing else, nowhere, thus the big bang created all that exists. This belief should be left open to change based on future scientific discoveries.

    * From Wikipedia, in the list of commonly misused English words:
    Won’t is a contraction for “will not”, while wont is a rare, slightly archaic word meaning “accustomed” or “inclined to” (as an adjective) or “habit or custom” (as a noun).


  36. Can’t tell what exactly your point is, bud, in all that mess of verbiage.

    But your last bit about the big bang has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution is about life adapting, not about the origins of the universe.

    As for all those so-called creationists among scientists, their religious belief had little to do with the science they did, and whatever supernatural beliefs they might have had had no effect on the laws of physical world that they discovered. You won’t find too many creationists among modern scientists outside the confines of loony bins like Liberty University and the nutcases in the ID movement.

    As for the ancient Greeks, they did some legitimate science and they did a lot of math, as did societies before them (Egypt, Babylonia, etc).

    As for science’s main tenet being to identify the creator, please, if you want to live in the Dark Ages ruled by the ignorance of religion, go ahead, but don’t drag your nonsense out into the light of day where it will shrivel into nothing. Science is about discovering how the real world, the empirical world, works, and science can save your ass from the bad stuff in the real world, where religion will get you and lots of other people killed, as it usually does.

    And all the discoveries of science are considered open to change based on the development of further factual evidence, which cannot be said of religion, which chooses to live by unproven and unprovable absolutes that have no basis in fact or evidence.

    Crap, I’m sick of you assholes. Go peddle your stupidity to your co-religionists so you can all kiss each others’ asses to justify your ignorance.


  37. Bud: You appear to be a clueless parrot.

    Ric: Making cold slaw out of word salad?


  38. But cole slaw is salad, according to the latest scientific theory on the origins of slaw. Or have I slewed the slaw views?


  39. I think you have a slawed view of salad. Cole slaw (oddly, until today, I thought of it as cold slaw) is chopped cabbage and mayo. Real salad has marshmallows, jell-o and kool whip.


  40. Yeah, it was named after Nat King Cole. Bet you didn’t know that either.

    Do real men eat real salad? Or is your version just for slathering on women… oh never mind.


  41. So if you tost with salad, does one say salud? And wasn’t Nat King Cole the jolly one?


  42. Ah, geez, you’ve been into the (((Scotch))) again.

    And no, he wasn’t. There were only seven, and none named Jolly. There was Happy, though. Perhaps you’re confused.


  43. There was Happy, Gay, Sleezy, Boozy, Doobie, Doc, Spanky, and, hm. Can’t remember the last one.

    No Scotch involved tonight. Just a normal Thursday night.


  44. Ummm… okay. Whatever you say. It’s gonna be okay. There, there.


  45. Who was the seventh?

    Oh. The seventh. That would be D, A, C, F#.


  46. Oy!


  47. I’m sorry, do you prefer minors? That would be D, F and A. That better?


  48. hey there and thank you for your information – I have definitely picked up anything new from right here. I did however expertise several technical issues using this web site, since I experienced to reload the web site lots of times previous to I could get it to load correctly. I had been wondering if your web hosting is OK? Not that I’m complaining, but slow loading instances times will often affect your placement in google and can damage your high-quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords. Well I am adding this RSS to my e-mail and can look out for much more of your respective fascinating content. Ensure that you update this again very soon..


  49. Thank you for any other informative site. Where else may just I am getting that type of info written in such a perfect method? I have a mission that I’m just now running on, and I have been on the look out for such information.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: