New Donald Trump Video Shows Hillary Clinton Barking Like a Dog

Trump is going to dredge the sewers of misogyny
Politics • Views: 57,540

Now that Hillary Clinton appears to have the Democratic nomination all but locked up, here’s the intellectual level you can expect Donald Trump to take when attacking her. He posted this ad to his Instagram account today; it intersperses a clip of his strongman pal Vladimir Putin being a strong manly man practicing judo, with a clip showing Hillary Clinton barking like a dog. Trump’s knuckle-dragging fans are sure to guffaw about this one.

Instagram

Is this what we want for a President?

As a former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy experience puts Donald Trump to shame; Trump has zero foreign policy experience, and his advisers… well, he has none.

And of course, the Clinton clip is ludicrously out of context; when Clinton “barked” like that she was actually mocking the Republican Party.

“One of my favorite, favorite political ads of all time was a radio ad, rural Arkansas, where the announcer said, ‘Wouldn’t it be great if somebody running for office said something, we could have an immediate reaction as to whether it was true or not,’ ” the Democratic presidential candidate told an audience during a rally in Reno, Nev.

“‘Well, we’ve trained this dog,’” she continued, paraphrasing the ad. “‘And the dog, if it’s not true, he is going to bark. And then the dog was barking on the radio. And so people were barking at each other for days after that.’

“I’m trying to figure out how we can do that with the Republicans. We need to get that dog and follow them around, and every time they say these things like, ‘Oh, the Great Recession was caused by too much regulation’ — arh, arh, arh, arh!”

Jump to bottom

264 comments
1
Great White Snark  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:25:59pm

Suggest her campaign run loops of his angry foam at the mouth moments.

2
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:27:42pm

Hillary’s people have to have some dirt on The Donald™. She’s saving the dead hooker stuff for the worst October Surprises ever.

3
Charles Johnson  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:28:20pm

I’m turning on the ads from our new ad supplier again - please let me know right away if you see one of those malware warnings from your browser.

4
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:28:48pm

re: #1 Great White Snark

Suggest her campaign run loops of his angry foam at the mouth moments.

“Beat the living hell out of him! I mean it!”

5
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:29:26pm

Putin wants Trump to become the US President because he knows that Trump doesn’t give a shit about human rights, and that’s good for Putin.

6
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:30:03pm

re: #2 teleskiguy

Hillary’s people have to have some dirt on The Donald™. She’s saving the dead hooker stuff for the worst October Surprises ever.

Maybe. I’m hoping she brings up that he was fined for racial discrimination in housing, that he’s endorsed by Duke, and that his Daddy is said to have been a Klansman.

7
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:30:15pm

re: #5 Nyet

Putin wants Trump to become the US President because he knows that Trump doesn’t give a shit about human rights, and that’s good for Putin.

Yep.

8
Cheechako  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:30:36pm

Several weeks ago, when that barking clip first aappeared, I suggested that clip would come back to haunt her. (Can’t find the comment to repost).

9
Belafon  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:30:57pm

I would just put Obama’s Correspondent’s dinner takedown of Trump in a commercial.

10
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:32:01pm

re: #7 HappyWarrior

Yep.

To add more nuance: strictly speaking none of the R candidates care about human rights, but only Trump (to my knowledge) is a Putin apologist.

11
Belafon  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:32:28pm

As for responding to the commercial, she should just put out a statement saying “See, they can’t even put a commercial out that doesn’t set off the Republican lie detector.”

12
FormerDirtDart  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:32:38pm
13
Decatur Deb  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:32:49pm

re: #3 Charles Johnson

I’m turning on the ads from our new ad supplier again - please let me know right away if you see one of those malware warnings from your browser.

One of the partner ads says stunning new evidence suggests Jesus wasn’t nailed to a cross. Doing C14 tests on ancient velcro must be a bitch.

Other than that, nothing weird.

14
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:33:07pm

re: #10 Nyet

To add more nuance: strictly speaking none of the R candidates care about human rights, but only Trump (to my knowledge) is a Putin apologist.

Yeah I haven’t heard Cruz or Kasich praise Putin. You’re right though. Trump flat out does not care about human rights at all.

15
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:34:18pm

re: #12 FormerDirtDart

[Embedded content]

Yeah because Scalia sure protected the Constitution great. // Pathetic GOP. They really do deserve a left wing Scalia one day to mock their absurdest interpretation of the Constitution that they get from playing Ouija board with the founders.

16
Belafon  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:36:15pm

re: #12 FormerDirtDart

17
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:37:58pm

This is just pure desperation. His polling numbers in head to head general election matchups are plummeting and knows he’s supplied her campaign with a lifetime of material for much more devastating return fire in the general election. Also, the ads her team creates then will have the benefit of actually being substantive, demonstrating beyond all doubt that he lacks the intelligence and temperament for the Presidency. They won’t be smarmy little retarded hack jobs like this, but a relentless series of body blows, karate chops and uppercuts.

18
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:38:09pm

re: #16 Belafon

[Embedded content]

Exactly. He’s president from 2013-17. He won. They just can’t accept that Scalia died in his term and they’re resorting to out right lies about a tradition that has never existed before. The voters chose Obama over that asshole Romney and the GOP just can’t respect that voters choice. Really, fuck them.

19
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:38:55pm

So there’s this new atheist blog network focusing on social justice and feminism:

the-orbit.net

20
Charles Johnson  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:39:50pm

Trump knows exactly what he’s doing when he posts fucked up stuff like this. He’s appealing directly to the right wing cavemen that make up a huge part of his support base.

21
The Engineer Lobuno  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:40:42pm

Sure, it’s a low brow ad, something that the right wing would come up with, but I’m underwhelmed by it. Maybe because I left middle school so long ago, I can’t feel the connection.

22
Brian J.  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:40:51pm

re: #20 Charles Johnson

Trump knows exactly what he’s doing when he posts fucked up stuff like this. He’s appealing directly to the right wing cavemen that make up a huge part of his support base.

Of course, the obvious problem that will have Republicans guzzling Maalox straight from the bottle is that everyone else can see it too.

23
Great White Snark  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:41:02pm

re: #5 Nyet

Putin wants Trump to become the US President because he knows that Trump doesn’t give a shit about human rights, and that’s good for Putin.

He also knows that a man easily angered is a man easily manipulated. That thin skin is a bitch for Trump.

24
Belafon  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:41:18pm

re: #19 Nyet

So there’s this new atheist blog network focusing on social justice and feminism:

the-orbit.net

OK. I’m in. They have a Steven Universe review.

25
Joe Bacon  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:42:15pm
26
CuriousLurker  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:42:50pm

*SIGH* Lovely. Okay, I think I need to give up for the day. Gonna go watch that last episode of season two of Bosch on Amazon Prime.

G’nite, lizards.

Mayor and church leaders call for ban on ‘Britain First’ after demo against East London Mosque

Tower Hamlets Interfaith Forum and the local authority have been meeting police chiefs to try and get the ‘Britain First’ movement barred after its members besieged the mosque in Whitechapel on Saturday.

Mayor John Biggs arrived at the mosque after receiving a call about the picketing.

Forum chairman Alan Green, the rector of St John on Bethnal Green church, was out shopping in Whitechapel when he received a desperate call on his mobile from the mosque asking for help.

He ran to the Islamic centre to find pickets carrying crosses and waving Union Jacks and England flags blocking the entrance to the mosque in a face-to-face confrontation with Muslims—then found himself accused of being “a traitor” when he tried mediating. […]

eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk

27
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:43:19pm

re: #19 Nyet

So there’s this new atheist blog network focusing on social justice and feminism:

the-orbit.net

I have a deepseated objection to seeing atheism as a common cause. At best, it’s a common lack of belief, like not believing in pixies and nymphs. Not a unifying principle. As such, nothing about atheism implies any other beliefs.

But hey, that’s LITERALLY just me, since my perspective precludes me speaking for any atheists but me.

28
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:46:33pm

re: #10 Nyet

To add more nuance: strictly speaking none of the R candidates care about human rights, but only Trump (to my knowledge) is a Putin apologist.

Also Trump is unique in that he’d be the most clearly reckless and easy for Putin to outmaneuver on the world stage. Which is saying something because from what I gather Putin actually kind of sucks at long term strategic thinking. He mostly seems to hold onto power through a combination of a highly corrupted media shaping public opinion, fear, and having had the sheer luck to preside over the dramatic increase in prosperity from 2000 to 2010.

29
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:47:37pm

re: #27 Blind Frog Belly White

True, but the same is true for, say, sexual orientation. As long as there is social stigma and persecution, people will unite on the basis of things that are otherwise superficial.

30
nines09  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:48:22pm

Right now Trump probably feels like he could be caught in Trump Tower doing blow off a dead strippers boob, with two other strippers in the room servicing Christie and Carson, and a kilo of Peruvian flake scattered on the floor. With a dead guy on 5th Avenue he shot bleeding out. “My people love me. They know my magnificence. Have you seen these hands?”

31
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:48:23pm

re: #25 Joe Bacon

[Embedded content]

Not just Obama, Michelle Obama too.

32
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:48:28pm

re: #29 Nyet

True, but the same is true for, say, sexual orientation. As long as there is social stigma and persecution, people will unite on the basis of things that are otherwise superficial.

True. I don’t blame them for working together because of that. We’re only a few Presidents removed from a President who said he didn’t believe atheists could be patriots in this country.

33
Hal_10000  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:48:34pm

Devastating. If only Clinton had about a million video clips of Donald Trump saying stupid things *in* context.

Oh, wait.

34
Belafon  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:48:52pm

re: #27 Blind Frog Belly White

I have a deepseated objection to seeing atheism as a common cause. At best, it’s a common lack of belief, like not believing in pixies and nymphs. Not a unifying principle. As such, nothing about atheism implies any other beliefs.

But hey, that’s LITERALLY just me, since my perspective precludes me speaking for any atheists but me.

I would completely agree with you, if the religions weren’t involved in politics. But, even though you do not want your lack of belief to be politicized, it has been by the other side. To cross over into mathematics, even zero became a number.

Edited

35
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:49:14pm

re: #33 Hal_10000

Devastating. If only Clinton had about a million video clips of Donald Trump saying stupid things *in* context.

Oh, wait.

I’ll take Donald praising the Chinese response to pro-Democracy activists in 1989 for a 1000, Alex.

36
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:49:18pm

OK, I like Greta Christina, but this is taking it too far IMHO:

the-orbit.net

Because it’s being shared around on social media as a recent piece of writing, I decided that I need to apologize.

The titles of the two pieces were Five Stupid, Unfair, Sexist Things Expected of Men, and Five More Stupid, Unfair, Sexist Things Expected of Men.

I want to extend my apologies for using the word “stupid.” In 2010 I wasn’t aware of the problems with this language. I probably should have been, but I wasn’t. The piece also uses some other ableist language (“insanely rigid but impossibly contradictory”). If you want to understand more about why it’s ableist to use words like “stupid,” “insane,” “crazy,” “dumb,” and “idiot” as insults, please read the excellent piece on this by Ania Bula (my esteemed colleague here at The Orbit), Ableism Challenge. She explains it a lot better than I can.

37
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:49:38pm

re: #29 Nyet

True, but the same is true for, say, sexual orientation. As long as there is social stigma and persecution, people will unite on the basis of things that are otherwise superficial.

Most of my negative reaction is because I absolutely do not want atheism to be seen as another religion or belief system. That way madness lies.

38
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:50:07pm

re: #37 Blind Frog Belly White

Most of my negative reaction is because I absolutely do not want atheism to be seen as another religion or belief system. That way madness lies.

Also reasonable.

39
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:50:42pm

re: #32 HappyWarrior

The polls show that even Muslims - as much as they are hated by millions of yahoos - have (slightly) better chances of being elected than atheists.

40
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:51:03pm

re: #39 Nyet

The polls show that even Muslims - as much as they are hated by millions of yahoos - have (slightly) better chances of being elected than atheists.

Yeah I’ve seen that too.

41
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:52:12pm

re: #37 Blind Frog Belly White

Gotcha.

42
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:53:08pm

re: #30 nines09

Right now Trump probably feels like he could be caught in Trump Tower doing blow off a dead strippers boob, with two other strippers in the room servicing Christie and Carson, and a kilo of Peruvian flake scattered on the floor. With a dead guy on 5th Avenue he shot bleeding out. “My people love me. They know my magnificence. Have you seen these hands?”

Yep. With his Base. The rest of America thinks he’s an obnoxious pig.

43
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:54:16pm

re: #35 HappyWarrior

I’ll take Donald praising the Chinese response to pro-Democracy activists in 1989 for a 1000, Alex.

I’ll take Donald saying Americans’ wages are too high for 500, Alex.

44
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:56:06pm

re: #39 Nyet

The polls show that even Muslims - as much as they are hated by millions of yahoos - have (slightly) better chances of being elected than atheists.

Believers often have a hard time accepting the concept of nonbelief, I’ve observed. They presume that you have simply replaced God (invariably THEIR god) with something else.

I don’t find that with all believers. For example, my own family are mostly believers, and some of them take their belief so seriously as to put their asses on the line as members of Christian Peacekeepers, but they don’t ask me “How can you be a good person without God?”

45
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:58:46pm

re: #43 Big Beautiful Door

I’ll take Donald saying Americans’ wages are too high for 500, Alex.

Donald making fun of women’s looks for 800, Trebek.

46
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 7:59:00pm

re: #43 Big Beautiful Door

I’ll take Donald saying Americans’ wages are too high for 500, Alex.

In answering a question about raising the minimum wage.

47
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:00:39pm

re: #44 Blind Frog Belly White

Believers often have a hard time accepting the concept of nonbelief, I’ve observed. They presume that you have simply replaced God (invariably THEIR god) with something else.

I don’t find that with all believers. For example, my own family are mostly believers, and some of them take their belief so seriously as to put their asses on the line as members of Christian Peacekeepers, but they don’t ask me “How can you be a good person without God?”

I’ve noticed that some think “Oh, you think you’re God.” There’s a lot of threat they feel by people who choose not to believe. The funny thing is I actually want to believe in an afterlife very much but the concept of a Hell and eternal damnation has always alienated me. I never liked the Protestant ethos of having to accept Jesus for heaven because I could not help but to think of the many people who lived generations before there was even organized religion being damned because of that.

48
calochortus  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:00:41pm

re: #44 Blind Frog Belly White

Believers often have a hard time accepting the concept of nonbelief, I’ve observed. They presume that you have simply replaced God (invariably THEIR god) with something else.

I don’t find that with all believers. For example, my own family are mostly believers, and some of them take their belief so seriously as to put their asses on the line as members of Christian Peacekeepers, but they don’t ask me “How can you be a good person without God?”

At least it’s easier to find people who understand that you just don’t believe in the supernatural here in the Bay Area. When we lived in southeastern PA most people just couldn’t fathom not having a religion.

49
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:01:20pm

re: #46 Blind Frog Belly White

In answering a question about raising the minimum wage.

Just think of the jrebz that would be created if the peons could be paid a dollar a day./

50
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:03:03pm

Some atheists do have their God-substitutes. Some believe in fate, karma, influence of planets (astrology) and such. In other social contexts: some replace God with Dear Leader (what are Lenin and Stalin but local deities?).

This doesn’t apply to all atheists.

51
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:03:53pm
52
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:03:53pm

re: #27 Blind Frog Belly White

I have a deepseated objection to seeing atheism as a common cause. At best, it’s a common lack of belief, like not believing in pixies and nymphs. Not a unifying principle. As such, nothing about atheism implies any other beliefs.

But hey, that’s LITERALLY just me, since my perspective precludes me speaking for any atheists but me.

I’ve always thought that atheism is just as much a belief system as a any hardcore Christian sect. There is no empirical data for either position. Even Dawkins has softened his position, joining me in a skeptic bent.

No proof for or against. What I do reject is Theism. The thought that there is an active God, listening and responding to human pleadings is just silly. The Onion had a classic article a few years about a dying boy asking God to heal him. I think the headline was “Dying Boy Asks God To Save Him, God Says No.”

The child’s comment was something along the lines of “Well, at least he answered.”

Which is a cogent comment on the human condition on this poor benighted planet. No one wants to get raped, starve to death, get drowned by a tsunami, have a child with microcephaly, have your child tossed into the air and impaled by a bayonet, get ALS, die in a drone strike when the bad guys live across the street, or get shot by a cop because he’s scared.

But prayer, universal among the vast majority of humanity at some level, doesn’t seem to help (there are no atheists in foxholes).

Actually, there are and were, but probably a lot more Deists (Come on fate! Get me through this!).

53
ObserverArt  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:04:06pm

re: #14 HappyWarrior

Yeah I haven’t heard Cruz or Kasich praise Putin. You’re right though. Trump flat out does not care about human rights at all.

How could he, all Trump cares about is TRUMP®.

54
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:05:01pm

re: #50 Nyet

Some atheists do have their God-substitutes. Some believe in fate, karma, influence of planets (astrology) and such. In other social contexts: some replace God with Dear Leader (what are Lenin and Stalin but local deities?).

This doesn’t apply to all atheists.

I always thought of Marxism as a kind of secular cult with Marx as a prophet promising an inevitable workers’ paradise.

55
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:06:06pm

re: #51 goddamnedfrank

[Embedded content]

It’s true. When you’re a Democrat in a two man race and your best showing with the African-American community is 30%, that’s just bad and it’s a sign of what makes Bernie a weak candidate and his campaign makes it even worse.

56
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:07:23pm

re: #52 austin_blue

I’ve always thought that atheism is just as much a belief system as a any hardcore Christian sect. There is no empirical data for either position. Even Dawkins has softened his position, joining me in a skeptic bent.

No proof for or against. What I do reject is Theism

Rejection of theism is what atheism literally means.

57
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:08:41pm

re: #52 austin_blue

For all of Hitchens’ faults and aggravating stances, he volunteered to be waterboarded and called it torture afterward and he was a clever and loud anti-theist.

58
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:09:24pm

re: #52 austin_blue

I’ve always thought that atheism is just as much a belief system as a any hardcore Christian sect. There is no empirical data for either position. Even Dawkins has softened his position, joining me in a skeptic bent.

No proof for or against. What I do reject is Theism. The thought that there is an active God, listening and responding to human pleadings is just silly. The Onion had a classic article a few years about a dying boy asking God to heal him. I think the headline was “Dying Boy Asks God To Save Him, God Says No.”

The child’s comment was something along the lines of “Well, at least he answered.”

Which is a cogent comment on the human condition on this poor benighted planet. No one wants to get raped, starve to death, get drowned by a tsunami, have a child with microcephaly, have your child tossed into the air and impaled by a bayonet, get ALS, die in a drone strike when the bad guys live across the street, or get shot by a cop because he’s scared.

But prayer, universal among the vast majority of humanity at some level, doesn’t seem to help (there are no atheists in foxholes).

Actually, there are and were, but probably a lot more Deists (Come on fate! Get me through this!).

I believe you are overdefining atheism.

“Is there a god? No, I don’t believe there is.” - that’s atheism. It doesn’t require you to state that you’re CERTAIN there’s no god, just that you don’t believe there is one.

Belief in a god or gods provides a unifying principle for a belief system. Absence of such belief doesn’t.

59
calochortus  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:09:40pm

re: #52 austin_blue

I don’t see how that makes atheism a belief system. In my case it is just a complete and total lack of belief. There are things that would convince me that a deity exists in a heartbeat. I’ve just never seen any of them.
I don’t believe in gods in the same way I don’t believe there is a horse in my kitchen right now. It is possible, but as there is no evidence to support such a belief, it is extremely unlikely.

60
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:11:14pm

re: #52 austin_blue

I’ve always thought that atheism is just as much a belief system as a any hardcore Christian sect.

Atheism in general, being a lack of belief in deities, is no more a belief system than “bald” is a hair color.

It is true that some atheists have an absolute faith that there is no God, I’ve seen such folks. But even such a faith is more reasonable than the absolute faith that there is God, given that there are no objective reasons to think that there is God and there are reasons to think that he’s a human invention. The plausibility of the two opposite theses is not comparable. It could be compared to the absolute faith in existence and non-existence of the Devil: one is not like the other.

61
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:12:08pm

I still avoid the term atheist and use agnostic because of its focus on knowing one’s self and one’s own limitations. I know that my mind is incapable of wrapping itself around / truly understanding the concept of the divine or accepting its existence in this reality. Life, by my measure, is more or less just a bunch of random shit that happens, and trying to ascribe any kind of rhyme or reason to it is pointless.

My operating principal is just try not to be a dick, because shit is bad enough as it is.

62
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:13:12pm

I consider myself agnostic. I honestly don’t know. Not knowing doesn’t define me. I see religion as a complex thing. A force that can do good and evil sometimes at the same time.

63
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:13:51pm
64
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:15:32pm

I am a member of The Church of Our Lady of Perpetual Astonishment, founded by Kurt Vonnegut.

65
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:19:01pm

The concept of Russel’s teapot is helpful here:

Russell’s teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion.[1] Russell wrote that, if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the ground that they cannot prove him wrong.

It is true that we cannot know, in an absolute sense, that there is or isn’t such a teapot in our universe. (In fact, given infinite universes, there will be infinite such teapots purely due to quantum fluctuations.)

The reasonable way to handle the issue is probabilistic: while it’s not 100% certain that there is no such teapot, there is no reason to think that it exists and there are reasons to think that it doesn’t. That makes it very improbable that the teapot exists.

Now if we had two groups of people who had an absolute, 100% confidence that the teapot exists - or not - they would be sharing one thing, namely faith.

But given that the probability of the teapot existing is indeed very low, the believers in its existence are “much more wrong” than the other group.

66
mmmirele  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:20:58pm

At work, I’m a member of the Church of Bacon. (There are plaques, not paper signs, actual freaking plaques, telling us we cannot have seafood anywhere on my floor, where a few hundred people work, because someone is allergic. Not that I bring seafood to work, but if bacon is banned, I’m definitely pulling the Church of Bacon card.)

67
nines09  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:21:25pm

Like A Stone

Chris Cornell could bring it. Always liked this since day one. Draw your own conclusions.

Good night and Happy Saint Patrick’s Day come the morn. Bars open early, so breakfast can be served. May your road be easy and your load light. Slainte!

May those who love us love us.
And those that don’t love us,
May God turn their hearts.
And if He doesn’t turn their hearts,
May he turn their ankles,
So we’ll know them by their limping.

68
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:21:52pm

I understand that many people, facing the random shit that happens, cannot stand the thought that nobody’s in charge, and prefer to think “it’s all part of God’s plan”. But that doesn’t compute with me.

For me, the universe makes a lot more sense if nobody’s in charge. If somebody WERE in charge, a lot of things would be hard to explain, and the old dodge of “It’s a mystery!” or worse, “Who are YOU to question God?” really doesn’t cut it. You know, things like cancer, especially pediatric cancer, or genocide. If you believe in an ‘involved’ god, you have to explain those things. If you believe in an UNinvolved god, you might as well not believe in one at all.

69
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:22:27pm

re: #65 Nyet

The concept of Russel’s teapot is helpful here:

It is true that we cannot know, in an absolute sense, that there is such a teapot in our universe. (In fact, given infinite universes, there will be infinite such teapots purely due to quantum fluctuations.)

The reasonable way to handle the issue is probabilistic: while it’s not 100% certain that there is no such teapot, there is no reason to think that it exists and there are reasons to think that it doesn’t. That makes it very improbable that the teapot exists.

Now if we had two groups of people who had an absolute, 100% confidence that the teapot exists - or not - they would be sharing one thing, namely faith.

But given that the probability of the teapot existing is indeed very low, the believers in its existence are “much more wrong” than the other group.

I really hope that someday NASA puts a teapot in orbit there just to fuck with people.

70
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:26:11pm

re: #68 Blind Frog Belly White

I understand that many people, facing the random shit that happens, cannot stand the thought that nobody’s in charge, and prefer to think “it’s all part of God’s plan”. But that doesn’t compute with me.

For me, the universe makes a lot more sense if nobody’s in charge. If somebody WERE in charge, a lot of things would be hard to explain, and the old dodge of “It’s a mystery!” or worse, “Who are YOU to question God?” really doesn’t cut it. You know, things like cancer, especially pediatric cancer, or genocide. If you believe in an ‘involved’ god, you have to explain those things. If you believe in an UNinvolved god, you might as well not believe in one at all.

Lots of people want there to be some mysterious entity to give their lives purpose. But we are all born with a purpose; we evolved to love and care for each other because we are intensely social animals which thrive in a community all working together. What greater purpose do you need?

71
The Ghost of a Cunning Plan  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:27:25pm

re: #69 goddamnedfrank

Sputnik was actually a samovar.

72
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:27:47pm

re: #56 Big Beautiful Door

Rejection of theism is what atheism literally means.

I’ll disagree with that. I’m an agnostic with a Deist bent because I just don’t know. I reserve the possibility that there was something that, at the moment of the Big Bang, a being (thing?) incomprehensible to us, dictated the weak force, the strong force, the gravitational constant, and the speed of light. In other words, I believe in the possibility that a thing created our universe and then walked away. Why not? It’s innocent and doesn’t drive how I react in this existence.

Here’s a funny bit from Roger Zelazny. A gladiator is going into a death match and asks an agnostic priest to “shrive him”.

Insofar as I may be heard by anything, which may or may not care what I say, I ask, if it matters, that you be forgiven for anything you may have done or failed to do which requires forgiveness. Conversely, if not forgiveness but something else may be required to insure any possible benefit for which you may be eligible after the destruction of your body, I ask that this, whatever it may be, be granted or withheld, as the case may be, in such a manner as to insure your receiving said benefit. I ask this in my capacity as your elected intermediary between yourself and that which may not be yourself, but which may have an interest in the matter of your receiving as much as it is possible for you to receive of this thing, and which may in some way be influenced by this ceremony. Amen.

Now, see? That’s killer bee. It’s the real human condition on Earth.

73
Charles Johnson  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:28:12pm
74
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:28:22pm

re: #70 Big Beautiful Door

Lots of people want there to be some mysterious entity to give their lives purpose. But we are all born with a purpose; we evolved to love and care for each other because we are intensely social animals which thrive in a community all working together. What greater purpose do you need?

My view is that life has the purpose you give it. The universe is an amazing and wonderful place, and getting to spend up to 100 years in it is pretty cool, and I don’t want to fuck it up for the next tour group.

75
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:30:02pm

re: #73 Charles Johnson

[Embedded content]

MARTYRDOM!

76
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:30:30pm
77
jaunte  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:30:52pm

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

78
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:30:54pm

re: #9 Belafon

I would just put Obama’s Correspondent’s dinner takedown of Trump in a commercial.

YES. That’s what started this horror.

Well, except for the part where Trump demanded the birth cert.

(need to look up Barantude, his response was heartbreaking)

79
GlutenFreeJesus  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:31:22pm

God’s a kid with an ant farm, lady. He’s not planning anything. - John Constantine

80
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:32:42pm

re: #77 jaunte

[Embedded content]

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

They’re going to ram the choice of a majority of your party down your throat!

81
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:32:59pm

re: #20 Charles Johnson

Trump knows exactly what he’s doing when he posts fucked up stuff like this. He’s appealing directly to the right wing cavemen that make up a huge part of his support base.

Forgive me for catching up & commenting.

Is it the 27% or is he getting more idjits?

82
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:34:17pm

re: #77 jaunte

[Embedded content]

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

Hey kids, I’m a has been asshole who reinvented myself as a right wing fuckwad after 9/11 and haven’t been funny in years. Really no shit that she leads in Superdelegates. That’s just reality because the SDs are seeing who will not only be a better GE candidate but a better President too and they’re rightly convinced that’s Clinton.. I don’t mind the SD system because these officials endorsing are the ones that are going to be dealing with the President elect.

83
jaunte  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:34:38pm

re: #80 Blind Frog Belly White

You can tell he’s a conservative by the popular “jam down your throat” prose styling.

84
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:35:05pm

re: #83 jaunte

You can tell he’s a conservative by the popular “jam down your throat” prose styling.

If I had a dime for everytime a conservative has used that these past seven years, I’d have a huuuuuuuuuuuge amount of money.

85
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:36:02pm

re: #77 jaunte

[Embedded content]

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

Dear Dennis:

Bernie is not a Democrat. He caucuses with them. He’s not part of how the Party is run. He has chosen to have no voice in the process. So your post is brain dead at the start. Please fuck off, and then fuck off some more.

86
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:36:11pm

re: #72 austin_blue

I’ve seen deism being treated both separately from theism and as a part of it. A terminological thing, not a substantive one. Personally, I think it makes more sense to treat the deistic God as just that - God, which makes deism a part of theism.

Anyway, as long as you treat this deity as merely possible - rather than as significantly probable, you would fall under my understanding of atheism, even if you would never use the label yourself. After all, I also don’t reject the mere possibility of any deity existing, and I can also call myself an agnostic (as well as an atheist).

87
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:36:23pm

re: #73 Charles Johnson

THE HONKEYCAUST IS UPON US!!!

88
Kragar  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:37:17pm

re: #73 Charles Johnson

89
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:39:46pm

re: #88 Kragar

Seems to be a bot. All the tweets are the same…

90
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:40:07pm

re: #86 Nyet

I’ve seen deism being treated both separately from theism and as a part of it. A terminological thing, not a substantive one. Personally, I think it makes more sense to treat the deistic God as just that - God, which makes deism a part of theism.

Anyway, as long as you treat this deity as merely possible - rather than as significantly probable, you would fall under my understanding of atheism, even if you would never use the label yourself. After all, I also don’t reject the mere possibility of any deity existing, and I can also call myself an agnostic (as well as an atheist).

Again, there is a fundamental difference between an agnostic (I don’t know) and an atheist (there is no possibility that there is a God).

Pretty basic, isn’t it?

91
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:41:55pm

re: #72 austin_blue

I’ll disagree with that. I’m an agnostic with a Deist bent because I just don’t know. I reserve the possibility that there was something that, at the moment of the Big Bang, a being (thing?) incomprehensible to us, dictated the weak force, the strong force, the gravitational constant, and the speed of light. In other words, I believe in the possibility that a thing created our universe and then walked away. Why not? It’s innocent and doesn’t drive how I react in this existence.

Sure that might be the case. Scientists have been studying whether this universe is actually a computer simulation which would mean we were created by software written by an intelligent agent. I don’t believe in the existence of any such entity without evidence to support its existence, hence I am an atheist.

92
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:41:55pm

re: #90 austin_blue

Again, there is a fundamental difference between an agnostic (I don’t know) and an atheist (there is no possibility that there is a God).

Pretty basic, isn’t it?

But what you’ve just written is not true. And moreover, it has been explained above that it’s not true.

93
calochortus  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:41:57pm

re: #90 austin_blue

Again, there is a fundamental difference between an agnostic (I don’t know) and an atheist (there is no possibility that there is a God).

Pretty basic, isn’t it?

And there is one of the problems with the definition of atheism. It can mean, lack of belief, or a firm belief that there is no God. Two very different things.

94
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:44:06pm

re: #48 calochortus

At least it’s easier to find people who understand that you just don’t believe in the supernatural here in the Bay Area. When we lived in southeastern PA most people just couldn’t fathom not having a religion.

In my circle of friends there is zero religion. We never discuss it, except to comment on how the religious people are being outrageous.

Sure it’s the same most everywhere.

95
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:44:07pm

re: #77 jaunte

[Embedded content]

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

Hillary will win the nomination even if she doesn’t have the support of a single superdelegate.

96
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:44:07pm

re: #93 calochortus

And there is one of the problems with the definition of atheism. It can mean, lack of belief, or a firm belief that there is no God. Two very different things.

And lack of belief in God already includes firm belief in no God,

97
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:44:23pm

re: #96 Nyet

And lack of belief in God already includes firm belief in no God,

As a subset.

98
calochortus  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:46:53pm

re: #96 Nyet

And lack of belief in God already includes firm belief in no God,

I can’t see why that would be. I could be convinced of the existence of God, but either there isn’t such a thing or God prefers me as a nonbeliever.

99
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:46:53pm

re: #95 Big Beautiful Door

Hillary will win the nomination even if she doesn’t have the support of a single superdelegate.

She’s gotten much more of the vote than he has but they’re still crying rigged game. Shrug. Honestly, Bernie blew it in building a base as far I’m concerned. All these Bernie still has a chance are really just not grounded in reality. I hate to shit on someone’s dreams like that but it’s just reality. They can bitch about the SDs all they want but I can add that the Dems didn’t even have to let Bernie, a non Democrat compete in their primary and they did.

100
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:47:33pm

re: #66 mmmirele

At work, I’m a member of the Church of Bacon. (There are plaques, not paper signs, actual freaking plaques, telling us we cannot have seafood anywhere on my floor, where a few hundred people work, because someone is allergic. Not that I bring seafood to work, but if bacon is banned, I’m definitely pulling the Church of Bacon card.)

Bravo!

101
vgranucci  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:47:45pm

re: #12 FormerDirtDart

And the link in the tweet leads to a “when did you stop beating your wife?” type survey.

102
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:48:19pm

re: #88 Kragar

[Embedded content]

This little charmer was the only one so far to like that disgusting Tweet:

103
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:49:04pm

re: #98 calochortus

If you have a firm belief in non-existence, you automatically lack a belief in existence.

That is, lack of belief in existence automatically includes those with firm belief in non-existence.

104
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:49:18pm

re: #77 jaunte

[Embedded content]

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

jam down the throat appears yet again. org. teabaggers.

105
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:50:24pm

re: #99 HappyWarrior

She’s gotten much more of the vote than he has but they’re still crying rigged game. Shrug. Honestly, Bernie blew it in building a base as far I’m concerned. All these Bernie still has a chance are really just not grounded in reality. I hate to shit on someone’s dreams like that but it’s just reality. They can bitch about the SDs all they want but I can add that the Dems didn’t even have to let Bernie, a non Democrat compete in their primary and they did.

Some people invest a lot in a political campaign, hence they spin fanciful scenarios when they are losing. Most Democrats will support Hillary in November, even perhaps a better percentage of Democrats than of Republicans supporting Trump.

106
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:50:30pm

re: #78 Stanley Sea

YES. That’s what started this horror.

Well, except for the part where Trump demanded the birth cert.

(need to look up Barantude, his response was heartbreaking)

With President Obama’s Birth Certificate, Klansman Trump Reminds Blacks They Will Never Be American

107
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:51:11pm

re: #104 Stanley Sea

jam down the throat appears yet again. org. teabaggers.

Its almost like they have an oral fixation of some kind.

108
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:51:28pm

Oh Gawd. The scumbag fuckface leader of the Republican Party in Travis County, TX retweeted a tweet of mine from two freaking weeks ago.

109
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:52:31pm

re: #90 austin_blue

Again, there is a fundamental difference between an agnostic (I don’t know) and an atheist (there is no possibility that there is a God).

Pretty basic, isn’t it?

This is exactly what I meant when I said you overdefine atheism. Atheism is not certainty there is no god. It’s not believing there is one.

From the Merriam Webster online dictionary:

a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

You’re insisting on ‘b’ only, but the rest of us are telling you it’s ‘a’, as well. Sorry, but Merriam Webster trumps you.

110
calochortus  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:52:57pm

re: #103 Nyet

If you have a firm belief in non-existence, you automatically lack a belief in existence.

That is, lack of belief in existence automatically includes those with firm belief in non-existence.

Ahh, yes.

111
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:52:59pm

re: #108 teleskiguy

And one of his knuckle-dragging followers chimes in.

112
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:53:12pm

Some months ago I tried to have a philosophical discussion about atheism and the problem is that atheists seem to be pretty defensive, often at the expense of the coherency of their own views. Believe what you want, I don’t really care, it’s your business, not mine. Just don’t tell me you don’t believe anything, because that is just impossible.

113
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:53:42pm

re: #105 Big Beautiful Door

Some people invest a lot in a political campaign, hence they spin fanciful scenarios when they are losing. Most Democrats will support Hillary in November, even perhaps a better percentage of Democrats than of Republicans supporting Trump.

Yeah I don’t get emotionally invested anymore I’m too worn out for that shit. I just hope for sane candidates with sane ideas. Though I have to say, I think a lot of people do sell Clinton short. I resent Clinton being sold as just adopting the lesser evil and Bernie js voting your heart. It’s not that simple. I’m sure there’s a lot of people especially older women who remember the so called good old days and are thrilled that a woman could be President. It’s wonderful if Clinton does get elected. In 8 years we will have told African Americans and women that they too can aspire to be President.

114
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:53:59pm

re: #108 teleskiguy

Oh Gawd. The scumbag fuckface leader of the Republican Party in Travis County, TX retweeted a tweet of mine from two freaking weeks ago.

[Embedded content]

Creepy dude.

115
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:54:41pm

re: #107 Big Beautiful Door

Its almost like they have an oral fixation of some kind.

Dr. Fraud on line 1.

116
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:54:42pm

re: #108 teleskiguy

Oh Gawd. The scumbag fuckface leader of the Republican Party in Travis County, TX retweeted a tweet of mine from two freaking weeks ago.

[Embedded content]

It’s a good reply, though. It doesn’t attack you in any way but pushes away firmly from Todd Klancannon. I give it a solid ‘B’.

117
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:54:56pm

re: #106 Stanley Sea

[Embedded content]

Watch this.

“for the one, heinous, low class individual who took credit, Donald Trump”

118
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:55:16pm

A quick diagram, also for future use:

119
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:55:25pm

re: #112 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

Some months ago I tried to have a philosophical discussion about atheism and the problem is that atheists seem to be pretty defensive, often at the expense of the coherency of their own views. Believe what you want, I don’t really care, it’s your business, not mine. Just don’t tell me you don’t believe anything, because that is just impossible.

Lolwhut?

120
FormerDirtDart  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:55:54pm

re: #102 Dark_Falcon

This little charmer was the only one so far to like that disgusting Tweet:

[Embedded content]

I guess she needs to head east until she has to swim, then keep going east until she can’t see land in any direction, then keep swimming east till she hits dry land again.
There, where her people came from, I’m sure she’ll find a few friends.
Unfortunately for her she’ll find there are a lot of laws there to control her pathetic hate…

121
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:56:23pm

re: #111 teleskiguy

122
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:57:32pm

Anyone who believes in racial and ethnic purity is an idiot. Shit, I’m proud to be what they call a mutt. I still loved that racist Cobb being discovered to be part African and the British reporter going “Welcome my brother!.” Just priceless.

123
jaunte  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:58:15pm

re: #122 HappyWarrior

They’re no scientists.

124
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:58:31pm

re: #111 teleskiguy

I am a “cuck.” How will I ever redeem myself?

125
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:58:39pm

re: #92 Nyet

But what you’ve just written is not true. And moreover, it has been explained above that it’s not true.

Did I miss something? Was there a proof above? I didn’t see that.

I really don’t want to argue about this. These are matters of faith and belief. I’m an agnostic, I don’t know, and it has no affect on how I live my life. I just try be a good human, help my community, and do no harm to others. The whole God/No God thing is a distraction when we should be concentrating on what we need to do to make our shared existence better for all of us.

Just my 2 cents.

126
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:58:53pm

re: #111 teleskiguy

And one of his knuckle-dragging followers chimes in.

[Embedded content]

It’s delicious that someone who almost certainly opposes gay marriage has chose a gay character (South Park’s) Satan as his avatar.

127
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:58:54pm

I think Robert Morrow got drunk one night told his friends he was going to get eleced as chairman of the Travis County GOP and no one took him seriously until it actually happened. Shit how the fuck does that guy have a job like that while I have my struggles. I mean yeah I sometimes get nervous in interviews but I’m not batshit.

128
Kragar  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:59:38pm

re: #102 Dark_Falcon

129
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 8:59:45pm

re: #123 jaunte

They’re no scientists.

Nope. It’d be boring to be purely one group anyhow.

130
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:00:39pm

re: #129 HappyWarrior

Nope. It’d be boring to be purely one group anyhow.

Not to mention the problem of inbreeding.

131
jaunte  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:00:41pm

Go Langobards!

132
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:01:13pm

re: #128 Kragar

[Embedded content]

None are welcome except my brothers and I at Free Irish German Slovakiaenia but not ethno Slovaks aloud only Rusyns.

133
retired cynic  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:01:32pm

re: #106 Stanley Sea

Wow.

134
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:02:06pm

re: #124 teleskiguy

I am a “cuck.” How will I ever redeem myself?

[Embedded content]

135
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:02:18pm

re: #130 Blind Frog Belly White

Not to mention the problem of inbreeding.

Oh yeah for sure. I do have to chuckle in a way that’s what fucked so many monarchies throughout the world. So obsessed with pure blood that they had all these problems.

136
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:02:46pm

re: #116 Dark_Falcon

It’s a good reply, though. It doesn’t attack you in any way but pushes away firmly from Todd Klancannon. I give it a solid ‘B’.

This is like saying Al Capone was a good guy because he operated soup kitchens.

137
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:02:49pm

re: #125 austin_blue

Did I miss something?

Yes, and not for the first time, because you regularly post your false definition of atheism, regularly get corrected on that, and then, after some time, simply repost it as if nothing happened.

Was there a proof above? I didn’t see that.

The proof is in the pudding dictionary. Here’s OED:

atheism, n.
[…]
Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

atheist, n. and adj.
[…]
A. n.

1. One who denies or disbelieves the existence of a God.

2. One who practically denies the existence of a God by disregard of moral obligation to Him; a godless man.

138
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:03:07pm

re: #135 HappyWarrior

Oh yeah for sure. I do have to chuckle in a way that’s what fucked so many monarchies throughout the world. So obsessed with pure blood that they had all these problems.

Hemophilia, for example.

139
Kragar  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:03:12pm

re: #132 HappyWarrior

None are welcome except my brothers and I at Free Irish German Slovakiaenia but not ethno Slovaks aloud only Rusyns.

I’ll have to see about getting my kids a passport for my kids to visit from French-Italian-German-Native-American-Japanese-vakia.

140
Big Beautiful Door  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:03:34pm

re: #122 HappyWarrior

Anyone who believes in racial and ethnic purity is an idiot. Shit, I’m proud to be what they call a mutt. I still loved that racist Cobb being discovered to be part African and the British reporter going “Welcome my brother!.” Just priceless.

All humans are mutts; race is primarily a cultural construct rather than a genetic reality. These girls, for example, are twin sisters:

141
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:03:35pm

Better a “cuck” who sees his white skin as some sort of badge of honor. My family just happens to be of predominately European desent. It makes me no better or worse than anyone else. Except those bastards from the next village over. Those guys suck.

142
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:04:02pm

re: #138 Blind Frog Belly White

Hemophilia, for example.

Yeah I was thinking of the Romanovs.

143
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:04:58pm

re: #140 Big Beautiful Door

All humans are mutts; race is primarily a cultural construct rather than a genetic reality. These girls, for example, are twin sisters:

Embedded Image

It’s amazing how different their phenotypes are. Beautiful family I must say.

144
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:05:02pm

re: #136 teleskiguy

This is like saying Al Capone was a good guy because he operated soup kitchens.

More like saying the soup kitchens were a shrewd PR move. Morrow could still be a lunatic, even if he managed a civil reply with some level of wit. Especially given the friends he’s had chiming in.

145
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:05:44pm

re: #142 HappyWarrior

Yeah I was thinking of the Romanovs.

Although they got it from Queen Victoria.

146
prairiefire  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:06:45pm

re: #145 Blind Frog Belly White

Although they got it from Queen Victoria.

And marrying cousins.

147
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:06:47pm

re: #119 Blind Frog Belly White

Lolwhut?

It’s quite simple. You simply can’t know everything. people act on beliefs all the time. But as a religious matter, you cannot know whether God exists or if God doesn’t exist. Neither can be proved. Therefore, whichever way you see it, it’s based on belief.

148
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:07:01pm

re: #145 Blind Frog Belly White

Although they got it from Queen Victoria.

Yeah they did. Grandmother of Europe. When I was a kid, I thought the monarchs of these countries were all pretty much the ethnicity of their given country i.e. Elizabeth II being nearly exclusively English. I had no idea about hte Windsors extensive ties to Germany.

149
Ziggy_TARDIS  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:07:05pm

re: #129 HappyWarrior

If they are English in origin, it is doubly stupid, considering England is made up of Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, and French.

150
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:07:22pm

re: #134 Dark_Falcon

Thanks for this.

Though it’s a waste of time talking to these cretins, you could put a pin-sized hole in their heads and the PSI air coming out of their heads would be plainly audible.

151
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:07:23pm

re: #109 Blind Frog Belly White

This is exactly what I meant when I said you overdefine atheism. Atheism is not certainty there is no god. It’s not believing there is one.

From the Merriam Webster online dictionary:

You’re insisting on ‘b’ only, but the rest of us are telling you it’s ‘a’, as well. Sorry, but Merriam Webster trumps you.

Isn’t that a position without a distinction? Don’t both of them require Faith?

152
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:07:28pm

re: #141 HappyWarrior

Better a “cuck” who sees his white skin as some sort of badge of honor. My family just happens to be of predominately European descent. It makes me no better or worse than anyone else. Except those bastards from the next village over. Those guys suck.

I’m proud of my German heritage, I’m proud of my Scots-Irish heritage going back to the American Revolution. Being white is simply a physical trait I was born with. It gives me no pride at all.

153
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:07:30pm

re: #146 prairiefire

And marrying cousins.

And hence why Shelbyville was established.

154
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:08:15pm

re: #151 austin_blue

Isn’t that a position without a distinction? Don’t both of them require Faith?

How does lack of faith require faith?

155
Joe Bacon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:08:51pm
156
HappyWarrior  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:09:33pm

re: #149 Ziggy_TARDIS

If their English in origin, it is doubly stupid, considering England is made up of Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, and French.

Right. Not to mention all the numerous people who have been in England throughout the ages. I had some results that are no indication of my cultural make up but knowing how things happen, it’s really not a surprise. The thing that arouses my curiosity though is who these people were and what brought them to the places where my family lived.

157
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:10:10pm

re: #150 teleskiguy

Thanks for this.

Though it’s a waste of time talking to these cretins, you could put a pin-sized hole in their heads and the psi air coming out of their heads would be plainly audible.

I know, but I ask that question of every knuckhead who DERPs out the “cuck” meme. So far, no one has yet tried to answer it, which speaks volumes about those who use the meme.

158
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:10:59pm

re: #154 Nyet

There is a difference between belief and faith.

159
calochortus  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:11:45pm

Good night all. Hasta mañana. And do drop me a note when everyone agrees on the faith thing. ;-)

160
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:12:08pm

re: #151 austin_blue

Because people who believe in God can’t prove its existence and people who don’t believe in God can’t prove its non-existence, the most logical thing to believe is neither, which is to say Who knows?

161
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:13:18pm

re: #160 Mich-again

Because people who believe in God can’t prove its existence and people who don’t believe in God can’t prove its non-existence, the most logical thing to believe is neither, which is to say Who knows?

Nobody knows, indeed. Maybe witches and the Devil do exist. /

162
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:13:33pm

Science is a different matter altogether. You don’t believe it or not, you accept it or not.

163
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:13:38pm

re: #109 Blind Frog Belly White

This is exactly what I meant when I said you overdefine atheism. Atheism is not certainty there is no god. It’s not believing there is one.

From the Merriam Webster online dictionary:

You’re insisting on ‘b’ only, but the rest of us are telling you it’s ‘a’, as well. Sorry, but Merriam Webster trumps you.

Nobody needs to require their beliefs to conform to a dictionary.

164
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:14:19pm

re: #158 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

There is a difference between belief and faith.

Whether there is a difference depends on immediate context. E.g. religious belief and religious faith are interchangeable.

165
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:14:23pm

re: #161 Nyet

Nobody knows, indeed. Maybe witches and the Devil do exist. /

That would be AWESOME

166
ipsos  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:15:11pm

re: #155 Joe Bacon

Toomey’s FB page is amazing today. Over 2000 responses to his post about Garland, and more than 1900 of them are telling him to do his job and bring Garland to a vote.

167
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:15:19pm

re: #160 Mich-again

Because people who believe in God can’t prove its existence and people who don’t believe in God can’t prove its non-existence, the most logical thing to believe is neither, which is to say Who knows?

The premise doesn’t really support the conclusion.

168
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:16:35pm

Rejecting both extremes and stopping at that is lazy. You have to think further, in terms of probability. And that’s where purist agnosticism fails.

169
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:17:13pm

re: #154 Nyet

How does lack of faith require faith?

Because you must have Faith to maintain such a position! Sorry, but I must admit that my instructor at Tulane in Logic was an adjunct professor who was a Jesuit. It stuck.

170
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:18:52pm

re: #161 Nyet

Can you either prove they do or prove they don’t exist?
If not, then the whole argument seems pointless. Which is why people end up fighting wars to prove they are right.

171
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:19:11pm

Robert Morrow has turned my Twitter mentions into a stupid game of whack-a-mole.

172
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:19:14pm

re: #169 austin_blue

Because you must have Faith to maintain such a position! Sorry, but I must admit that my instructor at Tulane in Logic was an adjunct professor who was a Jesuit. It stuck.

What you’ve just written did not make sense to me, logically or otherwise. One doesn’t have to have faith in order to have lack of faith. Quite the contrary, if you lack faith, you don’t have faith.

173
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:20:33pm

re: #170 Mich-again

Can you either prove they do or prove they don’t exist?
If not, then the whole argument seems pointless. Which is why people end up fighting wars to prove they are right.

Exactly. Well put.

174
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:21:26pm

re: #170 Mich-again

Can you either prove they do or prove they don’t exist?

You’re missing the point. Yes, purely philosophically you can hardly prove anything at all. That’s not what matters.

175
BeachDem  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:22:40pm

re: #44 Blind Frog Belly White

Believers often have a hard time accepting the concept of nonbelief, I’ve observed. They presume that you have simply replaced God (invariably THEIR god) with something else.

I don’t find that with all believers. For example, my own family are mostly believers, and some of them take their belief so seriously as to put their asses on the line as members of Christian Peacekeepers, but they don’t ask me “How can you be a good person without God?”

That’s the one that gets me. If you need a god to make you be a good person, you’re doing it wrong. And I agree with your viewpoint on being an atheist. I don’t feel it makes me part of any “group.” I just don’t believe.

176
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:22:41pm

re: #168 Nyet

OK, I’ll try to break it down into more significant digits for you. The most logical position is to be totally uncertain, at the 50.000..% level of certainty. Any attempt to demonstrate the probability that one way or the other is more likely will rest on assumptions.

177
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:23:37pm

I have said repeatedly that I am a conservative person. By that I mean that I respect doubt. I wouldn’t argue anybody’s religion or beliefs because those things are based on ideas that are often beyond my comprehension. Your beliefs are your business. However, I still think it is fair game to discuss beliefs. I try to refine my understanding of God and the world and I think that is a vital part of maturing. I think discussing faith can and must be done respectfully, no matter what your beliefs are. Push, prod, ask, but don’t shove. I am the captain of my soul, and you are the captain of yours. (Just don’t park your soul on my lawn please)

178
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:23:45pm

I mean, you can’t exactly disprove that everything you see around you is just a hallucination. If you call yourself an agnostic about everything on such a flimsy basis… but usually people calling themselves agnostics are inconsistent: they only want to apply this agnosticism to the matter of God’s existence.

179
klys (maker of Silmarils)  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:24:18pm

After we’re done with this discussion, we’re going to move on to the angels on the head of a pin, right?

/

180
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:24:40pm

re: #176 Mich-again

OK, I’ll try to break it down into more significant digits for you. The most logical position is to be totally uncertain, at the 50.000..% level of certainty. Any attempt to demonstrate the probability that one way or the other is more likely will rest on assumptions.

I don’t know how you live then, because you can’t be certain about anything in your life.

181
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:24:44pm

re: #174 Nyet

I can prove 2+2 = 4
I can prove if you jump off a building without a jetpack you will fall to the ground.

Don’t overthink this. Some things can be proven, some things can’t.

182
BeachDem  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:24:51pm

re: #45 HappyWarrior

Donald making fun of women’s looks for 800, Trebek.

I’ll go with his foreign policy advisor(s) consisting of “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.”

183
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:25:17pm

re: #172 Nyet

What you’ve just written did not make sense to me, logically or otherwise. One doesn’t have to have faith in order to have lack of faith. Quite the contrary, if you lack faith, you don’t have faith.

Then you are incapable of holding a position. And that’s a QED. You either have and hold a belief, or you don’t. Belief is faith, and faith is belief.

184
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:25:40pm

re: #174 Nyet

You’re missing the point. Yes, purely philosophically you can hardly prove anything at all. That’s not what matters.

That’s why I make the argument that everybody believes in something, not matter whether they want to consider themselves atheists or not. At some point you wind up believing something.

185
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:25:58pm

re: #179 klys (maker of Silmarils)

After we’re done with this discussion, we’re going to move on to the angels on the head of a pin, right?

/

Three.

186
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:27:25pm

re: #181 Mich-again

I can prove if you jump off a building without a jetpack you will fall to the ground.

Um, no. Because first you will have to prove that buildings, jetpacks and me exist and are not a figment of your imagination.

187
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:27:48pm

re: #175 BeachDem

That’s the one that gets me. If you need a god to make you be a good person, you’re doing it wrong. And I agree with your viewpoint on being an atheist. I don’t feel it makes me part of any “group.” I just don’t believe.

Often people’s understanding of good and bad is limited to what hey felt on the last day of school. Too few people continue to try to grow.

188
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:28:32pm

re: #178 Nyet

Actually I belong to a church that has been around a very long time. But I am also an engineer and I understand the interaction of faith and reason. And I like to paraphrase a guy from the 13th century who said if science can prove that dogma is false it makes a mockery of the religion. So then as science expands knowledge it actually helps get us closer to what God is by proving what God isn’t.

189
goddamnedfrank  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:28:32pm

I have no idea what the original context of this image is but it feels apropos nonetheless.

190
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:28:49pm

re: #183 austin_blue

Then you are incapable of holding a position. And that’s a QED. You either have and hold a belief, or you don’t. Belief is faith, and faith is belief.

And there are atheists who don’t hold a belief in God’s non-existence. Clearer now?

191
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:29:46pm

re: #181 Mich-again

I can prove 2+2 = 4
I can prove if you jump off a building without a jetpack you will fall to the ground.

Don’t overthink this. Some things can be proven, some things can’t.

What would be the point of proving that 2+2=4?

192
retired cynic  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:29:54pm

I am seeing mobius strips.

193
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:29:55pm

My old high school chum, who was a comedian in Denver, now lives in L.A., trying to make the big time.

194
Pawn of the Oppressor  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:30:20pm

re: #102 Dark_Falcon

This little charmer was the only one so far to like that disgusting Tweet:

[Embedded content]

Blood and Soil!

The mating call of Fascist pigs everywhere.

195
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:32:26pm

re: #189 goddamnedfrank

He’s watching somebody replace a roll of toilet paper?

196
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:32:52pm

re: #181 Mich-again

I can prove 2+2 = 4

BTW, even that rests on the assumption that your thought processes are correct.

197
klys (maker of Silmarils)  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:33:28pm

Psst, someone is wrong on the Internet.

198
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:33:33pm

re: #194 Pawn of the Oppressor

Blood and Soil!

The mating call of Fascist pigs everywhere.

A call I answered with a classic LGF response to racists: #blocked.

199
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:34:02pm

re: #186 Nyet

And if we fed the tuna fish mayonnaise and onions we wouldn’t have to add anything to the can of tuna to make salad.

200
Stanley Sea  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:34:08pm

re: #193 teleskiguy

My old high school chum, who was a comedian in Denver, now lives in L.A., trying to make the big time.

[Embedded content]

LA Troubles.

My apartment/condo is really great re: noise. Footsteps above , not so much.

Builders don’t give a shit.

201
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:35:30pm

re: #199 Mich-again

And if we fed the tuna fish mayonnaise and onions we wouldn’t have to add anything to the can of tuna to make salad.

Understandably non-responsive.

202
BeachDem  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:35:56pm

re: #77 jaunte

[Embedded content]

Bernie fans seriously re-tweeting Dennis Miller’s advice on super delegates.

Has Victoria Jackson weighed in yet? I seldom make up my mind until I’ve checked with the two unfunniest right wing “comedians” out there.

203
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:36:12pm

re: #178 Nyet

I mean, you can’t exactly disprove that everything you see around you is just a hallucination. If you call yourself an agnostic about everything on such a flimsy basis… but usually people calling themselves agnostics are inconsistent: they only want to apply this agnosticism to the matter of God’s existence.

Well, that’s insulting. What is the flimsy basis? I apply my agnosticism to everything I do in my life: not expecting a God to intervene in our world. Is that objectionable to you? And if so, how can you possibly justify such a position?

204
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:37:00pm

re: #201 Nyet

if you want to argue that perhaps 2+2 doesn’t equal 4 then I need to go get a MM card and buy a gram of Kush and get back with you later.

205
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:38:02pm

re: #196 Nyet

BTW, even that rests on the assumption that your thought processes are correct.

I’ve seen people gloat over the fact that nothing can be proven because no arguments can be made without assuming anything exists. The people who make those kinds of arguments are usually the ones who wind up depending on assumptions as much as anybody else. It’s absolutely childish, and in this case it’s actually completely wrong. “2+2=4” not because of assumptions or analysis, it is true because of the definitions of “2”. “+”, “=”, and “4”. No need to prove anything else.

206
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:38:09pm

re: #203 austin_blue

Well, that’s insulting. What is the flimsy basis? I apply my agnosticism to everything I do in my life: not expecting a God to intervene in our world. Is that objectionable to you? And if so, how can you possibly justify such a position?

Do you seriously consider that the probability that the world around you is a hallucination is 50%?

207
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:39:03pm

re: #204 Mich-again

if you want to argue that perhaps 2+2 doesn’t equal 4 then I need to go get a MM card and buy a gram of Kush and get back with you later.

AK Thunderfuck.

208
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:39:51pm

re: #204 Mich-again

if you want to argue that perhaps 2+2 doesn’t equal 4 then I need to go get a MM card and buy a gram of Kush and get back with you later.

I’m not the one pushing the bogus 50/50 probability where it doesn’t belong. I’m simply demonstrating where your own assumptions lead. To philosophical nihilism.

209
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:40:37pm

re: #207 teleskiguy

2 + 2 = eeer!

210
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:40:51pm

re: #208 Nyet

The other problem with the 50% threshold is that there is no way to quantify it.

211
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:41:39pm

re: #209 Mich-again

2 + 2 = eeer!

212
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:42:26pm

re: #203 austin_blue

“Not expecting God to intervene in the world” is not exclusive to agnostics.

213
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:42:52pm

re: #205 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

I’ve seen people gloat over the fact that nothing can be proven because no arguments can be made without assuming anything exists. The people who make those kinds of arguments are usually the ones who wind up depending on assumptions as much as anybody else. It’s absolutely childish, and in this case it’s actually completely wrong. “2+2=4” not because of assumptions or analysis, it is true because of the definitions of “2”. “+”, “=”, and “4”. No need to prove anything else.

But your explanation (as any), again, depends on the assumption that your thought processes are correct. It’s not an assumption I challenge, I’m pointing out that it’s an assumption.

214
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:43:38pm

re: #210 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

50/50 = “I don’t know”.

215
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:45:10pm

re: #213 Nyet

What thought processes are at work in the definition of 2? When we speak of “2” we are agreeing that it has a specific meaning. Without that agreement, you cannot discuss anything because nothing would have any meaning to the other person.

216
Single-handed sailor  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:45:22pm

re: #204 Mich-again

if you want to argue that perhaps 2+2 doesn’t equal 4 then I need to go get a MM card and buy a gram of Kush and get back with you later.

That’s how I handle delving into string theory, just can’t smoke enough to get through M theory.

217
Mich-again  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:46:57pm

My favorite politicians are the ones who are on a mission to defend God in this evil secular world. Because the entity that created billions of galaxies filled with billions of stars and knows every living creature by name needs some home-schooled hilljack on Earth to be his bodyguard.

218
Dark_Falcon  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:47:42pm

This story makes me sick:

‘Next time I’ll rape you’: Woman is called a ‘whore’ and ‘Feminazi’ by trolls after she posts shocking CCTV shaming pervert who pulled down her knickers in the street

Andrea Noel posted CCTV of man pulling down her knickers in the street
US journalist has since been branded a ‘whore’ and a ‘Feminazi’ by trolls
Abusers threatened to rape and kill her and men have loitered at her home
One wrote: ‘I hope the next time they rape you so you know your place’
27-year-old is planning to leave Mexico City until the scandal blows over

The level of online misogyny is truly stunning to behold. And I find it intensely sick that a woman is attacked for posting footage of her clearly being abused.

219
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:48:00pm

re: #215 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

What thought processes are at work in the definition of 2? When we speak of “2” we are agreeing that it has a specific meaning. Without that agreement, you cannot discuss anything because nothing would have any meaning to the other person.

The definition of “2” is in your mind. Any operations on that definition are a chain of thought processes. The first assumption that we have to make to discuss anything is that our thought processes are at least somewhat reliable.

220
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:48:41pm

What I think about when i read conversations like these is that people fall into the trap of reinforcing a preconceived notion. I’m not judging, I am not disputing, I am challenging (whoever) to try harder. Not that you can convince somebody else of the merits of your beliefs, but yourself. The moment you think you have all the answers is the moment your life begins to end.

221
teleskiguy  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:49:17pm

Goin’ up.

222
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:50:10pm

re: #147 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

It’s quite simple. You simply can’t know everything. people act on beliefs all the time. But as a religious matter, you cannot know whether God exists or if God doesn’t exist. Neither can be proved. Therefore, whichever way you see it, it’s based on belief.

I refer you to Sergey’s post on Russell’s Teapot. You assert the existence of something for which there is no proof. It is not incumbent upon me to disprove it in order not to believe in it.

And they’re not opposite sides of the same coin. If I say Fairies exist, you not believing in them is not a ‘belief’, it’s a reasonable conclusion. It is always reasonable to conclude that if there is no evidence for something, it doesn’t exist.

223
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:50:28pm

re: #206 Nyet

Do you seriously consider that the probability that the world around you is a hallucination is 50%?

Ummm… no. I also don’t believe that aliens have been giving humans butt probes for the last seventy years.

224
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:51:08pm

Anyway, it started with the definition of atheism, and it is useful to remember that the most general definition of atheism is lack of belief in deities. Not belief in their non-existence. An agnostic thus can be an atheist.

225
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:51:51pm

re: #190 Nyet

And there are atheists who don’t hold a belief in God’s non-existence. Clearer now?

Then they aren’t really atheists, are they?

226
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:52:09pm

re: #223 austin_blue

Ummm… no.

Why though? Can you prove that the world around you is not your hallucination?

I also don’t believe that aliens have been giving humans butt probes for the last seventy years.

But being a consistent agnostic, you don’t believe that they didn’t either, right?

227
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:52:33pm

re: #225 austin_blue

Then they aren’t really atheists, are they?

They are atheists, per definition. They lack belief in God.

228
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:52:48pm

re: #219 Nyet

The definition of “2” is in your mind. Any operations on that definition are a chain of thought processes. The first assumption that we have to make to discuss anything is that our thought processes are at least somewhat reliable.

The definition of 2 is in everybody’s mind, not just mine. If I go anywhere in the world and ask for 2 of anything, (adjusting for local language), I will get 2 of them. If you can’t agree on the definitions of the words we use to communicate, then there is no way to communicate at all.

229
BeachDem  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:52:56pm

re: #181 Mich-again

I can prove 2+2 = 4
I can prove if you jump off a building without a jetpack you will fall to the ground.

Don’t overthink this. Some things can be proven, some things can’t.

Spread your arms and hold your breath and always trust your cape.

The Cape

230
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:54:46pm

re: #163 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

Nobody needs to require their beliefs to conform to a dictionary.

It’s not a question of BELIEFS conforming to a dictionary. It’s a question of WORDS conforming to a dictionary, which, I assure you, is generally a requirement.

That is, Sergey has correctly defined atheism as not believing in the existence of a god or gods. That includes both those who insist there is no god or gods, as well as those who don’t insist, but just don’t believe. Austin blue was incorrectly defining atheism too narrowly, including only those who insist on certainty.

231
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:55:49pm

re: #226 Nyet

Why though? Can you prove that the world around you is not your hallucination?

But being a consistent agnostic, you don’t believe that they didn’t either, right?

What does agnosticism have to do with alien butt probes? Have you been drinking?

232
William Lewis  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:56:45pm

Good grief. Should I dig out my copy of the Philosophical Investigations? Wittgenstein to the rescue!!!!!!

///////////

233
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:57:55pm

re: #228 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

The definition of 2 is in everybody’s mind, not just mine.

See, you have just added another assumption: that other minds other than yours exist.

If I go anywhere in the world and ask for 2 of anything, (adjusting for local language), I will get 2 of them. If you can’t agree on the definitions of the words we use to communicate, then there is no way to communicate at all.

That is not responsive to what I wrote. Definition of 2 is still in your mind and you still rely in your thought processes to do anything with that definition. So you make an assumption about the reliability of those thought processes.

Here is the point: there always are assumptions. We always have to start with some brute facts, that just “are”. So “assumption” is not a dirty word, making an assumption does not mean you have faith (or one could argue otherwise - but then we all are “faithful”, so what does it matter to the agnostics if it’s about God or not?).

234
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 9:58:47pm

re: #151 austin_blue

Isn’t that a position without a distinction? Don’t both of them require Faith?

No. Not believing in something for which there is no evidence is not faith. Do you believe in Santa Claus?

And I’m not being flippant here. To disbelieve in the existence of something for which there is no evidence requires no faith at all. I don’t believe there’s an invisible horse in my kitchen. That doesn’t require me to go into the kitchen and fail to bump into it, in order that my disbelief in the invisible horse to not be faith-based.

235
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:00:41pm

re: #231 austin_blue

What does agnosticism have to do with alien butt probes? Have you been drinking?

So you have missed another point I’ve been making: agnostics like yourself arbitrarily limit their “agnosticism” to the matter of God, even though the very same principles are applicable anywhere, as I have just demonstrated with my questions.

“You can’t prove there is no God, so it’s reasonable to be a pure agnostic!”
“OK, but can you prove that the world is not a hallucination?”
“Shut up, what does that have to do with agnosticism!!”

236
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:04:00pm

re: #160 Mich-again

Because people who believe in God can’t prove its existence and people who don’t believe in God can’t prove its non-existence, the most logical thing to believe is neither, which is to say Who knows?

Hold on a moment, Pard. Belief in the existence of something for which there is no evidence is NOT the opposite side of the coin from not believing in the existence of something for which there is no evidence.

You don’t believe in an infinite number of things for which there is no evidence. It takes no faith to do that.

237
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:04:36pm

I’m a probabilistic atheistic agnostic. I acknowledge that I can’t disprove God in an absolute sense (hence agnostic), but I insist on using probabilistic thinking in regard to God - just as we do to make judgments about other things.

238
Khal Wimpo (not-so-Super Tuesday's Child)  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:05:24pm

re: #72 austin_blue

I’ll disagree with that. I’m an agnostic with a Deist bent because I just don’t know. I reserve the possibility that there was something that, at the moment of the Big Bang, a being (thing?) incomprehensible to us, dictated the weak force, the strong force, the gravitational constant, and the speed of light. In other words, I believe in the possibility that a thing created our universe and then walked away. Why not? It’s innocent and doesn’t drive how I react in this existence.

Here’s a funny bit from Roger Zelazny. A gladiator is going into a death match and asks an agnostic priest to “shrive him”.

Insofar as I may be heard by anything, which may or may not care what I say, I ask, if it matters, that you be forgiven for anything you may have done or failed to do which requires forgiveness. Conversely, if not forgiveness but something else may be required to insure any possible benefit for which you may be eligible after the destruction of your body, I ask that this, whatever it may be, be granted or withheld, as the case may be, in such a manner as to insure your receiving said benefit. I ask this in my capacity as your elected intermediary between yourself and that which may not be yourself, but which may have an interest in the matter of your receiving as much as it is possible for you to receive of this thing, and which may in some way be influenced by this ceremony. Amen.

Now, see? That’s killer bee. It’s the real human condition on Earth.

I thought I had read all the Zelazny there was - which novel/story is this from?

Been thinking lately about Jack of Shadows and Home Comes the Hangman for some reason. Maybe because of the parallels between the Hangman coming home, and 40 years of christawful sins against dimwitted “Reagan Democrats” coming home to torment the GOP.

They really did screw those people over, you know.

239
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:05:48pm

re: #234 Blind Frog Belly White

No. Not believing in something for which there is no evidence is not faith. Do you believe in Santa Claus?

And I’m not being flippant here. To disbelieve in the existence of something for which there is no evidence requires no faith at all. I don’t believe there’s an invisible horse in my kitchen. That doesn’t require me to go into the kitchen and fail to bump into it, in order that my disbelief in the invisible horse to not be faith-based.

But the horse is a thing, it’s either there or not. Whereas God is most definitely a thing in this world in the minds of most people. It’s not a horse in the kitchen, it’s an assumed force in the world.

240
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:07:22pm

Those Tulane logic courses were all in vain.

241
Joe Bacon  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:08:10pm

re: #223 austin_blue

Ummm… no. I also don’t believe that aliens have been giving humans butt probes for the last seventy years.

Aliens have heard our radio and TV broadcasts. They know to stay away because the Human Race is insane…

They heard Rush and saw 19th Century Fox!

242
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:08:34pm

re: #238 Khal Wimpo (not-so-Super Tuesday’s Child)

I thought I had read all the Zelazny there was - which novel/story is this from?

Been thinking lately about Jack of Shadows and Home Comes the Hangman for some reason. Maybe because of the parallels between the Hangman coming home, and 40 years of christawful sins against dimwitted “Reagan Democrats” coming home to torment the GOP.

They really did screw those people over, you know.

Creatures of Light and Darkness, 1969

243
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:09:20pm

re: #222 Blind Frog Belly White

I refer you to Sergey’s post on Russell’s Teapot. You assert the existence of something for which there is no proof. It is not incumbent upon me to disprove it in order not to believe in it.

And they’re not opposite sides of the same coin. If I say Fairies exist, you not believing in them is not a ‘belief’, it’s a reasonable conclusion. It is always reasonable to conclude that if there is no evidence for something, it doesn’t exist.

That almost works. The argument I make is that your conclusion that the thing for which you don’t have evidence is not one of knowledge, but only belief. It’s the age old problem of proving a negative. You accept that the negative isn’t proven and move on with your life with that conclusion. I’m not trying to insist that you change your ways. I am trying to argue that just because you come up with a working model of the Universe that works for you should not be the end of your journey (I know there is a better word, but it escapes me). You can do a better job of stating your case. You don’t owe it to me or our fellow lizards. You do owe it to yourself. I can see flaws in your arguments. I don’t say that as an insult. There are flaws in my world view too, but I respect them and do not assume I have all the answers. That’s part of my conservative nature, and it is roughly based on the discipline of science in which your conclusions are only as strong as the weakest of your measurements (or in this case premises). But when I offer my opinion, I am pretty sure that it is as well thought out as it can be, and not based on half thought-out propositions and ideas. You can’t do your best for anybody else if you haven’t already done the best you can for yourself too.

244
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:11:58pm

re: #240 Nyet

Those Tulane logic courses were all in vain.

Well, that’s just mean. I’m a sixty year old man, and you are just are incapable of engaging in a civil conversation. Too bad for you. I expected better on this board.

245
Khal Wimpo (not-so-Super Tuesday's Child)  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:12:10pm

re: #242 austin_blue

Creatures of Light and Darkness, 1969

Hm. Same year he did Lord of Light. Something about light in the aftermath of 1968, maybe …?

I keep going back to Hunter Thompson’s line about how shitty 1968 was, that it was a bad year for everyone but Richard Nixon and the Viet Cong.

I think 2016 is going to go down in history alongside ‘68.

246
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:13:15pm

re: #205 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

I’ve seen people gloat over the fact that nothing can be proven because no arguments can be made without assuming anything exists. The people who make those kinds of arguments are usually the ones who wind up depending on assumptions as much as anybody else. It’s absolutely childish, and in this case it’s actually completely wrong. “2+2=4” not because of assumptions or analysis, it is true because of the definitions of “2”. “+”, “=”, and “4”. No need to prove anything else.

Here’s the thing. None of us can conclusively know anything beyond our own existence. But, if you treat the universe as if it exists, it generally responds as if it does. Hit that window too hard, and it will break as you’d expect and you’ll probably cut yourself and it will hurt. So it’s a reasonable conclusion that the universe exists as you perceive it, as long as it responds correctly.

Now, WRT belief in the supernatural - if there’s no evidence for it, there’s no reason to conclude it’s true. It’s not faith to conclude that.

247
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:13:26pm

re: #244 austin_blue

Well, that’s just mean. I’m a sixty year old man, and you are just are incapable of engaging in a civil conversation. Too bad for you. I expected better on this board.

You relinquished any expectation of civility with “Have you been drinking?”.

248
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:13:30pm

re: #233 Nyet

The definition of 2 is not just in my mind. If I ask you for two whatevers, then I know that as long as you’re not being a dick, you will give me two whatevers. I don’t know why you insist that the meaning of 2 is up to the individual.

249
William Lewis  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:13:58pm

re: #242 austin_blue

Creatures of Light and Darkness, 1969

Good book, though “Lord of Light” remains his finest moment. Sam’s blessing of Nirriti fits well with the above.

250
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:15:07pm

re: #245 Khal Wimpo (not-so-Super Tuesday’s Child)

Hm. Same year he did Lord of Light. Something about light in the aftermath of 1968, maybe …?

I keep going back to Hunter Thompson’s line about how shitty 1968 was, that it was a bad year for everyone but Richard Nixon and the Viet Cong.

I think 2016 is going to go down in history alongside ‘68.

Sci Fi was always independent of its time. Thank god.

251
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:16:09pm

re: #248 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

The definition of 2 is not just in my mind. If I ask you for two whatevers, then I know that as long as you’re not being a dick, you will give me two whatevers. I don’t know why you insist that the meaning of 2 is up to the individual.

Sigh. I’m not insisting that the meaning of 2 is up to the individual.

This sub-conversation started with the claim: “Any attempt to demonstrate the probability that one way or the other is more likely will rest on assumptions”.

I’m showing that everything rests on assumptions. So assumptions are not something we can avoid by staying alleged agnostics.

252
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:19:36pm

re: #239 austin_blue

But the horse is a thing, it’s either there or not. Whereas God is most definitely a thing in this world in the minds of most people. It’s not a horse in the kitchen, it’s an assumed force in the world.

You state that a horse is a thing whereas god is a thing. I don’t see a contrasting statement, so I don’t understand your use of ‘whereas’.

And reality is not subject to majority vote, so the fact that many people believe in a god or gods is not evidence for the existence of such.

253
austin_blue  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:19:43pm

re: #247 Nyet

You relinquished any expectation of civility with “Have you been drinking?”.

Well it was either that or you are fucking crazy to posit that there is a 50% chance that our universe is a hallucination. I went with the more reasonable explanation.

254
Nyet  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:22:03pm

re: #253 austin_blue

Well it was either that or you are fucking crazy to posit that there is a 50% chance that our universe is a hallucination. I went with the more reasonable explanation.

I did not posit there is a 50% chance that our universe is a hallucination. Since you’re unable to proceed without mischaracterizing my argument, we may as well stop here.

255
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:22:05pm

re: #250 austin_blue

Sci Fi was always independent of its time. Thank god.

Except Asimov’s story about figuring out that the murderer was from Mercury because he would not expect the sun to rise. Once we knew that Mercury rotated, POOF!

256
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:25:49pm

re: #246 Blind Frog Belly White

Here’s the thing. None of us can conclusively know anything beyond our own existence. But, if you treat the universe as if it exists, it generally responds as if it does. Hit that window too hard, and it will break as you’d expect and you’ll probably cut yourself and it will hurt. So it’s a reasonable conclusion that the universe exists as you perceive it, as long as it responds correctly.

Now, WRT belief in the supernatural - if there’s no evidence for it, there’s no reason to conclude it’s true. It’s not faith to conclude that.

I repeatedly use the word belief instead of faith for reason. The things you cannot require some sort of belief, whichever side (it isn’t binary) you decide to go with. The lack of evidence for a God’s existence is not proof of its absence. There is no way to prove our existence with a God or without a God. It isn’t easy to develop a world view, and I think that just saying well, there is no evidence for it is just taking the easy way out. Yeah, I’m a ball buster.I expect people to make an effort, but I wouldn’t do it unless I expect the same of myself. I will put my ideas out there for people to wail away (and I’ve done it repeatedly) and I will stick around to support them. But I would never mock anybody or pretend that I had all the answers.
And with that, I really gotta go beddy bye. I mean nothing but good will to all. When I push, I only do it in the desire to encourage the exploration of your own souls, not to make you change your ways.

257
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:32:57pm

re: #256 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

I repeatedly use the word belief instead of faith for reason. The things you cannot require some sort of belief, whichever side (it isn’t binary) you decide to go with. The lack of evidence for a God’s existence is not proof of its absence. There is no way to prove our existence with a God or without a God. It isn’t easy to develop a world view, and I think that just saying well, there is no evidence for it is just taking the easy way out. Yeah, I’m a ball buster.I expect people to make an effort, but I wouldn’t do it unless I expect the same of myself. I will put my ideas out there for people to wail away (and I’ve done it repeatedly) and I will stick around to support them. But I would never mock anybody or pretend that I had all the answers.
And with that, I really gotta go beddy bye. I mean nothing but good will to all. When I push, I only do it in the desire to encourage the exploration of your own souls, not to make you change your ways.

Again, it’s NOT BINARY. The existence of god is just one of myriad possible beliefs. I don’t believe in the Easter Bunny, or the invisible horse in my kitchen, or Odin, or Zeus, or Ghanesh, either. I assume you also don’t believe in those things. Are they also binary?

258
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:34:23pm
The things you cannot (“Know” presumably) require some sort of belief, whichever side (it isn’t binary) you decide to go with.

No. Not believing in things for which there is no evidence is a REASONABLE CONCLUSION, not a belief.

259
SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:36:26pm

re: #257 Blind Frog Belly White

??? Why are you arguing with me by taking a stand that religious belief is not a binary thing when you actually quoted me saying is isn’t binary?

And to BFBW, that “reasonable conclusion” is not based on knowledge, therefore it is a belief, whether you like it or not.

Now this time I really mean it. Good night!

260
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:41:01pm

re: #259 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

??? Why are you arguing with me by taking a stand that religious belief is not a binary thing when you actually quoted me saying is isn’t binary?

And to BFBW, that “reasonable conclusion” is not based on knowledge, therefore it is a belief, whether you like it or not.

Now this time I really mean it. Good night!

No, you’re wrong. If that were true, there would be no knowledge, only belief.

261
Blind Frog Belly White  Mar 16, 2016 • 10:49:23pm

re: #259 SteveMcGaziBolaGate RN

??? Why are you arguing with me by taking a stand that religious belief is not a binary thing when you actually quoted me saying is isn’t binary?

Because even though you SAY it’s not binary, you treat it as such. You say that in the absence of evidence for the existence of something, whether you think it exists or not is a belief. But if I don’t see a glass on the counter, is thinking there’s no glass on the counter a belief or a conclusion?

262
Rocky-in-Connecticut  Mar 17, 2016 • 3:52:38am

re: #21 The Engineer Lobuno

Sure, it’s a low brow ad, something that the right wing would come up with, but I’m underwhelmed by it. Maybe because I left middle school so long ago, I can’t feel the connection.

It’s because I’ve noted long ago that right wing humor is the sort of humor that never really left middle school. The sort of humor where one bully kneels down behind the victim and the other bully shoves her over.
hurr hurr hurr

263
7-y (Expectation of Great Things in Due Course)  Mar 17, 2016 • 4:33:52am

re: #86 Nyet

I’ve seen deism being treated both separately from theism and as a part of it. A terminological thing, not a substantive one. Personally, I think it makes more sense to treat the deistic God as just that - God, which makes deism a part of theism.

Anyway, as long as you treat this deity as merely possible - rather than as significantly probable, you would fall under my understanding of atheism, even if you would never use the label yourself. After all, I also don’t reject the mere possibility of any deity existing, and I can also call myself an agnostic (as well as an atheist).

Years ago I found my term - apatheist - the existence of God or gods, or not, is not a question worthy of spending any energy on because it doesn’t matter and I don’t care.

264
7-y (Expectation of Great Things in Due Course)  Mar 17, 2016 • 6:06:13am

...


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ...
Cheechako
4 hours ago
Views: 30 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
7 hours ago
Views: 85 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1