Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Thursday, August 7, 2008

Chumming the waters in desperation

Over at "Atheist Central" , Ray has devoted an entire post to something that he has already thought so clever as to merit a permanent place on his sidebar - the inane "Atheist Starter Kit".

That's right...the entirety of his latest post is mindless copypasta from his own sidebar. It's almost as if he didn't have anything else to talk about...like, for example, the most recent ass-whipping administered to him by PZ Myers, courtesy of WDAY radio. Funny how that seems to have slipped his mind, isn't it?

I was going to go through an exhaustive point-by-point refutation of Ray's "Atheist Starter Kit", but then I realized that that would be taking the fun away from the rest of the Raytractors. So, please, respond on whichever points you wish...let's just make sure we hit them all at least once.


  1. I just can't believe anybody still posts over there. To each their own, but I just can not bring myself to do it.

  2. I posted on the "Atheist Starter Kit" a few days ago. Scroll down a ways.

    And no, I'm not reprimanding you. I can't always keep up with what's going on with this blog either.

  3. I can barely even look at Ray's site anymore. One because it seems he is getting more stupid and desperate by the day, but mostly because Terry seems to be seriously losing it. I've tried just scrolling right on by. I really have.

    And yeah, I think that 'Onfire' dude is really a Terry sockpuppet.

  4. Yes, Lance, but that was before Ray recycled his sidebar as a blog post.

    Apparently, Ray really thinks he has something clever here...or perhaps he's just desperate to sweep his WDAY radio humiliation under the rug. Either way, someone needs to call him on his bullshit.

  5. I just posted :
    "You Know You are a Fundamentalist Christian if....." thingy over there.

    It's just as trite as Ray's screed but I wanted to respond in kind rather than try to refute his mindless drivel point by point.

    I have been dropping by their to throw a stink bomb in from time to time (troll? I suppose.)

  6. Yes, Lance, but that was before Ray recycled his sidebar as a blog post.

    Oh, well, see my comment to you was a parody. Yeah, that's it.

  7. "#4.You can also deal with the "whoever looks on a woman to lust for her, has committed adultery with her already in his heart, yada, yada, jesus, blah blah, fart..."

    I'm wondering, shouldn't the lustee be just as responsible as the luster. Here's what I mean.

    Let's say, for example, all the ladies and,perhaps even some of the gentlemen, on this blog find Ray sexually irresistable. It's possible right? That cool Tom Selleck mustache, that sexy accent, those uber-tight Jordache jeans (is that a banana in your pocket, Ray?).
    Watching Ray in a video along side Kirk Cameron with his Tiger Beat cuteness just might be to much for some women. So, ultimitely, isn't Ray to blame for planting the seeds of lust into females hearts?

    He is a sex-demon and if god is just, then Ray got some burning and teef gnashing a comin'.

    Any thoughts Ladies? NT? Maryanne? Maragon?

  8. I just threw up in my mouth a little.

    No, really. I actually just did.

  9. I'm keeping track of how many of Ray's posts have mentioned evolution and/or atheists-atheism since July 18th. right now I have 28 total, 19 mention in evolution or atheists/atheism. If no non-believers posted there, if people just ignored him when he street preaches, he'd lose it.

  10. :::passes the TUMS and a garbage can to Trip:::

  11. I would love to see him try and street preach here up in Canada. He can stand on a corner in Toronto and everyone would treat him just like every other wacko shouting about god - avert eyes, turn up Ipod.

  12. Rebuttal attempt

    1. - Ray, when you stop with the fallacies, the complaints most likely will stop.

    2. - Not even close. Your label of creation already implies an unwarranted assumption. Why not start with Universe, cosmos, etc.. Then we can argue from that point on.

    3. - And what about Zeus? Apollo? Mithras? Thor? Odin? What if YOU, Ray, are wrong about those beliefs?

    4. - Non Sequitur. What does that conclusion have to do with the premise? None.

    5. - Most atheists have read the Bible. It does imply the world is flat, that the universe is geocentric, and that Pi=3.0. Maybe Christians should read beyond apologetics and the Bible. It's wrong to own beliefs anyway, but I'll deal with that some other time.

    6. - There are moral absolutes. Social mores, laws and ethics provide testimony to that. It's a false statement about atheists to claim we believe there are no moral absolutes. That's a strawman. Before complaining about dismissing common sense, it would help if you, Ray, had any to begin with. A cop out argument, like me dismissing you or Lee Strobel once being atheist. It's irrelevant in most discussions anyway.

    7. - No beliefs. Not even of evolution by natural selection. Rather, acceptance of the evidence shows that evolution by natural selection has occured. Continually subject all theories to new evidence and data. If those theories fail to match the data, then modify them or tossed them out. Evolution by Natural Selection has withstood the battery of 150 years of new and radically differing ideas and data, and it has not only survived, but has thrived. It would help, if you, Ray, understood what science is (a methodology) and what comprises acceptable physical evidence.

    8. - You're making an unwarranted assumption about the threat of eternal punishment. No evidence to back up the assertion of the existence of Hell, let alone the possibility of eternal punishment or the existence of an eternal soul. A railway line at least presents physical evidence for existence, which is more than can be said of your claims.

    9. - Roman Catholics are Christians. This is a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. Catholics and Christians have committed atrocities in the name of God and Jesus. Post Hoc claims against their Chrisitanity places you in the position of claiming to know what and how they believed. I thought that was a property of your God, not of humans, Ray.

    10. - Strawman argument. Lack of belief is not a belief. Doubt and skepticism is always there. But without evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to accept the existence of a God. That is not pretending, that is just accepting the null hypothesis until statistically significant data says otherwise. Besides, Christians and religionists can't claim exclusivity for the need of socialization with like minded individuals. Atheists are humans also, and humans, being social animals, have a need for socialization.

  13. Trip-Monk
    You said,

    "Either way, someone needs to call him on his bullshit."

    That's not nice. Amiable Atheist has set forth rules by which we should not use profanities on this blog (i did trick her into saying the word "fuck" though.

    No more dirty words, or you may be shunned, fucktard.

  14. That's not nice. Amiable Atheist has set forth rules by which we should not use profanities on this blog (i did trick her into saying the word "fuck" though.

    I thought we had agreed to disagree but now I see you feel the need to continually ridicule me for disagreeing with you. Lovely behavior.


Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.