Our New Home

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

The Forum

Thursday, October 23, 2008

For real?

Dani' El said:
Sadly, Einstein treated his wife and children like dirt.

I cannot find any supporting evidence for this in Wikipedia, Conservapedia or a Google search.

EDIT: OK, I just read Dani'els statements in the "Good News for Atheists"/Atheist Bible post. The man is insane, which is a diagnosis I had not yet come to when I originally made this post. His beliefs have absolutely no grounding in reality.

I fear I may be losing my scientific approach to the Evolution vs. Creation debate the more I comment on and converse with these nutjobs. I need to return to the fundumental elements which got me into this debate in the first place: science and debate. presuppositionalistic illogicality, random insane babbling, simple witnessing and outright lying are hurting my mental health.

I need to find a better quality of opposition.

41 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Einstein had problems with marital fidelity, maybe this is what's his names issue.
    But we know for reals that religious leaders are a laugh riot as spouses right? Martin Luther was real fun snuggle bunny, Jimmy Swaggart, and Ted Haggard just to mention a few. So what was his point again?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Even if that was true, so what? Does Einstein's personal life somehow invalidate his scientific work? No.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Can anyone here show either empirically or logically that God does not exist?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Kaitlyn wrote:
    "Can anyone here show either empirically or logically that God does not exist?"

    Off topic, but no, it is impossible to show that a God doesn't exist because a God is unfalsifiable.

    However, the biblical God, who created the world and then flooded it and killed everything at some point in human history... He is falsifiable, and has been falsified. Such events would leave evidence, and no such evidence exists.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And that, Quasar, is the difference between us and those like Dani'el.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't mean this in any mean or unkind way at all but he sounds a bit mentally ill:

    When I was first saved in Aug 05, I began to give warning of the judgment to come on SF and LA to the churches and synagogues. Satan (yes Satan is real) tried to stop me by arresting me on the lies of a false witness. I was held in jail, without charge or a lawyer for 40 days. I saw many amazing things while in jail, miracles, signs and wonders! Praise God! it was an amazing purifying experience!

    While in jail, the wicked cops were trying to terrify me. At one point they put me on a contraption that I didn't know existed until I sat in one called "Satan's chair". It's an electric stun chair designed to subdue violent inmates.
    They put me on this thing (why? for praying and singing), turned it all the way up, and shouted, "Are you ready to die!!"
    I shouted back, "YES!" and I meant it. I wanted to go home. But God has showed me that I have much work to do in Israel and I'm going there soon. Cant go home just yet.
    BTW they didn't zap me. Got slapped around a bit, nothing to bad.
    After God destroyed New Orleans and more, they let me go.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I remember way back some christian ranting about Dwakins marriage. hang on, it was Terry, now that I think about it.

    But it's the same issue, does Dawkins' divorce negate his arguments?

    Classic ad hominem.

    Mind you, if Dawkins had written or stated that marital perfection was a sign of atheism, or a proof of evolution, then the criticism would be valid.

    Which is why it is epic fail when people like Swaggart and Haggard cock up, because they do hold themselves and their lives up as examples of the transforming power of God.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Quasar, I am starting to feel the same. You can see my posts with Mark Forgiven a ways down. He has no logic and when I point that out he doesn't have a clue what it means. It is so bizarre.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Can anyone here show either empirically or logically that God does not exist?

    I can not.

    By way of mixing it up, I believe that an absent creator is the only kind that could exist, while allowing humanity to grow and struggle on its own. An omnipresent and apparent deity would result in us turning ourselves into slaves.

    <.<

    >.>

    ReplyDelete
  11. As for Dani'el, he writes a bit like an unstable person.

    At first, he came off as another MWLaine, ranting and condemning. Lately, he seems to be trying to be witty and dismissive, while also *attempting* to argue rationally.

    I can't quite nail him down yet.

    ---

    Einstein did infact divorce his wife and marry his cousin, which resulted in animosity from his kids. He wasn't the best family man - though that really doesn't modify his impact upon humanity in any way.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dani'el has committed to Dec 31st 2009 as a deadline for the end of the world.

    He claims that he knows this through specific, divine revelation and that he is the 'Lot' of the present day (I asked and, no; he doesn't have kids!). With a mission to Israel or some such thing coinciding with the destruction of San Francisco by fire and brimstone from the sky, he's got a pretty good end-times story on the go.

    His blog is...interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Jill D quoted from the paranoid schizophrenic Dani'el.

    Honestly I'm speechless. That is extremely sad. It's obvious that he is unbalanced. You'd think his fellow christians would step in. Maybe they have through email or something. He does need some serious counseling and I do hope he gets it soon. This type of mindset could lead him to do something violent against his perceived "Satan".

    ReplyDelete
  14. I just read his blog, and "interesting" is definitely a word that describes it...

    I believe it's common for paranoid schizophrenics to treat numerical coincidence as "significant". I'm not an expert, however; can anyone here support/reject this notion?

    As an afterthought, his change in tone (from his rants to his attempts at being funny) sort-of supports the schizo hypothesis.

    Weird...

    ReplyDelete
  15. After reading his blog I will have nothing to do with him now. He has delusions of grandeur and he believes God is talking to him. That screams paranoid schizophrenic to me. He needs help.

    ReplyDelete
  16. BeamStalk - Rocky S. said...

    After reading his blog I will have nothing to do with him now.


    On an ironic note, after Ray reads my reply, he likely won't have anything to do with me now, other than the usual quote mine, thus I'm spreading my unedited reply around a bit for future comparison's sake.

    I had challenged Vera to meet me at a skeptical site since it seems that my reply to one of her posts to me wasnt' getting through, and she declined.


    You can see my response to her not-so polite declination over there, but I'll just post it below. Her remarks to me are in italics.

    ====
    Vera, I'll be blunt. When it comes to skeptics or skepticism, you don't have a clue.
    First of all, Maragon asked first and secondly, I don't want to go to skeptics dot com and sit around with a group of nuts who love to mock and scorn a bunch of stuff they know nothing about and take advantage of people who are suffering to mock God. -snore- Can anyone say pontine tumor?
    "Mocking people who are suffering"? You sow! That's apparently his son! He's a father who's wondering why his son is suffering; something that any CARING father would like to know, and you call it mocking?

    If you're so stupid that you say stuff like that, then lady, you deserve to get mocked.


    Unfortunately, skepticism still leads them to a belief system that is based on nothing but negativity and a negative ideology.
    Wrong...we care about reality, and the positive benefits that happen when people embrace it; taking medicine as opposed to faith-healers, etc who con people out of their savings while doing nothing for the victim.

    We care for science and human inquirery and we appreciate the benefits they can bring.

    These people capitalize on negatives and completely disregard the positive. They are whiners and complainers that think life should be happy always.
    Evidence please? Where did you get that idea? Because we don't like it when your "God" orders the deaths of pregnant women and children? Well, excuse us for being true pro-lifers.

    Plus all their judgments are skewed within their ideology and so they never judge righteously on any topic.
    Look who's talking. How many times have Maragon and others tried to straighten you out on this very blog?


    Good grief, you're whinging about how you'd get treated at a skeptic site, yet us skeptics recieve the same kind of treatment at sites like this one.

    We don't puss out like you. So be it, if the guy whose son is suffering from the pontine tumor saw your remark, he'd bitch-slap you right into a retirement home, and justifiably too.

    I'm through with you. No doubt, Ray'll use this post, selectively edited, if it's even allowed on here, to use as an example of how "negative" we skeptics are.

    It'd be a dumb move on your part, because I have your post, and I'm storing this, my entire reply to you, on some other places on the web.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Reynold,

    I went back and read some things Vera said in that thread. I see she is back to justifying how her god killed the Midianite children. I really wish she could condense her lenghty replies and just say what she really wants to say which is this:

    "No matter what God does, even killing kids, it's ok. Also, every thought that goes through my head is either directly from RTB website or God himself told me. Oh yeah, I also blabber about shit that has nothing to do with the point and if I say it then it has to be true."

    Let me tell you what Vera told me once when I told my deconversion story and questioned why her god lets kids be beaten and molested as kids. I had said that part of my deconversion involved wondering why, if there were a god, he would have allowed me to be molested at the age of 4. Vera said something to the effect of 'the only reason you're saying that is because you want to justify atheism'.

    Let me be blunt. Vera is a vile cunt who will say anything to protect her crazy beliefs. She doesn't care what happens to anyone, she can find a way to say that her god is never at fault and that he is just dreamy. She's sick and stupid and I'm sorry she wasn't infertile.

    ReplyDelete
  18. She's sick and stupid and I'm sorry she wasn't infertile.

    Sorry, but this last paragraph made me both laugh and wince :)

    No criticism intended

    ReplyDelete
  19. WEM,

    Well, I'm glad I could at least give you a chuckle! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sorry, just wanted to plop this in here somewhere.

    Palin resisted the suggestion that if Ayers was a "domestic terrorist" — a standard line in her campaign addresses — then so were conservative religious activists who bombed abortion clinics.

    "I don’t know if you’re going to use the word ‘terrorist’ there," she said.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Dani'el also says,
    "And this is coming and soon [the destruction of SF and LA.]
    I look for it any day, but there is a very large signpost ahead in June 09.

    And I didnt come to this as a conclusion or interpretation of scripture. I know it is coming the same way that Abraham knew of the destruction of Sodom.

    Yes, thats right."

    There you have it. Bat Shit mother fuckin Crazed Christian.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Does Vera just bring me up constantly? Or am I delusional?

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Yeah, she does seem to bring you up frequently. It might be partly due to the fact that you're ardent about what you write, and are one of the few who post a real picture of yourself as your avatar. And female to boot.

    In a blog/topic populated mostly by nerdy white guys hiding behind their alter e-Egos (myself included).

    Who knows - maybe she's just mammarily challenged?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Face it, Maragon; Vera has the hots for you.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Craig,

    I just saw that video. Palin sickens me.

    Video.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Maragon,

    I really do think she is jealous of your youth, beauty and intellect. Instead of just admitting that a young, attractive female has valid points that she can't readily give valid, logical answers to, she talks crap about you instead. That's our wittle Vera!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Tangent: I love avant garde jazz. I'm going to use the Palin subject as a nice segue to this

    ReplyDelete
  29. nm,
    there is a lenghty interview with an American feminist about Sarah Palin.
    I still don't understand why any woman can even think about voting her.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Tilia,

    Great link! That was a really good interview.

    This part really got to me:

    "SPIEGEL: As an ardent feminist, you supported Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton in the primaries. Doesn't that contradict your fundamental political beliefs?"

    Pollitt seems to me, although I could be wrong, to be more of an equity feminist than a gender feminist. I see her as someone who would vote more based on the issues than on gender. Or maybe I just want to see her that way because I am that way and I am certainly more of an equity feminist than a gender feminist myself. But Pollitt come back with this, which I agree with:

    "Pollitt:I was on the fence for a long time. But when Bill Clinton started interfering in the race, it reminded me of how tired I was of the Clintons. And I felt, let's turn the page, let's have new people in government. With the Clintons it would have been the same old group of people in the White House, because in reality you never just vote for the guy -- or the woman -- at the top."

    I wasn't a fence sitter, but I was very, very tired of the Clintons and I was never, ever a Hillary fan.


    But then earlier in the interview Pollitt had this to say:

    SPIEGEL: Well, did Hillary Clinton lose because of media sexism?

    Pollitt: No, she made crucial mistakes in her campaign, and she bears responsibility for that. Still, one has to acknowledge that she had to face incredible sexism in public discourse. Jokes were made about her voice, and about her laugh, which was described as a "cackle." There was a nutcracker in the shape of Hillary that crushed walnuts between its steely thighs, which was good for many a laugh. And when her eyes misted up for a moment on the campaign trail in New Hampshire, there were comments about whether she was fit to be commander in chief. They would never ask that about a man! You have to say that male fear of female power was very much on view with Hillary.



    I disagree with the last sentence. I don't think that male fear of female power had a substantial role in the failure of the Hillary campaign. I think the political legacy of Bill had a lot to do with it and I also think that people got tired of Hillary's lies. Or then again, maybe I'm just projecting because those were my reasons for not liking her.

    Ok, one more thing I have to point out.

    SPIEGEL: What excites people about Sarah Palin?

    Pollitt:They feel that she is likeable. They can relate to her because she seems ordinary, warm, enthusiastic. If Sarah Palin was my neighbor, I might like her too -- but as a potential President? It's shocking to me that people would vote for someone because they think he or she is "like me." Oh, Sarah Palin is a mom, I am a mom, so I will vote for her. That is irresponsible.

    SPIEGEL: But with George W. Bush, Americans also voted for the guy that a lot of people would like to have a beer with.

    Pollitt:Yes, and one would think that the past eight years have taught people that maybe it's not a very good idea.



    Uhhh...ya think ??!!?? That was a superb interview, Tilia. Thanks again for that link!

    ReplyDelete
  31. mn,

    She's frightening. But then I'm not a "real" American. We've got our own crazed fundie congresswoman here in MN. Michele HUAC Bachman. Thankfully, she's about to get tossed out on her shapely ass.

    Just a hunch but I think veraisdoug.

    ReplyDelete
  32. nm,
    one of the biggest achievements of the early feminists could have been that we can have a more relaxed opinion about feminism today. I just wonder why such dinosaurs as Sarah Palin or this Raani woman and her clan are still around.

    thanks for the pictures, by the way :D

    ReplyDelete
  33. Craig,

    Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh...I can not stand Michele Bachman!! I also can't stand to watch her eyes when she is listening to someone talk. She just creeps me out, apart from her completely illogical responses.

    Tilia,

    I think Raani is just a product of poor education and very bad religion. Chances are if she had been raised in a more relaxed church and had a solid education she wouldn't think we never went to the moon, either. I get really sad when I think of the minds of that woman's kids. I sincerely hope that as they get older that they think themselves out of that mess of crap she has taught them.

    Sorry again that it took me so long on the pics.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Dani'el isn't allowed to reveal exactly who he is yet, "per orders from the Father."

    I sure hope he doesn't try and do something really stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Just another chain saw, batshit, out house crazy believer.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Dan has now posted a comment announcing that he is praying that God curses the USA with Obama as president.
    Ya gotta love that imprecatory prayer thing. So...progressive.

    I think he said that in the same comment that he criticized rev Wright. OOOOOOOO,K. Dan is criticizing Wright...the irony is lost on him.

    Laugh or cry?

    ReplyDelete
  37. All of a sudden this image came to me.
    Dani'el, (not married, no kids) delusional in his bunker mentality, in the attic room at his mother's house, doors barred...hoping, praying for doom, despair and agony.

    We need more of him on Ray's site. He's the best player on our team.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Hopefully, Daniel (I won't spell it the way he does, anymore than I'll ever refer to Chad Johnson as Chad Oucho Cinco) is just where you see him. But it would have been nice if Timothy McVeigh were there as well, along with Ted Kaczynski, but who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ruf,

    I think you have something there.... a budding Ted Kuzinski...nice.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Dannyboy writes @ AC:Unless of course an evil world ruler, Satan (who is quite real, I've met him face to face. I'll be giving testimonies of this on my blog soon) does indeed crave human sacrifice.

    Fellows, we have a new man at the lead! It's not Mussolini-shaped demons anymore, it's now Satan himself!
    Eat your heart out, MWL. Daniel pwnzor'd you so bad.
    Seriously, is this some sort of 'I seez moar evil den u duz' competition?

    ReplyDelete

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.