Pharyngula

Survivor: Pharyngula! Day Three.

Well, gang, the voting is closed on our first Survivor event. I would never have expected such a dramatic turn-around. From out of nowhere, John Kwok surged out of fifth place in the field — I had written him off as a bad bet — to rally astonishingly by doing one simple thing: commenting. He clobbered Pete Rooke and Simon, even, just by writing one threat (to sic his facebook friends on me), and doing his usual irritating name-dropping nonsense. He showed real heart in this race, and I’m sure that if he just continues to babble, he will eventually win his place in the fabulous Pharyngula dungeon.

In the end, though, he could not stop the juggernaut. One person stood out as a universal target for opprobrium by virtue of her homophobia and her cheerfully evil views. She was described as the Dolores Umbridge of Pharyngula. And for that reason, Barb has been found unfit, and is cast into the dungeon for all time.

Now, on Day Three of Survivor: Pharyngula!, you get to vote on who you’d next like to evict. You may notice some changes in the list.

Africangenesis
Barb
Facilis
John Kwok
Piltdown Man
Pete Rooke
Silver Fox
Simon

A few people on the first list who garnered little enthusiasm have been dropped. On the other hand, a few have been added. It’s a remarkable thing: these threads represent an opportunity for readers to vent their spleens over some of the more obnoxious commenters here, and thus represent a dangerous circumstance for the pesky little goblins — you’d think, if they had an sense at all, that they’d realize this is the time they should be lying low, keeping as quiet as possible. But no! I guess if they had any brains in the first place, they wouldn’t be quite as annoying. Maybe if I’d called this Shark Week: Pharyngula!, they’d have realized that jumping into a well-chummed lagoon full of vicious beasts champing their razor-toothed jaws was not a good idea.

Now vote by leaving a comment here. Or, if you’d rather, you can always send the thread off in unusual directions — the last one seemed to be all about oral sex, lesbians, and bacon. I’ll tally the votes on Friday, if I can manage to pick them out of the non sequitur salad.

How about an immunity challenge for our contestants? Since the last runoff was characterized by an astonishing lack of self-awareness on the part of the victims candidates, we should test that. The challenge for the seven surviving candidates is to write a short comment, 200 words or less, that reveals that they actually understand why their attitudes and pattern of expression have so exasperated readers here, and explains what they will do to change their behavior in the future. This will be a tough one for this crowd, I’m sure. Let’s see if they can wake up enough to do some honest self-assessment.

They have until 1pm tomorrow to complete the immunity challenge, and then we’ll open those up to the crowd for honest evaluation.

Comments

  1. #1 God Retardent
    March 18, 2009

    It’s Kwok for the chop

  2. #2 bybelknap, FCD
    March 18, 2009

    Any of them pass the first immunity challenge “why are there still monkeys?”

  3. #3 True Bob
    March 18, 2009

    What a choice! For sheer thickness of skull (I’m not sure there’s a cavity within it) I lean towards Africangenesis. I do have a soft spot for Rooke, but he’s so outrageous with the similes that IMHO he’s worth it just for entertainment value. I’m not so familiar with all of them, so my precious vote goes to…..

    Silver Fox

  4. #4 Hammy
    March 18, 2009

    So the winner of this whole thing will win a spot in the dungeon, yes?

    Or a spit in the dungeon. That works too.

  5. #5 Jim
    March 18, 2009

    I vote to evict PZ Myers. His crimes? Insipidity, stupidity, and wanking.

  6. #6 JBlilie
    March 18, 2009

    “last one seemed to be all about oral sex, lesbians, and bacon”

    ROTFLMAO! What fun this place is!

    Bacon and vagitarianism are wonderful!

  7. #7 oaksterdam
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis

  8. #8 Facehammer
    March 18, 2009

    I vote Kwok. While his terrible threat had me in stitches, he comes across as such an unbearable pillock that, with Barb out of the running, none of the others that I recognise even come close.

    Well, except Simon, maybe.

  9. #9 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Oooh, this one is going to be tougher. Decisions, decisions. A chance to derail a libertard. Tempting, very tempting…

  10. #10 Bill Dauphin
    March 18, 2009

    It’s Kwok for the chop [emphasis added]

    Any fans here of the Food Network show Chopped? I’m imagining…

    “Chefs, open your baskets. Your ingredients for the appetizer round are…

    “Fatwa envy, quotemining, Godwin, and striped bass.

    “You have 20 minutes, startinggggggg… now!

    What?… huh?… Oh, sorry; just daydreaming. Carry on….

  11. #11 epsilon
    March 18, 2009

    Now that Barb’s gone, I vote for the Kwok-pot.

  12. #12 JBlilie
    March 18, 2009

    Jim@5

    Hoping you are being sarcastic. (And wanking is not a crime.)

  13. #13 Shamelessly Atheist
    March 18, 2009

    Fasciitis- I mean, Facilis, for the dumb comment on the anti-condom pope blog entry.

  14. #14 Dustin
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Frank McCourt’s wife.

  15. #15 FlameDuck
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke.

    I got the Shark Week reference, but had to Google Dolores Umbridge. I’m sure that says something deeply disturbing about me.

    Also I think the immunity challenge is a bit weak. There are hundreds of other weak creationist conspiracies to debunk. How about “Explain why scientists consider carbon dating a reliable indication of age”, or how about “Explain why it took more than 5 minutes to create the Grand Canyon, and how we know this to be a fact”. I mean let’s have some fun with them! Make an immunity challenge they can’t fake…

  16. #16 Glen Davidson
    March 18, 2009

    I’m going to have to go for Africangenesis, since it’s just tiring dealing with his “perspective.”

    Mostly it’s just so pointless. Kwok actually does make points in many cases (not always good, too often strained–but I hope he’s not being voted off by anyone because of his viewpoints, only because of presentation), if you just ignore the name-dropping and high school thing. Oh, and Kwok really has tackled the IDiots on forums that we often don’t see, which should count for something.

    Glen D
    http://tinyurl.com/6mb592

  17. #17 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 18, 2009

    I’ve changed my vote to none. Simon still is purely an annoying little twit with nothing to add beyond barely school yard taunting, but fuck it.

  18. #18 sdh
    March 18, 2009

    Since Facilis actually won the first immunity challenge, shouldn’t his name be removed from the list?

    Maybe I don’t understand how this works, since I do not watch reality shows.

  19. #19 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    For those not following closely I am reposting my profiles of the candidates.

    Facilis: Has defended God killing 42 children for merely mocking a prophet. Had a “proof” of God which was just an Argument from Ignorance (summary of his argument can be found here). Somehow aced the first immunity challenge.

    Quote:

    I’ll do my own humorous summary
    “Debating with an atheist”
    Atheist: I deny the existence of air
    Facilis: what?? You’re breathing now. Air is the necessary precondition for breathing.
    A: No. I see no reason why air is necessary for breathing. I am breathing now and i don’t believe in air.
    F: It the impossibility of the contrary. What else could you be breathing.

    [Note: This made the FSTDT Top 100]

    Pete Rooke: Made EXTREMELY gruesome analogies involving corpses, rape, and books made from human skin. Then posted said analogies SEVERAL times here. Complains about the language of this blog even though he has filters blocking foul language on his browser. Seems to have greater knowledge of arcane 15th century book binding practices than sex.

    Quotes

    Suppose you had a very sacred book outlining your philosophy on life. This book also happened to be stitched together and bound in the skin and flesh of a loved one who had recently passed away.

    Who among us would knowingly drink the semen from another?

    I would never inflict oral sex on a women.

    Simon: Never added a single worthwhile thing. Copies and pastes huge blocks of texts without attributing. Accuses others of being homosexual and then spends the next 10 posts graphically talking about a penis entering an anus. Congratulated PZ and wife on 29th wedding anniversary by asking how many abortions they’ve had during that time.

    Quotes:

    There is No God therefore you are ALLOWED having sex with your mom and dad vise versa. Ask PZM if he likes to have sex with you, may be he already has sex with his kids. It is allowed, no rules no law, as atheist you are free. scientifically right.

    do you agree with homosexual ?
    is it ok to insert your penis to a man’s anus ?

    oh you are a gay !?
    if no rape it is ok, do you smell the feces perfume after?
    do you think the canal through which feces are released is the proper place for your penis ?

    Genius Nerd,
    you are awaited by Kel tonight to lick Your feces on his penis. Free HIV guaranteed.

    [Note: I literally have a dozen more quotes like the above but I think you get the picture]

  20. #20 Kaessa
    March 18, 2009

    “Shark Week: Pharyngula!”

    I love it. I’d like to cast my vote for Kwok. It’s interesting to watch someone diving into a shark tank with a bucket of chum, and not understand why the sharks are biting him.

    OT: Is it just me, or is the TypeKey sign in just awful? It won’t let me sign in with my email address, and if I sign in with my OpenID, it doesn’t “stick”.

  21. #21 Jim
    March 18, 2009

    JBlilie: “Hoping you are being sarcastic. (And wanking is not a crime.)”

    Nope – dead serious. PZ should be man enough to take what he so freely dishes out. Also, he’s the one who defined “wanking” as a thought crime, punishable by expulsion from this dreadful blog (a punishment much to be desired by sensible people).

  22. #22 sdh
    March 18, 2009

    Since Facilis actually won the first immunity challenge, shouldn’t his name be removed from the list?

    Maybe I don’t understand how this works, since I do not watch reality shows.

  23. #23 JBlilie
    March 18, 2009

    Jim@5

    Hoping you are being sarcastic. (And wanking is not a crime.)

  24. #24 MikeMa
    March 18, 2009

    I vote sImOn.

    He adds nothing and his sentence structure and grammar are atrocious. Waste of electrons really.

  25. #25 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon

  26. #26 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!
    SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!
    SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!

  27. #27 sdh
    March 18, 2009

    Since Facilis actually won the first immunity challenge, shouldn’t his name be removed from the list?

    Maybe I don’t understand how this works, since I do not watch reality shows.

  28. #28 JBlilie
    March 18, 2009

    “last one seemed to be all about oral sex, lesbians, and bacon”

    ROTFLMAO! What fun this place is!

  29. #29 Owlmirror
    March 18, 2009

    I think simon has demonstrated ever-more unpleasant and alienated behavior.

    It’s time to nuke him from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

  30. #30 Nix Noctua
    March 18, 2009

    Err… I’m kind of just a lurker, but that John Kwok guy really annoys the crap out of me.

  31. #31 natural cynic
    March 18, 2009

    Do we hafta vote again, already? There should be at least a week between challenges. Time for a few more comments to arrive that will cement the next victim to the floor of the dungeon.

  32. #32 sdh
    March 18, 2009

    Since Facilis actually won the first immunity challenge, shouldn’t his name be removed from the list?

    Maybe I don’t understand how this works, since I do not watch reality shows.

  33. #33 JBlilie
    March 18, 2009

    Scott From Oregon!

  34. #34 aproustian
    March 18, 2009

    After Feynmaniac’s summary…
    Simon.

  35. #35 Matt
    March 18, 2009

    Simon. So crass and deranged. A sick individual.

  36. #36 Dustin
    March 18, 2009

    Can we vote the double-post generating SB lag off of the island?

  37. #37 Kite
    March 18, 2009

    With Barb gone, locking Simon and his worthless viewpoints away from the sane and civilized would be my vote. Ahh, wish fulfillment!

  38. #38 Nix Noctua
    March 18, 2009

    Err… I’m kind of just a lurker, but that John Kwok guy really annoys the crap out of me.

  39. #39 sdh
    March 18, 2009

    Since Facilis actually won the first immunity challenge, shouldn’t his name be removed from the list?

    Maybe I don’t understand how this works, since I do not watch reality shows.

  40. #40 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    Why the fuck are you here Jim? No one hijacked your browser and forced you to read. Start your own blog if you can do better or just continue pulling your pud to WingNutDaily. In your case wanking is a crime because you did it in public, but in your case by the size of things it’s only a misdemeanor.

  41. #41 jon
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok for the block!

  42. #42 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    Hmmmm unusual thread direction? I’ve got a good one:

    Group sex etc.

    How about a little love for those people who just want MORE! So what’s the thoughts of the assorted Pharyngulites on the love between a man and a woman….and perhaps another woman or man or several of them. What about a woman and a woman and a woman and a….? What about a man and a man and a man and…you get the drift. Poly love in all its consensual participating adults.

    So from polyamory we move to polymarriage. Why can’t one woman marry two men, one man two women, or any combination up from that? Surely the lawyers will love such scenarios (the pre nup was surely invented for such contractual negotiations), and with suitable caveats, the people involved will love them too.

    As for Shark week voting….I’m in two minds about the whole shebang and was from the start. However, since that didn’t stop me voting vehemently for homophobe Barb, I can’t really take a principled stand right now can I? I suppose therefore I’ll have to either join in the feeding frenzy or ignore it and just go with the comedy. I think I’ll plumb for the latter as this, to my mind, is getting unnecessarily ugly. An excuse to pursue vendettas and pettiness. Hence, as I cannot retract my vote for Barb, I’ll admit to my hypocrisy, castigate myself for it and simply spoil my ballot paper with a series of knob jokes.

    Cheers

    Louis

  43. #43 sdh
    March 18, 2009

    Since Facilis actually won the first immunity challenge, shouldn’t his name be removed from the list?

    Maybe I don’t understand how this works, since I do not watch reality shows.

  44. #44 Jaycubed
    March 18, 2009

    Sans Simon!

  45. #45 Stephen Marley
    March 18, 2009

    With Barb gone, you gotta go with KWOK this time….

  46. #46 Helfrick
    March 18, 2009

    Also, he’s the one who defined “wanking” as a thought crime, punishable by expulsion from this dreadful blog (a punishment much to be desired by sensible people).

    Uh, oh. Somebody is jealous they aren’t in the running. Sorry Jim, maybe you’ll get your chance next time.

  47. #47 Steve in MI
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok gets my vote for the next long walk off the short blog-pier.

  48. #48 Chirality
    March 18, 2009

    Given Feynmaniac’s helpful post (19), I vote for Simon.

    Though Pete Rook’s “I would never inflict oral sex on a woman” is pretty patethic, as well.

    Still: I vote for Simon

  49. #49 Jefrir
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis – he’s just so bloody tedious.

  50. #50 The Science Pundit
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis

    I must confess that I usually don’t read the threads that get really long because of the trolls and those who feed them (although I have been guilty myself of feeding those cerebrally deficient ogres), but of the trolls that I’ve encountered regularly enough (Facilis, Pete Rooke, & Africangenesis), AG is the worst that IMO.

  51. #51 ???
    March 18, 2009

    Why the fuck are you here Jim? No one hijacked your browser and forced you to read. Start your own blog if you can do better or just continue pulling your pud to WingNutDaily. In your case wanking is a crime because you did it in public, but in your case by the size of things it’s only a misdemeanor.

    Concern troll is concerned.

  52. #52 Jadehawk
    March 18, 2009

    voting for Simon. he’s useless and frustrating and disgusting.

    a few weeks ago it might have been tempting to remove AG, but after the incident with the River Main, in which he insisted it was spelled Mein, and then refused to accept that he fucked up and instead kept digging himself in deeper, he has become a fucking joke and easy to ignore.

    oh, and Facilis winning the immunity challenge meant that he was immune from being booted the last round. new round, new immunity challenge. and I think it’s fair that it’s not a creationist one this time, since not all candidates are creationists. though “explain why the election of Obama will not lead to the end of the world” might have been a good one, too.

  53. #53 dNorrisM
    March 18, 2009

    I vote Simon.

    Barb is sure of the superiority of her faith, but Simon is sure of the superiority of his intellect.

    Kwok sometimes has useful points to make, almost invariably in the 2nd or 3rd sentence. The rest I skip.

    disclaimer: I’m a rather half-wittedhearted pharyngulite.

  54. #54 epsilon
    March 18, 2009

    Methinks that Jim has some sort of connection to Barb.

  55. #55 Benjamin Geiger
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, with an instant-runoff vote for Africangenesis.

    John Kwok-o-shit is more amusing than annoying, at least to me. Of course, I have no Facebook friends (because I have no Facebook account, and intend to keep it that way). Pete Rooke is obnoxious but occasionally enlightening, in the “poster child for retroactive birth control” kind of way. Silver Fox can go, but I find him/her/it easy to ignore.

  56. #56 Nix Noctua
    March 18, 2009

    goddammit. sorry for the double post, I don’t comment on forms often.

  57. #57 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Re: immunity challenges I believe are only good for one round. (My knowledge of Survivor comes from listening to others talk about it.)

  58. #58 Dustin
    March 18, 2009

    Though Pete Rook’s “I would never inflict oral sex on a woman” is pretty patethic, as well.

    No doubt he chivalrously inflicts it upon men in airport bathroom stalls, instead.

  59. #59 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    punishable by expulsion from this dreadful blog (a punishment much to be desired by sensible people).

    Sooo… get sensible. Go away.

  60. #60 Delta Whisky
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok

  61. #61 speedwell
    March 18, 2009

    I’m casting my vote based on which commenter is most likely to ruin the fun, not necessarily on who is the most “evil.”

    I vote John Kwok. If he is unaccountably able to fumble his way through the immunity challenge, my second pick is Pete Rooke. Simon and Facilis are just poe-strength stupid.

  62. #62 JPBrowning
    March 18, 2009

    Feynmaniac @#19

    I seem to miss all the greatest trolls and idiots to either laugh at, or fight the nausea at their unbelievable idiocy, so thanks for the rundown. And from said rundown, I would have to say Simon seems like a clear cut winner for me, since I absolutely hate the completely ignorant christians that always demonize the atheists into things they are not.

    I have caught a bit of Facilis here and there. The condom comment earlier today was quite stupid.

    John Kwok wouldn’t be too bad if he’d just lose some of his narcissism. He actually knows a few things, and doesn’t normally seem to delve into the unrealistic. He does however seem to have to bring up who he knows and how important he thinks he is far to often.

    Pete Rook is just random, stupid, and in need of a mental health professional.

    Other than that, I didn’t really know any of the list. But the review of contestants was helpful to me.

    Throw my vote in for Simon.

  63. #63 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    ???:
    Actually ??? my post applies to you too. -E.V.

    (Things for ??? to do: Learn what a control troll is)

  64. #64 Jim
    March 18, 2009

    “Why the fuck are you here Jim?”

    Good question. There’s not a lot of value to be had from a blog that devotes so much of its energy to ridiculing people.

    Bye-bye.

  65. #65 catgirl
    March 18, 2009

    It’s a tough choice between Simon and Africangenesis, and it would be fun to see John Kwok throw his temper tantrum over at Facebook, but I think I’ll go with Africangenesis this time.

    Also, when did you ban Barb? She was suspiciously absent from the Pope & condoms thread and the life doesn’t begin at conception thread, and I’m wondering if it’s because she was already banned when those came out.

  66. #66 Screechy Monkey
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  67. #67 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    Concern troll *sigh*
    (Post ECT aphasia is a bummer)

  68. #68 donna
    March 18, 2009

    Mmmm, lesbian bacon sex….

    Although lesbian bacon hentai would be better…

  69. #69 melatonin
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok’s a bit wacky, but I have this strange fantasy of him and Javison in a fight to the death.

    Simon

  70. #70 kung foo joe
    March 18, 2009

    I’d go for John Kwok. I find his references to friends of note being far too close to a five your-old shreeking “My dad’s bigger than your dad, and he has a spaceship !!”. It’s a bit weird from an adult.

  71. #71 JPBrowning
    March 18, 2009

    Jim @#65

    Stop talking about leaving, how it’s the sensible thing to do, how PZ should be banned from his own blog, and other such inane nonsense and actually go the fuck away. Thanks.

  72. #72 me2
    March 18, 2009

    I was going to use my second vote for John Kwok, but after reading through some of sImon’s posts, I’ve decided to vote for him. He’s creepy and scary. He needs to be sent to a nice warm padded cell, with no chance of ever being released.

    Definitely simOn!

  73. #73 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    a series of knob jokes.

    well? I’m waiting.

    I vote for the kwokster.

    reason?

    Because he actually IS someone who fights against IDiots (I’ve seen him post on other sites for years), but he is such an immature bore that it would do him some minor good to consider indeed WHY people are wanting to see him tossed from here.

  74. #74 bassmanpete
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    @sdh Why are you posting the same comment so often?

  75. #75 James F
    March 18, 2009

    Feynmaniac makes a cogent case. Simon it is!

    Other than that, I echo Glen’s point in #16, “Kwok really has tackled the IDiots on forums that we often don’t see, which should count for something.”

  76. #76 H.H.
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

  77. #77 Angel Kaida
    March 18, 2009

    Simon. Please.

  78. #78 LanceR, JSG
    March 18, 2009

    …oral sex, lesbians, and bacon…

    Yes, please. One for me, and one for my wife, please. Does that come with drinks?

    Oh, Pete Rooke(d), you are the weakest link. Goodbye.

  79. #79 pazmusik
    March 18, 2009

    I cast my vote for Simon.

  80. #80 Diane
    March 18, 2009

    Hmmm, Kwok is a misogynistic prick, but I do get a cheap thrill with his name dropping. I’m waiting for him to mention that he personally knows the invisible sky fairy. Rooke uses psychotic imagery to make his useless points, and is easily offended by foul language and that annoys the fuck out of me, but Silver Fox is just unrepentingly stupid and she reminds me of my holier than thou, skeletons rattling in her closet grandmother. I hated my grandmother. So, Silver Fox gets my vote off the island.

  81. #81 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    March 18, 2009

    Many of the trolls provide a certain level of low humor. For example, I could never vote for the Rookie, as grotesque as his analogies are and for having a closed blog while at the same time demanding that PZ censure his blog. The reason is this, he makes me laugh.

    My vote is for the person who is incapable of expressing a coherent thought, Simon.

  82. #82 damnedyankee
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke is running a strong second for me (“inflict” oral sex? You’re doing it wrong, Petey), but I have to go with Simon. I assume Jim and ??? are bucking for inclusion in Season Two. The latter was so much more approachable back when he was frontman for the Mysterians and was content to only go by his first name…

  83. #83 Newfie
    March 18, 2009

    sdh
    for not being able to read instructions… at least 6 times.

  84. #84 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    Mmmm, lesbian bacon sex….

    My next book:

    “On Sex and Sexual Orientation in Bacon”

    I predict the title alone will move it into amazon’s top 100

  85. #85 Kaessa
    March 18, 2009

    I’d like to change my vote from Kwok to Simon. I’ve decided egotistical/narcissistic is much better than just plain disgusting.

    Simon’s comments nauseate me.

  86. #86 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Continued profiles

    John Kwok: (AKA the Facebook Menace, Abbie Smith’s cyerberstalker) Lives perpetually in his prestigious high school. Cannot go 2 posts without mentioned it or the fact that someone is an alumni from it. Has unhealthy obsession with Abbie Smith. Threatened PZ with “losing some friends over at Facebook” if he gets banned and by doing so increased his chances of being banned. Even though he is anti-creationist he has such annoying personality that he has alienated any potential allies he could have had here.

    Quote:

    I am not writing again to irritate you, but I am putting you on notice. I have contacted several prominent friends over at Facebook to act accordingly if you decide to bounce me from Pharyngula.

    [Bold mine]

    Piltdown Man: Has suggested that PZ had at one point in the past had been possessed by demons. Thinks using Latin terms makes his arguments less crappy (they don’t). Wants to return to some sort of Catholic monarchy. Moniker comes from a fraudulent fossil formed from the skull of a medieval man, a chimp and an orangutan. Quite appropriate.

    Quote

    [Guardian's readers] despise country-dwellers (ie the people who grow their food) because rural folk tend to be a bit more traditional in their outlook. And they’re all so dhimmified that they’ll roll in the dirt like a bitch dog in heat if a Muslim so much as glances at them – and anyone who doesn’t do the same is “xenohobic”.

    Kill them all, let God sort them out.

    Clearly your view of demonic possession hasn’t progressed beyond the Blatty/Friedkin level. Who better than a mild-mannered professor to do the Devil’s work? (Not that PZ strikes me as particularly mild-mannered!)

  87. #87 heliobates
    March 18, 2009

    I don’t think we should ban Pete Rooke, per se. I just think he shouldn’t be allowed to comment, particularly about sex, until he can prove that he got laid.

    She was described as the Dolores Umbridge of Pharyngula.

    This is going on my wall, beside the TWO thread-wins I racked up on Day 2. You just know John’s already dropping my name, elsewhere: “Heliobates? John was that Camarhynchus or Cactospinus? No way, I went to high school with him!”

    Oh, BTW: Plonk Simon.

  88. #88 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    @sdh Why are you posting the same comment so often?

    This thread is slowing down the posting…apparently sdh doesn’t get it.
    ______________________

    Simon is disgusting. Obviously a closeted homophobe. Closeted or no, homophobes are despicable and Simon is just nasty about it.

    Simon and Barb deserve each other. It would be so cool to toss them in a real dungeon together.

    Simon

  89. #89 firemancarl
    March 18, 2009

    How does one choose between Pete and Simon?

    I suppose I have to go with Pete. The analogies using rape etc, are just too creepy.

    Facilis..is close because he actually supports his god killing children.

    Choices!

  90. #90 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok’s a bit wacky, but I have this strange fantasy of him and Javison in a fight to the death.

    Kwirk vs. Johrn

  91. #91 Lance
    March 18, 2009

    Wait, what’s wrong with bacon? ;)

  92. #92 Matt
    March 18, 2009

    Just a lurker here, but Simon gets my vote

    Rooke is too funny to get rid of. I loved reading his posts on the last thread about sex in general. You can’t make shit like that up. I haven’t laughed so hard in a long time. Simon’s just a douche with homosexual issues, and Kwok at least has a brain that works and the ability to write intelligible sentances.

  93. #93 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    Icthyic,

    You’re waiting for a series of knob jokes? Not a problem old son, not a problem.

    An Englishman, Irishman and a Scotsman are sitting in a bar discussing how they pleasure their wives. The Englishman says “I like to pleasure my wife by using my fingers, and she lifts a foot off the bed in sheer ecstasy.”

    The Scotsman, with proper disdain, replies “Ach that’s nothing! My wife is very fond of being pleasured with my tongue, in fact she rises a full two feet above the bed when I do this in gasping joy.”

    The Irishman, with a wry smile on his face laughs a soft knowing little laugh and says “Oh you boys are so far out of the running it isn’t true. I have sex with the wife, cough my filthy yoghurt, wipe my dick on the curtains and she goes through the fucking roof!”.

    I will now proceed to fully deconstruct that joke for its sexist, nationalist, racist, jingoist and infantile themes…

    {clears throat}

    What do you mean “no thanks”?

    Spoilsports.

    Louis

    P.S. I was out shopping the other day and I went into a shop and laid my cock on the counter. The young lady behind the counter calmly said “I think, sir, you have misread the sign above the door it says ‘CLOCK repairs’.”

    I replied “Well you can put two hands on that then!”.

    P.P.S. Notice I never said they were going to be GOOD jokes, in fact as an alternative to the formerly proposed “derail topic” how about a Pharyngula Joke-a-Thon. Everyone tell a joke, dirty or otherwise.

  94. #94 abeja
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

  95. #95 Badjuggler
    March 18, 2009

    Assuming Feynmaniac’s recap is accurate, Simon seems a shoo-in to me.

  96. #96 Jo
    March 18, 2009

    PZ, I’ve just perused your ‘dungeon’ for the first time (that sounds bad) and I noticed that you’ve linked to many of your miscreant’s blogs…from a Page Rank 5 page?! What are you doing to the internets?!

  97. #97 Traffic Demon
    March 18, 2009

    Voting for Kwok because I got sick of reading “mendacious intellectual pornography” repeated ad nauseum.

  98. #98 Exitus
    March 18, 2009

    Think I’m going to vote for Silver Fox, as hes been irritating me for some time now.

  99. #99 Ariel
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    Bad grammar, gross and totally unfunny.

  100. #100 Dave
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

  101. #101 Dahan
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis was my number two last time and stays there, strengthened by his comment about the use of condoms and the pope.

  102. #102 GaryB
    March 18, 2009

    If you are going to ship each of these people off to the dungeon in rapid order, why not just ship them all off all at once?

    If others find this way more fun, then I can’t argue.

    Simon should go.

  103. #103 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    It appears that my occasional fucking of html tags continues apace. I am a dirty dirty boy and deserve to be spanked. Next, TYPO the Gdo of clerical errors will smite me some more. I promise I shan’t enjoy it.

    Icthyic: Food and shagging was the last thread’s divertissment I still reckong mucky jokes and shagging and shagging should be this one’s. Mind you I am in a minority of one ‘twould seem? Us shagging shaggers are an oppressed minority dontcherknow. Mind you, I’d buy a copy of that book you’re planning….

    Louis

  104. #104 Logicel
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Silver Fox

    AG blows out the most meaningless hot air ever, so I just skip over his vapid mush. Did toy for voting for him, but do not want to waste a vote for SILVER FOX who is ridiculously dense, oppressively patronizing, and deeply clueless.

  105. #105 abstruse
    March 18, 2009

    Sophist Simon.

  106. #106 Michelle
    March 18, 2009

    I’m renewing my vote for Pete Rooke. :P

    What? I stand by my choice!

  107. #107 Dahan
    March 18, 2009

    Sorry, I wasn’t very clear. Facilis has moved to number one now that Barb is gone.

  108. #108 vespera
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis should stay, despite being an ass, since he did win immunity. Get rid of Simon.

  109. #109 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok. Bye bye.

    He seems to be one of those freakish right-wingers who accepts evolution but loves himself religion and conservative bs. Why he comes here I dunno, other than he’s infatuated with his bestest friend everrrrr Ken Miller.

  110. #110 Christopher
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, definitely. Hope he doesn’t get immunity.

  111. #111 hf
    March 18, 2009

    Simon again.

  112. #112 Kobra
    March 18, 2009
  113. #113 Elliott
    March 18, 2009

    For my next vote: Facilis

    Not on the list, but JIM needs to go to Dungeon too for:

    Posted by: Jim | March 18, 2009 2:47 PM

    I vote to evict PZ Myers. His crimes? Insipidity, stupidity, and wanking.

  114. #114 Logicel
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Silver Fox

    AG blows out the most meaningless hot air ever, but I just skip over his vapid mush. Did toy for voting for him, but do not want to waste a vote for SILVER FOX who is ridiculously dense, oppressively patronizing, and deeply clueless.

  115. #115 me2
    March 18, 2009

    Ichthyic @85

    “My next book:

    “On Sex and Sexual Orientation in Bacon”

    I predict the title alone will move it into amazon’s top 100″

    Hopefully John Kwok doesn’t get to review it.

  116. #116 Klokwurk
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    The Scottish Farmer:

    The pilot of an aerobatic biplane landed in the recently mown field of a Scottish farmer to make a few adjustments to his engine. While he was tinkering with his machine, he noticed a Scotsman and his wife watching with a great deal of curiosity. The Scotsman asked the pilot how much he would charge to give both he and his wife a ride.

    ‘Well’, said the pilot, ‘Normally I charge $50 dollars each, but if you are both completely quiet throughout the flight, the ride will be free of charge. If I hear the least amount of noise, you will owe the full fare.’

    The couple quickly climbed aboard, and the pilot taxied and took off. Immediately, he proceeded to put his plane through all of its paces: barrel rolls, stalls, spins, split S maneuvers, you name it and he did it. The couple in back were completely silent throughout the thirty minute flight.

    Upon landing, the pilot said, ‘I really have to hand it to you for keeping quiet through all that!’

    ‘Aye’, said the Scotsman, ‘but I’ll admit, ye almost heard me when the wife fell out.’

  117. #117 Jo
    March 18, 2009

    I also vote for Facilis for his comment in the Pope/condoms thread. Idiot.

  118. #118 Vic
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke

  119. #119 sjk
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis, because he is no fun at all.

    But John Kwok makes the second place in the modesty competition.

  120. #120 ice9
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    Kwok can be amusing.

    ice

  121. #121 Natalie
    March 18, 2009

    Write in: Scott from Oregon. He doesn’t show up much, but fuck is he obnoxious when he does.

  122. #122 Watchman
    March 18, 2009

    Despite Facilis’s strong resume, and despite the surprisingly nauseating backspin of his overhand serve on today’s PopeQuack thread, I must cast my vote to plonk the vapidly disgusting:

    Simon

  123. #123 BeamStalk
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon. I don’t post much but holy fucking christmas jew is he annoying. I would also guess an upstanding christian along the lines of Ted Haggard.

  124. #124 SpankMeSIlly
    March 18, 2009

    You have to wonder about a guy who encourages people to talk about how evil they think others are.

    If there were a vote for biggest Scienceblogs Jackass, PZ would win, hands down, then brag about it, and all his minions would say they’re Jackasses too.

    Sycophants rule!

    I guess the Scienceblog editors keep him around for the same reason that TV and radio shows let Ann Coulter spew all over the airwaves: Love him or hate him, he brings traffic to the site. And traffic means more advertising dollars. PZ Meyers – The Rush Limbaugh of Scienceblogs.

    Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics:
    Even if you win, you’re still retarded.

    You win!

  125. #125 Fred Mounts
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis

  126. #126 Trillian
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  127. #127 Grendels Dad
    March 18, 2009

    Feynmaniac,

    As long as you are being so industrious, and I am still trying to catch up after missing most of the comments from February, you mind doing a ?greatest hits? (or misses, as the case may be) for Africangenesis and SF. They stick out in my mind, but for reasons that are a bit hazy at the moment.

    P.S. After all of the bacon talk, would it offend our tentacled overlords to get some shrimp recipes? Maybe we could ease into it with some bacon wrapped shrimp?

  128. #128 ShadetheDruid
    March 18, 2009

    My vote for this round has to go to.. Simon.

  129. #129 Brownian
    March 18, 2009

    “Why the fuck are you here Jim?”

    Good question. There’s not a lot of value to be had from a blog that devotes so much of its energy to ridiculing people.

    Bye-bye.

    Jesus, Jim. Careful you don’t accidentally knock that industrial-sized drum of screaming fucking moron on yourself.

  130. #130 NickK
    March 18, 2009

    It’s time to nuke him from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

    Fuckin-A, man!! Fuckin-A!!

  131. #131 Christopher
    March 18, 2009

    Can we offer up a learning experience for the immunity challenges from now on? Say, have the trolls go out and get a real science magazine and summarize a specific article in it on how it impacts a scientific topic?

    I’m big on learning more than BSing.

  132. #132 Sanity Jane
    March 18, 2009

    So hard to choose…but I’m going with Simon in hopes of reading no more of what looks like barely controlled Tourette’s driven by the confused sexuality of an underachieving adolescent. (Methinks he doth protest teh gay too much.) Not funny, just sad and disgusting.

  133. #133 Lsuoma
    March 18, 2009

    Silver Fox.

  134. #134 Lee Picton
    March 18, 2009

    Trolls are by turn entertaining, frustrating, stupid, exasperating, unintentionally funny, and dense. But none of them roused in me the drgree of antipathy that Barb did. She was hands down, easy to ban for her sheer evilness. This decision is harder. I find it pretty easy to ignore a troll I don’t care for since his/her name is at the top of the post so I can’t really get worked up about most of them. But Simon does give me the creeps, so this time, I vote for Simon.

  135. #135 Sastra
    March 18, 2009

    I think one round was enough, frankly.

    I’m voting Simon mostly because I don’t want to see any of the others go.

  136. #136 speedwell
    March 18, 2009

    This is the joke that seems to go over the best when I tell it… apologies if “it ain’t the way you heard it”…

    Anyway, Carlos, the leader of the street gang, calls young De’Von, one of the gangsters, over to meet him at a deserted warehouse down on the wrong side of town. When De’Von gets to the meeting place, Carlos tells him, “Yo, De’Von, I been watchin’ you and you’re tough. Think you’re all that? Well, I got a job for you. I want you to be my lieutenant. But in order to prove you’ve got what it takes, you have to do three things for me.”

    De’von nods.

    “Chillin’. Well behind this first door there’s a huge bottle of Everclear. I want you to drink the whole bottle without stopping for breath, and you have to hold it all down for ten minutes, to show you’re real cool. Then you come back out here and I’ll take you to the second room. In there, there’s a pack of hungry street dogs and I want you to fight them and make them obey you to prove you’re a real leader. Then come back out here and I’ll take you to a room where I got something you’ll like, my man. I got a beautiful chica in bed in that third room, and I want you to fuck her brains out to prove you’re a real man. OK? Go!”

    So De’Von runs into the first room and Carlos shuts the door and smiles as he hears the steady “glug-glug-glug” sound without a single pause.

    After the ten minutes are up, De’Von opens the door and comes staggering out. Carlos shows him to another room and closes the door behind him.

    From behind the closed door, Carlos can hear wild barks and growls and human cries and screams. The noise and commotion go on for at least an hour, and Carlos is beginning to get concerned.

    Finally the room falls silent. De’Von opens the door, leans against the door frame, and gasps out, “Damn, you are one serious mofo, Carlos. I can’t believe I made it through that shit. Now… where’s that girl I gotta fight?”

    Ba-dum-bump…

  137. #137 varlo
    March 18, 2009

    Why not first perform a shotgun marriage between Kwok and Simon, then boot the happy (?) couple?

  138. #138 LightningRose
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis the twit.

  139. #139 sublunarynature
    March 18, 2009

    1 vote from me to kick out simon.

    1 vote from me for more discussion of oral sex and lesbians! (reading that thread was way more fun than I should be allowed to have at work)

    However, as I don’t like bacon (I know! Blasphemy! Sorry.), can I have ice cream instead?

  140. #140 Ben
    March 18, 2009

    #42,

    My wife and I are planning to marry a third this summer. She is a woman that we both love and we all feel the best thing would be a plural marriage.

    Strangly enough, both women are Christian and I am an atheist.

  141. #141 heliobates
    March 18, 2009

    Jesus, Jim. Careful you don’t accidentally knock that industrial-sized drum of screaming fucking moron on yourself.

    Yeah, it might blot out the Industrial Stupid Concentrate stain all down the front of him.

  142. #142 aiabx
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke

  143. #143 Katrina
    March 18, 2009

    This round is tough for me. Two of my least favorites are competing with each other: Piltdown Man and Simon.

    In spite of Killfile, I still groan every time I see that Piltdown Man has posted. It’s like driving past an accident and trying NOT to look. But Simon is incoherent in his scatological obsession and the repulsiveness just really gets to me.

    I vote again for Simon. But Pilty is my runner-up.

    With that, I wish you all a good night. I’ll try to catch back up again tomorrow.

  144. #144 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Kill them all, let God sort them out.
    Or, Simon.
    I’m slightly worried though – what if we banned all the trolls – what would we do then? Even my new-found interests in science lesbians would likely pall. And the supply of arrogant, religiously inclined nutcases on the internet can only be finite – surely?

  145. #145 speedwell
    March 18, 2009

    She is a woman that we both love and we all feel the best thing would be a plural marriage.

    Congratulations, Ben, that’s awesome. Keep that eye on what’s good and right about your marriage, and about what makes the three of you happy, and you’ll be well defended against people who can’t see past the potential problems. They’re no better than those old ladies who greet the news of a new pregnancy with all the things they think could go wrong. Much happiness to you all!

  146. #146 'Tis Himself
    March 18, 2009

    I seriously considered voting for Simon this time. His homoerotic fantasies are disturbing.

    My vote this time is for John Kwok. On the Panda’s Thumb thread tomh linked to yesterday, I found this classic bit of treason:

    If we do become the USSA, then I am hopeful that our military will honor their oaths to defend the U. S. Constitution by any means necessary, including a military coup d?etat against the Messiah.

    Unless Kwok can successfully bullshit around his hatred for the rule of law (extra credit if he does it without once mentioning his high school) I will continue to vote to throw his dumb ass off this blog.

  147. #147 MyaR
    March 18, 2009

    I must cast for my vote for the one from the list who first annoyed their way into my consciousness. And I’ve been busy lately, so am not as familiar with some as I would be normally. So my vote goes to the one who’s been annoying for what seems like years now, with essentially no change — Africangenesis.

  148. #148 TuxKiller
    March 18, 2009

    And my vote goes to….. SIMON

  149. #149 Sili
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok

    I still say the next immunity challenge should be for them to decide among themselves unanimously.

    Actually. Annoying as they are, I don’t think I need to see the herd culled more at the moment. But I’m getting very irregular here, so …

  150. #150 BAllanJ
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for SIMON

    kamaka beat me to this above, but I get a delightful picture in my head of a dungeon wall with Barb and Simon attached to it with ankle and leg irons… and they’re blabbing on infuriating each other to no end… but we can’t hear it… Ah.

  151. #151 ???
    March 18, 2009

    Actually ??? my post applies to you too. -E.V.

    Concern troll is still concerned.

    (Things for ??? to do: Learn what a control troll is)

    Controll troll = ev

  152. #152 Strangebrew
    March 18, 2009

    Simple Simon!

  153. #153 ???
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for concern / control troll EV.

  154. #154 badrescher
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok. The name-dropping is pathetic & annoying.

  155. #155 Ryk
    March 18, 2009

    I’m fairly new here and am not familiar with all of these people so my vote isn’t fully informed. I was leaning towards Africangenisis as a prime specimen of stupidity, but then the pope post turned me in favor of Facilis.
    I have read comments from both and either is worthy of being dungeoned. At this time however I am voting for John Kwok. Making threats is stupid. Making ridiculous little threats involving friends on Facebook is more stupid. I say vote him off the island just for being a little bitch.

  156. #156 Kel
    March 18, 2009

    I think I’ll change my vote from simon to AfricanGenesis, if for nothing else than to stop him complaining about AGW at the same time as saying “I’m just looking at the science”

  157. #157 Edward Lark
    March 18, 2009

    Still de-lurking for John Kwok. I’m telling you guys, you may think he is an insufferable narcissist now, but if he isn’t booted . . .

    Since Barb is gone, my close second will have to shift to Facilis. He reminds me of a thick-headed git on a photography site I frequent that thought he was the paragon of logic and reasoning, while being completely immune to same.

  158. #158 Ben
    March 18, 2009

    Thanks Speedwell. This is not something we are rushing into. The three of us have known each other for years and we are all old enough to know the difference between lust and love.

  159. #159 badrescher
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok. The name-dropping is pathetic & annoying.

  160. #160 Pete Rooke
    March 18, 2009

    I believe that if selected for banning I should be allowed to mount a defence/appeal and call some character witnesses to protest on my behalf. If you would like to act as a character witness for me, in the hopefully unlikely event of my banning (an event that draws ever nearer the longer this game continues), please let me know!

  161. #161 JackC
    March 18, 2009

    Simian

    er…

    Samoan

    dammit

    it is like trying to grab a watermellon seed….

    S
    I
    M
    O
    N

    THERE! Gotcha, ya little bastid….

    JC

  162. #162 Ryk
    March 18, 2009

    I’m fairly new here and am not familiar with all of these people so my vote isn’t fully informed. I was leaning towards Africangenisis as a prime specimen of stupidity, but then the pope post turned me in favor of Facilis.
    I have read comments from both and either is worthy of being dungeoned. At this time however I am voting for John Kwok. Making threats is stupid. Making ridiculous little threats involving friends on Facebook is more stupid. I say vote him off the island just for being a little bitch.

  163. #163 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Pete, the best thing you can do is to disappear for a couple of days. Out of threads, out of mind. Something Kwok can’t figure out. Can you?

  164. #164 withheld
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok

    Unless he somehow wins the immunity challenge.

  165. #165 Evolving Squid
    March 18, 2009

    Curb the Kwok!

    Rooke seems to be making a funny up above me here, so I say he stays at least for another round.

  166. #166 Hipstermama
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  167. #167 Aquaria
    March 18, 2009

    Oh goody! A chance to toss Silver Fox to the sharks.

    Silver Fox’s immunity challenge has to be explaining, cogently and succinctly, why assertion is not evidence.

    I know–it’s a no-win for him, but it’s the least he deserves.

  168. #168 Hellsau
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis.

    I am a sporting chap, and I’d like to force him to win yet another immunity challenge to survive. His comment on the Pope thread was deadly stupid as well.

  169. #169 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke. You could at least try to win immunity. It’s your best chance.

    It’s neck and neck between Kwok and Simon though.

  170. #170 Doc Bill
    March 18, 2009

    Since Kwok is famous for the phrase describing the Disco Tute, “mendacious intellectual pornographers” which really rolls off the tongue …

    … my official vote goes to a Genuine idiot, the kind who gives morons a bad name …

    Silver Fox

  171. #171 Stagyar zil Doggo
    March 18, 2009

    Damn! I guess I’m not around as much anymore. The only contestant that I recognize is Piltdown Man. For those unfamiliar, he seems to be some kind of ultra right wing “the current Pope is a scandalously liberal abomination”, Society of St. Pius X type Catlikker. You can meet him in this thread if you felt so inclined.

    I am quite torn over this guy. It would probably be a good thing not to have a whiny (on Catholic “Persecution”), ultra right wing nutjob incapable of making an argument not involving special pleading around. On the other hand the idea of a Catholic who wants to castrate popes carries a certain morbid interest.

    on the whole I believe I shall abstain from voting this round.

  172. #172 Josh
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, although the more I read his stuff the more I wonder if he’s real.

  173. #173 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    ??? – being a bit of a psychic, I’m sensing narcisstic anger, absent sex-life and….you’ve just lost your job, correct? Do you see how the first, causes the second two, which in turn leads back to the first?
    Yes, it’s all a big circle, like your blow-up friend’s mouth.
    That’ll be $100.

  174. #174 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    Thanks Speedwell. This is not something we are rushing into. The three of us have known each other for years and we are all old enough to know the difference between lust and love.

    how do you deal with intimacy in a 3 way relationship?

    I’m genuinely curious.

  175. #175 CG
    March 18, 2009

    Yay for round 2! How many more will we have? Will this be a last-troll-standing competition?

    My vote for this round goes to Simon, nothing at all good comes from his posts. He’s a nutter, and he has terrible communication skills too! The posts of his that aren’t copied and pasted from elsewhere are just about unreadable (and could possibly be improved by being completely unreadable because they are such rubbish).

  176. #176 CrypticLife
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    Kwok’s facebook threat was just hilarious. I think Facilis is actually trying to get banned.

    Rooke is creepy and dishonest, but at least represents something. Simon is just . . . ugly.

    The interesting thing about this immunity challenge is that responders can’t cheat off each other. I still think it’s a bit weak, though. And frankly, if one of them said they weren’t planning to do anything to change I’d have to give them full credit for honesty.

  177. #177 LanceR, JSG
    March 18, 2009

    Rooke(d), we have the ultimate character witness. You. Your past posts are all preserved for everyone to peruse. It is too late to attempt justification. It is not, however, too late to change your behavior.

    Start thinking *before* you post crap like “I would never inflict oral sex on a woman”.

    I’m not changing my vote. This pathetic whiner needs to be exiled for a while, perchance he will learn how to think.

    Rooke(d)

  178. #178 cactusren
    March 18, 2009

    Simon. While the others may be vacuous, they at least seem to be trying to make some point. It would seem that Simon’s only goal is to write about his sexual fantasies (by projecting them onto others) in a venue where none of his pious friends will ever see them. It’s not funny, and doesn’t contribute to any sort of conversation.

  179. #179 James F
    March 18, 2009

    Could we just ban anyone who trolls the voting threads? Because…damn.

  180. #180 Lowell
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

    He’s totally useless. None of the other contestants are even close, in my opinion.

  181. #181 ???
    March 18, 2009

    ??? – being a bit of a psychic, I’m sensing narcisstic anger, absent sex-life and….you’ve just lost your job, correct? Do you see how the first, causes the second two, which in turn leads back to the first?

    No, no and no. 0 for 3 so far.

    Yes, it’s all a big circle, like your blow-up friend’s mouth.

    Project much?

  182. #182 Ubertotung
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  183. #183 Avenel
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke

  184. #184 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke. You could at least try to win immunity. It’s your best chance.

    One more post, then disappear if you are smart.

    If you lose, no appeals. After all, how many appeals do you give at your blog? (I really don’t know, never visited.)

  185. #185 Blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    “I believe that if selected for banning I should be allowed to mount a defence/appeal and call some character witnesses to protest on my behalf. If you would like to act as a character witness for me, in the hopefully unlikely event of my banning (an event that draws ever nearer the longer this game continues), please let me know! ”

    So do you just like it here? Why not try the challenge, or just make a plea stating why you want to stick around.

    That being said: my vote goes to Simon. He’s a good old fashioned internet troll, and it’s hard to even imagine another person on the backend of that spew.

  186. #186 Heywood
    March 18, 2009

    Axe Simon!

  187. #187 Aquaria
    March 18, 2009

    I believe that if selected for banning I should be allowed to mount a defence/appeal and call some character witnesses to protest on my behalf

    It’s not your blog. You don’t get to make the rules.

    You have the immunity requirement to meet if you want to stick around. That, or hope that someone is crazier/dumber than you.

    I know it’s a tough thing to decide between the likes of John Kwok, Silver Fox, AG, Simon and you, but you never know–you might get to stay. If you’re really lucky, an even more disgusting and braindead troll will come along and keep you from getting tossed to the sharks.

    So meet the condition laid before you, or fuck off.

  188. #188 JackC
    March 18, 2009

    @116 – you may have presented that as a joke, but I know of at least one person where – well – not TWO passengers, only one – that really happened!

    Not going to tell the whole story, but suffice it to say, it was the pilot’s birthday, tandem biplane with new aerobatic student in the back.

    Upon aircraft auto-recovery from an aileron roll, and trainer’s attempts to talk to the student, pilot turns around – and finds an empty seat.

    Punch line: The “student” was a skydiver and bailed at the top of the roll. Happy Birthday! :-)

    JC

  189. #189 Sven DiMilo
    March 18, 2009

    I’m not voting because if I couldn’t get myself banned, then nobody else should get banned either. *pouts*

    As previously stated, most of those on the list are in my personal killfile anyway and don’t generally bother me directly. I’d have to vote based on whose comments bother me most when others quote them. That would have to be the odious and useless simon (capitalization varies, evidently purposefully to evade the killfile).

    So OK, I vote to banninate simon.

    Kwok is a special case. The “Lockheart” tag is very apt. Again, IANA?, but the diagnoses of others (Asperger’s, narcissism, or most likely a toxic combination of the two) seem accurate to me. (Exhibit A: he almost never uses the word “me,” preferring either “myself” or “yours truly.”)

    The guy is indeed a tireless foe of creationism, especially over on Amazon, but perhaps a little too tireless. The same kind of obsessive completism that causes him, after seeing a movie, to review not just the movie but also (separately) the score and soundtrack of the movie, for every movie, also causes him to review–at great length, and never failing to repeat the mantra “mendacious intellectual pornography”–every…single…freakin…book on creationism, ID and evolution, whether or not he has read the damn book. It goes beyond tireless to not mentally healthy (IMO). He believes deeply (and, I’m sure unconsciously) that his opinion about whatever is as important to everyone else as it is to him.

    Then there’s the whole obsession with Abbie Smith thing; he has described his banning from erv as a “long-distance lovers’ quarrel” and as “losing the love of his life” and he brings her name up at every opportunity, appropriate or not. Very creepy in a fantasy-addled-stalker kind of way, as many have pointed out.

    As for the incessant Stuy-High and Brown U referencing and the ridiculous compulsive dropping of names of friends, classmates, teachers, and fellow alumni, my feelings have moved rather quickly from amusement to amazement to pity. It seems clear that Kwok’s self-worth is inextricably tied up with these associations and that he is incapable of realizing that nobody else is impressed. It’s best read as inadvertant self-parody, I think. He also shows signs of confusing Facebook and Amazon “friends” with real friends.

    I just don’t want to make fun of the guy anymore (especially since I explicitly promised not to*. It’s not fun–he is completely humorless and oblivious to irony. And I guess I don’t think he deserves banning just for being ineluctably insufferable. I believe he can’t help it–and I predict that he’s psychologically incapable of rising to PZ’s new immunity challenge. Instead he’ll get defensive. Even this long, direct analysis (which I would be mortified to read about myself, or even my internet “self”) will not make a dent.

    So now I’ve said everything I have to say about the fascinating J*hn Kw*k (oops, except for: why the hell does he caps-lock GOD?) and will forever shut up about the poor guy.

    *That thread, beginning at #83 and snowballing from there, is the best single example of the Kwok MO I have seen. Even after PZ intervened repeatedly and I fled the field in boredom, he just kept going.

  190. #190 SC, OM
    March 18, 2009

    I believe that if selected for banning I should be allowed to mount a defence/appeal

    Oh, please, do it now. I’m almost feeling guilty about how much I’m enjoying these threads*, but I’ll admit I’d find that most entertaining.

    Actually, why don’t you just respond to the immunity challenge?

    *(though I wish the insults could be had with no traces of sexism/misogyny)

  191. #191 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Rooke,

    Your best bet now is to take a shot at the immunity challenge. If no one else does you will win by default.

    While I have probably been one of your harshest critics here (even though I didn’t make the gruesome trio!) I have given you credit when I thought you deserved it . Your recent good behavior and lack of analogies makes me you think you don’t merit a banning. Just keep in mind this isn’t your blog.

  192. #192 ???
    March 18, 2009

    Could we just ban anyone who trolls the voting threads? Because…damn.

    Okay, you’re banned.

  193. #193 Heywood
    March 18, 2009

    Simon!

  194. #194 ProudCynic
    March 18, 2009

    Hmm… Again, as a long-time lurker, I don’t have much knowledge about the trolls of this place. Though I followed the links to some of Peter Rooke’s ‘commentary’ on Titanaboa and had an encounter with Kwok, I haven’t found either of them particularly annoying.

    Thus, I was going to vote for Simon, but then I remembered Kwok’s bizarre name-dropping habits. And seeing as, from my limited knowledge, Simon has disappeared on his own…

    My vote’s for John Kwok.

  195. #195 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Project much?

    Indeed I do, indeed I do ;)
    You are aware that Wanker isn’t, strictly speaking, a job, aren’t you?

  196. #196 Kel
    March 18, 2009

    I’m looking forward to seeing if any of them attempt to pass the immunity challenge. It would be interesting to see how aware these people are of their own behaviour. Either way it’ll make for a laugh.

  197. #197 ennui
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    Because (ctrl-C)+(ctrl-V)!= thinking.

  198. #198 Stu
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis.

    By the way… do you know why Simon stinks so bad?

    So blind people can hate him too.

  199. #199 Jenny T
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok

    He needs to learn to control his tourette-like outbursts of name-dropping. It is sad seeing how out of control he is with respect to that. He needs help.

    I haven’t dealt much with africangenesis, so I can’t really in good conscience vote for him, but perhaps next round if he pulls a Kwok and shows up to show everyone exactly why he was nominated.

    Piltdown Man and Silver Fox are annoying, but I can handle their annoyances more than a name-dropping, mentally ill, internet stalking bore who might as well be stuck in high school given his value for acquaintances.

    As for the rest, Pete Rooke seems to be growing slowly and can be fun to watch, Simon is just incoherent and Facilis just makes me roll my eyes.

  200. #200 Flori-DUH Rob
    March 18, 2009

    I was all ready to cast my vote for Simon, but Rooke’s “I would never inflict oral sex on a woman” quote just irks the hell out of me. (Although he is most likely saving a woman or two from utter disappointment, and himself from embarassment.)

    Gotta vote Rooke.

  201. #201 Saber
    March 18, 2009

    Simple Simon for verbal slime and
    homophobic fare…
    Says Simple Simon “Penies and ‘ginas
    are the only correct pair.
    But the line on Simple Simon
    is totally clear to any,
    Simple Simon wants a fine man
    to fellate his own eeny-meeny.

  202. #202 MikeM
    March 18, 2009

    I’m sticking with Rooke, because of his persistence.

    You’re not one second closer to my salvation, Rooke. And you helped.

  203. #203 Sioux Laris
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok, on mine honour.

  204. #204 Bride of Shrek OM
    March 18, 2009

    My vote for this session is that total knob Simon.

    Unlike the others that occasionaly throw in a howler that we can all snigger at (Peter Rooke’s “never inflict oral sex on a woman” comment let’s face it, pretty funny. I wouldn’t let that little dweeb near my vagina if he was the last tongue on Earth.) or, in Facilis’ case, get just plain antsy which allows us to poke it with a stick for a while for kicks… well Simon is just plain bloody weird and no amusement value at all.

  205. #205 Moses
    March 18, 2009

    I know Barb was the #1 choice, but I was mostly absent during the Barb-storm so I’m sticking with my main demented fuck-wit: Pete Rooke

  206. #206 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    By the way… do you know why Simon stinks so bad?
    So blind people can hate him too.

    Don’t you just know that this started life as a really nasty racist joke? And don’t you just have a teeny weeny suspicion that AG told it when it was?

  207. #207 blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    I never could figure out which way Pete’s infliction was supposed to be going. I guess either way is a “sin”. But there’s a big difference between a sin and something unpleasant, so why the assumption that the woman would find it unpleasant? Later on he said something about people engaging in oral sex commiting a sin similar to condom use. The only sad thing that says to me is that if ever a girl did go down on him she would “fall from grace” in his eyes. Damn, can’t win for losing!

    Besides I think maybe he’s… confused. I think I’m enabling now though, so I better shut it.

  208. #208 SC, OM
    March 18, 2009

    No need to ban Africangenesis. We at the International Central Committee of the Left Anarchists have our own plans for him – far worse than anything you squiddy-bourgeois can dream up…

  209. #209 Africangenesis
    March 18, 2009

    It diconcerting that someone who is an atheist and scientifically literate doesn’t agree with you on every point and dares to question your assumptions. I disagree without demonizing, so it is embarrassing to have your own boorish behavior put to shame. I show that there is an intellectual defense to conservatism and libertarianism that is not easy to dismiss. It is uncomfortable to be shown the weak and ignorant ad hominem namecalling of your leaders that has been passing as cleverness. It is frightening to be shown that those you admired and thought knowledgable are actually ignorant. There are those that called me arrogant, because they were used to receiving unquestioning agreement and admiration and were embarrassed to be shown to be wrong or intellectually clueless. Internicene wars are often the most viscious. The far left progressives like being thought the most irreverent and challenging. They don’t like being shown shallow, destructive and vindictive by someone more nihilistic and yet more comfortable in his own skin than they are.

    I come here to explore the implications of human evolution for society and morality, full of wonder and curiosity and willingness to learn. Is this a good place to do that?

  210. #210 Cath the Canberra Cook
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, on the basis of the insult to PZ & Trophy Wife in the anniversary thread. I was thinking Kwok, more for his creepy Abby-stalking than the birther & name-dropping shit, but nasty personal insults to our host’s wife sealed it for Simon.

  211. #211 Moses
    March 18, 2009

    Posted by: E.V. | March 18, 2009 3:01 PM

    SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!
    SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!
    SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!! SCOTT FROM OREGON!!!

    Personally, I think him and the rest of the gun-toting, quasi-survivalist libertarian crowd should be up there too. But he’s not on the list.

    Though he should be.

  212. #212 Ryk
    March 18, 2009

    I’m fairly new here and am not familiar with all of these people so my vote isn’t fully informed. I was leaning towards Africangenisis as a prime specimen of stupidity, but then the pope post turned me in favor of Facilis.
    I have read comments from both and either is worthy of being dungeoned. At this time however I am voting for John Kwok. Making threats is stupid. Making ridiculous little threats involving friends on Facebook is more stupid. I say vote him off the island just for being a little bitch.

  213. #213 Captain Mike
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  214. #214 dogscratcher
    March 18, 2009

    #209 gets my vote.

  215. #215 Ryk
    March 18, 2009

    I’m fairly new here and am not familiar with all of these people so my vote isn’t fully informed. I was leaning towards Africangenisis as a prime specimen of stupidity, but then the pope post turned me in favor of Facilis.
    I have read comments from both and either is worthy of being dungeoned. At this time however I am voting for John Kwok. Making threats is stupid. Making ridiculous little threats involving friends on Facebook is more stupid. I say vote him off the island just for being a little bitch.

  216. #216 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    AG. It’s your numbskulled libertarianism that irks people… it gets really boring and repetitive. If you left those rants for other blogs you would get less votes off the island.

    Also your silly AGW denialism gets really boring too.

    I won’t vote you off yet.

    Show us that you understand WHY you’re on the list.

  217. #217 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    BTW -??? is probably Scott from O’s sockpuppet.

  218. #218 the other Adam
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    At first I was going to vote for Silver Fox, but when I think about it, Simon’s homophobia, bizarre fixations and utter lack of anything resembling thought make the choice obvious.

    I also vote that post #160 counts as Pete’s attempt at the immunity challenge. No do-overs.

  219. #219 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    There are those that called me arrogant

    No fucking way!

    Seriously…you do realise you’re supposed to be defending yourself, don’t you?
    Or have you been taking lessons from Kwok?

  220. #220 Stu
    March 18, 2009

    Fuck a duck, AG… are you serious?

  221. #221 Kel
    March 18, 2009

    Show us that you understand WHY you’re on the list.

    Now that you’ve told him…

  222. #222 Rilke's Granddaughter
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok, without a doubt. I’m disappointed in the boy, too. That marvelous sprint from behind to catch up, and then he fails at the finish.

    Sad, really. He just kwoked up.

  223. #223 SC, OM
    March 18, 2009

    The challenge for the seven surviving candidates is to write a short comment, 200 words or less, that reveals that they actually understand why their attitudes and pattern of expression have so exasperated readers here, and explains what they will do to change their behavior in the future.

    Posted by: Africangenesis | March 18, 2009 5:18 PM

    FAIL!

    (I don’t actually think he should be banned. I do think he’s nuts.)

  224. #224 DCN
    March 18, 2009

    Silver Fox. While less noxious than Simon and Facilis, his idiocy pervasive and tedious enough to nearly ruin whatever thread he decides to taint.

  225. #225 CSue
    March 18, 2009

    AfricanGenesis.

    Although it is funny to watch him/her/it try to look smart – by misspelling big words.

  226. #226 astrounit
    March 18, 2009

    Okay, I get the picture. A bit of sport like at a shooting gallery at the carnival. Not bad, as long as we get to take them all out eventually. (No problem there either, for we can expect replacements to pop up anytime).

    Right now I’ve got my bead on Simon, but Kwok is right next to him.

    E.V. #26 has a pretty good exclamation point there. When’s Scott From Oregon going to pop up in this gallery?

  227. #227 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Haha. Chances are he still doesn’t get it.

  228. #228 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    When’s Scott From Oregon going to pop up in this gallery?

    He already has as “???”.

  229. #229 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    I apologize to all for name-dropping, and for mentioning my high school alma mater (which, on second thought should be mentioned since its current principal has banned the teaching of ID creationist there.).

  230. #230 Natalie
    March 18, 2009

    EV, what makes you think so?

  231. #231 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    I think the above post is a Kwoe

  232. #232 Leigh Williams
    March 18, 2009

    simOn!

    Top 5 reasons to ban Simon:

    5) His homoeroticism and abortion porn are creepy.
    4) He’s fucking illiterate.
    3) He can’t even type his own damn name.
    2) He’s not amusing.

    And reason #1 to ban Simon:

    1) Evil trumps annoying every time.

    p.s. Pete Rooke: I’ll speak up for you; I think you’ve got potential, son. Just lose the book-binding fetish. And, damn, do a little research about sex. Experiment to find out if women LIKE having oral sex “inflicted” on them. You obviously don’t have enough data. I think (pardon the profanity, now, it’s a little double entendre) you’re just fucking clueless and should avoid the subject until you have some real-world experience.

  233. #233 astrounit
    March 18, 2009

    Steve_C #227: I beg your pardon?

  234. #234 JeffreyD
    March 18, 2009

    I am all for mom and apple pie, not to mention “oral sex, lesbians, and bacon”. Hmmm, lesbian oral sex on a bed of baco…err excuse me, be right back.

    OK, where was I? Oh yes – I find Africangenesis, Facilis, Piltdown Man, and Simon easy to killfile and to ignore their mention by other posters. Like Walton, I still think there may be a spark in Petie Rooke, so willing to have him hang on a bit (Petie, I am in the UK for a while, want to meet for an orange squash? Walton never responded to this offer – I really don’t kill on first acquaintance).

    So my vote is for tossing KWOK, JOHN, famous celebrity with delusions of adequacy, into the memory hole.

    Ciao y’all

  235. #235 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    Natalie:
    The styles are similar and the juvenile attitude of ??? matches Scott when he’s pissy/bitchy. ??? may not be Scott but both could vanish and the world would be a better smarter place.

  236. #236 Laura
    March 18, 2009

    I’m a lesbian… eating bacon… any offers for the oral sex? ;)

    And my vote goes to Simon. I have nothing to say that hasn’t already been said.

  237. #237 withheld
    March 18, 2009

    Pete, if you can answer the immunity challenge, you can buy your safety. Show that you can accept that your moral imperatives about how people should conduct their private lives are not universal. Just because you believe something is wrong, doesn’t mean that it applies to everyone. It only applies to you.

    I’m not willing to ban you, because I still think you can learn something. You seem to be young and strong principled, but misguided. You see, I used to be you, and lately I’ve been missing me, so I asked Hathaway if I could room with me, and he said “sure.” Sorry, I seem to have gotten off track.

    I was once young and Catholic. I believed that I was right and everyone else was evil. I grew up. I can now accept that people are different, and what is right for me is not the only way to live. I’m straight, married, two kids. I also support same-sex marriage. It does nothing to hurt me, and I believe it will help strengthen the community. Why would I want to get in the way of any two (or three, or …) people who love each other enough to actually spend the rest of their lives together. It’s not about sex. It is about relationships. The sooner you can learn that, the happier we will all be.

    It is up to you. We can’t be character witnesses, because all we know if you is what you write here. Show us you can grow, and you will be allowed to stay.

  238. #238 Numad
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok, to avoid switching jockeys in midstream.

    I think one of these trolls might be the one who likened a single comment of mine to “an inquisition”, but I don’t recall which one that was.

    Oooh, group sex.

  239. #239 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    There was a typo, so am reposting this:

    I apologize to all for name-dropping, and for mentioning my high school alma mater (which, on second thought should be mentioned since its current principal has banned the teaching of ID creationism there.).

  240. #240 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    @ Ben #140:

    All the best to you are the two ladies you will share your life with. I think polymarriage/polyamory is a GOOD idea, and I’m deadly serious. If it works for you, it works. All partners must go in with eyes wide open and the minimum quantity of bullshit. I echo the comments of Speedwell @ #145.

    @ Icthyic #174

    Dude, count me in as curious too. I’ve never gone as far as full blown poly marriage. The lifestyle we have suits thus far. Perhaps that should be the Lifestyle.

    Louis

  241. #241 cicely
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

  242. #242 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Astro. I was speaking to Kel. He thinks I set up AG for immunity.

  243. #243 Pete Rooke
    March 18, 2009

    The Immunity Challenge

    Much of the rancour generated on Pharyngula is not too dissimilar to other sites on which people from diametrically opposite points of view come into contact. Typically the issues are controversial and the case for/against is made with a vehemence that encourages assent and discourages dissent with the blogger (in this case PZ Myers).

    The views may make perfect sense in the context of the site and its nature but the internet is not clearly demarcated and there are no clear boundaries that have been established. Conflict is inevitable. Creationists come into contact with advocates for Scientism and the result is a situation in which neither side is willing to accept even the most reasonable set of premises that their opponent sets out lest they make a logical leap in their next move that is unwarranted or disliked. The thinking goes:

    “Don’t let them get a foot in the door and they will be powerless to dispute your beliefs”.

    Beliefs are tremendously important to people. One does not simply choose to pick up or discard a belief. The protagonist in JM Coetzee’s most recent book writes:

    “I should thoroughly revise my opinions, that is what I should do. I should cull the older, more decrepit ones, find newer, up-to-date ones to replace them. But where does one go to find up-to-date opinions…Can one buy fresh opinions in the marketplace?”

    Beliefs are with us until a momentous shift occurs. The beliefs I am talking about are not trivial choices but that which shapes our entire world-view. We are inclined to dismiss evidence which does not cohere to this world-view (that determines our outlook on life) and, whatever pretence we put up, it is ultimately impossible to achieve a state of perfect rationality (nor is it necessarily desirable; we are humans and not robots after all). The mythical view from nowhere remains ever elusive.

    A second issue that leads to conflict is the anonymity of commenters (even the blogger may remain anonymous) and this leads to a general decline in basic civility. Why be reasonable when you are conversing with someone you don’t know personally and who you may never come into contact with again? The partner in the “conversation” (and often it would be generous to call it that) lacks any corporal-sensual presence. Eye contact, gestures and body posture, or the rhythm and sound of the voice are forsaken. Imagine the bond with another person who is facing you, watching you and communicating with you. Sartre perhaps overstates the case but one certainly does feel as if they are, in some small way, experiencing the other’s consciousness.

    In the light of even a stranger’s gaze the propensity to be cruel is greatly diminished. That is not necessarily to dispute the grounds for conflict which occur when I post but the context does make it far more likely.

  244. #244 Barklikeadog
    March 18, 2009

    Pete for sure. He’s sick at best.

  245. #245 windy
    March 18, 2009

    natural cynic & Sastra:

    Do we hafta vote again, already? There should be at least a week between challenges.

    I think one round was enough, frankly.

    I AGREE! This way we are going to burn through contestants too fast. And I don’t think it’s necessary to have a goal of banning someone on every round.

  246. #246 Guy Incognito
    March 18, 2009
  247. #247 ThisIsFun
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Facilis. Maybe he’ll come through on the immunity challenge again, since he did so well the first time. Hold his feet to the flames!

  248. #248 Pascalle
    March 18, 2009

    Silver Fox.

    So much text with so much nonsence.

  249. #249 DominEditrix
    March 18, 2009

    In descending order: Simon, Facilis, Kwok, Silver Fox, Piltdown, AG. And a promise from Pete to get some long-term psychological counselling from a non-Catholic therapist.

  250. #250 DavidCOG
    March 18, 2009

    “…write a short comment, 200 words or less, that reveals that they actually understand why their attitudes and pattern of expression have so exasperated readers here…”

    Comedy gold.

  251. #251 scooter
    March 18, 2009

    simon

  252. #252 adobedragon
    March 18, 2009

    Voting for Kwok and nominating Scott from Oregon.

  253. #253 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Hehe. Awww no. Pete FAILED.

    Funny. It’s all just a misunderstanding. phhhht.

  254. #254 Saber
    March 18, 2009

    And Pete is disqualified @ #243 for more than doubling the designated word count! Thanks for playing!

  255. #255 Longstreet63
    March 18, 2009

    I lurk here every day, though I seldom post, and don’t always make it to the end of the comment threads. But if anyone wants my opinion. here it is:

    Some of the nominees, I don’t know, so can’t comment.

    Pete Rooke is a well-recognized stain on the Internet, but he’s so utterly, earnestly clueless that he’s almost a perfect straight man. His now classic “I would never inflict oral sex on a woman” is priceless, not just for being a platinum-cast example of missing the point, but for the inherent sexism that the only understanding he had of oral sex was woman-giving-man.

    There’s you’re character witness, Pete. It would be a shame to lose the hilarious contribution of such a born gimp. Pete, you hate yourself far more than we ever could, and I’d enjoy watching it develop.

    John Kwok, on the other hand, seems to be the sort of person whose mental image comes equipped with a field marshal’s uniform, encrusted with gold leaf and tailored to a body six inches taller and fifty pounds lighter than his. His world revolves around him, the rest of us mere underlings who inexplicably fail to be loyal. The George McClellan of the group, he ko doubt tells people of his close personal friendship with PZ, who went to his high school.

    I was unfamiliar with Africangenesis until I saw his post above. Clearly a misunderstood scholar, peeved and saddened that we fail to appreciate the favor of his illuminated wisdom. Coversation with such a person is like arguing with a billboard.

    Facilis is simply stupid. But he does make a good negative example of the dangers of religion. Apparently, unused brain cells atrophy.

    Silverfox, now…that one is a waste of space. Like a brain-damaged pekingese, he has only one trick and does it constantly. And he isn’t good at it. But even though he drops the ball every single time, he still thinks he’s getting a treat.

    While I think the best answer would be to tell all of them that the world is about to be eaten by a giant mutant space-goat and congrats for getting a seat on the first ship out, given the choices, I nominate:

    Silverfox

    Get on the train, pal. You will be issued new clothing at the camp.

  256. #256 Victor W
    March 18, 2009

    My vote goes out to Simon and the rest of his chipmunk brethren.

  257. #257 Watchman
    March 18, 2009

    And reason #1 to ban Simon: 1) Evil trumps annoying every time.

    Hear, hear. And our boy Facilis appears to be in the same category as Simon.

    I do question the plonkability of AG. I find the campaign against him to be a little unsettling. Has he crossed the threshold into terminal Insipidity? That seems to be the only bannable offense he may be charged with. He’s surely innocent of Godbotting, Slagging, Spamming Sockputtetry, Morphing, Slagging, Trolling and Wanking. Is he up on charges of Stupidity? PZ’s criterion: “those who seem to say nothing but stupid things get the axe.” I think he’s clear on this one, too, though I’m sure at least one or two of you will disagree with me on that point.

    Insipidity seems to be the only possibility: “Being tedious, repetitive, and completely boring; putting the blogger to sleep by going on and on about the same thing all the time.”

    Still, the prospect disturbs me. There’s a difference between an AG and a nasty little stinkbug like Simon.

    One man’s opinion, which is open to modification.

  258. #258 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    Scientism?

    Fuck off!*

    Louis

    *This is all the intellectual argument that deserves. No such thing exists, it’s an excuse made up by extreme postmodernists/fideists etc to prevent examination of the shortcomings of their claims. Creationism has no rational support. End of story. If it did, scientists would listen. It doesn’t. We don’t. Fallacious claims insinuating the “truth is somewhere in the middle” don’t count. The “truth”, as far as such an entity can be entertained, is predicated upon the reliable, reproducible, rational evidence. Assertions by fiat do not count.

  259. #259 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    Like a brain-damaged pekingese, he has only one trick and does it constantly.

    I am so stealing that.

  260. #260 Quidam
    March 18, 2009

    SIMON

  261. #261 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Sigh…the challenge was :

    [T]o write a short comment, 200 words or less, that reveals that they actually understand why their attitudes and pattern of expression have so exasperated readers here, and explains what they will do to change their behavior in the future.

    Pete went over by almost 300 words and barely touched on the subject, Kwok mentioned his school’s principal in his answer, and Africangenesis used the opportunity to criticize everyone but himself.

    This is pathetic.

  262. #262 NewEnglandBob
    March 18, 2009

    Chop John Kwok

  263. #263 David
    March 18, 2009

    Can I vote for Barb again? Is there a deeper level of the dungeon? No? Sigh…

    In that case, my vote goes to Simon. I couldn’t find the quote someone mentioned where he asked PZ how many abortions his wife had, but his “Free HIV guaranteed” comment was not funny, not cool, and seriously uncalled; and that’s what clinched my vote for him.

    But I gotta say, it was a damn close vote between Simon and Pete Rooke. Few things can piss me off quite like people casting judgments on things that A: they know nothing about, and B: don’t concern them. And way, way…WAY too many people in this country are uptight about sex as it is. And yes, I’ve seen more people hurt by those attitudes than any dangerous or “unnatural” sex act.

    So I vote Simon this round, but Pete better start extolling the virtues of how more oral sex can better society, or I’m gunning for him in round three!

  264. #264 Longstreet63
    March 18, 2009

    @259 “I am so stealing that.”

    Thanks,EV. I actually worked on that for a few minutes to get just the right note of pathetic annoyance in there.

  265. #265 Pete Rooke
    March 18, 2009

    JefferyD,

    I would be happy to meet you and have a drink while experiencing each other’s corporal-sensual presence (see previous post).

  266. #266 Spiro Keat
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  267. #267 Mari
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok. He was a close second last time and his incorrigible behavior in the second Survival thread did nothing to help him.
    Simon is still annoying and Facilis has moved up just for his stupid comment in the pope-thread.

  268. #268 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Seriously, contestants do you think everything you write is absolutely perfect? Have you made any mistakes while here on Pharyngula?

    If so, simply write about those mistakes and how you think they effected other people. Then write on how you wish to improve. Honestly, not hard. You don’t need to quote a list of people you know, rant about science, or quote Sartre. We are just looking for you to show a bit of self-awareness, considerations of others, and an interest in improving.

    If you don’t think you’ve made a single mistake then you deserve to lose.

  269. #269 ennui
    March 18, 2009

    Pete, double fail for plagiarism!

  270. #270 Kitty'sBitch
    March 18, 2009

    I love it!!
    In an attempt to gain immunity, Pete posted a comment that included the term “scientism”.
    Come on people, that’s adorable!!
    I’ve said it before, and I don’t understand it myself but, I kinda like having Pete around.

    I think that Kwok’s apology shows that he understands exactly why he drives us crazy, so he passes the challenge.

    Still working my way through the comments, but I’m satisfied by the responses from Kwok and Rooke (although his was a little long).

  271. #271 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ Feynmaniac –

    What you and others fail to understand is that the school’s principal is a science teacher himself and teaches a rigorous freshmen-only introductory physics course to a select group of freshmen. The overall quality of American public secondary school science education would improve dramatically if other principals followed in his lead by pledging – and then ensuring – that no forms of creationism, including Intelligent Design, would be taught in their schools.

    Much to my amazement in early December 2007 I received an unsolicited e-mail from William Dembski. He was bragging how he knew scores of Texas high school principals who wanted Intelligent Design only – not including evolution – to be taught in their schools. When I told him about the pledge made during the Dover trial by my high school’s current principal, he couldn’t answer when I asked him how many of his Texas principals taught science too.

  272. #272 Jello
    March 18, 2009

    Simon and his fecal fetish need to go.

  273. #273 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    How More Oral Sex can Better Society

    ooh, another good book title.

    no worries, I’ll put your name in the acknowledgments.

  274. #274 Kat
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis, after what he wrote

    “I hate distributing condoms. Its like saying “Those Africans and children are animals without the self-control to stop themselves from having sex.”
    I agree with the pope that it would enhance the problem of promiscous sex ,which is very wrong. We should have more programs promoting abstinence and self-control”

    Dumb fuck…

  275. #275 Mari
    March 18, 2009

    Sorry, I must have forgotten to close the tab. I only wanted the name Kwok to be bold…

  276. #276 Watchman
    March 18, 2009

    Feynmaniac’s #261 does raise good points, but I would counter by saying that AG’s comment was not an attempt at answering the challenge.

  277. #277 mirroreyes
    March 18, 2009

    Simon

  278. #278 Cat of Many Faces
    March 18, 2009

    simon

  279. #279 SC, OM
    March 18, 2009

    JefferyD,

    I would be happy to meet you and have a drink while experiencing each other’s corporal-sensual presence (see previous post).

    JeffreyD – Please make sure this meeting is in a very public place. Tell us when you’re going. And check in afterwards.

  280. #280 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    I am voting for Silver Fox not only because of his inane remarks here, but especially for his rather bizarre comments that he left over at PT several months ago.

  281. #281 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    What you and others fail to understand is that the school’s principal is a science teacher himself

    WEEEOOOOSSSHHH!

    that response shows just how far this challenge is over the head of the Kwokster.

    Internal monologue much, John?

  282. #282 Teleprompter
    March 18, 2009

    Well, I’m sticking with my original write-in candidate:

    Silver Fox

  283. #283 Vole
    March 18, 2009

    The Rooke.

    Scientism, forsooth!

  284. #284 Dianne
    March 18, 2009

    This is pathetic.

    On the one hand, I agree. On the other, it is a very hard challenge. Criticizing oneself is always difficult.

  285. #285 AdamK
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok, by a mile: a dillweed who should be banned from the Internet entirely.

  286. #286 Kitty'sBitch
    March 18, 2009

    Laura
    “I’m a lesbian… eating bacon… any offers for the oral sex? ;)”

    That depends…will you share the bacon?

  287. #287 Eidolon
    March 18, 2009

    AG has to get my vote – I think it’s the pretense that is so bad. That, and thread hijacking.

    Second – the Rookster
    Pete:
    Like Kahn, you keep missing the point. Your beliefs are fucking bullet proof. No amount of rational, factual, observable evidence seems to be enough. Worse, you don’t even try. Instead of dealing with evidence, you keep retreating to belief – not the same thing.

    Simon is so stupid – no problemo.

    You know SF is going to post drivel

    The rest – save them for later abuse.

  288. #288 cpsmith
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for John Kwok.

    He sometimes espouses views that I agree with but he presents himself so badly that I am ashamed to be associated with them when he is posting. I don’t want others to be put off by such views simply because an idiot is espousing them.

  289. #289 astrounit
    March 18, 2009

    Steve_C: Ah yes. Cool.

  290. #290 Jadehawk
    March 18, 2009

    amazing. three attempts at the immunity challenge, but all failed, with kwok coming closest to getting it.

  291. #291 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ Ichthyic –

    Others, not yours truly, have emphasized how important my high school alma mater is, by referring to it themselves in the past two days. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, then take a look here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuyvesant_High_School

    It is the oldest “magnet” school of its kind in the country, and among the first – if not the very first – to emphasize the teaching of science, mathematics and engineering.

    Just think for a moment please. Wouldn’t it make a lot of sense to remind opponents of evolution that a science teacher who is the head of America’s premier science and mathematics-oriented high school has pledged that Intelligent Design creationism will never be taught there as long as he continues serving as the school’s principal?

  292. #292 blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    “This is pathetic.

    On the one hand, I agree. On the other, it is a very hard challenge. Criticizing oneself is always difficult.”

    This is so true, and being on a troll list already indicates that you are a bit unaware of your impact on others.

    I’m going to stand up a little bit for Pete’s big rambling and obtuse post. I think if he got more specific, I mean gave it a few hundred more words, he might come up with a thesis for that. Then he could delete a few thousand of the words that follow it and actually have a point. I’m actually kind of impressed.

  293. #293 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Continued profiles

    Silver Fox Dumb, annoying git who keeps asking for questions about basic science he could easily look up on his own. Posts have a low idea-to-word ratio. Was so disappointed when he didn’t make it to Survivor: Pharyngula that he gave a bunch of sophistic arguments until we let him play. Pathetic.

    Quote:

    Why can’t God draw a square circle?, Why can’t God make 7 plus 5 equal 13? They all lack perfection and it is a logical contradiction for God to lack perfection.

    “Silver Fox, please prove it. It’s ok, I’ll wait.”

    The proof is in the proposition. All you need is the reasoning necessary to understanding it.

    Africangenesis Spouts long unintelligible rants dealing with pseudoscience and Libertarianism. His fellow Libertarians have disowned him. Denounces everyone who disagrees with him as a ‘leftist anarchist’. During immunity challenge was asked to show some ability for self-reflection. He used the opportunity to criticize everyone but himself. Is like Rorschach from Watchmen, only creepier.

    Quote

    The far left progressives like being thought the most irreverent and challenging. They don’t like being shown shallow, destructive and vindictive by someone more nihilistic and yet more comfortable in his own skin than they are.

  294. #294 Aquaria
    March 18, 2009

    Oh FFS, J*hn Krock o’ shit!

    For the love of everything scientific, get the fuck over yourself. You don’t seem to get that nobody cares about your personal connection to anyone! Quite frankly, the thought of you personally connected to a sentient being strikes me as a) repulsive and b) unlikely.

  295. #295 Ben
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis, you said you were “full of wonder and curiosity and willingness to learn.”

    Do you really think that’s true?

  296. #296 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 18, 2009

    Pete, were you born into a family that practices the same religion you currently practice?

  297. #297 JeffreyD
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke, re your #265 (“I would be happy to meet you and have a drink while experiencing each other’s corporal-sensual presence”), not asking for a date, son. (laughing)

    OK, being serious, I won’t ask where you are on an open thread, so you need to contact me at keltixx at yahoo dot com and we can set something up (public email, even trolls can write stupid things if they wish, my spam filters are excellent). I am currently in Birmingham, but get down to London as needed. In fact, planning to meet one of the great Pharyngula mainstays down there at the end of this month (yes, I know I need to reply to your email (grin)). I am also free most weekends to travel a reasonable distance, couple of hours by train.

    We will meet in a public location. I will wear a white sport coat with a pink crustacean and carry a rolled up copy of the Dead Sea Scrools, on papyrus. The code phrase is, “the duck howls at midnight” and your reply is “I have a cunning plan”. I prefer places that sell alcohol, coffee will do in a pinch. Bacon is always acceptable.

    Ciao

  298. #298 SLW13
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, for all the aforementioned reasons.

  299. #299 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ Aquaria –

    Shut the F**K up yourself.

    I heard the school’s principal make this pledge at an alumni gathering that was held while the 2005 Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial was in progress. Another alumnus asked him if Intelligent Design would ever be taught at the school. The school’s principal gave a thoughtful response, and the only reasonable one he could give as a science teacher.

    P. S. I don’t know him. I’ve spoken to him a few times at alumni meetings.

  300. #300 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Geeze Kwok.

    Give it a rest. Stop living the glory days. High School is over. What have you done since then???

    Oh shit, nevermind. I really don’t care.

  301. #301 Wowbagger, OM
    March 18, 2009

    I’m sure I posted a comment that’ll show up later – but I’m not going to type it again.

    Vote for Simon. John Kwok’s name dropping just makes him look like an attention-seeking tool who has nothing of his own to attract it. He’ll get bored and wander off eventually.

    The others are irritating but can serve as fodder for why their particular beliefs/worldviews/concepts are so fractally wrong and only supported in their deranged imaginations. However, if they can be asked to restrain blathering on about those in threads pertaining to related topics then they should be allowed to stay.

  302. #302 Susannah
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    My first thought was Pete Rooke, but then I read Feynmaniac’s post (#19). Ugh!

  303. #303 cpsmith
    March 18, 2009

    I voted for Kwok, but if he wins the immunity challenge my second choice would be Africangenesis.

  304. #304 Parse
    March 18, 2009

    Though I’m seriously tempted to name Kwok for the asinine Facebook threat, or Pete Rooke for general stupidity, I’m voting for Simon. ‘Good’ trolls can serve as training dummies; a way to beginners and veterans to practice sharpening their skills, and to help people further realize their views and opinions.
    As for Simon, well, there’s repressed homosexuality there beyond the dreams of psychiatrists.

  305. #305 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ Steve_C –

    Under no circumstances do I want any teacher teach Intelligent Design or other forms of creationism either at my high school OR AT other New York City public high schools. Yes, high school was a long time ago, but I don’t want any current New York City public school student to be subjected to intellectual child abuse from the Dishonesty Institute.

    Get the picture? If you don’t then why don’t you shut the F**K up too?

  306. #306 JeffreyD
    March 18, 2009

    SC, OM of the beautiful mind, re your #279, see my note back to him, public of course. Send me a note and I will tell you when planned and how it went. I would never discuss a personal meeting on this blog, unless it was truly hilarious, of course. No, not even then, I am the soul of discretion. Besides, I might need plausible deniability.

    Friends help you move, good friends help you move bodies.

    Ciao, my lovely anarchist.

  307. #307 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Dammit Kwok
    “I have persistently put irritating, pompous, self-regarding posts here. I have brought up old quarrels and had them all over again. And again. I have name-dropped in every post, and mentioned my school and college in every sentence. I have used the phrases alma mater and alumni. (And I have added something in brackets that refutes everything I’ve just said)”
    There – how hard was that?
    Rookey: you should be able to put forward something a little more truthy than that, surely? You’re an apologetics kind of guy, aren’t you? Well then you’ll be used to lying for a cause. Put a bit of effort in, man, or that cosmic blowjob will never be yours!

  308. #308 astrounit
    March 18, 2009

    The bead’s still on Simon until he twirls. After reading #243, my aim swings over to the Rooke after I nab the Kwok.

    Just to put him out of his tedious misery.

  309. #309 Tabby Lavalamp
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis and Pete “Pleasureless Sex” Rooke have both made excellent arguments in this thread for why they should receive my vote. However, despite Sven’s excellent post on the subject of John Kwok and what may be wrong with the guy, I have to vote for John again. The image of him asking his Facebook friends to drop Myers because he banned him is just too tempting.

    So – I vote for John Kwok.

  310. #310 Wowbagger, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Crazy Kwok wrote:

    Get the picture? If you don’t then why don’t you shut the F**K up too?

    Because he’s not under thread of being banned, dumbass. If you want to keep posting here – I have no idea what you’re trying to achieve by doing so but you seem to want to stay – then insulting people isn’t going to help your cause.

    And just write ‘fuck’, John. We don’t care if baby Jesus cries.

  311. #311 Knockgoats
    March 18, 2009

    Why can’t one woman marry two men, one man two women, or any combination up from that? Surely the lawyers will love such scenarios – Louis

    I think you answered your own question right there, Louis!

    On the dungeon contest, I’m torn between Simon, Facilis and (after reading his ravings about Obama elsewhere), John Kwok. I think Scatalogical Simon just shades it!

  312. #312 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Oh for fuck’s sake Kwok. You really don’t get it. Everything you post is like you’re patting yourself on the back.

    You could talk about keeping ID out of schools without ever mentioning how fucking fantastic your OLD school is.

    The fact that ID isn’t taught at your, special, super great, HEY THE BEASTIE BOYS WENT THERE TOO school, isn’t a big deal. There’s no chance ID would make it into the New York City Public schools anyway.

    Uhg.

  313. #313 maureen
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok,

    Please switch your brain to RECEIVE.

    Idea one: the posters and regular lurkers at Pharyngula have notched up some thousands of years of life.

    Idea two: in the course of that many will have met people who are powerful, important, interesting.

    Idea three: most of the time they don’t mention it. Why? Because in most cases it is not relevant to the discussion.

    Idea four: when contact with another human is relevant, as in discussions with another scientist, they mention the name but they don’t make a big deal of it.

    That’s the rule of thumb here – one you would be wise to follow.

    OK?

  314. #314 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    No, John no.
    *Sighs*
    Look, how many fingers am I holding up?
    *Holds up 6 fingers”

  315. #315 Al
    March 18, 2009

    AfricanGenesis: the tedious threadjacking counts as wanking…

  316. #316 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok, continues on, heedlessly rambling.

    truly the sound of one hand clapping.

  317. #317 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ Wowbagger, OM –

    I’m probably going to voted off anyway, so I’ll defend myself whenever I deem it necessary. As for mentioning that word, I’d rather not spell it out in full.

    PS You should read the novel “The Diviners”. The author had a rather hilarious means of contending with a NYC-based critic – who was writing book reviews for my hometown’s august newspaper – by lampooning him as a fictional character. I think I’ll follow in that author’s lead after I am finished revising a novel-in-progress.

  318. #318 tmaxPA
    March 18, 2009

    Another vote (first this round, no duplicates, does this count, PZ are you INSANE?) for Simon.

    And a Molly Award nomination for:
    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/survivor_pharyngula_day_three.php#comment-1481225

    Just how many round of this are you doing? Will there be just one left at the end of the week?

  319. #319 Kimpatsu
    March 18, 2009

    Get rid of Facilis for his anti-condom Papist garbage.

  320. #320 Africangenesis
    March 18, 2009

    Ben#294,

    “Africangenesis, you said you were “full of wonder and curiosity and willingness to learn.”

    Do you really think that’s true?”

    What else would be the point of challenging myself and following the primary literature? As a skeptic, I don’t want to hold a position without being aware of what is assumed and what the uncertainty of the evidence is. But that doesn’t mean I can’t look forward to the publication of new results, currently that is especially in the areas of medicine, climate science, genomics (neaderthals!), alternative energy and energy efficiency and cosmology (dark matter and dark energy). regards,

  321. #321 Hideki
    March 18, 2009

    My vote goes for Simon, should by some miracle he win immunity then Pete Rooke instead.

    John Kwok seems harmless and isn’t a theist so really should he be on this list at all? Is being annoying in itself sufficient reason?

  322. #322 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    *Holds up 6 fingers”

    I see 4 lights…

  323. #323 mothra
    March 18, 2009

    I vote to consign SIMON to the dungeon. My second choice is John Kwok. These two posters are in desperate need professional help. I disagree with others on the list, but that alone is not reason enough for dungeonization.

    OT- a researcher looks at creationist terms (baramin) and says ‘Oooh, sciency!’ A theist looks at a theory they do not try to understand and says: ‘that’s scientism.’

  324. #324 SC, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok, by a mile: a dillweed who should be banned from the Internet entirely.

    I was scrolling up and already laughing from JeffreyD’s comment, then that made me laugh till I cried. Something about the thought of it.

    JeffreyD:

    I would never discuss a personal meeting on this blog

    I just meant a “back at the hotel in one piece” post. Those analogies aren’t easy to forget, and I’m a worrier.

    :)

    Ciao, my lovely anarchist.

    Ciao, dear man.

  325. #325 Knockgoats
    March 18, 2009

    I come here to explore the implications of human evolution for society and morality, full of wonder and curiosity and willingness to learn. – Africangenesis [Emphasis added.]

    There’s a point at which lack of self-awareness becomes sublime. Africangenesis has reached this point!

  326. #326 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ Steve_C –

    Only a delusional mind like yours would insist that I am patting myself in the back by stating how wonderful my high school alma mater is.

    That’s not what I have been saying, idiot. Instead, I have noted that the principal of America’s premier high school of science, mathematics and technology has pledged that Intelligent Design creationism WILL NEVER BE TAUGHT at his school as long as he continues serving as its principal.

    I don’t care if the school is named “PZ Myers High School”, “Charles Darwin High School”, or, as is the case, “Stuyvesant High School”.

    Just get it into your thick skull. Repeat after me:

    The principal of America’s best high school of science, mathematics and technology has pledged that Intelligent Design creationism will never be taught there while he serves as the school’s principal. Maybe other high school principals should take the same pledge too. If they did, perhaps the overall quality of American science secondary school education would begin to improve.

  327. #327 T_U_T
    March 18, 2009

    John Asperger Kwok :

    Yes, high school was a long time ago, but I don’t want any current New York City public school student to be subjected to intellectual child abuse from the Dishonesty Institute.

    Can you comprehend that right now, we want to talk about something else than your high school, can’t you ?
    It is not that difficult. People talk about lot of different things. One, or a few at time. Right now, we are not talking about your high school. We are talking about something else. Do you understand ?
    OK.
    So we are NOT talking about your high school. And we don’t want to talk about it because we have different matters to discuss. SO it is really inappropriate from you to keep going about it. Are you still with me ?
    So, if you want to talk about your high school, kindly ask just once, and if we say no, then we want not talk about it, and you have to go find someone else who will.
    Otherwise we will just get angry and won’t talk about it anyway.
    So, please, stop talking about it. RIght now,

  328. #328 Ken Cope
    March 18, 2009

    …who was writing book reviews for my hometown’s august newspaper – by lampooning him as a fictional character. I think I’ll follow in that author’s lead after I am finished revising a novel-in-progress.

    “…The footnotes for my nineteenth book. This is my standard procedure for doing it. And while I compose it, I’m also reviewing it!”

    Kwok’s a real nowhere man, sitting in his nowhere land, making all his nowhere plans for nobody.

    It’s where Kwok belongs. The Boob has my sympathy, and my vote.

  329. #329 debaser
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon

    Post #19 was very helpful. Continuing with my “Fuck the Homophobes” platform, Simon appears to be the leading choice. I encourage everyone to consider the “Fuck the Homophobes” voting strat — you just keep picking homophobes until it doesn’t apply. Then you win! ….and start picking the most repetitive troll, or the most unoriginal troll. It’s like artificial selection.

  330. #330 Wirelizard
    March 18, 2009

    Simon must go.

    Pete “never inflict oral sex” Rookie amuses me and sometimes appears to almost have a functioning sense of humour.

    His Kwokishness is so over-the-top he’s a parody of himself without apparently trying.

  331. #331 Stwriley
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, no question.

    He’s just too vile to keep around any longer, especially with the extreme homophobia and anal sex obsession (though having to scroll past those idiotic cut-and-pastes is enough to earn him a permanent dungeon cell in my book).

  332. #332 John Kwok
    March 18, 2009

    @ T_U_T –

    You’re suffering from bad reading comprehension. I wasn’t referring to my high school, jerk. I was expressing my desire that no NYC public school student should be subjected to intellectual child abuse from the Dishonesty Institute

    @ Jim # 5

    Reluctantly, in light of these inane comments from those criticizing me, I must endorse your recommendation. I add that vote too, immediately after my vote for Silver Fox.

  333. #333 debaser
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon

    Post #19 was very helpful. Continuing with my “Fuck the Homophobes” platform, Simon appears to be the leading choice. I encourage everyone to consider the “Fuck the Homophobes” voting strat — you just keep picking homophobes until it doesn’t apply. Then you win! ….and start picking the most repetitive troll, or the most unoriginal troll. It’s like artificial selection.

  334. #334 Wirelizard
    March 18, 2009

    Simon must go.

    Pete “never inflict oral sex” Rookie amuses me and sometimes appears to almost have a functioning sense of humour.

    His Kwokishness is so over-the-top he’s a parody of himself without apparently trying.

  335. #335 SimonC
    March 18, 2009

    Put my vote in for Simon – he’s a nasty little shit and he brings shame to the name of ‘Simon’.

  336. #336 astrounit
    March 18, 2009

    The bead’s still on Simon until he twirls. After reading #243, my aim swings over to the Rooke after I nab the Kwok.

    Just to put him out of his tedious misery.

  337. #337 gruebait
    March 18, 2009

    I’m throwing my stone at Kwok.

  338. #338 T_U_T
    March 18, 2009

    John Asperger Kwok :

    I was expressing my desire that no NYC public school student should be subjected to intellectual child abuse from the Dishonesty Institute

    I wholeheartedly agree with you on that. But, we are talking about something else and dont want to talk about that particular issue right now. Do you understand ?

  339. #339 Ben
    March 18, 2009

    #174, just like in any other. We all have times when we want to be alone. We also have times when we want to be with just one or the other. Honesty is the most important part of any relationship but that is most true when you have more than 2.

    To be honest it can be quite boring which is really a good thing. :)

  340. #340 Longstreet63
    March 18, 2009

    “I was expressing my desire that no NYC public school student should be subjected to intellectual child abuse…”

    YES. We got that, Field Marshal.

    It’s a trivially understandable implication.

    Have you anything else, at all, to say, or must you bizarrely persist in restating it, like some kind of Sam-I-Am?

  341. #341 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Ben @140

    My wife and I are planning to marry a third this summer. She is a woman that we both love and we all feel the best thing would be a plural marriage.

    See, SEE!! First it’s teh gays, and now this…oh noes!!!

    We is slipperin down the slippy slope!!!

    Yous is endangerin tah immoral souls.

  342. #342 Stu
    March 18, 2009

    I was expressing my desire that no NYC public school student should be subjected to intellectual child abuse from the Dishonesty Institute.

    …by constantly referring to your high school.

    Wankety-wank-wank-wank… your hand is so numb you obviously don’t even notice anymore.

  343. #343 astrounit
    March 18, 2009

    Aaaack…pardon the redundant post. Damn. What’s with SB today?

  344. #344 debaser
    March 18, 2009

    Sorry my double post above (#329/333). It timed out the first way through- I backed up and waited before trying again.

    If Simon gets kicked out, that will mean that my choice won each time! I’m a winner in a winner take all system!

  345. #345 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Right now I’m leaning toward Simon (not official yet PZ), but if JK can’t shut up for two days, he will be receiving my vote.

    This isn’t to say if PR, AG, FFF, or SF are out of the woods. If any of them does something really stupid in the next day or two, they may receive the vote.

    If they are all stupid, decisions, decisions…

  346. #346 Africangenesis
    March 18, 2009

    Feynmaniac, You are so arrogant.

    “Africangenesis Spouts long unintelligible rants dealing with pseudoscience and Libertarianism”

    You think because you can’t understand something that it is unintelligible. Case in point, you comment here:

    “I have no idea what you are talking about.”

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/survivor_pharyngula_day_two.php#comment-1481021

    Did it ever occur to you this might be a biology blog and some familiarity with biology might sometimes be in order? I doubt you have any idea what you mean by pseudoscience either. It is probably just words and concepts you don’t understand.

  347. #347 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    “I have no idea what you are talking about.”

    go right on ahead, dig yourself in deeper.

    Feyn also said:

    Quite frankly, half of what you write is unintelligible and the other half is just plain wrong.

    which I would agree with 100%

    you also don’t like to fix your own errors; not a sign of someone “interested in learning”.

  348. #348 Stephen Wells
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok, if I never hear another word about your ever-loving high school it will be too soon. This is a vote for your removal for absolutely terminal lack of awareness.

  349. #349 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Josh @172

    Simon, although the more I read his stuff the more I wonder if he’s real.

    And if this Simon is some made-up thing, that would be meta-disgusting, a truly depraved mind.

  350. #350 marcus
    March 18, 2009

    Anyone who “…wouldn’t dream of inflicting oral sex on a woman…” has much deeper problems than an aversion to evolutionary science. Don’t just dream it, do it! Once you get past your initial shyness you’ll have it licked!(Take your time, anything worth doing is worth doing right.)If you can describe the taste by tomorrow I’ll rescind my vote for Pete Rooke.

  351. #351 Stu
    March 18, 2009

    Feynmaniac, You are so arrogant.

    The projection, it burns.

  352. #352 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Hey AG. You are SO SAFE at the moment.

    Kwok you fucktard. I GET IT. You, however, do not.

    How can you be so fucking blind. The reason people want you gone is that you’re so fucking pompous and want all this recognition because you went to Stuyvesant HS. You can’t stop talking about it.

    No one fucking cares. This is where you’re supposed to show you understand WHY people want you gone. And you go and repeatedly do the exact thing everyone wants you gone for.

    Normally we would PRAISE someone for actively keeping ID out of their alma mater. But from you it’s just lame bullshit. ID has as much a chance in most of the NY Public School System as it does at MIT.

    Plus, you had ZERO to do with your principal disregarding ID.

  353. #353 brokenSoldier, OM
    March 18, 2009

    My vote goes for Kwok – anyone who throws up a Facebook threat like that is quite deserving of a plonk.

  354. #354 Laura
    March 18, 2009

    That depends…will you share the bacon?

    Wouldn’t that be some sort of… prostitution?

    …sounds good to me!

  355. #355 brandon
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok

    *plonk*

  356. #356 Bernard Bumner
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok, please turn off your speech to text. You appear to be accidentally transcribing your every conscious thought onto the internet…

  357. #357 Aquaria
    March 18, 2009

    I did not tell you to shut up, John Krockofshit. I told you to get over yourself.

    I said that nobody cares about your personal connections. It doesn’t matter.
    That’s what you just don’t get.

    Get your facts straight before spouting off yet more inanity.

    Moron.

    And you just had to contradict yourself while ironically digging that self-aggrandizing hole yet deeper, by saying so-and-so wasn’t your friend, but you had “talked to him” at a few meetings.

    LIke a) it matters or b) anyone but you cares?

    You do not get it.

    PZ, this narcissistic parasite is still #2 on my list. Behind Silver Fox.

    Just for being such a tiresome wanker.

  358. #358 IST
    March 18, 2009

    Simon, after his comments today.

    Banning Petey is rather like kicking a puppy.. granted, he does piddle on your carpet quite alot. As much as he gets smacked with the verbal rolled-up newspaper on the nose, he might actually learn something by being here.

    I don’t share others distate for AG; the L_tarians don’t annoy nearly as much as they do others on here… I’m not sure I’d classify him as the worst of the lot,either.

    Kwok’s a bit creepy at times, and I suspect that he’ll end up gone regardless of whether or not he eventually gets my vote… I also haven’t caught most of the ERV/Abbie Smith thing, so I’ve missed what seems to be a main element of the reason for his inclusion on the list.
    Facilis needs to join Barb shortly as well.

  359. #359 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis,

    Did it ever occur to you this might be a biology blog and some familiarity with biology might sometimes be in order?

    My “I have no idea what you are talking about.” was in reference to this comment of yours:

    Modern humans aren’t on a par with social insects, and an effective population size of 10000 may be small, but it isn’t a relatedness coefficient of 0.75 yet. That will take a few more genocides and stalinist purges, then the state may be able to fade away and the anarchists will be in heaven with their near clones.

    The biology wasn’t so troubling as the anarchist conspiracy theory for genocide. This doesn’t seem like something someone who is “full of wonder and curiosity and willingness to learn” would say. Seems more like the mad rantings of a syphilitic mind.

    Back to ignoring you.

  360. #360 Ale
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon, because he is a mindless, vapid, robotic idiot with no mind of his own. Either he is an unfathomably stupid human, or a robot uncomfortably close to the uncanny valley – entering from the demented fundamentalist angle. Occam’s demands the former, rather than the latter.

  361. #361 uncle frogy
    March 18, 2009

    I dislike to a high degree some of the aforementioned “commenters” and disagree with them totally and most completely. they can be very exasperating and most profoundly pig ignorant. they only come here to judge and be superior, condescending and self righteous. they have little love for the search for knowledge or “enlightenment” and are only interested in dogma.
    Dumping them off the “boat” would be fun but it bothers me just the same. It just feels weird to me and I can’t “vote” but that’s OK. I do not control here nor do I want to. I make no judgment on anyone who does vote. This is not my house nor is it “Hyde Park Corner”
    thanks

  362. #362 pcrthis
    March 18, 2009

    I was leaning toward Simon but John pushed me over the edge. Has to be Kwok.

    /relurking

  363. #363 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    #174, just like in any other. We all have times when we want to be alone. We also have times when we want to be with just one or the other. Honesty is the most important part of any relationship but that is most true when you have more than 2.

    …We also have times when we want to be with just one or the other…

    well, that’s just it. Is it an agreed upon “territorial” arrangement? How does one turn on and off intimacy so that one prefers to be with one sometimes and the other at other times?

    how do conflicts get resolved? are there times when all three truly feel the same level of intimacy at the same time?

    just to be clear, I’m defining intimacy to be beyond just the sex part of it (that’s actually the easy part); I’m speaking of the genuine emotional bond; the feeling of mutual trust and respect. Is it just a matter of years of knowing each other?

    OTOH, I can’t imagine you would want to answer such personal questions on a public blog, or even anywhere. So don’t feel obliged to do so on my account.

  364. #364 Jeremy
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok

    Only to see his threat carried out ;)

  365. #365 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    John, did you you say you’ve been having a threesome with Alma Mater and Al Lumni?
    ‘Cos I should warn you, they say they’ve ever even met you.

  366. #366 Michael
    March 18, 2009

    I retract my vote from Kwok, who I now find slightly charming and amusing in his pompous l’il way, and now cast it for Simon, ’cause fuckin’ hell, in the closet much? Just come out and say it, you want to be some top’s toilet, and that’s perfectly OK. We just don’t want to read about it.

    … Unless we do, and that’s OK too. But not here, you socially inept fuckstick.

  367. #367 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    AG, one stupid post, you just went up a notch.

  368. #368 Pete Rooke
    March 18, 2009

    Michelle,

    I am unsure of why you still vote for me (twice). I partook in the challenge and I renounced the miniskirt analogy.

  369. #369 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Pete,

    There was a 200 word limit, you went over by almost 300 words and didn’t really discuss what was asked. Please read the challenge carefully and try again.

  370. #370 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Ichthy @174

    how do you deal with intimacy in a 3 way relationship?

    I’m genuinely curious.

    It’s kind of simple, really. It requires each individual to put their partners’ happiness before their own. The rest works itself out.

  371. #371 amhovgaard
    March 18, 2009

    Delurking to vote for Simon, who is just nasty and evil, and to plead on behalf of Pete Rooke – for two reasons: 1. he’s often tea-all-over-key board-amusing 2. even when he’s not, I tend to feel sorry for him more than anything else – he seems like a prudish child, not a young adult, and needs to be seduced ASAP.

  372. #372 Wowbagger, OM
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok ‘of shit’ wrote:

    I think I’ll follow in that author’s lead after I am finished revising a novel-in-progress.

    I hope it’s less of a snore-fest of self-congratulatory blandness than your posts. You’ve somehow managed to create distilled soporific in text form.

  373. #373 Hideki
    March 18, 2009

    Hihi

    Does this whole survivor idea remind anyone else of the Stanford prison experiment or is that just me?

    I’m beginning to wonder if we’re not trapped in some sociological study PZ has sprung on us without mentioning it -.o;

  374. #374 E.V.
    March 18, 2009

    It’s okay Uncle Frogy, I’m sure you can be a conscientious objector without fear of being flamed.

    OT. Barb said she was too busy to post but I wonder if Dr. Scientist Hubby exercised his right as head of the xian&trade household and forbade Barb from coming here and making him look bad on the net. Well she’s banned now and the world will never know.

  375. #375 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    @ Knockgoats #311

    Dammit, you know I think you might be right. But, that said, don’t even lawyers deserve a little happiness? Won’t someone PLEASE think of the children?

    Louis

  376. #376 xiangtao
    March 18, 2009

    If you go by the rule that it is better to show than to tell, both Kwok and Rooke have done a brilliant job of showing why they are up for the chopping block. If you were to assume that they did this intentionally rather than out of oblivious dumbfuckery, it could be said that they passed the challenge with flying colors.

    I vote for Simon

  377. #377 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Pete, somebody (not me) gave you a good hint upthread. If you can find it, relate properly to it, and give a succinct post, you might get immunity. Otherwise, no.

  378. #378 JamesR
    March 18, 2009

    SIMON None come close for the amount of hatefulness he seems to share

  379. #379 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    And for that reason, Barb has been found unfit, and is cast into the dungeon for all time

    Well I hope you people are happy. There’s an MD out there extremely pissed that his dumb-as-a-rock wife isn’t busy typing away on the computer anymore.

  380. #380 John Morales
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    ennui @268, yeah, I noticed Pete Rooke made an effort to research and synthesise his thesis (it’s all a misunderstanding!) by paraphrasing snippets from others. It was too long, and the idea that it’s a contrast between scientism and creationism shows he doesn’t get it yet.

    Still, he’s really trying to meet the challenge.
    A for effort.

    John Kwok wasn’t on my radar until these Survivor threads, but he’s put a yeoman effort into proving his he’s a more than worthy candidate for plonking.

    I consider AG has done himself no favour in his attempted self-defense in this thread.

    All that said, (and pending further developments), I very much doubt I’ll be voting to plonk any other commenters on that list. I’m pretty tolerant of others, as I hope others are pretty tolerant of me.

  381. #381 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Rooke @265

    corporal-sensual

    I can translate: corporeal sensory

    Unless the SM reference was purposeful…

  382. #382 Louis
    March 18, 2009

    @ Hideki #373:

    My thought exactly, hence why I changed my mind and wrote post #42. I can’t undo former involvement, nor would I attempt to change anyone else’s mind on that basis (that would be concern trolling at the least) but I can stop participating in those elements I disagree with. Hence knob gags and continued bashing of bullshit (i.e. business as normal) without the voting aspect.

    Louis

  383. #383 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon.
    My reasons should be obvious.

    BTW, my high school algebra teacher was also the football coach! Beat [i]that[/i] Kwok!

    Football works bitches!!!!eleven!!!

  384. #384 marcus
    March 18, 2009

    kamaka@370 Thank you very much. I have a similar situation developing in my life and your answer, though simple, was profound and enlightening in the best way, reminding one of something they already know.

  385. #385 Aquaria
    March 18, 2009

    Hideki:

    I’ve requested the banning of Silver Fox, for godbotting, stupidity and insipidity, in several comment threads over the past few months. I didn’t need encouragement on that score. I’m just reiterating that here. Some of the others, yeah, I’ve said get them outta here.

    I don’t know PZ’s reason for doing this, but this little exercise could have quite a few purposes. It gives the snarkers a chance to really let loose and finish off some already mangled chew-toys. It encourages lurkers to speak up about the trolls that annoy them. And it sends a message to potential trolls that posting here can have some unpleasant consequences.

    And it’s fun. In a sadistic sort of way. If you’re into that sort of thing.

  386. #386 Pete Rooke
    March 18, 2009

    My maths teacher was also my PE, English, Science and history teacher. Jack of all trades, master of f-all.

  387. #387 Stwriley
    March 18, 2009

    Michael @ #366,

    Thank you, I haven’t laughed that hard in a month!

  388. #388 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    PZ…Emergency message!!

    The Kwok is TRYING to get banned so he can fame-claim his banning!!!

    Hahaha…there’s only one punishment for that twit…

  389. #389 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rook: shorter challenge:
    Why I have appeared to be a fuckwit and am about to be voted off Pharyngula (up to 200words)

  390. #390 «bønez_brigade»
    March 18, 2009

    For round 3, again, I vote for:

    Facilis

  391. #391 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    My maths teacher was also my PE, English, Science and history teacher. Jack of all trades, master of f-all.

    were you homeschooled, by any chance?

  392. #392 Wowbagger, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke wrote:

    My maths teacher was also my PE, English, Science and history teacher. Jack of all trades, master of f-all.

    Indeed. A good teacher might have taught you that the consistent version of that expression is ‘Jack of all trades and ace of none’ – keeping the playing card motif all the way through.

  393. #393 blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    “My maths teacher was also my PE, English, Science and history teacher.”

    Really? How did that work? Most of my math teachers gave credit for your name and passed you if you missed fewer than three days of class. One of my science teachers had “problems” with aspects of science and another preferred to talk about her past affair with a student and such (she was insane). My English and History teachers were consistently great. Go figure.

    Oh– and no one famous went there. I was in the first class. Guess it’s up to me to do something with my life.

  394. #394 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Look, could the troilists just go and do their thing somewhere else?
    If we must have sex talk, I vote for the lesbians. That way there’s at least 33% more sassy lady.

  395. #395 Carlie
    March 18, 2009

    I’m going to have to vote for simon. It would be Pete, but simon’s comment about abortion in the anniversary thread was so over-the-top absolute troll, it has to win him a place in the dungeon.

  396. #396 Eric Saveau
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for AfricanGenocide, on the grounds that he has shown himself to be a foul, vile, hateful, lying, grotesque, criminally wrong piece of America-hating shit. His ability to parrot a few accuracies with regard to biology doesn’t make up for the fact that he’s epically wrong about everything else.

  397. #397 Eduardo Padoan
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon. thanks for the summary, Feynmaniac.

  398. #398 Naked Bunny with a Whip
    March 18, 2009

    I’m voting for Facilis. He’s the only one in that list who doesn’t piss me off or make me chuckle sometimes, and a boring troll is doubly useless.

  399. #399 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    And at least with the lesbians I don’t feel even slightly jealous.

  400. #400 Kel
    March 18, 2009

    “Tis better to be silent and thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt” – Lincoln

  401. #401 Aquaria
    March 18, 2009

    Wowbagger: It sickens me to defend Pete, but the phrase jack of all trades and etc has nothing to do with cards.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_of_all_trades,_master_of_none

  402. #402 Dust
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis gets my vote. Thanks for banning Barb.

  403. #403 jasonk
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis, for being incredibly boring, and …

    I show that there is an intellectual defense to conservatism and libertarianism that is not easy to dismiss.

    … for apparently being unable to understand anything anyone’s ever said to him.

  404. #404 ECOA
    March 18, 2009

    Oral Sex, Bacon, and Lesbians are three of my favorite things! While I find thread hijacking to be annoying, I support the continued presence of anyone who discusses three of my favorite things in the positive light they deserve.

  405. #405 MoxieHart
    March 18, 2009

    Long time lurker delurking for the fun.
    My vote goes for Simon solely because I think his evil is the closest in scale to Barb’s.
    But dear Jebus, John Kwok is pushing me. He’s kind of charmingbut he reminds me of the former student body president of a high school currently working at a car dealership who can’t stop thinking of how great his life was then.

  406. #406 PZ Myers
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok, you must zip it up. The one thing that will win you a ban is if you keep spouting off so stupidly.

  407. #407 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    [pedant]
    “Jack of all trades, master of none” is a figure of speech used in reference to a person who is competent with many skills but is not outstanding in any particular one.
    The “Jack” here means a “man” of all trades – not to do with playing cards, phrase first recorded 1621.
    [/pedant}

  408. #408 Snoof
    March 18, 2009

    I _was_ going to vote for Simon, but it’s become clear that Kwok has run out of things to say and yet hasn’t stopped talking. This is the internet – being boring is the greatest sin. Well, that and spamming.

    So here’s a vote for Kwok – may his Book of Faces never run out of Frendz (TM).

  409. #409 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    It sickens me to defend Pete, but the phrase jack of all trades and etc has nothing to do with cards.

    Since a “jack” referred to a generic man in the 1600’s, did “jill” refer to a generic woman?

  410. #410 mandrake
    March 18, 2009

    As truly annoying as these people are, I think Barb was the only one who should be banned. She stated outright that nothing we could said would make her question her faith. So her only reason for coming here was to preach and her only interaction was to say everyone else was wrong.
    Not that I like defending them, but they do occasionally listen and contribute.

    I am poly, & would recommend:

    Polyamory:
    “The Ethical Slut”
    http://powells.com/biblio/2-9781890159016-1

    There’s a second edition out but I haven’t read that one, so can’t comment.

    How does one work out intimate arrangements when more than two people involved?
    The same way as everyone else, silly. Ask questions. Listen to answers.

  411. #411 Stanton
    March 18, 2009

    Either Simon, for the same reasons as the previous thread, or Silver Fox, because he’s a pompous and narcissistic apologist.

  412. #412 John Morales
    March 18, 2009

    PZ, talking about trolls, I note you’re being impersonated here (and again in the same thread).

  413. #413 sammywol
    March 18, 2009

    So tough to choose. I think it has to be africangenesis for that special (although sadly far from unique) ability to derail an interesting thread into total wank with top speed. Hope to see a chalenge attempt too.

  414. #414 KO
    March 18, 2009

    Ichthyic @ #409:
    I believe it was a slang term for prostitute. Might be considered illuminating of 18th century attitudes…

  415. #415 Dianne
    March 18, 2009

    There’s an MD out there extremely pissed that his dumb-as-a-rock wife isn’t busy typing away on the computer anymore.

    It’s ok. He’s at work. The beauty of medicine as a profession is that it’s always possible to find more work to do if you really want to.

  416. #416 windy
    March 18, 2009

    Sven:

    As for the incessant Stuy-High and Brown U referencing and the ridiculous compulsive dropping of names of friends, classmates, teachers, and fellow alumni, my feelings have moved rather quickly from amusement to amazement to pity. It seems clear that Kwok’s self-worth is inextricably tied up with these associations and that he is incapable of realizing that nobody else is impressed.

    True. But I’m not sure which alternative is healthier for him, blocking him at least for a while or letting him chew on the electric cords of Pharyngula. It seems as if he’s actually trying not to name-drop in this thread but it’s not working out.

    Perhaps there are shades of John A Davison syndrome here, so that Kwok’s tendency to make you want to tear out all your hair in frustration has increased later in life? There’s some evidence that it wasn’t always this bad (see acknowledgments)

  417. #417 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Since a “jack” referred to a generic man in the 1600’s, did “jill” refer to a generic woman?
    Yes. See also Jillstrap. Or….is that a dildo?

  418. #418 heliobates
    March 18, 2009

    I think I’ll follow in that author’s lead after I am finished revising a novel-in-progress.

    I’ll bet you didn’t get rid of the Banden Banshee by smiling at him!

    When is Magical Me coming out, again? We just can’t wait to read all about your latest exploits, professor.

  419. #419 azqaz
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis. ‘Nuff said. Now I have to go wash my brain to get rid of the stench.

  420. #420 Ariel
    March 18, 2009

    This is off topic, but is anyone familiar with that naturalpathy thing where they put something your allergic to in your hand and then test your muscle strength and it’s supposed to make you weaker if its harmful or whatever?

    I tried looking it up but I’m not sure what it’s actually called. It sounds like woo to me, I can’t think of how such a thing could actually work. It’s hard to argue against though because I don’t know anything about it.

  421. #421 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    I believe it was a slang term for prostitute. Might be considered illuminating of 18th century attitudes…

    Well, that gives whole new meaning to the “Jack and Jill” poem…

    a common man and a prostitute go up a hill… to get WATER?

    I think not.

  422. #422 clinteas
    March 18, 2009

    One Survivor challenge would seem enough.

    Simon gets my vote.

  423. #423 Ale
    March 18, 2009

    @Ariel (420):

    I think you are talking about Applied Kinesiology:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_kinesiology

    AFAIK, it is completely woo. See, for instance:

    http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=102

  424. #424 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    How does one work out intimate arrangements when more than two people involved?
    The same way as everyone else, silly. Ask questions. Listen to answers.

    I’m thinkin’ three is better than two just for the referee. And make no mistake, the emotional intimacy loses nothing…

  425. #425 The MadPanda
    March 18, 2009

    The agony of choice!

    John Kwok. I like most of his posts over on Panda’s Thumb, so he’s not all bad, but his conduct here (and on ERV) has been inappropriate. (Johnny Boy, when your host asks you to stop wearing a lampshade on your head and tap-dancing on his coffee table, it’s considered proper to knock it the hell off.)

    If by some means he figures out why so many people find him annoying, dull, insipid, and/or creepy, or if he manages to win immunity, then consider my followup candidate to be Piltdown Man.

    With extreme prejudice and all due haste, I add. And the same for any of these pissant concern trolls like little Saint Jimmy (see #5) who pop in here to whine about how unfair it is that big bad PZ actually holds these goons responsible for their chronic unwillingness to abide by the clearly stated rules.

    The MadPanda, FCD

  426. #426 Ariel
    March 18, 2009

    Thank you Ale. I’m going to show this to my mom, though she doesn’t really get the whole peer-reviewed double blind study as opposed to anecdotes thing.

  427. #427 cap
    March 18, 2009

    i vote for john kwok.

  428. #428 tsig
    March 18, 2009

    Kwok

    He did it the old fashioned way: he earned it.

  429. #429 Ray Ladbury
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok, Ok, fool that I am, I’m going to hope we can make this a moment of personal growth here for you. Think, Dude, where did you start attracting enmity. Wasn’t it when you made an actual threat–and not just any threat, but a lame facebook threat, at that?
    Did you ever stop to think that maybe you could post about a highschool OTHER THAN the one you went to. And maybe you could post about something you read the SOMEONE ELSE WROTE that you found was insightful. And maybe you could highlight a comment SOMEONE ELSE made.
    Dude, it’s time to try and finally pass sandbox. Maybe, just maybe, it’s not ALL about you. Think about it.

  430. #430 scooter
    March 18, 2009

    aauuugh this is bugging the shit out of me, am I the only one who can’t figure out Rooke’s

    I would never inflict oral sex on a woman

    Does he mean he would never give, as inf licked
    or receive, like stick it in f’licked ?

    Or is the ambiguity the joke ?

    -dense in Houston

  431. #431 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    @mandrake.

    thanks. Just got a copy of the book you recommended.

  432. #432 Woo Woozy
    March 18, 2009

    Voting for SIMON.

  433. #433 GAZZA
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke again.

  434. #434 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Does he mean he would never give, as inf licked
    or receive, like stick it in f’licked

    Well, he made the statement in response to this:

    Pete needs a good 12-step program and a blow job

  435. #435 Ale
    March 18, 2009

    Ariel,
    Gullible relatives are a tricky thing – you do not want to be too confrontational to their superstitions, because they might become resistant to your input or even remove you completely form the situation (because you “really do not understand” them and so on). This is bad because it leaves them to deal with the woo totally alone, which is usually counterproductive. Be supportive with your mom – if she is bent on woo it will be difficult to sway her at first. The best result is usually to start creating a rational system of thought to supplant the magical one, while, at the same time, ensuring that she gets proper treatment in addition to the woo. Of course, if you convince her of not having AK at all that would be the best thing.

  436. #436 blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    Scooter: I couldn’t figure it out either. Maybe a Texas thing? It’s such a weird thing to say anyway, I think the joke is… well… just Pete being Pete.

  437. #437 Conor H.
    March 18, 2009

    Simon. That kind of vitriolic homophobia is unacceptable to me.

  438. #438 Monado
    March 18, 2009

    Facilis.

  439. #439 druidbros
    March 18, 2009

    Well after Barb is gone I feel a little better but now I am torn between John Kwok and Simon. I hate people who are too stupid to realize that being LGBT is NOT A CHOICE. So I vote for…..Simon.

    (John Kwok …next!)

  440. #440 Michael X
    March 18, 2009

    Well, since Kwok is going to get himself banned with or without my vote, and I’ve never encountered Simon, I’ll have to vote for Silver Fox for his inability to add to any thread he’s ever commented in.

    Pete’s a pretty close second though. So keep up the good work Pete! I’m sure you can change my mind.

  441. #441 kryptonic
    March 18, 2009

    simon

  442. #442 Kendo
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon.

  443. #443 Eric Saveau
    March 18, 2009

    jasonk @403 FTW!!!

  444. #444 'Tis Himself
    March 18, 2009

    Way back in #146, I posted a quote from John Kwok and my challenge:

    If we do become the USSA, then I am hopeful that our military will honor their oaths to defend the U. S. Constitution by any means necessary, including a military coup d?etat against the Messiah.

    Unless Kwok can successfully bullshit around his hatred for the rule of law (extra credit if he does it without once mentioning his high school) I will continue to vote to throw his dumb ass off this blog.

    Since then Kwok has failed to justify why he advocates treason against the United States as well as repeatedly tooting his tin horn about his high school.

  445. #445 Nes
    March 18, 2009

    After seeing his “defense” of the historicity of Jesus a while ago, I have to vote for Simon. He’s a complete waste of everyone’s time.

    Seeing some of his quotes regarding penis and ass just reinforces that vote. Makes me think that he’s 35 years younger than he claims…

  446. #446 Ariel
    March 18, 2009

    Ale, I am pretty lucky in that I’m not too surrounded by crazy relatives. My mom is partial to the new age woo, homeopathy, chiropractics, accupuncture and that sort of thing. I’m not sure she even believes it that much, she just doesn’t understand why I’m so against it.

    I love pharyngula, in my real life people don’t get my extreme aversion to woo. Anyways, thanks for the advice. It sounds like you’ve walked this path before. If so, I hope you managed to avoid alienating them. Your definitely right, no one likes to hear that what they believe is stupid.

  447. #447 Tassie Devil
    March 18, 2009

    Simon.

    Useless, nasty and adds nothing to the thread.

  448. #448 Real Name
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok’s finishing up a novel? Perhaps we could take a page from the author’s own book and review it before actually reading it.

    A coming-of-age story in the rich tradition of Salinger, Chabon, Judy Blume, and Barry Williams, John Kwok’s astounding first novel chronicles the journey of its protagonist (identified only as “John” or occasionally “yours truly”) and his well-known classmates and fellow alumni as they negotiate the mean hallways of New York’s prestigious and celebrated Stuyvesant High School and the mean quads of Rhode Island’s prestigious and celebrated Brown University in search of kicks, love, and Facebook friends. “John” is mentored along the way by a certain well-known and celebrated memoirist (whose current wife is interested in evolutionary biology and macrame as well as in “John”) and a fellow alumnus turned religious biology professor who remains nameless throughout the book. After graduation from prestigious and celebrated Brown University (whose other alumni include Nobel Prize winners, advisors to Presidents and classmates and fellow alumni of “John”‘s from a certain celebrated and prestigious New York public high school), the plucky and repetitive protagonist takes on his life’s work: battling the mendacious intellectual pornography of Intelligent Design Creationsim Borgitude via long and repetitively insightful Amazon.com reviews and incessant, redundant and highly annoying blog comments. Along the way, he gains and loses the love of his life without her even really knowing about it, but he faithfully carries a torch for her through years of lonely reviewing and commenting. In the end, all is for naught, for he is voted off a metaphorical island and in revenge, encourages his many and well-known Facebook friends to defriend his mortal enemy, the Cephalopodian Overlord of the metaphorical island. This accomplishes diddly-squat and our hero, unchastened, soldiers on toward the morrow, Stuy High banner held high and mendacious intellectual pornographer Borg drones scattering before him like discarded handouts from the celebrated writing teacher and well-known memoirist who shall remain nameless blowing like tumbleweeds down the deserted halls of the prestigious and famous-alumni-rich high school of “John,” his classmates (including EPA section chiefs and Scientific American editors), and his fellow alumni. This reviewer has seldom read a first novel that uses the phrase “mendacious intellectual pornography” quite as often. This is the kind of book that comes along once, or twice, or sometimes three times in a generation, and anyone with any interest in high schools, memoirists, or mendacious intellectual pornographers will want to buy several copies and write glowing reviews at Amazon.com. It’s the feel-vaguely-exasperated book of the summer!

  449. #449 druidbros
    March 18, 2009

    And I almost forgot to thank the host. Thanks PZ for the entertainment of your version of Survivor. This is really fun.

  450. #450 Marcus
    March 18, 2009

    I have read this blog off and on for a long time, but I haven’t commented much or read many of the comments. But from what I’ve seen I must say that my vote falls on Simon.

    He says some weird-ass things (or maybe that should be “weird ass-things” in his case), but it’s the copy&paste of huge blocks of text that bothers me the most. Not because they are too long, but because it’s the laziest form of trolling I’ve ever seen. He doesn’t seem to care at all if the texts he posts have anything to do with the subject at hand, nor does he seem to listen at all to any criticism to it.

    I’m an old-fashioned nerd of the kind who thinks that the Internet should be as free of censorship as possible and I normally don’t support the banning of even annoying individuals, but on a blog like this I see nothing wrong in banning someone who seems utterly unable to contribute anything to the conversation.

    Regarding the small off-topic conversation about polyamory, I really have to agree with kamaka @#424 who wrote:
    “I’m thinkin’ three is better than two just for the referee.”

    A referee can indeed be a very good thing. In fights and disagreements between two people in a relationship, it is often very good to have a third intimately involved person who can mediate and help the arguing parties see each others’ points of view.I have seen this in action and it can work very well.

  451. #451 Diane
    March 18, 2009

    I’m changing my vote from Silver Fox to Africangenesis. In addition to his pompous idiocy, he ended a sentence with a verb and that will not do. BTW, had no idea Silver Fox was a man. I must have missed the post where he identified himself as such. He still reminds me of my detested grandmother, though.

  452. #452 'Tis Himself
    March 18, 2009

    Real Name #448 for the win!

  453. #453 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    @Real Name – brilliant!

  454. #454 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    PZ, an idea for next immunity challenge:

    Choose one of your fellow 5 contestants. Give one compliment to that contestant, one criticisms, and one way that contestant can improve their posts, all in under 200 words.

    These people seem to be incapable of self-assessment, let’s see how they are at assessing one another. The results should be interesting.

    Man, reality shows bring out the worst in me.

  455. #455 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Diane @451

    He still reminds me of my detested grandmother, though.

    I had one of those, the nasty bitch.

    But the interesting point, you were unsure of the maleness?? Absolutely an asshole *male*. Women don’t end sentences with verbs. NEVER.

  456. #456 LanceR, JSG
    March 18, 2009

    @#318 A Molly nom? For me! My first!! *bats eyes*1

    Kwok, you are really pushing the envelope. I may have to change my vote…

    1. a man my size, with my general level of hairiness, batting his eyes? Never a pretty sight.

  457. #457 Qwerty
    March 18, 2009

    I can quit reading the “creationists go to the Smithsonian” thread as Barb “the bland babbler” has been banished.

    I will abstain from the current vote until tomorrow as the person I vote for may pass the immunity test. (Really, I can’t decide who should go.)

  458. #458 tony
    March 18, 2009

    I’m voting for Africangenesis.

    Too much of his AGW Liberturdian nonsense has been spewed over every thread imaginable.

    Good riddance. (and it will save me a killfile!)

  459. #459 Wolfhound
    March 18, 2009

    I must admit that Pete Rooke, my front runner in the 1st round, is showing a side of himself that is charming in a creepy way, but charming none the less, with a bit of potty humor thrown in.

    This time around, I find myself torn. On the one hand, Silver Fox is an astoundingly dense godbotter and annoying as all get-out. Kwok is a self-aggrandizing name dropper who Fails To Get It. But, exasperating as his hubris is, he is, after all, OUR self-aggrandizing name dopper. I’m willing to forgive the bad image he gives the anti-ID crowd simply because he is anti-ID. Even if he repeats this fact over and over and over and over and over again.

    Screw it, this Wolfhound has become a Foxhound. The Fox must go!

  460. #460 Ichthyic
    March 18, 2009

    It’s the feel-vaguely-exasperated book of the summer!

    ROFLMAO

  461. #461 AnthonyK
    March 18, 2009

    Women don’t end sentences with verbs. NEVER.

    No? What about “I do”? Or is that beginning a sentence?

  462. #462 Feynmaniac
    March 18, 2009

    Real Name #448

    Well done.

  463. #463 tony
    March 18, 2009

    Dear PZ

    Can we continue Survivor for a whole season? I’d like to send Simon(ass-love), Silver(cannot disprove Ra)Fox, and ever-so-friendful John Kwok directly to the dungeon.

    There are more (‘J’ comes to mind), so I’m waiting with bated breath for the next installment!

    You respectful poster
    Tony

  464. #464 Jenny T
    March 18, 2009

    Damn, not 20 posts after I mention africangenesis pulling a Kwok, he goes and does it. Fortunately for him, Kwok couldn’t stand to be upstaged and posted again about his high school and its principal, as if anyone here gave a damn about it.

    Honestly, I have to hand it to Simon, he at least hasn’t had the idiocy to try to defend himself in this thread by continually expounding his homophobia and weird sexual obsessions. As Kel quoted form Lincoln, “‘Tis better to be silent and thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.” Kwok and anfricangenesis just can’t help themselves I guess though. On the other hand though, Pete has attempted to answer in earnest, failing nonetheless, but I think for him, an honest attempt is progress, so he will continue to be on my personal ‘not ban-worthy’ list for now. Not to mention he says some of the funniest things

  465. #465 ScottRS
    March 18, 2009

    Africangenesis. Weapons-grade insipid.

  466. #466 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    No? What about “I do”? Or is that beginning a sentence?

    I’m thinkin’ that particular unfinished sentence was created by males for females…

  467. #467 Naked Bunny with a Whip
    March 18, 2009

    Or is that beginning a sentence?

    *snickers quietly*

  468. #468 blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    “Women don’t end sentences with verbs. NEVER.”

    I don’t know how true that is.

    So, I disagree.

  469. #469 ?????? ?????????? ?????????, ??
    March 18, 2009

    Real Name – Bravo! (Brava?)

    Are we voting again? Didn’t we do that last night?

    Simon, then, for being extremely distateful and yet, unlike Brownian, utterly devoid of redeeming characteristics.

    After this round of plonking, can we take a step back and review what it is we’ve done, and why? How many more rounds of culling are planned, anyway?

  470. #470 Crystal D.
    March 18, 2009

    I’m going for Kwok, but only because someone else called him “Kwok of shit”, which I really liked at first, laughed very hard, but then I didn’t like it because I don’t like baby-speak but I started talking like that to my cats. So logically I blame John Kwok.

  471. #471 Kseniya
    March 18, 2009

    No? What about “I do”? Or is that beginning a sentence?

    LOL!

  472. #472 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    Is anyone else disappointed that Cuttlefish hasn’t voted?
    It would probably be funny and poetical.

  473. #473 withheld
    March 18, 2009

    Where can I get a “Fuck the Homophobes” T-Shirt? Might need it the next time Fred Phelps comes to town.

  474. #474 cicely
    March 18, 2009

    Pete Rooke,
    While I wouldn’t go so far as to volunteer to stand as a character witness for you, I will say that I think it would be a shame if you were plonked. I may be rashly optimistic, but I don’t think that you are irredeemably stupid, just naive and mistaught, and overly convinced that you are/must be right; if you are indeed but a youth (to lapse into slight pomposity), these are things you could, with a little initiative, grow out of. I think you could get a lot of good out of hanging out here, if your skin is thick enough.

    Losing the creepy analogies would be a step in the right direction (I admit, I don’t follow every thread, but I don’t recall seeing the Old Perennials lately).

  475. #475 nick nick bobick
    March 18, 2009

    I wasn’t planning on voting for multiple banishments in such a short time – let’s not lose ALL the funnies at once, but Kwok’s continuing obtuseness on this thread has made me change my mind. If it walks like a Kwok, and quacks like a Kwok, and looks like a Kwok…

    Kwok

    I have ignored his rants on most blogs I have seen him on (ERV, Panda’s Thumb, etc.) but did some research on him after following some links to his ravings yesterday. His Amazon profile is quite revealing: he is an underacheiver and is attempting to compensate.

  476. #476 scooter
    March 18, 2009

    and the Rodney Dangerfield award goes to

    Posted by: AnthonyK

    Women don’t end sentences with verbs. NEVER.

    No? What about “I do”? Or is that beginning a sentence?

  477. #477 Kseniya
    March 18, 2009

    How old is the Rookester, anyway? When he first showed up I figured he was 40-something, maybe 50. Didn’t he claim to be a pastor or something? Now it comes out that he’s a “youth”? Like Walton? College-aged perhaps?

  478. #478 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    Not too long ago the (aptly named) Rookie claimed to be twenty two.

  479. #479 Tark
    March 18, 2009

    Oral Sex, Bacon, and Lesbians

    Vote: Banish Simon. Muzzle Kwok. Put Silverfox on notice.

    Tax Religion. More DIScern trolls, Less CONcern trolls!
    Tark

  480. #480 Kseniya
    March 18, 2009

    Oh! Ok then. Very close to Walton’s age. He’s around 21 now I guess. Not that far behind me, either.

    I miss Etha. :-|

  481. #481 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    Ok Tark, that’s enough with the flashies, already.

    (the above does not apply to lesbians, of course)

  482. #482 Wowbagger, OM
    March 18, 2009

    Re: the ‘jack of all trades’ info – thanks for that; whenever it was I’d first heard it it was with the Jack/Ace dichotomy, which I quite liked. It always seemed to make sense, and I’ve never had occasion to look into it any further.

    Apologies to Pete Rooke’s English/PE teacher – well, for that slur anyway; I’d still like to ask him to explain why he never taught Pete anything about the use of analogies…

  483. #483 Dustin
    March 18, 2009

    I have a creeping suspicion that indiscriminate use of the flashing font and gumby background is going to lead to no use of the flashing font and gumby background.

    We can’t have nice things.

  484. #484 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Tark…

    Stop, please stop with the flashy things…

    They make good bookmarks, but they’re dreadful…

    Although I do share your enthusiasm for lesbians…

  485. #485 Steve_C
    March 18, 2009

    Who doesn’t love oral sex, bacon and lesbians???

  486. #486 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    Although I do share your enthusiasm for lesbians…

    Me too! Especially lesbians wrestling in bacon grease, which leads to… oh never mind.

  487. #487 Dustin
    March 18, 2009

    Who doesn’t love oral sex, bacon and lesbians???

    Simon. He just loves poop.

  488. #488 Tark
    March 18, 2009

    Humble apologies all. A kid with a new toy ….

    Kinda like Pete Rooke and his penis …
    Or Kwok with his penis IN his rolodex …
    Or SilverFox with God’s penis in his mouth …

    (and now wondering if I have aged myself incredibly with rolodex reference. Sigh. I do remember the bacon though…
    and the odd lesbian. The even ones were a bit off.)

    Tax Religion. Normal programming resumes forthwith.
    Tark

  489. #489 blueelm
    March 18, 2009

    Simon should take a lesson from the < a href="http://www.homestarrunner.com/vcr_poop.html">poopsmith and try a vow of silence!

  490. #490 Aleph
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok.

    What the hell are you anyway? Is this just one long tribute to Al Bundy? Assuming, for the sake of argument, that you have actually matriculated, I have a question…

    Based on your writing “style” i cannot imagine that your head wasnt repeatedly used to clean the toilets of your high-school so why, oh dear god why, must you KEEP FCUKING REFERENCING IT IN EVERY BLEEDING (other) POST?

  491. #491 Tark
    March 18, 2009

    And many thanks to Dustin at #483 for a bark out loud David Cedaris reference. Nicely Done.

    Tax Religion. Me lurk quieter one day.
    Tark

  492. #492 'Tis Himself
    March 18, 2009

    I love bacon, even though my diet won’t let me have it. I’m a great fan of oral sex, both giving and receiving. And I am a lesbian. Lesbians dream of making love to women, I dream of making love to women, so I must be a lesbian.

  493. #493 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok? He used to play for the Phillies, didn’t he?

  494. #494 mds
    March 18, 2009

    Didn’t he claim to be a pastor or something?

    You might be conflating him with Fr.J who showed up around the same time in the cracker threads, although I think Fr.J might have been disappearing around the time that Pete became most active.

    The open thread a couple days shows a more human side to Rooke, at least later in the thread (after he nominated Janine, Nerd of Redhead and Patricia for expulsion, petitioned PZ to add a profanity filter to the blog, claimed that the problem with religion is that it has bad PR, and indicated that he doesn’t approve of mixed gender work enviornments based on their portrayal in a TV show, and complained that Evil Dead wasn’t religious enough for him).

    For instance, in #494, he contributes a recipe, and apart from reacting badly to video posted by Janine, generally seems to be getting along with people. At #614, and a few later posts, he seems to open up a bit. He also seems to have a greater range of musical tastes than Walton.

    In the last little while he does seem to be making an effort. It’s just unfortunate that his religious upbringing has left him with so many hangups around sex (see Oral Sex, I would never inflict), but while he seems to place religion and Catholicism in general on a pedestal, I can’t remember him ever quoting scripture as though it would hold any weight with us. While I find many of his opinions offensive, or just ludicrous, he seems more redeemable than someone like Simon, Facilis or Silver Fox.

  495. #495 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok. Still for the same reasons.

    Fasciitis- I mean, Facilis, for the dumb comment on the anti-condom pope blog entry.

    I have yet to read that.

    I also don’t seem to have been on the same threads as simon much.

    a few weeks ago it might have been tempting to remove AG, but after the incident with the River Main, in which he insisted it was spelled Mein, and then refused to accept that he fucked up and instead kept digging himself in deeper, he has become a fucking joke and easy to ignore.

    ROTFL! So he believed German spelling is logical just because it’s more logical than the English one? On which thread was that? :-D

    @sdh Why are you posting the same comment so often?

    Because he/she/it/squid is too stupid to read the error message!

    Not on the list, but JIM needs to go to Dungeon too for:

    I bet he’s already banned. Compare him to a couple dungeon inhabitants.

    can I have ice cream instead?

    I scream: “Ice cream!”
    — First-year textbook of English as a foreign language.

    I believe that if selected for banning I should be allowed to mount a defence/appeal and call some character witnesses to protest on my behalf.

    You misunderstand. This is not a trial. It’s a reality show.

    Either succeed at the Immunity Challenge, or heed the advice of what is now comment 162 but will probably move upthread.

    the inherent sexism that the only understanding he had of oral sex was woman-giving-man.

    Oh, I wouldn’t call that sexism. I’d call it sheer ignorance. It isn’t long ago (maybe a year or two) that I even learned of the existence of man-giving-woman (probably right here on Pharyngula); my imagination is way too pathetic* to come up with it on its own.

    * As a vertebrate paleontologist, I don’t need no stink’n’ imagination. Reality pwnz0rz any fiction any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Off the top of my head — adelogyrinids? Hello? Who ordered those?!? What next, champsosaurs…?

    I think that Kwok’s apology shows that he understands exactly why he drives us crazy, so he passes the challenge.

    That wasn’t by him!

    Comment 271, on the other hand, is by him. Either that, or copypasta of a comment by him.

    Comment 291 seems to be parody again…

    OK, I give up. If he’s voted off, maybe the parodies will stop. AAAAARRRRRGH!!!

    and carry a rolled up copy of the Dead Sea Scrools, on papyrus. The code phrase is, “the duck howls at midnight” and your reply is “I have a cunning plan”.

    LOL!

    Somehow I doubt the papyrus…

    Sorry my double post above (#329/333). It timed out the first way through- I backed up and waited before trying again.

    You should not have tried again. You should have read the error message, gone back to back up, and then just refresh. Read the error message to find out why this makes sense.

  496. #496 Moses
    March 18, 2009

    Posted by: John Kwok | March 18, 2009 6:57 PM

    @ Steve_C –

    Only a delusional mind like yours would insist that I am patting myself in the back by stating how wonderful my high school alma mater is.

    That’s not what I have been saying, idiot. Instead, I have noted that the principal of America’s premier high school of science, mathematics and technology has pledged that Intelligent Design creationism WILL NEVER BE TAUGHT at his school as long as he continues serving as its principal.

    I don’t care if the school is named “PZ Myers High School”, “Charles Darwin High School”, or, as is the case, “Stuyvesant High School”.

    Just get it into your thick skull. Repeat after me:

    The principal of America’s best high school of science, mathematics and technology has pledged that Intelligent Design creationism will never be taught there while he serves as the school’s principal. Maybe other high school principals should take the same pledge too. If they did, perhaps the overall quality of American science secondary school education would begin to improve.

    Yes, yes, and you went there. And you can drop names.

    Now, get it through your thick skull: a. WE DON’T FUCKING CARE; and, b. name dropping is generally recognized as part of an immature or defective personality.

    But while I would never name drop, I could name drop. I’m seriously fucking connected IRL. Hell, I could use my relatives from my vast family. One was the head of one of the worlds largest non-religious charitable organzation for decades. Two were olympians, one of whom won a gold and bronze medal. Four have played in the NFL, though only one had a meritorious career. A cousin manages a AAA baseball team and may end up in the majors, as a manager, someday. My grandfather, nearly two-decades after his death is still so well regarded in his industry that the just published a 40-page biographical article in a journal that started with his business ventures starting during his teen years and ended at his death. I could drop my uncle who worked at Lawrence Livermore (PhD Physics) and knew all kinds of great phycists, though he never got that noteriety. I could talk about my cousin who is a partner in Ernst Young or her father who is one of those elite-echelon banker fellows at one of the giant banks that people are a bit ticked at right now…

    I could drop all kind of names. Rich relatives, powerful relatives, famous relatives; yet I clearly recognize how incredibly childish it would be and how it would, ultimately, reduce my ability to make any kind of point without being subject to derision and scorn, if not being completely ignored. In short, all of my participation would be meaningless if all I could do was blather on about my family and all of its accomplishments.

    And this, Horatio, is why you’re up for the vote. Because you keep blabbing about famous people who went to your high school.

    We get it. We don’t care. We think it makes you look like a prawn.

  497. #497 insert witty name
    March 18, 2009

    I vote for Simon. He’s just sick in the head.
    Real name you’re a genius.

  498. #498 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    And I am a lesbian. Lesbians dream of making love to women, I dream of making love to women, so I must be a lesbian.

    No, you dream of watching lesbians making love to women. That makes you an ordinary wanker.

  499. #499 Nominal Egg
    March 18, 2009

    A cousin manages a AAA baseball team and may end up in the majors, as a manager, someday.

    Here’s hoping he comes to Colorado, and soon.
    Clint Hurdle is an idiot.

  500. #500 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    March 18, 2009

    Rookie, I am going to do you a favor. Hit this link. For your own sake, do not watch the slideshow, just listen to the song. Take it to heart. Sing out.

    I want to be seduced!

  501. #501 Demonhype
    March 18, 2009

    I was going to search, but Feymaniac’s summaries pretty much did it for me. I’d have to go with Simon, without a doubt. That dude is scary stupid beyond all reason.

  502. #502 Dustin
    March 18, 2009

    And many thanks to Dustin at #483 for a bark out loud David Cedaris reference. Nicely Done.

    It was a coincidence. I don’t read David Sedaris. The post was mostly inspired by MST3K.

  503. #503 Rahne
    March 18, 2009

    John Kwok, he annoys me

  504. #504 Moses
    March 18, 2009

    Posted by: Nominal Egg | March 18, 2009 11:21 PM

    Here’s hoping he comes to Colorado, and soon.
    Clint Hurdle is an idiot.

    He was in the Seattle farm-club organization for years. Now he’s in the Atlanta system. Even so, I suspect he’ll have to break into some kind of assistant coach in the majors before he gets a shot at managing a club. And that’s not so easy to do.

    OTOH, he’s won three titles in the minors, so maybe he’ll make it. He’s certainly gone further than anyone (in my family), in professional athletics, since the 1970’s.

  505. #505 kamaka
    March 18, 2009

    Janine @ 500

    I want to be seduced!

    Perhaps. Though I’m guessing not by the types portrayed in the video.

  506. #506 WTFinterrobang
    March 18, 2009

    1 vote for “What happened to my butt hymen” Simon

  507. #507 heliobates
    March 18, 2009

    PZ needs to give us an annual Pharyngula International Self-Aggrandizement thread. Banned or not, John would always be allowed to post there.

    All of us could then talk about the famous people we know and how great our senior kindergarten class was.

  508. #508 «bønez_brigade»
    March 18, 2009

    @tony [#463],
    From what little I’ve seen of Survivor on TV (and I’ve intentionally seen very little of it), only one survives — meaning all others are voted off — and that’s a good result, I’d say.

    ——————–

    @Nominal Egg [#472],
    I’d also enjoy a(n evolving) take from Cuttlefish on this whole Survivor game.

    ——————–

    @Tark [#479],
    You forgot to change the blockquote width.

    ——————–

    @Dustin [#483],
    I agree. That’s why I reserve it for special cases; and now I’ll have to devise a Day 4 way of voting…

  509. #509 Michael Hawkins
    March 18, 2009

    Maybe we’ve been taking the wrong angle on these guys. Maybe they’ve all just got very thin myelin.

    Science and insult! It’s perfect.

  510. #510 Dr. Pablito
    March 19, 2009

    More please: oral sex, lesbians and bacon.
    Off the island: Simon. Sanctimonious doofus.

  511. #511 Kseniya
    March 19, 2009

    Lesbians dream of making love to women, I dream of making love to women, so I must be a lesbian.

    Ahh. The old “I’m a lesbian trapped in a man’s body” ploy. That won’t fly here, Captain Shameless!

    As for Rooke being a man of the cloth: First, no way am I confusing him with Fr.J. Second, it’s likely I read someone else’s facetious comment and taken it seriously. Third, Rooke’s opinions on women and their place in society are so stygian, I’d have believed nearly anything about him – up to and including a claim that he’s an undead witch-hunting Inquisitor, one of the Nazgul.

    (Ahem. In the event that the latter turns out to be true, I’d like to take this opportunity to point out that “I am no man!”)

    Knowing that he’s a couple of years younger than I am, as opposed to 20 years older, does make him a little easier to take.

  512. #512 lledowyn
    March 19, 2009

    Like yesterday, I vote for John Kwok. I *really* want to see what the effect of his Facebook threat is going to be.

  513. #513 bastion of sass
    March 19, 2009

    Still voting to throw Simon off of Pharynguland. He’s disgusting, and nothing more.

    I think Pete Rooke’s comments on the Survivor Day 1 thread about his lack of sexual experience and sexual hangups made me feel some pity towards him.

    I used to image he was just a crotchety, dried-up husk of an old coot whose brain cells were beginning to rot. To learn he’s a 22 year-old student who’s obviously lived a very repressed and sheltered life, honestly makes me feel for him. So, I’d keep Rooke.

  514. #514 Discombobulated
    March 19, 2009

    John Kwok ?

    Quite a feat. He’s not even a creationist, he is just an interminable blowhard, and while some of the others are annoying, his comments are the only ones that make me want to hurt kittens.

    Pete, while clearly failing his first attempt at the immunity challenge (try again!), I agree with Feynmaniac: he has been showing some signs of self-reflection lately in other threads.

  515. #515 Dustin
    March 19, 2009

    “I am no man!”

    Must you shout that every time you stab me in the face?

  516. #516 Marc Buhler
    March 19, 2009

    I vote John Kwok – “himself”.

    Why?

    well – this is reason enough….

    *******************************************
    Posted by: John Kwok | February 26, 2009 12:08 PM

    @ sng,

    Whether or not PZ wishes to admit this, Ken Miller has done far more work than PZ has in exposing the illogical, unethical behavior of creationists (If that’s not the case, then why do you think Ken received the AAAS Public Understanding of Science and Technology Award? There is nothing in PZ’s past history which suggests that he, too, is worthy of such recognition.).
    ********************************************

  517. #517 siMon
    March 19, 2009

    To the readers of Pharyngula,

    I sincerely apologize for my reprehensible behavior while on this weblog. In retrospect, it was quite inappropriate to graphically expose my private sexual fantasies of defecation and homosexual acts to the readership here. I sincerely regret any feelings of discomfort and disgust this may have created. Also, when I was quoting large blocks of texts without adequately providing citations I was committing intellectually dishonesty. Finally, my question to Dr. Myers on his wedding anniversary reflects quite poorly on my judgment.

    The American philosopher Henry David Thoreau once wrote ‘I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of man to elevate his life by a conscious endeavor’. I will endeavor to elevate my standing with the readership of this weblog by making my commentary more substantive in the future.

    Sincerely,

    sImon

  518. #518 Menyambal
    March 19, 2009

    Simon is evil. Boot his cruelty as hard as you can.

    Most of the others make me think–not think that they are right, mind. They make me think about how I know what I know, and how I can express my thoughts to others. Getting some things into words in order to argue with those guys is a good thing for me.

    But Simon doesn’t listen, so I don’t need to think to disagree with him. He just makes me feel all smug for not being like him. Which isn’t good for my intellect. If someone must be kicked, make it Simon, and make it hurt.

  519. #519 Ken Cope
    March 19, 2009

    To the homophobes, and for lovers of bacon and lesbians, (and lesbian bacon lovers!) I present a youtube video, and an image, mostly NSFW.
    An excerpt from Zappa’s film 200 Motels, Penis Dimensions, and a novel use for bacon

  520. #520 Marie the Bookwyrm
    March 19, 2009

    Ooooo, another go-round. (I never watch those reality shows, so I don’t know what the rules are.) On the first day I had voted for the horrendous Barb before I was exposed to the twisted imaginings of simon (or ‘slime-on’). But a vote is sacred (I know–not really), so I didn’t feel I could take it back. Now that we get to vote again, I say ‘Get rid of that creep, simon!’.

  521. #521 SteveL
    March 19, 2009

    Remove Kwok please. The thread #189 mentioned was enough evidence for me. He pissed all over it.

  522. #522 Tark
    March 19, 2009

    Dustin @ #502 – Even more nicely done then!

    Bonez – re blockquotes, I realized. Haste makes mistakes and your fu is much better than mine anyway.

    Nothing like topping off an evening with some Redbone,
    Janine, your fu is better than all. Shine on.

    Tax Religion. (Insert something pithy here on your own, I am tired.)
    Tark

  523. #523 Tiina Järvi
    March 19, 2009

    Simon. The continuous homophobic attitude adds nothing to anything discussed here, though I have to addmit Facilis’ condom comment yesterday (my time) was appalling, misogynist and ignorant enough to get my vote. Well, fortunately for me there is a next round.

  524. #524 Blind Squirrel FCD
    March 19, 2009

    Simon, for his lousy sentence structure.

  525. #525 rednomad
    March 19, 2009

    After reading the profiles given by feynmaniac, I’m going to cast a vote for Simon (I mean, getting rid of this sort of trash is just simple house cleaning)

  526. #526 marc buhler
    March 19, 2009

    Is it too much to hope for John and Simon to end in a tie?

    Please?

  527. #527 Leigh Williams
    March 19, 2009

    I think Pete did pretty well with his essay. Some of his points were pretty obvious: this is a rough-and-tumble place where passionate people argue a lot, and the anonymity of the internet makes it easy to be rude. But he did reveal some promise, I think, when he talked about how hard it is to look objectively at your strongly-held beliefs . . . and maybe let them go . . . even when you know there’s something wrong. The “scientism” thing? Look, that’s where he is now. The last few days have given us some hints that it might not be where he ends up. And damn, folks, he did try.

    But, Pete, please eschew obfuscation. Also, brevity is the soul of wit.

    I do wish, JeffreyD, that I could join you for that, what was it, orange squash? Though I’d be drinking a martini, of course. I’m no 22-year-old innocent.

    Oh, and RealName? Way to go, dude or chica!

  528. #528 Michael X
    March 19, 2009

    Kseniya,

    Knowing that he’s a couple of years younger than I am, as opposed to 20 years older, does make him a little easier to take.

    Why is this?

    Is it that you’d be sadder that someone older would have these views (which sounds more reasonable) or would you be more challenged in your own views by the simple fact that someone that age held those views?

  529. #529 Michael X
    March 19, 2009

    Kseniya,

    Knowing that he’s a couple of years younger than I am, as opposed to 20 years older, does make him a little easier to take.

    Why is this?

    Is it that you’d be sadder that someone older would have these views (which sounds more reasonable) or would you be more challenged in your own views by the simple fact that someone that age held those views?

  530. #530 Phrogge
    March 19, 2009

    Still SIMON, for the many good and sufficient reasons cited above.

    Then maybe Kwok for being repetitiously repetitiously repetitiously tiresome. I think I’ve changed my mind after all about being able to ignore his posts; the incessant mosquito whine of his name-dropping, nothing-new posts has me desperately seeking surcease by swatter instead of just pulling the blanket over my ears.

    AfricanGenesis is quickly climbing the charts, and I haven’t even had much exposure to him.

  531. #531 Sioux Laris
    March 19, 2009

    Already voted, but how can anyone read the comments JKwok has left on this single thread and not want him to enjoy life very, very far from wherever they are? He’s sort of like Eric Idle at his very worst, except without even an echo that intelligence or humor ever existed as positive virtues. He’s a sort of over-the-top parody of some Dickensian character – one whom, when found as a greasy, blackened stain due to having spontaneously combusted, you cheer the author for disposing of, finally.

    Again, if the John Kwoks of this world happen to be on my side, the world needs more sides. Preferably without doors or connecting vents.

  532. #532 Michael X
    March 19, 2009

    Well Kseniya,
    Since I asked you twice, just assume I really want to know.

  533. #533 Valis
    March 19, 2009

    Facilis for sure.

  534. #534 Zirrad
    March 19, 2009

    Kwok…

    although banning him will probably just feed his delusions.

  535. #535 jasonk
    March 19, 2009

    Dear Africangenesis,

    Please keep commenting in this thread so that more people will see the necessity of voting for you.

    May I suggest you explain how anthropogenic global warming is a liberal conspiracy, and scientists are misrepresenting the consensus?

    Thanks!

  536. #536 Taliesan
    March 19, 2009

    My vote goes to Africangenesis. He gives my continent a bad name.

  537. #537 nothing's sacred
    March 19, 2009

    a few weeks ago it might have been tempting to remove AG, but after the incident with the River Main, in which he insisted it was spelled Mein, and then refused to accept that he fucked up and instead kept digging himself in deeper

    That is quite false; you misrepresented his behavior in that very thread and continue to do so. In http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/02/i_marvel_every_time_at_a_presi.php#comment-1404044 he admitted his error, which you surely saw because you posted immediately after him and later commented on his post. But you took him to task for his comment about the spelling having changed, which was likely a joke, and never acknowledged that he admitted the error and chastised himself for not looking it up. AG is terribly wrongheaded about a number of things, but none of them justifies banning — especially not an error that he admitted to and you are lying about — or, you’re doing just what he did but copped to, namely not looking it up before making a claim.

    A good teacher might have taught you that the consistent version of that expression is ‘Jack of all trades and ace of none’ – keeping the playing card motif all the way through.

    What other neologistic back formations would you have good teachers mislead their students with?

    I vote for Simon, because I had to disinfect my screen after his anal leakage got on it.

  538. #538 Jeanette
    March 19, 2009

    Simple Simon. He needs to spend less time on the internet, and go get his butt porked, for the good of his mental health.

  539. #539 Brian G
    March 19, 2009

    John Kwok must go

  540. #540 Wowbagger, OM
    March 19, 2009

    nothing’s sacred, #537

    For someone so caught up in pedantry and fact-checking, you might have bothered to check all the posts in this thread. Try reading through again and maybe you’ll find the post where I admitted my error and apologised.

  541. #541 SC, OM
    March 19, 2009

    For someone so caught up in pedantry and fact-checking, you might have bothered to check all the posts in this thread. Try reading through again and maybe you’ll find the post where I admitted my error and apologised.

    Yeah, pretty sloppy work there, truth machine.

  542. #542 Drosera
    March 19, 2009

    I say kill all the trolls in the list, except for the female virgins among them. After all, God asked of Moses:

    Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
    But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. (Numbers 31:17-18)

    But if PZ thinks it is more fun to dump them one by one I would say Simon deserves to go first.

  543. #543 clinteas
    March 19, 2009

    Yeah, pretty sloppy work there, truth machine.

    More like a cheap clone,really.

  544. #544 Jacob Relat
    March 19, 2009

    Tor is blocked, then?

  545. #545 Zetetic
    March 19, 2009

    I am changing my vote from Simon to Facilis.

    It was close for me before, but after Facilis’ revolting comment in the “The pope is an evil quack” thread I have changed my mind.

    Here

    Time for flaccid Facilis to go…

  546. #546 Leigh Williams
    March 19, 2009

    Withheld @237: That was a very wise and kind post.

    Pete, read that over again, please. Withheld has your best interests at heart.

  547. #547 SC, OM
    March 19, 2009

    More like a cheap clone,really.

    No, it’s him, I’m fairly sure. See this thread (which I just checked and now see that I’ll have to go back to – argh) in particular:

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/another_option_for_obama_to_do.php

    I had suspected (and hinted at) it earlier, but that one pretty much convinced me.

  548. #548 Wowbagger, OM
    March 19, 2009

    SC wrote:

    No, it’s him, I’m fairly sure.

    I reckon you’re probably onto something. On one of the other threads ‘nothing’s sacred’ posted a few comments in a row – a trademark of tm.

    But why bother with the handle change? He wasn’t plonked, was he?

  549. #549 clinteas
    March 19, 2009

    Checked the other thread out….

    Truthy,welcome home !!

  550. #550 SC, OM
    March 19, 2009

    But why bother with the handle change? He wasn’t plonked, was he?

    No. If it is him, it’s kind of amusing. It would be exhausting to have to try to remove all distinctive marks from your comments (tone, vocabulary, issues of interest,…), but if you’re not going to there seems little point in changing your moniker.

  551. #551 John Morales
    March 19, 2009

    SC, the evidence is pretty persuasive (I’d not followed that thread as it’s internal US politics); I concur with your assessment.

    Wowbagger, tm withdrew voluntarily.
    The changed handle presumably is to avoid the baggage that the old monicker had accumulated, and to turn over a new leaf.

    If this is so, I hope our noticing doesn’t drive him off again…

  552. #552 SC, OM
    March 19, 2009

    If this is so, I hope our noticing doesn’t drive him off again…

    You really must get over this crush, John. :)

  553. #553 Raiko
    March 19, 2009

    John Kwok

    … because I just threw him off my facebook.

  554. #554 Kel
    March 19, 2009

    I liked having Truth Machine around, it’s always good to have commenters who will take others to task. Speaking of which, whatever happened to BobC?

  555. #555 clinteas
    March 19, 2009

    Hey non-aussies,can someone check out RD.net and see if they can access it please? Im having an attack of internet censorship paranoia….

    And to the Seed IT guys,can we fix the submission thingy already??

  556. #556 SC, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Speaking of which, whatever happened to BobC?

    BobC who called for the destruction of every person in Iraq, and I believe Afghanistan as well; and who, while he considered abortion “murder,” thought all fundamenalist “subhumans” should abort? I expressed my concern to him the crazier he sounded, but I also suggested he should be banned. Wherever he is, I hope he’s getting the help he needed.

  557. #557 MartinM
    March 19, 2009

    BobC who called for the destruction of every person in Iraq, and I believe Afghanistan as well; and who, while he considered abortion “murder,” thought all fundamenalist “subhumans” should abort?

    Isn’t he still here under the name bobxxxx? Certainly sounds the same to me.

  558. #558 Cath the Canberra Cook
    March 19, 2009

    Clinteas, I also see richarddawkins.net as down at the moment. But we don’t actually *have* censorship yet so it’s probably only an admin thing. Or perhaps a hacker attack.

    (And support the EFF via http://nocleanfeed.com/ )

  559. #559 SC, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Isn’t he still here under the name bobxxxx? Certainly sounds the same to me.

    I’m glad you said that. I’ve only read one or two comments by bobxxxx, but I had a similar feeling. If it is, so much for my hopes.

  560. #560 clinteas
    March 19, 2009

    Cath,

    But we don’t actually *have* censorship yet

    Yes we do.I just posted this on the “what the heck” thread too.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/aussie_firewall_wikileaks/

  561. #561 Wowbagger, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Kel wrote:

    I liked having Truth Machine around, it’s always good to have commenters who will take others to task. Speaking of which, whatever happened to BobC?

    BobC, as SC noted, got a bit indiscriminate in his attacks; this put him at odds with a few of the other commentators, who asked him to pull his head in. He might have resented that.

    truth machine had his moments but was also prone to unneccessary vindictiveness and spiteful attacks. In a way I miss having him here to tear strips off the deserving – but I also understand that a lot of good people aren’t upset he upped stakes and left town.

  562. #562 Mari
    March 19, 2009

    clinteas & Cath: I also get a internal server error and I’m not in Australia.

  563. #563 chupa
    March 19, 2009

    SIMON – should be gone next, I’m pretty sure his real name is Ted Haggard.

    But, I think Kwok really sucks too. Maybe all he needs is a list of ‘warning words’. He can write out his whole post, then erase any sentence that mentions any of the following:

    high school
    alumni
    alma mater
    stuyvesant
    anyone famous that he personally knows
    anyone not famous that he personally knows

    And, if after doing that, there are any sentences left, then hit POST, otherwise try again. Of course, I tried this on every Kwok post in the thread, and not a single sentence was left over, :(

  564. #564 Thomas Winwood
    March 19, 2009

    Voting Facilis, for his beastly little comment on the Pope-condom thread.

  565. #565 David Wiener
    March 19, 2009

    Simon

  566. #566 bleu
    March 19, 2009

    Silver Fox

  567. #567 dreamstretch
    March 19, 2009

    Has to be Simon as he seems to be the only one deliberately trolling. Facilis gets a special mention for his comment on the Pope thread.

  568. #568 Heywood
    March 19, 2009

    Simon.

  569. #569 Kel
    March 19, 2009

    I remember BobC getting offside with people, though my personal dealings with him weren’t too bad (probably because I didn’t talk politics with him)

  570. #570 Benjamin
    March 19, 2009

    Simon. Even in his “apology,” he still doesn’t get why he is a vile troll.

  571. #571 sbh
    March 19, 2009

    simoN. This guy may enjoy pummeling his straw man, but for the rest of us, it’s boring. And if you can’t learn from experience, what can you learn from?

  572. #572 CosmicTeapot
    March 19, 2009

    Simply Simon.

  573. #573 tripwire
    March 19, 2009

    Silver Fox

    He only has one trick: purposefully misunderstanding the difference between a bare assertion and a proof. Time and time and time and time again, without showing any sign of improved comprehension.

  574. #574 Flashboy
    March 19, 2009

    /delurking

    Simon. There are enough bigoted fools in RL without having to encounter them here in one of my safe bastions of rational thought. He needs therapy, but he’s not going to find it here.

    Do we get to hunt and shoot anyone? (Java applet concept there for the taking, no royalty required.)

    /lurking

  575. #575 Philip1978
    March 19, 2009

    I confess to being something of a lurker here but I cannot help but vote here

    Mr Kwok you do seem to hold thyself in high esteem sir – I am sure you are a lovely chap really but calm down, ranting on a thread where your freedom to post is currently narrowing is positively silly. If you enjoy posting on this site, why not fight for that right? You do not have my vote though, no, not you.

    Mr Rooke – Oh dear, poor chap, oral sex is oral sex – even without bacon – I can quite happily report it is a very good idea no matter what sexual orientation you are, if you don’t enjoy it, no problem, don’t do it – but not doing it because your religious mind wont let you is daft. Live a little.

    But my vote goes to Simon.

    I just happen to be heterosexual but don’t expect any gold stars for that announcement. I am so comfortable with my own sexuality I have not the slightest worry about what other consenting adults who are not related are getting up to. Go for it, I heartily encourage it – in the words of one of Stephen Fry’s characters, Donald Trefusis, “If you have been, I’m most awfully pleased!”

    What I think is one of the more poisonous aspects of religion is the hang up about sex and how humans should go about it. I often wonder if the sexual frustration of most religious fundamentalist groups were eradicated would the world not be a safer place? I am sure most religious batshit ideas are the result of not being able to express sexuality properly.

    Simon says it is not ok to be gay cos his God says so and seems to take great delight in pouring scorn upon those who are. That is extremely insulting, nasty and vile – what a horrible thing to do.

    I hope he is removed to the dungeon in the style of my favourite Shakespearean stage exit of all time.

    Exit pursued by a bear

    :)

  576. #576 JennyAnyDots
    March 19, 2009

    OK, not read through to the end of this yet (I can only get away with reading so much in my lunchbreak before I have to get back to work) but simply for inspiring Real Name at 448, surely John Kwok has to stay. Who knows what gems he might lead to in future?

    I don’t think I’ve read comments by everyone up for banning today, but based on Feynmaniac’s edited highlights, Simon would seem to be a deeply objectionable person in the same vein as Barb. Therefore, my vote = Simon.

  577. #577 ???
    March 19, 2009

    BTW -??? is probably Scott from O’s sockpuppet.

    Wrong, moron. Wrong state, wrong country, wrong person. How did you manage to make three mistakes in one sentence?

  578. #578 Philip1978
    March 19, 2009

    ???

    You really are most grumpy today, cheer up.

  579. #579 Watchman
    March 19, 2009

    Wrong, moron. Wrong state, wrong country, wrong person. How did you manage to make three mistakes in one sentence?

    This is an interesting claim coming, as it does, from someone who contributes nothing of value and who appears to be unsure of his own name. I believe that misidentifying a person is one mistake. The other inaccuracies follow from the single error.

  580. #580 Dustin
    March 19, 2009

    ??? is probably DaveScot. He’s down on his luck these days. You know how it is — one minute you’re rubbing elbows with the great luminaries of our day like William “Fart Foley” Dembski, Denise “Dr. Zaius” O’Leary and Steve Fuller (President of the Junior Paul Feyerabend League for Flunking Science and Crying About It). The next, you’re out on the street, drinking sterno and shouting at the parking meters.

    Ok, so DaveScot has always done that, but you get the idea.

  581. #581 Facilis
    March 19, 2009

    Why is there so much Facilis hate on Pharyngula?? Hmm.
    I guess I ask difficult question. It’s not every day a theist asks an atheist to solve the problem of induction or account for the metaphysical foundations of morality nd logic, but back during my presup phase I did that a lot. It did not help that I repeated myself a lot. many people just do not have the patience.I also hold strong views on topics like sin, sex and abortion that most posters disagree with.People hate it when there worldviews are challenged
    I probaly won’t bring up my presuppositional arguments here any more. I think anyone who looks at one of the previous threads will be able to get the essence of it.

  582. #582 Dustin
    March 19, 2009

    Oh good. A notpology.

    If presuppositionalism is your shtick, then it doesn’t take too long to figure out how you came up with that screen name, oh facile one.

  583. #583 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    March 19, 2009

    Great, we have the “I am a martyr for the cause of righteousness” defense.

    The reason you are disliked is easy, you repeated assert the same disproved arguments over and over again as if you are brandishing a huge broadsword. That is not a sword in your hands, it is a hot dog.

  584. #584 Sven DiMilo
    March 19, 2009

    People hate it when there worldviews are challenged

    Yeah. That’s it, all right. *eyes roll around uncontrollably*

  585. #585 Stephen Wells
    March 19, 2009

    Facilis, the incessant repetition is only half of it. Incessant repetition _of known errors_ is the really tooth-grinding part. It’s nice if you don’t bring up the presup thing but it would be even better if you showed some awareness of its logical flaws.

  586. #586 AnthonyK
    March 19, 2009

    No, facilis, it’s because you never learn or move on. You’re also grumpy and sullen – you know, you don’t have to post here – and are unwilling to have your views on sex and abortion even slightly challenged by..reality.
    Oh and you’re tryong to proselytise. Which makes all your posts a lie anyway.
    But I won’t vote you off, seeing you get spanked, time after time, is a guilty pleasure of mine.

  587. #587 Watchman
    March 19, 2009

    It’s not every day a theist asks an atheist to solve the problem of induction or account for the metaphysical foundations of morality nd logic

    Yes, it is.

    People hate it when there worldviews are challenged…

    … by flawed and previously-refuted arguments that have been recycled hundreds of times, put forward by someone who advocates against encouraging a vulnerable population to utilize prophylactics to protect itself against highly-communicable fatal disease.

  588. #588 The Dave
    March 19, 2009

    simon

  589. #589 mayhempix
    March 19, 2009

    I agree with SC that this Survivor game is a bit of a guilty pleasure. I enjoy it but at the same time wonder if it really serves a purpose other than to ridicule those who tend to cluelessly ridicule themselves.

    There is something almost naive and childlike in the way that Facilis, Rooke and Kwok have tried to convince us that they should be allowed to stay. While that doesn’t negate the insipid, foolish and/or bizarre things they have stated, it does make one wonder what the threads would be like without them. We would turn our scathing guns towards each other, as happens time to time, and the resulting carnage can be pretty nasty at times.

    That said I was leaning towards Simon until AG posted “I show that there is an intellectual defense to conservatism and libertarianism that is not easy to dismiss.” That inane statement makes AG “easy to dismiss” and moves him to the top of my list.

    Africangenesis is my vote.

    I do agree with some previous comments that Scott of Oregon needs to be added to the list. His drive-by shootings after PZ slammed the one note idiocy of the Libertarians are angry and obnoxious.

    Oh and did I mention bacon eating vagitarians make a straight male seriously consider a sex change?

  590. #590 Stephen Wells
    March 19, 2009

    The notpologies come thick and fast; we’ve already seen AG and Rooke play the you-fear-the-force-of-my-arguments card, and Kwok repeatedly insist that we just don’t understand how _important_ his high school is to world peace and justice. I guess a healthy strain of narcissism is a prerequisite for trolling.

  591. #591 Karey
    March 19, 2009

    I vote Facilis. I have no sense of humor when it comes to the AIDS in africa issue. Even if he’s not serious and just saying things to provoke people, to quote jon stewart, this is not a fucking game. The rest of the trolls on the list are just frustrating blatherers. People like Facilis, their attitudes cause real damage and death. Score another hypocrisy point for the pro-lifers.

  592. #592 Feynmaniac
    March 19, 2009

    The sad thing is facilis’ non apology @ #581 is the best one yet.

    Honestly, since these guys can’t self-criticize I say next round they must criticize one of their fellow contestants.

  593. #593 Naked Bunny with a Whip
    March 19, 2009

    It’s not every day a theist asks an atheist to solve the problem of induction or account for the metaphysical foundations of morality nd logic

    Untrue. Theists are often asking atheists to solve “problems” that only exist in their minds because of their religious beliefs. They then typically reject our simple explanations of why their problem is nonexistent outside their imaginary framework. See the recent abortion thread for numerous examples.

    People hate it when there worldviews are challenged

    On the contrary, I love having my worldview challenged. The neurological experiments that indicate that my free will may be nothing but after-the-fact rationalization are disturbing, yet there they are. And I’ve been reading some fascinating reviews of recent work in loop quantum gravity and the holographic principle, which indicate that the universe, at its base, works in a way that is fundamentally non-intuitive.

    Your empty babble, however, is nothing but boring assertions which were answered dozens of times with no indication you even noticed. I didn’t even learn anything from the refutations because they were so basic and simple.

    I don’t hate you, Facilis. If I hated you, you’d at least be interesting.

  594. #594 mayhempix
    March 19, 2009

    Janine, Insulting Sinner | March 18, 2009 11:34 PM
    “I want to be seduced!”

    Do you prefer vagitarians,?
    Erectarians?
    Or will either suffice?

  595. #595 Longstreet63
    March 19, 2009

    “Why is there so much Facilis hate on Pharyngula?? ”

    You give yourself too much credit. It’s not about hate. It’s contempt.

    To quote myself, “Facilis is merely stupid.”

    Getting on the nominees list is probably the most significant thing you’ve ever done.

  596. #596 kamaka
    March 19, 2009

    Naked Bunny

    And I’ve been reading some fascinating reviews of recent work in loop quantum gravity and the holographic principle, which indicate that the universe, at its base, works in a way that is fundamentally non-intuitive.

    Where can I find this stuff? Sounds very interesting.

  597. #597 Feynmaniac
    March 19, 2009

    These people seem to be under the mistaken impression they are on the list because people disagree with their views. No, you are on the list because people disagree with your behavior. The fact that you used the opportunity of self-assessment to blame everyone here should clue you in on that.

  598. #598 Stephen Wells
    March 19, 2009

    New scientist has an overview last month, I think; it’s basically a boundary-values thing, what’s happening within a volume of space is fully describable/determined by what’s happening on the boundary of that volume, so there’s this “holographic” thing going on where the physics of a 3-D volume is kind of a projection of the physics of the 2-D boundary.

  599. #599 Africangenesis
    March 19, 2009

    nothing’s sacred#537,

    Thanx for caring about accuracy and fairness. I wish it wasn’t so rare a commodity.

    On a science blog perhaps those characterizing a contributer should have to document their characterizatiions with links to evidence that could survive peer review as being a representative sample. I don’t watch survivor or american idol or other manipulative and exploitive programs. What is going on here is pretty disgusting and I refuse to vote. If someone is spamming the forum and refusing to participate in good faith, then it is reasonable to block them. The rest is censorship and mob behavior and PZ should reconsider what he is doing here.

  600. #600 Dianne
    March 19, 2009

    I hate to say this, but this whole theme is bringing out a competitive streak in me. I could make a better self-critique of why I annoy people than that. And name drop more effectively too (especially if I’m allowed to make things up…which, as far as I know, John Kwok and others aren’t.)

  601. #601 Stephen Wells
    March 19, 2009

    Yay, AG spans the forum with climate-change denial then says that spamming is grounds for disposal. So that’s clear then :)

  602. #602 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Facilis shows he is a Fallacious Fool again with his non-answer to the challenge. He is oblivious to why he is on the list. So, he goes up a notch for my vote, but so did all the people who have answered so far.

  603. #603 aratina
    March 19, 2009

    These people seem to be under the mistaken impression they are on the list because people disagree with their views.

    That may be true, but I’m still voting for Kwok for purely political reasons. I wonder if the Secret Service has paid him a visit yet.

    kamaka, here is the article Stephen Wells spoke of: Our World May be a Giant Hologram.

  604. #604 AnthonyK
    March 19, 2009

    PZ should reconsider what he is doing here.

    How true! This whole idea is a sick, twisted attempt by the Darwinist PZ Myers to force some of his commentators to evolve. It’s intellectual eugenics – no longer will the likes of Barb have the right to spawn, or Simon to..however he intends to reproduce…it’s all down to mob rule, and the survival of the facetiousist.
    Are you up for it AG? Are you more than a one trope pony? Dance Rand-boy dance.

    It it makes it any better, imagine you’re living in an oppressive state where they make you…..
    Oh, sorry, I forgot.

  605. #605 JennyAnyDots
    March 19, 2009

    Just wondering, but does anyone know what the final numbers were yesterday? Did I miss the bit that told us how much Barb won by, or how closely fought it was?

  606. #606 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 19, 2009

    The rest is censorship and mob behavior and PZ should reconsider what he is doing here.

    What a load of horseshit. PZ can’t censor anybody, he isn’t the government. This blog is a private, not public place. So PZ can set rules for those of us who post here, and if we wish to post, we need to follow those rules. Since this is a private individual setting policy at his place, the libertardian philosophy should be his place, his rules, and go along with it or not. What a fucking hypocrite. AG gains +5 on my stupidity ranking, and is now tied with Simon for the lead.

  607. #607 heliobates
    March 19, 2009

    I guess I ask difficult question. It’s not every day a theist asks an atheist to solve the problem of induction or account for the metaphysical foundations of morality nd logic, but back during my presup phase I did that a lot.

    Keep telling yourself that. I’m sure it has nothing to do with your complete misunderstanding of logical argumentation and your absolute refusal to address the weaknesses of your own argument.

    If I were in charge of immunity challenges, you’d be typing up that full formal explication of the universal, absolute, unchanging laws of logic, in their universal, unchanging and absolute form. Perhaps Sye could help you with it, since he hasn’t turned in that assignment, either.

    Presuppositionalism and the TAG are not challenges to metaphysical naturalism. The obtuse rhetorical style of their adherents is an invitation to lose my temper online.

  608. #608 AnthonyK
    March 19, 2009

    ??? you seem a charmning fellow. Why won’t you stop being so coy, and show us a little more of your mind? Such a magnificent organ deserves not to be hidden from view!

  609. #609 Sastra
    March 19, 2009

    “The challenge for the seven surviving candidates is to write a short comment, 200 words or less, that reveals that they actually understand why their attitudes and pattern of expression have so exasperated readers here, and explains what they will do to change their behavior in the future.”

    I reread this challenge, and then reread Facilis’ reply at #581:

    Why is there so much Facilis hate on Pharyngula?? Hmm. I guess I ask difficult question…It did not help that I repeated myself a lot. many people just do not have the patience.I also hold strong views on topics like sin, sex and abortion that most posters disagree with.People hate it when there worldviews are challenged…I probaly won’t bring up my presuppositional arguments here any more.

    I think this is a proper and reasonable response to a pretty insulting “challenge.” Most of the hostility towards Facilis is indeed because we don’t like his views. Saying that it’s really because he won’t change his views is more or less restating that. And I think that saying it’s because of the methods he uses in promoting them is also a bit disingenuous.

    One of the things that always annoys me in any religious debate is when the religious person suddenly shifts their defense of their belief, to an attack on the nonbeliever, by using the old “the real problem isn’t what you’re saying — it’s the way you’re saying it.” You see, they’d be just fine and dandy with atheism and listening to atheist reasoning and considering all the arguments against the existence of God IF ONLY the atheist were doing it the right way.

    But oh dear, the atheist isn’t doing it the right way. They’re being shrill or arrogant insensitive or insulting or aggressive or passionate or disrespectful or dogmatic or childish or repetitive or they swore or they committed some other stylistic breach that makes everything else they are saying completely ignorable, because now the focus just has to be on on the person, and not the argument.

    I hate that. It’s a rhetorical trick. I refuse to employ it myself. If there’s some kernel of a reasonable argument in a post, then I don’t give a crap about the way somebody said it. I think Facilis should stay.

    “I’ll say it again. The first tactic to avoid addressing the hard question of the validity of religious belief is to reply with a criticism of those who don’t believe. Don’t fall for it.? (PZ Myers)

  610. #610 Watchman
    March 19, 2009

    I’m not in love with this Survivor gambit either, and have never seen the TV show (or any show like it, for that matter). Nor am I a big fan of banning commenters except in the most extreme cases of egregiously anti-social bloghavior, but I think our contestants are missing a critical point here:

    You’re all in line to get banned anyway, based your commenting behavior and the cumulative effects thereof. This voting isn’t really a witch hunt, it’s just PZ’s way of giving his readers some say about the order in which you presumably doomed commenters will be plonked.

    However, there is a Dickensian aspect to all of this. You are being shown your transgressions, sometimes in great detail and with the aid of flashbacks (hat-tip to Feynmaniac, among others) with the hope that these revelations will somehow change you. As someone recently (and correctly) pointed it, you are being censured not for your views, but for the various dull, vile, or intransigent ways in which you repeatedly promote them.

  611. #611 Theo
    March 19, 2009

    I’ll vote Kwok again this round, even though I am tempted to vote for a couple of others. Kwok bores me.

    Let’s keep this game up and find the ultimate Pharyngula Survivor troll. There can be only one!

  612. #612 Africangenesis
    March 19, 2009

    Stephen Wells#54,

    “Yay, AG spans the forum with climate-change denial then says that spamming is grounds for disposal. So that’s clear then :)”

    Do you really think people are going to think you are clever? I discuss the science and the peer review literature and you engage chiefly in mischaracterizations and ad hominem attacks. Who is really the one spamming the forum? I can show where you’ve lied and mischaracterized, do you think you can make a reasoned and representative case for your characterizations?

  613. #613 kamaka
    March 19, 2009

    Thanks for thr link, Aratina.

    It worked! My brain hurts now.

  614. #614 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 19, 2009

    AG, your false anti-AGW claims just got you another +2 points in the stupidity race. You are now ahead of Simon.

  615. #615 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    It’s not every day a theist asks an atheist to solve the problem of induction or account for the metaphysical foundations of morality nd logic, but back during my presup phase I did that a lot. It did not help that I repeated myself a lot. many people just do not have the patience.I also hold strong views on topics like sin, sex and abortion that most posters disagree with.People hate it when there worldviews are challenged

    presuppers are as close to varelse as one can be without ceasing to be biologically human.

  616. #616 fiisi
    March 19, 2009

    I wasn’t going to participate, although I’ve enjoyed reading the comments the past few days. I’ve changed my mind. First, I petition to change the game from Survivor to Lost, because putting some of these folks on a plane and crashing it in some part of the world no one will ever find again is a lovely thought. It’s not cruel, they would be getting their own little fantasy island where women who have the sex and get pregnant die, there is no taxes, and the scientists are evil.

    Now my vote, which is for Simon, because he was my inspiration for this post after reading more of his proselytizing tripe on the AIDS/condom thread. I vote for him to get lost.

  617. #617 heliobates
    March 19, 2009

    If there’s some kernel of a reasonable argument in a post, then I don’t give a crap about the way somebody said it. I think Facilis should stay.

    At what point does refusal to discuss the argument cross the line into “arguing in bad faith”? Doesn’t “reasonable argument” presuppose some kind of give and take? Unless I’m missing whole chunks of Facilis’ posting history here, I don’t see any give and take on his part. His entire schtick is to repeat assertions he learned from Greg Bahnsen. There’s no challenge in this, nor is there any growth in either sophistication or clarity.

    I didn’t vote for him and I don’t want to see him banned, but clearly PZ thinks that “argument by repeated assertion” contravenes one of the blog rules (my money is on “wanking”). I’d just like Facilis to make good on his promise by offering a serious challenge to metaphysical naturalism. He could start by supporting his initial proposition that laws of logic exist in an absolute, unchanging, universal form. In order to do that, he’d have to have to prove that he has access to them in their absolute, unchanging, universal form. That he refuses to do so is fatal to his credibility and so to the presumption that there is anything “reasonable” about his argument.

  618. #618 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Is it that you’d be sadder that someone older would have these views (which sounds more reasonable) or would you be more challenged in your own views by the simple fact that someone that age held those views?

    It’s night in America, so let me answer. I’d be sadder because it would mean someone has managed not to learn through much of his life, and it would mean he’d have had plenty of opportunity to inflict his arguments from ignorance on other people, even children perhaps. In other words, young as he is, he can’t have done much damage, and he’s more likely able to learn. Indeed, he shows signs of a learning process.

    Challenged? By the fact that there are old coots who never learned a thing? Ha.

    Simon. Even in his “apology,” he still doesn’t get why he is a vile troll.

    That apology is not by him. If you can’t see that by just looking at it, point at the link that his name is and behold the URL in wonderment.

    It’s not every day a theist asks an atheist to solve the problem of induction

    Facilis, just because you haven’t thought about this issue much doesn’t mean it’s a problem.

    There is no problem of induction!

    Induction does not work. It is not scientific. It can be used to generate hypotheses — just as well as dreams, spurious aesthetic considerations, or hallucinogens –, but it is completely incapable of testing hypotheses!

    The scientific method does not include induction. Instead (…repeating the beginner’s lecture that you’ve probably received 10 times already…), it has only two parts: falsification and parsimony. It is hypothetico-deductive: you make up a claim and then try to answer the question “if I were wrong, how would I know?”.

    How do I know that the sun will rise tomorrow? By induction, right? The sun has risen so often that I can safely generalize, right?

    Wrong!

    I deduce the prediction that the sun will rise tomorrow from the theory of gravity (or rather relativity, actually). And then tomorrow I’ll test it.

    While I will not live in absolute metaphysical certainty since then, the theory of gravity (let alone relativity in general) has already survived so many tests that I really don’t need to worry.

    or account for the metaphysical foundations of morality nd logic

    Morality has no metaphysical foundations, period. It follows from my own egotism and from natural selection — I hope you won’t call those metaphysical.

    Logic… you seem to claim that without a god logic wouldn’t work. Show me. If you were wrong, how would you know?

  619. #619 Africangenesis
    March 19, 2009

    Come on Nerd of Redhead#606,

    “PZ can’t censor anybody, he isn’t the government. This blog is a private, not public place.”

    Of course he has the right, but blogs are part of the media now. Some would like to have the reputation of being a place where the science can openly be discussed, let the evidence fall where it may. If the open science discussion content gets too low, if the blog gets a reputation for shouting down and banning open discussion rather than understanding and following the scientific evidence, then it will lose part of its mission.

    “AG gains +5 on my stupidity ranking, and is now tied with Simon for the lead.”

    Don’t pretend to be being objective. You know you called me a liar and were proven wrong, while I was able to show it was you that actually lied. That should be pretty recent in your memory. You won’t care to link to that discussion because your attempt to spin out of your lies was pretty pathetic.

  620. #620 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    falsification and parsimony

    the problem is, that induction naturally follows from parsimony, so science uses induction after all. ( and there is no problem of induction thus )

  621. #621 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 19, 2009

    AG, you now gained +5 points for more stupidity. Fortunately for you, Simon is also being very stupid, so you are still tied. You morally bankrupt libertardians can’t seem to realize you are your own worst enemies. I don’t need to refute you, you own blather refutes you.

  622. #622 Naked Bunny with a Whip
    March 19, 2009

    @kamaka: I found a brief overview of those ideas in Lee Smolin’s “Three Roads to Quantum Gravity”. It’s not the biggest book, or the newest, or the most in-depth. However, it clarified a number of ideas for me that I kinda-sorta knew from other reading because Smolin’s descriptions were brief and clear.

    Some of the topic covered include:
    * Black holes, entropy, and information.
    * Quantum spin networks and relational models of space.
    * String theories as high-level abstractions.
    * Reality seen as processes and information flow.

  623. #623 Dustin
    March 19, 2009

    There is no problem of induction!

    Dead on. There is no reason to justify induction as a valid method of drawing a conclusion because we do not use induction to draw conclusions. We may induce as a way of generating predictions, which are then put to experiment, but we do that exactly because reasoning by induction may be faulty.

    I think philosophy instructors do a tremendous disservice to the whole human race by teaching it in a historical way, and then stopping at Hume without serious examination of the problem of induction. It leaves scores of people blundering around mumbling about their own epistemological crisis when all of the evidence is against that kind of skepticism: they clearly know something.

  624. #624 fallsaturdays
    March 19, 2009

    Lurker vote for Simple Simon

  625. #625 Stu
    March 19, 2009

    I discuss the science and the peer review literature and you engage chiefly in mischaracterizations and ad hominem attacks.

    Oh you miserable, pathetic little lying sack of shit (and no, that is not an ad hominem). First you say you are here to learn. Then you complain that nobody understands your perfect points. Now it’s just wanting to discuss. Sure. All about science. Take your tired, vacuous wanna-be windbag routine and shove it.

  626. #626 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    There is no reason to justify induction as a valid method of drawing a conclusion because we do not use induction to draw conclusions.

    this is not true. We use occam razor, and experiment results need statistical evaluation, so we still use induction ( not that it were really a problem though )

  627. #627 aratina
    March 19, 2009

    It’s night in America, so let me answer… – David M., OM

    Yes, it is so late that when I stare up at the sky, I suddenly can’t see anything. :P

    OK, how long were you sitting on that one? It was enormously ironic, but I liked it.

  628. #628 Sastra
    March 19, 2009

    heliobates #617 wrote:

    At what point does refusal to discuss the argument cross the line into “arguing in bad faith”?

    Ah, but you’re discussing presuppositionalism, which (as you know) is a “bad faith” argument. Facilis’ failure to answer your challenge is not his own failure, due to any personality flaws — it’s the failure of presupp apologetics itself. He can’t do better than what he has to work with.

  629. #629 Feynmaniac
    March 19, 2009

    Agreed with helio @ #617.

    Facilis has repeated his “argument” over and over and over while completely ignoring any criticisms of it. He doesn’t seem interested in honest debate.

    I don’t want to see him banned either, but I hope he takes this Survivor thing as hint to either stop spamming or actually respond to criticisms.

  630. #630 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Who is really the one spamming the forum?

    I think the accusation is that you like to bring up global warming on completely unrelated threads. The name of that crime is threadjacking.

  631. #631 Dustin
    March 19, 2009

    We use occam razor,

    There are pragmatic reasons for appealing to an economy of description, not least of them is that we are trying to put things to experiment. You don’t assume things which don’t add to the predictions entailed by your theory. There is no inductive reasoning here.

    and experiment results need statistical evaluation, so we still use induction ( not that it were really a problem though )

    Which is not even close to being the same thing as using induction. Probabilism and experiment are not simply different from inductive reasoning, they are what we use instead of inductive reasoning.

  632. #632 John H
    March 19, 2009

    Delurking to vote for the Kwokster. Fuck me, but that guy is seriously tedious. No-one CARES where you went to school or where you went to uni, absolutely no-one. Do you stand on street corners with a placard saying ‘I know Ken Miller, please be my friend on Facebook!’?

    From reading an old thread on Panda’s Thumb, he’s also a birther. How he can call IDists liars and then say that Obama isn’t a US citizen in the same breath is fascinating.

    *Right, back to lurking*

  633. #633 Ken Cope
    March 19, 2009

    The reason, Sastra, that facilis finds himself on this list, is that after every response to his repetitive demonstrations that he knows fuckall about logic, being utterly incapable of reason, his nonsense is refuted by multiple posters, many of them of the quality shown by DM OM above, @619, and then the little prat turns around, declares victory, even asking to be awarded a Molly because he has shown us all the error of our ways; then he cuts and pastes the same drivel on a new thread, as if nobody ever responded to him.

    As for the way he says what he says? I don’t see how posts from facilis pass the Turing test.

  634. #634 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    Fymaniac, this is, what presuppositional apologetics amounts to.
    Use the radical skepticism to dismiss anything the enemy says, then declare that because he failed, you are true about god, flat earth, 2+2=3 , he owns INFINITE amount of money to you, and what ever shit you want to believe. Refuse any objections by radical skepticism. If the enemy objects against the obvious double standard you are using ( radical philosophical skepticism against his claims, unquestioning unthinking acceptance of bs you make up as you go ), then dismiss his objection with radical skepticism.

    Entire presuppositionalism is just a denial od service attack on the listener. Not real communication.

  635. #635 Lowell
    March 19, 2009

    Kseniya,

    You’ve got it right. When Pete Rooke first showed up here during Crackergate he claimed to be a religious authority. That’s why I sometimes call him Pastor Pete.

    From his now defunct website for St. Chad’s Omega Evangelical Church:

    Welcome to St chads Omega Evangelical church of the Internet. The senior Pastor for the church is Pastor Pete Rooke who is an ordained minister under World Christianship Ministries and Holy Christian Life Synod.
    We hold an Independent Church charter under Holy Christian Life Synod Southern Evangelical Ministries.

    Here’s one of the threads where Pete’s ministry was discussed: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/08/so_this_is_what_a_witchunt_loo.php

    There’s definitely something fishy about the limited biographical details we have for Pastor Pete. A 22-year-old British college student with an evangelical ministry?

    I think he also claimed to have a wife and kids at some point in discussing what he allows them to read on the Internet, but I’m not 100% sure about that.

    Definitely a strange guy.

  636. #636 kamaka
    March 19, 2009

    Naked Bunny w/whip

    I found a brief overview of those ideas in Lee Smolin’s “Three Roads to Quantum Gravity”.

    Hahaha… well, that makes things easy, that book is on the top of my ‘to be read’ stack! I read Smolin’s “Life of the Cosmos” not too long ago…my head is still reeling from that one… and enjoyed it so much I had to buy “Quantum Gravity.”

    Thanks

  637. #637 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    You don’t assume things which don’t add to the predictions entailed by your theory. There is no inductive reasoning here.

    of course there is. If you cut the things that dont add to the predictive power, you end up producing neat generalizations the same way as induction does.

  638. #638 Sastra
    March 19, 2009

    I still think the problems w/ Facilis lie as much with the argument as with the person making it (presuppositionalism reduces to “the other person doesn’t need to be convinced: they need to be reminded of what they already know — repeatedly — till they are eventually woken from their stupor.”) But you can’t say that he’s not willing to improve:

    Facilis #581 wrote:

    I probaly won’t bring up my presuppositional arguments here any more.

    There now.
    And there was much rejoicing …

  639. #639 kamaka
    March 19, 2009

    I don’t see how posts from facilis pass the Turing test.

    *sprays coffee*

  640. #640 heliobates
    March 19, 2009

    I don’t think I get your point, Sastra. If all that Facilis has is a position that is childish in its inadequacy, and he clings to it tenaciously, why shouldn’t the grownups banish him to the kiddie table? As far as I’m concerned, refusal to know one’s audience is a personal flaw.

  641. #641 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 19, 2009

    It is NOON in America… Damn. If I’m already too lazy to count to six, why am I too stupid to look at the time tags!?!

    <headdesk>

    Well, as long as it isn’t mourning again in America…

    induction naturally follows from parsimony

    You seem to be using at least one of these words in a wider sense than I.

    (And it’s not likely we’ll ever find out how Facilis uses “induction”.)

    There are pragmatic reasons for appealing to an economy of description, not least of them is that we are trying to put things to experiment.

    Also, where else should we start? At the most munificent hypothesis?

    2+2=3

    Oh, yeah. Good example. Facilis, why is this wrong?

    Because of the way the symbols “2”, “+”, “=”, and “3” are defined.

    —————-

    Comment 634 is Molly-worthy.

  642. #642 heliobates
    March 19, 2009

    There now.
    And there was much rejoicing …

    Oh. Okay, gotcha.

  643. #643 Dustin
    March 19, 2009

    Also, where else should we start? At the most munificent hypothesis?

    You’ll get my fairy-powered Martian abiogenesis beams when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.

  644. #644 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 19, 2009
    The senior Pastor for the church is Pastor Pete Rooke who is an ordained minister under World Christianship Ministries and Holy Christian Life Synod. We hold an Independent Church charter under Holy Christian Life Synod Southern Evangelical Ministries.

    Uh… ours claims to be Catholic.

    If you cut the things that dont add to the predictive power, you end up producing neat generalizations the same way as induction does.

    How?

  645. #645 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    March 19, 2009

    Entire presuppositionalism is just a denial od service attack on the listener. Not real communication.

    Nice.

    The Religiofilibuster

  646. #646 blueelm
    March 19, 2009

    Thanks for that link Lowell! That’s the Pete I remember disliking. I also thought he was older and had a ministry. Perhaps he was lying then. His whole tone has changed some what. Lying is a sin, isn’t it? I can’t remember. Something about those curried chickpeas warmed my heart, but also made him very… odd.

  647. #647 Lowell
    March 19, 2009

    Uh… ours claims to be Catholic.

    Has he expressly made that claim? I know it seems like the obvious conclusion from his vigorous defense of communion wafers, but I’m not sure.

    In any case, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was either (a) lying about one or more of the details he’s chosen to share publicly or (b) really good at compartmentalizing contradictory beliefs.

  648. #648 AnthonyK
    March 19, 2009

    If I’m already too lazy to count to six,

    Simply count to seven and give up early. Just as lazy.

    Alternatively, devote your life to proving that “6” does not exist, and evade forever you personal sextet attaining responsibilities by asserting that no one can attain a number between “5” and “7”.

    Admittedly, this approach is unlikely to save time in the long run, which may be a factor in your considerations.

  649. #649 Bernard Bumner
    March 19, 2009

    I’d forgotten quite how horrible Pete’s attempt at analogy were. Not so much torture of the language, as extraordinary rendition of English to a hostile territory where every single tool of pain, subtle or bloody, was applied to it.

    Why did I look at them again? I feel dirty and used, and not in a good way.

  650. #650 Watchman
    March 19, 2009

    Is it possible we have two different Peter Rookes? One being a past for a Southern Evangelical church, the other being a sexually repressed English schoolboy who happens to espouse many of the same views as the good Pastor? Yes, it’s possible.

    Or is it possible that someone Googled “Peter Rooke”, came up with the pastor, and incorrectly applied this identity to our schoolboy?

    Of the two, I’d go with the second, though I do recognize the existence of a third possibility: shameless lying.

  651. #651 Ben
    March 19, 2009

    The godbots annoy me much more than AG does.

  652. #652 AnthonyK
    March 19, 2009

    who happens to espouse many of the same views as the good Pastor?

    Well, at least his espouse won’t have to suck his knob.

  653. #653 Longtime Lurker
    March 19, 2009

    Is it possible we have two different Peter Rookes? One being a past for a Southern Evangelical church, the other being a sexually repressed English schoolboy who happens to espouse many of the same views as the good Pastor? Yes, it’s possible.

    Pete Rooke is Walton?

    ZOMG!!11!!11!

  654. #654 Stephen Wells
    March 19, 2009

    Point of order, PZ: if we have a challenge round in which all remaining candidates pass their immunity test, do the executions stop? :)

  655. #655 JeffreyD
    March 19, 2009

    Janine, Insulting Sinner at #500 – “I want to be seduced!”

    (wafting the aromas toward her) Janiiiiine. I have chocolate and martiniiiiiiiiis.

    Ouch! Oh, I also have a spouse, never mind. Anyway, gotta love Leon Redbone. Summer coming, time to get out the hat and the white linen jacket.

    Leigh, at #527, I plan to have a martini, whatever Petie wants to have is up to him. I mentioned orange squash in order not to spook him. Wish you could join. If ever in your neck of the woods, spousal unit and I will buy you a fine martini.

    Ciao y’all

  656. #656 Patricia, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Janine @500 – Good ol’ Leon, my favorite singer. *grin*

    Hi JefferyD!

  657. #657 Lowell
    March 19, 2009

    Watchman:

    Or is it possible that someone Googled “Peter Rooke”, came up with the pastor, and incorrectly applied this identity to our schoolboy?

    Good point, but way back in October 2008 Pastor Pete admitted that he was the “Pastor Pete Rooke” from St. Chad’s Omega (after I pressed him on what happened to the site). See posts #126 and #127 on this thread http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/10/theres_probably_no_god_now_sto.php

    I wrote:

    I see Pastor Pete Rooke is back.
    Pastor Pete, you never answered my question the last time I saw you here: what happened to your church’s website, http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/stchadsomegachurch/
    I remember it had a donation button back during Crackergate. How can I donate to St. Chad’s Omega Church now that the site is gone?

    Pete Rooke responded:

    @ Lowell
    There wasn’t enough support to make it viable although I do still make my services available; not that you are genuinely interested

    Now, I guess it’s still possible that our Pete Rooke has assumed the identity of the real Pastor Pete Rooke from St. Chad’s Omega Church. Maybe he’d like to clairify.

  658. #658 Stu
    March 19, 2009

    if we have a challenge round in which all remaining candidates pass their immunity test

    You’re joking, right? Have you READ how badly they have been sucking so far?

  659. #659 Kelly
    March 19, 2009

    I just read the thread about the pope and AIDs.
    Ugh, Simon.

  660. #660 Sisyphus Fragment
    March 19, 2009

    My vote is for: Facilis

    Because he approves of the church’s preferred method for killing Africans.

  661. #661 JeffreyD
    March 19, 2009

    Patricia, OM – Hiya darling lady. How are the chickies?

    Ciao

  662. #662 Patricia, OM
    March 19, 2009

    JefferyD – Good news on the Pullet Patrol. We have a contract with an organic company and are selling them about 30 dozen eggs a week. So finally, some income!

  663. #663 Alan Kellogg
    March 19, 2009

    Haven’t really read the thread, because I’m not that young any more. So this comment is made without considering what anybody else has said.

    I’m voting for Piltdown Man this time, because he’s plain mean. He says nothing of value, couches it in the meanest language he knows, then has snits when he’s called on it.

    I also ask that AfricanGenesis be dropped from the list. His opinions and understandings are often misguided. However, at the same time he is sometimes right, and sometimes well spoken. On rare occasion he is both. In my considered opinion rousing fits of tizzies in certain parties (Knockgoats’ fondness for becoming irate duly noted) is no cause for bannination.

    (Knockgoats singled out because he is fond of becoming irate.)

  664. #664 JeffreyD
    March 19, 2009

    Patricia, re #662, great hon! Hoping things continue to get better.

    Off to drinks and dinner. Ciao until later.

  665. #665 Kseniya
    March 19, 2009

    Hello Michael X! It’s nice to see you prowling around here. Regarding Pete Rooke and how his age affected my view of him, you asked:

    Why is this? Is it that you’d be sadder that someone older would have these views (which sounds more reasonable) or would you be more challenged in your own views by the simple fact that someone that age held those views?

    That’s a fair question. Your first proposed answer is closer to the truth. It’s definitely not the second.

    I believe that he is not so much locked into a worldview which has been calcified by years of inflexible adherence to its defining doctrines and dogmas, which might have been the case if he were twice my age (which is what I’d assumed) as he is trying to define himself, discover his place in the world, and develop his worldview. Unfortunately, he appears to have been indoctrinated with some dreadfully medieval attitudes, and seems to be handicapped (though perhaps not critically) by a tenacious combination of limited life-experience and a paralyzing fear of the outside world.

    This is “easier to take” because I optimistically believe he is teachable and, in his heart of hearts, wants to join us all here in the 21st century, even if it means shattering and discarding some of what he still holds as sacred and true.

    I could be wrong in my optimism, but it does hearten me to know he’s not a twisted old tree, beyond change and redemption. That’s where I’m coming from.

    He is not unlike Walton in some of these respects, but I’d never accuse Walton of being “medieval”, and aside from his tendency to cling desperately to his favored social, political and economic philosophies even in the face of contradicting evidence from the real world (to a degree that flirts with willful discompassion for his fellows) I believe he’s neither intransigent nor heartless, and is essentially a kind and intelligent person who is also searching to find himself and his place in the world. (As are we all?)

    Aside from his admitted problems with depression, Walton doesn’t worry me. Rooke does. Someone broke him. He’s only two years older than my brother. It makes me sad.

    There you go, Michael. The long answer. :-)

    I don’t know what to make of the “two Rookes” problem.

  666. #666 Janine, Ignorant Slut
    March 19, 2009

    Posted by: JeffreyD | March 19, 2009

    Janine, Insulting Sinner at #500 – “I want to be seduced!”

    (wafting the aromas toward her) Janiiiiine. I have chocolate and martiniiiiiiiiis.

    Ply me with chocolate martinis and I will follow you anywhere.

    Wait, I actually respect other people’s commitments.

  667. #667 catgirl
    March 19, 2009

    Silverfox, now…that one is a waste of space. Like a brain-damaged pekingese, he has only one trick and does it constantly. And he isn’t good at it. But even though he drops the ball every single time, he still thinks he’s getting a treat.

    Thank you for making my workday more enjoyable. I love interesting analogies, and I love it that you took this one so far. This is almost as good as my analogy that spanking during sex is like putting salt on melon. A lot of people think that a little bit enhances the enjoyment, but I personally don’t like either.

  668. #668 Patricia, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Haw! Ha! Hey Janine, you got #666! Does that make you the Vile Anti-Christ now?

    I forgot to lift the ban on Sven for the spanking couch yesterday… did you remember, or do I owe him one extra round with oak paddles?

  669. #669 Michael X
    March 19, 2009

    Kseniya,
    Thanks for the answer. That is of course what I figured, but it wouldn’t be the first time a young vibrant freethinker was abnormally deferential to age. I was discussing the idea with a friend just earlier and thought I’d ask you.

    If it’s worth anything, my thought was that when someone grasps something early on in life that they find a powerful argument – evolution of example – they have a hard time believing that anyone so much older could doubt such an evident truth without very good reason. And thus they are more likely to doubt themselves when questioned by an older person than a younger. That, though, is just my very non-expert guess and I’m happy – and totally unsurprised – that it is not the case with you.

    So here’s my long post to match yours! Good to see you around lately as well!

  670. #670 Conor H.
    March 19, 2009

    I actually find Pete Rook very entertaining and only a little irritating. He seems like the kind of guy who just needs some sciencey liberal intellectuals of poor taste like my friends and I to expose the world to him and uncover his eyes.

  671. #671 catgirl
    March 19, 2009

    Facilis, you fail at your immunity challenge. I’m not an atheist and I still think you’re a troll, so you can’t just blame it on me being some close-minded immoral person who doesn’t like to be challenged.

  672. #672 Michael X
    March 19, 2009

    David,
    Your answer to my question is also unsurprising. Of course you’re not swayed by anything! You’re, like, David fucking Marjanovi?!

    (+1 if David now becomes self conscious, +5 if he blushes)

  673. #673 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    David, dustin,

    this article served me as a starting point, it should serve you as well http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.54.9286

  674. #674 Ranson
    March 19, 2009

    After slugging through the threads this week, I’m beginning to realize what the final immunity challenge will be like. It’s going to be the Pharyngula equivalent of a SNL “Celebrity Jeopardy” sketch.

    Write a word. Most any word. We’ll accept anything except “bible”, “Facebook”, “logic”, “climate”, “libertarian”, or “feces”. Any other word. Any time now. We’ll take abbreviations and mis-spellings. Any word not on the list.

    Time will pass. Answers will be given, and this shall be how PZ is forced to respond:

    Once again, you have all failed. What you’ve just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may Janine have mercy on your soul.

  675. #675 khan
    March 19, 2009

    Simon

  676. #676 Knockgoats
    March 19, 2009

    Knockgoats singled out because he is fond of becoming irate. – Alan Kellogg

    You filthy… cornflake! How dare you make such a monstrous and unjustified accusation? If ever we meet, I’ll pull you inside out and make you swallow yourself, you demented rice crispy!

    (Note: despite my extreme dislike of Africangenesis for his unpleasant and ludicrous ideology, and for his egregious smugness, I agree with Alan that he should not be dungeoned.)

  677. #677 blueelm
    March 19, 2009

    Maybe Pete started to drop some of his internet persona over time… like so

  678. #678 Patricia, OM
    March 19, 2009

    Knockgoats – I actually like it when you get in a snit. ;) You do some of your best work then.

    Was going to mention ol’ Piltdown Man for almost the same reasons as Alan. He doesn’t save his meanness for me, but some of his battles with you verge on epoch.

  679. #679 J-Dog
    March 19, 2009

    Real Name 448 – WOOOT! POTW!

    Oh wait, maybe this is the wrong blog???!! What with Icthyic and Louis I thought I was over at ATBC again for a moment!

    OK Back on target – Jim is the one you want gone! Throw him right off the island for stupidity. At least Kwok is more on our side – generally – and I can handle the friends and high school thing.

    Now. Can we all get back to the oral sex, bacon and lesbians?

  680. #680 John Phillips, FCD
    March 19, 2009

    Kwok was my second choice behind Barb after day two so I will stick to him as my first choice in this round. This must be especially noteworthy for someone who only recently started posting regularly. Though I think that may be to do with him being banned from other sites for much the same ‘sins’ as has condemned him here, such as over at our Abbie’s. It will be interesting to see if he finally ‘gets it’.

    Second choice, if one becomes necessary, has to be Africangenesis now that he has been added to the roll. He is one of the few I actually have killfiled due to ruining so many threads with reams and reams of screen space devoted to his brand of libertarian wanking.

  681. #681 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    March 19, 2009

    I did some checking in the archives, and found that Simon has been trolling on and off for quite a while. Since he is a habitual offender, I’ll throw my vote to Simple Simon. AG is in second place for his constant threadjacking.

  682. #682 Stu
    March 19, 2009

    Note: despite my extreme dislike of Africangenesis for his unpleasant and ludicrous ideology, and for his egregious smugness, I agree with Alan that he should not be dungeoned.

    And what about my blood pressure, hmm?! DAMN you!

  683. #683 Medusa
    March 19, 2009

    Scott From Oregon just because he annoys me the most.

  684. #684 JeffreyD
    March 19, 2009

    Janine at #666, I am just a shameless flirt, but harmless in the true Southern cultural tradition. There, my secret is out.

    Should you come to Charleston SC, spousal unit and I will take you to “Choclatini Heaven” at The Thoroughbred Club at the Charleston Place Hotel. We try to spend 3 of every 4 Sunday evenings there, when I am in country, listening to piano music and enjoying the good life.

    Ciao

  685. #685 gypsytag
    March 19, 2009

    after that display of complete lack of self-awareness @243

    Peter, Peter feces eater needs to go find another sandbox to bury his crap in.

  686. #686 jasonk
    March 19, 2009

    I also ask that AfricanGenesis be dropped from the list. His opinions and understandings are often misguided. However, at the same time he is sometimes right, and sometimes well spoken. On rare occasion he is both. In my considered opinion rousing fits of tizzies in certain parties (Knockgoats’ fondness for becoming irate duly noted) is no cause for bannination.

    I’d agree that that alone is no cause. However, http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/plonk.php Africangenesis stands accused hundreds of counts of felonious Insipidity, as well as dozens of misdemeanor counts of Wanking and Slagging (“left anarchists”).

  687. #687 DeadGuyKai
    March 19, 2009

    ZOMG Simon.

  688. #688 catgirl
    March 19, 2009

    I think that you should make these episodes weekly, so that you can take the time to find the “best of” for all the contestants and include that in the post.

  689. #689 'Tis Himself
    March 19, 2009

    Knockgoats #676

    (Note: despite my extreme dislike of Africangenesis for his unpleasant and ludicrous ideology, and for his egregious smugness, I agree with Alan that he should not be dungeoned.)

    I agree. Much as I detest libertarians and much as I despise people who pretend to know economics but really don’t have a clue, I cannot vote for banning AG. Killfile works for him.

  690. #690 Owlmirror
    March 19, 2009

    David, dustin,

    this article served me as a starting point, it should serve you as well
    [Link to: Minimum Description Length induction, Bayesianism, and Kolmogorov complexity (2000)]

    I think that’s one of the papers that abb3w mentioned… the other one was:

      Minimum message length and Kolmogorov complexity (1999)
    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.17.321

    (Note: use the cached PDF link on the far top right; the www3.oup.co.uk on the left is 404-ing)

    Hm.

    For some reason, PDF at the link T_U_T originally posted was not from 2000, but was from 1996.

    The PDF on this one is from 1998 (same title and authors):

    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.50.3424

  691. #691 Kel
    March 19, 2009

    Even if there is inductive logic, so what? I’m sure facilis didn’t mind using inductive logic when he turned on his computer this morning and logged onto pharyngula as opposed to going anywhere else. Even if the problem exists, it’s not a problem. Science works, the fact that we can make computers with more mathematical capability than the entire human race combined or predict to meticulous accuracy the time and place of solar eclipses well into the future demonstrates the validity of the scientific endeavour.

    It’s only a problem of certainty, and that’s what makes it appealing to people like facilis. He’d rather be certain than know. facilis, watch The Ascent Of Man episode Knowledge or Certainty. In fact what the entire series, it’s science programs like this and Cosmos you should be watching as opposed to propaganda films like Expelled.

  692. #692 Sid
    March 19, 2009

    I vote for John Kwok just because I want to see PZ depicted in a novel!

  693. #693 vespera
    March 19, 2009

    Be it resolved that Stuyvesant High School is just fucking awesome in every way, so amazing that mere words cannot give it its due, and therefore we can STOP TALKING ABOUT IT!
    That said, Kwok is annoying, but not worthy of elimination. Get rid of Africangenesis. What a stuck-up fool.

  694. #694 Owlmirror
    March 19, 2009

    [Link to: Minimum Description Length induction, Bayesianism, and Kolmogorov complexity (2000)]

    Well, d’oh. One of the authors (Paul Vitanyi) has his publications online:

    http://homepages.cwi.nl/~paulv/publications.html

    including the full PDF of P.M.B. Vitanyi and M. Li, Minimum Description Length Induction, Bayesianism, and Kolmogorov Complexity, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, IT-46:2(2000), 446–464

  695. #695 Cath the Canberra Cook
    March 19, 2009

    Clinteas: no, we do NOT have censorship yet. The list in question is to be used (is being used??) for a trial at a couple of small ISPs. If Conroy’s idiotic legislation is passed, which fortunately seems doubtful now, then all ISPs will be forced to use it.

    It is not too late. Go to http://www.nocleanfeed.com/action.html to see what you can do.

  696. #696 Longstreet63
    March 19, 2009

    @667 Thanks, Catgirl.

    Analogies are like my life, in that both have a superficial congruence to reality that vanishes on closer examination.

    Metaphor, of course, IS my life.

    Yes, I have a disturbing tendency to tell the same joke twice.

  697. #697 T_U_T
    March 19, 2009

    Owlmirror, I didn’t know this stuff is already doing its rounds here. I discovered it just a few weeks ago, and I am still excited about it. (why david rejects the idea of inductive logic is a mystery then to me )

  698. #698 Jadehawk
    March 19, 2009

    truth machine, AG’s “when did they change the spelling” wasn’t a joke, it was digging himself in deeper by not admitting being arrogantly ignorant. to his credit he LATER admits that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, but that’s after 2 posters had to point it out to him that the spelling was in fact NOT changed

  699. #699 Craig
    March 19, 2009

    No immunity should be awarded to any of them, so NONE OF THE ABOVE gets my vote.

  700. #700 Alan Kellogg
    March 19, 2009

    JasonK, #686,

    I sort of agree with you. I have yet to meet an anarchist who was a functioning leftist. But that means AG has a point, thus there is no call to oust him.

    It comes down to this, the party in power tends to conservatism as time goes by. What was once progressive and far sighted becomes doctrinaire and takes on the color of conformity. Once the party of challenging and upsetting establishd truth, it becomes the established truth. Where once it looked forward to the future in the hopes of changing things for the better, it becomes focused on the past out of fear the outsiders will upset and overthrow their cherished truths.

    Knockgoats,

    You dare exhibit humor at my outrageous challenge to your personality? Sir, had I no sense in any measure of the word I should issue a dare of real portent and potential embarrassment. I shall stifle these weakly struggling urges that do wander vaguely in the general area of that I call my cognition, and proceed to engage myself in matters of little more importance.

    Go ahead and try that again, I doubt me very much that anything will change come a reiteration of your utterance.

  701. #701 Owlmirror
    March 19, 2009

    Owlmirror, I didn’t know this stuff is already doing its rounds here. I discovered it just a few weeks ago, and I am still excited about it.

    It’s been referenced, but it is not well-propagated or well-understood. Most of us are not information theorists.

    I’ve noted it as “this looks like it might be really interesting and applicable to the epistemology of science… if I understood it well”. But I haven’t had a chance to digest it well myself, yet.

    The information is too highly compressed, for most people. Heh.

    And I think it needs to be unpacked into more basic English, anyway.

    (why david rejects the idea of inductive logic is a mystery then to me )

    Presumably because he’s thinking in terms of falsifiability and parsimony being rooted in empirical deduction, thus:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetico-deductive_method

    Information theory may well address the issue of induction so as to weld it comfortably to hypothesis generation and deduction… but I think it needs to be expressed better in basic natural language in order for it to be understood.

    That being said, I wish to add my approval for the phrase:

    “Presuppositionalism is just a denial-of-service attack on the listener.”

    iptables -A INPUT -s Facilis -j DROP
    iptables -A OUTPUT -d Facilis -j DROP
    
  702. #702 Cloudwork
    March 19, 2009

    SIMON – retreats back to lurk spot

  703. #703 David Marjanovi?, OM
    March 19, 2009

    searching to find himself and his place in the world. (As are we all?)

    … …mmmmm… …I find the whole concept so alien that I don’t think I’ve quite understood it. I mean, I do think I know myself pretty well. Is that different with other people? ~:-|

    Michael X: +6, or something. But what do you mean, I’m never swayed by anything? Just yesterday, Tianyulong just tore an idea I adhered to to shreds.

    this article served me as a starting point, it should serve you as well

    Even the abstract goes way over my head. I don’t understand what it talks about. Could you help…?

    and may Janine have mercy on your soul.

    …and may truth machine have…

    Naaah.

    It’s only a problem of certainty, and that’s what makes it appealing to people like facilis. He’d rather be certain than know. facilis, watch The Ascent Of Man episode Knowledge or Certainty. In fact what the entire series, it’s science programs like this and Cosmos you should be watching as opposed to propaganda films like Expelled.

    Well said.

    Owlmirror, could you please translate the Unix?

  704. #704 Piltdown Man
    March 19, 2009

    Bugger.

    Been a bit distracted and missed all these recent developments. Oh well.

    Since I’ve already flunked the immunity challenge, I can only say (in the words of Major James Innes Randolph) –

    … I don’t want no pardon for what I was and am —
    I won’t be reconstructed and I do not give a damn

    However I was taken aback by Alan Kellogg @ 663:

    he’s plain mean. He says nothing of value, couches it in the meanest language he knows, then has snits when he’s called on it.

    … backed up by Patricia @ 678.

    Mean???

    I don’t know what I’ve said here that could be construed as cruel or hurtful, but since that obviously is the case, I apologize unreservedly.

  705. #705 Bryn
    March 19, 2009

    I really can’t vote for Kwok. He’s like a high school football star–so caught up in “remember that *great* pass I made in ’75???!?” that he stopped living, learning or anything else from that point on. He’s stuck back in high school, treating it like it was an end in itself and not the means to an end. It seems to be all he’s got and it’s just…..sad.

    Simon, on the otherhand, well. Simon writes his vitriol with such utter relish; every “anus”, “screwing you in the backside” and such that he’s more than a little creepy. I get the impression that he gets such enjoyment out of typing it that he’s sitting their wanking away at his computer (“wanking” in this instance being used in it’s classic sense).

    Simon gets my vote for sheer creepitude.

  706. #706 Owlmirror
    March 19, 2009

    Owlmirror, could you please translate the Unix?

    If a computer or router is on the receiving end of a denial-of-service attack, you change the network settings (on the computer/router itself, (and preferably, on “upstream” routers as well — the farther “upstream” the better, obviously)) so that no packets from the attacking system get through.

    What I wrote are just the commands to cut off all communication with a particular network address (which properly goes where I wrote “Facilis” on the command line), using one particular type of Unix-based IP-address filtering system.

    There are other ways as well, of course. On Windows, you can use the built-in firewall (assuming you have Win XP SP2 or higher), or use a big routing table (see the “route” and “netstat” commands )

  707. #707 Kugelblitz
    March 19, 2009

    Greetings. I wonder…may I play Devil’s Advocate for a moment?

    I’m new here and I may be missing something but I’m curious about the Survivor idea, when viewed in the context of last months kerfuffle, the “We made them cry!” thread. It seemed to me that a number of folks on this blog were telling Greg at TDG that he had no right to protest what anyone did on his site because he didn’t restrict access to it. I agree, in fact, but what makes Pharyngula different? If anyone can
    post here, is there a rational basis to complain about what they post?

    Personally, I love folks like Simon and John Kwok because they allow me to take a much more charitable attitude towards some of the cretins I work with; it’s partly “there but for the grace of Finagle go I” and some “things could be much, much, worse.” But I am puzzled as to what good it does to ban them, rather than simply shun them…does berating them, responding to them in any way, not merely encourage and legitimize them? Do they not then go to other blogs and crow about how they must be right, since Pharyngula banned them?

    I’m not trying to tell anyone how to view anything or anyone but I am curious about the wonderful world of blogging. I’d appreciate it if an old hand could explain the rationale behind banning to me.

    Oh, and if I were to cast a vote it would be for Simon; to err is Human but he raises it to a new level. I wish I could shake the feeling that banning him may only attract even more egregious wingnuts. Thank you, I now surrender the floor.

  708. #708 Azkyroth
    March 20, 2009

    The reason you are disliked is easy, you repeated assert the same disproved arguments over and over again as if you are brandishing a huge broadsword. That is not a sword in your hands, it is a hot dog.

    I’m stealing this line. Leave a response if you want any particular attribution for it. :D

  709. #709 Notagod
    March 20, 2009

    Kugelblitz, did you read the text of the thread topic and follow the link to:
    fabulous Pharyngula dungeon
    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/plonk.php
    ?

    The above has no relation to what is
    —–
    below. (laziness has combined two comments.)

    a..Hi ,

    umm, I haz bin preparing to cast my wish but, I can’t find one guy’s comment where he casually mentioned one time that he had attended Stupidant(sp?) School. He sounded really important and he casually mentioned that he had some VERY important friends. I would like to find that one comment because I want to ensure that I don’t wish for him, because he is so like WOW. A google has been done on “Stupidant” but the comment might have been lost because of the spiderweb so that would be very sad. Too bad he didn’t post more than that one time so one of his comments wouldn’t be lost. Anyway one guy did a bad thing because the WOW guy said he wouldn’t let his friends be friends with the one guy any more. So there. Ha! Well, the WOW guy won’t be one of the survivors getting wishes anyway cause, well, WOW!

    P.S. I think the WOW guy might be gradgeeated school. So I don’t know that part for certain though.

  710. #710 Notagod
    March 20, 2009

    Notagod votes: John Kwok

  711. #711 Feynmaniac
    March 20, 2009

    David Marjanovi?,

    Even the abstract goes way over my head. I don’t understand what it talks about. Could you help…?

    This may help:

    Minimum description length

    The minimum description length principle is a formalization of Occam’s Razor in which the best hypothesis for a given set of data is the one that leads to the largest compression of the data.

  712. #712 the chiggler
    March 20, 2009

    They all fail the test. Kwok is still kweepy and Africangenesis is well Africangenesis. The Rookster was winning hands down with his cut and paste stream of consciousness until Facilis managed to blow the fuse on my irony meter. Facilis must go

  713. #713 Susan
    March 20, 2009

    I vote for (or against, really) Simon.

  714. #714 clinteas
    March 20, 2009

    Feyny,

    very interesting link,thanks for posting it !

  715. #715 The Chimp's Raging Id
    March 20, 2009

    +1 for John Kwok

    There are others up for eviction who are either more stupid or more hateful, but Kwok simply bores me to tears. With his incessant name dropping and love of non sequitur he commits the high crimes of wanking and insipidity. It’s time he was given a one way ticket to PZ’s dungeon.

  716. #716 JBlilie
    March 20, 2009

    Mr. Kwok:

    HIGH SCHOOL IS LONG IN THE PAST. GET OVER IT.

    I remember speaking to a co-worker (engineering company) and he waxed lyrical about how great high school was and then asked me if I didn’t agree.

    I said to him, quite honestly, that I hadn’t thought about high school in a decade. I was 31 at the time and just finished up a decade of climbing hundreds of mountains and most recently (then) a 2-year trip around the world by bicycle.

    Listen to Springsteen’s song “Glory Days” and then go take a long look in the mirror. (Viewing 16 candles or some similar movie may make the insignificance, insularity, pettiness, and contingency of HS come home to you as well.) You are in serious danger of turning into a classic cocktail party bore. (I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt.) All this HS nonsense is just making you (bored) enemies. Yes, it’s great what the principal did, whoo hoo. Never mention it again.

    All the best, JB

  717. #717 Africangenesis
    March 20, 2009

    Feynmaniac#359,

    “The biology wasn’t so troubling as the anarchist conspiracy theory for genocide. ”

    Originally, you only quoted the biology part. The anarchist stuff was part of a running dialogue I’m having with the anarchists about whether anarchism is practical with modern human nature, or if like Stalin, they will have to change human nature by “artificial selection” to make anarchism work. Of course, this depends on what sort of society is most compatible with human nature, how mutable human nature is, and what the practical requirements are for an anarchist society to have hopes of working. There isn’t much information on the latter, and there is plenty to discuss about the first two.

  718. #718 SC, OM
    March 20, 2009

    The anarchist stuff was part of a running dialogue I’m having with the anarchists…

    With whom here, specifically? I am an anarchist, and have largely been ignoring your posts after pointing you to the relevant information (and pointing out that you are woefully ignorant of anarchism). Who are the other anarchists engaged with you in this alleged “running dialogue”?

  719. #719 SC, OM
    March 20, 2009

    …modern human nature…

    Hilarious.

  720. #720 Lynna
    March 20, 2009

    I’m voting to keep ‘em all, no matter how dumb, young-and-dumb or otherwise annoying.

    This is selfish on my part. I don’t post here much, so it’s no skin off my back if the regulars are forced to employ snark whips to keep the nominees in line. I’ve enjoyed the snarkiness and the occasional attempt to inject reason into the head of a nominee with a hypodermic.

    Freedom to be dumb, I guess. The regulars and PZ may be understandably weary of them. If so, put them in the dungeon for a little rest — let them out whenever you think you can stand another dose.

    Pete Rooke rejuvenated the “Nothing worse than a foul-mouthed woman” judgement, and that was good for a bout of ROTFL.

  721. #721 Africangenesis
    March 20, 2009

    SC’OM#719,

    “…modern human nature…
    Hilarious.”

    The intent is to specify the “modern humans” who spread from east Africa and displaced homo neanderthalis and home erectus their more recent their african homo relatives and have subsequently further evolved under apparent positive selective pressure from disease, agriculture and civilization. Based on genomic analysis, human evolution appears to have been particularly rapid in the last 10 thousand years.

    “With whom here, specifically? I am an anarchist, and have largely been ignoring your posts after pointing you to the relevant information”

    With you specifically, when I question the practicality of anarchism given human nature, you refer me, apparently to Kropotin. i have read parts of “Mutual Aid” and the Bread one. I found them to selective gatherings of “just so” stories, that don’t address the current understanding of human nature . I also noticed the site was pretty general, and included other authors that I had already read, e.g., Stirner and Chomsky.

    Also, my human nature discussions address the practically of state oriented central planning, given that with the centralization of power, checks and balances invariably seem to erode and as von Hayek noted, the “worst” tend to rise to the top.

  722. #722 jon
    March 20, 2009

    Africangenesis@721

    “The intent is to specify the “modern humans” who spread from east Africa and displaced homo neanderthalis and home erectus their more recent their african homo relatives and have subsequently further evolved under apparent positive selective pressure from disease, agriculture and civilization. Based on genomic analysis, human evolution appears to have been particularly rapid in the last 10 thousand years.”

    What’s a nubian?

  723. #723 Africangenesis
    March 20, 2009

    Jon,

    “What’s a nubian?”

    I have no idea. If I mentioned “nubian” somplace, it must have been a typo. Apologies.

  724. #724 SC, OM
    March 20, 2009

    With you specifically,

    Then there is no “the anarchists.” So stop calling everyone you address an anarchist. Stop acting insane.

    And we haven’t had a “running dialogue.” I’ve barely responded to your posts for weeks.

    when I question the practicality of anarchism given human nature, you refer me, apparently to Kropotin. i have read parts of “Mutual Aid” and the Bread one.

    You can’t question anything about anarchism, because you know virtually nothing about it. I referred you to a site which can introduce you to a variety of anarchist writings. Your problem is that you’re incapable of deriving meaning from text, so even if you do read, you misunderstand in fundamental ways.

    I found them to selective gatherings of “just so” stories, that don’t address the current understanding of human nature .

    There is no such thing.

    I also noticed the site was pretty general, and included other authors that I had already read, e.g., Stirner and Chomsky.

    Whose arguments, if you have indeed read them, you don’t grasp.

    Also, my human nature discussions address the practically of state oriented central planning, given that with the centralization of power, checks and balances invariably seem to erode and as von Hayek noted, the “worst” tend to rise to the top.

    None of this has anything to do with anarchism. If you had read and understood Kropotkin, you’d know this. You’re a joke.

    OK, I’m running late to meet someone, but my ultrasocial/busy weekend begins now. Have a great one, all!

  725. #725 SC, OM
    March 20, 2009

    Africangenesis,

    Over the weekend, please write 200 words describing Kropotkin’s position in and on central state planning in agriculture and food distribution. You may also reference his letters to Lenin provided on the site I linked to. Go!

  726. #726 Africangenesis
    March 20, 2009

    SC,OM,

    The discussions also include participants of persuasions other than anarchism, thus the “Also” in the text that you quoted. I agree that arguments on that front don’t apply to anarchism, although I’m not quite sure what does apply to anarchism in any practical working sense. One of the authors writing an introduction to Kropotkin was quite taken with the labor union movement, but I doubt that the way labor unions are organized and run could appeal to an anarchist. I tried Kropotkin’s major works and didn’t notice the letters to Lenin. Hopefully they elucidate some practical principles that will aid in assessing anarchism.

  727. #727 Erasmus
    March 20, 2009

    Ah, interesting: human nature in relation to social planning. I would like to say that you assuredly can have a scientifically informed conversation about this subject. Steven Pinker proves as much in The Blank Slate. I’ve found that many lefties like to paint the impression that the data is all ambiguous, and therefore the terrain is best suited to tactics from “traditional philosophy” and/or “humanities scholarship”.

    Chomsky is perhaps the prime example. His work on politics is strikingly innocent of scientific methodology. He doesn’t demonstrate a willingness to use any statistical techniques beyond the crudest (e.g. raw body count). Many of his central convictions seem to boil down to boring semantics and subjective opinion. (Thus “the US is itself a leading terrorist state”.) He doesn’t seem to be enthusiastic about using the toolkit of cognitive psychology to shed light on the question of how we should structure society, which is very curious for an academic in his field. Some of his causal models are so ridiculously primitive that they honestly remind me of tribal superstition. Everything bad is imputed to a malignant conscious agent (“the United States”, or “the West”); more prosaic, “naturalistic” causes, such as chance, religion, and the universally dark side of human nature, are overlooked entirely.

  728. #728 Nix
    March 20, 2009

    Sorry, but IMNSHO there’s no way Kwok has Asperger’s. I mean, yes, the repeating yourself past sanity is a trait of sub-middle-aged aspergics (it took me ten or fifteen years to get good enough to spot the signs of total boredom in conversational partners in realtime), but it’s *also* a trait of totally arrogant and self-absorbed twonks.

    One major argument against it is the subject of his obsession. I find it very unlikely that any strong aspie would have a pleasant or even tolerable time at any normal scholastic institution, because if there’s one thing that characterizes us in our teenage years it’s that we act *strange* compared to everyone else (simply because we haven’t kept up as everyone else zooms off into adult forms of social interaction). The other kids spot this and make our lives hell.

    I sometimes think about my secondary school (expensive, prestigious, academically brilliant, just like Kwok’s, and I could drop a huge pile of names but I won’t because I know it’s annoying). Actually I sometimes have dreams about it. Actually, let’s call them nightmares, or perhaps combat flashbacks.

    If there are any aspies here for whom school was *not* the worst time of their lives by a long chalk (and who are not currently in an internment camp), I’d be fascinated to heap of it.

  729. #729 tigtog
    March 21, 2009

    Africangenesis #619

    “PZ can’t censor anybody, he isn’t the government. This blog is a private, not public place.”

    Of course he has the right, but blogs are part of the media now.

    So? The media doesn’t have to publish anything they don’t want to publish. They have always refused to publish certain Letters to the Editor and they still continue to refuse to publish any comment on their online publications that they deem unacceptable for any reason. No explanation required.

    Freedom of the Press, baby. Freedom of the Press.

  730. #730 tigtog
    March 21, 2009

    Ack, screwed up the blockquote.

    “Of course he has the right, but blogs are part of the media now. ” was part of the comment by Africangenesis.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.