Now on ScienceBlogs: The Galaxy's Biggest Valentine
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
The convent is opposed to all that is sacred in human nature.
[Lemuel K. Washburn, Is The Bible Worth Reading And Other Essays]
« Multicellular claymation | Main | Oh, give it a rest, Bill »
More articles by PZ Myers can be found on Freethoughtblogs at the new Pharyngula!
Category: Administrative • Kooks
Posted on: October 28, 2009 3:12 PM, by PZ Myers
It's rather pathetic when banned loons like "help ma boab" come crawling back, begging to be released from the dungeon…especially when their apologies are this insincere. It just reaffirms why he got tossed in there in the first place.
I'm Sorry
I'm sorry that I trod on someone's arrogant, over-inflated, preposterous ego. Can I come back onto your blog? I promise I won't do it again. Pretty please?
No.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/123462
HTML commands: <i>italic</i>, <b>bold</b>, <a href="url">link</a>, <blockquote>quote</blockquote>
casaubon's book 02.13.2012
denialism blog 02.13.2012
respectful insolence 02.13.2012
evolutionblog 02.12.2012
starts with a bang! 02.11.2012
Comments
Posted by: Aratina Cage
|
October 28, 2009 3:23 PM
ROFLMAO!
Posted by: Rob Clack | October 28, 2009 3:24 PM
Offtopic:
The AFA has a web page where you can send an email to Macomb County Road Commission to complain about their removal of a nativity scene from government property.
It's a pre-written whinge, but there's nothing to stop you changing the text to congratulate the good commission on their eminently sensible actions. I just did.
Posted by: IaMoL | October 28, 2009 3:27 PM
He can have Lion WTF as his new roomie too.
Posted by: ursa major
|
October 28, 2009 3:27 PM
As Halloween draws near the denizens of the dungeon grow restless and once again seek to walk upon the earth.
Posted by: Ben in Texas | October 28, 2009 3:28 PM
Too funny. What a pinhead.
Posted by: WashingMachine0
|
October 28, 2009 3:29 PM
Well, what's left to say except
Failed troll, is a failure
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 3:32 PM
There's nothing like a smarmy creobot who views himself as one of God's chosen to teach us a thing or two about humility.
A real Ambassador from Christ this one is.
And they wonder why people can't fucking stand Christians of their ilk?
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
October 28, 2009 3:32 PM
Trolling while asking to be no longer counted as a troll?
God, how stupid are these people?
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 28, 2009 3:34 PM
There was no trodding on egos, just on reason and knowledge.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 28, 2009 3:37 PM
HMB never had a clue, or was receptive to learning, and his witless attempt to get reinstated proves that. He just came here to preach his version of stupidity. He is where he belongs.
Posted by: Sastra
|
October 28, 2009 3:39 PM
As I recall, there were some interesting discussions with 'help ma boab,' though the only topic I can remember right now had to do with figuring out what the heck his nick meant. But the noise-to-signal ratio was pretty damn high -- and help-ma didn't handle it well.
It shouldn't be that hard to argue against the majority opinion -- and still stay out of the dungeon. Ignore any insults, stick to topic, and respond directly to what people say, and not what you wanted them to say. But track record shows that this is very hard, indeed.
Maybe the calmer, disciplined antagonists all leave Pharyngula to go argue on the Unitarian sites, or something, leaving us the ticking time bombs.
Posted by: Desert Son
|
October 28, 2009 3:40 PM
That's hilarious!
No kings,
Robert
Posted by: The Pint
|
October 28, 2009 3:40 PM
Hmm, as far as apologies go, that's a FAIL. So no, he gets to shuffle back into the dungeon and be grateful he hasn't been walled up like a la "Cask of Amontillado."
Posted by: The Pint
|
October 28, 2009 3:43 PM
ARGH! Typing fail - that's supposed to be ..."walled up a la 'Cask of Amontillado.'"
Posted by: JackC
|
October 28, 2009 3:45 PM
Was I the only one (probably) that didn't know this whackjob has his own web page?
No - Really!
JC
Posted by: Ben in Texas | October 28, 2009 3:51 PM
@15, I think HMB took his nickname from that comic strip.
Posted by: Newfie
|
October 28, 2009 3:54 PM
time for another round of survivor?
Lyin' Irk has my vote.
Posted by: Michelle R | October 28, 2009 3:55 PM
help ma boab's Life meter.
Has no life [||..........] Has a life
Posted by: lordshipmayhem
|
October 28, 2009 4:02 PM
Well, that was certainly lucid... on PZ's part, that is.
On "help ma boab"'s part, on the other hand, there's a certain unthinkin arrogancy there I find common on the faithful.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 28, 2009 4:05 PM
LOL!
Pathetic.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
October 28, 2009 4:07 PM
Is he sorry or is he really, really, really sorry?
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 28, 2009 4:11 PM
Someone please post this on Failblog.
Posted by: Aratina Cage
|
October 28, 2009 4:16 PM
I want to add this special message for the boaby in the red box:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbEr-XKtUEE
Posted by: Stuart | October 28, 2009 4:16 PM
I have just started following this blog and I must admit that was pretty bloomin funny
Posted by: JackC
|
October 28, 2009 4:22 PM
Ben@16 - yeah - that was what I was referring to. I never checked before, not being that interested, but I just had to find out what the hell his nic purportedly meant - if anything. It was just too odd. I learned something.
I guess my larger point was - I was probably the only one that wasn't aware. That happens to me a lot.
JC
Posted by: FastLane | October 28, 2009 4:22 PM
Thanks Bob Clack, letter of appreciation sent!
As for the troll in dungeon, ha...ha ha...hahahahahhaa.
Man, that's funny. He should be a comedian.
...or not.
Posted by: MrFire
|
October 28, 2009 4:27 PM
Perhaps PZ should consider renaming posts such as these to 'I get e-fail'...
Posted by: daveau
|
October 28, 2009 4:29 PM
What the hell was the point of that apology? Did his mother make him do it?
Posted by: Alverant
|
October 28, 2009 4:32 PM
Well PZ he has a point. You do have a preposterous ego. Imagine you, a scientist, demanding proof before believing something! [/ sarcasm directed at help ma baob]
Posted by: Angela | October 28, 2009 4:44 PM
Oh, pish posh. Your ego isn't THAT preposterous. Hyperbole is not boab's friend. ;)
(Thanks for the chuckle!)
Posted by: NewEnglandBob
|
October 28, 2009 4:45 PM
(Logged into typePad. The sixth time was the charm.)
Forrest Gump apparently knows trolls like this:
Stupid is as stupid does.
Posted by: Keenacat
|
October 28, 2009 4:51 PM
ursa major @ #4 just won the thread so hard...
Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 28, 2009 4:51 PM
What do you expect from the guy who wrote:
Posted by: JarrodB | October 28, 2009 4:55 PM
I wonder what that promise is worth...
Posted by: kopd
|
October 28, 2009 5:04 PM
I should have known better than to follow a link to an example of a troll trolling. It's no fun live, why would I go watch a rerun? [facepalm]
Posted by: That Darn Satan! | October 28, 2009 5:08 PM
Erm. Didn't he just win space on the actual front page of the blog? That might've been his cunning plan, y'know. You may have just doomed us all.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 28, 2009 5:11 PM
One of my favorite moronic quotes I've ever read on this blog. I think someone put that on fstdt... or at least they need to.
Posted by: sasqwatch
|
October 28, 2009 5:12 PM
He said "Please". I mean, really, PZed... pull your head out of your ass. You don't have to be such an arrogant pompous douchebag about it. When somebody addresses you in a nice, courteous fashion with a word like "please", doesn't it merit some form of courteous recognition in turn? Ya prick. ;-)
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/CoxkKJE0ro_mSac3sNN0spZuE9c7BxOsLw--#9ee78
|
October 28, 2009 5:14 PM
So did I. You might want to make sure to use a mail drop, like Mailinator.com. It looks like you'll get a bucket full of AFA junk email.
Posted by: sasqwatch
|
October 28, 2009 5:19 PM
...asking fossils to do something. Wow.
Last week, I took my sweetie on a neat drive, which included seeing the ancient tree remnants in Florissant fossil beds. We got there late, though - so only had a few moments. Great place.
I'm trying to imagine how I would have gotten along with the Forest Service rangers if they observed me yelling at all the petrified trees... telling them to DO SOMETHING!
Posted by: Feynmaniac | October 28, 2009 5:19 PM
Yeah, they did.
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus
|
October 28, 2009 5:29 PM
As a Christian I feel great empathy for Brother help ma boab (even if he is a gristle gripper of the first order) and I would like to put myself forward (in Christ) as his redeemer.
Dear Brother PZ, I appeal to you (as the hell-bound chief atheist, apostate and evil person), what about letting hmb come back if he agrees to attend a week long ceremony of purification and penance organized by myself and Brother Floyd Rubber?
First we will exorcise hmb and deliver him of the demon of false humility, the demon of serial killer fantasies, the demon of rancid body hair, and the demon of nose picking.
Then we will cleanse hmb inside and out, teaching him what it means to truly grovel for God, bringing him into a new relationship with all the meatholes Jesus gave him, and instructing him in the joys of flogging, branding, begging, screaming, and thrice-daily cbt.
This will all be done in a spirit of Christian love, of course.
By the end of the week hmb will have been entered anew by the Holy Spirit (and for the first time by Floyd Rubber) and he'll be to Jesus as a new born lamb is to the shepherd and as a rack of lamb is to a good dinner party.
Finally, to prove that the divine task has been performed properly, we will also record and photograph the entire week, and a boxed set of images of hmb's tribulations will be available to discerning buyers for $99.95 plus P&P, delivered in plain brown packaging.
Yours in redemptive ministry
Smoggy
Posted by: formosus
|
October 28, 2009 5:36 PM
@Rob Clack #2-
Thanks for the heads up. I congratulated them for upholding the constitution, and encouraged them to remain firm as the shitstorm flies at them (in not so many words).
Posted by: MikeM | October 28, 2009 5:37 PM
PZ, I'm only saying this because I mean it: You are definitely one of the funniest people in America.
That's all I got.
Posted by: kopd
|
October 28, 2009 5:43 PM
@formosus
As did I, in quite a few words actually.
Posted by: TonyJ | October 28, 2009 5:46 PM
I don't see anyone in the dungeon for concern trolling.
I am deeply concerned about this...
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 5:50 PM
I sent the following using the link provided by Rob Clack in #2:
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 5:55 PM
Oh, Smoggy.
You make my want to join your religion. (And I would, if it didn't require so many conversions on my part.)
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 28, 2009 6:07 PM
HMB's plea had me laughing so hard, it cut off the flow of blood to my brain, making me feel faint. I read it off of my phone. I am afraid I really scared the little girl who was next to me
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 28, 2009 6:44 PM
"Cynic" is just another word for "son of a bitch".
Posted by: Biology blogger | October 28, 2009 6:45 PM
Uh oh. PZ posts the annoyig emails he gets. Should I be worried (I sent him like 3 in 2 days)
Posted by: jimmiraybob | October 28, 2009 6:59 PM
Can you talk to SciBlogs about writing a Zombie Night code where every once in a while you could leave the dungeon door ajar and the undead would roam through the threads? There could maybe be a special zombie insignia on each of their comments for quick identification.
Can you imagine a comments section with such a high-density dungeon-zombie presence? Maybe there could be an award for most slain in a single night.
Too Roman?
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | October 28, 2009 7:06 PM
Is it me, or has the population of the dungeon skyrocketed recently? It feels like just last week it was just Charlie Wagner and J.A.Davison, but now there are plenty of people in there.
Is this just a function of the number of readers, or is PZ finally drawing the really upscale trolls?
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | October 28, 2009 7:09 PM
Biology blogger:
Only if your email is really amusing, and particularly if it makes you look really, really stupid. Keep in mind that PZ deals with weapons-grade stupid, so what may be 'too dumb to live' to us may not be worth mentioning.
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | October 28, 2009 7:15 PM
One more thing about the dungeon: Maybe it's time for a redesign. We seem to have groups of dungeon denizens that are alike in more than their list of crimes. For instance, we have a few neoNazis, stormfronters, and the like; we have a few übermorphers (Charlie Wagner, the Kansas troll, etc); we have the drive-by sneerers (dsmvld, etc)...
Thoughts?
Posted by: Insightful Ape
|
October 28, 2009 7:31 PM
When will he be joined by Stewart and lyin' irk?
Posted by: Biology Blogger | October 28, 2009 7:53 PM
One of my messages that I sent had the subject "I'm an Agnostic, and I think ID should be taught". Hopefully PZ didn't click "send to spam".
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 28, 2009 7:58 PM
Nope, HMB was a month or so ago, and then one more idjit after that.Posted by: Biology Blogger | October 28, 2009 8:00 PM
Before I post my next comment, is it a crime on this blog to aid people who are in the dungeon, come back without being let back in?
Posted by: Biology Blogger | October 28, 2009 8:03 PM
NOTE: I DON'T WANT TO DO IT INTENTIONALLY. BUT MY WOULD-BE COMMENT WOULD DO THAT IN PASSING.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 28, 2009 8:05 PM
leave them "dead"
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
October 28, 2009 8:17 PM
Not a crime, but annoying. And superfluous. I already have a small flock of dungeon residents who use pseudonyms and anonymizers. They're usually readily recognized and simply deleted on site.
Somebody who regularly encouraged banned persons to troll the site some more, though, would be regarded as someone deserving of dungeon time themselves.
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
October 28, 2009 8:23 PM
On sight. Also on site. You know what I mean.
Posted by: Lion IRC | October 28, 2009 8:28 PM
A person who genuinely apologises for what they said earlier is admitting they know they were wrong or that they didnt know the rules. The Creator of the blog gets to make the rules not the visitors. If two visitors to the blog are in disagreement about whether something is in accordance with the rules it is a nil-all-draw. They NEED a Higher Authority to whom they can appeal viz, PZ Myers. A reasonable prior warning as to what rules must be followed is in accordance with natural justice. So if someone is new, it would be fair (ethical) to let them know if certain behavior would result in a ban.
If they deliberately defy the authority of the Creator/Manager of the blog then there is nothing unreasonable about them being kicked/banned/punished.
Lion (IRC)
PS- I am deperately hoping the Higher Authority analogy doesnt go unnoticed.
Posted by: Snoof | October 28, 2009 8:33 PM
My word, Lion. That analogy had all the grace and subtlety of a brick thrown through a window. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to respond (curse my masochist tendencies), and point out a minor flaw in said analogy.
There's pretty conclusive evidence that PZ does, in fact, exist.
Posted by: Sphere Coupler | October 28, 2009 8:34 PM
. Careful what you ask for, look ahead a little, can you imagine the mayhem oh, oh, oh the horror,the horror.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU0DxJVWhGw&feature=related
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus
|
October 28, 2009 8:37 PM
"I am deperately hoping the Higher Authority analogy doesnt go unnoticed"
I'm not sure about your analogy, but the euphemism didn't go unnoticed Lionirk (nor did the poor spelling and punctuation). I think you're entering withdrawal, you'd better mainline a bit more of that "Higher" authority before the shakes get really bad, God starts issuing new instructions, and they put you in the paddy room again.
Yours in Christian concern
Smoggy
Posted by: Aratina Cage
|
October 28, 2009 8:39 PM
There is a reason we have laws and court systems. No god required, Lyin. But more importantly, the trolls in the dungeon did not get there simply by disagreeing with others. A good bunch of them followed your pattern of incessant proselytizing to us atheists, which is annoying and grating. And they lied a lot for Jesus, like you have done and continue to do. So carry on with your Christianinanity; I expect you to be plonked soon enough.Posted by: Noel
|
October 28, 2009 8:40 PM
Wow. I hadn't visited the dungeon before. What a wonderful place; I intend visiting a few of those blogs for some fun one day soon.
Also, PZ, I note that you use the word 'fuckwit' to describe one of the inmates. Makes a proud Aussie boy go all tingly...
I need to point out to the world that its origin is NOT British, but, in fact Australian:
fuck-wit / fuckwit:
A stupid person, a fool, a simpleton, a dimwit-halfwit-nitwit. Australian origin, ca. 1970s. See also: fuckwittage-/-fuckwittery / fuckwitted.
see http://www.sex-lexis.com/F-Word-Dictionary/fuck-wit%20/%20fuckwit
It's an effective word - the 'f' and the 'w' work quite nicely together, and it's my second favourite, headed only slightly by 'fuck-knuckle'.
Posted by: Biology Blogger | October 28, 2009 8:41 PM
Thanks for the clarification Dr. Myers. I decided not to post the comment. Just going to cause a ruckus for no reason.
Posted by: John Morales | October 28, 2009 8:42 PM
LIRC,
LOL. Snoof pegged it.
Was it not made known to you?
Posted by: Wowbagger, OM | October 28, 2009 8:44 PM
Tell you what, Lyin' Irk, you get your god to post on the thread in such a way that we know that it could only be your god doing so and then we'll accept your argument.
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 9:01 PM
I didn't. That was awesome. I couldn't have put it better myself.
For those of you a little denser than the average Pharyngulite, Lion IRC has beautifully and succinctly pointed out how human societies (at least one of which PZ is a member, another he is an arbiter of) are perfectly capable of defining rules and regulations sufficient that their constituent members can get along.
God doesn't run this blog; it's PZ. God doesn't run human societies, it's us! It's all in our power!
That is what you were saying isn't it, Lion IRC?
Weird. For some reason my initial impression of you was that you were a theist. My apologies.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 28, 2009 9:20 PM
Very funny notpology from hmb...
I thought all the banned Pharyngula trolls play at the intersection and Rosenhouse's place these days !
I dont think that one knows what day of the week it is, let alone what he's arguing for or against...:-)
Posted by: Lion IRC | October 28, 2009 9:21 PM
Hi Brownian OM,
Maybe you are right and that human societies can define the rules and the constituent members can get along.
Somebody tell the folk at Hiroshima and Auschwitz and Tiananmen Square that. Collective rule making would be fine if we could just get the minority to accept that Churches should be tax exempt.
I am happy to sign up for the constitution - liberte, egalite, fraternite. French atheist lefties? I think not.
Liberty - Free will. (you know what THAT means!)
Equality - Yep equal in the eyes of an objective Creator.
Fraternity - We all share the same Father.
Lion (IRC)
Posted by: Wowbagger, OM | October 28, 2009 9:28 PM
You do realise that two out of those three acts were performed by Christian members of Christian nations, following the orders of their Christian superiors given the authority by Christian governments elected by Christians, don't you?
Posted by: Newfie | October 28, 2009 9:31 PM
My "Creator" is more objective than yours.
And did you have to go Godwin the place, Lyin' Irk?
And, are you doing some type of project here for your "bible" school, or sumthin'?
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 9:35 PM
Would it have been better if they'd been Midianites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Benjamites, Syrians, Assyrians, or Ethiopians?
Posted by: John Morales | October 28, 2009 9:35 PM
LIRC, if you were aware of the history of Christianity, you'd not be so quick to bring up war and repression. The two go hand-in-hand.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 28, 2009 9:42 PM
Yawn, Lyin' Lion can't see his Lyin'. He's too busy vainly attempting to be intellectual. And failing each and every time. Maybe if he actually thought before he set something into the keyboard. Starting with the non-existence of his creator, as he has shown no evidence for one. Just his delusions of one. Which makes him sound stoopid.
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 9:46 PM
My actual first impression of Bravehandle IRC, is that he's none too bright. I'm hoping he's a member of the lay clergy or in some other position where he's given just enough authority to feed his complex but really can't do any damage.
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 28, 2009 9:46 PM
...if you were aware of the history of Christianity, you'd not be so quick to bring up war and repression. The two go hand-in-hand.
Kill them all. God will recognize his own.
Wowbagger, I have to correct you on one point; the Nazis never won an election. They were not elected into power. They were part of a coalition government and took power from there.
Posted by: Sastra
|
October 28, 2009 9:48 PM
Lion IRC #76 wrote:
In Christian doctrine, yes -- and it makes little sense. We are all free to make a choice to obey God or not... and then suffer the penalty for disobedience. This seems to be the same sort of "liberty" Ghengis Khan gave to those who refused to bow to him. Their choice -- and their head. But he let them choose.
Who apparently made a diverse humanity and sent them to live on earth so that the fit may be separated from the unfit, and the unworthy purged from existence and thrown into suffering lest they pollute the perfection of heaven. A hierarchy where an unquestionable Authority rules with Absolute Power and damns and saves those whom it prefers is not exactly a model on which one would build a notion of human equality.
And some children will rise to Glory, and others will sink into ignoble and desolate ruin, because they're just so different. Fraternizing with your fellow man in order to reach out to the damned doesn't foster much sense of brotherhood, I'd guess.
Posted by: Lion IRC | October 28, 2009 9:53 PM
Hi John Morales,
The history of things done in the name of Christianity is reasonably familiar to me. So by all means, along with Japanese, Americans, Germans, Chinese, Midianites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Benjamites, Syrians, Assyrians, or Ethiopians we can and should add religious conflict to the war/repression list.
I bet this list gets a LOT longer before we run out of examples of human conflict and inabilty to... "define rules and regulations sufficient that our constituent members can get along"
Lion (IRC)
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 9:55 PM
That often how it's done in multi-party systems, Janine. It's not quite right to say they weren't elected into power.
Posted by: Wowbagger, OM | October 28, 2009 9:56 PM
Good point, thanks.
Posted by: Insightful Ape
|
October 28, 2009 9:57 PM
You don't have a clue what rubbish you're spewing out, lyin' irk.
Egalite: we are equal in the eye of the LAW. (You can throw in a creator if you want to-to me that would be the Flying Spaghetti Monster. He's the only one who doesn't discriminate againt those who don't believe in him. So the concept of a patriarchal god like yours is anathema to true Egalite).
Liberte: we can choose whatever gods or none. We can take their names in vain, and make whatever f-ing images we like. (Right out of the bible, ain't it?)
Fraternite: certainly doesn't mean we share the same father. Do all "frat boys" have the same father?
Incidentally when you have time you may want to tell the victims of the Holy Inquisition that the only true authority comes from god. I'm sure they will understand. Unlike the framers of the US constitution that thought it comes from the people.
Posted by: Sastra
|
October 28, 2009 10:01 PM
Lion IRC #85 wrote:
Either God is capable of defining rules and regulations which would satisfy reasonable people as being good, workable, and livable -- or God cannot.
If God can define such rules, then so can reasonable people, by seeking after what is good, workable, and livable.
If God can't, then all we have is a dictator which squashes all rebellion. This is harmony at a cost. Don't overestimate the value of harmony.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
October 28, 2009 10:02 PM
Right or not, that's the only option available until such time as an outside force decides to impose its will by force. Unless you have a better idea?
Posted by: Rorschach | October 28, 2009 10:02 PM
However, Hitler was appointed chancellor by a democratically elected and popular president in 1933( who to be fair at the time was very old and a bit senile and heavily influenced by Hugenberg and some politicians). And the NSDAP polled around 44% or so in elections in '33 and was by far the strongest party.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
October 28, 2009 10:05 PM
...outside agent... *sighs*
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
October 28, 2009 10:10 PM
Except you just said they did, as in the case of PZ running this blog. You claimed that obeisance to a higher authority is necessary. But for what? Given that the slayers of the Midianites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Benjamites, Syrians, Assyrians, and Ethiopians were supposedly only able to do so because of their slayers' abject obeisance to YHWH, it seems that subordination to god or man isn't all that protective. Even Christians have been slaughtered by Romans, Jews, Muslims, the Boxers, etc.
So what the fuck did you bring up slaughter for? What's your point? Faith or no faith, god or no god, people get slaughtered by other people (or YHWH, if you believe the bible). That it exists (and has been attributed to the god you worship) is certainly no point against atheists, nor for your god.
Are you that defensive about your idiotic faith that you'll belch out any answer you think will get us pesky atheists off your back even if it contradicts an earlier one, or are you just that thick that you don't see your inconsistency?
Man, atheism is lucky to you're on the side of Christianity.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
October 28, 2009 10:16 PM
Lyin' Irk,
I doubt you're familiar with the 1631 Destruction of Magdeburg. To put it simply, Count Tilly's army lay seige to a large city in Germany and, when it finally fell, went on a 14 day rape, pillage, burn and kill frenzy. Before the seige, Magdeburg had a population of 30,000. After the sack, fewer than 5,000 survived.
About a third of the population of central Europe died during the Thirty Years War (TYW). It was the most destructive war in Europe until World War I (WWI) and there were higher civilian casualties in the TYW than in WWI. The TYW was found between Catholics and Protestants to see which religion could grab the most land and population.
Posted by: Snoof | October 28, 2009 10:17 PM
Well, you've convinced me, Lion! I for one am glad you've peeled back the veils from my eyes! Humans _can_ only be moral with a supernatural god dictating commands, punishing the guilty and rewarding the righteous.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go sacrifice a virgin and spill her blood down the steps of the pyramid, as commanded by Quetzalcoatl.
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 28, 2009 10:43 PM
Rorschach, the Nazi Party had 230 seats in the Reichstag after the July 1932 elections. The Nazi Party had 196 seats in the Reichstag after the November 1932 elections. They were the largest party but not a majority party.
The numbers you are siting are from the March, 1933 election. This was after the Enabling Act. This was passed after the Reichstag Fire. This gave Hitler great powers to "protect" the state during emergency situations, that lasted until the fall of the Third Reich. And Hitler assumed the title of president after Hindenburg died. Also, the SA used the power of being an arm of the state to break up attempts of opposition parties to organize.
They were not elected, they usurped.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 28, 2009 10:54 PM
(had to look up the 1932 election figures)
Janine,
my point is that even in those elections the NSDAP was the strongest party and therefore the winner of the election, if you consider the german parliamentary system.( 33% and 37% of the vote).
Take for example the most recent german election, just a month ago :
The conservative CDU "won" the election with 33.8 % of the votes, as in they are the strongest party and get to appoint the chancellor candidate and get to choose a coalition partner.
In that sense, the NSDAP certainly won those elections.
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 28, 2009 11:06 PM
Rorschach, first of all, even with many of the leftist parties "outlawed" by the Enabling Act and with the SA attacking oppositions, in other words, a rigged election, they could not will a majority. Also, the powers of dictatorship that Hitler had came from the Enabling Act. Hitler was not elected Fuhrer.
The Nazis were the largest party in the Reichstag but not the majority. Not that it mattered because the Reichstag was soon made powerless.
They were NOT elected.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 28, 2009 11:20 PM
Agree with you on SA bullying and outlawing of leftist parties, and while I still think that they technically had the majority vote, the election results from 1930 onwards were certainly not the result of a fair and uninfluenced voting process.
I think we're derailing the thread lol....
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 28, 2009 11:28 PM
Rorschsch, the people who ran the government hated the Wiemar constitution. All of them were working at tearing it down.
Also, a majority means that they held more then fifty percent of the seats. The Nazis never did. Not that it mattered because the Reichstag became a rubber stamping organization.
I am afraid I crashed this baby.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 28, 2009 11:37 PM
Well, I tried to explain above that a relative majority is and was enough for forming a government and appoint a chancellor candidate.
True.
Posted by: Patrick | October 29, 2009 12:41 AM
Stephen Harper has twice been elected Prime Minister of Canada. At no time did his party form a majority.
If he won those elections, then so did Hitler.
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | October 29, 2009 1:14 AM
If they deliberately defy the authority of the Creator/Manager of the blog then there is nothing unreasonable about them being kicked/banned/punished.
Lion (IRC)
Ban, please.
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 29, 2009 1:14 AM
Wrong.
Posted by: aratina cage | October 29, 2009 1:46 AM
Sqwiki-wiki sez:
andIt is an interesting distinction whether majority means largest percentage or more than 50% of the vote.Posted by: TheTrueScotsman | October 29, 2009 2:30 AM
The nickname (Help Ma Boab) is Scottish. It's an old fashioned expletive. Boab is a Scots way of saying Bob - short for Robert.
It was commonly found in the Oor Wullie (Our William) comic strip in the Sunday Post that almost all Scots kids have read for the last 80 years. It was also found with two other expletives, "Jings" and "Crivins". I spent my childhood using these three words in place of swear words.
I suppose it sounds like "Help me God" whereas the other two sound like Jesus and Christ. Similar to when we use freakin' or Frackin' today.
A sentence would be "Help ma boab, wiz that no yer Ma ah saw wi' thon meenister ehent the shoaps?" (Help me God, was that not your mother I saw with that particular minister of religion behind the shopping street?
Posted by: speedweasel
|
October 29, 2009 2:51 AM
Congratulations Lion. You are the one. You are the insipid, boring little troll that made me finally reach for the killfile. I’ve been reading this blog for a little over a year and I’ve suffered through fervent god-bottery and time-cubist nuttery, mindless barbarianism and shameless libertarianism, homeopathic woo and philosophers with nothing better to do.
But it was you and your insipid, mediocre, waffling that finally drove me to censorship. You have contributed nothing to any discussion. You are like fingernails on the blackboard of enlightened thought. Your arguments are tedious, plodding around in circles. You are clearly typing just for the sake of having an audience, blissfully unaware of how ridiculous and lame you sound.
Oh, how it must suck to be you. You can’t even meet the unexacting standards of a half decent Internet troll. In fact, you’re so average that if you entered a competition to find the most average person in the world, you’d come somewhere in the middle. You’re not even worthy of the dungeon.
Goodbye Lion. You will not be missed.
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 29, 2009 3:09 AM
Speedweasel, you defame all of the decent average people who try to make it through the best they can. Lion, on his best days, can not reach average if he was on a seven foot ladder and swinging a ten foot pole.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
October 29, 2009 4:13 AM
He's gone? Good.
Why the Belgium are they putting creches up in October?!
Posted by: speedweasel
|
October 29, 2009 5:10 AM
@Janine The Ineffable, OM
Of course you are right. My apologies to all who dwell in mediocrity :)
The point I was trying to convey is that Lion ‘isn’t even wrong’. Not bad, certainly not good but sort of ‘nowhere’ on any of the issues being discussed here at Pharyngula. Average was a poor choice of word to describe Lion’s irrelevant ramblings.
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | October 29, 2009 6:42 AM
"Help ma boab, wiz that no yer Ma ah saw wi' thon meenister ehent the shoaps?"
TrueScotsman,
Something along this line?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qPrR49qsDc
Posted by: Cosmic Teapot
|
October 29, 2009 6:48 AM
Wouldn't fraternity mean we all share the same brother?
Posted by: Zetetic
|
October 29, 2009 7:01 AM
I had a feeling that HMB would try to come back eventually. Then again, I was pretty sure that HMB would also shoot his/herself in the proverbial foot as well. No surprises here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lion @ #85:
Yet curiously you fail to mention that most of the historical examples of past wars and atrocities were either in spite of, or because of, a belief in a god(s). That's not very intellectually honest of you Lion IRC.In other words...When it comes to making people behave more civilized, a belief in god(s) is about as useful as screen doors on outer hatches of a submarine. People that act decent tend to do so even with a lack of belief in a god(s). While people that commit atrocities will do so in spite of any religious beliefs, or they use them as justification (i.e. Hitler, etc).
If you want to claim that the belief in an invisible father figure is necessary to keep people from killing each other, then you'll have to provide credible evidence for that assertion. Additionally you'll have to show that belief in such a being is in any way more effective than other forms of authority. Since historical reality shows otherwise, I'm afraid that you'll "have your work cut out for you".
Of course even if you could justify such a claim, it still has no bearing as to the reality of whether such an entity even exists in the first place. The Appeal to Consequences fallacy may be compelling to you, but it's not to anyone that tries to view the subject objectively.
Posted by: Coryat
|
October 29, 2009 7:02 AM
Lion (IRC) Sed:
"The Creator of the blog gets to make the rules not the visitors. If two visitors to the blog are in disagreement about whether something is in accordance with the rules it is a nil-all-draw. They NEED a Higher Authority to whom they can appeal viz, PZ Myers[...] PS- I am deperately hoping the Higher Authority analogy doesnt go unnoticed."
I am desperately hoping that your pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey style capitalisation doesn't go unnoticed. If you suddenly start Words with capitals it can seem confusing to Readers like me who NEED consistency; I am Appealing to You!
Posted by: druidbros
|
October 29, 2009 7:13 AM
To Janine.....Free elections in 1932 under Germany’s Weimar Republic made the NSDAP the largest parliamentary faction; no similar party in any country at that time had achieved comparable electoral success. Hitler’s January 30, 1933 appointment as Chancellor of Germany and his subsequent consolidation of dictatorial power marked the beginning of Nazi Germany.
They did win the election in that they were the largest political faction in 1932 and therefore were able to appoint Hitler as Chancellor.
Posted by: druidbros
|
October 29, 2009 7:18 AM
And on a completely unrelated note.....
The key to marital bliss is finding an older man, say British researchers. In a new report published in the European Journal of Operational Research, scientists at the University of Bath found divorces happen at only one-sixth the average rate when the man is at least five years older than the woman. The Telegraph also reports that divorce is eight times less likely when the woman has a higher education level than her husband.
Chances are bad for partnerships with significantly older women, though; their divorce rates are three times as high than couples that are the same age. Likewise, if the husband has the better education the chance of divorce goes up.
Led by Dr Emmanuel Fragniere, these researchers tracked 1,074 Swiss couples over the course of five years. They also found that divorce rates were lower if neither member of the couple had divorced before, but couples where both partners had been divorced before stood a better chance than couples where only one partner had previously divorced.
Apparently, marrying a much older man is the way to go; an unrelated German study released earlier this year also pointed out the health benefits for older men marrying younger women: namely, they live a lot longer.
*********************************
Now I feel so much better......
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | October 29, 2009 10:20 AM
Damn...Godwin in only 83 posts~! I have three models that I would like to test.
1. The probability of introducing Hitler/National Socialism is constant (like the probability of a light-bulb burning out), so that with enough posts eventually there is a near 100% probability that the Fuhrer-bomb will be dropped.
2. Adding a parameter to the model: The probability of finger-pointing and Nazi-naming will increase as an internet debate reaches a stalemate. I guess this is minimally a two paramter addition if we assume that the increase is linear.
3. The probability is not static and is not constant, but is free to change through a brownian or markov process with each new post. The probability of change from post to post can be drawn from a Dirichlet distribution...we could use I guess a hierarchical Bayesian approach and estimate parameters of this distribution if we wanted.
I need to go back to school.
Posted by: kopd | October 29, 2009 10:39 AM
Godwin in only 83 posts
No. I disagree. "As a Usenet (or Internet) discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
Post #83 is not a comparison. It is merely the statement of fact that the Nazis were not elected into power. Not every mention of Nazis is a Godwin violation. If somebody says "Name three heads of state active in 1941" and I say "Churchill, FDR, and Hitler" that is not a Godwin.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 29, 2009 10:44 AM
kopd @ 118,
you are correct in pointing out that the post @ 83 has bugger all to do with Godwin's law.
Which is incorrect....;)
Posted by: kopd | October 29, 2009 10:49 AM
Which is incorrect....;)
I refuse to let the veracity of my facts change my mind about whether they're true. :-p
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | October 29, 2009 11:04 AM
They did win the election in that they were the largest political faction in 1932 and therefore were able to appoint Hitler as Chancellor.
That is incorrect. Franz Von Papen convinced Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as Chancellor. The idea was two fold; as part of a coalition with conservative politicians, they would be able to control Hitler. Second, it was to show that the Nazis were incapable of running a government, the power elite were expecting Hitler to fail and be discredited.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 29, 2009 11:14 AM
Correct-ish. In 1933, not '32, btw.And not so much Papen as v Schleicher and the Rupert Murdoch of the time, Hugenberg, but yeah.
Of course my point about the NSDAP winning relative majorities at elections stands...:-)
And while you emerge from refreshing slumber Janine, I withdraw for a short nap now,early start tomorrow, it being 215 am here....
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | October 29, 2009 11:15 AM
Word...atcually, its post #76 that compares societies with no higher power to imperial Japan, communist China, and Nazi Germany. It is a pretty inept comparison I guess, and maybe only marginally Godwinesque. Still, I prefer statistical models to laws, especially when describing complex systems, like internet banter. Not quite on topic, but discussion seems to have wandered far afield.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
October 29, 2009 12:25 PM
Banter?!! This is serious business!!!! My exclamation points prove it!!!!!
Posted by: aratina cage | October 29, 2009 12:42 PM
Naked Bunny with a Whip, you just violated Internet Law #10, the Law of Exclamation! You must be one of those people who wear their underwear on the outside!! ;P
Posted by: JackC
|
October 29, 2009 1:33 PM
Wow. I have a "Cruise Book" from my Navy days showing one of our officers in just such a predicament. It is just amazing what can be seen the day one crosses the equator for the first time.
Maybe I will have to scan and post the pic.
JC
Posted by: howdy-lentils
|
October 29, 2009 1:34 PM
@Rob #2
Thanks for that AFA link. I've been going down the list, sending messages of support to everyone they're protesting. Also left this comment on the page for the non-Christmas business boycott:
"Christmas is a pagan holiday and Christmas trees are forbidden by the Bible. Read God's HOLY WORD! Jeremiah 10:2-4 The customs of the people ARE IN VAIN!"
That ought to throw them!
Posted by: jdhuey | October 29, 2009 1:39 PM
It seems to me that a mind/body dualism is intimately wrapped up with consciousness and is a very useful capability. Back in my youth, I used to go hunting deer and one of the things that I would have to do is envision myself in different places to see which one would give me the best shot at the spot that I thought the deer would show up at. Other hunters often talked about putting themselves into the role of the prey in order to predict how they would move. To do either of these requires the mental trick of 'leaving your body behind', which would be impossible to do if you felt that your body was 'you'. I seems to me that any type of conscious planning requires the ability to mentally project oneself into different situations. So, if you can mentally project your conscious self to different places is it really much of a mental leap to think of 'yourself' as a disembodied entity that just happens to spend a lot of time in one particular body?
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
October 29, 2009 1:49 PM
@aratina cage: The outside of what?!?
Posted by: druidbros
|
October 29, 2009 2:09 PM
But I still stand by my correction of your statement, Janine, that Nazi's never won an election.
Further, the elections happened in 1932. Von Papen was appointed Chancellor first by Hindenberg. He lost support and convinced Hindenberg to appoint Hitler in 1933.
In 1932 in the Reichstag elections, the Nazi Party won 37.3% of the votes (230 seats) proving the Nazi party to be the most popular party. President Hindenburg however, despised Hitler and appointed Franz Von Papen as his chancellor. General Von Schleicher stopped supporting Von Papen and decided he himself should become chancellor. This triggered off a power struggle between Von Schleicher and Von Papen, which ended up with themhaving Hitler become Chancellor in Jan 1933.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 29, 2009 3:19 PM
…or because of beliefs in practically religious ideologies like Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism.
Posted by: TheTrueScotsman | October 29, 2009 5:27 PM
Jeff Eyges
Thanks for the link.
This is slightly better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLxLmFhROqY
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
October 29, 2009 9:19 PM
Outside of your clothes, like Superman or Batman and Robin.
Posted by: kopd | October 29, 2009 9:40 PM
And Quail-Man!
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | October 30, 2009 7:58 AM
Thanks for the link.
This is slightly better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLxLmFhROqY
How on earth do they get anything done in Scotland? They're incomprehensible!
Posted by: Aratina Cage
|
October 30, 2009 8:46 AM
*looks at your screen name*.
.
*facepalm from embarrassment*
Posted by: Zetetic
|
October 30, 2009 11:56 PM
David Marjanović @ #131:
An excellent point.Although, I was trying to focus specifically on Lion's assertion that with out a higher authority that there can be no resolution to conflicts (an obviously incorrect assertion), or that a belief in god(s) are essential to preventing conflict (also obviously untrue).
Posted by: Thomas Winwood
|
November 1, 2009 7:03 AM
#128: I'd say you're confusing the subconscious abilities to perform a 3D transformation of the environment (which is needed to prevent you becoming disoriented whenever you move your head) and make empirical predictions based on past experiences with a philosophical disconnect between "body" and "mind".