Jen McCreight has published a solid response to the clueless anti-atheist article in Ms magazine…and it’s in Ms magazine. It’s good stuff, too, with a list of all the godless women the original article ought to have consulted.
I made an argument earlier that that a few people created disproportionate amounts of value for society. I cited the example of the Industrial Revolution as supporting evidence. About 95% of the rebuttals probably were nothing more than insults which referred to me as a libertarian turd.
Reading through the thread in question, I have to disagree with your description of events.
You start by asserting that the Industrial Revolution was an example of an elite being more productive that the general population.
This is immediately followed by several requests to back up that assertion.
This is followed by three posts where you first reassert that you’re right, then respond to a different point, and finally complain about the tone of the thread.
Several more posts follow that directly question your central assertion (with arguments, not insults) and instead of responding, you complain about how mean everyone is.
Now, it’s a long thread and I just scanned it quickly, so maybe I missed the part where you provided evidence for your assertions. If so, please provide a link to it.
As it is, the situation is as follows: you made an assertion, it was questioned, you refused to back it up. When people called you on that behaviour, you whined about it.
The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.
Kate Clancy comments on a ‘satire’ published in a serious journal.
Genome Biology published a satirical piece…
We’re doomed. The Pacific striped octopus is exhibiting complex social behaviors.
Panamanian biologist Aradio Rodaniche first reported…
Next week, I think I will!
But we have to be clear that it is only a hypothesis at this point. I…