There is a God

**#41** · **#41** by **MacIver** » Nov 29, 2011 7:20 am

Jayjay4547 wrote:The worse religion gets the more it denies that mystery. Atheists sometimes uses the very basest notion, where God is something we can decide about and classify.

Another often cited argument; God is immeasurable, undefinable and totally out with of human understanding. But any believer who claims this is so is being a hypocrite of the highest order. Because their very belief is a form of definition of God. Either we can postulate about his/her/it's existence using logic and reasoning or we cannot. If we cannot then belief in him/her/it is as pointless as non-belief. Agnosticism would be the correct belief system.

But as Durro's said the Welcome forum isn't the place for this discussion. I look forward to seeing you in the theism or nontheism sections. :thumbup:

**#42** · **#42** by **Jayjay4547** » Nov 29, 2011 7:23 am

Durro wrote:Now that we've had the warm and fuzzy reunion, it might be time to take any debating or discussion elsewhere to an appropriate forum, eh ?

Sounds great- move it over Durro to where is best I'm happy

**#43** · **#43** by **Durro** » Nov 29, 2011 8:44 am

I wasn't going to move this thread, but would like to encourage anyone wishing to get into anything more than welcoming or reminiscing about the good times on RDF to take it to an appropriate forum.

**#44** · **#44** by **Shrunk** » Nov 29, 2011 11:13 am

Jayjay4547 wrote:Shameful pleasure.
Those RDF moderators who threw me off on the supposed grounds of lying when I didn't lie - and then were themselves treated with such gross discourtesy by the RDF they had served so faithfully.

Except you did lie, as you have admitted yourself just one page ago:

Jayjay4547 wrote:I got thrown off for lying 6 times- in the view of the moderators. My last lie I think, had to do with the bicorn fish. I used Microosoft Paint to draw this critter, whose main feature is two tusk-like teeth that it rams into its foes. I dishonestly claimed, this pic came from a still from a BBC film by David Attenburgh (lie #2). the aim of this deception was to make a point about chimp teeth, where the incisors slope outwards. The point I had wanted to make was that chimps bite and when they bite hard, against a predator, they must use their arms to grab andpull while biting into their antagonist- else they risked breaking their incisors through bending stress. And this was all about how different chimps are from humans, in their way of reacting to predatory attacks on them. I worked out the ratio of compressive force to pulling in force, from images of chimp skulls. the bicorn fish is the limiting case for this analysis- it simply bashes into its antagonist, no jaw-closing force at all. By this stage, relations were a bit unhappy between me and the site. Then I mentioned in passing that the bicorn fish was "gedenken". That was the last straw, revealing lie number 6. I must have mislaid a lie or three in the retelling. Anyway I felt aggrieved and my only consolation was that I might possibly have managed to irritate Richard Dawkins himself.

As such, I believe your accusation against the RDF moderators, most of whom are members of this board as you are well aware, constitutes a personal attack, and has been duly reported.

**#45** · **#45** by **Durro** » Nov 29, 2011 12:21 pm

Accusations against unspecified RDF Mods who may or may not be Mods or members of this forum is not a clear instance of personal attack/insult against a Ratskep member, so there's no case to answer with respect to our FUA.

JayJay's posting history and whether or not he has lied is a matter of public record and for others to judge.

Durro

**#46** · **#46** by **Jayjay4547** » Nov 30, 2011 6:11 am

Shrunk wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Shameful pleasure.
Those RDF moderators who threw me off on the supposed grounds of lying when I didn't lie - and then were themselves treated with such gross discourtesy by the RDF they had served so faithfully.

Except you did lie, as you have admitted yourself just one page ago:

Jayjay4547 wrote:I got thrown off for lying 6 times- in the view of the moderators. My last lie I think, had to do with the bicorn fish. I used Microosoft Paint to draw this critter, whose main feature is two tusk-like teeth that it rams into its foes. I dishonestly claimed, this pic came from a still from a BBC film by David Attenburgh (lie #2). the aim of this deception was to make a point about chimp teeth, where the incisors slope outwards. The point I had wanted to make was that chimps bite and when they bite hard, against a predator, they must use their arms to grab andpull while biting into their antagonist- else they risked breaking their incisors through bending stress. And this was all about how different chimps are from humans, in their way of reacting to predatory attacks on them. I worked out the ratio of compressive force to pulling in force, from images of chimp skulls. the bicorn fish is the limiting case for this analysis- it simply bashes into its antagonist, no jaw-closing force at all. By this stage, relations were a bit unhappy between me and the site. Then I mentioned in passing that the bicorn fish was "gedenken". That was the last straw, revealing lie number 6. I must have mislaid a lie or three in the retelling. Anyway I felt aggrieved and my only consolation was that I might possibly have managed to irritate Richard Dawkins himself.

As such, I believe your accusation against the RDF moderators, most of whom are members of this board as you are well aware, constitutes a personal attack, and has been duly reported.

I don't admit that I lied. Only a complete idiot could mistake my crude PaintBrush pic of a non-existing fish as a still from a David Attenborough wildlife film. Only a complete idiot would think I wasn't being tongue-in-cheek. I was winking at the reader. it's not my fault if readers had become so stuffed with stupid anger as not to see the wink. And you still don't get it, you get ever more puffed up in your outrage.

But what is truly nearly incredible is that when I pointed out the whole thing was gedenken, then instead of seeing the joke was on them for their credulity, I was accused of lying.

There is a symmetry between the bicorn fish and the aquarium jaws that caused such glee on RDF . There the joke was fairly on me. I Google-Imaged for Jaws, chose one of the many images and slapped it in. No joke, as a real example. Then some poster , gifted with more sense than I had applied, took a careful look at this image. Hello hello, something is wrong with these jaws. Goodness, it cant be, yes, its aquarium toy. What an idiot I had been. That was a fair hit and I richly deserved the consequences. But who were the bigger idiots- the RDF mob for taking a paintbrush image and wink as a real fish and a real claim, or little old me for taking an aquarium jaws as real jaws? The upper jaw gradually fills with air from the pump then it tilts up and goes blup. OK I was the bigger idiot but not by much. But you Shrunk need to get off your huffing and puffing grandstand and see the bicorn fish became a joke on you.

By the way, Thaniks Durro, your balance much appreciated.

**#47** · **#47** by **Spearthrower** » Nov 30, 2011 6:29 am

I recall all of this Jayjay, and the problem was that you made numerous assertions that were equally absurd, and yet defended them vigorously. Why should anyone have given you the benefit of the doubt?

But as I already said - what's past is past. Why don't you leave these reminiscences in the past and get on with interacting now with a fresh slate rather than trying to provoke yet more confrontation over old bones?

**#48** · **#48** by **Jayjay4547** » Nov 30, 2011 7:19 am

Am I provoking confrontation by reacting to being called a liar? Now you claim I made "numerous absurd assertions". And I'll not forget the "excrement" accusation above. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Over and out

**#49** · **#49** by **DanDare** » Nov 30, 2011 1:05 pm

Hi JayJay. Why don't you start a thread in the theism section about the "great religion" and we can discuss that subject there. I don't care to go over lurker's baggage. Leave him behind and let's get on with some discussion.

**#50** · **#50** by **Durro** » Nov 30, 2011 11:20 pm

**#51** · **#51** by **Spearthrower** » Dec 01, 2011 5:38 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:Am I provoking confrontation by reacting to being called a liar? Now you claim I made "numerous absurd assertions".

Actually, you called yourself a liar numerous times in the thread...

And you seem to have overlooked the 2 times I called for a clean slate:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/new-m ... l#p1089639

Unforgettable and unforgivable. But, let's permit jayjay a fresh start here. Perhaps he found himself cornered and couldn't find a way to back down.

But as I already said - what's past is past. Why don't you leave these reminiscences in the past and get on with interacting now with a fresh slate rather than trying to provoke yet more confrontation over old bones?

Jayjay4547 wrote:And I'll not forget the "excrement" accusation above. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Over and out

Wasn't me though, was it? So why are you directing it at me? Or is it aimed at a collective? :think:

There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Re: There is a God

Who is online