You know who piss me off?
Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 03:03:57 GMT

--------
Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such as
philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and publish
them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and use
vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of their
arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the particulars
they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR CONSENSUS
FOUNDATIONS to begin with.

I hate stupid people.
And that goes triple for smart stupid people.
--
Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.



Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 03:46:39 GMT

--------


kdetal wrote:

> Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such as
> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and publish
> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and use
> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of their
> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the particulars
> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR CONSENSUS
> FOUNDATIONS to begin with.
>
> I hate stupid people.
> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.
> --
> Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.
>

At least they're maybe sort of moving toward truth. At least, they don't
have religion as the bottom line. There are people whose world history
is at odds with geological dates for the Grand Canyon. Near here, there's
a place by the Bay called Scientist Cliffs where there are layers of seashells
a couple of hundred feet deep; it'll give you a sense of time like counting the
rings in a tree. Considerably more than a million years of seashells, and
shark's teeth 60 million years old. The best thing to do when you encounter
people like that is to smile, because their bus just don't go there.
http://www.gnsi.science-art.com/GNSIDC/reports/2002Apr/apr2002.html





Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 03:58:18 GMT

--------
ZombieQualia wrote:
>kdetal wrote:
>
>> Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such
>as
>> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and
>publish
>> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
>> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and
>use
>> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of
>their
>> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the
>particulars
>> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR
>CONSENSUS
>> FOUNDATIONS to begin with.



> At least they're maybe sort of moving toward truth.

No, they're not, that's the point. They just have smoother ways of presenting
lies.

As I just wrote elsewhere, they are no better in an intellectual light than any
Alt.Timmy posting excitedly about conquering demons and adventures on the 4th
plane of the 7th throne of Marchosias.

It is like mathmatics in that Base 2 and Base 10 are similar because they
discuss the same operational values, in different terms, applicable only to
their particular Base.

It is unlike Base Mathmatics in that no consistant, logical, theoretically
provable and *transferable* underlying structure exists, in our current level
of understanding.

Without this, proponents of Base 2, Base 6, Base 8 and Base 10 would all argue
that their particular Base is the Correct way of doing math, all the while
using different values to express each of their bases, and correlating them
with results from experiments that, what the hell, seem like they might relate,
mixed together with whatever favorite theory and conjecture the major proponent
of each Base chose.

The winner would be the proponent that simultaneously keyed in to the a priori,
albeit subjective notions of the current scientific community and threw their
argument together in the most convincing and deceptively objective manner.

Because all the proponents start from an inaccurate foundation, the
distillation point where it might be shown *why* the explanation of Marchosias
might be less probable than another theory in a verifiably correct
understanding of the process, is never reached.

At least, they don't
>have religion as the bottom line. There are people whose world history
>is at odds with geological dates for the Grand Canyon.

Science based on subjective opinion IS religion.

Near here, there's
>a place by the Bay called Scientist Cliffs where there are layers of
>seashells
>a couple of hundred feet deep; it'll give you a sense of time like counting
>the
>rings in a tree. Considerably more than a million years of seashells, and
>shark's teeth 60 million years old. The best thing to do when you encounter
>people like that is to smile, because their bus just don't go there.

No.

Because their bus picks up everyone else for the ride.

--
Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.



Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:05:03 GMT

--------


kdetal wrote:

> ZombieQualia wrote:
> >kdetal wrote:
> >
> >> Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such
> >as
> >> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and
> >publish
> >> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
> >> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and
> >use
> >> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of
> >their
> >> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the
> >particulars
> >> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR
> >CONSENSUS
> >> FOUNDATIONS to begin with.
>
> > At least they're maybe sort of moving toward truth.
>
> No, they're not, that's the point. They just have smoother ways of presenting
> lies.
>
> As I just wrote elsewhere, they are no better in an intellectual light than any
> Alt.Timmy posting excitedly about conquering demons and adventures on the 4th
> plane of the 7th throne of Marchosias.
>
> It is like mathmatics in that Base 2 and Base 10 are similar because they
> discuss the same operational values, in different terms, applicable only to
> their particular Base.
>
> It is unlike Base Mathmatics in that no consistant, logical, theoretically
> provable and *transferable* underlying structure exists, in our current level
> of understanding.
>
> Without this, proponents of Base 2, Base 6, Base 8 and Base 10 would all argue
> that their particular Base is the Correct way of doing math, all the while
> using different values to express each of their bases, and correlating them
> with results from experiments that, what the hell, seem like they might relate,
> mixed together with whatever favorite theory and conjecture the major proponent
> of each Base chose.
>
> The winner would be the proponent that simultaneously keyed in to the a priori,
> albeit subjective notions of the current scientific community and threw their
> argument together in the most convincing and deceptively objective manner.
>
> Because all the proponents start from an inaccurate foundation, the
> distillation point where it might be shown *why* the explanation of Marchosias
> might be less probable than another theory in a verifiably correct
> understanding of the process, is never reached.
>
> At least, they don't
> >have religion as the bottom line. There are people whose world history
> >is at odds with geological dates for the Grand Canyon.
>
> Science based on subjective opinion IS religion.
>
> Near here, there's
> >a place by the Bay called Scientist Cliffs where there are layers of
> >seashells
> >a couple of hundred feet deep; it'll give you a sense of time like counting
> >the
> >rings in a tree. Considerably more than a million years of seashells, and
> >shark's teeth 60 million years old. The best thing to do when you encounter
> >people like that is to smile, because their bus just don't go there.
>
> No.
>
> Because their bus picks up everyone else for the ride.
>

No, no! Don't get on that bus! You know better!





Correspondent:: Unclaimed Mysteries
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 05:14:19 GMT

--------
König Prüß wrote as part of the internets:

> There are people whose world history
> is at odds with geological dates for the Grand Canyon. Near here, there's
> a place by the Bay called Scientist Cliffs where there are layers of seashells
> a couple of hundred feet deep; it'll give you a sense of time like counting the
> rings in a tree. Considerably more than a million years of seashells, and
> shark's teeth 60 million years old.

Satanic deceptions, you heathen.


--
It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net


Correspondent:: asscoassc@aol.comBLOWME (AssCo Assc)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 04:41:04 GMT

--------
<< Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such
as
philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and publish
them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and use
vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of their
arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the particulars
they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR CONSENSUS
FOUNDATIONS to begin with. >>

Hey, I LIKE "The Meaning of Lost and Mismatched Socks"!





ooOOoo

It petrifies the tongue. . .
Shoots arrows through the lung. . .
Guttural rending pain . . .
. . . and next it Sclerotifies the brain
-- Copyright 2004 Ilya Shambat


Correspondent:: "Rev. Ivan Stang"
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:32:20 -0500

--------
In article <20041217234104.00362.00001955@mb-m17.aol.com>, AssCo Assc
wrote:

> << Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such
> as
> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and publish
> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and use
> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of
> their
> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the
> particulars
> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR CONSENSUS
> FOUNDATIONS to begin with. >>
>
> Hey, I LIKE "The Meaning of Lost and Mismatched Socks"!
>

Princess Wei bought TEN COPIES of that book yesterday! So now you all
know what you're getting for Xmas. And maybe author Harry S. Robins
will finally get those two front teeth.

(I got Hal a DVD of "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms," but I got it from
the vintage-film newsgroup! TOOK ALL FUCKING NIGHT!)

--
The SubGenius Foundation, Inc.
(4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected, Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
P.O. Box 181417, Cleveland, OH 44118 (fax 216-320-9528)
Dobbs-Approved Authorized Commercial Outreach of The Church of the SubGenius
SubSITE: http://www.subgenius.com PRABOB


Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:18:23 -0800

--------

People who don't put their trash can away as soon as possible after
trash day but leave it out for about three days before they finally put
it away.


Correspondent:: Baldin Pramer
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:10:22 -0700

--------
kdetal wrote:

> Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such as
> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and publish
> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and use
> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of their
> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the particulars
> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR CONSENSUS
> FOUNDATIONS to begin with.
>
> I hate stupid people.
> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.

OK, I give up. Who pisses you off?

--
Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A.


Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 11:23:30 GMT

--------
Baldin Pramer wrote:
>kdetal wrote:
>
>> Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such
>as
>> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and
>publish
>> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
>> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and
>use
>> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of
>their
>> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the
>particulars
>> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR
>CONSENSUS
>> FOUNDATIONS to begin with.
>>
>> I hate stupid people.
>> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.

>OK, I give up. Who pisses you off?

http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/Anabiosis%201983.htm
--
Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.



Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:41:34 GMT

--------


kdetal wrote:

> Baldin Pramer wrote:
> >kdetal wrote:
> >
> >> Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such
> >as
> >> philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and
> >publish
> >> them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
> >> ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and
> >use
> >> vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of
> >their
> >> arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the
> >particulars
> >> they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR
> >CONSENSUS
> >> FOUNDATIONS to begin with.
> >>
> >> I hate stupid people.
> >> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.
>
> >OK, I give up. Who pisses you off?
>
> http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/Anabiosis%201983.htm
> --
> Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.
>

Oh, yeah! I saw that website before! I forget how I found it,
if it was posted or I stumbled onto it, but the memes part didn't
put me off too much; it was the green hair and paranormal part.
But, hey! If the Psychic Fiends Network and Ms. Cleo can pretend
they're Jamaican jabooties and parlay that into an empire of trailer
park real estate, it's likely on account of virally-rigged prionic memes!

"How do you do, and please buy our mud!
Yes, here in Burundi, we have a wide selection
of sticks and mud."
--Minister of Development, Burundi









Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:24:19 -0600

--------
On 18 Dec 2004 11:23:30 GMT, kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:


>>> I hate stupid people.
>>> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.
>
>>OK, I give up. Who pisses you off?
>
>http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/Anabiosis%201983.htm

Ahhhhh...yesssssss. Susan Blackmmore.

Susan Blackmore is a high profile skeptic.

Here's my take on the skeptics. i love them. i love them. You as a
self proclaimed mystic and me as a flakey artist type need to snuggle
up nice and close to the skeptical community and all the other active
'rational thinking' communities. Yes, logic is like driving all the
time in first gear...but slow and steady caution keeps one from
tipping over into new agey lotusland twittiness.

It's also socially important at this time because the small bastions
of rational thinking that still exist in this world are the few
institutions that are keeping many societies from becoming Taliban
Afghanistans, Irans, or fundamental xtian Jonestowns.

Without the duct tape of rationality keeping the irrational herd
instinct penned in, crack pot You and crack pot me and crack pot
everyone else on this list would be unorthodox kristian bonfire
kindling.

Sorry if this doesn't make much sense, i'm in a hurry.

Salacia


Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 16:34:54 GMT

--------
HdMrsSalaciathe Overseer wrote:

>>>> I hate stupid people.
>>>> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.
>>
>>>OK, I give up. Who pisses you off?
>>
>>http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/Anabiosis%201983.htm
>
>Ahhhhh...yesssssss. Susan Blackmmore.
>
>Susan Blackmore is a high profile skeptic.
>
>Here's my take on the skeptics. i love them. i love them. You as a
>self proclaimed mystic and me as a flakey artist type need to snuggle
>up nice and close to the skeptical community and all the other active
>'rational thinking' communities. Yes, logic is like driving all the
>time in first gear...but slow and steady caution keeps one from
>tipping over into new agey lotusland twittiness.
>
>It's also socially important at this time because the small bastions
>of rational thinking that still exist in this world are the few
>institutions that are keeping many societies from becoming Taliban
>Afghanistans, Irans, or fundamental xtian Jonestowns.
>
>Without the duct tape of rationality keeping the irrational herd
>instinct penned in, crack pot You and crack pot me and crack pot
>everyone else on this list would be unorthodox kristian bonfire
>kindling.
>
>Sorry if this doesn't make much sense, i'm in a hurry.
>
>Salacia

Wrong. *I* am a skeptic. Of the pyrrhonian variety. Therefore I recognize
false skeptics instantly.

And anyone with a brain should be able to recognize arguments built on
subjective conjecture.

Most people who proclaim themselves skeptics are nothing of the sort. Again,
smart, incredibly STUPID people who have no understanding that a logical
argument can be completely internally coherent and still COMPLETELY wrong when
based on false premises. Or have no idea how to construct valid and reliable
"proofs", no acknowledgement of the temporary-ness of any fact due to the fact
that a larger "set" of facts may disprove anything at any moment. And mostly-
HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE ART OF SKEPTICISM REALLY MEANS.

So don't fucking lecture ME about logic and skepticism.

I hate ALL stupid people STUPID harebrained mystics, STUPID
pseudo-intellectual posturing, STUPID airy fairy artists who can't fucking buy
a cup of coffee and especially INCREDIBLY STUPID people in academic communities
who are so FUCKING STUPID they don't even KNOW that they NEVER LEARNED HOW TO
THINK PROPERLY.

--
Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.



Correspondent:: "Salacia"
Date: 18 Dec 2004 09:56:44 -0800

--------

kdetal wrote:


> Wrong. *I* am a skeptic. Of the pyrrhonian variety. Therefore I
recognize
> false skeptics instantly.
>
> And anyone with a brain should be able to recognize arguments built
on
> subjective conjecture.
>
> Most people who proclaim themselves skeptics are nothing of the sort.
Again,
> smart, incredibly STUPID people who have no understanding that a
logical
> argument can be completely internally coherent and still COMPLETELY
wrong when
> based on false premises. Or have no idea how to construct valid and
reliable
> "proofs", no acknowledgement of the temporary-ness of any fact due to
the fact
> that a larger "set" of facts may disprove anything at any moment.
And mostly-
> HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE ART OF SKEPTICISM REALLY MEANS.
>
> So don't fucking lecture ME about logic and skepticism.
>
> I hate ALL stupid people STUPID harebrained mystics, STUPID
> pseudo-intellectual posturing, STUPID airy fairy artists who can't
fucking buy
> a cup of coffee and especially INCREDIBLY STUPID people in academic
communities
> who are so FUCKING STUPID they don't even KNOW that they NEVER
LEARNED HOW TO
> THINK PROPERLY.
>
> --
> Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an
idiot.

Well why didn't you just SAY you hate everyone who doesn't think
EXACTLY like you!
Everyone can identify with THAT!

Except that that's soooooo many people, and so many ideas that you
should just really dig a hole and get in it so as not to have your
superior intellect annoyed by instead of just fucking bored or simply
amused by all the new crackpot ideas that have the nerve to stimulate
your attention. W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?

If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.

Of course you won't. SubGeniuses tend not to have that kind of
ambition. Unless they're in a manic upswing.



Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 22:07:53 GMT

--------
Salacia squealed out:

>Well why didn't you just SAY you hate everyone who doesn't think
>EXACTLY like you!
>Everyone can identify with THAT!

Wrong. I hate everyone who doesn't understand how to THINK, period.
There are plenty of people, albeit a number that is diminishing I'm sure, who
*do* know how to think, and whom I respect for this, regardless of whether I
agree with them.


>Except that that's soooooo many people, and so many ideas that you
>should just really dig a hole and get in it so as not to have your
>superior intellect annoyed by instead of just fucking bored or simply
>amused by all the new crackpot ideas that have the nerve to stimulate
>your attention.

Crackpot ideas are great. They have nothing to do with the point of THIS
thread however.

> W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?

Indeed. What WOULD Nenslo do?
Pondering this question keeps me up nights.

>If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
>reality....

This one person has nothing to do with anything, except exciting one of my pet
peeves, as she is indicative of a much larger problem.


>and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
>views.

Give me a fucking break. This response means either you didn't understand what
I was saying or you just want to wank at me.

> Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!

TYPICAL.
Because someone is an idiot and cannot present something correctly,
automatically means I disagree with them. Because it must always be this or
that. There are only two possibilities in every situation, right?

It's not like there are a multiplicity of variables that interact and resonate
in all kinds of complicated ways in this complex process we call life.

Agree OR Disagree with them, it doesn't fucking matter because the whole thing
is a bastion of scientific illiteracy.


>It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
>THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
>CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.

Who gives a shit?

>Of course you won't. SubGeniuses tend not to have that kind of
>ambition. Unless they're in a manic upswing.

Translation:
Ambition- Gooooooood
Subgenius- Baaaaaaaaaaaad

This message brought to you by another proponent of two-valued orientation.

See how much easier life is when you don't have to think!

Don't miss next week when we'll learn how to over-simplify and make
all-inclusive generalizations.

--
Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.



Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:54:29 -0600

--------
On 18 Dec 2004 22:07:53 GMT, kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:

>Salacia squealed out:
>
>>Well why didn't you just SAY you hate everyone who doesn't think
>>EXACTLY like you!
>>Everyone can identify with THAT!
>
>Wrong. I hate everyone who doesn't understand how to THINK, period.

No. You hate everyone who doesn't think like you. Specifically, you
complained that you hate people who can't argue their case properly.

How arrogant to suggest that the only people who think are those who
can construct a cogent argument. Logic, even more so than sanity is a
one trick pony. Albeit a tremendously USEFUL one. There are many, many
more was to think, discuss and communicate than by logical or
analytical means. If you haven't experienced the value of those other
modes of thinking then you are handicapped.

>There are plenty of people, albeit a number that is diminishing I'm sure, who
>*do* know how to think, and whom I respect for this, regardless of whether I
>agree with them.
>

>Crackpot ideas are great. They have nothing to do with the point of THIS
>thread however.
>
>> W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
>
>Indeed. What WOULD Nenslo do?
>Pondering this question keeps me up nights.

Nenslo would tell the people who annoy him to SHUT UP. That keeps it
nice and simple. He doesn't expend much energy at it, he doesn't fret
over it, he brushes it off and then he goes and lives his life. He
makes a pie.

>>If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
>>reality....
>
>This one person has nothing to do with anything, except exciting one of my pet
>peeves, as she is indicative of a much larger problem.
>
>
>>and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
>>views.
>
>Give me a fucking break. This response means either you didn't understand what
>I was saying or you just want to wank at me.

I don't want to wank at you. You are one of the few loser females like
myself that hang out here. We need more. You got all touchy because I
stepped on your toes and took the focus of the thread off your pet
peeve and onto the value of the person who irritated you. I took it
off of your idea of a logical thread and skewed it. Boo hoo. I do it
all the time. B.F.D. Get over it. My idea of slack does not include
debating all the time. Excuse my bad form, OR KILL ME!

>TYPICAL.
>Because someone is an idiot and cannot present something correctly,
>automatically means I disagree with them. Because it must always be this or
>that. There are only two possibilities in every situation, right?

Well, then if you do agree with her show her how she could have proven
her argument correctly. I'm sure she would appreciate the suggestion
of how to make her ideas more plausible.

>Agree OR Disagree with them, it doesn't fucking matter because the whole thing
>is a bastion of scientific illiteracy.

They are making the attempt, AND they are subject tothe rigours and
scrutiny of the scientific method. All it would take is one person who
can point out that an argument or hypothesis is wrong to change that.
That could be YOU!!! It is still preferable to non-scientific
illiteracy.

>Who gives a shit?

You cared enough to bring your pet peeve to alt.slack. You appear to
have a passionate investment in the problem if you would complain so
vigourously.

>>Of course you won't. SubGeniuses tend not to have that kind of
>>ambition. Unless they're in a manic upswing.
>
>Translation:
>Ambition- Gooooooood
>Subgenius- Baaaaaaaaaaaad

That's a ridiculous low blow. Slack doesn't mean don't do anything. It
means do what you WANT to do, what you are passionate about. Slack and
ambition are not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, it's not usually
an ambition to do anything, mmmm, useful or ambitious in the
conventional sense. Alas.

>This message brought to you by another proponent of two-valued orientation.
>
>See how much easier life is when you don't have to think!

LIKE YOU WANT EVERYONE TO THINK....LIKE YOU.
How dull. How one dimensional. How always black and white.

>Don't miss next week when we'll learn how to over-simplify and make
>all-inclusive generalizations.

What can I say....I'M A BIG PICTURE KIND OF GAL.

Headmistress Salacia the Overseer





Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 19 Dec 2004 01:25:05 GMT

--------
Salacia wrote:



I don't debate with people who through ignorance or choice make arguments
tangental and unrelated to the original premise, as your comments show.

Have a nice life reading your view of reality into everything.
--
I do what I want. That's why I always win.



Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:31:43 -0600

--------
On 19 Dec 2004 01:25:05 GMT, kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:

>Salacia wrote:
>
>
>
>I don't debate with people who through ignorance or choice make arguments
>tangental and unrelated to the original premise, as your comments show.

Because you can't. You are handicapped. You don't know how. How sad.
How dull. How limiting.

>Have a nice life reading your view of reality into everything.

That's a wonderful catch-all-vague-non-specific-jab. Cowardly.
Uninsightful.

Salacia




Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 19 Dec 2004 02:43:23 GMT

--------
>kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
>
>>Salacia wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>I don't debate with people who through ignorance or choice make arguments
>>tangental and unrelated to the original premise, as your comments show.
>
>Because you can't. You are handicapped. You don't know how. How sad.
>How dull. How limiting.

You're right. I can't debate people who are unable to read. It *is* sad.

>>Have a nice life reading your view of reality into everything.
>
>That's a wonderful catch-all-vague-non-specific-jab. Cowardly.
>Uninsightful.

Learn to read.



--
I do what I want. That's why I always win.



Correspondent:: HellPope Huey
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 03:38:00 GMT

--------

What, you expect me to make a list? What small percentage of the
limited group who would read it do you think would give half a shrew
mole's shit?

No, let's not make it so easy; if we're going to meta-sociologically go
at people's binary privates with gardening shears, let's focus more
effectively and enjoy the heat generated by setting fire to the minutiae
as we usually do. Lists are for wussies; extended polemics are the way
to go in this Gorgo-a-go-go world. HIT it, Zubin!

--

HellPope Huey
I pissed right into the bottled city of Kandor
Hey, even Kryptonian flowers need nitrogen.

"Its disheartening to know that you live
in a country that's just teeming
with semi-literate, mediocre psychos."
- Henry Rollins

"Sometimes its like you're two different people."
"Well, that's three less than I used to be."
- "Stark Raving Mad"


Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:22:29 -0800

--------
kdetal wrote:
>
> >kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
> >
> >>Salacia wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>I don't debate with people who through ignorance or choice make arguments
> >>tangental and unrelated to the original premise, as your comments show.
> >
> >Because you can't. You are handicapped. You don't know how. How sad.
> >How dull. How limiting.
>
> You're right. I can't debate people who are unable to read. It *is* sad.
>
> >>Have a nice life reading your view of reality into everything.
> >
> >That's a wonderful catch-all-vague-non-specific-jab. Cowardly.
> >Uninsightful.
>
> Learn to read.

So when are you two going to rip each others' shirts off?


Correspondent:: asscoassc@aol.comBLOWME (AssCo Assc)
Date: 21 Dec 2004 22:29:48 GMT

--------
Hey now.







ooOOoo

It petrifies the tongue. . .
Shoots arrows through the lung. . .
Guttural rending pain . . .
. . . and next it Sclerotifies the brain
-- Copyright 2004 Ilya Shambat


Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:48:19 -0800

--------
On 18 Dec 2004 09:56:44 -0800, "Salacia"
wrote:

>Well why didn't you just SAY you hate everyone who doesn't think
>EXACTLY like you!
>Everyone can identify with THAT!
>
>Except that that's soooooo many people, and so many ideas that you
>should just really dig a hole and get in it so as not to have your
>superior intellect annoyed by instead of just fucking bored or simply
>amused by all the new crackpot ideas that have the nerve to stimulate
>your attention. W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
>
>If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
>reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
>views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
>It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
>THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
>CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
>
>Of course you won't. SubGeniuses tend not to have that kind of
>ambition. Unless they're in a manic upswing.

For what it's worth, I definitely relate to what kd is saying.

I agree with what you said before, that without skeptics we would
slide into irrational-belief based insanity like the Taliban (or like
those villages in Africa where they put somebody to death because they
believe they are sorcerers who go around magically stealing penises or
whatever insanity).

But a lot of so-called skeptics, and implicitly champions of rational
thought, make little or no sense at all if you really look closely at
what they are saying.

I ran into yet another one about two days ago. A couple years ago I
would have joined into the argument but I am just so tired of it, and
it is so inevitably futile, that I just said "the hell with it".

This one was a "CSICOP" This is people who are, theoretically, a team
of skeptics ... but the acronym/name they have chosen, really, tells
more of a story than they seem to realize. They think of themselves
as cops, the name is obviously not an accident ... it doesn't even
cross their minds to see the contradiction in that. If they are cops,
that implies that the people they are "arresting" are doing something
wrong, and that is the implicit thinking in a faux "skeptic's"
approach. They aren't "skeptically investigating" anything, they are
arresting bad people who commit the crime of thinking anything is
possible which the skeptic doesn't think is possible. That is not
"skeptical inquiry", it is a belief, attacking another belief. It's
religion.

So this CSICOP posts a paper titled "Mothman Solved!"

To really get this, you would really need to read the book, The
Mothman Prophecies. You won't really get it by seeing the movie, the
movie is very different from the book in too many ways.

The book is both less and more strange than the movie in many ways.
In addition to sightings of "Mothman", there is a long series of very
strange incidents, "men in black" type incidents, strange medical
phenomena (much like in the movie), a very strange series of incidents
(these are similar to some of what was in the movie) where people are
visited by other people, such as the author of the book, and the
visitors act very strange and do very strange things ... and then
later the visitors swear that they never visited the visitees and did
the things the visitees report.

Now don't get me wrong. I am not claiming that one single word of the
Mothman book is true. The guy who wrote the book, John Keel, is a
Subgenius minister, so for all I know the whole thing is a whole
well-written prank. But any time I discuss things like this, people
make a lot of assumptions such as that I believe every word of it
absolutely ... as with most other subjects, whether it's beliefs or
politics or music or whatever, people break it into "believers" and
"non-believers" and you are either one or the other. Just for
rhetorical purposes, imagine I am netiher.

For now I am just trying to describe the nature of the incidents
described in the book.

So this CSICOP posts this paper, "Mothman Solved!" and you read it ...
it really wanders a bit while avoiding his "solution" until the very
end ... but in the end his "solution" is, that the people who thought
they saw mothman actually were just seeing owls.

Now, as far as whether that particular point is true or not, I think
it is subject to argument. The idea that this whole town full of
people would suddenly completely forget what owls look like and
mistake them for otheworldly visitors strikes me as a real stretch ...
anything is -possible- and it isn't a completely illogical idea, but
it doesn't seem like the most reasonable first conclusion. Another
problem is that "Mothman" is described as larger than man-sized, which
owls aren't. How does he deal with this? He doesn't exactly, but in
the course of his "solution" he offhandedly says "assuming a lot of
exagerration ..." in reference to the size discrepancy ...

But regardless of that particular point, let's assume he's 100% right
about that particular point, just for purposes of discussion. His
"solution" doesn't come anywhere close to accounting for what is
described in the book.

But he doesn't hesitate, despite that, to call it "Mothman Solved!".
As if he has succesfully "busted" the whole thing, like a good cop.

From any kind of real scientific point of view, this is so shoddy and
half-assed that it is just staggering. Any scientist who applied a
process of analysis so absolutely insufficient and unlikely to a real
scientific inquiry would be laughed out of town very quickly. In
fact, regardless of the subject, he/she would probably be, ironically,
seen as exactly the kind of person he is supposedly "copping"; a
fanatical kook.

I use the example from "Mothman" just because it is relatively simple.
In many cases, the underlying thinking is just as bad, but it would
take a lot longer to break down and analyze why.

Most people I encountered when I was interacting with people involved
with occult/"new age" beliefs were really not very good at logical
thinking. A lot of them obviously were simply lunatics, nutcases.
Most of the rest of them came from a religious background, and really
never went very far beyond the "choice of beliefs", which has nothing
to do with logical thinking.

I came from a scientific background and a completely non-religious
upbringing, and kd from what I have seen her say comes from a
scientific background, which makes us both very unusual in that
community. To me, and I think to her, the complete ridiculousness of
most of the so-called "skeptics" and csicops is obvious. You don't
really have to look at most of them long to see that their arguments
are circular, subjective, and rarely hold water.

To me it really is ... or maybe I should say "was", because I have
really gotten to the point where I don't give as much of a shit about
it anymore ... it is, or was, very frustrating. I think there's a
whole side of existence we are rejecting because the "cops" tell us
it's all debunked. It's a waste.

Again, despite that, I look at skeptics and "believers", and I know
the skeptics really do perform a valuable service. There really is a
large amount of "belief" out there which is nuts. There are a lot of
fakes, loons, and charlatans.

But as with most other subjects, people don't seem capable of anything
but "you're for us or against us". Either/or, period. The skeptics
are often little better than the "believers".






--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
Let's put some of mommy's medicine in the fishtank and watch the
fish swim sideways!



Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 23:33:19 GMT

--------
Zapanaz wrote:



>But as with most other subjects, people don't seem capable of anything
>but "you're for us or against us". Either/or, period. The skeptics
>are often little better than the "believers".

Joe agrees with me. Joe is GOOD.

Salacia disagrees with me. Salacia is BAD.

Any questions?
--
I do what I want. That's why I always win.



Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:29:24 -0600

--------
On 18 Dec 2004 23:33:19 GMT, kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:

>Zapanaz wrote:
>
>
>
>>But as with most other subjects, people don't seem capable of anything
>>but "you're for us or against us". Either/or, period. The skeptics
>>are often little better than the "believers".
>
>Joe agrees with me. Joe is GOOD.
>
>Salacia disagrees with me. Salacia is BAD.
>
>Any questions?

Oh that's too simplistic!

I want to see ALL the trees in your forest!

How BAD am I?





Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:13:55 -0800

--------
On 18 Dec 2004 23:33:19 GMT, kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:

>Joe agrees with me. Joe is GOOD.
>
>Salacia disagrees with me. Salacia is BAD.
>
>Any questions?

No, monkey BAD, "Bob" GOOD.

http://joecosby.com/media/applets/bobwheel/bobwheel.htm

repeat, lather and rinse until the bad old questions go away forever.

broken brain GOOD. healed brain BAD.


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
The wind is the moon's imagination; wandering



Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:25:44 -0600

--------
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:48:19 -0800, Zapanaz
wrote:

Zapanaz:

(clipped to his wrap up for brevity)
>But as with most other subjects, people don't seem capable of anything
>but "you're for us or against us". Either/or, period. The skeptics
>are often little better than the "believers".

I absolutely agree with this. I've seen Randy and Susan Black**** ?
just completely trash people's beliefs like school yard bullies. They
appear to get a sadistic pleasure out of debunking and depantsing
paranormalists and faith healers. Not very professional or scientific
at all at times. But if no one was around to act as charlatan
unmaskers we'd be overrun and ruled by them. (Scratch that 'ruled'
thing..too late.)

(I have to admit that I find their methods caustic but also
enlightening, socially and morally valuable and really
entertaining.)

They are scientists though and subject to the rigours of the
scientific method. All it takes is one scientific thinker to debunk
THEM.

Salacia




Correspondent:: "Kevin Cunningham"
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:49:46 GMT

--------

"HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" wrote in
message news:f8l9s0toag4lceoul83te8i1eag5790a5i@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:48:19 -0800, Zapanaz
> wrote:
>
> Zapanaz:
>
> (clipped to his wrap up for brevity)
>>But as with most other subjects, people don't seem capable of anything
>>but "you're for us or against us". Either/or, period. The skeptics
>>are often little better than the "believers".
>
> I absolutely agree with this. I've seen Randy and Susan Black**** ?
> just completely trash people's beliefs like school yard bullies. They
> appear to get a sadistic pleasure out of debunking and depantsing
> paranormalists and faith healers. Not very professional or scientific
> at all at times. But if no one was around to act as charlatan
> unmaskers we'd be overrun and ruled by them. (Scratch that 'ruled'
> thing..too late.)
>
> (I have to admit that I find their methods caustic but also
> enlightening, socially and morally valuable and really
> entertaining.)
>
> They are scientists though and subject to the rigours of the
> scientific method. All it takes is one scientific thinker to debunk
> THEM.
>
> Salacia
>
You don't know how right you are. For all of you (you means all of you
except me) who think anything is always true in the future you will find
that you are wrong.

New theories about thing like string theory, domesticated animals, stroke
care, on and on, show us whole new ways to think. If I had walked into class
in '56 and let out a few child like thoughts on string theory I'd still be
in the nut hatch. Just about everything I think is true now is wrong and
when has it ever been different.

If you think that there is some guide to the Great Truth out there just
leave me alone and shut up. I'm old enough to have heard it all before.
That includes all the loosers who wanted to convert me to Indian assholes,
American assholes, Christian assholes and assholes in general.

Every day there is some jerk somewere that proves that yet another thing
that most people need to keep going is a lie. What new about that?

Rev. Doc. Junior Mints
Anti-Pope of Atlanta




Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:56:45 -0800

--------
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:25:44 -0600, HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
wrote:

>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:48:19 -0800, Zapanaz
> wrote:
>
>Zapanaz:
>
>(clipped to his wrap up for brevity)
>>But as with most other subjects, people don't seem capable of anything
>>but "you're for us or against us". Either/or, period. The skeptics
>>are often little better than the "believers".
>
>I absolutely agree with this. I've seen Randy and Susan Black**** ?
>just completely trash people's beliefs like school yard bullies. They
>appear to get a sadistic pleasure out of debunking and depantsing
>paranormalists and faith healers. Not very professional or scientific
>at all at times. But if no one was around to act as charlatan
>unmaskers we'd be overrun and ruled by them. (Scratch that 'ruled'
>thing..too late.)
>
>(I have to admit that I find their methods caustic but also
>enlightening, socially and morally valuable and really
>entertaining.)
>
>They are scientists though and subject to the rigours of the
>scientific method. All it takes is one scientific thinker to debunk
>THEM.
>
>Salacia
>

You know me personally, I don't even mind the ones who are jerks about
it, if they are at least half-way witty or something.

The ones that really piss me off ... the ones that really piss me off
are not necessarily skeptics, or one thing or another. The ones that
really piss me off always make me think of the fairy tale, "The
Emporer's New Clothes".

Here is a link if you have never read the story:

http://hca.gilead.org.il/emperor.html

Y'know actually, after hearing this story a lot when I was a kinder,
and reading the original now, I see there is a difference between the
way the story is usually told and the real version.

The story the way I always heard it growing up, when the innocent
little child points out that the emperor is buck nekkid, everybody
goes "HEY YEAH", -including- the emperor, and everybody sees THE TRUTH
glory hallelujah.

In the original though, the emperor and his retainers continue to
insist that there is nothing amiss.

Those are the ones who really piss me off no end. The ones who have
had something as obvious and undeniable as that pointed out to them,
and still insist on the delusion.

In real life though, I think most of the crowd would have quickly
sided with the emperor, and gone back to believing he was clothed.

That story has become like the whole Bible for me. It sums up my
whole impression of the world and of people. Like WMD's in Iraq. THE
EMPEROR IS NAKED. It couldn't be more obvious.

It bothers me less that the government would lie about it than that
people are so easily swayed to accept a completely transparent lie,
and nothing in the world will shake them from believing what the
emperor tells them to believe.

In real life, that FREAKS ME OUT. I lose it. I am just not capable
of dealing with it. The springs pop out of my brain.

Regardless of whether it's politics, skepticism, or whatever. The
ones who will maintain that yes, they do so have a winged green pig on
their shoulder, and no amount of clear, concise, rational explanation
will convince them that there isn't. At times like that, being a
bully and a jerk is all you CAN do. DO YOU WANT A DISH OF MILK FOR
YOUR PIG, GEORGE?






--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"Birds are the eyes of God." -- Shaman Leo



Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:20:27 -0800

--------
Salacia wrote:
> W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
>
> If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
> reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
> views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
> It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
> THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
> CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
>

Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.


Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:51:47 -0600

--------
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:20:27 -0800, nenslo wrote:

>Salacia wrote:
>> W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
>>
>> If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
>> reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
>> views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
>> It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
>> THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
>> CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
>>
>
>Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.

Sure she does. But she really overreacted when I made a
nonthreatening contribution to the thread. So things got nasty right
fast.


Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:00:27 -0800

--------
"HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:20:27 -0800, nenslo wrote:
>
> >Salacia wrote:
> >> W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
> >>
> >> If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
> >> reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
> >> views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
> >> It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
> >> THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
> >> CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
> >>
> >
> >Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.
>
> Sure she does. But she really overreacted when I made a
> nonthreatening contribution to the thread. So things got nasty right
> fast.

I meant you TOO. Everyone means everyone. It takes two assholes to
carry on a multipost slapfight, not one "right" person and one "wrong"
person. All those capital letters and cusswords and that SHUT UP, was
that before or after you stopped being nonthreatening? Was that you
being right and rational or what. GMAFB. If you two aren't going to
rip each other's shirts off then I'm out of here.


Correspondent:: HellPope Huey
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:39:25 GMT

--------
In article <41C5EBE9.406B7DFB@yahoox.com>, nenslo
wrote:

> I meant you TOO. Everyone means everyone. It takes two assholes to
> carry on a multipost slapfight, not one "right" person and one "wrong"
> person.

Not when I am the one who is in the right. There can be just one
asshole in such a situation. We are just so used to there being 2 OR
MORE that the concept of Right and Rong have become decrepit through
disuse. In this, you know I am right. Well, basically.

> All those capital letters and cusswords and that SHUT UP, was
> that before or after you stopped being nonthreatening? Was that you
> being right and rational or what. GMAFB. If you two aren't going to
> rip each other's shirts off then I'm out of here.

You know you want it to be their PANTS, admit it. First person who
ISN'T sporting Spider-Man or SpongeBob undies wins a fee pair of both in
MY size.

--

HellPope Huey
I am the Flaming Fudge Bag
on the Doorstep of Complacency.

"You've been more than a friend.
Even heroes can have heroes.
I've looked up to you for so long.
I'm sorry I didn't say so earlier.
There's so much I want to tell you...
not about...being heroes. But about being men.
About knowing that what we did
was always better than than what we are.
That was our gift. Our art."
- "Earth X"

"May I remind you,
we are not all creatures of the night?"
- "The Batman"


Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:52:00 -0600

--------
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:00:27 -0800, nenslo wrote:

>"HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:20:27 -0800, nenslo wrote:
>>
>> >Salacia wrote:
>> >> W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
>> >>
>> >> If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
>> >> reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
>> >> views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
>> >> It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
>> >> THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
>> >> CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.
>>
>> Sure she does. But she really overreacted when I made a
>> nonthreatening contribution to the thread. So things got nasty right
>> fast.
>
>I meant you TOO. Everyone means everyone. It takes two assholes to
>carry on a multipost slapfight, not one "right" person and one "wrong"
>person. All those capital letters and cusswords and that SHUT UP, was
>that before or after you stopped being nonthreatening? Was that you
>being right and rational or what. GMAFB. If you two aren't going to
>rip each other's shirts off then I'm out of here.

FUCK OFF, MAN!!! Can't you see I'm licking my doggamn wounds today!!

~sniffle~




Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:02:28 -0800

--------
"HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" wrote:
>
>
> FUCK OFF, MAN!!! Can't you see I'm licking my doggamn wounds today!!
>

Hey look, KOSHER PICKLING SALT!!! Rub a dub dub!


Correspondent:: "Rev. Ivan Stang"
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 12:22:30 -0500

--------
In article <41C52BBB.B25E0C6@yahoox.com>, nenslo
wrote:

> Salacia wrote:
> > W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
> >
> > If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
> > reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
> > views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
> > It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
> > THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
> > CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
> >
>
> Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.


GOD DAMN IT, NENSLO, YOU FUCKING FUCK!! They do NOT! On the contrary,
AS ANY ONE SINGLE BRAIN CELL ON ITS OWN COULD TELL, everyone has a
right to react IRRATIONALLY against EMOTONALISM. What in the living
FUCK do you think this whole bitter argument is ABOUT?!? You had it
COMPLETELY BACK-ASSWARDS. So SHUT THE FUCK UP that yapping flapping
TRAP of yours, you irrational nitwit, OR I WILL RIP YOUR SHIRT OFF.

You know PERFECTLY WELL that YOUR BRAIN IS ALREADY THINKING, "STANG IS
RIGHT YET AGAIN."

--
The SubGenius Foundation, Inc.
(4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected, Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
P.O. Box 181417, Cleveland, OH 44118 (fax 216-320-9528)
Dobbs-Approved Authorized Commercial Outreach of The Church of the SubGenius
SubSITE: http://www.subgenius.com PRABOB


Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:50:17 GMT

--------


"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:

> In article <41C52BBB.B25E0C6@yahoox.com>, nenslo
> wrote:
>
> > Salacia wrote:
> > > W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
> > >
> > > If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
> > > reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
> > > views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
> > > It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
> > > THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
> > > CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
> > >
> >
> > Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.
>
> GOD DAMN IT, NENSLO, YOU FUCKING FUCK!! They do NOT! On the contrary,
> AS ANY ONE SINGLE BRAIN CELL ON ITS OWN COULD TELL, everyone has a
> right to react IRRATIONALLY against EMOTONALISM. What in the living
> FUCK do you think this whole bitter argument is ABOUT?!? You had it
> COMPLETELY BACK-ASSWARDS.

I thought it was "bass-ackwards"

I'm jus' sayin'!





Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:01:37 -0800

--------
"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
>
> nenslo
> wrote:
>
> > Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.
>
> GOD DAMN IT, NENSLO, YOU FUCKING FUCK!! They do NOT! On the contrary,
> AS ANY ONE SINGLE BRAIN CELL ON ITS OWN COULD TELL, everyone has a
> right to react IRRATIONALLY against EMOTONALISM. What in the living
> FUCK do you think this whole bitter argument is ABOUT?!? You had it
> COMPLETELY BACK-ASSWARDS. So SHUT THE FUCK UP that yapping flapping
> TRAP of yours, you irrational nitwit, OR I WILL RIP YOUR SHIRT OFF.
>
> You know PERFECTLY WELL that YOUR BRAIN IS ALREADY THINKING, "STANG IS
> RIGHT YET AGAIN."

I agree with this post.


Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:44:09 -0600

--------
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 12:22:30 -0500, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
wrote:

>In article <41C52BBB.B25E0C6@yahoox.com>, nenslo
>wrote:
>
>> Salacia wrote:
>> > W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?
>> >
>> > If you are soooo upset by this one person's spin on their
>> > reality....and so CORRECT publish a fucking paper that rebuts her
>> > views. Duh. Put up or SHUT UP!
>> > It doesn't have to appear in an academic journal. MANY INDEPENDENT
>> > THINKERS EVEN PUBLISH COHERENT ARGUMENTS ON PERSONAL WEBPAGES. FOR
>> > CHEAP!! some of the kooky ones start cults and stuff too.
>> >
>>
>> Everyone has a right to react emotionally against irrationality.
>
>
>GOD DAMN IT, NENSLO, YOU FUCKING FUCK!! They do NOT! On the contrary,
>AS ANY ONE SINGLE BRAIN CELL ON ITS OWN COULD TELL, everyone has a
>right to react IRRATIONALLY against EMOTONALISM. What in the living
>FUCK do you think this whole bitter argument is ABOUT?!? You had it
>COMPLETELY BACK-ASSWARDS. So SHUT THE FUCK UP that yapping flapping
>TRAP of yours, you irrational nitwit, OR I WILL RIP YOUR SHIRT OFF.
>
>You know PERFECTLY WELL that YOUR BRAIN IS ALREADY THINKING, "STANG IS
>RIGHT YET AGAIN."



Correspondent:: "Paul Casino"
Date: 19 Dec 2004 01:42:40 -0800

--------
>W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?

I dunno. But I'll bet it might involve a severe beating with a pipe
wrench, a few well-placed one-liners, a cigar and two gallons of
gasoline. And your house.



Correspondent:: HellPope Huey
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:13:43 GMT

--------
In article <1103449360.306091.261200@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Paul Casino" wrote:

> >W.W.N.D.? What would Nenslo Do?

The Nude Macarena, in a public fountain, while quoting Goethe? Hey, I
took a shot.

--

HellPope Huey
I am the Flaming Fudge Bag
on the Doorstep of Complacency.

"You've been more than a friend.
Even heroes can have heroes.
I've looked up to you for so long.
I'm sorry I didn't say so earlier.
There's so much I want to tell you...
not about...being heroes. But about being men.
About knowing that what we did
was always better than than what we are.
That was our gift. Our art."
- "Earth X"

"May I remind you,
we are not all creatures of the night?"
- "The Batman"


Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:04:05 GMT

--------


kdetal wrote:

> HdMrsSalaciathe Overseer wrote:
>
> >>>> I hate stupid people.
> >>>> And that goes triple for smart stupid people.
> >>
> >>>OK, I give up. Who pisses you off?
> >>
> >>http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/Anabiosis%201983.htm
> >
> >Ahhhhh...yesssssss. Susan Blackmmore.
> >
> >Susan Blackmore is a high profile skeptic.
> >
> >Here's my take on the skeptics. i love them. i love them. You as a
> >self proclaimed mystic and me as a flakey artist type need to snuggle
> >up nice and close to the skeptical community and all the other active
> >'rational thinking' communities. Yes, logic is like driving all the
> >time in first gear...but slow and steady caution keeps one from
> >tipping over into new agey lotusland twittiness.
> >
> >It's also socially important at this time because the small bastions
> >of rational thinking that still exist in this world are the few
> >institutions that are keeping many societies from becoming Taliban
> >Afghanistans, Irans, or fundamental xtian Jonestowns.
> >
> >Without the duct tape of rationality keeping the irrational herd
> >instinct penned in, crack pot You and crack pot me and crack pot
> >everyone else on this list would be unorthodox kristian bonfire
> >kindling.
> >
> >Sorry if this doesn't make much sense, i'm in a hurry.
> >
> >Salacia
>
> Wrong. *I* am a skeptic. Of the pyrrhonian variety. Therefore I recognize
> false skeptics instantly.
>
> And anyone with a brain should be able to recognize arguments built on
> subjective conjecture.
>
> Most people who proclaim themselves skeptics are nothing of the sort. Again,
> smart, incredibly STUPID people who have no understanding that a logical
> argument can be completely internally coherent and still COMPLETELY wrong when
> based on false premises. Or have no idea how to construct valid and reliable
> "proofs", no acknowledgement of the temporary-ness of any fact due to the fact
> that a larger "set" of facts may disprove anything at any moment. And mostly-
> HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE ART OF SKEPTICISM REALLY MEANS.
>
> So don't fucking lecture ME about logic and skepticism.
>
> I hate ALL stupid people STUPID harebrained mystics, STUPID
> pseudo-intellectual posturing, STUPID airy fairy artists who can't fucking buy
> a cup of coffee and especially INCREDIBLY STUPID people in academic communities
> who are so FUCKING STUPID they don't even KNOW that they NEVER LEARNED HOW TO
> THINK PROPERLY.
>

I guess that I have thoughts tangential to this, if not exactly parallel.

There was a study that I can't relocate immediately, but the jist was
that subjects scoring in the bottom 12th centile rated themselves at 62%
or above, better than average--

One thing that reminded me of this again recently was an angry rant
by the parent of a kid in a school for gifted and talented. He was indignant
about the results of "No Child Left Behind," which seemed to be that
neither did any child get ahead. For it is certain that if some get ahead,
some get left behind. The evident trend is toward a Golden Mean of
mediocrity. A game of musical chairs was not permitted because some
kids get left out!

After this recent election, I am rather disenchanted with voting.
Everyone's vote counts the same (granted that voting has only a
weak linkage with actual policy decision) but stupid people's votes
and informed, well-considered votes all count the same. What kind
of a deal is that? Does it all average out somehow? I don't think so.

One guy I met said that about 80% of the World is incompetent;
maybe so, a grim prospect.

You know, being able to see the Truth might be a curse like
the gift of Cassandra, you can see but nobody believes you.



Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:17:15 -0800

--------
kdetal wrote:
>
> And anyone with a brain should be able to recognize arguments built on
> subjective conjecture.
>

Or read Armenian. Thing is, skills must be learned, whereas emotional
reactions and subjective conjecture come naturally. Rationality is a
skill which requires thought and practice, and has little use in
everyday life. It requires a major retooling of personal habits and the
discarding of all the stimulus - response reactionism we have learned
from infancy.

Hating irrational people is like hating people who can't play the
balalaika. Nobody's saying you can't or shouldn't, but WHY???


Correspondent:: Artemia Salina
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:41:30 -0500

--------
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:17:15 -0800, nenslo wrote:

> kdetal wrote:
>>
>> And anyone with a brain should be able to recognize arguments built on
>> subjective conjecture.
>>
>
> Or read Armenian. Thing is, skills must be learned, whereas emotional
> reactions and subjective conjecture come naturally. Rationality is a
> skill which requires thought and practice, and has little use in
> everyday life. It requires a major retooling of personal habits and the
> discarding of all the stimulus - response reactionism we have learned
> from infancy.
>
> Hating irrational people is like hating people who can't play the
> balalaika. Nobody's saying you can't or shouldn't, but WHY???

Its akin to hating ignorance. Ignorance, or the lack of interest
in acquiring knowledge, causes many problems in society. Reactionism
is comparable in that it is the lack of interest in being rational,
and like ignorance, it causes many problems in society as well.

Hating something because it causes problems certainly seems reasonable,
emotional reaction-wise.


--
0:-) 0:-) 0:-) 0:-) (-:0 (-:0 (-:0 (-:0
0:-) Artemia Salina (-:0
0:-) Surrounded by Angels (-:0
0:-) 0:-) 0:-) 0:-) (-:0 (-:0 (-:0 (-:0



Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:15:09 -0800

--------
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:41:30 -0500, Artemia Salina
wrote:

>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:17:15 -0800, nenslo wrote:
>
>> kdetal wrote:
>>>
>>> And anyone with a brain should be able to recognize arguments built on
>>> subjective conjecture.
>>>
>>
>> Or read Armenian. Thing is, skills must be learned, whereas emotional
>> reactions and subjective conjecture come naturally. Rationality is a
>> skill which requires thought and practice, and has little use in
>> everyday life. It requires a major retooling of personal habits and the
>> discarding of all the stimulus - response reactionism we have learned
>> from infancy.
>>
>> Hating irrational people is like hating people who can't play the
>> balalaika. Nobody's saying you can't or shouldn't, but WHY???
>
>Its akin to hating ignorance. Ignorance, or the lack of interest
>in acquiring knowledge, causes many problems in society. Reactionism
>is comparable in that it is the lack of interest in being rational,
>and like ignorance, it causes many problems in society as well.
>
>Hating something because it causes problems certainly seems reasonable,
>emotional reaction-wise.

Well I agree, BUT, I really fucking hate people who can't play the
balalaika. Those mother fuckers.

--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"yoga is preventing the mind-stuff from
assuming one of its forms" -patanjali



Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 23:39:28 GMT

--------
Salacia wrote:

>>It's also socially important at this time because the small bastions
> >of rational thinking that still exist in this world are the few
> >institutions that are keeping many societies from becoming Taliban
> >Afghanistans, Irans, or fundamental xtian Jonestowns.
> >
> >Without the duct tape of rationality keeping the irrational herd
> >instinct penned in, crack pot You and crack pot me and crack pot
> >everyone else on this list would be unorthodox kristian bonfire
> >kindling.

I agree with this. Bad rational arguments are still better than the Crusades.

The world would just be wise to realize that bad rational arguments can also
kindle Crusades.

I am done with seriousness for the day. Back to feces, disfiguration and the
Flintstones.
--
I do what I want. That's why I always win.



Correspondent:: mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 15:00:53 GMT

--------
>Pseudo-intellectuals who structure arguments in non-scientific genres such as
>philosophy, theoology and psychology in a pseudo-scientific manner and
>publish
>them in pseudo-professional journals as if what they say has ANY MEANING AT
>ALL, simply because they understand how to posit a rational argument and use
>vocabulary, regardless of the fact that EVERY FOUNDATIONAL SUPPOSITION of
>their
>arguments is circular and based on NO KNOWN ACTUAL FACTS, since the
>particulars
>they are discussing have only SUPPOSITIONAL, SUBJECTIVE and POPULAR CONSENSUS
>FOUNDATIONS to begin with.
>
>I hate stupid people.
>And that goes triple for smart stupid people.

Well, luckily for us, the "Smart Stupid People" are being pushed out of power
the the "Stupid Stupid People"

I do'nt know if thats an improvemnet, but just look around.

As DEVO once said: "De-evolution is REAL,just look around!"


MSHOTZ: The Post Post Modern Man

"War hath no Fury like a non-combatants"

Charles E. Montague


Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 16:38:01 GMT

--------
mshotz wrote:

>Well, luckily for us, the "Smart Stupid People" are being pushed out of power
>{by} the "Stupid Stupid People"

You know, THIS seems to be true. At the moment. In my opinion. At this place
and time.

I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart stupids or
the stupid stupids. Tough one.



--
Pissing me off never means that you're right. Only that you are an idiot.



Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:49:35 -0800

--------
On 18 Dec 2004 16:38:01 GMT, kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:

>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart stupids or
>the stupid stupids. Tough one.

that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
think about that question any more.

We're even stupider than both of them! Praise "Bob"!


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
Let's put some of mommy's medicine in the fishtank and watch the
fish swim sideways!



Correspondent:: kdetal@aol.com (kdetal)
Date: 18 Dec 2004 23:42:32 GMT

--------
Zapanaz wrote:
>kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
>
>>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart stupids
>or
>>the stupid stupids. Tough one.
>
>that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
>think about that question any more.

But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?


--
I do what I want. That's why I always win.



Correspondent:: "Rev. Ivan Stang"
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 12:35:53 -0500

--------
In article <20041218184232.06022.00001608@mb-m21.aol.com>, kdetal
wrote:

> Zapanaz wrote:
> >kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
> >
> >>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart stupids
> >or
> >>the stupid stupids. Tough one.
> >
> >that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
> >think about that question any more.
>
> But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?
>
>
> --
> I do what I want. That's why I always win.
>


Let's get back to the tearing each others' shirts off part. I have a
video camera. (THANKS TO SALACIA!)

But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's kookbasher show,
"Bullshit"? I think it's the greatest TV series ever made, well, at
least since Futurama. Their episode on PETA made me laugh so hard I
bout like to bust a gut. "I WOULD KILL EVERY LAST BONOBO CHIMPANZEE
MYSELF IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE THE LIFE OF ONE JUNKIE WITH AIDS!"
was one memorable line from that.

It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely emotional
way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and maddening from start to
finish. Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.

--
The SubGenius Foundation, Inc.
(4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected, Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
P.O. Box 181417, Cleveland, OH 44118 (fax 216-320-9528)
Dobbs-Approved Authorized Commercial Outreach of The Church of the SubGenius
SubSITE: http://www.subgenius.com PRABOB


Correspondent:: purple
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:29:11 -0500

--------
On 12/19/04 12:35 PM, in article
191220041235530560%stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
wrote:

> Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.

I did you guys (and the U.S.), am doing you guys (and the U.S.), and will
continue to do you guys (and the U.S.). And that's just a couple of hours a
week (on you guys, not the U.S.), leaving me lots of time to do bigger, more
important projects.

As for Penn and Teller, not funny enough - making you a MORON!!!!!!!


The Great Bob Dobbs



Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:07:39 -0800

--------
"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
>
> In article <20041218184232.06022.00001608@mb-m21.aol.com>, kdetal
> wrote:
>
> > Zapanaz wrote:
> > >kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
> > >
> > >>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart stupids
> > >or
> > >>the stupid stupids. Tough one.
> > >
> > >that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
> > >think about that question any more.
> >
> > But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?
> >
> >
> > --
> > I do what I want. That's why I always win.
> >
>
> Let's get back to the tearing each others' shirts off part. I have a
> video camera. (THANKS TO SALACIA!)
>
> But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's kookbasher show,
> "Bullshit"? I think it's the greatest TV series ever made, well, at
> least since Futurama. Their episode on PETA made me laugh so hard I
> bout like to bust a gut. "I WOULD KILL EVERY LAST BONOBO CHIMPANZEE
> MYSELF IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE THE LIFE OF ONE JUNKIE WITH AIDS!"
> was one memorable line from that.
>
> It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely emotional
> way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and maddening from start to
> finish. Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.
>

I read an article by the big ugly loudmouth guy of Penn and Teller that
he wrote for the Skeptical Inquirer telling why he was a skeptic. He
got a "Kreskin's ESP" game when he was a kid and couldn't make the
pendulum work. Made him so sad and mad (i.e. "rational") that he's been
on a rabid take no prisoners jihad for calmly reasoned clarity of
thought ever since.

I became a MetaSkeptic when I saw how many "Skeptics" base their
position on emotional reaction, and use fallacious arguments and ridicule.


Correspondent:: "Rev. Ivan Stang"
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:33:00 -0500

--------
In article <41C5ED98.F192B5DC@yahoox.com>, nenslo
wrote:

> "Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
> >
> > In article <20041218184232.06022.00001608@mb-m21.aol.com>, kdetal
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Zapanaz wrote:
> > > >kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart
> > > >>stupids
> > > >or
> > > >>the stupid stupids. Tough one.
> > > >
> > > >that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
> > > >think about that question any more.
> > >
> > > But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > I do what I want. That's why I always win.
> > >
> >
> > Let's get back to the tearing each others' shirts off part. I have a
> > video camera. (THANKS TO SALACIA!)
> >
> > But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's kookbasher show,
> > "Bullshit"? I think it's the greatest TV series ever made, well, at
> > least since Futurama. Their episode on PETA made me laugh so hard I
> > bout like to bust a gut. "I WOULD KILL EVERY LAST BONOBO CHIMPANZEE
> > MYSELF IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE THE LIFE OF ONE JUNKIE WITH AIDS!"
> > was one memorable line from that.
> >
> > It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely emotional
> > way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and maddening from start to
> > finish. Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.
> >
>
> I read an article by the big ugly loudmouth guy of Penn and Teller

Penn -- he's the one who's your fellow SubGenius minister.

>that
> he wrote for the Skeptical Inquirer telling why he was a skeptic. He
> got a "Kreskin's ESP" game when he was a kid and couldn't make the
> pendulum work. Made him so sad and mad (i.e. "rational") that he's been
> on a rabid take no prisoners jihad for calmly reasoned clarity of
> thought ever since.
>
> I became a MetaSkeptic when I saw how many "Skeptics" base their
> position on emotional reaction, and use fallacious arguments and ridicule.

But without the ridicule, it's BORRR-ing.

So, as someone who does kook-bashing comedy largely to "believer"
audiences (Starwood etc.) I have had to find ways to insult everyone's
most cherished beliefs relatively gently. Most of the believers believe
that the next believer over in the row of seats is a kook, so a polite
and indirect ridicule works -- you poke fun at the folks sitting NEXT
to the folks you're ADDRESSING. So to speak. They like it even better
if you *acknowledge that you are doing this.* Because they AREN'T
STUPID necessarily.

The mistake the dumb skeptic makes is to believe the believers are
necessarily dumb. Obviously, one can be very intelligent and yet
believe all manner of silly hogwash. That's one of the TRUE REAL-LIFE
MAGICAL MIRACLES which gives the lie to wholesale skepticism.

If by MetaSkeptic you mean one who is skeptical even of the skeptics,
I'm with you. Since the dumb skeptic already "knows," he too is a Tue
Believer. "We don't know whose aquarium we might be in," is the way I
put it.

On a basic level, everyone believes everyone ELSE is a BIT of a kook at
least, as I'm sure they all are. Only from the loftiest perches, such
as mine, may one confidently sit back and judge the relative kookliness
of others, without that judgement being colored by emotions, ignorance,
prejudice, sympathy, hunger for candy bars, sour grapes, envy, etc.

--
The SubGenius Foundation, Inc.
(4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected, Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
P.O. Box 181417, Cleveland, OH 44118 (fax 216-320-9528)
Dobbs-Approved Authorized Commercial Outreach of The Church of the SubGenius
SubSITE: http://www.subgenius.com PRABOB


Correspondent:: purple
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:09:32 -0500

--------
On 12/20/04 9:33 AM, in article
201220040933003735%stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
wrote:

> In article <41C5ED98.F192B5DC@yahoox.com>, nenslo
> wrote:
>
>> "Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <20041218184232.06022.00001608@mb-m21.aol.com>, kdetal
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Zapanaz wrote:
>>>>> kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart
>>>>>> stupids
>>>>> or
>>>>>> the stupid stupids. Tough one.
>>>>>
>>>>> that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
>>>>> think about that question any more.
>>>>
>>>> But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> I do what I want. That's why I always win.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Let's get back to the tearing each others' shirts off part. I have a
>>> video camera. (THANKS TO SALACIA!)
>>>
>>> But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's kookbasher show,
>>> "Bullshit"? I think it's the greatest TV series ever made, well, at
>>> least since Futurama. Their episode on PETA made me laugh so hard I
>>> bout like to bust a gut. "I WOULD KILL EVERY LAST BONOBO CHIMPANZEE
>>> MYSELF IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE THE LIFE OF ONE JUNKIE WITH AIDS!"
>>> was one memorable line from that.
>>>
>>> It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely emotional
>>> way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and maddening from start to
>>> finish. Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.
>>>
>>
>> I read an article by the big ugly loudmouth guy of Penn and Teller
>
> Penn -- he's the one who's your fellow SubGenius minister.
>
>> that
>> he wrote for the Skeptical Inquirer telling why he was a skeptic. He
>> got a "Kreskin's ESP" game when he was a kid and couldn't make the
>> pendulum work. Made him so sad and mad (i.e. "rational") that he's been
>> on a rabid take no prisoners jihad for calmly reasoned clarity of
>> thought ever since.
>>
>> I became a MetaSkeptic when I saw how many "Skeptics" base their
>> position on emotional reaction, and use fallacious arguments and ridicule.
>
> But without the ridicule, it's BORRR-ing.
>
> So, as someone who does kook-bashing comedy largely to "believer"
> audiences (Starwood etc.) I have had to find ways to insult everyone's
> most cherished beliefs relatively gently. Most of the believers believe
> that the next believer over in the row of seats is a kook, so a polite
> and indirect ridicule works -- you poke fun at the folks sitting NEXT
> to the folks you're ADDRESSING. So to speak. They like it even better
> if you *acknowledge that you are doing this.* Because they AREN'T
> STUPID necessarily.
>
> The mistake the dumb skeptic makes is to believe the believers are
> necessarily dumb. Obviously, one can be very intelligent and yet
> believe all manner of silly hogwash. That's one of the TRUE REAL-LIFE
> MAGICAL MIRACLES which gives the lie to wholesale skepticism.
>
> If by MetaSkeptic you mean one who is skeptical even of the skeptics,
> I'm with you. Since the dumb skeptic already "knows," he too is a Tue
> Believer. "We don't know whose aquarium we might be in," is the way I
> put it.
>
> On a basic level, everyone believes everyone ELSE is a BIT of a kook at
> least, as I'm sure they all are. Only from the loftiest perches, such
> as mine, may one confidently sit back and judge the relative kookliness
> of others, without that judgement being colored by emotions, ignorance,
> prejudice, sympathy, hunger for candy bars, sour grapes, envy, etc.

Skeptic(al) about WHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The Great Bob Dobbs



Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:24:56 -0800

--------
"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
>
> If by MetaSkeptic you mean one who is skeptical even of the skeptics,
> I'm with you. Since the dumb skeptic already "knows," he too is a Tue
> Believer. "We don't know whose aquarium we might be in," is the way I
> put it.
>
> On a basic level, everyone believes everyone ELSE is a BIT of a kook at
> least, as I'm sure they all are. Only from the loftiest perches, such
> as mine, may one confidently sit back and judge the relative kookliness
> of others, without that judgement being colored by emotions, ignorance,
> prejudice, sympathy, hunger for candy bars, sour grapes, envy, etc.
>

One thing you learn, no, two things you learn living in the Kooks
Museum, as I do, are:

When "skeptics" know only ONE thing about a religion or belief, it's
always the SAME thing.

The craziest stupidest religion or belief you ever heard of may be the
only thing that is keeping another person's life from being a disastrous
nightmare of failure and misery.


Correspondent:: asscoassc@aol.comBLOWME (AssCo Assc)
Date: 20 Dec 2004 23:44:39 GMT

--------
<< The craziest stupidest religion or belief you ever heard of may be the
only thing that is keeping another person's life from being a disastrous
nightmare of failure and misery.
>>

"may be" . . . ?





ooOOoo

It petrifies the tongue. . .
Shoots arrows through the lung. . .
Guttural rending pain . . .
. . . and next it Sclerotifies the brain
-- Copyright 2004 Ilya Shambat


Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:33:35 -0800

--------
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:33:00 -0500, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
wrote:

>In article <41C5ED98.F192B5DC@yahoox.com>, nenslo
>wrote:
>
>> "Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
>> >
>> > In article <20041218184232.06022.00001608@mb-m21.aol.com>, kdetal
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Zapanaz wrote:
>> > > >kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart
>> > > >>stupids
>> > > >or
>> > > >>the stupid stupids. Tough one.
>> > > >
>> > > >that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
>> > > >think about that question any more.
>> > >
>> > > But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > I do what I want. That's why I always win.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Let's get back to the tearing each others' shirts off part. I have a
>> > video camera. (THANKS TO SALACIA!)
>> >
>> > But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's kookbasher show,
>> > "Bullshit"? I think it's the greatest TV series ever made, well, at
>> > least since Futurama. Their episode on PETA made me laugh so hard I
>> > bout like to bust a gut. "I WOULD KILL EVERY LAST BONOBO CHIMPANZEE
>> > MYSELF IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE THE LIFE OF ONE JUNKIE WITH AIDS!"
>> > was one memorable line from that.
>> >
>> > It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely emotional
>> > way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and maddening from start to
>> > finish. Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.
>> >
>>
>> I read an article by the big ugly loudmouth guy of Penn and Teller
>
>Penn -- he's the one who's your fellow SubGenius minister.
>
>>that
>> he wrote for the Skeptical Inquirer telling why he was a skeptic. He
>> got a "Kreskin's ESP" game when he was a kid and couldn't make the
>> pendulum work. Made him so sad and mad (i.e. "rational") that he's been
>> on a rabid take no prisoners jihad for calmly reasoned clarity of
>> thought ever since.
>>
>> I became a MetaSkeptic when I saw how many "Skeptics" base their
>> position on emotional reaction, and use fallacious arguments and ridicule.
>
>But without the ridicule, it's BORRR-ing.
>
>So, as someone who does kook-bashing comedy largely to "believer"
>audiences (Starwood etc.) I have had to find ways to insult everyone's
>most cherished beliefs relatively gently. Most of the believers believe
>that the next believer over in the row of seats is a kook, so a polite
>and indirect ridicule works -- you poke fun at the folks sitting NEXT
>to the folks you're ADDRESSING. So to speak. They like it even better
>if you *acknowledge that you are doing this.* Because they AREN'T
>STUPID necessarily.
>
>The mistake the dumb skeptic makes is to believe the believers are
>necessarily dumb. Obviously, one can be very intelligent and yet
>believe all manner of silly hogwash. That's one of the TRUE REAL-LIFE
>MAGICAL MIRACLES which gives the lie to wholesale skepticism.
>
>If by MetaSkeptic you mean one who is skeptical even of the skeptics,
>I'm with you. Since the dumb skeptic already "knows," he too is a Tue
>Believer. "We don't know whose aquarium we might be in," is the way I
>put it.
>
>On a basic level, everyone believes everyone ELSE is a BIT of a kook at
>least, as I'm sure they all are. Only from the loftiest perches, such
>as mine, may one confidently sit back and judge the relative kookliness
>of others, without that judgement being colored by emotions, ignorance,
>prejudice, sympathy, hunger for candy bars, sour grapes, envy, etc.

Don't ever lower your standards.

--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
Drop Down on all Fours and Stick Your Ass High
in the Air: You are Sexy as Hell! Young, Firm
Breasts, a High, Tight Rump...Why Do You Have
to Do the Drug 'Thang'? Damn, Bitch, You are
So Pretty!
--anti-drug advice to the US Air Force



Correspondent:: "Rev. Ivan Stang"
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:28:29 -0500

--------
In article <8aoes0poad2jnr21o11c1qo6t97is2kkjt@4ax.com>, Zapanaz wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:33:00 -0500, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
> wrote:
>
> >In article <41C5ED98.F192B5DC@yahoox.com>, nenslo
> >wrote:
> >
> >> "Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > In article <20041218184232.06022.00001608@mb-m21.aol.com>, kdetal
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Zapanaz wrote:
> >> > > >kdetal@aol.com (kdetal) wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >>I'd have to think hard about who gets on my nerves more. The smart
> >> > > >>stupids
> >> > > >or
> >> > > >>the stupid stupids. Tough one.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >that's why I joined the Church of the Subgenius. I don't have to
> >> > > >think about that question any more.
> >> > >
> >> > > But WHAT WOULD NENSLO DO?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > I do what I want. That's why I always win.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Let's get back to the tearing each others' shirts off part. I have a
> >> > video camera. (THANKS TO SALACIA!)
> >> >
> >> > But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's kookbasher show,
> >> > "Bullshit"? I think it's the greatest TV series ever made, well, at
> >> > least since Futurama. Their episode on PETA made me laugh so hard I
> >> > bout like to bust a gut. "I WOULD KILL EVERY LAST BONOBO CHIMPANZEE
> >> > MYSELF IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD SAVE THE LIFE OF ONE JUNKIE WITH AIDS!"
> >> > was one memorable line from that.
> >> >
> >> > It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely emotional
> >> > way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and maddening from start to
> >> > finish. Jeepers, I hope they never do a show about US.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I read an article by the big ugly loudmouth guy of Penn and Teller
> >
> >Penn -- he's the one who's your fellow SubGenius minister.
> >
> >>that
> >> he wrote for the Skeptical Inquirer telling why he was a skeptic. He
> >> got a "Kreskin's ESP" game when he was a kid and couldn't make the
> >> pendulum work. Made him so sad and mad (i.e. "rational") that he's been
> >> on a rabid take no prisoners jihad for calmly reasoned clarity of
> >> thought ever since.
> >>
> >> I became a MetaSkeptic when I saw how many "Skeptics" base their
> >> position on emotional reaction, and use fallacious arguments and ridicule.
> >
> >But without the ridicule, it's BORRR-ing.
> >
> >So, as someone who does kook-bashing comedy largely to "believer"
> >audiences (Starwood etc.) I have had to find ways to insult everyone's
> >most cherished beliefs relatively gently. Most of the believers believe
> >that the next believer over in the row of seats is a kook, so a polite
> >and indirect ridicule works -- you poke fun at the folks sitting NEXT
> >to the folks you're ADDRESSING. So to speak. They like it even better
> >if you *acknowledge that you are doing this.* Because they AREN'T
> >STUPID necessarily.
> >
> >The mistake the dumb skeptic makes is to believe the believers are
> >necessarily dumb. Obviously, one can be very intelligent and yet
> >believe all manner of silly hogwash. That's one of the TRUE REAL-LIFE
> >MAGICAL MIRACLES which gives the lie to wholesale skepticism.
> >
> >If by MetaSkeptic you mean one who is skeptical even of the skeptics,
> >I'm with you. Since the dumb skeptic already "knows," he too is a Tue
> >Believer. "We don't know whose aquarium we might be in," is the way I
> >put it.
> >
> >On a basic level, everyone believes everyone ELSE is a BIT of a kook at
> >least, as I'm sure they all are. Only from the loftiest perches, such
> >as mine, may one confidently sit back and judge the relative kookliness
> >of others, without that judgement being colored by emotions, ignorance,
> >prejudice, sympathy, hunger for candy bars, sour grapes, envy, etc.
>
> Don't ever lower your standards.

Hey, you ripped that line off from Yvonne Frost!

--
The SubGenius Foundation, Inc.
(4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected, Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
P.O. Box 181417, Cleveland, OH 44118 (fax 216-320-9528)
Dobbs-Approved Authorized Commercial Outreach of The Church of the SubGenius
SubSITE: http://www.subgenius.com PRABOB


Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:17:17 -0800

--------
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:28:29 -0500, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
wrote:

>> Don't ever lower your standards.
>
>Hey, you ripped that line off from Yvonne Frost!

No, I CHANNELLED it!


It's a great line. It's so OPAQUE.



--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
It is not a lack of love,
but a lack of friendship
that makes unhappy marriages.
- Friedrich Nietzsche



Correspondent:: "Zevaluz"
Date: 20 Dec 2004 08:40:22 -0800

--------
Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
> But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's
> kookbasher show, "Bullshit"?
(coupleosentencessnippedhere)
> It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely > emotional
way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and > maddening from start
to finish. Jeepers, I hope they never > do a show about US.

It's very entertaining, maybe slightly inaccurate at parts.

-I generally hop up and down when they're equating yoga with
stretching. I gained quite a bit of muscle doing ashtanga yoga and
lost weight as a result - I 'get' that the end philosophy is 'just do
nice things for yourself, don't couch it in mysticism', but I want to
do harmful things to the image on my monitor when I see that part of
the episode.

What would there possibly be in the Church of SubGenius to tear into?
What would they call bullshit that you (we/us/them!) haven't already
done in a thousand skilled ways?



Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:29:39 -0800

--------
Zevaluz wrote:
>
> Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
> > But hey, what do ya'll think of Penn and Teller's
> > kookbasher show, "Bullshit"?
> (coupleosentencessnippedhere)
> > It's a show that tears into irrationality in an extremely > emotional
> way. An absolute gas, alternately hilarious and > maddening from start
> to finish. Jeepers, I hope they never > do a show about US.
>
> It's very entertaining, maybe slightly inaccurate at parts.
>
> -I generally hop up and down when they're equating yoga with
> stretching. I gained quite a bit of muscle doing ashtanga yoga and
> lost weight as a result - I 'get' that the end philosophy is 'just do
> nice things for yourself, don't couch it in mysticism', but I want to
> do harmful things to the image on my monitor when I see that part of
> the episode.

Some people REALLY LIKE mysticism. It has made me very happy at times
and I am sure many of you will be sorry to know it kept me alive when
nothing else would. I am still fondly devoted to a couple of deities
whom I know very well never existed. Except when I worship them, THEY
DO EXIST.

Why believe in an atom you've never seen but not a god you've never
seen, when the atom will never love you back?


Correspondent:: "Rev. Ivan Stang"
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:52:54 -0600

--------
In article <41C75253.DCF6AD23@yahoox.com>, nenslo
wrote:


>
> Some people REALLY LIKE mysticism. It has made me very happy at times
> and I am sure many of you will be sorry to know it kept me alive when
> nothing else would. I am still fondly devoted to a couple of deities
> whom I know very well never existed. Except when I worship them, THEY
> DO EXIST.
>
> Why believe in an atom you've never seen but not a god you've never
> seen, when the atom will never love you back?

Little Nenslito, since I read it a couple of days ago, I have quoted
that last line there (WITH attribution!) to my wife, my father and two
gay guys standing with us in the long line at the airport, and it
provoked a hearty laff each time.

P.S. I am enjoying "Darwin's Children" by Bear after having enjoyed
"Darwin's Radio." They're about evolutionarily advanced super-kids
appearing among us in the near future. But not the kind of super we're
expecting. I still think the Stephen Baxter is tops among all the Hard
SF writers whose last names start with a B, though.

My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
frozen Neandertal.


Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:26:57 -0800

--------
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:52:54 -0600, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
wrote:

>My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
>now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>frozen Neandertal.

A frozen Neanderthal? A YETI?

If jim can find the number 111 anywhere you could make more of an
effort to find subgenius symbolism everywhere.


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"Islam is a religion in which God requires
you to send your son to die for him.
Christianity is a faith in which God sends
his son to die for you."
--Attorney General John Ashcroft

"Subgenius is a religion where you send "Bob" your money, and you get
to kill him."
--The Reverend Doctor Lieutenant Chaos Israel.



Correspondent:: "Ad Absurdum"
Date: 26 Dec 2004 15:17:44 -0800

--------
SubGenius symbolism IS everywhere. "Making an effort" sounds mightily
stupid and boring to me. I thought it was BREAKING the effort that let
the symbolism just POOOOUUUUR in!



Correspondent:: Reverend Kenny <5ubg3n1u5@comcast.no.spam>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:36:37 -0500

--------


Ad Absurdum wrote:
> SubGenius symbolism IS everywhere. "Making an effort" sounds mightily
> stupid and boring to me. I thought it was BREAKING the effort that let
> the symbolism just POOOOUUUUR in!
>

On Demand Cable has Live concert footage from earlier this year of DEVO
doing Whip It in Japan.

That band reeks of Subgenii doesn't it?

When the cream sits out too long................

--
Illuminations,
Reverend Kenny

The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
-Isaac Asimov


Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:24:40 -0800

--------

>Ad Absurdum wrote:
>> SubGenius symbolism IS everywhere. "Making an effort" sounds mightily
>> stupid and boring to me. I thought it was BREAKING the effort that let
>> the symbolism just POOOOUUUUR in!
>>

Putting you in my killfile was how I stopped the stupid and boring
from POOOUUUURING in.


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
there was a young lady from Bude
who was taking a swim in the lake
a man in a punt
stuck his pole in her ear
saying you can't swim here
it's private



Correspondent:: "Ad Absurdum"
Date: 26 Dec 2004 16:50:29 -0800

--------
Yeah you really have to do something about me 'cause my thirty posts a
day just POOOUUUUR every thread full of long-winded horseshit. Sorry
to hear you're having such continuing trouble ignoring me, Joe, but I
know you don't worry too much about wasting your time.



Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:54:05 GMT

--------


Ad Absurdum wrote:

> Yeah you really have to do something about me 'cause my thirty posts a
> day just POOOUUUUR every thread full of long-winded horseshit. Sorry
> to hear you're having such continuing trouble ignoring me, Joe, but I
> know you don't worry too much about wasting your time.

Yeah, but if you post, say 30, then Joe has to post at least 50;
and it sort of stresses him out! I mean, give a slackard a break!






Correspondent:: nikolai kingsley
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:51:29 +1100

--------

> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
> frozen Neandertal.



that explains where the Neanderthal went. they didn't cross-breed with
the new apes; they all *froze*. an endless quest for something to keep
their fermented mare's milk cool, i guess.


Correspondent:: "Revi Shankar"
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:00:42 -0500

--------

> >
> > Why believe in an atom you've never seen but not a god you've never
> > seen, when the atom will never love you back?


How do you know an atom won't love me back? Just because they don't love
YOU..






Correspondent:: HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:55:32 -0600

--------
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:00:42 -0500, "Revi Shankar"
wrote:

>
>> >
>> > Why believe in an atom you've never seen but not a god you've never
>> > seen, when the atom will never love you back?
>
>
>How do you know an atom won't love me back? Just because they don't love
>YOU..

Actually, they CAN when they all join up together in one of those Xmas
vibrators.

TALK STRING THEORY TO ME BABY!!!!!


Correspondent:: nenslo
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:52:17 -0800

--------
"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
>
> In article <41C75253.DCF6AD23@yahoox.com>, nenslo
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Some people REALLY LIKE mysticism. It has made me very happy at times
> > and I am sure many of you will be sorry to know it kept me alive when
> > nothing else would. I am still fondly devoted to a couple of deities
> > whom I know very well never existed. Except when I worship them, THEY
> > DO EXIST.
> >
> > Why believe in an atom you've never seen but not a god you've never
> > seen, when the atom will never love you back?
>
> Little Nenslito, since I read it a couple of days ago, I have quoted
> that last line there (WITH attribution!) to my wife, my father and two
> gay guys standing with us in the long line at the airport, and it
> provoked a hearty laff each time.

That's pretty good considering how unwieldy it is. At least I'm good
for something.

>
> P.S. I am enjoying "Darwin's Children" by Bear after having enjoyed
> "Darwin's Radio." They're about evolutionarily advanced super-kids
> appearing among us in the near future. But not the kind of super we're
> expecting. I still think the Stephen Baxter is tops among all the Hard
> SF writers whose last names start with a B, though.

I have given up trying to find anything by those B guys that isn't
already part three of a series of nine novels. I like stand-alones and
short stories best. The B novelist I am going to spend some time with
in the near future is Balzac.

>
> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
> frozen Neandertal.

That's what I mean. I know there's no limit to the number of novels
that can be written about, say, what REALLY happened to the dinosaurs
and how it's connected to the Knights Templar, the Fraternitatis Rosae
Crucis, Bigfoot, Crop Circles and Cattle Mutilation, but there's a
definite limit to the number I can read. ZERO. I'm going highbrow for
a couple of months so if I do review anything here it will be things
that none of you would ever read or watch.

For example I watched a fine Chinese movie, the kind with NO FIGHTING in
it, today called Not One Less, about a thirteen year old substitute
teacher at a village school who has to go into the big city to try to
find one of her students who had to go work to pay his family's debts
but got lost. And then Mrs. Nenslo and I watched the classic high
budget overwrought melodrama East Of Eden. I have been reading some
short stories by B. Traven and Tennessee Williams this week, and last
week read Other People's Money by Emile Gaborieau, originally published
in the 1870s, a kind of half-mystery half-melodrama about investment
swindlers.

I also really enjoyed An Egyptian Story, an autobiographical fantasy
film by Yusuf Shahin, in which the protagonist is an Egyptian film
director undergoing a triple bypass operation who finds himself on trial
for his life in a courtroom within his own chest cavity and his inner
child is trying to kill him by clogging his arteries. Alternates
between bizarre psychobiological fantasy and intriguing flashbacks of
his life and career as an independent filmmaker in the 40s and 50s.
See? TOTALLY BORING to almost everyone who reads this newsgroup.


Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:01:18 -0800

--------
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:52:17 -0800, nenslo wrote:

>I also really enjoyed An Egyptian Story, an autobiographical fantasy
>film by Yusuf Shahin, in which the protagonist is an Egyptian film
>director undergoing a triple bypass operation who finds himself on trial
>for his life in a courtroom within his own chest cavity and his inner
>child is trying to kill him by clogging his arteries.

Well I'm sure any vegetarian can read that with a great sense of
triumph.

to me personally it wouldn't be so much boring as nauseating.


--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
> "The Lord of the jungle immerses himself in an orgy of blood and lust.
> The Man of Bronze thirsts for a devastating revenge. Their final
> meeting is a climax of sex, violence and perversion that will never be
> forgotten. For the loser -- a hideous death. For the winner -- a
> beautiful, voluptuous woman and the promise of immortality..."



Correspondent:: HellPope Huey
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:34:31 GMT

--------
In article <251220042252541722%stang@subNOSPUMgenius.com>,
"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:

> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
> frozen Neandertal.

Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about with
a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.

--

HellPope Huey
People applauded rather than throwing fruit.
I take this as a good sign.

Infinite goodness
is creating a being you know, in advance,
is going to complain.
- William Peter Blatty, "Ninth Configuration"

"Does the noise in my head bother you,
bother you, bother you, bother you?"
- Loop Guru, "Loop Bites Dog"


Correspondent:: mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull)
Date: 29 Dec 2004 00:23:39 GMT

--------
>> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
>> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>> frozen Neandertal.
>
> Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
>Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
>this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
>did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about with
>a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.
>

Philo was actually preserved in a Atlantian Time capsule as a joke for future
generations.


MSHOTZ: The Post Post Modern Man

"War hath no Fury like a non-combatants"

Charles E. Montague


Correspondent:: Rev DJ Epoch
Date: 29 Dec 2004 12:12:40 GMT

--------
mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull) wrote in
news:20041228192339.12272.00002815@mb-m28.aol.com:

>>> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
>>> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>>> frozen Neandertal.
>>
>> Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
>>Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
>>this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
>>did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about with
>>a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.
>>
>
> Philo was actually preserved in a Atlantian Time capsule as a joke for
> future generations.
>
>

Sooo... where in Atlanta is he?

--
The Church of Our Lady of Prepetual Motion
Cathedral, Carwash and Dancehall- Home of the Traci Lords Memorial Brothel
Rev. DJ Epoch - proprietor and janitor
Divine Southern Redneck Yeti Clench Recruitment site: http://revdjepoch.COM

"If you want my delusions, you'll have to pry them from my cold,
dead hippocampus with a grapefruit spoon."
-- HellPope Huey


Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:36:18 GMT

--------
Rev DJ Epoch wrote:
>mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull) wrote in
>news:20041228192339.12272.00002815@mb-m28.aol.com:
>
>>>> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
>>>> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>>>> frozen Neandertal.
>>>
>>> Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
>>>Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
>>>this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
>>>did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about with
>>>a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.
>>>
>>
>> Philo was actually preserved in a Atlantian Time capsule as a joke for
>> future generations.
>>
>>
>
>Sooo... where in Atlanta is he?

At the Waffle House on Peachtree!



Correspondent:: Rev DJ Epoch
Date: 29 Dec 2004 17:36:52 GMT

--------
König Prüß, GfbAEV wrote in
news:6xxAd.1184548$Gx4.580376@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

> Rev DJ Epoch wrote:
>>mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull) wrote in
>>news:20041228192339.12272.00002815@mb-m28.aol.com:
>>
>>>>> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I
have
>>>>> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>>>>> frozen Neandertal.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
>>>>Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
>>>>this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
>>>>did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about
with
>>>>a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Philo was actually preserved in a Atlantian Time capsule as a joke for
>>> future generations.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Sooo... where in Atlanta is he?
>
> At the Waffle House on Peachtree!
>
>

WHICH ONE?!? There's only about twelve of the fuckers. They pop up around
here like kudzu...

--
The Church of Our Lady of Prepetual Motion
Cathedral, Carwash and Dancehall- Home of the Traci Lords Memorial Brothel
Rev. DJ Epoch - proprietor and janitor
Divine Southern Redneck Yeti Clench Recruitment site: http://revdjepoch.COM

"If you want my delusions, you'll have to pry them from my cold,
dead hippocampus with a grapefruit spoon."
-- HellPope Huey


Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:22:41 GMT

--------
Rev DJ Epoch wrote:
>König Prüß, GfbAEV wrote in
>news:6xxAd.1184548$Gx4.580376@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>
>> Rev DJ Epoch wrote:
>>>mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull) wrote in
>>>news:20041228192339.12272.00002815@mb-m28.aol.com:
>>>
>>>>>> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I
>have
>>>>>> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>>>>>> frozen Neandertal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
>>>>>Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
>>>>>this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
>>>>>did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about
>with
>>>>>a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Philo was actually preserved in a Atlantian Time capsule as a joke for
>>>> future generations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Sooo... where in Atlanta is he?
>>
>> At the Waffle House on Peachtree!
>>
>>
>
>WHICH ONE?!? There's only about twelve of the fuckers. They pop up around
>here like kudzu...
>

Waffle House Juke Box-Real Audio
http://www.wafflehouse.com/rajukebox.htm



Correspondent:: Rev DJ Epoch
Date: 30 Dec 2004 13:31:11 GMT

--------
König Prüß, GfbAEV wrote in
news:R6GAd.45961$uM5.26704@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

> http://www.wafflehouse.com/rajukebox.htm

Yet another good reason NOT to eat there. My arteries harden just looking
at the place.

--
The Church of Our Lady of Prepetual Motion
Cathedral, Carwash and Dancehall- Home of the Traci Lords Memorial Brothel
Rev. DJ Epoch - proprietor and janitor
Divine Southern Redneck Yeti Clench Recruitment site: http://revdjepoch.COM

"If you want my delusions, you'll have to pry them from my cold,
dead hippocampus with a grapefruit spoon."
-- HellPope Huey


Correspondent:: mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull)
Date: 29 Dec 2004 23:50:06 GMT

--------
>mshotz@aol.commonkeypo (Rev. Richard Skull) wrote in
>news:20041228192339.12272.00002815@mb-m28.aol.com:
>
>>>> My onliest problem with the sf I've been reading lately is that I have
>>>> now read three novels in a row that start with the hero finding a
>>>> frozen Neandertal.
>>>
>>> Isn't that how the Church itself came into being? I HAVE wondered here
>>>Philo really came from, since HE introduced you to Dobbs and put you on
>>>this wretched Scribe path. Did he have a frozen saxophone with him or
>>>did he pick that up later? So much for incautiously stumbling about with
>>>a metal detector and looking for valuable coins.
>>>
>>
>> Philo was actually preserved in a Atlantian Time capsule as a joke for
>> future generations.
>>
>>
>
>Sooo... where in Atlanta is he?
>
>--

At the World of Coca-Cola. Near the exit, where they have all those free
samples of Coke products from around the world.


MSHOTZ: The Post Post Modern Man

"War hath no Fury like a non-combatants"

Charles E. Montague