Should Skeptics, by definition, be Atheists?

[articulett]

Thanks HM.

 

[CFLarsen]

How about listening to the speakers and engage in discussion of scientific & skeptical topics? Wouldn't that be a better use of your time, rather than a petty internet vendetta?

Who said I wouldn't be listening to speakers and engage in scientific and skeptical topics?

If someone ignores you online, what do you suppose the odds are that they will ignore you in a face to face confrontation?

Articulett doesn't ignore me online.

Randi, Shermer, et al probably have to deal with their share of people who bring up trivial matters. I would hope you understand that and reconsider shoving internet transcripts in their faces.

That is not what I had in mind. I am just going to see if articulett has the guts to face the very same people she has dismissed as lesser skeptics than herself.

The printouts are for documentation. Just as articulett insisted.

If you insist on continuing on your current planned course of action at TAM, consider wearing some padded wrist wraps. The barrier may protect the skin and underlying structures from the metal restraints.

If you are insinuating that people should be arrested for putting claims to the test at TAM, then you have no idea what TAM is all about.

 

[fkwebinash]

A skeptic is, basically, someone who does not believe on something bakced up only by anecdotal evidence (Or simply, with no evidence at all), and says that solid evidence is required for any claim.

As the Bible is something we cannot really take for "Solid evidence", a skeptic usually doesn't take the Bible as proof.

But you can still believe on stuff like, say, intelligent design. You're free to believe what you want.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You did totally take my comment out of context, Claus.

But it led to an interesting exchange, up to a point anyway.

 

[articulett]

You did totally take my comment out of context, Claus.

But it led to an interesting exchange, up to a point anyway.

That's our Clausy.... ever the provocateur of interesting exchange.

 

[HghrSymmetry]

Thanks HM.

Thou art* most welcome.

(*pun intended)

 

[HghrSymmetry]

Who said I wouldn't be listening to speakers and engage in scientific and skeptical topics?

Perhaps no one, yet the obsessive stalkerish attacks seem to indicate that that predominates your thoughts.

Articulett doesn't ignore me online.

Responding to others quotes of yours isn't necessarily synonymous with taking a person off the ignore function.

That is not what I had in mind. I am just going to see if articulett has the guts to face the very same people she has dismissed as lesser skeptics than herself.

Very well. I would recommend that your intended target simply not respond to any churlish behavior.
Perhaps if you're civil, you may even get a response.

The printouts are for documentation. Just as articulett insisted.

My guess is that presenting them to the speakers may not have the intended effect. They may very well have an effect, but it might be quite different than the anticipated one.

If you are insinuating that people should be arrested for putting claims to the test at TAM, then you have no idea what TAM is all about.

Negative, I was insinuating that disruptive behavior at TAM (or any public arena) may invite authoritative action.
As far as me not knowing what TAM is all about, you may be partially correct.
I'm learning though, and despite the fair distance that seperates me from the area, I may yet have the opportunity to attend one of the future events.

 

[articulett]

Just to be clear, I don't think of anyone as "lesser skeptics" than myself. Except Claus, of course.

(I wonder if I should print this out as "evidence"?)

 

[HghrSymmetry]

You may not have to. I get the vague feeling that several thousand copies are probably already plastered on someone's bedroom wall.

 

[CFLarsen]

You did totally take my comment out of context, Claus.

No, I didn't. You made a false deduction from a well-known bible story, that's all.

Perhaps no one, yet the obsessive stalkerish attacks seem to indicate that that predominates your thoughts.

Nonsense.

Responding to others quotes of yours isn't necessarily synonymous with taking a person off the ignore function.

It isn't merely that. She can't stop talking about me, even in posts that are not responses to others quoting me.

Very well. I would recommend that your intended target simply not respond to any churlish behavior.
Perhaps if you're civil, you may even get a response.

Yes, we've seen this defense before. "You gotta ask me nicely". Sorry, but you don't choose who asks you, what they ask you, or how they ask you.

Negative, I was insinuating that disruptive behavior at TAM (or any public arena) may invite authoritative action.
As far as me not knowing what TAM is all about, you may be partially correct.
I'm learning though, and despite the fair distance that seperates me from the area, I may yet have the opportunity to attend one of the future events.

Then, you shall see what TAM really is. Asking questions and engaging in debates are encouraged - not seen as "disruptive behavior".

Just to be clear, I don't think of anyone as "lesser skeptics" than myself. Except Claus, of course.

(I wonder if I should print this out as "evidence"?)

Excellent! Then, you'll have even more to explain at TAM.

 

[amb]

A skeptic is, basically, someone who does not believe on something bakced up only by anecdotal evidence (Or simply, with no evidence at all), and says that solid evidence is required for any claim.

As the Bible is something we cannot really take for "Solid evidence", a skeptic usually doesn't take the Bible as proof.

But you can still believe on stuff like, say, intelligent design. You're free to believe what you want.

I.D has no proof either. It's just creationism by stealth. A true skeptic requires more proof than a discredited scientist lecturing all around the place with a model of a single cell in tow showing anyone who bothers to listen how complex the cell is, and insisting, with no proof ''that because of this complexity it must have been created.''
By an intelligent being who just happens to be ''God''

 

[HghrSymmetry]

It isn't merely that. She can't stop talking about me, even in posts that are not responses to others quoting me.

I haven't done post research on that, so I can't speak to its accuracy.

Yes, we've seen this defense before. "You gotta ask me nicely". Sorry, but you don't choose who asks you, what they ask you, or how they ask you.

I agree. Don't get me wrong, you can do/ask anything you want, that's your choice. I'm simply saying that no one has any obligation to respond or address you if they chose not to.
Persisting in bedeviling a person...well, just makes the perpetrator look silly.

Then, you shall see what TAM really is. Asking questions and engaging in debates are encouraged - not seen as "disruptive behavior".

Hopefully it won't escalate beyond that.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Because (as she has already told you) the punishment dealt to Lot's wife seems out of propotion with the supposed wrong she committed, especially in comparison with her husband, who, if I recall correctly, committed incest and offered his daughters up to be raped, and not only was he not punished, he was glorified. It is perfectly reasonable to draw the conclusion that the punishment afforded to Lot's wife had to do with her gender, especially when compared to the treatment of women in other parts of the bible.

Well said. It reminded me that the entire Bible describes women as second class citizens. And then there was that Cannon thing where the male leaders in the Catholic church decided to leave the Gnostic Books out of the New Testament. Suspiciously those included a different view of Mary Magdalena.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...

If someone ignores you online, what do you suppose the odds are that they will ignore you in a face to face confrontation?
....

I introduced myself to Claus at TAM 5. We had had a long futile discussion on non-human primate language research in another thread. I thought maybe in person I could actually talk to him. He had nothing to say, not even "nice to meet you." But I did see him talking to other people so I really didn't know what to make of it.

 

[CFLarsen]

I introduced myself to Claus at TAM 5. We had had a long futile discussion on non-human primate language research in another thread. I thought maybe in person I could actually talk to him. He had nothing to say, not even "nice to meet you." But I did see him talking to other people so I really didn't know what to make of it.

That is not correct. I distinctly remember us having a brief conversation at the book table, which ended with you being incredibly condescending to me. I did nothing to provoke it, you just saw an opportunity to deliver a stinger, and then walk away.

 

[articulett]

I introduced myself to Claus at TAM 5. We had had a long futile discussion on non-human primate language research in another thread. I thought maybe in person I could actually talk to him. He had nothing to say, not even "nice to meet you." But I did see him talking to other people so I really didn't know what to make of it.

I talked to him before I knew inside his head (I hadn't read much of him before)... so I assumed he was likable like all the other people there.

That's why I have him on ignore... maybe I'll like him again if he can be a stranger. If he would just learn to laugh at himself or admit that he may have over-reacted-- but no... --Claus is in his own world where he is the "uber skeptic". It matters not to him that no one is following him nor shares his view. In his head Claus is ALWAYS right... he never cedes a point... never really has a point as far as I can tell.

He's just pissy. You don't think he's going to do anything creepy do you? I'm glad to "talk", but I'm quite sure he will not get satisfaction from the conversation and hear all kinds of things that are not there. Doesn't nearly every discussion with Claus just keep getting thornier the more you try to correct his misperceptions or follow him or keep on track?

Reading through these posts and knowing whatever you know of Claus, do you think I have anything to worry about? At least it's all documented. I think last TAM I had been having an argument with his countrymate Dann online-- and I think he said to me "Dann says hi" and I said, "I'm sure he did". But that was it. I didn't realize Claus was so much like Dann at that time. Ah well, I can't be a fangirl to every skeptic.

Does Claus really think Michael Shermer or anyone else is going to care about my opinion-- or rather HIS opinion of my opinion? Doesn't this all seem incredibly petty and nonsensical? Does anyone other than Claus see me the way he sees me? I guess I should be flattered by the attention--but reading through this, do you think I need to arm myself with pepper spray or something? Does Claus have people who are his friends on line? Does he ever work through his issues? Have you ever seen him resolve a conflict or does he carry a grudge forever?

To me, he always seems to be derailing threads to tell everyone how they should be more like him... --not realizing, that nobody wants to be like him. Surely, there is some forum member he admires that he could learn to be more like or ask how he's coming across. He seems to have problems with a lot of people. Especially women.

 

[modecom]

Ah well, I can't be a fangirl to every skeptic.

I will always be an Arti fanboy!!

 

[HghrSymmetry]

I introduced myself to Claus at TAM 5. We had had a long futile discussion on non-human primate language research in another thread. I thought maybe in person I could actually talk to him. He had nothing to say, not even "nice to meet you." But I did see him talking to other people so I really didn't know what to make of it.

Acknowledged.

Perhaps the bluster is more bark than bite, though I think it wise to err on the side of caution.

 

[amb]

Acknowledged.

Perhaps the bluster is more bark than bite, though I think it wise to err on the side of caution.

What's the old saying? ''empty vessels make the most sound'' I think that's the case here. Claus may be all bluster but harmless. [ I hope]

 

[HghrSymmetry]

What's the old saying? ''empty vessels make the most sound'' I think that's the case here....

Affimative, I think that's it.

He's just pissy. You don't think he's going to do anything creepy do you?

Unknown, but the posts are a bit unsettling.

I'm glad to "talk", but I'm quite sure he will not get satisfaction from the conversation and hear all kinds of things that are not there. Doesn't nearly every discussion with Claus just keep getting thornier the more you try to correct his misperceptions or follow him or keep on track?

This might be a case of leaking against a tornado.
Recommendation: Do not respond.

Reading through these posts and knowing whatever you know of Claus, do you think I have anything to worry about?

General awareness of surroundings and an eye for safety are probably prudent.

Does Claus really think Michael Shermer or anyone else is going to care about my opinion-- or rather HIS opinion of my opinion?

It seems that way.

Doesn't this all seem incredibly petty and nonsensical?

Aye.

Does anyone other than Claus see me the way he sees me? I guess I should be flattered by the attention--but reading through this, do you think I need to arm myself with pepper spray or something?

A little extra insurance wouldn't hurt. Also consider some of the stun guns now on the market. Some are very powerful and can render the most fearsome aggressor lame.

Does Claus have people who are his friends on line? Does he ever work through his issues? Have you ever seen him resolve a conflict or does he carry a grudge forever?

A cursory look at others reactions indicate the majority have difficulty as well.
This would argue for the deviancy to be with the individual and not everyone else.

To me, he always seems to be derailing threads to tell everyone how they should be more like him... --not realizing, that nobody wants to be like him. Surely, there is some forum member he admires that he could learn to be more like or ask how he's coming across. He seems to have problems with a lot of people. Especially women.

Sometimes past issues and problems can manifest themselves in obsessive compulsive behavior later on.
Deja vu....just remembered 'Cranial Effluvia.'
**shudder**