John-Keats.com Allowing Nonsense In Their Forums!!!

[clerihew80]

While perusing the forums of John-Keats.com, a website devoted to the great Romantic poet, I came across some posts related to astrology. To my utter dismay, these presumably intelligent people seem to buy into that gibberish. The following, for example, was posted by no less than a Moderator (proving that Mods are the same wherever you go):

That's a pretty cool website! And the Keats profile was pretty much right on, in my estimation. I remember back in college, I had a roommate who owned a book on astrology and as an example of the quintessential Scorpio, they listed--of all people--our man Keats. He really fits the Scorpio profile to a T.

As if that wasn't bad enough, even the Forum Administrator, who goes by the name Saturn, acceded to the degeneracy.

Piqued, I registered under the handle ChildeHarold80 and posted the following:

I hope Malia, Saturn, and AsphodelElysium are aware that, since the signs of the Zodiac were drawn up in the second century A.D. by Ptolemy (the same infallible authority behind the Ptolemaic system which said that the Earth was at the center of the universe), the earth's rotational axis has shifted by some 30 degrees. Thus, the signs commonly used in horoscopes are off by at least a month. They are also insufficient: there should be 13, rather than 12.

In any case, there is absolutely no evidence that the positions of the planets at the time of one's birth have any effect whatsoever on one's personality or fate. By what mechanism, I ask you, could information be related from planet to earthling? Gravity, at such distances, is far too weak to be relevant. All planets, including earth, shine by reflected sunlight, so light is out of the question.

Finally, it is demeaning to arbitrarily divide humanity into twelve separate categories. Is there a substantial difference between asserting differences in temperament between two persons, just because one was born in June and the other in November, and asserting that blacks and whites are inherently different because of their skin colors?

I must state my opinion in full. I believe it is shameful to associate the name and legacy of a great man like Keats with this facile superstition.

In response, I was told not to "have a cow, dude."

This is an abomination, an affront to the memory of John Keats and literature itself. I urge my fellow skeptics to visit this website and register their disgust. The thread referred to is titled "Random Keats Sightings" and it's in the "Keats Around The World" section.

 

[Gregory]

In response, I was told not to "have a cow, dude."

Sounds about right to me. "Abomination?" "Affront to literature?"

You should try to relax a little; that would be my advise.

 

[clerihew80]

Sounds about right to me. "Abomination?" "Affront to literature?"

You should try to relax a little; that would be my advise.

What?! I've got to hear this craven complacency here, too? I will not relax! If need be, I will give birth to twenty cows in the name of truth!

I ask you, fellow skeptics, will you be Neville Chamberlains or will you be Churchills?

 

[Gregory]

What?! I've got to hear this craven complacency here, too?

Yes, you do, because you're acting like a hysterical idiot. But I like how you compare yelling at some astrologers on a Keats forum to Churchill's stand against the Nazis. Seriously, I do; it's absolutely adorable.

 

[clerihew80]

Yes, you do, because you're acting like a hysterical idiot. But I like how you compare yelling at some astrologers on a Keats forum to Churchill's stand against the Nazis. Seriously, I do; it's absolutely adorable.

It was a metaphor. I made no direct comparison between myself and Churchill. Your unfamiliarity with the use of figurative language, and your apathy in the face of the debauch and profanation of a website devoted to one of our greatest poets, makes evident your contempt for literature. I feel sorry for you.

 

[Gregory]

Of course you do. Sort of like the 9/11 nut who feels bad for the people who believe the official story, and the Christian fundamentalist who feels sorry for me because I refuse to see his version of the truth.

I don't feel sorry for you, but I do notice that you get hysterical over stupid things, and I think your life might be happier if you tried to control that. That's all.

 

[clerihew80]

Of course you do. Sort of like the 9/11 nut who feels bad for the people who believe the official story.

A most inappropriate analogy.

I don't feel sorry for you, but I do notice that you get hysterical over stupid things, and I think your life might be happier if you learned some priorities.

Happiness is not the point of existence. And how on earth can it be considered "stupid" to get upset over the idea of the unhallowed specter of Inanity dancing on the grave of John Keats?

 

[Gregory]

No; the point of existence is screaming at people about astrology on Keats forums. So go to it, big boy!

 

[-Fran-]

Hmm... though I can understand your frustration, is it really that very surprising that believers in astrology also like poetry? I mean, a bit of newage in such circles are not really all that surprising.

Hey, and who are you to talk, you will pretend to believe in astrology just to get a girl in bed. Why, here's a golden opportunity, imagine how many of those you can land in bed if you agree with them?

 

[clerihew80]

Hmm... though I can understand your frustration, is it really that very surprising that believers in astrology also like poetry? I mean, a bit of newage in such circles are not really all that surprising.

It should be more than surprising. It should be shocking, intolerable.

Hey, and who are you to talk, you will pretend to believe in astrology just to get a girl in bed.

That's different. We're talking about Poetry here, not the importunate urges of temporal existence.

Why, here's a golden opportunity, imagine how many of those you can land in bed if you agree with them?

I don't know, most of them are probably fat and unattractive.

 

[-Fran-]

It should be more than surprising. It should be shocking, intolerable.

If you say so

That's different. We're talking about Poetry here, not the importunate urges of temporal existence.

If you say so

I don't know, most of them are probably fat and unattractive.

Yes, probably, and the poor things are totally missing out on god's gift to women too, how sad

 

[clerihew80]

Yes, probably, and the poor things are totally missing out on god's gift to women too, how sad

I never said that I was "god's gift to women." First of all, I don't believe in god. Second, I am well aware of my limitations.

This is typical of my experience on the internet. All kinds of things are attributed to me which I give no countenance to.

 

[Gregory]

Well, buck up Winston! So, nobody's taking you seriously. Don't get downhearted; you need to expect setbacks. After all, you must not underrate the gravity of the task which lies before you or the temerity of the ordeal, to which you shall not be found unequal. You must expect many disappointments, and many unpleasant surprises, but you may be sure that the task which you have freely accepted is one not beyond the compass and the strength of the atheist and skeptical community.

 

[-Fran-]

I never said that I was "god's gift to women." First of all, I don't believe in god. Second, I am well aware of my limitations.

This is typical of my experience on the internet. All kinds of things are attributed to me which I give no countenance to.

Who believes in god? But you can't really be especially surprised about that some of your comments will generate certain reactions? That would be naive beyond belief.

 

[clerihew80]

After all, you must not underrate the gravity of the task which lies before you or the temerity of the ordeal, to which you shall not be found unequal.

Are you sure "temerity" is the word you want here? "Temerity" means "reckless boldness," or "rashness."

 

[Gregory]

Yes, I'm sure. The whole post is a joke of sorts, although I admit it's a pretty damn obscure one.

 

[clerihew80]

Joke or not, you still have to choose the proper word. I see no other malapropisms in the post, so I assume it was a discrepancy, rather than a deliberate attempt at humorous misuse.

 

[Gregory]

I didn't choose the word; that's the joke.

 

[clerihew80]

I didn't choose the word; that's the joke.

I agree. The joke is obscure - to the point of incomprehensibility.

 

[fuelair]

While perusing the forums of John-Keats.com, a website devoted to the great Romantic poet, I came across some posts related to astrology. To my utter dismay, these presumably intelligent people seem to buy into that gibberish. The following, for example, was posted by no less than a Moderator (proving that Mods are the same wherever you go):

As if that wasn't bad enough, even the Forum Administrator, who goes by the name Saturn, acceded to the degeneracy.

Piqued, I registered under the handle ChildeHarold80 and posted the following:
In response, I was told not to "have a cow, dude."

This is an abomination, an affront to the memory of John Keats and literature itself. I urge my fellow skeptics to visit this website and register their disgust. The thread referred to is titled "Random Keats Sightings" and it's in the "Keats Around The World" section.

Their forum, their rules. If you want to complain, complain to the forum/web site OWNERS. Oh wow, deja vu all over again - I feel like I have seen a complaint just like this somewhere else!!! Where could that have been???!!!