Another forums stated rules...

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2005-09-22 03:54pm

The Silence and I wrote:The other posters have already covered this pretty well, all I can add is this exchange from TNG Ensigns of Command:

GOSHEVEN
This meeting is not for outsiders [to speak in].

DATA
Do you consider your position so weak that it cannot withstand debate?
Nuff said.
(Added the brackets to make it fit a bit better.)

I can't think of a better reply than that. I wonder what the fundie's reply would be

Wyrm · Post by **Wyrm** » 2005-09-23 12:17am

Well, folks, I found a reference to how much he's seen creationists use a kind of argument Gothmog uses in Mike's debate with Robert Mercer. Although I don't remember this particular point, I do remember looking through this hate mail page in my premembership lurking. I'm beginning to think that the observation may be a brain bug on my part.

Sorry for the confusion.

Itô Doeblin · Post by **Itô Doeblin** » 2005-09-23 06:51am

Wyrm wrote:Well, folks, I found a reference to how much he's seen creationists use a kind of argument Gothmog uses in Mike's debate with Robert Mercer. Although I don't remember this particular point, I do remember looking through this hate mail page in my premembership lurking. I'm beginning to think that the observation may be a brain bug on my part.

He has mentioned it on the board, here.

Have a nice day, Itô

Lucifer · Post by **Lucifer** » 2005-09-23 10:55am

Feigns ignorance. They just don't want anything to smash their faith, and they're probably also really worried about losing support just because atheists or other non-Christians post something logical, and that some Christians, who aren't as fundamental as that big group, would go with the atheists. But there are plenty of other forums for atheists to smash faiths, or use logic that is what they consider "anti-bible".

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-09-23 11:58am

What's most interesting about fundies is the way they will engage in the following process:

Make a point in an argument.
Either ignore rebuttals to that point or promise to address them later, perhaps after speaking to your priest or minister.
Never mention that point again in that thread.
A week later in a completely different thread or different forum, bring up the exact same point with no mention of the rebuttal for which you have no answer, as if the rebuttal itself never took place.

Look at the way creationists continually spout the "second law of thermodynamics" bullshit wherever they go. You can't seriously believe that none of them have ever heard someone blast that argument for its myriad scientific inaccuracies, because it's so trivially easy to do so and these guys who go out trying to "spread the word" on venues other than Bible-thumping circle-jerks would have encountered these rebuttals before. But it's pretty obvious that they hear the rebuttal and simply don't acknowledge it. They can hear it a hundred times, never really address it once, and still keep spouting their point.

There is an intrinsic dishonesty common to this sort of person which violates the normal spirit of debate, and which is very frustrating for people who are accustomed to a somewhat higher standard of conduct. It often leads to frustration and "personal attacks" whereby you accuse the person of being a liar and promptly get sanctioned by the board administration in most places.

But none of that is news: the interesting part is this: do these fundies admit to themselves that they are being dishonest? Do they, like Dostoyevsky's priests, believe that the end justifies the means and it's OK to lie to people if it will bring them to Christ? Or are they so goddamned stupid that they honestly don't understand the whole "you can't keep using a point if it's been refuted" concept at all?