Hello Darkness! The Official Blog of Helen Keller

As dictated orally to Dayseed.

 Page 1 of 1
 [ 7 replies ] 

Permanent LinkPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:25 pm 
Seriously forum fans, in recent weeks, there have been to my knowledge, two fucking ridiculous challenges issued by people to the forum with little forethought as to any answers that may arise.

Granted, the first challenge was issued by Otto the WonderMoron. His challenge, for those that weren't thoroughly entertained by the antics, was to name a single country in the west ruled by a theocracy. Somebody piped in with (what is a correct answer) the Vatican. Well, didn't dipshit go furious over this. Essentially, Otto was trying to illustrate that no country in the west could be ruled by a theocracy and didn't give ANY thought to answers he could receive. I'll get to the overall thrust soon.

The second challenge was issued by Donkey Whisperer, who wanted to know if anybody would miss the Blue Jays should they depart from Toronto. The answer? Yes. SOMEbody would. At least one poor bastard that bought a ticket in the past years would miss the team. However, what Donkey Whisperer was hoping to achieve, say, a debate on the effect losing the team would have on Toronto, he instead issued a simple yes or no question and then freaked out when it was answered.

All of this leads to the Me No Dumb theory. That is, Otto and Donkey Whisperer both issued challenges that THEY didn't know the answer to. And if they didn't know the answer, then either would you because they cannot fathom somebody being smarter or more resourceful then they are.

Consequently, moronic challenges come flying out of their (online) mouths, egos are attached, brouhahas erupt and threads get locked.

In future, seriously folks, take the time to consider when issuing broad ultimatums to the entire forum if there are angles to your question not initially conceived. I urge people to go to the thread Opinions: Why Your's Doesn't Matter and begin reading about Page 11 to understand the full folly that issuing a stupid challenge can be.
Opinions: Why Your's Don't Matter

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Up next, fact versus opinion: Why your opinion on facts is wrong. Stay tuned forum fans, the Comment Corner is open for business!

_________________
Nam eloquentiam quae admirationem non habet nullam iudico


 Profile  
 


Comments
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Permanent LinkPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:13 pm 

It’s a blatant case of intellectual relativism – the habitually dumb and uneducated want to dump on intellectualism and scholarship so they seek to undermine it by attacking its methodology. Why should they have to substantiate their dipshit points (like Residential Schools were altruistic, Christians didn’t help with the Third Reich’s Anti-Semitic pogroms or no one would car if the Jays left Toronto) when it’s far easier to demand that objective facts (you know, the things standing in the way of their declarations) meet their personal verification. They want you do to their research. They want you to convince them. In fact, they want you to legitimize already verified points to them before they (and they wont, anyway) acknowledge their existence. It’s the height of anti-intellectualism and laziness. It’s the badge of dullards everywhere. It’s intellectual relativism.

Retards like Otto the Wonderfuck and Supertard (aka Man of Dumb) need to rationalize their piss poor schooling, crappy intellects and moronic missteps. Don’t let them, forum fans, hide behind intellectual relativism. A fact is a fact. World War Two occurred. That’s it. It’s not debatable. You haven’t heard of it? Who cares? Remember, it doesn’t have to enter into your consciousness before it’s independently verified. A simple lesson. But, let’s be honest as it goes out to simpletons.

Methinks the Comment Corner may need a resurrection

_________________
"Wannsee was just a conference of top administrators." (BeaverFeaver trying to downplay the origins of the Final Solution)


Permanent LinkPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:44 pm 

Dayseed, think you could go back in time and drag michaelredeagle to present day? Apparently the laws of physics are just interpretations of our mind, so it's just mind over matter. Let me know how it goes; I'd have loved to have been there for that one :twisted:

_________________
Image


Permanent LinkPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:59 pm 

Hey that fuckin’ twit tried to deny the Holocaust too! He’s a perfect example of what happens when one issues absolute challenges and then…bam! He’s proven categorically wrong and has to resort to nit picking, hair splitting, and post-modern horseshit to save his crumbling point. He got schooled. Others have failed to learn his lesson. They are my entertainment. :twisted:

_________________
"Wannsee was just a conference of top administrators." (BeaverFeaver trying to downplay the origins of the Final Solution)


Permanent LinkPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:30 pm 

Bluenose,

No can do about dragging Michaelredeagle forward. He'll just have to stand as the solid gold statue warning people about the dangers of issuing challenges.

Unfortunately, I can't resurrect the other seminal study in online folly. On the old Historytelevision.ca forum, there was a legendary poster by the name of Mr. Potatohead. He read the FIRST page of an online introduction to vectors and then began to argue the most inane shit based on his stunted knowledge.

Even worse, Hormel26C FOUND the page from which Mr. Potatohead was plaigarizing. There was a messy concilliatory speech by Mr. Potatohead, in which he blamed his mathematician brother for putting the thoughts in his head and that he would be taking some time off from the forum. Flash forward like a month and there he was again, DENYING everything he had said in his concilliatory speech.

It was a classic thread to be sure! You would have enjoyed Mr. Potatohead a THOUSAND times more than Michaelredeagle.

_________________
Nam eloquentiam quae admirationem non habet nullam iudico


Permanent LinkPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:08 am 

Mustang1 raises some interesting points. I'd just like to throw in my observation that the Internet has become a tool of the intellectually lazy. "Fact" - usually confused for opinion - is obtained by finding material on the Internet that provides an intellectual boner. In this way, anyone with enough smarts to navigate GOOGLE can expound "expertly" on any topic. We have all experienced these self-ordained scholars; they expose themselves when challenged to extend themselves beyond web-surfin' researchin', right?

Mr. Potatohead. ROTFL

_________________
When the pH of the soil becomes acidic the Al becomes toxic to the roots of the plant and yields plummet. - "Dr" Bobby


Permanent LinkPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:45 am 

WIAF!

Long time no see! As you can see, the old Comment Corner has been resurrected in this new incarnation. If you need a little corner to comment on whore Bobby and his web-surfin' antics, or just want to shit some more on his test-tube cleanin' science helpin', you're more than welcome here.

Or, if you want to simply make fun of Bobby's Kirk Cameron "I'm going to sue you for posting my public picture" Growing Pains mullet, that's good too.

_________________
Nam eloquentiam quae admirationem non habet nullam iudico


Permanent LinkPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:23 am 

Thanks for the welcome mat Dayseed [BB],

"Dr" Bobby is still doing his thing, although of late he just posts directly from 2-3 websites, one of which is nothing more than a biotechnology PR site. He has become rather cautious of late - simply refusing to answer any questions I have - even on topics he brings up. Case in point: he brought up a study done at the University of Minnesota claiming it proved organic vegetables pose a greater health risk than conventional produce. Note that his claims were not in fact his own, rather just regurgitated from some of his "think tank" hero-shills. When I pointed out that in fact the study suggested the opposite, he decided that the study revealed "serious statistical flaws". Upon my asking what these flaws are, he shut up, and after being pushed on the matter, declared that he would only reveal his case by email. That's our Bobby! :lol:

Some time later, I posted some research that suggested that Round-up (specifically its surfactant) may not be as environmentally benign as Monsanto and Bobby the Laboratory Demonstrator would have us believe. He ridiculed the study and challenged me to defend it. What was I to do but say, "okay."? Guess what? The "academic" capitulated - again! He has told us when he has finished consulting with his expert colleague, he will reveal the truth. It's been three months. That's our Bobby! :roll:

One last tidbit: a couple of weeks ago, he posted his latest "article" (an op-ed in the Ottawa Citizen). It seemed very familar. Imagine my surprise when I discovered it was an almost verbatim copy of an op-ed he published in the Globe&Mail three years ago! [?] I'm no expert in the matter, but I would think the G&M would have assumed copyright on the original and that Bobby is plagiarizing himself. That's our Bobby! 8)

_________________
When the pH of the soil becomes acidic the Al becomes toxic to the roots of the plant and yields plummet. - "Dr" Bobby





 Page 1 of 1
 [ 7 replies ] 


 

Author
USER_AVATAR

Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (186)

Archives
- April 2011
Gandharvas, Diabaloney
   Wed Apr 20, 2011 12:56 pm

+ January 2011
+ December 2010
+ November 2010
+ September 2008
+ July 2008
+ May 2008
+ April 2008
+ March 2008
+ February 2008
+ January 2008
+ December 2007
+ November 2007
+ October 2007
+ September 2007
+ August 2007
+ July 2007
+ June 2007
+ May 2007
+ April 2007
+ March 2007
+ February 2007
+ January 2007
+ December 2006
+ November 2006
+ October 2006
+ September 2006
+ August 2006
+ July 2006
+ June 2006