Noyau (2)

…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation

Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.

[to work around page bug]

2,941 thoughts on “Noyau (2)”

  1. ET is almost certainly has an earthly origin. Sometimes it takes a lot of work to pin it down. this one could be military, which could pose some problems.

  4. petrushka:
    There is a Professor B in VJ’s review, so that is what Corney is responding to.

    VJ’s essay, by the way, is well writtenand well worth reading. I would be happy to see it posted here as an OP. We could leave comments on. 🙂

    . . . .

    I posted at Cornelius Hunter’s blog asking VJT to do exactly that. My comment has yet to make it through moderation.

  5. phoodoo,

    That’s sort of my point Allan. First you blame me for your snarky posts. Then you say you don’t care that every other poster on your side of the ledger is rude, your job is to just point out that you don’t like if I give it back.

    I don’t care if you give it back or not. Nor am I responsible for other people’s content. I am responsible for mine; you are responsible for yours. But it seems intensely hypocritical for someone who makes a habit of being a dick to complain at me for being a dick. Don’t give me that ‘they started it’ routine. I’m sure Joe Gallien is just a fucking pussycat underneath it all as well.

    Kind of shows your incredibly biased blind spot now doesn’t it? When will you have the integrity to call out posters who are wrong, but have the worldview you like?

    How do you know I haven’t? I have in fact criticised people ‘on my side’ for both tone and content in the past. The fact that I don’t do it every third post, in hope that YOU might spot it, does not negate that.

  6. Allan Miller,

    I never complained at you for being a dick Allan, I complained at you for posting worthless junk.

    Strange that you couldn’t tell the difference. Why would I complain at you for being a dick, EVERY atheist poster here uses the same schtick. At least I can name some polite non-atheists who post here, despite all the bullshit you guys lay down on a regular basis as if someone stole your play toys.

    You however can not name one worth emulating.

  7. Patrick: I posted at Cornelius Hunter’s blog asking VJT to do exactly that.My comment has yet to make it through moderation.

    My comment has made it through moderation. Perhaps Vincent will see it and join the discussion here.

  9. I do not see comments by phoodoo, unless you quote them (please avoid it). But I do see:

    RECENT COMMENTS
    phoodoo on Truth, Reason, Logic

    And that, I must admit, is mighty amusing.

  13. petrushka: I am expecting Mung and all out ID advocates to drop by momentarily to comment.

    I’d hate to disappoint you, petrushka. 🙂

  14. dazz: Creatards love to buy the same book over and over and over again

    What really pisses me off is when I buy a book by an evolutionist and find them using the same arguments as the creatards.

  15. Alan Fox: I opened a thread on Undeniable, Vincent’s review and the disappearance.

    Another rule-breaking meta-issues OP. Good for you Alan!

  20. Mung: Been there. Done that. It’s a scam. It doesn’t work.

    I think you quoted the wrong part:

    “Tone! Pearl-clutching!” – You’ve definitely been there and done that.

  21. Mung: What really pisses me off is when I buy a book by an evolutionist and find them using the same arguments as the creatards.

    Finding words like “design” in scientific work doesn’t mean they’re using ID arguments. In fact, once again, there have been no novel ID arguments for ages. Are you ready to back that up with some reference? And I don’t mean a quote mine Mung, so go ahead, put your money where your big mouth is

  22. dazz: And I don’t mean a quote mine Mung, so go ahead, put your money where your big mouth is

    I have a standard $10,000.00 money where my mouths is offer. Put up your $10,000 and explain why I should wager my 10k against it.

  23. Phoodoo, go ahead, give it your best shot. Be the NewPhoodoo.

    Richardthughes & Co. will still be assholes.

    But at least we’ll have a sample size of 2!

  30. Meanwhile, dazz and Richardthughs can’t manage to put ten thousand dollars at risk between the two of them.The moral of this story is, don’t aspire to be a retail store clerk.

  31. Mung:
    Meanwhile, dazz and Richardthughs can’t manage to put ten thousand dollars at risk between the two of them.The moral of this story is, don’t aspire to be a retail store clerk.

    There’s nobility in all work, Mung. Do you think having more money makes people better than others? Was that ‘revelation’ or ‘objective morality’ that got you there?

  32. Mung:
    Meanwhile, dazz and Richardthughs can’t manage to put ten thousand dollars at risk between the two of them.The moral of this story is, don’t aspire to be a retail store clerk.

    What’s the bet and how do we get to decide who wins? I’m still waiting for those evolutionists using ID arguments, BTW

  33. Mung:
    I have a latex fetish.

    It only takes one Google search with the base term to learn that one must use the full phrase “latex typesetting system” when looking for that specific information.

  34. Mung:
    Meanwhile, dazz and Richardthughs can’t manage to put ten thousand dollars at risk between the two of them.The moral of this story is, don’t aspire to be a retail store clerk.

    I suspect that a few people here might be willing to take your bet if you’d specify exactly what it is you’re asking people to bet on. Can you write it down clearly here?

    Let’s make this happen. The Murrow Indian Children’s Home could use more donations from atheists.

  37. Mung:
    Phoodoo, go ahead, give it your best shot. Be the NewPhoodoo.

    Richardthughes & Co. will still be assholes.

    But at least we’ll have a sample size of 2!

    Well, I challenged Allan to name a few polite posters on the atheist side here, who are worth emulating, and he couldn’t do it.

    Of course it was the easiest challenge in the world because they simply don’t exist here. I would say most of the non-atheist posters here are pretty good actually. I think most insults we give back are well deserved and necessary at times here given the local temperament and lack of fair play by the moderators.

    So no, I am happy to pour wet paint all over the dunce Richard whenever it strikes me. I am still entertaining and provocative-and I am right.

  40. phoodoo:
    Richardthughes,

    I give the new Alan some credit.Tom English is a complete whining asshole.I am not surprised you haven’t noticed.

    I’ll just quote Tom’s last comment in full and leave it to readers to work out who the asshole is in this dialogue:

    “Vincent,

    I am pleased to see that you are questioning your own beliefs, and are revising them. I continue to do the same — both the questioning and the revising. (I’m about to turn sixty, and yet the pace of change does not seem to be slowing.)

    Although I haven’t taught in seven or so years, I am at heart an educator, not an indoctrinator. I do not gauge the growth in others according to their convergence with the way I’ve grown. What I look for is internal coherence. There are views I disagree with strongly, and yet recognize as sensible.”

  41. phoodoo: Tom English is a complete whining asshole.

    Regarding what?

    The treatment he got from certain people when he defended Bob Marks over Baylor closing down his website? Ditto for defending him against biased editing at Wikipedia? Or because he spotted Winston Ewert’s plagiarism and brought it to the attention of the appropriate authorities?

  42. I’d nominate Newton (although I don’t actually know if he/she is an atheist) and KN. I think they are always at least as nice as their adversaries.

    I agree that Mung, colew (sp?) and FMM, while not always pleasant, take more shit than they spew out. Several other theists here have seemed to me either mean-spirited, crazy or both.

  43. Alan Fox,

    Tom English frequently addressing his feelings about the individual rather than about ideas (as witnessed by his rather immature remarks about Denise O’Leary) and anyone else who is critical of his work. His comments about Doug Axe and about anyone affiliated with any organization that holds views different than his are not worthy of anyone who considers themselves an academic.

    I don’t see him being substantively any different than a less well known Jerry Coyne.

  45. Thanks, phoodoo, but I’m inconsistently nasty. I think maybe I COULD be polite if this were a different sort of place. The people I mentioned–maybe Alan too–manage to stay decent in spite of the toxicity here.

  46. I also don’t think KN is that bad in general, but he some times loses it. I guess its all relative.

    BTW- As far as I know, I don’t think I have ever instigated insults toward anyone without them asking for it first. Of course that just so happens to be about everyone-but I don’t take the blame for that.

  47. keithS, of course. He’s basically the Ghandi of this place.

    *raises hands, backs away slowly*

  48. walto,

    Well, there is a level of nastiness that is perhaps sometimes necessary, and then there is another level of nastiness that is pointless and completely useless to the objective of conversation. Some people just seem to think it is their job to say dumb things just to hear themselves speak- regardless of how mindbogglingly boring it is.

  49. phoodoo:
    Alan Fox,

    Tom English frequently addressing his feelings about the individual rather than about ideas (as witnessed by his rather immature remarks about Denise O’Leary)…

    O’Leary continues to make these false allegations and continues to ignore Tom’s objections.

    …and anyone else who is critical of his work.

    I’ve not seen Tom attacking the character of anyone criticising his published work? Do you have an example?

    His comments about Doug Axe and about anyone affiliated with any organization that holds views different than his are not worthy of anyone who considers themselves an academic.

    Is Axe above criticism? According to Vincent Torley, his latest book, Undeniable, falls far short of an acceptable academic standard in many respects.

    I don’t see him being substantively any different than a less well known Jerry Coyne.

    There’s Jerry Coyne, his blog, his books and what his critics say about him. There’s a discrepancy!

Leave a Reply