The Atlas Asylum of absurd/ignorant posts IX

[The Dowager Mod]

I would be the Fascist mod and I will give you a time out if you do not cool your jets.

[brucejoel99]

The namesake strikes again:

“Gender-affirming healthcare” is one hell of a euphemism for sterilizing children and disrupting their natural puberty with experimental drugs.

To say nothing of irreversible, life-altering surgeries.

[Donerail]

I would be the Fascist mod and I will give you a time out if you do not cool your jets.

I apologize for responding to badger with the same level of respect and courtesy he routinely extends to others.

[The Dowager Mod]

I would be the Fascist mod and I will give you a time out if you do not cool your jets.

I apologize for responding to badger with the same level of respect and courtesy he routinely extends to others.

I don't care if you are rude to him, just as long as you don't resort to the drinking nonsense.

[Donerail]

I would be the Fascist mod and I will give you a time out if you do not cool your jets.

I apologize for responding to badger with the same level of respect and courtesy he routinely extends to others.

I don't care if you are rude to him, just as long as you don't resort to the drinking nonsense.

Yeah that's fair tbh, my bad

[AtorBoltox]

    Gov. Noem is in the right on this issue, and I give major props to BRTD for standing up for her in this thread against the waves of people attacking him for actually caring. Yeah, satanic shoes aren't the most pressing issue in the world. Still, nobody should be in the business of normalizing or rehabilitating Satan's image and society should not be treating this as if it were something perfectly normal. That this is being written off as not a big deal speaks directly to the profound spiritual malaise that this country faces.

1. Satan is not real. Even a lot of Christians don’t believe there is literally a red guy with horns who lords over a fiery underworld, and there isn’t much in the Bible to support that. Most of that conception of Satan comes from Dante’s Inferno, Milton’s Paradise Lost, and various Looney Tunes cartoons. It’s not a real thing and it’s embarrassing for real live adults to not only believe in it but have a moral panic over it (AGAIN).

I don't see how you could read the New Testament and not see the reality of Satan and demons. Christ was tempted by Satan after fasting for 40 days in the desert.  He talks about Satan and spiritual warfare repeatedly, as do his early apostles and disciples in their New Testament letters.   

[Badger]

Whether or not Gulf Coastal elitist was hatched from a spawn of Cobra eggs is a factual question. But either he was or if he wasn't. There's no direct evidence for or against this Theory, but facts by themselves something something something politically inconvenient something.

Am I doing this right?

Last post was deleted by fascist mods (hi jdb! luv u) so I'll play nice for a bit: do you sincerely believe, as you're suggesting, that this is equally as realistic a scenario as someone in a laboratory messing up? That it's completely beyond the realm of reality to believe that someone dropped a vial, someone labeled something wrong, someone put their mask on without sealing it properly? Why do you think it's so implausible that an accident happened here?

Other than the fact that there is not far exactly zero evidence for such a proposition, yeah, I'd say they're running neck-and-neck as far as credibility.

More to the point, your argument was a misplaced syllogism that conflated the conceivably theoretically possible with the arguable and credible.

[Badger]

I would be the Fascist mod and I will give you a time out if you do not cool your jets.

I apologize for responding to badger with the same level of respect and courtesy he routinely extends to others.

I don't care if you are rude to him, just as long as you don't resort to the drinking nonsense.

Yeah that's fair tbh, my bad

Apology accepted.

I think I'll celebrate this reproachment with a wee dram of either the two whiskeys my wife bought for my birthday Friday! Yukatori or Quiet Man? Decisions decisions...

 wish I could pour you a splash through the internet.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

[Badger]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

[Stuart98]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

Is that his own doing though, or is it more a matter of numerous events that happened after his death? Particularly since for such a universally recognized figure, we have basically no records of what he said and did from the time he was actually alive. It's not hard to imagine a world where Christianity in its infancy died not long after Jesus' death, like all the other upstart religious movements of the time eventually did, and where either some other movement took a similar role or where no truly dominant religious movement ever arose in the west.

[Donerail]

Whether or not Gulf Coastal elitist was hatched from a spawn of Cobra eggs is a factual question. But either he was or if he wasn't. There's no direct evidence for or against this Theory, but facts by themselves something something something politically inconvenient something.

Am I doing this right?

Last post was deleted by fascist mods (hi jdb! luv u) so I'll play nice for a bit: do you sincerely believe, as you're suggesting, that this is equally as realistic a scenario as someone in a laboratory messing up? That it's completely beyond the realm of reality to believe that someone dropped a vial, someone labeled something wrong, someone put their mask on without sealing it properly? Why do you think it's so implausible that an accident happened here?

Other than the fact that there is not far exactly zero evidence for such a proposition, yeah, I'd say they're running neck-and-neck as far as credibility.

More to the point, your argument was a misplaced syllogism that conflated the conceivably theoretically possible with the arguable and credible.

[Sorry to do this in this thread; it's off-topic, and please feel free to move it if necessary. There is a COVID origins thread in Individual Politics (for some reason) that this may fit into better]

The evidence for an artificial origin is purely circumstantial, but that doesn't mean there is "zero evidence." Given where the disease originated and the conduct of the CPC thus far it seems exceedingly unlikely that we will ever be able to gather reliable direct evidence on the origins of the disease (the joint statement on the WHO's "investigation" released by the State Department today indicates as much).

Here is what we know: the virus is most similar to a coronavirus (RaTG13) found in bats, and it was first detected in Wuhan. We know most of the early cases are linked to a seafood market in that city, and we also know that it's unlikely that it originated from the market (the market, contra early reports, did not sell either bats or pangolins, the theorized animal hosts). We know that no animals with similar viruses have been found nearby, with the horseshoe bats that host RaTG13 native to Yunnan, which is hundreds of miles away. As far as definitive knowledge about the virus itself goes, that's pretty much it — if you see a way to take those facts and assemble them into "this is definitely zoonotic," let me know.

We also know that there are three high-security virology labs in Wuhan, one of which contained the world's most comprehensive bank of bat coronaviruses. We know that lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was performing gain-of-function research, attempting to develop more infectious strains of disease to prevent future outbreaks. And we know, based on diplomatic cables from 2018, that the lab did not meet accepted safety standards for handling those kind of pathogens.

The alternative theory is that a horseshoe bat infected a person, maybe a miner or farmer, directly, and that at some point RaTG13 went through some sort of dramatic change, maybe combining with another coronavirus to produce SARS-CoV-2 (there's some suggestion that the Mojiang virus, a poorly-studied virus found in Yunnan, may be involved). I am personally skeptical of this explanation because there are several characteristics of the virus that are still difficult to explain, but I certainly acknowledge that it's a possibility.

This matters not because it provides a reason to "punish China" — it is only luck that this happened in China and not the US, where broken vials and human errors are just as common. (A researcher at my alma mater, for instance, died in 2009 from a lab accident involving the plague. That's not an exception — there have been hundreds of similar accidents at supposedly secure US labs.) It matters because there are labs in the US and elsewhere performing similar research. If it came from a bat, that's a reason to focus more on zoonotic diseases, including maybe performing more gain-of-function research to identify and respond to emerging threats, and maybe more broadly to change how we are expanding human settlement into the urban-wild boundary. If, however, it escaped through a lab accident, that's a reason to focus on lab safety, where we locate our labs, and how we do research.

I do not understand why you are so quick to dismiss either hypothesis — we simply do not have the evidence at this point to make a definitive determination. There is a reason 60 Minutes is having a discussion about both possibilities, there's a reason Robert Redfield came out and said this week that he personally believes a lab leak is more likely, and there's a reason Tedros said yesterday that "all hypotheses remain open."

This post is probably way too long, but it really does bother me that so many people are willing to jump to conclusions when we just don't have the data to support them. Figuring out what exactly happened here is essential to preventing another pandemic. It's obviously bad that politicians on the right are attempting to exploit that for racist ends, but that shouldn't be a reason to justify foreclosing any investigation into all the possibilities.

I think I'll celebrate this reproachment with a wee dram of either the two whiskeys my wife bought for my birthday Friday! Yukatori or Quiet Man? Decisions decisions...

 wish I could pour you a splash through the internet.

Ah, it's springtime (at least in California), all the cool kids are back to drinking claws now

[John Dule]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

I thought that thread was about people who are "overrated" in the sense that they don't deserve the respect with which we treat them, not people who are "overrated" in terms of their contributions to history. Obviously Jesus was one of the most influential figures in history.

[ꙮ]

I never considered him or those who think like them to be my equals, but I’m tired of treating those like him like they’re even fit to shine my shoes or exist in the same multiverse when it comes to morality.

We are good and they are evil. Simple as, no compromises or apologies.

Everyone bow down to the King of Morality, SAAuthCapitalist! Truly, none of us mere evil humans are fit to breathe the same air or even exist in the same "multiverse" as him. O glorious teacher, show us the true way, so that we can hope to approach your level!

In all seriousness, I'm getting big "drunk Alben Barkley" energy from this guy. It's amusing.

[SAAuthCapitalist]

I never considered him or those who think like them to be my equals, but I’m tired of treating those like him like they’re even fit to shine my shoes or exist in the same multiverse when it comes to morality.

We are good and they are evil. Simple as, no compromises or apologies.

Everyone bow down to the King of Morality, SAAuthCapitalist! Truly, none of us mere evil humans are fit to breathe the same air or even exist in the same "multiverse" as him. O glorious teacher, show us the true way, so that we can hope to approach your level!

In all seriousness, I'm getting big "drunk Alben Barkley" energy from this guy. It's amusing.

People who support forced vaccinations and mutilating children are literally evil, this shouldn’t be a controversial opinion.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

You keep saying "mutilating children", but I never see anyone actually argue that children should be "mutilated".

[WMS]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

I thought that thread was about people who are "overrated" in the sense that they don't deserve the respect with which we treat them, not people who are "overrated" in terms of their contributions to history. Obviously Jesus was one of the most influential figures in history.

My college professor who taught classes on Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece at the University of New Mexico, Dr. Richard Berthold, was an unrepentant atheist libertarian who held no sacred cows and delighted in spreading institutional chaos. Yes, he was a utter delight to hear in class and he really knew his stuff. On Christianity and Jesus, he both pointed out the other major historical root of Christianity in addition to Judaism, the mystery cults of the Levant, as well as holding the view that Christianity persecuted pagans harder starting with Constantine than the pagans persecuted Christians before that*.

However, he also held the view that Jesus of Nazareth (or is the proper name Joshua Bin Joseph?) was a historical figure, albeit not in the way Christians view it**. He also held generally positive views of Jesus and Early Christianity. In his words, they really followed what they said they did. They were (his words again), compared to the other religious options around at the time in the Empire, very egalitarian socially, with a positive view of this life and the next, a strong dedication to helping the poor and downtrodden, and were also notable in the greatly expanded role for women in the faith***. Jesus and the Early Christians certainly deserve better than the ahistorical BS that New Atheists (including THE OH SO EDGY R/ATHEISM) engage in, on this forum and elsewhere.

Learn some history, will you?


*Although he also said it was a comparison based on empire-wide persecutions; local and regional entities were the main persecutors of Christianity for its first two centuries plus, empire-wide persecutions developed during the Anarchy. When Christians began their persecutions it was with the power of the Roman Emperors behind it.
**If anyone doubts that Jesus was a historical figure at all, there is a delightful atheist article on why he was here.
***Yes, Paul of Tarsus was somewhat misogynistic and also rather sex-negative, but he wasn’t the Sole Authority on these matters. The later Church Councils changed that, unfortunately. While we’re at it, the myriad of local religions, the State Cult, Mithraism, and absolutely Greek philosophy were all extremely male-dominated and misogynistic.

[John Dule]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

I thought that thread was about people who are "overrated" in the sense that they don't deserve the respect with which we treat them, not people who are "overrated" in terms of their contributions to history. Obviously Jesus was one of the most influential figures in history.

My college professor who taught classes on Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece at the University of New Mexico, Dr. Richard Berthold, was an unrepentant atheist libertarian who held no sacred cows and delighted in spreading institutional chaos. Yes, he was a utter delight to hear in class and he really knew his stuff. On Christianity and Jesus, he both pointed out the other major historical root of Christianity in addition to Judaism, the mystery cults of the Levant, as well as holding the view that Christianity persecuted pagans harder starting with Constantine than the pagans persecuted Christians before that*.

However, he also held the view that Jesus of Nazareth (or is the proper name Joshua Bin Joseph?) was a historical figure, albeit not in the way Christians view it**. He also held generally positive views of Jesus and Early Christianity. In his words, they really followed what they said they did. They were (his words again), compared to the other religious options around at the time in the Empire, very egalitarian socially, with a positive view of this life and the next, a strong dedication to helping the poor and downtrodden, and were also notable in the greatly expanded role for women in the faith***. Jesus and the Early Christians certainly deserve better than the ahistorical BS that New Atheists (including THE OH SO EDGY R/ATHEISM) engage in, on this forum and elsewhere.

Learn some history, will you?


*Although he also said it was a comparison based on empire-wide persecutions; local and regional entities were the main persecutors of Christianity for its first two centuries plus, empire-wide persecutions developed during the Anarchy. When Christians began their persecutions it was with the power of the Roman Emperors behind it.
**If anyone doubts that Jesus was a historical figure at all, there is a delightful atheist article on why he was here.
***Yes, Paul of Tarsus was somewhat misogynistic and also rather sex-negative, but he wasn’t the Sole Authority on these matters. The later Church Councils changed that, unfortunately. While we’re at it, the myriad of local religions, the State Cult, Mithraism, and absolutely Greek philosophy were all extremely male-dominated and misogynistic.

I'm not reading all that, but saying Jesus was "overrated" does not necessitate having a negative view of him, so your argument is moot.

[WMS]

I'm not reading all that, but saying Jesus was "overrated" does not necessitate having a negative view of him, so your argument is moot.

You really should: when the author self-describes as “Wry, dry, rather sarcastic, eccentric, occasionally arrogant Irish-Australian atheist bastard” the odds are good it will be funny as well as informative.

Hmm I thought you had voted negatively in this poll but you didn’t vote at all so in your specific case the point is moot based on lack of information.

[Badger]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

Is that his own doing though, or is it more a matter of numerous events that happened after his death? Particularly since for such a universally recognized figure, we have basically no records of what he said and did from the time he was actually alive. It's not hard to imagine a world where Christianity in its infancy died not long after Jesus' death, like all the other upstart religious movements of the time eventually did, and where either some other movement took a similar role or where no truly dominant religious movement ever arose in the west.

That is an excellent point, and while it does still not negate Jesus Christ as one of the most influential persons in history, it arguably negates him from being the most important person despite being the focal point and worshipped deity of the most numerous religion on Earth.

There's a book I own published a few decades ago which I have in my library as a hand-me-down from my folks. I'm too lazy to get out of bed and go refresh my memory of the author's name hiking - to my disappointment I seem to recall he wound up getting involved with some anti-semitic Fringe groups - - but the book is called the 100 most influential people in history. It has 100 entries each anywhere from a few to several pages long which describes the entrants life story, an argument for their impact or lack thereof in history, and why they were placed where they were on the overall list. The author places Christ has the third most influential person in history behind Muhammad and, somewhat surprisingly, Isaac Newton. Is the theory for placing Muhammad first was that, whereas Christ had effectively note immediate impact on his world during his lifetime, Muhammad during his was an important political and military leader. Furthermore, what is many of the precepts of Christianity codified after Christ's death by Saint Paul ( number 6 on the list), Muhammad through his revelation of the Qur'an had effectively the combined impact on Islam as Christ and Saint Paul put together did on Christianity.

[Ancestral Republican]

Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ.

Based.

Yeah, Jesus was undeniably, whether one believes in God or as a Christian or not, unquestionably one of the most historically influential figures on record.

Is that his own doing though, or is it more a matter of numerous events that happened after his death? Particularly since for such a universally recognized figure, we have basically no records of what he said and did from the time he was actually alive. It's not hard to imagine a world where Christianity in its infancy died not long after Jesus' death, like all the other upstart religious movements of the time eventually did, and where either some other movement took a similar role or where no truly dominant religious movement ever arose in the west.

That is an excellent point, and while it does still not negate Jesus Christ as one of the most influential persons in history, it arguably negates him from being the most important person despite being the focal point and worshipped deity of the most numerous religion on Earth.

There's a book I own published a few decades ago which I have in my library as a hand-me-down from my folks. I'm too lazy to get out of bed and go refresh my memory of the author's name hiking - to my disappointment I seem to recall he wound up getting involved with some anti-semitic Fringe groups - - but the book is called the 100 most influential people in history. It has 100 entries each anywhere from a few to several pages long which describes the entrants life story, an argument for their impact or lack thereof in history, and why they were placed where they were on the overall list. The author places Christ has the third most influential person in history behind Muhammad and, somewhat surprisingly, Isaac Newton. Is the theory for placing Muhammad first was that, whereas Christ had effectively note immediate impact on his world during his lifetime, Muhammad during his was an important political and military leader. Furthermore, what is many of the precepts of Christianity codified after Christ's death by Saint Paul ( number 6 on the list), Muhammad through his revelation of the Qur'an had effectively the combined impact on Islam as Christ and Saint Paul put together did on Christianity.

I had the same book. But believe it or not, one of my teachers borrowed it and never gave it back. I would follow the same logic though. Mohammed spread Islam through conquest in his own lifetime, while Christianity was the work of many different people, mostly after Jesus had died.

[S019]

Democrats want to inject microchips so the government can track you at all times.

No need. Big tech already does that.

[KaiserDave]

Democrats want to inject microchips so the government can track you at all times.

No need. Big tech already does that.

Do you know what a phone is

[Ferguson97]

I never considered him or those who think like them to be my equals, but I’m tired of treating those like him like they’re even fit to shine my shoes or exist in the same multiverse when it comes to morality.

We are good and they are evil. Simple as, no compromises or apologies.

Everyone bow down to the King of Morality, SAAuthCapitalist! Truly, none of us mere evil humans are fit to breathe the same air or even exist in the same "multiverse" as him. O glorious teacher, show us the true way, so that we can hope to approach your level!

In all seriousness, I'm getting big "drunk Alben Barkley" energy from this guy. It's amusing.

People who support forced vaccinations and mutilating children are literally evil, this shouldn’t be a controversial opinion.

Forced vaccinations are incredibly based.

What children do I want to mutliate?

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]