The 'Rational' Fundy Formula for Debate

Desdenova
atheist
Desdenova's picture
Posts: 410
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
The 'Rational' Fundy Formula for Debate

!. Come up with a word or series of words to describe what it is that you don't understand but wish to 'disprove'.

2. Take rarely used words from philosophy or any other subject that sounds good such as non-paraconsistent logic, phenomenological reduction, Epistemology, Suburethral Calculi, absurdist progressive gradualism.

3. Insert these words into mind numbingly long tirades.

4. Insist that any refutation of your gibberish is an ad hominem attack. Ad hominem makes you sound uber cool and intelligent!

5. Declare victory in an insulting and condescending manner.

6. Copy & paste the next installment.

 

The end result looks something like this.

A Logical Discombobulation of Atheistic Absurdist Progressive Gradualism

Atheists are inherently absurdist progressive gradualists, as demonstrated by Urey & Geller in their atheist soup mixture which failed to replicate God's creation event. Lacking the enticement of God's Luddite Rapidism, they flounder on the banks of epistemological failure and sexual paraphilia. I shall now demonstrate this using Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's model of phenomenological reduction.

While absurdist progressive gradulists are attempting to prefabricate the protozoan dichotomy of their lexicon, they lavishly reveal the Suburethral Calculi of their dilemma. Grimacing in the externalist bigotry of their self effacing narcisim, their true nature is thus revealed. This non-paraconsistent logic reticulates impulsively in the very heart of their argument, thereby proving a) Orville Redenbacher's theory of Goddidit, b) that atheistic absurdist progressive gradualism is ineffectual and inconsistent with logic, and c) that atheistic absurdist progressive gradualists do indeed consume babies....

Author's Note: Continue on in this manner for a minimum of 58 paragraphs before ending with the word Respectfully.

 

It takes a village to raise an idiot.

Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.

Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
Desdenova wrote:ROFLMAO I

ROFLMAO

I think I described a pattern too, once-- something like this:

  1. Theist makes the Initial post, usually cordial.
  2. Posters here object
  3. Theist attempts to defend.
  4. Posters here object more.
  5. Theist gets upset, resulting in ad hominems
  6. Posters point out the pissed off theist.
  7. The theist gets enraged, posting junk, then is never heard again...

 

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Desdenova wrote:2. Take

Desdenova wrote:

2. Take rarely used words from philosophy or any other subject that sounds good such as non-paraconsistent logic, phenomenological reduction, Epistemology, Suburethral Calculi, absurdist progressive gradualism.

 

I don't claim to be anything other than a true ignoramus when it comes to philosophy.  Does "suburethral calculi" have anything to do with bladder control?

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ROFLMAO

ANSWERS !!!

 ANSWERS :

Des :

It is a logical fallacy to admit to a logical fallacy. Since you believe in nothing, it is a logical fallacy to say that you believe in something. The logical fallacy can not exist if the person can not formulate logic to begin with, another thread can start this up. Empricism can have no known sequence of logical fallacy since all is a logical fallacy.

Ubuntu :

Patterns can only be described by the infinite reference point. Without an infinite reference point, the reference point becomes non-existent and therefore empiricism can not create the reference point.

CJ:

The Bible speaks very plainly on bladder control. But since all that Atheists have is empircism, we  can not logically ascertain that bladders exist to those that do not believe in them.

Harleysportster :

Humor and sarcasm are logical fallacies. You have no infinite reference point, therefore it is illogical to reference humor from non-existence.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

ANSWERS !!!

 ANSWERS :

Des :

It is a logical fallacy to admit to a logical fallacy. Since you believe in nothing, it is a logical fallacy to say that you believe in something. The logical fallacy can not exist if the person can not formulate logic to begin with, another thread can start this up. Empricism can have no known sequence of logical fallacy since all is a logical fallacy.

Ubuntu :

Patterns can only be described by the infinite reference point. Without an infinite reference point, the reference point becomes non-existent and therefore empiricism can not create the reference point.

CJ:

The Bible speaks very plainly on bladder control. But since all that Atheists have is empircism, we  can not logically ascertain that bladders exist to those that do not believe in them.

Harleysportster :

Humor and sarcasm are logical fallacies. You have no infinite reference point, therefore it is illogical to reference humor from non-existence.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Desdenova
atheist
Desdenova's picture
Posts: 410
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote: I don't claim to

cj wrote:

 

I don't claim to be anything other than a true ignoramus when it comes to philosophy.  Does "suburethral calculi" have anything to do with bladder control?

 

<chuckles> Kidney stones below the urethra. I never said the words had to make sense in the context they were being used. They just need to sound impressive.

It takes a village to raise an idiot.

Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.

Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Desdenova wrote:cj wrote:I

Desdenova wrote:

cj wrote:

I don't claim to be anything other than a true ignoramus when it comes to philosophy.  Does "suburethral calculi" have anything to do with bladder control?

<chuckles> Kidney stones below the urethra. I never said the words had to make sense in the context they were being used. They just need to sound impressive.

 

Calculi = calcium - got it.  I'll bet you would sound impressive if you were passing one.  I thought my chain was being pulled.  I just couldn't figure out from which direction. 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Ctchewlu (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Hello everyone. New member

Hello everyone. New member here. It may be awhile before I start posting. It takes TIME to read all of this and compose THE ANSWERS!!!!


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2406
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Welcome..........

Ctchewlu wrote:

Hello everyone. New member here. It may be awhile before I start posting. It takes TIME to read all of this and compose THE ANSWERS!!!!

e

 

 

 

                   ..................and tell us about yourself.  All...... and I say ALL!!!  are welcome here.  We  have no censorship,  unless you make death threats,  so speak up and make a post.  We all want to hear from  newbies.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
That was a very funny OP

 

Thanks for that, Des.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Ctchewlu wrote:Hello

Ctchewlu wrote:

Hello everyone. New member here. It may be awhile before I start posting. It takes TIME to read all of this and compose THE ANSWERS!!!!

LOL.

Someone has undoubtedly come across the threads of Jean Chauvin and his formulas for mass replying.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Ctchewlu wrote:Hello

Ctchewlu wrote:

Hello everyone. New member here. It may be awhile before I start posting. It takes TIME to read all of this and compose THE ANSWERS!!!!

I consider your refutation of my meaningless argument an Ad hominem attack based on the fact that Ad hominem sounds uber cool.  Also the fact that I didn't even present a meaningless argument and that you didn't object to it makes it even more confusing.

Welcome to the forum, post a message in Introductions.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Heh, I missed this thread.

Heh, I missed this thread.  Awesome OP, I lol'ed.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Tadgh
atheist
Tadgh's picture
Posts: 125
Joined: 2010-08-29
User is offlineOffline
Brilliant post. You are, I

Brilliant post. You are, I believe, referring to what we used to call "double talk."


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
My favorite part is "and end

My favorite part is "and end with the word respectfully".  So true.  I've lost count of how many people call you names, insult you at every turn, get nasty and hateful, condemn you to hellfire, then sign, "Respectfully".

 

If you want to tell someone to fuck off and die in a fire, just do it, God knows what you mean anyway.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.