THAT post felt like trolling

[RussBLib]

Just wondering who here might have alerted on that thread started by "SoLeftIAmRight"? Is wondering about that, or posting about it, a violation of the rules?

s/he could just as easily have put it in all caps: JUSTIFY YOURSELVES, ATHEISTS!!!

[trotsky]

1. No clue, and actually I wouldn't have minded discussing it.

Might have been a chance to debunk an oft-used bit of nonsense thrown around too much - that somehow atheists are taking an "extreme" position that they don't have evidence for.

[Tobin S.]

2. I wasn't particularly offended by it, but it was clearly out of place for the group.

It was much more apt for Religion. However, I was not the one who alerted on it and I was kind of surprised to see it locked given how things usually work for non-believers around here.

[LiberalAndProud]

3. I think it's a fair question coming from a religious point of view.

The idea that one can be an agnostic atheist simply doesn't occur to some until they find themselves right there.

Me -> Mirror.

I wouldn't have minded the discussion, either.

[Rainforestgoddess]

4. Not me

I am see it until just now. I think it could have been a good discussion as well.

[Silent3]

5. I obviously missed something

Is this a thread which has been deleted now?

[LiberalAndProud]

6. Hidden.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/123033472

[Silent3]

7. Ah. Doesn't bother me.

I'd have gladly left that thread open to argue it out.

[deucemagnet]

8. I thought it was a bad hide.

The poster seemed polite and respectful and I would have liked to have seen where things went.

[LiberalAndProud]

9. I suspect jurors were trying to respect our safe haven.

Anybody have the jury results?

[RussBLib]

10. obviously the "quality" of the juries varies wildly

I wonder if it would be good to automatically publish jury results so you would know if/when you got alerted on?

Then again, most jurors I've seen don't bother to include any explanation for their vote.

A far-from-perfect system.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. That really isn't and shouldn't be a jury function.

[LiberalAndProud]

18. Agreed. But the jury does what the jury does.

Also, I could be wrong.

[deucemagnet]

22. I'm sure that was their intent.

Personally, I didn't see any harm in letting that thread go for a while. If the OP were trolling, I'm sure we would have known beyond a shadow of a doubt in a few posts. Anyway, it's a moot point now.

[progressoid]

11. I dunno. Seemed like s/he was genuinely interested.

[Warpy]

12. Looked like trolling to me, too

This is a safe haven. We don't have to justify anything to anyone here.

It might have been more appropriate in the Religion group.

I'm glad someone alerted and a jury gave a collective boot to his/her arse.

[Mbrow]

13. Yeah, I did not reply to it

Because I had somewhere to be, but it wasn't bad or hurtful. When i'm on a jury I don't automatically cut them off if they are questioning assumptions, in this case an easy answer might have been "there is no God, prove me wrong."

[Warren Stupidity]

15. That was a meddlesome jury enforcing the SOP of this forum.

Bad Jury Bad Alert.

[frogmarch]

17. I thought it was trolling.

I didn't alert on it, but it's okay with me it was hidden.

If I wanted to hear someone tell me I can't KNOW the Christian god doesn't exist I'd phone one of my in-laws.

[Jeff Murdoch]

19. If the OP had included some reasons

for their assertions, it might not have been alerted, but as written it was pure flame bait.

[PeaceNikki]

20. I agree. That's why my reply was pushing for more....

I was expecting a long, thoughtful OP with reasoning, etc. But it was all: "WTF, you guys are dumb... thoughts?"

[Goblinmonger]

21. Thanks for the laugh.

I needed it today.

[Curmudgeoness]

23. It wasn't me who found it offensive.

I did think it was probably trolling, but I would have been willing to see how it went. It seemed to be insulting, but I wasn't sure. I didn't see it until it was already hidden, so I couldn't get into the discussion.

And the think is, we CAN justify ourselves.

[bvf]

28. Agreed re justification,

And the hide occurred just as I was about to post to the thread. A WTF? moment there.

[bvf]

24. Didn't see any reason for the alert or the hide.

Having said that, it looked as if SoLeftIAmRight was champing at the bit to make some ridiculous epistemological argument, if his/her responses to the couple of comments that made it through were any indication.

There's belief, and then there's justified belief--a huge distinction.

[RussBLib]

25. so no one here will cop to alerting on the post?

interesting.

maybe it was a host?

doesn't really matter.

don't really give a fuck about it. not worth it.

[AlbertCat]

33. not worth it.

I know..... just another one of "those" discussions where we repeat the same things we've gone over a million times and debunk... again.... the "You can't be sure" stuff all over again. Yawn.

Perhaps if in the initial statement he had hinted at what our supposed fundamental flaw in thinking was, we would have all gone ""Awwwww..... this again???? ".

[PeaceNikki]

36. t'wernt I.

Although based on the replies below, it is probably a good thing it was locked anyway.

[RussBLib]

37. I agree

My radar seems to still be working.

Poor faithiests. They know not what they do. Caught in a closed loop of their own making.

Pity.

[onager]

26. Atheists! We are worse than ZOMBIE HITLERZ!1!

[RussBLib]

27. speaking of Hitler

couldn't resist

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. That is someone banned from DU before for being rude to "a raving atheist"

SoLeftIAmRight
40. atheist are unable to reason

I am able to have more reasoned discussions with scholarly Christians than with any atheist I have ever encountered.

Try agnosticism.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4911786

...

SoLeftIAmRight
56. That is a lot of words to put into my mouth - hope you washed your hands.

If you can say something about how we think, our understanding of time and space, that fact that a wise person once said "I know nothing" then come and give me some enlightenment. As long as you are struggling at the jesus v. nothing level I would be happy if you would leave me alone.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4913222

muriel_volestrangler
61. Brilliant - your standard response to any reply to your blanket "atheist are unable to reason" claim

is to post a nonsensical "I don't want to talk to anyone who doesn't think like me" reply. Your first claim is, frankly, stupid. All groups are able to reason; you're more likely to to find reason used well in a group that doesn't depend on 'truths' revealed by scriptures that demand they are taken on faith.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914404

SoLeftIAmRight
62. Wow!

You prove my point. You are stuck in a jesus v. nothing world. You paint a picture with truths, scripture, and faith as if that is a counterpoint your religion.

Atheist make a simple mistake in their thinking. By definition you make statements about reality that are as silly as the easter bunny.

The nature of 'reality' is not only stranger than you imagine, it's stranger than you can imagine!

It is for weak minds to argue about things that we have no ability to perceive. The structure of our cognition can not grasp the true nature of time, space, mass, or any of the oddities that show themselves at the extremes of scale.

I suggest that you take a less militant view and acknowledge that "we know nothing."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4915765

...

muriel_volestrangler
81. You are admitting to signing up to DU more than once

Were you banned before? If so, for what?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4916150

SoLeftIAmRight
82. Yes

I was less than civil with a raving atheist.

I proposed and organized and presided at the first gathering of DU folks in Houston Texas.

You will surly remember there was a time when there was a section in the upper right part of the home page that listed these events. Skinner would never sanction these events. It was a concession on his part to even post the events. I had several conversations about this with him.

be well
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4916194

[trotsky]

30. Excellent.

Thanks for that info. Name didn't even look familiar to me! Must not be capable of making a lasting impression.

[Hissyspit]

31. Yeah, troll.

[RussBLib]

32. thanks, Muriel. sounds like a militant faithiest to me.

I get the impression that he thinks he knows there is a God while insisting that no one really knows anything.

[LiberalAndProud]

35. I guess that conversation was headed nowhere.

Thanks jury.

[mr blur]

34. Faithiest Troll.

They're everywhere.