more of gemli's gems

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21629
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Image
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

What are the odds gemli might be interviewed for a Witnesses movie snippet?
gemli Hoosier 31 minutes ago

You probably haven't ever fooled someone with a magic trick. It's not the trick that does the job. It's what the spectator says afterwards that's important.

Blaine presents the effect with a serious tone that has an ominous tinge. The spectator was completely fooled, slack jawed and stunned. He will tell his friends that he witnessed a miracle. He'll embellish his story with details that weren't even there, and swear that he witnessed the impossible.

Once you've convinced people that they've witnessed a miracle the magician's job is done. They will defend it to the death.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4823876704


:lol:

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

This is more of an anti-gem, but it does clearly point out the deeply pretzeled logic that belief in historicity requires:

Louis Midgley Dr. Exiled • 2 hours ago • edited

... And there is actual evidence that there were Lehites. You doubt this only because you demand proof....

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4824222203

Priceless.

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21629
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

My Lord. BYU professor, folks.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:My Lord. BYU professor, folks.

- Doc

A BYU prof who has backed himself into a corner, but can’t stop posting:

Genealogy Louis Midgley • an hour ago

Louis: “ And there is actual evidence that there were Lehites.”

Louis, in your opinion, what’s the most compelling evidence for your assertion?


Louis Midgley Genealogy • 32 minutes ago

The fact that you don't know that there no such evidence.

:eek:

User avatar
Gadianton
Hermit
Posts: 9926
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Gadianton »

Mr. Midgl wrote: And there is actual evidence that there were Lehites. You doubt this only because you demand proof

These guys are truly hopeless. They've been confused on the same basic concepts for decades, for Mr. M, his confusion may span more than half of a century, and it's possible that he's been confused longer than anybody else in the history of the world on this matter. If true, then what an embarrassing distinction to hold.

Earlier, he boasted the gold plates met a high standard of physical evidence that no other holy relics meet. Now he steps back, "I said evidence, but you want absolute proof!"

But on another day, if the context is science, he'll insist as he and all his Mopologist buddies do, that Karl Popper and others showed that there is no such thing as 'proof' in science, that science has been wrong a lot and everything rests ultimately on faith. If proof is impossible, then Gemli is wrong to ever demand proof on theoretical grounds. Fine. total certainty is out -- so how relatively certain is he talking? He must believe there is a scale, since he's already claimed that as empirical confirmations go, the gold plates has left nearly any other religious claim in the dust. How about compared to the existence of coronavirus? The existence of Mt. Rushmore? The earth going around the sun? Which other empirical claim that we're all familiar with rests at the same level of evidence as the gold plates?

This is the question he and his buddies talk in circles to avoid answering.

Evidence must be objective enough to make the Book of Mormon better demonstrated than other religious claims, but subjective enough to throw science out as a competitor.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6586
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Philo Sofee »

Lemmie wrote:This is more of an anti-gem, but it does clearly point out the deeply pretzeled logic that belief in historicity requires:

Louis Midgley Dr. Exiled • 2 hours ago • edited

... And there is actual evidence that there were Lehites. You doubt this only because you demand proof....

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4824222203

Priceless.

Oh....... my............Gawd............ :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Yer killin me Lou!
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6586
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Philo Sofee »

Gadianton wrote:
Mr. Midgl wrote: And there is actual evidence that there were Lehites. You doubt this only because you demand proof

These guys are truly hopeless. They've been confused on the same basic concepts for decades, for Mr. M, his confusion may span more than half of a century, and it's possible that he's been confused longer than anybody else in the history of the world on this matter. If true, then what an embarrassing distinction to hold.

Earlier, he boasted the gold plates met a high standard of physical evidence that no other holy relics meet. Now he steps back, "I said evidence, but you want absolute proof!"

But on another day, if the context is science, he'll insist as he and all his Mopologist buddies do, that Karl Popper and others showed that there is no such thing as 'proof' in science, that science has been wrong a lot and everything rests ultimately on faith. If proof is impossible, then Gemli is wrong to ever demand proof on theoretical grounds. Fine. total certainty is out -- so how relatively certain is he talking? He must believe there is a scale, since he's already claimed that as empirical confirmations go, the gold plates has left nearly any other religious claim in the dust. How about compared to the existence of coronavirus? The existence of Mt. Rushmore? The earth going around the sun? Which other empirical claim that we're all familiar with rests at the same level of evidence as the gold plates?

This is the question he and his buddies talk in circles to avoid answering.

Evidence must be objective enough to make the Book of Mormon better demonstrated than other religious claims, but subjective enough to throw science out as a competitor.

Well, to quote the moronic thinking of Midgley, "you are exactly right." I am more than good with absolute certainty being out. However, that does not eliminate the probability BASED ON EVIDENCE. Do they not yet know Bayes Theorem?!? Even after Interpreter has published articles using it, lousy though that use is???
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6586
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Philo Sofee »

Genealogy Louis Midgley • an hour ago

Louis: “ And there is actual evidence that there were Lehites.”

Louis, in your opinion, what’s the most compelling evidence for your assertion?


Louis Midgley Genealogy • 32 minutes ago

The fact that you don't know that there no such evidence.

HOWLING LAUGHTER!!! TEARS!!!!! My sides are KILLIN ME MAN!!!!!!

Stephen Colbert, step aside, you have been replaced!

This is truly TRUMP LEVEL STUPID........
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

Gemli has summed up quite well the SeN writing staff’s infatuation with the word ‘scientism’:

gemli Smokey • 20 hours ago

"Scientism" is a word that had a specific and legitimate meaning when it was used to criticize inappropriately applied "scientific" analysis to societal behavior. Even scientists are opposed to this imprecise and misapplied use of science in this case.

But the term "scientism" has been co-opted by theists to ridicule those who ask for evidence of religious claims, such as the existence of spirit beings, life after death and paranormal phenomena.

If these things do exist, they should be observable by everyone, not just those in the thrall of some religion.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4829264083

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

More scientism discussion with gemli, as usual, bringing a refreshing logic to a blog where staff writers routinely misuse the word:
Hoosier gemli • 2 days ago

Scientism is the principle that only one kind of evidence can ever count, only one mode of inquiry is ever to be accepted. It is the belief that science can explain all things, and all things can only be explained by science.

We do oppose this, and proudly.



gemli Hoosier • 2 days ago

The only kind of evidence that can be relied upon is that which can be observed and tested. Theological claims are only asserted, leave no unequivocal or examinable trace, and run counter to everything we know about physical reality. We once thought that gods and spirits were responsible for nearly everything. But over time scientific explanations have replaced religious ones. How often has the reverse been true?

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4829382995


Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

I love this discussion!
Hoosier gemli • a day ago

[gemli: ]”The only kind of evidence that can be relied upon is that which can be observed and tested.”

Thank you for illustrating my point to perfection.

The essential problem with this, however, is that religious claims can be observed and tested, but not in the publicly verifiable sense that scientific ones can....

http://disq.us/p/27vfgk6


Oh dear. Talk about “scientism.” Can we use the term “religionism” similarly?

Gemli’s comeback:
gemli Hoosier • a day ago

I wonder how religious claims are observed and tested while they're unable to be observed and tested. It sounds like they're simply felt and imagined, as if these feelings come from nothing more than human imagination combined with human fears and longings.

Theological claims don't run counter to gravity. They don't run counter to, or in step with, anything in the universe. They're merely ideas that have no effect on the physical world--except, of course, in stories that people tell which can't be confirmed and leave no evidence that can be examined. If crucially important evidence of the divine is claimed to have existed, it is always lost, stolen, buried, misplaced, hidden or destroyed. It makes a fellow wonder if it ever existed at all.

http://disq.us/p/27vh90n


Gemli makes short work of the next response, which really is nothing more than religious scientism incarnate:
Hoosier gemli • a day ago

Funny how your claims cannot be observed nor tested either. Do tell me how you intend to prove your theory of religious cognition?

Because that must be proved. The witnesses of many people contradict your materialistic worldview. We testify of our experiences. We testify of what we know. You have to dismiss our witness or your worldview crumbles. So you have your theory. Can you prove it? If not, it will rest on the same sandy ground you ascribe to us: a story invented to meet your needs.



gemli Hoosier • a day ago

Those who make a positive claim of something's existence have the burden of proof.

http://disq.us/p/27vmhw9



It’s a little embarrassing that an adult, in a discussion about scientism, presents anecdotal “witnessing” as evidence. However, this is a blog pushing a movie where “witnesses” are presented as virtually unassailable evidence, so maybe it is inevitable. Illogical, yes, but on this blog, inevitable.

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen more than a handful of ufo movies with equally compelling “witness” accounts.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

And the ultimate comeback:
DanielPeterson Mod gemli • 20 hours ago

You're not just unconvinced, gemli. I could respect that.

You're as dogmatically convinced as any snake handler or cargo cultist.



gemli DanielPeterson • 15 hours ago

Yes, that sounds like me. But all it would take to change my views would be...wait for it...evidence.

http://disq.us/p/27w4j0g

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Gemli and Philip Jenkins would get along quite well, I suspect.

User avatar
Jason Bourne
God
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:00 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Jason Bourne »

Stocks wrote:Those guys are really losing it.

The three stooges. Dan. Lou. Kiwi.

Even if I remained a believing member, I would shudder with embarrassment for what passes as defending the faith over there.

By their fruits ye shall know them, eh guys?

Ugh! I certainly don't miss those three one bit.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

Ideeho gemli • 5 days ago

Hardly, BUT it did invite you to exit your cocooned, ensconced universe to peer out for a tad, so there is that...


gemli Ideeho • 5 days ago

This is rich. When the Mormons tell you to leave your cocooned, ensconced universe, you know God of Irony is smiling.

http://disq.us/p/28ul7to
Lol.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6586
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Philo Sofee »

Lemmie wrote:
Fri Mar 13, 2020 7:12 am
And the ultimate comeback:
DanielPeterson Mod gemli • 20 hours ago

You're not just unconvinced, gemli. I could respect that.

You're as dogmatically convinced as any snake handler or cargo cultist.



gemli DanielPeterson • 15 hours ago

Yes, that sounds like me. But all it would take to change my views would be...wait for it...evidence.

http://disq.us/p/27w4j0g
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Gemli and Philip Jenkins would get along quite well, I suspect.
Gemli is unassailably powerful, and we have.................wait for it.........the evidence. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

More of an anti-gem, really, or maybe a gemli gem, once removed.

DanielPeterson gemli 10 hours ago

gemli: "some underlying story that was made up out of whole cloth to begin with"

That's the dogma speaking in you, gemli. Try really, really hard to think and speak for yourself. I'm convinced, based on my own experience, that you would find the experience exhilarating.

gemli: "Truth is that which can be observed, tested and confirmed."

But may, in fact, currently be unobserved, untested, and impossible to confirm -- and may NEVER be observed, tested, or confirmed.

Did a being named Glambo, son of Glorp, once live on a planet in the Southern Pinwheel Galaxy? If one did, we will almost certainly never know.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4896639171
Lol. Would Peterson’s Glambo, Son of Glorp be related to Sagan’s fire-breathing dragon living in his garage? It seems to me that gemli is the one thinking for himself, not Peterson.


“ Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.“
—-Carl Sagan

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22391
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by moksha »

Did a being named Glambo, son of Glorp, once live on a planet in the Southern Pinwheel Galaxy? If one did, we will almost certainly never know.
Never say never, proof of Glambo's existence may be hidden away in a stone box just waiting for someone righteous enough to dig it up.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

Again more of an anti-gem, but it seemed apropos:
Louis Midgley • an hour ago

...there is no "the other board, " and crackpots only demolish themselves...

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4906045298
:rolleyes:
From the crackpot of all crackpots, no less.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Lemmie »

This may have to be broken out into a separate thread, but for now I thought an appropriate addition to “gemli’s gems” would be: “Moksha’s Meaningfulnesses.”

I have in mind Moksha’s response to a particularly disturbing conclusion quoted in a certain blog location:
For how foolish it is to long for a future that, first, always remains uncertain and, second, even at best — namely, when it is really fulfilled — only brings one nearer to the grave....

When knowledge of the inescapability of death has really seized a person, then everything that fills his days becomes stale and empty.
Wow. Really? The implication seems to be that there is no reason to live life well without believing in an afterlife. What a depressing approach. Moksha lightens the mood considerably with just the right touch of levity and care:
Moksha [to the rescue]:

Hope springs eternal. Might as well have it till the inevitable end along with Wellbutrin as needed. Best wishes and condolences to all who need that as well.

Group hug!

http://disq.us/p/29f4q1w
Thank you, Moksha!

User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 10222
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: more of gemli's gems

Post by Res Ipsa »

Awesome response Moksha! My experience has been the opposite — my life seems more important and meaningful because it’s all I’ve got. I think it’s hard for someone who’s been a theist all her life to understand how an atheist experiences life. Not that we all do it identically, but we’re don’t tend to fit well with theist stereotypes of atheists.

Post Reply