Name 5 people you can’t stand thread who you don’t share a religion with

[lilpixieofterror]

Well for you, James my friend, although I don't usually waste my time responding to LPOT's thought-disordered rants.

Of course they are 'thought disordered rants' because you're too stupid to refute any of it, so you need some port in a storm to avoid all the refutations of your nonsense.

I usually quoted the stats as “non-believers” rather than type out the full wordy heading of “Atheist/Agnostic/Nonbeliever in God”. The point being made was that Norway is a secular, largely non-believing nation as indicated by the statistics. In any event when I referred to these figures I generally included the link for people to check it out for themselves, which is probably where she got her "ammunition" from in the first place, i.e. my link.

Trying to rewrite history again Tazzy Wazzy? Here is YOUR FULL QUOTE on the matter:

In some Scandinavian countries one is automatically added to the membership of the national church at birth and one has to actually "sign out” to not be counted as Christian. But, in actuality all the Scandinavian countries, along with much of Europe, have extremely high rates of non-belief in God, (Norway at 72%).

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

And while they may be “cultural Christians" they nevertheless rank high in the Inequality adjusted HDI whereas the actual Christian USA only ranks 28th.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

That that I call a misrepresentation. Norway isn't at 72% at all, they have a range from 31-72%. What is it called again when you leave out the whole quote and only pick the part of the quote that you like and ignore the rest? Likewise, you're ignoring that other countries are on that list that are not on the top of the HDI list. Don't take my word for it, here is the top 5, from the list:

Country: Population: Non believer range: Number of non believers:
Sweden 8,986,000 46 - 85% 4,133,560 - 7,638,100
Vietnam 82,690,000 81% 66,978,900
Denmark 5,413,000 43 - 80% 2,327,590 - 4,330,400
Norway 4,575,000 31 - 72% 1,418,250 - 3,294,000
Japan 127,333,000 64 - 65% 81,493,120 - 82,766,450
Czech Republic 10,246,100 54 - 61% 5,328,940 - 6,250,121

The third row there gives us a range of belief while the 4th row gives us the estimated numbers of the population. For Norway it is 31-72% are estimated to be non believers. That is a RANGE, but you did not include the range. What you did was cut out the lower number and pretend it was only a higher number. That is a lie at worst and a massive basic reading comprehension problem, at best. Face it Tazzy Wazzy, you misrepresented the data and are trying to weasel your way out of ignoring my fully claim and only picking to address part of my claim and ignoring the rest. More of your dishonest nature, shows itself again and thus you give more reasons why pretty much everybody sees you as a laughing stock and why few take you seriously around here. Thanks Tazzy for giving a perfect example of your dishonest nature and why you don't deserve a ounce of respect.

Once again, for the world to see:

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

With these sorts of misrepresentations and half-truths, which seem to be her stock-in-trade, you can see why I no longer bother with your sparring partner.

Yep, the world can see how dishonest you really are. Your claim was that Norway was at 72%, you ignored that the range was 31-72%. What is it called again when you leave out part of the quote and only pick and choose what you want to hear and ignore the rest? Oh yeah at worst lying and at best a massive problem with basic reading skills.

BTW: I too remember that amazing epic post where AP used language such as "thatness", "thisness", and "whatness" to explain the profundities of Aristotelian metaphysics. I don't think he's ventured out of his 'Shallow Waters' hidey-hole ever since.

And nothing to prove him wrong yet, but you've been proved wrong right here. Enjoy trying to hide the fact you cut out that Norway has a range of 31-72%. Also, I love that you ignored the fact that Vietnam and many other countries also have a higher number of non believers, but are not on the top of the HDI list, thus refuting your claims that higher levels of unbelief = high HDI list. Gosh, it must suck to be wrong so much, but too full of yourself to ever admit to your lies or omissions, eh?

[Sea of red]

It's good to see you Sea of Red. I almost miss these spats between you and lilpixie. Like watching an old married couple...

Good to see you've kept yourself sane on this forums. lol

I don't really have a problem with her to be honest. As a recovering hot-head myself, I've learned to let people cool off when things get really strung out in a debate. I don't look at her as a bad person or anything, like she may believe. What I'll never understand is why she can't leave people alone that don't want to talk to her, or let people cool off that are trying to be civil.

I've found that if I leave her alone for awhile and give her space she's pleasant, but if I reply everytime she wants to talk things eventually go south.

[Sea of red]

Well for you, James my friend, although I don't usually waste my time responding to LPOT's thought-disordered rants.

I usually quoted the stats as “non-believers” rather than type out the full wordy heading of “Atheist/Agnostic/Nonbeliever in God”. The point being made was that Norway is a secular, largely non-believing nation as indicated by the statistics. In any event when I referred to these figures I generally included the link for people to check it out for themselves, which is probably where she got her "ammunition" from in the first place, i.e. my link.

Once again, for the world to see:

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

With these sorts of misrepresentations and half-truths, which seem to be her stock-in-trade, you can see why I no longer bother with your sparring partner.

BTW: I too remember that amazing epic post where AP used language such as "thatness", "thisness", and "whatness" to explain the profundities of Aristotelian metaphysics. I don't think he's ventured out of his 'Shallow Waters' hidey-hole ever since.



Perish the thought, but you're right.

Yeah, that post was pretty hard to forget for me. I doubt that's what made him go into his own part of the forum though. I think he just likes to read his own posts and since he's respected on here (for whatever reason) they gave him his own echo chamber.

[Sea of red]

As you present it now, at best, you got an example of some arrogance. At the worst, I got an example of a basic reading compression fail and at worst an example of dishonesty.

My hunch at the time was a little of both.

Than you shouldn't of jumped into the conversation.

Just like you can post to people that have specifically told you not to converse with them, I can post a little jab and not actually get into the conversation itself.

Don't know what else to tell you kid. I've made this pretty easy.

[Sea of red]

There's thousands of post, here on the new tWeb. You can't find examples right now? On the other hand, the example of mine comes from the new tWeb and was posted within a few weeks. Trying to say that your source says the population of Norway is 72% atheist, when it groups atheist/agnostics together and gives a range of 31-72% is a huge problem no matter how you stack it.

Go back and read my post history. I haven't posted all that much in over a year until recently. I had personal problems that had to be taken care of, and I paid zero attention to this site during that time, so forgive me if while dealing with issues in my life I didn't keep a record of what Apologia Phoenix' rants.

I'm pretty satisfied with Jamie's explanation. And before you start, know that I give the same benefit of the doubt to everyone, rather than assuming dishonesty from the get-go. Perhaps you should take your advise about not "assuming the worst" in people.

If Jamie gets on your nerves then ignore him and don't respond. I mean geez, the guy hasn't spoken to you in YEARS, I would think that would be enough to realize he doesn't care what you think.

[Tassman]

He'll have to answer for that. He's my friend, so you should expect that I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, due to our off-forum relations. I don't know what he what he intentions were, so I'll have to let him answer for himself.

Well for you, James my friend, although I don't usually waste my time responding to LPOT's thought-disordered rants.

I usually quoted the stats as “non-believers” rather than type out the full wordy heading of “Atheist/Agnostic/Nonbeliever in God”. The point being made was that Norway is a secular, largely non-believing nation as indicated by the statistics. In any event when I referred to these figures I generally included the link for people to check it out for themselves, which is probably where she got her "ammunition" from in the first place, i.e. my link.

Once again, for the world to see:

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

With these sorts of misrepresentations and half-truths, which seem to be her stock-in-trade, you can see why I no longer bother with your sparring partner.

BTW: I too remember that amazing epic post where AP used language such as "thatness", "thisness", and "whatness" to explain the profundities of Aristotelian metaphysics. I don't think he's ventured out of his 'Shallow Waters' hidey-hole ever since.

It's good to see you Sea of Red. I almost miss these spats between you and lilpixie. Like watching an old married couple...

Perish the thought, but you're right.

[lilpixieofterror]

Couple points:

1)Nick used the terms in order to purposeless obfuscate the discussion.

As you present it now, at best, you got an example of some arrogance. At the worst, I got an example of a basic reading compression fail and at worst an example of dishonesty.

2)I already told you that I'm not going to speak on Jamie's behalf.

Than you shouldn't of jumped into the conversation.

[lilpixieofterror]

I haven't debated the guy in years; now it's all gone.

There's thousands of post, here on the new tWeb. You can't find examples right now? On the other hand, the example of mine comes from the new tWeb and was posted within a few weeks. Trying to say that your source says the population of Norway is 72% atheist, when it groups atheist/agnostics together and gives a range of 31-72% is a huge problem no matter how you stack it.

[Adrift]

It's good to see you Sea of Red. I almost miss these spats between you and lilpixie. Like watching an old married couple...

[Sea of red]

Yes and the evidence still stands and is present in this thread. I would think trying to make an argument that the data clearly doesn't make is a far more serious than using some old terms.

Couple points:

1)Nick used the terms in order to purposeless obfuscate the discussion.
2)I already told you that I'm not going to speak on Jamie's behalf.

[Sea of red]

And you can prove this how?

I haven't debated the guy in years; now it's all gone.

[lilpixieofterror]

It wasn't just his language, it was his overall way of debating. I found he's going to repeat his arguments in future debates even if I show him how it's flawed after twenty pages, and doesn't really care how much time you take out of your day to reply to his points.

Pointless.

And you can prove this how?

[lilpixieofterror]

Did you not read my post?

Yes and the evidence still stands and is present in this thread. I would think trying to make an argument that the data clearly doesn't make is a far more serious than using some old terms.

[Sea of red]

And yet, I've had similar interactions over the years. Your friend is trying to pretend that atheism leads to the best society possible and is bending the facts to suit his beliefs vs letting the facts speak for themselves. The reality is, many countries, on that list, rank in all kinds of ways (some with a higher range of atheist/agnostics than Norway's has), so it is pretty obvious that the amount of atheist/agnostics that a society has would have zero bearing on it's position on the HDI list. The question becomes; why does he keep saying and imply it does when it is clear that it doesn't?

Did you not read my post?

[Sea of red]

And that proves your claims because...

Besides, I would think misrepresenting the number of atheist, in Norway, would be far more of a serious problem than using archaic terms would be.

It wasn't just his language, it was his overall way of debating. I found he's going to repeat his arguments in future debates even if I show him how it's flawed after twenty pages, and doesn't really care how much time you take out of your day to reply to his points.

Pointless.