I’m not fooling about this Molly »« How can anyone vote for this party? Jesus helps.

Have you ever noticed that real polymaths tend not to call themselves polymaths?

I was alerted to the existence of Jonathan Bishop on twitter: he is, apparently a super-genius who will “write papers on-demand” and “work with leading academics” in just about any field. As proof of his bonafides, he plasters a photo of him wearing a mortar board everywhere. I’ve got one of those goofy hats somewhere, I should start wearing it more often. So I’d look smart.

The hat is silly, but what he says is sillier.

I’d like to know whether HERV is linked to Lucy’s more rigid brain as I believe schizophrenia makes the brain less ‘rigid’.

My question now is: can/did retrotransposons viruses transfer from fruit flies to humans via fruit to create more rigid brains?

So many assumptions: what does Mr Bishop know about endogenous retroviruses? What does he know about the molecular biology of Lucy’s brain? What does it mean to say a brain is more or less rigid? Where’s the link between this putative rigidity and endogenous retroviruses? Why are we drawing a link between australopithecines, schizophrenia, and retroviruses?

To answer these questions, I checked out Mr Bishops’ website. Something about it reminded me of Kent Hovind, for some reason.

Hi, my name is Jonathan Bishop. I am an IT polymath with professional expertise and Masters degrees in the scientific, legal and economic aspects of online communities and e-learning systems. I have direct experience in working in government, industry and academia and using this to push the boundaries of online community and trolling research. I hope that by the end of my career to have made an outstanding contribution to the advancement of knowledge, practice and policy in the fields of information technology, the arts, law and sciences.

Oh. Well. I guess that settles that. Of course, when I looked at his publications, just about all I see are conference presentations at IT meetings; I don’t see much evidence of a polymath.

You have reached The Official Website of Jonathan Bishop. I am regarded by Incisive Media to be one of ‘Britain’s foremost exporters of online community and e-learning research to the USA and Mainland Europe‘. I am regarded as the leading authority in the world on trolling and increasing participation in online communities.

Never heard of him. Oh, and the “trolling research”? He’s got a couple of blog entries about some incident at a football game. If that’s all it takes to be an expert in trolling, I must be the Einstein of trolls!

I told him that he was babbling BS. So he replied:

We’ll see Mr Myers when my empirical research paper on plasticity and social/emotional/cognitive imparment is published!

Oooooh, he’s submitted a paper. Where, I wonder?

I sent it to Nature Neuroscience, so it will probably get into the Daily Mail after! I am based at the Insitute of Life Science!

Heh. Chewtoy. He’ll probably appreciate the brief surge of traffic this post brings to him.

Comments

  1. says

    Well, there is an Institute of Life Science in Swansea, UK.

    Bishop is not on the staff there. So…”based” may be a euphemism of some sort.

  2. andyo says

    How do you find these people? Or you just do an “I’m feeling lucky” on Google and it’s just random kooks?

  3. jacobusvanbeverningk says

    I am regarded as the leading authority in the world on trolling

    Not sure whose, but indeed, clearly an April 1st issue.

  4. says

    Professor Myers. No I do not understand much about “endogenous retroviruses”. The first I heard of them was today thanks to Scott Hurst.

    Biology is not a subject I know a lot about. I am not even an amateur biologist. My interest in biology is purely for philosophical purposes about what could be possible. I see science as a way of refuting the Bible. So my question about ‘fruit flies’ was not a serious position on the Origin of the Species, but merely a way of testing the boundaries of biology for refuting Genesis 3 – an on going hobby of mine as a former Christian.

    I am willing to provide you with a poster provided to an academic conference on the paper I sent to Nature Neuroscience and discuss it with you over Skype if you’d like?

    Further, I ask you to withdraw your attacks on my reputation as a trolling expert, or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee. It might reassure you to know that I have been called a ‘trolling expert’ by the UK television station ITV Wales and receive at least one enquiry a day from the media. I had not heard of you until today, and would expect a professor not to use such logical fallacies which I teach to people at the Crocels Trolling Academy as a way to ‘win arguments’ but ‘lose debates’!

  5. says

    I remember that guy. I had a long debate on his blog with him about cannabis policy and the relative risks of cannabis and currently-legal recreational drugs. Looks like me and my co-commenters managed to win him round on that one, so I can’t be too hard on him:-)

  6. says

    To become a “Fellow of the RSA” it appears that you send them some money. Also note his spelling of “Charterered”.

    The British Computer Society is not a very nice organisation – they owe a group that I belong to several thousand pounds.

  7. Hank Fox says

    …or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee.

    At least you know he’s telling the truth when he says …

    I had not heard of you until today.

  8. christophepetroni says

    If this is an April Fools’ contribution, it’s the first on FtB that fooled me. I must not be cynical enough yet.

  9. says

    I possess the awesome superpower of KOOK MAGNETISM.

    That gave me a wonderful mental image of you, dressed up like Magneto, waving your hands and making kooks fly around the room and smash (gently) into things!

  10. Reverend PJ says

    It might reassure you to know that I have been called a ‘trolling expert’ by the UK television station ITV Wales and receive at least one enquiry a day from the media.

    OMG! It was on teevee so it must be true!!
    Maybe I should start wearing my official PhD hat everywhere, that way people will know I’m an expert.

  11. alexmcdonald says

    Not the Jonathan Bishop, who represents Treforest on Pontypridd Town Council in South Wales by any chance?

    This grand overblown self promotion from his website http://www.jonathanbishop.org.uk/; “which led to me gaining Fellowship of the Royal Society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures and commerce” led me to http://www.thersa.org/fellowship/joining-old, where for the princely sum of 150 of our British Pounds I too can gain a fellowship.

    Jon appears to run an extensive web of websites, some of which (as in the Crocels Trolling Academy) see little updates, make grand claims and appear to have PO or drop-box addresses associated with grander institutions such as the genuine ILS in Swansea. Also runs a political party, and is “Father to the Fourth way in the Information Age”, whose manifesto can be found here; http://www.pluralist.org.uk/.

    Harmless crank, I suspect.

  12. says

    I wouldn’t be so shocked if I were you municipalis. I wrote of of the most cited papers in Computers in Human Behaviour:
    http://www.journals.elsevier.com/computers-in-human-behavior/most-cited-articles/

    I am also editing books from Springer and IGI Global, the latter nearly in press:
    http://www.polnetics.com

    I have workshops and special issues on the way.

    Thanks for your comments Alex. I will take “harmless crank” to mean someone who is different from others who wants to get the best out of life and do well for themselves, while also helping others along the way.

  13. interrobang says

    Okay, so that makes you a know-some-of-it in the sociology of computing. It doesn’t mean you know jack shit about biology, and you probably shouldn’t be challenging an actual biologist on the subject.

    You’re the only person I’ve ever encountered who has “Nobel syndrome” without benefit of having won a Nobel.

    Also, go ahead and complain to PZ’s bosses. They’ll laugh you off, just like they did with all the angry Catholics, et cetera. Funny how that works…

  14. theophontes 777 says

    I would just like to state, for the record and contrary to popular speculation, that I am not a polymath.

  15. christophburschka says

    It sounds like a prank, but jonathanbishop.com was registered in 2000, and the internet archive shows it has always contained much along the same lines. Jonathan Bishop is real.

    so it will probably get into the Daily Mail after

    … now there’s a proud achievement for any scientist.

  16. IslandBrewer says

    Calling oneself a polymath is like being in MENSA, the primary purpose of which is to signal to others that you already assume you’re smarter than everyone else.

  17. says

    interrobang – If you read my earlier post you will see that I said I have little expertise in biology. But, we are in a democracy and laypersons – like myself in biology – have as much right to an opinion as the experts and authorities.

    I call myself a polymath for a simple reason – I have studied IT though the eyes of many disciplines – economics (MScEcon), computer science (MSc), law (LLM) and media studies (BSc (Hons).

    I actually think this is more accurate. It would be arrogant of me to call myself an IT expert – I am not, as I have only studied a small area of IT: online communities and e-learning. While I call myself a trolling authority – there are few people in this field – I would never call myself an IT authority because IT is such a broad area.

  18. gillyc says

    Jonathan, I clicked on the link and have been looking at your website and blog. I doubt you’re interested in my opinion (which is – it’s really badly written, pompous and extremely boring) but one thing I hope you’ll consider is that in your list of reasons for various wars, for WW2, you seem to be implying it’s partly the Jew’s fault. You might want to fix that.

  19. Thomas Sea says

    Johnathan Bishop: you are claiming to know things, either prove in an understandable way that you do indeed know things or back away from the keyboard. Also: it’s not godwinning the argument if you were the one who wrote the WWII article.

    @GlenDavidson: I want to be a polynomial too! Specifically: -7x⁴+18ix³-4x²+5x-34i=yi

  20. Louis says

    I, on the other hand, AM a polymath. I do at least one sum per day, and some of them have even involved parrots. There truly is no limit* to my talents.

    Louis

    * Pity it’s the limit at the beginning, but I digress.

  21. says

    Thomas,

    You’ve got a web browser and an ability to read.

    Unlike others, I am willing to be fully accountable for my views, which is why I have been putting everything I have written or formally spoken on my website since 2002.

    If you want to discuss any of them, please leave a comment on the appropriate page of my site.

  22. raven says

    Further, I ask you to withdraw your attacks on my reputation as a trolling expert, or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee.

    Actually you really should send PZ a bouquet of flowers. He’s given you far more attention than you deserve.

    Harmless crank? Not really. Obnoxious crackpot is more like it. Making trivial threats is lame. At least the xians manage to make a few death threats here and there.

  23. Amphiox says

    or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee

    Dear Jonathan, please familiarize yourself with the first rule of holes before posting another comment here.

    It’s for your own good.

  24. theophontes 777 says

    @ jonathanbishop

    Unlike others, I am willing to be fully accountable for my views,

    Others are not willing to be accountable for their views? Could you provide evidence in support of this claim? (You can leave your response on TZT. Link here, thank you for your support.)

  25. Thomas Sea says

    Hey Johnathan I did some reading! Yay for reading!

    Blaming ‘Zionist Jews’ for the holocaust is the most disgusting thing I’ve read in a while and I’ve read some shockers recently!

    YAATP!

    You
    Are
    A
    Terrible
    Person

    Since you make people pay 180 for 10 hours of a course which teaches people to be able

    to created sustained posts which are easily recognisable as trolling, and be able to make imaginative use of trolling conventions to produce entertaining posts that captures the interests of other community members.

    I’m sure you’ll recognize this expression: “Fuck Off, the adults are talking.”

  26. Thomas Sea says

    I’m sure you’ll recognize this expression: “Fuck Off, the adults are talking.”

    (that wasn’t supposed to be in blockquote. idgaf

  27. interrobang says

    But, we are in a democracy and laypersons – like myself in biology – have as much right to an opinion as the experts and authorities.

    Bullshit. You are entitled to your own informed opinion, and you certainly aren’t entitled to your own facts. And you’re also not entitled to be taken as seriously as the experts and authorities are, should you be dumb or pompous enough to start bloviating about stuff you don’t know anything about. You’re also not immune from criticism, should you open your mouth, either.

    Your rhetoric certainly indicates that you do feel entitled to be taken as seriously as “experts and authorities,” despite admittedly being somewhat of a know-nothing on the subject. If you’ll pardon me, since rhetoric is my home turf, but your discursive manner oozes entitlement and smugness. I’d work on that, if I were you, since you’re not exactly winning friends and influencing people (positively, at least).

    On the other hand, since you seem to think being in the Daily Fail is some sort of an accomplishment, maybe you’re not so concerned about your reputation. (I was quoted in the Toronto Star, an actually reputable newspaper, in 2000, as a “computer issues scholar,” but I don’t go around bragging about it; it’d just make me look pathetic.)

  28. raven says

    But, we are in a democracy and laypersons – like myself in biology – have as much right to an opinion as the experts and authorities.

    This is Postmoderism.

    “My ignorance is just as good as your expertise.”

    Not it isn’t. Postmodernism is just wrong especially when it comes to science. It ran aground when it didn’t see the rock labeled “reality”. There is only one real world.

  29. Thomas Sea says

    Well at least Johnathan Bishop has some sympathy for the people of Palestine, oh wait no he doesn’t.

    Comparing your experience of being told you can’t get a doctorate is not the same as having your family’s land taken by force. Your every attempt to score ‘good guy’ points makes you seem like more of an asshole every time.

    My offer of stepping away from the keyboard stands as originally put forward.

  30. says

    Frankly, Paul Myers has been at this game 37 years, while I only 8. He has had 1.16 papers published a year, while I have had 1.63. In his first 8 years as a published researcher he got 28 citations, whereas I have 143. In his first 8 years his h-index was 3 and g-index 5, whereas mine is 4 and 11.

    I think he can keep his “goofy hats” to himself, their associated diplomas are obviously not worth the paper they are written on!

  31. gillyc says

    LMAO at “The second Act came about when the social networking technology I invented in 1999 – the circle of friends – was being popularised by Friendster and MySpace, before becoming an essential part of Facebook when it became mainstream from 2007.” (http://www.jonathanbishop.com/knowledge-base/trolling/)

    I think Jonathan Bishop must be a masochist; he seems to have set up a whole website in order to publicly humiliate himself.

  32. says

    He has had 1.16 papers published a year, while I have had 1.63.

    The difference being, PZ’s papers contain actual science. That counts, ya know. Considering your…chosen field, you aren’t too good at it, Cupcake.

  33. Sarahface says

    This is ever so slightly disappointing, since one of my stated aspirations is to be a polymath. (I know it’s unlikely, but I can dream, right?)
    And *now* I find out that all I need to do is write some garbled nonsense on the internet, hold some abhorrent views, and get quoted by ITV Wales as an expert. I guess I should just give up now, then…

  34. says

    “actual science” – the height of a scientist’s career would be getting into Nature and getting 100 citations within a day and then many after. This was Paul second Nature article:
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v454/n7204/full/454581a.html?pagewanted=all
    It go 1 citation!

    And his first was this one:
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v320/n6059/abs/320269a0.html
    It has had less than 7 citations every year, whereas my major paper in CHB has had just over 20 each year.

    It was hardly worth Paul getting into Nature!

  35. gillyc says

    Jonathan Bishop, can you actually read?? The first one you linked to is a book review. Book reviews don’t generally get cited. Duh.

  36. logic says

    No I do not understand much about “endogenous retroviruses”. The first I heard of them was today thanks to Scott Hurst.

    Biology is not a subject I know a lot about.

    Yet, immediately after hearing about them, he feels qualified to speculate on the connection between retroviruses and shizophrenia. A classic case of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

  37. David Marjanović says

    Biology is not a subject I know a lot about.

    The process of science publishing isn’t anything you know a lot about, either.

    For fuck’s sake, Nature Publishing Group journals reject almost every manuscript that is submitted to them!!! Bragging that you submitted your manuscript to Nature Neuroscience just brands you as hopelessly naïve. Come back if the manuscript gets accepted!

    Besides, I don’t know how strict Nature Neuroscience is about this, but Nature itself cancels even accepted manuscripts when their contents leak out. Your manuscript isn’t top-secret anymore? Buh-bye.

    My interest in biology is purely for philosophical purposes about what could be possible.

    Without knowing biology, you can’t find out what’s possible in life.

    I see science as a way of refuting the Bible. So my question about ‘fruit flies’ was not a serious position on the Origin of the Species, but merely a way of testing the boundaries of biology for refuting Genesis 3 – an on going hobby of mine as a former Christian.

    …really… you’re doing it wrong. Genesis 3 is a story that evolved from a Sumerian story. You simply don’t need to take it any more seriously than that.

    Frankly, Paul Myers has been at this game 37 years, while I only 8. He has had 1.16 papers published a year, while I have had 1.63. In his first 8 years as a published researcher he got 28 citations, whereas I have 143. In his first 8 years his h-index was 3 and g-index 5, whereas mine is 4 and 11.

    Part of the reason is that more and more is published every year. That’s why practically all impact factors of journals increase. Today, Nature’s is 36.1 – in the 1980s, it was around 15.

    So, my first paper came out in 2007, I defended my doctoral thesis in November 2010, I had (IIRC) 95 citations in December 2011 (the last time I had someone check), my H index was 4, and I don’t know what the g index is. And that’s in a really small field, dude. Go to Google Scholar and find out!

    the height of a scientist’s career would be getting into Nature

    Again: Nature rejects almost everything. Rumor has it that Henry Gee’s best man gets about 1 paper per year through, but that’s it.

    and getting 100 citations within a day

    What field publishes 100 papers per day?

  38. kemist says

    I call myself a polymath for a simple reason – I have studied IT though the eyes of many disciplines – economics (MScEcon), computer science (MSc), law (LLM) and media studies (BSc (Hons).

    Wow, I wonder what that makes me then (else than spectacularly overqualified for all existing jobs) – I am a computer engineer (here this degree includes hardware/device design as well as software) with a degree in chemistry and a PhD in physiology-endocrinology.

  39. says

    Logic, you think one needs to have qualifications to give opinions such as in the form of refutable hypotheses about something. Few people in the word have the qualifications Paul has. Are you saying most people have no right to an opinion?

  40. David Marjanović says

    Today, Nature’s is 36.1 –

    And in 2005 or thereabouts, it was 27.

  41. says

    the height of a scientist’s career would be getting into Nature and getting 100 citations within a day and then many after.

    Today Nature, perhaps tomorrow the Daily Mail. Oh the dizzy heights that our Mr. Bishop wishes to scale.

    Someone give him a cookie.

  42. David Marjanović says

    Logic, you think one needs to have qualifications to give opinions such as in the form of refutable hypotheses about something.

    Not quite. Logic rightly thinks that one needs to have qualifications to give opinions in the form of refutable hypotheses that haven’t already been refuted. If you literally don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re at high risk of reinventing the square wheel for the 2937th time.

  43. says

    David – That is like saying that for years that scientists have been trying to refute the last measurement of Pi, and therefore and therefore anyone not qualified in mathematics has no right to attempt to be the next.

  44. Thomas Sea says

    Johnathan Bishop, it’s just swell that you’re trying to learn about real science. Have you noticed that all the articles in Nature have specific titles which describe one small aspect of a recognized area of study? That’s what scientific papers look like!

    Guess what:

    empirical research paper on plasticity and social/emotional/cognitive imparment

    doesn’t meet any of those criteria!

    If you had a good understanding of evolutionary science you’d know why PZ Meyers’ book review had not been commonly cited. The reason is that neither creationism nor debunking creationism are novel. Science is hungry for new ideas, while reviewing a creationist book and thoroughly trashing the ideas it perpetuates is old hat to evolutionary scientists, it was an article which PZ saw value in writing, because trashing creationism is something that is still relevant due to all the creationists and IDists attempting to get onto school boards.

    The zebra fish article has been cited 7 times a year since publication? Since being published in 1986? That’s not too shabby for something published when I was 1 year old. As a layexpert you must be aware that biology is a rapidly moving field. Getting what appears from my search to be over 200 citations on a single paper would be very good.

  45. kemist says

    the height of a scientist’s career would be getting into Nature

    Meh.

    Overrated.

    The most difficult papers to get into for a scientist (in terms of sheer amount and quality of work) are those which specialize in your specific field. They’re difficult to get into because your reviewers actually know your field intimately, and it’s harder to waffle them.

    It’s not the best work that gets published in Nature, it’s the work that’s most likely to attract attention from the media. They have accepted and published a lot garbage (some of which mere undergrads would easily have detected as shoddy work) because of that.

  46. Sastra says

    jonathonbishop #61 wrote:

    Are you saying most people have no right to an opinion?

    People repeat the phrase “right to an opinion” (as in “I have a right to an opinion”) all the time, but what does it really mean? People are allowed to have an opinion — as opposed to what? Being fined? Being clapped in jail? Being strapped down in a chair and forcibly fed some other opinion by a mind-control device? Being sent to their room without supper?

    I think it’s usually meant to signal that someone doesn’t want to be criticized. They have a right to express their opinion and be greeted with approving nods signifying that hey, it’s a free country isn’t democracy grand? It’s also perhaps a subtle plug for the idea that ‘opinions’ are like ‘preferences’ — there is no true or false on the matter and thus nobody should ever tell anyone else their personal taste is wrong. It’s subjective. Everyone is in the same boat.

    Not really. Some boats leak.

    My interest in biology is purely for philosophical purposes about what could be possible.

    Ah, you mean like Deepak Chopra? Got it.

  47. kemist says

    Are you saying most people have no right to an opinion?

    Well, you know what they say about opinions… Everyone has one.

    Nobody has deprived you of your right to an opinion.

    The thing is, everybody else has the right to their own opinions about yours.

  48. janine says

    Oh, heck, I was mistaken – I actually thought he expressed himself badly, but no, he really does blame the jews http://www.jonathanbishop.com/2726/unplugged-and-uncut/the-holocaust-the-true-story/
    Yuck. I need a shower.

    Gillyc, this is a very cold comfort but at least he calls it My Truth… and not The Truth….

    Who knew that the Zionists were around to abuse German farmers after the gassing of disabled people got started. Because Jews were disenfranchised years before the gassing began.

    Our polymath does not understand cause and effect very well.

    Anti-Semite cupcake.

  49. says

    Are you saying most people have no right to an opinion?

    In case you haven’t noticed, you’ve been littering your opinions all over the place. You can drop this little red herring, because what you’re really after is this: you have no right to disagree with me!!1! Sorry, you don’t get that one.

  50. says

    The funnier thing is gillyc, a version of that paper got rejected from a journal because the reviewer said that Christ got his abilities from “The Holy Spirit” and could not be compared with skilled persuaders!

  51. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    flogthebishop is one of the more amusing chewtoys lately, ’tis true.

  52. Louis says

    Jonathan, #61,

    People are entitled to their own opinion.

    People are not entitled to their own facts.

    People are also not entitled to have their fact-free opinions taken seriously.

    Simple!

    Louis

  53. Brownian says

    Opinions are such wonderful things to have, aren’t they? You don’t need to have done any study, research, or thinking to have them!

    Logic, you think one needs to have qualifications to give opinions such as in the form of refutable hypotheses about something.

    Are you saying most people have no right to an opinion?

    But what’s this? Someone holding an opinion that Jonathan Bishop doesn’t like? Best put a stop to that right now:

    Further, I ask you to withdraw your attacks on my reputation as a trolling expert, or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee.

    Seriously, fuck this wanker.

  54. says

    Brownian – “Opinions are such wonderful things to have, aren’t they? You don’t need to have done any study, research, or thinking to have them!”

    Aren’t you lucky!

  55. Brownian says

    I feel Godwin’s law is about to be proven…

    Godwin’s Law doesn’t really apply when you’re talking to an actual anti-Semite.

    And, if I were as stupid as you, I wouldn’t be in such a rush to brown-nose people who were fond of eugenics.

  56. Louis says

    And by the way I L.O.V.E. love the implication that because opinions aren’t magically facts I’m a fascist! That’s some quality crankery. Tell me Jonathan, how like Galileo are you?

    Louis

  57. camelspotter says

    my first publication got cited 34 times so far. i think that makes me a poly-retard. also explains why i sometimes rinse the teaspoon after removing the teabag, even though i haven’t stirred the milk in yet. guess that will all resolve itself once my citation count creeps over that magic number 38.

    (that’s also the number of simulated combat drops lieutenant goreman did prior to lv-426. figures)

  58. Brownian says

    And by the way I L.O.V.E. love the implication that because opinions aren’t magically facts I’m a fascist!

    At least he isn’t threatening to tell Mom and Dad on you.

  59. IslandBrewer says

    For an expert on trolling, I’m kind of disappointed. Low on the danielhaven quotient, but I’ll wait post-flounce to submit a score.

  60. says

    I see you’re an expert on crankery Louis seeing as you can appreciate the many qualities on it. I can’t have a right to an opinion though, because I’m clearly not as expert as you.

  61. says

    Louis:

    how like Galileo are you?

    Oh hey, we are already persecuting the poor Cupcake, why it’s awful, awful I say, what we’re doing, saying stuff like opinion and fact are two differenty thingamabobs!

    Goodness me, we’re The Pharyngula Inquisition™. Now, where’s me goofy hat?

  62. Louis says

    Jonathan,

    From your #89,

    I can’t have a right to an opinion though…

    From my #79,

    People are entitled to their own opinion.

    Now this is very embarrassing for you. Do you see how my comment at #79 is the precise opposite of your claim about my comment at #89? Why it’s almost like you are not an honest interlocutor. It’s also almost like you think you’re the only scientist here. Big, big oopsie.

    Louis

  63. gillyc says

    Jonathan, that just says an awful lot about the quality of the journals you’re submitting stuff to.

  64. says

    Caine, you’re not persecuting me. It has been fun trying out all my new and old trolling techniques on this thread! My favourite was the Horn effect method where I compared Louis to Mussolini to imply he was a fascist!

  65. janine says

    For an expert on trolling, I’m kind of disappointed. Low on the danielhaven quotient, but I’ll wait post-flounce to submit a score.

    One would have to start spewing random syllables to approach danielhaven territory.

    Narf!

  66. Thomas Sea says

    why PZ Meyers’

    Who?

    ;)

    Oh carp, this isn’t even the worst case of me getting a teacher’s name wrong in recent history.

    I handed up half of my coursework and he never said anything about it, it was really terrible.

    PZ Myers, PZ Myers, PZ Myers, PZ Myers, PZ Myers, PZ Myers, PZ Myers, Ok I think I’m alright now, PZ Mey… Crap! PZ Myers, ok, ok ok.

  67. Louis says

    Caine,

    I know right. I have persecuted him by not taking his opinion seriously and treating opinions like facts. I’m a naughty, naughty fascist.

    Louis

  68. janine says

    Whatever, jonathanbishop. You defended a fascist action.

    What does that fucking make you?

    Assclam.

  69. says

    Louis – From my #79, People are entitled to their own opinion.

    So you’re saying I’m not allowed to share other’s opinions now I am only allowed my own?

  70. says

    Tell me Jonathan, how like Galileo are you?

    In a comment on his post about the poor German farmers being mistreated by the Jews, he refers to himself as a Renaissance Man.
    Yes, a Renaissance Man.
    Wank wank wank.

  71. Louis says

    Brownian,

    I’m sure he will threaten to tell mummy on me soon enough. Mind you, he’s resorting to “LAWL I JUST TROLLIN’” awfully early. This one has gotten boring early.

    Louis

  72. Brownian says

    I can’t have a right to an opinion though, because I’m clearly not as expert as you.

    Oh, shut the fuck up already. Do you still have your opinion, dumbass? I mean, no one actually cracked open your skull, rooted through the cobwebs, and took it from you, right?

    As Caine noted, this ‘everybody is entitled to an opinion’ bullshit is a red herring, and what you really want is everyone else to suspend their opinion that you’re a fucking moron. Hell, you threatened to cry to PZ’s administration when he expressed his opinion, stop crying fascism, you dumb as shit hypocrite.

    You’ve got the right to express your opinion, and we’ve got the very equal right to point out how fucking dumb you are. Don’t like it? Complain to Mussolini, you stupid bag of wrong.

  73. Louis says

    Jonathan,

    Haha, no of course I’m not saying that. Although good effort, champ. No where have I implied originality is a requirement to have an opinion. Tsk, F-, must troll try harder.

    Louis

  74. andyo says

    Well at least Johnathan Bishop has some sympathy for the people of Palestine, oh wait no he doesn’t.

    AHAHA! This opening sentence is AWESOME:

    I used to have unfavourable attitudes to the Muslims, but then then I went to university with some and found out they are just like anyone else.

  75. says

    Marcus Ranum:

    That gave me a wonderful mental image of you, dressed up like Magneto, waving your hands and making kooks fly around the room and smash (gently) into things!

    Fuckin’ kook magnets, HOW DO THEY WORK?!

    Also, I’m tempted to ask which house Mr. Bishop was in at Crocels: Ravenclaw or Slytherin.

    Raven, I’d suggest reading Natalie Reed on postmodernism before you write it off entirely.

    Bishop:

    He has had 1.16 papers published a year, while I have had 1.63

    Rants on St0rmfr0nt don’t count. Say, have any of your papers been about “enriched vibrants,” by any chance?

    I haven’t checked TZT in ages; did we manage to introduce Kenaz to Danny? Introduce FlogTheBlsip (snerk, Josh) to both of them. Maybe we should toss them an economy-sized bottle of Jergens’ lotion while we’re at it, if only so we don’t have to mop up the skin flakes from the floor afterward.

  76. janine says

    You already are an ape, as am I.

    But I never made an apology for mass murder.

    Unlike you.

    You are really bad at this insult thing.

  77. Brownian says

    So you’re saying I’m not allowed to share other’s opinions now I am only allowed my own?

    Jonathan’s not an expert in reading either, I see.

  78. says

    That was known as the ‘accent method’ Louis and is quite difficult to do online. But if you wanted to sign up to the Trolling Academy…

  79. Brownian says

    I used to have unfavourable attitudes to the Muslims, but then then I went to university with some and found out they are just like anyone else.

    I wonder if he counts that as academic or professional expertise in Muslimknowing.

  80. andyo says

    Reading the comments on the link above, the guy also seems unsurprisingly irony-challenged, so better make your insults clear, people!

  81. says

    I wonder if he counts that as academic or professional expertise in Muslimknowing.

    Well, he’s obviously a highly qualified academic. He has his own hat.

  82. says

    Janine, it is people like you that are the reason the world is in the mess it is in. One can’t provide an explanation for anything without being accused that one supports that action. If it was for people like you everyone in the world would be dead because there would be no food labels in case it sanctioned obesity, no GUM clinics in case it sanctioned STDs and no abortion in case it sanctioned rape. You need to rethink your approach to the world!

  83. Brownian says

    His fucking facebook profile pic is of a fellow (I can only presume it’s him) wearing a mortarboard.

    I can’t pick on this dipshit any more. Having to be Jonathan Bishop must be painful enough.

  84. Louis says

    Brownian,

    Agreed, there are truly some people for whom being themselves is mockery enough. Cruel, but rue.

    Louis

    P.S. And Jonathan, thanks but I rather doubt you have anything of worth to teach me. Coining special terms for dishonest obtuseness doesn’t really strike me as a particularly interesting use of my time.

  85. janine says

    Janine, it is people like you that are the reason the world is in the mess it is in.

    It is good to have my powers confirmed.

    *snort*

  86. gillyc says

    Every time I think he just can’t get any more stupid – he does! It’s almost impressive.

  87. says

    Louis, you’re saying learning is a waste of time? That must mean you don’t value time. What is the point in being here if you’re just wasting time?

    (P.S. That is called the bogus dilemma!)

  88. Louis says

    Janine,

    Have you been fucking the world up again? Naughty, naughty Janine! Get in here with Caine and me in the Spanking Suite. It’s time for the Punishment to be Administered.

    Louis

  89. janine says

    Amazing that the chewtoy knows all of this about from my pointing out how he cannot get his history right.

  90. janine says

    <q?(P.S. That is called the bogus dilemma!)

    This would be a great name for his blog!

  91. Louis says

    I must be a special soldier, Jonathan is giving me a Super Special Trolling Lesson All Of My Very Own.

    I’m enjoying the flirting.

    Louis

  92. logic says

    Logic, you think one needs to have qualifications to give opinions such as in the form of refutable hypotheses about something. Few people in the word have the qualifications Paul has. Are you saying most people have no right to an opinion?

    Notice how he subtley moved the goal post from making scientifically rigorous claims to merely having an opinion. If your statements about retroviruses and schizophrenia are merely idle speculation and uninformed opinion by a laymen, you certainly go out of your way to give your statements a veneer of authority with all the references to institutes and scientific papers.

  93. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Does anyone else hear flogthebishop’s writing in that grade-school-kid halting monotone children use when asked to read aloud from a book?

  94. janine says

    Louis, sometimes, being a lesbian is all you need to destroy society. It is good to know that I have more then one way to achieve this.

    Options are good.

  95. camelspotter says

    Chewing is a waste of tooth enamel. That must mean you don’t value tooth enamel. What is the point of being here if you don’t flossy regularly (or sometimes chew elephant grass)? Anyone?

  96. Louis says

    Josh,

    Nope, I’m hearing the soft fap-fap-fap noises coming from the background as he types one handed. He is attention whoring for all he is worth, when we ignore him, he’ll just go away. He’s just here for attention jollies. It’s so obvious with this sort of troll that their only goal is to be a turd in the punchbowl.

    The fun part is that, even with his academic hat and undeservingly patronising attitude, he really does have the mental capacity of a turd. Like most trolls.

    Louis

  97. says

    Janine, you compare being a lesbian to being Satan’s love child and human destroyer on Earth. I can’t believe someone would make such a link in this century!

  98. says

    Janine, it is people like you that are the reason the world is in the mess it is in.

    Next paper by Jonathan: Janine: History’s Greatest Monster.

  99. Louis says

    Janine,

    Oh yes. We learned the other day from a recently banned commenter that {ahem} “having fun with oneself” is destroying the Catholic church (think of the damage Jonathan is doing!). More than that, homosexual sex and even just plain old oral sex is destroying society at large (Jonathan won’t be helping with either of those. Narcissus cannot be dragged away from his mirror).

    Anyway, we all seem to be just ruining everything with all that sex. It’s such a shame.

    Louis

  100. andyo says

    Jeez, this guy is truly precocious. I had to get a master’s in Jew-liking and to acknowledge Latinos as equal… that required a PhD at the very least.

  101. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Janine, you compare being a lesbian to being Satan’s love child and human destroyer on Earth. I can’t believe someone would make such a link in this century!

    You really are dumb as shit.

  102. Louis says

    Jonathan,

    You forgot? But you were begging me to give you lessons. I’m thinking your “forgetting” was a bit convenient. Don’t be coy, you know you love me, it’s okay, it’s the 21st century, you can admit it now without fear of condemnation.

    Louis

  103. says

    Chewing is a waste of tooth enamel.

    That’s not how it works around here. Chewtoys keep our fangs sharp and our fur all sniny. See here.

    This is a rude blog. We like to argue — heck, we like a loud angry brawl. Don’t waste time whining at anyone that they’re not nice, because this gang will take pride in that and rhetorically hand you a rotting porcupine and tell you to stuff it up your nether orifice. If you intrude here and violate any of the previous three mores, people won’t like you, and they won’t hold back—they’ll tell you so, probably in colorful terms.

    We do have a general guideline for handling new people. If you’re a first time commenter, you get three strikes: you can make three comments, and the regulars are supposed to restrain themselves and try to get you to engage rationally before they are allowed to release the rabid hounds. They are hoping you will oblige them and give them an excuse to let slip the leash, so be warned.

  104. Brownian says

    What would you know about pain Brownian?

    Why? Are you asking me to prove my expertise? Don’t we live in a democracy, where laypeople have as much right to an opinion as the experts and authorities? I have no right to my opinion?*

    Next you will be claiming to be the worlds greatest Christ impersonator!

    This is why trolls like you are so fucking boring. What is this even supposed to mean? Have I demonstrated a penchant for grandiose and unsupportable claims about myself? Hardly. If I had, then this would make sense as an insult to me. In fact, such grandiose claims are kinda your domain.

    I get that you’re all fired up and excited and it’s a lot of fun playing the dozens, but insults kind of need to make a modicum of sense in relation to the person you’re insulting. Otherwise they’re just non sequiturs.

    Oh, and as for this:

    Caine says I am not a trolling expert, but she knows as much about trolling as a cat knows about barking.

    Even cats are entitled to their opinions on barking, dumbfuck.

    *See what I did there? See how I counterclaimed using a paraphrase of your own words? That’s how you make some fucking sense, dipshit.

  105. says

    Louis, knowing you love me just for a microsecond gave me a sense of worth that I have never experienced in my life. I don’t know how I survived until I met you! :o)

  106. 'Tis Himself, OM says

    I’ve got an MA but I don’t have a booootiful hat like jonathanbishop has. I feel so deprived. But at least I’ve got my very own opinion, which in lieu of a hat I will share with you all:

    <Ahem. Testing one two three. Is this thing on?>

    jonathanbishop is an anti-Semitic, self-aggrandizing wanker.

    There, I have announced my opinion. I feel so proud of myself!

    <pats self on back, strains arm when doing so>

  107. says

    Janine, you compare being a lesbian to being Satan’s love child and human destroyer on Earth.

    Such a dull crayon. Now you leave my sister alone. Her monstrosity is a force for good in the world.

    Psssst…I’m bisexual. We seduce both sides of the street. We run on pure evil.

  108. Thomas Sea says

    Hey Johnathan Bishop, we’ve all been waiting for you to unleash your amazing trolling skillz on us, but so far it’s just been weak arguments which you backpedal on as soon as people call them bullshit.

    We want to see some fireworks, you keep putting yourself forward as a pyrotechnics expert, but you’re all wet, a soggy flacid cardboard tube, emptied of sodden powder. Kind of disappointing, but our goal here isn’t to egg you on. We want to make you realize that:

    YAATP!

    You
    Are
    A
    Torrid
    Propellant
    !

  109. Louis says

    Jonathan,

    I am so glad to have validated your rather unremarkable existence. Now, lets not mess about. I am a short trip up the M4 from you, come on big boy. You know you want to.

    Louis

    P.S. Caine. Bisexual? I’m bisatchel. I take two bags to work. Is that like the same thing?

  110. janine says

    ‘Tis, with that statement, you have just proved that you are one of the reasons why this world is in the bad shape it is in.

    Funny how that works.

  111. Louis says

    I can’t wait for Jonathan to let us know that he is a l337 h4X0R (or however you spell it) and threaten to hack all our computers or something.

    Louis

  112. says

    Caine says I am not a trolling expert, but she knows as much about trolling as a cat knows about barking.

    You aren’t, Cupcake. Hmmm, cats don’t know about barking? I’m pretty sure my cats wouldn’t buy that, as they know what the monster dogses various barks mean. That would indicate that my cats are smarter than you, Jonathan.

    You aren’t an expert on trolling (let alone anything else), however, you do seem to be an expert on being intellectually challenged. I have to hand it to you, you are one of the Non-cognitive Elite™.

  113. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Oh look, it is me that is that. Or something. How is words work?

  114. janine says

    We run on pure evil.

    Caine, I would avoid the evilsands. It is so much work to get the evil out and does not transport well.

  115. 'Tis Himself, OM says

    Thank you, Janine. Coming from a jonathanbishop certified monster such as yourself, I feel truly honored that you recognize my lack of worth.

  116. says

    Tis Himself – jonathanbishop is an anti-Semitic, self-aggrandizing wanker.

    How do you define Semitic? Only a bigot would define only Jews as Semitic. Palestinians come from the same blood-line as the Israelites meaning both are Semitic! That would be like saying one is only attacking Christians if one attacks Catholics!

    And I’m very fortunate to be self-aggrandizing if I am so. I pride myself on being independent. What state would I be in if I relied on others opinions to give me self-worth!

  117. Brownian says

    I can’t wait for Jonathan to let us know that he is a l337 h4X0R (or however you spell it) and threaten to hack all our computers or something.

    Because given his past behaviour, this prediction is consistent, if hyperbolic, and therefore makes sense? A very good and relevant jibe, Louis.

  118. says

    Janine:

    Caine, I would avoid the evilsands. It is so much work to get the evil out and does not transport well.

    Oh! I will definitely avoid that, evilsand is so…abrasive. *Stocks up on slippery, lubricating liquid evil*

  119. Brownian says

    How do you define Semitic? Only a bigot would define only Jews as Semitic.

    Oh, he’s one of these types. What a repulsive piece of shit.

  120. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    And I’m very fortunate to be self-aggrandizing if I am so.

    How is words work? Meaning is how?

  121. says

    Caine – You aren’t, Cupcake. Hmmm, cats don’t know about barking? I’m pretty sure my cats wouldn’t buy that, as they know what the monster dogses various barks mean.

    I see, so suddenly your cats are the experts on everything? Where do you get such cats? You are so fortunate – have you got them insured?

  122. janine says

    And yet again, the bloody stupid johnson avoids answering why Jews are to blame for the Holocaust.

    Yes, we are toying with you but none of us are ignoring that you are a horrid little fuck up.

  123. Louis says

    Brownian,

    Anyone capable of writing and believing:

    I am regarded as the leading authority in the world on trolling and increasing participation in online communities.

    About themselves, even if true, and it isn’t, is capable of believing anything about themselves. And not in the good way.

    Frankly, his accusation of you (comedy trolling I know) as thinking of yourself as Christlike is a dead give away. This person has delusions of adequacy.

    Louis

  124. says

    See how kind I am? I told you I’d bring you a new chewtoy, and here he is, squeaky-squeaky-squeaking every time you bite into him.

  125. andyo says

    Hint: If you have to ask

    How do you define Semitic?

    after being called an anti-Semite, yeah, you are an anti-Semite.

  126. Amphiox says

    How do you define Semitic? Only a bigot would define only Jews as Semitic. Palestinians come from the same blood-line as the Israelites meaning both are Semitic!

    Irrelevant, as the term does not have to be exclusive for the charge to apply.

    That would be like saying one is only attacking Christians if one attacks Catholics!

    If one attacks Catholics, one IS attacking Christians, because Catholics ARE Christians. An anti-Catholic IS an anti-Christian, even if it does not attack any other Christians.

  127. Louis, A Very Naughty Boy says

    PZ,

    This chewtoy isn’t even intellectually engaging. This is a crappy chewtoy. It’s fun to bat it about a bit, but, come on, you know you can do better than this.

    Louis

  128. eigenperson says

    #168: Thanks, PZ. But you know, for the world’s expert on trolling, this one seems surprisingly tepid.

  129. says

    What state would I be in if I relied on others opinions to give me self-worth!

    Yeah, if you relied on other’s opinion of you, you’d be lying on a cold rocky beach, curled up under some rotting sea-wrack, doing your best to pretend to be a parasitic worm nestled in the rectum of a limpet.

    That might be a good career move for you yet, you know. It’s a step up.

  130. says

    PZ:

    I told you I’d bring you a new chewtoy, and here he is, squeaky-squeaky-squeaking every time you bite into him.

    He is very squeaky indeed. It is good. Thank you.

    Janine:

    The change will not take.

    Hmmm. Cookies enabled? Scrolled all the way down and clicked on ‘save’ or ‘update’ or whatever the fuck it is?

  131. Amphiox says

    I see our chew-toy has not only disregarded the first rule of holes, he has gone ahead and plowed straight through the 101st rule of holes, and is now deep core drilling down through the 102nd.

  132. Louis says

    OH NOES! CAINE AND I DISAGREE ABOUT THE CHEWTOY’S WORTH!!!!

    DEEP RIFTS!!!!!! DEEEEEEEEEEP RIFTS!!!!!!!!

    Louis

  133. Louis says

    PZ,

    Oh all right, I shall change my opinion to agree with Caine. But only because I am terrified of her.

    Wait, that’s a good reason, right?

    Louis

  134. says

    LMAO at “The second Act came about when the social networking technology I invented in 1999 – the circle of friends – was being popularised by Friendster and MySpace, before becoming an essential part of Facebook when it became mainstream from 2007.” (http://www.jonathanbishop.com/knowledge-base/trolling/)

    Wow. Sixdegrees.org must have been more innovative than I thought back when I joined in ’97. Who would have thought that they had build a time machine and gone forward in time to steal the “circle of friends” concept from Bishop?

  135. says

    Louis:

    OH NOES! CAINE AND I DISAGREE ABOUT THE CHEWTOY’S WORTH!!!!

    It’s alright, Hon. *Dons black Fedora, slings leather jacket over the couch back, pats couch* C’mon and sit by me. I’ll paint your nails this pretty pink and we can talk.

  136. Rey Fox says

    Oh goodie. Another special snowflake. I wonder if we’re going to have to have another Zombie Thread for this one, or if he’s ever going to get back to his Important Research.

  137. Amphiox says

    What state would I be in if I relied on others opinions to give me self-worth!

    A sorry state wherein you’d be engaging in utterly pathetic activities such as posting stuff like this:

    Further, I ask you to withdraw your attacks on my reputation as a trolling expert, or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee.

  138. Janine: History’s Greatest Monster says

    Thank you, Caine.

    Feeling stupid for overlooking that button on the bottom.

    And yet I am still doing better than the chewtoy.

  139. says

    Oh, and I don’t know if y’all noticed this from one of his comments to his vile anti-semitic blogpost:

    I’m of constructivist origin philosophically. That means I regard my interpretation of the world to be equally legitimate to anyone else’s.

    So his opinion on biology is obviosly as good as any biologist’s.

  140. beethovenfangirl says

    Aw, bless. He’s trying so hard.
    Please, someone be offended, just so he doesn’t feel to miserable.

  141. 'Tis Himself, OM says

    And yet I am still doing better than the chewtoy.

    That is setting the bar very low.

  142. says

    Oh my – I looked at the website of The Crocels Trolling Academy:

    The Crocels Trolling Academy was founded by online community authority, Jonathan Bishop, following mass media misrepresentation of trolling as being a type of activity solely used to harm others.

    Cllr Bishop has been researching concepts like trolling since the dawn of the century. He has had research published in books by leading information science publisher IGI Global every year since 2008. He has previously won ‘Letter of the Week‘ in the Daily Mail in March 2011 for a featured letter exposing the misrepresentation of trolling, which can be a positive and mutually rewarding pursuit for Internet users, and has been called upon to give expert opinion by ITV News.

    How can we beat “letter of the week” in the Daily Mail?

  143. Janine: History’s Greatest Monster says

    Caine, I know. I just wanted Patricia to give us something to riff on. It has been a while since she has been in such a playful mood.

  144. Janine: History’s Greatest Monster says

    Well, it was two trolls who were the catalyst for the unendless thread.

    The were two very creepy people.

  145. gillyc says

    I can’t even pretend to be offended any more, I actually feel sorry for him. He’s clearly at least somewhat delusional and has little to no self-insight.
    You’d think a supposed ‘expert’ on social media might think that anyone interested in his services might google his name and see this thread… but I guess he’s thinking that it reflects well on him.

  146. 'Tis Himself (without mortarboard) says

    How do you define Semitic? Only a bigot would define only Jews as Semitic.

    Here’s how dictionary.com defines anti-Semite:

    an·ti-Sem·ite noun
    a person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews.

    It’s common for anti-Semites like yourself to pretend that since Semite refers to more groups than just Jews, that the term “anti-Semite” refers or should refer to more groups than just Jews. Since non-anti-Semites (and even a good number of anti-Semites) use the term “anti-Semite” to refer to someone who detests, despises and otherwise hates Jews, then I’ve used the term correctly to describe you.

    In other words, asshole, you’re an anti-Semite. The evidence for your anti-Semitism is shown in your blog. Nice try with the tu quoque defense. Too bad it didn’t work.

  147. eigenperson says

    #203: I think it got punctured by an overly sniny fang and all the air escaped.

  148. eigenperson says

    OK, so maybe that’s not how squeaky toys work.

    Now, if only I could find a polymath to tell me how they actually work….

  149. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    So… our little trolling expert has published papers which have been cited numerous times in his other papers. He also has a diploma from an academy of his own creation, of which he is the only teacher and the only student. Basically, winning the “Letter of the week” in Daily Fail is his greatest achievement.

    How sad. I can just imagine him… printing pages of this thread, binding them, submitting to himself for review and then submitting to himself as a new paper. Maybe he will even write a little congratulations note to himself for doing such a good job.

  150. camelspotter (cited 34 times) says

    The more I think about it, the more the Lt Goreman from Aliens analogy seems to hold up: 38 citations versus 38 simulated combat drops; erm… well, that’s definitely quite similar already. And the whole banging-your-head-on-the-ceiling-then-getting-ass-wupped-by-aliens thing probably has some kind of analogical interpretation (maybe something to do with trolling?). He (Gorman) ends up having to blow himself to bits with a grenade just after hearing “You always were an asshole Gorman” from his one surviving buddy – presenting further scope for metaphorical similitude I feel.

  151. Azkyroth says

    I’d like to know whether HERV is linked to Lucy’s more rigid brain as I believe schizophrenia makes the brain less ‘rigid’.

    Fossils do tend to be relatively rigid, yes.

  152. Azkyroth says

    Unlike others, I am willing to be fully accountable for my views, which is why I have been

    …threatening complaints to PZ’s professional ethics department…

  153. Azkyroth says

    Not it isn’t. Postmodernism is just wrong especially when it comes to science. It ran aground when it didn’t see the rock labeled “reality”. There is only one real world.

    Postmodernism is the generalization of science into complex spaces.

  154. camelspotter (cited 34 times) says

    (It was 38 simulated drops, and only 2 real ones BTW. Just so we’re clear.)

  155. Azkyroth says

    The difference being, PZ’s papers contain actual science. That counts, ya know. Considering your…chosen field, you aren’t too good at it, Cupcake.

    Yeah, really. This is supposed to be a world class trolling expert? He’s just flopping a bit.

    It’s like seeing a “dance expert” walk out on stage and sorta do that awkward back-and-forth swaying thing you see at middle-school proms.

  156. Azkyroth says

    Louis – that is exactly what Benito Mussolini said!

    Mussolini was Italian, genius.

  157. says

    From Jonathan Bishop’s LinkedIn profile’s summary:

    Specialties
    information techology, the arts, law, and sciences

    Specialty – you keep using that word, I don’t think it means what you think it means.

  158. Azkyroth says

    my first publication got cited 34 times so far. i think that makes me a poly-retard.

    *cringe*
    *icy stare*

  159. says

    Azkyroth:

    *icy stare*

    Yeah, I noticed it too, but let it slide this time as it appears to be from someone new. (And I was having too much fun with the squeaky toy.)

  160. Azkyroth says

    Louis, knowing you love me just for a microsecond gave me a sense of worth that I have never experienced in my life.

    Having read your contributions to this thread, I find that plausible.

  161. christophburschka says

    I see science as a way of refuting the Bible.

    Science as a tool to refute the Bible makes no more sense than science as a tool to vindicate the Bible.

  162. gryphaea says

    ‘But, we are in a democracy and laypersons – like myself in biology – have as much right to an opinion as the experts and authorities.’

    Legally yes, but not factually! Only a complete muppet would not recognise the philosophical difference between the right to hold any opinion and the reality that opinion can be factually right or wrong.

    You have just as much legal right to be wrong as you do to be right and the law is not the framework that decides, though obviously it will draw on other frameworks to legislate our responsibilities to each other. (Note also that it does not use Constructivism!)

    Growing up in the UK you had the same opportunity as everyone else to realise that being right is much more difficult than being wrong. Constructivism is no get out of jail free card for personal responsibility. If you think you are just as educated, with an exactly equal chance of correctness as everyone else on all subjects then I think you are making a fool of yourself.

    You have the legal right to do this though, so we agree on that.

  163. Azkyroth says

    Caine – You aren’t, Cupcake. Hmmm, cats don’t know about barking? I’m pretty sure my cats wouldn’t buy that, as they know what the monster dogses various barks mean.

    I see, so suddenly your cats are the experts on everything? Where do you get such cats? You are so fortunate – have you got them insured?

    How does an “IT Expert” and expert on behavior in online communities manage to be unfamiliar with the <blockquote> tag?

  164. says

    Beatrice, anormalement indécente #210

    So… our little trolling expert has published papers which have been cited numerous times in his other papers. He also has a diploma from an academy of his own creation, of which he is the only teacher and the only student. Basically, winning the “Letter of the week” in Daily Fail is his greatest achievement.

    I received a real-looking diploma from a Catholic high school which went defunct a few years later and was torn down a decade ago. Also, my actual diploma was destroyed when our basement flooded some years back, so I not only don’t actually have a diploma, I can’t write them to ask for a new one.

    I have a blog on tumblr which automatically posts on FaceBook when I do an update, which pretty much counts as self-citation.

    And I’ve had letters-to-the-editor published in at least two monthly magazines, including the music mag “Circus” back in the 1970s before they went all apeshit-crazy for KISS.

    Thus, I believe I am actually more qualified to speak on biology than our Jew-baiting buddy here.

  165. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    xxxxxxxx1000,

    Let me guess, you are Bishop’s lawyer, one he hired from Bishop & himself.

  166. Ze Madmax says

    xxxxxxxx1000 @ #230:

    So we start with:

    DON’T YOU MOTHERFUCKING ASSHOLES

    YOU PATHETIC LOSERS

    YOUR OWN PATHETIC FUCKIN’ LIVES

    And then:

    YOU WILL ALL BE SUED FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER.

    Well, in that case I counter-sue times infinity! No takebacks! And I’ll demand ONE MILLION DOWLAHS

  167. says

    YOU WILL ALL BE SUED FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER.

    IF I WERE HIM, I WOULD SUE ALL OF YOU FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER.

    You might want to make up your mind before you hit the capslock, Cupcake.

  168. raven says

    random screaming troll:

    DON’T YOU MOTHERFUCKING ASSHOLES HAVE ANYTHING BETTER TO DO THAN INSULT SOMEONE YOU’VE NEVER MET FOR NO REASON?

    At this exact moment no, nothing better to do. I’m waiting for some chicken to cook for dinner.

    YOU SHOULD BE TOTALLY ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES. YOU WILL ALL BE SUED FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER.

    Well that is good to know. I was wondering what to look forward to after dessert. Thanks for providing us with something “BETTER TO DO.” We will all be getting our lawyers ready for SLAPP suits. Losers pay court costs and our lawyer’s fees. Do remember to budget enough for them.

  169. says

    myeck waters:

    Poor baby. He doesn’t like being criticized, I guess.

    I think that was supposed to be an example of “expert trolling”. That sorry little fuckit couldn’t troll his way out of a wet paper bag.

  170. Gregory Greenwood says

    Oh look – someone really likes ALL CAPS.

    You know, my fellow pharynguloids, I am beginning to think that this xxxxxxxx1000 chap (or chapess) is getting a little hot under the colour about something. I have never seen someone actually manage to foam at the mouth via the medium of a text based comment thread before, but xxxxxxxx1000, that brave pioneer of angry and incoherent online rants, has found a way.

    I look forward to reading hir bio in the dungeon…

    just one little quibble;

    IF I WERE HIM, I WOULD SUE ALL OF YOU FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER.

    Strictly speaking, slander is spoken, whereas libel is written – the two terms aren’t actually interchangeable.

  171. says

    Fuck, I left just before this thread got good.

    I find it incredibly rich that a self-professed ‘expert’ on internet trolling has a planet-sized sense of self-importance and treats the internet as very SERIOUS BUSINESS.

    Also, my money is split on whether xxxxxxxx1000 is Mr. Bishop having a meltdown, or a clever Pharyngulite giving this story a lovely conclusion.

  172. Philip Legge says

    And BANG! All of the ranty ALL CAPS comments have been smashed into oblivion.

    (Though I think deleting the repetitions and disemvowelling the remainder would have been funnier. All hail the CEO!)

  173. Patricia, OM says

    Dammit! Missed the whole caps rant, I swear I was only hacking up veg and chicken for soup for mere seconds.

  174. cm's changeable moniker says

    Eh?

    xxxxxxxx1000 @ #230:

    … gets me myeck waters. Poopyhead’s on a clean-up?

    OP?

    I paid taxes for this guy to get his degrees.

    I feel … a bit … libertarian right now.

  175. says

    Yeah, cm. Someone (i.e., most likely Jonathon Bishop) using the ‘nym xxxxxxxx1000 pooted out a stream of all-caps furious rants, many of them posted multiple times. It was all very sad.

    There were threats of legal action and I think a bit of pants-wetting as well. I’m pretty sure I could hear the sobs as I scanned past the multiple posts.

  176. Philip Legge says

    Patricia, OM,

    you didn’t really miss very much, but as a conoisseur of trolls and internet kooks, I might as well point out the habits of our lately banished visitor. If you read Ze Madmax’s summary at #232 and add a few bits of “BLAH BLAH BLARRGGH” between each of the quotes, you’ll get most of the message in the initial posting. Surprisingly, “xxxxxxxx1000” (aka DrJohnBrown101 according to the new entry in the Dungeon) was able to spell the Poopyhead CEO’s surname, unlike many inferior brands of troll!

    The second and third comments differed from the first by changing the last line, as Caine (love the new nym!) pointed out at #235. Ze then changed track with a short rant about “FEMINISM”, including the de rigeur gendered slur.

    Ze then returned to the same comment as two and three, now broken up into paragraphs rather than a caps-locked, wall o’text.

    Comment six retracted the gendered slur in comment four. Comments seven and eight were copies of comment five.

    Comment nine started with the interesting argument that “CAPS LOCK AIN’T THE PROBLEM” and touched on issues related to mental illness before recapitulating the now familiar comment five verbatim.

    If there any more comments before the fall of the banhammer I am sadly unaware of them.

  177. sambolic says

    Suppose everyone really believes Jonathan Bishop to be a “kook”. Why spend so much time attacking him? If it’s a sickness, shouldn’t he be pitied rather than attacked? If it’s ego, will attacking him help lessen his ego? In other words, if everyone truly believes he is a kook, then how is he worth the time to criticize?

    This thread has been like something out of the Twilight Zone. It’s been a weird read. Actions indicate that most of those who posted against him don’t really believe he’s sick or ego-maniacal. Actions indicate a strange kind of jealousy (strange because, um, why?) or frustration with a lack of types of success in life—the person taking the action believing Mr. Bishop to be an example of success or a fraud being irrelevant, in the latter case. The only other possibility for such an attack is that the people who loathe pretension in Jonathan Bishop so much as to repeatedly peck at him are themselves pretentious; and they know it deep down inside.

    Isn’t this behavior exactly the kind of thing society condemns in children who attack other children on social media sites? To put it more bluntly, what if Jonathan Bishop, a human being, committed suicide due to all these attacks? If you find yourself saying something like, “Good, the world would be a better place if he did,” then please seek psychiatric help: you’re the sick one.

    Lastly—and I am genuinely curious about this—why did a successful professor (we presume) from the University of Minnesota expend so much energy in rounding up critics to attack one man? Why such venom? Did Jonathan Bishop previously attack the professor? I’m baffled.

  178. cm's changeable moniker says

    Oh! Thanks. And I had a takedown lined up off the back of:

    Extra-Secure Heavy-Duty Hacker and Vexatious Complaint Resistant Pay-as-you-Go Hosting for Ethically-minded politicians and activists

    (Google it!)

    It’s no fun when the trolls get squashed before you can get to them. *pout*

  179. says

    sambolic:

    Suppose everyone really believes Jonathan Bishop to be a “kook”.

    Why should I suppose that? Why suppose anything at all? Jonathan Bishop deigned to present himself and his ideas many times in this thread. I can go exactly by what he wrote and what he blogs about and so on. Supposition isn’t required.

    As for thinking he’s a kook? Nope. I do think he’s a Cupcake. And quite the fuckwitted asshole.

  180. andyo says

    Suppose everyone really believes Jonathan Bishop to be a “kook”. Why spend so much time attacking him?

    Dear Concern Troll: You overestimate how long and how much effort it takes to ridicule someone so ridiculous.

  181. camelspotter says

    @sambolic – I think my Lt. Gorman analogy works just as well as either of your suggestions, therefore you are presenting us with a false dichotomy.

  182. Just_A_Lurker says

    sambolic

    This thread has been like something out of the Twilight Zone. It’s been a weird read. Actions indicate that most of those who posted against him don’t really believe he’s sick or ego-maniacal. Actions indicate a strange kind of jealousy (strange because, um, why?) or frustration with a lack of types of success in life—the person taking the action believing Mr. Bishop to be an example of success or a fraud being irrelevant, in the latter case. The only other possibility for such an attack is that the people who loathe pretension in Jonathan Bishop so much as to repeatedly peck at him are themselves pretentious; and they know it deep down inside.

    Wait…What? I’m sorry but where are you reading this shit? How in the hell do you get that pile of bullshit out of this thread? And seriously, if this is how you read it, stop yourself from this armchair psychiatry.

    Isn’t this behavior exactly the kind of thing society condemns in children who attack other children on social media sites?

    Firstly, no one here is a child.
    Secondly, we are making fun of his ideas, which he willfully decides to believe in. Totally different from what happens in school yard bullying.
    Thirdly, this is not bullying. Look it fuck up if you need to compare and contrast.

    To put it more bluntly, what if Jonathan Bishop, a human being, committed suicide due to all these attacks? If you find yourself saying something like, “Good, the world would be a better place if he did,” then please seek psychiatric help: you’re the sick one.

    Whoa there you presumptuous asshole. No one here wishes or thinks that. Fuck the hell right off. If someone is thinking about committing suicide, they obviously need to get help. How fucked up are you to pull this shit when other people here have contemplated it themselves or lost people because of it? WTF is wrong with you?

    Lastly—and I am genuinely curious about this—why did a successful professor (we presume) …

    (you ass)

    …from the University of Minnesota expend so much energy in rounding up critics to attack one man?

    You severely overestimate the amount of energy it takes to do this. Do you pull the same bullshit line about the sorcerer douche, Ken Ham and others? Do you just hate it when we don’t let bullshit get through without criticizing it?

    Why such venom?

    It’s a feature, not a bug. Why don’t people understand this? Why the fuck are you here if you don’t like it?

    Did Jonathan Bishop previously attack the professor? I’m baffled.

    Why do we have to wait for people to attack us to respond to their bullshit? We call people out who are wrong. Why is this so hard to understand? You clearly are baffled, perhaps you stumbled here accidentally? Take your tone trolling and stuff it. You aren’t going to change and neither are we. This is just pointless blathering. Fuck off already. I don’t for a minute believe this innocent”I’m just asking a question, why are you so mean?” crap. It’s tiring having to keep dealing with it.

  183. says

    I’m convinced shambolic is ol’ bishop posting under yet another ‘nym. Thinking we’re jealous? No one but bishop or his mum would get that idea from this thread. And both shambolic and xxxxxxxx1000 brought up the notion that we could drive bish to suicide.

    Time for new tricks, bishop. Like not being an idiot.

  184. Just_A_Lurker says

    And both shambolic and xxxxxxxx1000 brought up the notion that we could drive bish to suicide.

    Ah, damn I missed that fun.

  185. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    I tell you, living in a different time zone blows. I tune in only to find that ol’ flogging is gone, his puppet is fried and buried, and someone “sambolic” is not able to post more than once every two hours or so.

    Even worse, ALL THE BEST LINES ARE TAKEN! This is just not right.

    So, here is my 2 yuan observation (better than an opinion because I used more letters and syllables), if ol’ flogging is an expert troller, then so were my children around aged four. So much of what he said sounds like “I’m rubber, you’re glue”. And then he adds that exclamation point. I suppose to draw the attention of the less expert readers to the snappiest line he is delivering.

    And I agree with IslandBrewer at now #217. All that fluff to wade through and NO FLOUNCE! Flogging calls that expert? Pffffft.

  186. says

    No one but bishop or his mum would get that idea from this thread.

    True. I expect this is yet another attempt to impress us with his trollin’ skillz. He has mad skillz, yo! Yeah, in an alternate reality.

  187. Aquaria says

    interrobang – If you read my earlier post you will see that I said I have little expertise in biology. But, we are in a democracy and laypersons – like myself in biology – have as much right to an opinion as the experts and authorities.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Science isn’t about opinions, fuckface.

    It’s evidence or shut the fuck up. If you don’t know what you’re talking about, then shut the fuck up and learn from your betters.

  188. Aquaria says

    or else I will be making a complaint to your university’s professional ethics committee.

    I’ll give you the address myself, if you’ll shut the fuck up.

  189. Menyambal -- damned dirty ape says

    The faff about opinions reminded me of the time some young god-botherer goober was rude to my dad. Dad had said something coherent and insightful, and the kid just sniffed, “Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion.”

    Fortunately for the idiot, I was on my back under a Volkswagen Beetle holding up the engine. If I could have got out from under the car, I’d have clobbered the kid with the engine.

    Of course, my dad didn’t need my help.

  190. Aquaria says

    They come to me. I possess the awesome superpower of KOOK MAGNETISM.

    You, too, huh?

    I get them in public. This is why I don’t leave the house very often. My husband is always stunned at the people who find me. Sometimes, we can see their eyes light on me, and decide that I’m the person they absolutely must latch onto and tell their life story to. I try to get away. I don’t always succeed. I’m supposed to to take my stuff off the conveyor belt at HEB? Yes, I’ve had the nuts badger me when I’m checking out at the store.

    Pity me, I’m going to a Spurs game on the 14th, thanks to a friend’s benevolence. Who knows what whacko will cross my path at AT&T Center?

  191. WhiteHatLurker says

    @Just_a_lurker says

    If someone is thinking about committing suicide, they obviously need to get help.

    Well, JB does say I have been made to feel like there is no way out, and suicidal and I was subject to a tirade of abuse from lowlife cyber-bullies, comparing himself to someone that did take her own life after online exchanges. Reading his blog makes me think that this fellow does have some issues.

    I also missed the excised exchanges that went on earlier in this thread. If they are from sock puppets of JB, those comments could say more about his state of mind, other than the general “disturbed” vibe I’m getting.

  192. Therrin says

    Louis,

    I am a short trip up the M4 from you, come on big boy.

    Oh goodie, another ball-kicking contest?

    Aaaand a demonstration of twice-baked sock-puppetry. One would think a self-proclaimed master of trolling would be better at it.

  193. cyan says

    Does his polymathism not shine in this entry?

    “Should women wear gynadoms to prevent unwanted births? Is this the way to stop the prisoner dilemma of female opportunist DNA Thieves from not taking the contraceptive pill knowing their male partner won’t be wearing a condom?
    I invented this after saying to my mother that I thought a nominal charge on the CSA was fair as it would be a disincentive to opportunist DNA Thieves and blamed men for not wearing condoms – well with this invention they may have no choice or instead no blame!”

    From one of his Facebook webpages, on February 1st

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jonathan-Bishop/140953732616121

    and he has drawn the device he has envisioned.

  194. Ariaflame, BSc, BF, PhD says

    @cyan
    WTF?
    If he doesn’t trust one female controlled contraceptive method then why would another be better? Classic Dunning-Kruger this one.

  195. says

    DNA thieves and sperm theft, the MRAs favourite topics.
    First all those women don’t fuck them at all and then while totally not fucking them at all, they steal their DNA because they wanna have a little baby ’cause they’re so damn profitable!

    Honeycake, there’s a hint: Just wear a condom. Also protects both partners from infections.

    How do you steal sperm anyway, I mean, unless you rape the guy (which happens and is a crime, no argument there)?
    I mean, first he puts it there voluntarily and then she doesn’t really get any of it anyway…

  196. Catnip, Not a Polymath says

    I was once called a polymath by a colleague.

    I asked him what a polymath was.

    He replied, that if I had to ask, then he was wrong and I obviously wasn’t one.

    I had to look it up.

    That was a bad day for me.

    *slinks back into the corner*

  197. says

    “It has been fun trying out all my new and old trolling techniques on this thread!”

    Come back after you’ve spent more time at /b/.

  198. theophontes 777 says

    @ Lyn M.

    I tell you, living in a different time zone blows. I tune in only to find that ol’ flogging is gone, his puppet is fried and buried, and someone “sambolic” is not able to post more than once every two hours or so.

    Yeah, I always have the same problem too. I was hoping the trolls could get sluiced through to TZT for us here on the wrong side of the pond. (We can only live in hope.)

  199. says

    Cyan:

    Does his polymathism not shine in this entry?

    His idiocy certainly shines through. Apparently, he’s unaware of female condoms, not that it matters. If he’s convinced that women are DNA thieves* then leaving contraception to the woman is hardly a solution. There’s one way to make absolutely sure – go all juice and no seeds.

    *Yo, genius – not all women want sprogs. Me, for example. I’m childfree. I can’t imagine one who would want yours.

  200. Agent Silversmith, Post Palladium Isotope says

    I never knew ‘polymath’ meant someone who was proudly wrong in a wide range of poorly understood topics. It’s like a chef who burns two-minute noodles.

  201. John Morales says

    [meta]

    Well, what a puny specimen jonathanbishop proved to be.

    (So I didn’t miss out on much, at least!)

  202. says

    Giliell:

    Didn’t you know that your uterus is a magical factory that turns semen into hard dollars without any effort required on your part?

    Using that magical logic, I should have quite a lot of money. *looks around* Damn, I seem to have a malfunctioning AUMM.*

    *Automatic Uterine Money Machine

  203. Louis says

    Uteruses magically make money out of semen? And Caine gave me an honorary uterus because I’m now also a woman (and a newt and not a starfish…this is hard to keep up with)…

    I’m seeing {jazz hands} potentiallllll!

    Now, should I set my uterus to produce £20 notes or £50 notes? Or is that Not How It Works?

    Also, I don’t think Jonathan is a polymath. Polymaths demonstrate positive talent in many different areas. Jonathan has demonstrated woeful but hilarious incompetence in many different areas. Surely that makes him a polyclown.

    Louis

  204. John Morales says

    Louis,

    I’m seeing {jazz hands} potentiallllll!

    I’m seeing your offering to Tpyos.

    (Wipe those hands!)

  205. says

    Ah, now I get it.
    First I thought it made sense, because I have certainly experienced a decline in avaible income ever since I told Mr. to get rid of the stuff directly without taking the detour via my uterus*, but since Caine’s AUMM doens’t work either, there’s a new hypothesis:
    It’s orgasms.
    If you have an organsm the AUMM doesn’t work. It only works if you actually don’t like sex and have no pleasure. Pleasure inhibits the AUMM. This is in agreement with Tom Martin’s hypothesis that muslim women, especially in Saudi Arabia are the biggest whres of them all.
    Mystery solved!

    *coincidentially after the final kid was born

  206. John Morales says

    [meta*]

    Louis,

    Surely that makes him a polyclown.

    Clownism?!

    * So was my previous (duh).

  207. Louis says

    Caine,

    Have you been enjoying Conjugal Unpleasantness again?

    Such wickedness!

    Go and sit in a corner and think about what you have done.

    DON’T DO THAT WHILST THINKING!!!!!!!

    Louis

  208. says

    Louis:

    Have you been enjoying Conjugal Unpleasantness again?

    Such wickedness!

    Of course I have, I’m destroying Catholicism! It’s a duty, however, I am determined to do my bit.

    Go and sit in a corner and think about what you have done.

    Fine. I’m taking my toys with me.

  209. says

    Actions indicate that most of those who posted against him don’t really believe he’s sick or ego-maniacal.

    I don’t know if ego-maniacal is a clinical term, and in case it is, I am not going to claim that I am able to diagnose Jonathan Bishop in any way or shape.

    If you’re referring to the common usage, however, I will be quite happy to point out that anyone who edits his own wikipedia page, tries to convince others that he is notable enough for a wikipedia page, and claims to have invented a feature commonly used by social media sites would quite easily fit into that category.

  210. says

    Kristjan:

    I will be quite happy to point out that anyone who edits his own wikipedia page, tries to convince others that he is notable enough for a wikipedia page,

    That was interesting reading, thank you for the link.

  211. says

    Of course I have, I’m destroying Catholicism! It’s a duty, however, I am determined to do my bit.

    You know, I’ve been wondering about that ever since:
    Is there a most effective way to do it?
    I mean, let’s say we assign each masturbation a value of 1, do gay people get more?
    Heterosexual intercourse that involves mutual masturbation AND contraception, does it do more damage than homosexual intercourse?
    Is it stronger or weaker if they are married?
    Bonus points for toys?
    And since catholicism is so big on thought crime, what about the fantasies people have while masturbating/fucking?

  212. says

    Giliell:

    I mean, let’s say we assign each masturbation a value of 1, do gay people get more?

    Because the mere act of masturbation is so very evil, in this case, points are the same across the board.

    Heterosexual intercourse that involves mutual masturbation AND contraception, does it do more damage than homosexual intercourse?

    I’d say those are fairly equal in destructive power. Polysex a/o orgies would have higher points.

    Is it stronger or weaker if they are married?

    Hmmmm. In the case of hetros, weaker. For non-hetros, stronger.

    Bonus points for toys?

    Oh yes. Serious points may be gained if toys such as Jackhammer Jesus are used.

    And since catholicism is so big on thought crime, what about the fantasies people have while masturbating/fucking?

    Not as many points as lusting after one’s neighbour.

  213. Catnip, Not a Polymath says

    What about fantasising about mutual masturbation with your neighbour, who is of the same sex, thus making it a gay mutual (neighbourly) masturbation fantasy. Does that score anything in the catholic implosion?

  214. Catnip, Not a Polymath says

    You could use that to lubricate the toys assisting with generating the Sanctus Orgasmicus during the aforementioned fantasizing.

  215. Louis says

    Giliell,

    I think we can work out a system.

    We know that masturbation causes the destruction of the Catholic church. We have been informed that homosexual sex causes the destruction of society and that oral sex, whilst not quite as bad, also does this. So we have a unit free scale to start with. Society is larger than the Catholic church after all. I think your point about thought crimes is excellent.

    Therefore, if you will indulge me, I propose the following Scale of Wickedness:

    1) Thinking about extramarital heterosexual sexual activity, low level (kissing to light petting), 1 point.

    2) Thinking about extramarital heterosexual sexual activity, medium level (heavy petting to oral sex), 2 points.

    3) Thinking about extramarital heterosexual sexual activity, high level (penis in vagina sex, missionary only, lights off, socks on, brief as possible), 3 points.

    4) Performing extramarital heterosexual activity, very low level (hand holding) [N.B. You are allowed to think about this as long as you don't get Carried Away], 4 points

    5) Thinking about heterosexual sexual activity, very high level (penis in vagina sex in more than one position sex to light bondage), 6 points.

    6) Thinking about heterosexual sexual activity, Naughty level (S and M, anal, group, toys, anything kinkier than woman on top and anything involving a woman enjoying themselves in anyway at all etc), 8 points. (Double if the woman really enjoys herself)

    7) Performing extramarital heterosexual activity, low level, 10 points.

    8) Performing extramarital heterosexual activity, medium level, 12 points.

    9) Performing extramarital heterosexual activity, high level, 15 points.

    10) Thinking about homosexual activity, very low or low level, 50 points.

    11) Performing heterosexual activity, very high level, 60 points.

    12) Performing heterosexual activity, Naughty level, 100 points.

    13) Thinking about homosexual activity, medium level, 150 points.

    14) Thinking about homosexual activity, high level, 250 points.

    15) Thinking about homosexual activity, very high level, 500 points.

    16) Thinking about homosexual activity, Naughty level, 1000 points.

    17) Performing homosexual activity, very low level, 10000 points. (Double if male homosexual activity)

    18) Performing homosexual activity, low level, 25000 points. (Double if male homosexual activity)

    19) Performing homosexual activity, medium level, 60000 points. (Double if male homosexual activity)

    20) Performing homosexual activity, high level, 130000 points. (Double if male homosexual activity)

    21) Performing homosexual activity, Naughty level, 1000000 points. (Double if male homosexual activity)

    The higher the score, obviously the greater degree of societal/Catholic church destruction that occurs.

    Categories 1), 2), 3), 5), 6), 10) and 13) to 16) inclusive are also modifiers. If you are performing any of the other categories whilst thinking about any of these then the score is doubled. If you are thinking about someone other than the person you are doing it with, tripled.

    The marriage modifier applies differently to homosexuals and heterosexuals. If homosexual people are married, obviously this is a perversion and quadruples any specific score. Heterosexual people being married halves the score, but only for categories 4), and 7) to 9) inclusive.

    Granted this makes the “extramarital” descriptor redundant as these acts are being performed within marriage, but since sex is still dirty, some penalty applies unless a child is the result. In the case of successful production of child (and subsequent baptism thereof) the score for the specific category of act is reduced to zero in the case of a female child, and -100 in the case of a male child.

    The bestiality bonus multiplier of 5 applies to all categories as does similar necrophilia booster of 10. So for example, flogging a dead horse (assuming different sex, unmarried horse) is a category 12) (Naughty, 100 points) multiplied by 5 and then 10 to give 5000 points. This is obviously less destructive than those bloody gays holding hands (Category 17), 10000 points) because horses, well, you’ve seen Equus, they’re basically begging for it the saucy bastards.

    Thinking about or performing group sexual activities where there is a member of the same sex present is, regardless of degree of interaction (even if it is a brief nod) counts as a homosexual act.

    A woman seriously enjoying herself doubles the score, and this also applies to lesbians. In the case of multiple orgasms, the score can grow geometrically.

    Louis

    P.S. Technically there is a category 0) for Catholic priests which is raping children. This scores -10000000000000 points, in encouraged, and involves either a move to another parish and a cover up or both of those and promotion.

  216. Louis says

    Dammit I forgot wanking!

    That counts as “low level” performing activity I think, the obvious modifiers of what you are thinking about also apply.

    Louis

  217. Louis says

    Giliell,

    Mmm good point, that would produce a child out of wedlock, so the standard 15 point (category 9) score needs some modification. So double for enjoying herself, 30 points (assuming just the one orgasm obviously).

    Now, not baptising a child means it’s not a good Catholic (or religious for the faith-lovers) child. That could cause unrest and possible heathen activities, I think a standard 50 point penalty should apply for the lack of baptism alone. Given that women were sent to Magdalene laundries for things like this, the production of a bastard baby should carry a standard 30 point penalty, rounding the whole crime up to 110 points, the same level of severity as doing anything kinky when heterosexual, married or not.

    Assuming of course the child is a girl. Obviously if the child is a boy this almost nullifies the offence, bringing it down to 10 points, the same as a wank or a bit of a kiss and cuddle with someone not your partner.

    Naturally 10 points and above are crimes punishable by at least a good beating, possibly death. Certainly eternal damnation is a guarantee with scores above 10.

    Ghey Secks with Brownian is an immediate entry level Category 21) crime. The mere fact of it being with Brownian negates all the lower categories. It is kinky and Ghey by definition. Obviously appropriate multipliers and bonuses apply from that base score onwards. Basically, even holding Brownian’s hand in a slightly fruity way gets you 2000000 points (it is by definition Ghey, as I mentioned).

    HTH

    Louis

  218. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    theophontes 777 @ 274

    Yep.

    By the way, having a nice holiday? We got Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday off.

  219. says

    Crap. This new scoring system shatters my self-esteem — I only score, at best, a few hundred points a day.

    Oh, no…I really am a boring old vanilla white guy!

    <curls up in corner, cries>

  220. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    I must say, if ghey secks with Brownian merits such high destructo points, I’m becoming interested myself.

    I would have to do the sex change thing, of course, to make it really ghey and all, but perhaps that would add points?

    Former woman now a man has ghey secks with Brownian while thinking of … oh, polymaths trolling the Vatican? (Effective trolling, I mean.)

  221. Ogvorbis (no relation to the Ogg family) says

    Oh, no…I really am a boring old vanilla white guy!

    Right there with you, old man. Right there with you.

    Though I do have the cowboy hat. Any points for that?

  222. davidmcnerney says

    You need to click on the ‘Valid XHTML’ link at the bottom of the page.

    For an IT polymath that’s not very smart.

  223. says

    Lyn M

    I must say, if ghey secks with Brownian merits such high destructo points, I’m becoming interested myself.

    There’s a looong line and you have to get in the back (no pun intended), I’m sorry to say.

    I would have to do the sex change thing, of course, to make it really ghey and all, but perhaps that would add points?

    Ahhh, I see you’re new to this: Every secks with Brownian is automatically ghey secks. Nobody can haz heterosgshual secks with Brownian.
    +++++

    Oh, no…I really am a boring old vanilla white guy!

    I think Louis can rework this thing to give some extra points for cephalods in any incarnation.

    ++++++
    Reminds me how easy it is to cause public uproar when most of the public is boys 5-10:
    Loooooooooook, they’re kissing!!!

  224. Louis says

    PZ,

    The key is thinking about something naughty just for a second.

    Start with a Category 9), a basic marital 15 pointer. If the TrophyWife™ enjoys herself, you’ve doubled the score. Congrats! You’re hellbound already!

    Just allow the thought of a penis to flicker briefly through your mind. Someone else’s penis. Do not react with obvious and immediate disgust. Congrats! You have caught Teh Ghey! It’s that easy. That’s a straight Category 13) offence, 150 points added straight away, and clearly it’s not the TrophyWife™’s penis, so you get a triple multiplier. that’s 3(180), i.e. 540 points. Mind you, you are married, so that halves the score to 270, but it’s a respectable start. By the end of the week you could easily destroy as much of the Catholic church and/or society as a gay man thinking about a gay threesome. You may have to put the effort in to catch those darn gays up if they actually do anything though.

    With a little work and imagination you too could be one of the world’ worst perverts. I’m betting those kids of yours aren’t baptised…huh…huh. Just think of all the high scoring joy your past activities will bring you.

    Each additional offence either adds or multiplies the score. Even the most moderate of thoughts can have you in the thousands, and that’s before we crack the casing on the $145 dollar squildo (counts as bestiality, 5x multiplier).

    All of this is designed to have you howling with guilt at being so wantonly destructive that you hop directly to your local Catholic church and confess all so that the priest can get his jollies absolve you.

    Louis

  225. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Giliell @ 305

    Aha! I see. So any secks with Brownian is automatically ghey, and I can phone in a cancellation to the local sex-change clinic, here in sunny China. Right!

    As for the line-up, I understand. I am a patient woman, though, and will work on the whole fantasy multiplier part while waiting.

    *Jots note to self* Oh I know! Just work in being watched by barking cats, that ought to help.

  226. Louis says

    Lyn M,

    Thank you for drawing attention to my cis privilege and ignorance. I can only apologise for not considering my trans chums in my mathematics. Forgive me, it is an evolving document and my oversight was a genuine error.

    Okay, so my ignorant cis privilege + apology part is genuine. I am genuinely sorry for not considering it. “Evolving document”…yeah, that’s me taking the piss out* of myself! ;-)

    What follows is further piss taking, but out of those of our religious chums who think wanking is destroying the Catholic church etc:

    I think the mere state of thinking about trans things is an instant 5x multiplier for any and all crimes. Actually being trans? Phew, that’s a biggie. I’m going to consult my bible. After all, are you more or less destructive than the bestiality people?

    {Sound of frantic biblical consultation}

    Well, since horses are clearly asking for it, and camels are properly filthy (don’t get me started on llamas), but they are not human, therefore don’t have souls to be corrupted, I’m sorry, but you’re worse than them. Even the necrophiliacs are doing it with something dead, therefore departed of soul. I’m afraid it’s a 15x multiplier for you if anything enters or leaves your pants. The bible is quite clear.

    After all, trans people are both women and men at the same time, biblically speaking, they have rejected the body god gave them and altered it (possibly), this makes it group sex whatever you do! And auto-Ghey. Ohhhh the crimes are stacking up. Frankly, I think it’s impossible for you to think about holding your own hand without immediate damnation.

    If you had Ghey Secks with Brownian, used a dildo, enjoyed yourself more than once, thought about someone else (possibly a dead horse), then I think you would actually cause the Pope and at least two cardinals to fall down dead.

    I think you may have to take one for the team.

    As for thinking about IT polymaths trolling the Vatican? I’ve never heard something so disgusting and ridiculous. For shame!

    ;-)

    Louis

    * Taking the piss = mocking in British English.**

    ** Starts linguistic argument again.

    P.S. Obviously none of the above is actually true.

  227. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Louis @ 308

    As for thinking about IT polymaths trolling the Vatican? I’ve never heard something so disgusting and ridiculous. For shame!

    That was funny. Please note, you left out the cats. I would never think about a dead horse (unless the cats were eating it). I also appreciate the footnotes, but I am fluent in both American and Brit, being a Canadian from Ontario.

    I am not trans, myself, but thought erroneously I would have to go that way to enable ghey-ness with Brownian. Giliell straightened me out on that one, so to speak.

    So if I only thought about transgendering, that would also count, I’m guessing, although I concede not as much as if I actually did it.

  228. Louis says

    Lyn M,

    Yeah thinking about it would be pretty good, but for the full Pope and double Cardinal combo you’d have to go the whole hog. Just the thinking might get you a Monseigneur and perhaps the odd verger.

    If you did a double reverse rusty trombone with a cleveland steamer and a half-hearted donkey punch, I reckon you at least nobble pair of Bishops.

    Something to think about.

    Louis

    P.S. Oh fuck, now my evil, evil little brain is trying to translate acts into specific levels of destruction. Does wanking steal the faith from a newly baptised baby? Does doggy style cause momentary doubt in a local priest and moderate damage to a vestry? Can I sabotage the church roof fund by having my wife slap my arse and call me Susan? Enquiring minds need to know. And this enquiring mind needs to stop procrastinating. It won’t but it needs to.

  229. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Louis

    So many possibilities, so little time.

    Oh, I have a question. I was told today by a couple I just met, that there had been a test case in the UK about denial of service to a gay couple. I was told an elderly Christian couple gently asked a gay couple to take a room elsewhere than their B&B, then were sued and lost big time. Recently, the gay couple returned to court to have the pensions of the elderly Christians seized to pay the judgement. The people I spoke to were quite scandalized and kept saying the gay couple were mean. I pointed out that a judge had agreed with them, and asked some questions, but they had no information.

    Have you heard of the case?

    *Eyes shift guiltily. Yes, she’s too lazy to google.*

  230. Louis says

    Lyn M,

    Yeah I’ve heard of the case, but not the “seize the pensions” part.

    I confess my memory of the case isn’t great though. I’ll have to get off my arse and google too!

    Louis

  231. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Louis,

    Thanks! But if you recall a name or something so I can find the case, I would be happy. I will want to read the report myself because I suspect this stuff may come up again with these folks I met. It sounded like a spin was put on the reporting as I don’t see why the elderly couple’s church apparently did not assist with the legal costs, according to the people I met. The gay couple had backing from a gay rights organization, the devils. (All this from the couple I met. It just sounds fishy to me and I would like to know.)

    But you can’t have an opinion if you don’t do the research. Unless you are flogging, of course, who may manage that.

  232. Louis says

    Lyn M,

    Here’s one case I found, the more famous of two:

    Link 1
    Link 2
    Link 3

    No mention I saw of these Christian people losing their pensions. Their appeal, for example, was funded by a Christian legal/lobbying firm.

    Louis

  233. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Louis

    That has to be the case. It fits, if you leave out that the Bulls did not lose everything and that Preddy and Hall didn’t take them back to court, the Bulls appealed, and that the Bulls were supported by an organization while it was a government agency that advanced the case for Preddy and Hall. In the other case, it appears no one has gone to court as yet.

    The two I met are pleasant enough but they feel everyone should be entitled to his or her own beliefs, etc. (In short, they don’t like gay people, is my guess.) I pointed out the Bulls set up a business, and that there are general laws covering that, which even devout Christians must follow. The people I met also felt municipal councilors should be permitted to pray before a meeting. I just talked about the American constitution and how it prohibits that.

    I did ask them if it would be OK if Muslims prayed before the meeting. They conceded it was only for Christians, really, and did change the topic. I let it go as I had pressed them pretty hard, but they were the ones who brought it up in the first place.

    Could be why they didn’t invite me to dinner after I helped them with some computer/electronics purchases. Gee, I guess I’m not their kind.

  234. Louis says

    Lyn M,

    Gee, I guess I’m not their kind.

    Yeah. Anyone thinking in public must be punished. Especially if they think anything like “Gosh, perhaps religious privilege should be challenged.”. Worse if they actually say it. Especially if you’re a woman, I mean, a thinking woman? Deary me. No no no! Not allowed. Were this couple also older than you by any small chance?

    Louis

  235. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Louis,

    You are awesome, yes, they are. They look a bit old-fashioned, whereas I fondly believe I am more stylish. They aren’t much older than I am, about 15 years or so, but they look older than that.

    I think they expected me to simply agree. Whoops.

    Thanks for the comments. I had not thought about those angles.

  236. A. R says

    Louis: Keep your hands off that absolute EtOH. Otherwise Teh Groop Secks might be delayed during your recovery from benzene poisoning.

  237. Louis says

    Lyn M,

    Oh my comments shouldn’t be surprising. I’ve “enjoyed” similar experiences with people. I’m male (erm…obviously I hope!) and I still get dismissed by some few people for simply standing up and challenging extant prejudice. Admittedly it is almost always older people who do this, and admittedly very few people have the courage (I am a little….erm….”forthright” ;-) ) to do so.

    I have an unpleasant tendency to get spectacularly assertive and confrontational (not aggressive) when dismissed in this manner. Gets me into all sorts of fun. Luckily, being male, this is occasionally seen as an “asset” for some reason, whereas for women it’s not always the case.

    Louis

  238. Louis says

    A.R.

    I promise to avoid the stuff like the plague.

    Unless carefully purified (which is possible, but trickier than many suppose).

    Louis

  239. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Louis,

    It is usually considered a bug not a feature, in women, true. I practiced litigation for about 25 years, where everyday I was so glad that I was supposed to be argumentative and pushy. It transformed what some thought were negatives into positives, and I got paid for it too.

    I can go off like a rocket, I admit, but professional training is a great thing. It kicks in and I usually end up seeming dead calm, which takes the fun out of it for the yelling crowd.

    You clearly have great verbal ability, so I suspect that the intimidation factor is based on that, too. I mean, most people don’t willingly put their hands into a meat grinder, even if it isn’t being spectacularly assertive.

    I’m going to be logging out shortly. Thanks again for the links and for the comments.

  240. andyo says

    LOL, the guy has taken it to his facebook page, pathetically trying to get christians and muslims on his side, by reminding them of something completely irrelevant. Perhaps he thinks they will riot beside him?

  241. Louis says

    To get the benzene (or other solvents/organic residues) out of ethanol is pretty tricky. The difference in freezing points is huge, I’ve never tried that but it might well work, after all it’s one of the ways to freeze water out of ethanol.

    One problem is ethanol/benzene/water forms a ternary azeotrope, distilling this can reduce the water content, but retains a lot of the unpleasant organics. There are a few things you can do with temp/reduced pressure/serial fractional distillations to reduce this. To get really pure ethanol you need to combine methods, e.g. running very cold ethanol through drying columns containing anhydrous drying agents and activated charcoal after freezing out other crap* and filtering, then fractionally distilling the resulting fraction. And being vicious about cutting the fractions in the distillation too. The redistilling these.

    It’s what I’ve done when working with certain organometallics that required really pure, dry ethanol, above and beyond commercial “anhydrous” grade.

    Louis

    * That is the technical chemical term. Honest! ;-)

  242. KG says

    How do you define Semitic? Only a bigot would define only Jews as Semitic. Palestinians come from the same blood-line as the Israelites meaning both are Semitic! – jonathanbishop

    This sort of bilge is not an infallible sign of antisemitism – sometimes it’s just the result of ignorance and stupidity – but it is pretty reliable. “Semitic” is not used in current anthropology to refer to modern populations at all, only to languages and ancient cultures. “Antisemitism” on the other hand (or “anti-semitism” if you prefer) has always referred to a particular animus against Jews, and if not invented by 19th-century Jew-haters to refer to their own hatred, was readily adopted by them. That’s still what it refers to. As Steve Cohen noted in the 1980s, it generally includes the specific charge that Jews conspire with each other, and that even those who appear to be on opposite sides of political issues (like, say, financiers and Trotskyists), are secretly in league.

  243. Louis says

    I have done something really disgusting. I have looked at his page via Facebook as suggested by Andyo.

    The words “massive knobhead” come to mind.

    Louis

  244. A. R says

    Louis: Yeah, I was thinking it would be something like that. And I’ll recognize “freezing the crap out of x” as a technical chemistry term as long as you recognize “pissed of macrophage” as a technical immunology term.

  245. Louis says

    A.R.

    Deal!

    My wife is an ex-cell biologist, I am relatively familiar with their biological terminology.

    Louis

  246. Brownian says

    LOL, the guy has taken it to his facebook page, pathetically trying to get christians and muslims on his side, by reminding them of something completely irrelevant.

    What a cowardly douche. Honestly, it enrages me that I share a planet with little fucking weasels like him.

    This liberal everybody is valuable bullshit is just that. We need to start firing up the vats and tossing brainless fucks like him in.

  247. Matt Penfold says

    Oh, I have a question. I was told today by a couple I just met, that there had been a test case in the UK about denial of service to a gay couple. I was told an elderly Christian couple gently asked a gay couple to take a room elsewhere than their B&B, then were sued and lost big time. Recently, the gay couple returned to court to have the pensions of the elderly Christians seized to pay the judgement. The people I spoke to were quite scandalized and kept saying the gay couple were mean. I pointed out that a judge had agreed with them, and asked some questions, but they had no information.

    There is this report about an appeal that was withdrawn.

  248. Louis says

    Brownian,

    Oh come now. That’s a little extreme. I’m sure Jonathan has value. He could, for example, be used as a particularly annoying paper weight, or he could stand in a distracting sunbeam. I’m sure with suitable training he might be able to manage simple tasks.

    Louis

  249. says

    Caine:

    Yo, genius – not all women want sprogs.

    Here we see the typical MRA lack of understanding that women are individual human beings with varying desires and goals.

    Louis, how many points for doing the deed on a church altar?

    Also, I assert that ghey secks with Brownian will make the Vatican and its inhabitants automatically and instantaneously vaporize. Hopefully, all that artwork, plus the sooper seekrit archives of smut, will remain behind.

  250. Louis says

    Ms Daisy Cutter,

    During a mass or service or not?

    I’m thinking 3x multiplier for no service, 9x for during.

    Bonus points if you can involve the priest.

    Louis

  251. Brownian says

    Oh come now. That’s a little extreme. I’m sure Jonathan has value. He could, for example, be used as a particularly annoying paper weight, or he could stand in a distracting sunbeam. I’m sure with suitable training he might be able to manage simple tasks.

    Fine.

    But I’ve already started simmering the split peas. What am I supposed to use to flavour up the stock? A ham hock? Do I look like a chump?

  252. Brownian says

    Is this the way to stop the prisoner dilemma of female opportunist DNA Thieves from not taking the contraceptive pill knowing their male partner won’t be wearing a condom?

    God, I retract my capitulation to Louis’ #333. There’s more than enough of these “Denying the Holocaust makes me edgy and women just want to steal my genius for their own”-types that we’re not going to run out of paperweights any time soon.

    Into the soup with this clod, I say.

  253. says

    “You need to click on the ‘Valid XHTML’ link at the bottom of the page.

    For an IT polymath that’s not very smart.”

    As someone who takes pride in writing valid code, that’s pretty funny. He done goofed.

  254. Louis says

    Brownian,

    Be fair, I did say we could use him to block out annoying sunbeams too. I mean, you could be in an airy office, needing to pin down multiple piles of paper and block several sunbeams. Obviously he, and his ilk, could be stored in a cupboard until needed. Preferably away from internet access I think.

    Louis

  255. Brownian says

    Obviously he, and his ilk, could be stored in a cupboard until needed.

    [Conspiratorially winking] I hear what you’re saying.

    [Transfers peas to human-sized pot, resumes simmering.]

  256. Louis says

    Brownian,

    I said nothing. I did not have sex with that woman advocate stewing morons.

    Plausible deniability, baby, plausible deniability.

    Louis

  257. Just_A_Lurker says

    If you have an organsm the AUMM doesn’t work. It only works if you actually don’t like sex and have no pleasure. Pleasure inhibits the AUMM. This is in agreement with Tom Martin’s hypothesis that muslim women, especially in Saudi Arabia are the biggest whres of them all.
    Mystery solved!

    Wait, then why am I poor? Why is my AUMM broken? Can I get a repair and pay after it starts pouring out money? That would be useful as hell so I could pay rent!

  258. borkmcfink says

    You’d be better off watching John Bishop on YouTube than wasting any more time with this fellah that calls himself Jonathan Bishop.
    (url)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz0fb53LCHs(/url)

  259. Catnip, Not a Polymath says

    Thanks Louis, best laugh I’ve had all day.

    Only, what’s an ex-cell?

  260. Brownian says

    Only, what’s an ex-cell?

    I think Louis means a population biologist; someone who does their biology with spreadsheets and formulae.

  261. says

    I think Louis means a population biologist; someone who does their biology with spreadsheets and formulae.

    With the focus, obviously, on macro-evolution.

  262. Lyn M: Just Lyn M. says

    Matt Penfold @ 332

    Thank you! That makes it a certainty. The new people I met did miss the appeal by the Bulls, and grossly exaggerated the sum awarded, and forgot that the appeal by Hall and Preddy was withdrawn, but you know, the rest was … uh.

    OK. I’m done now.

  263. Louis says

    Nooooo. My wife is an ex-cell biologist. She looks after my exes, in their cells.

    That’s not creepy, right?

    Louis

  264. says

    You know that creepy xxxxxxxx1000 character, whose comments I’ve deleted because they were repetitive ALL CAPS SCREAMING FURIOUS ANGER-SHITS? He called up the division head and discipline chair yesterday and told them to fire me.

    Because I was mean.

    Right now, I’m so mean, I’m laughing.

  265. Louis says

    PZ, #351,

    B…B…B…BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAhAAAA!

    Oh that is PRECIOUS. I would love to have someone do that to my previous boss, who was the bluntest person I have ever met IRL. He would have listened calmly, issued a cheery “fuck off” and gone about his day.

    Louis

  266. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Right now, I’m so mean, I’m laughing.

    Bwahahahahahahaha. Hopefully they politely asked him what he did to be deleted, as one has to work at being banned from Pharyngula…