Ah, it’s another bright crisp summer morning, and I wake up to birds singing, the distant sound of the freight train moving through Morris, and the mad dinging of my email software, alerting me that there’s another flood of new hate mail on twitter, on youtube, and in my mail. Yes, it is August, and Thunderf00t has created a new video denouncing feminism. And me. And the accusations flooding in are so stupid and so wrong. I shall address them one more time, and then, please, slip on your nicest toe shoes and tutu and pirouette up your own anuses.
Here are a few of the bloody idiotic complaints I get.
-
“I am so disgusted with you and your war with Thunderf00t.” Aside from this post here, today, I have completely ignored Thunderf00t for the last several weeks. He, on the other hand, is making videos and twitter comments about me. There are certain people who, I think, don’t understand the internet: if I made a post two weeks ago or a month ago or a year ago, it persists. It doesn’t mean I’m sitting here right now, obsessing over something I wrote yesterday, even.
-
“How dare you violate Thunderf00t’s right to free speech!” This one is especially ironic, given that it’s made in response to Thunderf00t blithering away loudly and freely on the internet, again. We’ve done nothing to compromise his ability to express himself. We have said that this organization does not support his views, and will not give him our space or resources to do so.
-
“You and Rebecca Watson banned Thunderf00t!” No, we didn’t. We refused to support Thunderf00t’s dumbass crusade against feminism on our blog network. Also, do you realized that freethoughtblogs.com and skepchick.org are completely different entities? Rebecca Watson has no input at all on our management, and vice versa.
-
“You banned Thunderf00t for simply disagreeing with you!” No, we get disagreement all the time, and bloggers here have issues with each other frequently. What Thunderf00t was fired for was joining a network he clearly detested and immediately launching a campaign to tell everyone to stop talking about subjects he didn’t like. He hates freethoughtblogs, in case it wasn’t clear to you by now, so why the hell did he join at all? If it was to undermine it from within, his overt antagonism from day two onward made it clear he wasn’t going to be persuasive in the slightest. Dumbest fifth columnist ever.
-
“You promised you wouldn’t meddle with what he wrote!” Yes, and we didn’t. We didn’t edit or censor one word that he wrote: his blog is still here, completely intact and untouched. What we didn’t promise is that we’d give him space on our network forever and ever. I know he’s fond of complaining in academic terms about this, so digest this: he was never granted tenure here. He doesn’t get to complain that his tenure contract was violated, because didn’t have one. Now maybe if he’d built up some social capital with us, and demonstrated some ability to make an intelligent contribution, we’d have been more reluctant to let him go…but he didn’t, and showed no interest in doing so. He had no friends among the established bloggers here, and didn’t want any. That wasn’t a very collegial attitude.
Let me add one more thing: there’s this unfortunate idea that these attacks have to be personalized and focus on just me. I’m the guy who recruited Thunderf00t to join the network. He immediately raised the hackles of just about everyone here; we had a review committee that looked over his raw contempt for everything here, and the pile of disgusted emails we were getting, and his atrociously childish writing, and said, “Uh-oh, this was a huge mistake, this guy does not belong here.” And I was then the guy who asked everyone to hold off on kicking him out, he’ll settle down and start writing good stuff. And then he didn’t. And he didn’t. And he got worse. And every day I felt guiltier and guiltier, not to Thunderf00t but to this collective here where we’ve otherwise done such a good job in gathering good, intelligent writers…so when the whole group decided they could take no more of his abuse, I volunteered to deliver the axe in expiation. I was Thunderf00t’s sole advocate here (my big mistake). If you have a beef here, it’s not just with me, it’s with the whole damn network of about 40 writers who were unhappy to be saddled with a flaming asshole.
Now we’re done. We have been done for a long time. Thunderf00t is not and will not be a part of this network, and it’s quite clear he doesn’t want to be part of it, except to destroy it. I’ve addressed the complaints of his ignorant and indignant followers, so I’m putting it to rest — I’ve blocked him on twitter, I’m not reading his blog or watching his videos, so if you want to complain further, do your posturing for Thunderf00t, not me, because I don’t give a damn.
In terms of magnitude – which is greater? The TF feedback, or the cracker desecration feedback?
I find it fascinating (and disturbing) how many people seem to think that freedom of speech requires not only that (a) people get to say whatever they want, but (b) you have to provide them the soapbox from which to say it. Let them get their own damned soapbox.
Someone needs a class in Free Speech 101.
This is one of the must infuriating things morons like this say. Tf is still out there running his mouth about whatever the hell he wants. PZ and Ed have exactly no ability, and I would assume, no desire to shut Tf off the internet completely or to silence in other outlets. As far as i know he isn’t even banned here, he just not invited to post articles as a featured author.
His free speech rights are still 100% intact.
When someone makes this argument that not giving someone a platform to say what they want means you’ve violated their speech rights, I immediately imaging them in a pair of big floppy red clown shows and a purple afro wig blowing one of those party horns.
are we making bets on how long it’ll take for this thread to completely go to shit?
Ah, it’s another bright crisp summer morning, and I wake up to birds singing
I wonder… is that a reference to…
It’s a brand-new day
and the birds are singing
that you’re gonna die!!!
– Dr Horrible in a video that was used to open an episode of TET not too long ago.
This is what truly mystifies me. This and all those people who are so obsessed with the “FTBullies” that they set up two parody sites. There’s a whole wide web out there… if something pisses you off so much, why not just ignore it? Delete the bookmark and don’t give page views.
If anyone ever gets an answer to that, I’d love to hear it.
all typos above are sponsored by Shitty Workplace Coffee©. When regular coffee house coffee just isn’t shitty enough.
Your explanations have too much clarity and use logical arguments. The quasi-literate world of GluTube will never understand a word of it. Maybe Amazon or Barnes&Noble have a PZ to DudeBro/DudeBro to PZ translation dictionary.
(As someone who hasn’t followed this particular war closely) it was interesting and embarassing to go back and read the 100+ comments below thunderfoot’s first post. Not much skepticism on display…
Jadehawk:
Considering the subject post is all about shit, I think it’s inevitable. I’d say, no later than post #20.
Oh, no, the “you desecrated Thunderf00t” complaints are miniscule compared to the “you desecrated Jesus” complaints…which still trickle in, by the way.
Jadehawk,
I refuse to make any bets on that. I’ll lose my shirt.
Louis
P.S. Call me an optimist, post #30 earliest. DAMN! I AM SO WEAK!
“1 August 2012 at 8:16 am
Oh, no, the “you desecrated Thunderf00t” complaints are miniscule compared to the “you desecrated Jesus” complaints…”
And a striking similarity in the arrogance of both protagonists…
“… because I don’t give a damn.”
Oh, that’s our short stop!
(Sorry, just trying to inject some levity.)
Hmm. And I suppose it’s only coincidence that Thunderfoot resembles the iconic representations of Jesus? Hmm???
PZ:
That is good to hear. Really. I guess there may be some hope after all.
Louis:
No stuffing the thread with posts just so you win.
(See how I slyly conserve posts by combining replies. I will win, damnit.)
So, free speech means that when invited to your house, I can take a dump on your living room rug, and you can’t kick me out? Jesus Jet-skiing Christ.
Yeah, this is one of the things that’s really pissing me off about TF. Academic freedom doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want and not get fired, UNLESS you have tenure (and not even then, necessarily — a tenured professor at my school got all-but-fired due to some stuff he did and said. They couldn’t get rid of him completely, but they did take away classes/funding/any chance of him ever representing the school again.)
TF’s situation falls better under this analogy: an adjunct professor is hired at a school, and his first actions are to loudly criticize the school, publicly denigrate the school’s general consensus on some topic, and do so in poorly written, unacademic, unprofessional rants. He’d be fired immediately.
Nigel,
I categorically will not do…
…that
Louis
P.S. Your tactical self restraint, it was admirable.
I notice you failed to address the idea that you kicked Thunderf00t off because you’re trying to get into Rebecca Watson’s pants and thought it would impress her, so I’ll assume that one is true.
Misguided SIWOTI syndrome.
And keep in mind that there have been several blogs devoted solely to . One of them was called … AFAIK, they’re all dead now, but some kept going for a year, IIRC.
:-D
and nigel loses the bet.
TF fans must still be asleep
nigel, you lose.
However:
Only the fact that I recognize your name, Ace of Sevens, prevents this from being a case of Poe’s Law.
I’m kind of surprised that the YouTube fans are so obsessive about tracking opposition to TF.
I mean, most of the opposition is in the form of text rather than short, simple, video clips*. Not really in the typical YT-TF community member’s wheelhouse.
*with one notable exception that I know of.
All we need is some Thunderfoot crackers that turn into actual Thunderfoot after you eat them. We can call them “Thunderfood” Or is that getting creepy?
Nigel, you would have had it if not for that meddling Louis. ;)
Plus four hundred billion. He’ll probably release a sneering video tomorrow, bollocking even more about how his free speech has been taken from him via twitter-block and video not-watching and how PZ is about to wake a sleeping giant…
I was a fan of this guy, once upon a time. I’d always look forward to the next TF video. And even once I noticed just how pompous and self-righteous he could be, I never had an inkling that he’d be able to turn my respect into contempt in less than a week. But now I think of it, this petulant, arrogant, dogmatic, raging little narcissist has more in common with his partners-in-drama VenomfangX and DawahFilms than with anyone from the FtB crowd – or any skeptic I have any respect for, for that matter.
All I can say now is: sod off, Thunderfoot and take your monumental ego and braying apologists with you. You will not be missed. But hey – maybe you, Stangroom, Kirby and Blackford can find 30 other bloggers and create a skeptic focal point of your own. I’m sure you’d all get along just fine…until someone told you you were wrong about something.
Yes.
However, keep in mind that I am notoriously creeped out by just about anything (though I do like bladder sausage).
I was so disappointed with TF’s performance here on FTB. I used to really really like him, his why do people laugh at creationists series is one of my favorite of all time, and his Beauty in the Universe channel is fantastic. He was one of the reasons I decided to join youtube and ive spread his videos on science to just about everyone I know.
I know you have to seperate a person’s scientific contribution and liking that person, but I really thought I did like him, and now I dont know what to think. I kept checking his blog every day to see when he’d start talking about something else and far more interesting than (what started as a) spat disagreement founded on a misunderstanding. Now he’s gone so far off the rails… it’s sad watching someone you kind of put on a pedestal crashing his face into the floor :'(
It could just be a matter of numbers rather than hope. There are about a billion Catholics worldwide and if 1% have enough of a give-a-damn about the cracker incident, that is still ten million people. Even if 10% of atheists are anti-feminism, that is still a miniscule number.
It seems that Thunderf00t has discovered the ‘joy’ in trolling. It’s super sad to see someone who many people have said had a huge amount of potential fall into the troll pit.
Never impressed that much with TF. Fighting creationism is a lot like clearing snow in a blizzard. Every shovelful is made of he same stuff basically. It requires much more persistence than intelligence. Fewer people have heard of Barbara Forrest and Paul Gross– ironically, these heavy hitters are fighting creationism where it matters most…on school boards and courthouses.
Don’t get me wrong. The populist approach is also necessary. But one would be wrong to think that somehow TF was a leader in this fight, and even wronger to think that his expulsion from FtB is a boon to creationists.
Ace
Maybe because Abbie Smith’s lies and innuendo aren’t worth touching with a cattle prod.
Do us all a favor and go scurry back up whatever prolapsed orifice you crawled out of.
In before the Wankpocalypse. I’m sure this will be a 7 zillion post thread by the time I get home this afternoon.
Hurin, Ace of Sevens is a regular poster here. His post was sarcasm. But it’s okay; the responses of anti-FTB groupies are indistinguishable from reducto ad absurdam humour.
I was never sure of tf in his anti-creationist videos. Wrong as he was, venomfangx came across as more personable than tf, who seemed rather heavy handed to me. But then tf’s first video on FTB was the clincher. I lost all respect for him at that point. (And then it only got worse).
Bwahaha…Hurin shows the truth of #24! (and yeah, I would have thought the same way if it had come from one of the driveby posters)
I have never liked ThunderFoot. I have never payed anything like substantial attention to him or what he does, except years ago to note that I do not like him nor much of what he has to say. I will never understand why he was invited to blog here, considering he’s rather antithetical to the FTB community. I’m happy FTB, and PZ especially, have washed their hands of him. Good riddance! Now I can go back to ignoring him.
As I read this I could not help but think of Knife Party’s song, Internet Friends. There’s a line that goes: “You’ve blocked me on Facebook. Now you’re going to die.”
I quite liked some of Thunderf00t’s more amusing polemics, I found some his videos on Islam to appear uncomfortably jingoistic (something he denied).
This obsessive campaign, this is just weird. Pathological. Similar to the others who fixate over their persecution at the hands of feminists and politically-correct liberals.
nigel loses. Louis wins.
Sad face.
On the other hand, it’s rather cause for celebration. Either that, or it’s as Jadehawk suggests in #23: they’re all lazy sluggabeds who can’t be bothered to constantly hit refresh on Pharyngula.
As I’ve heard some people do.
Sane people who feel they were wronged respond to such situations either by legal means like filing suit, or by walking away and cutting their losses when there’s nothing to be gained. Sane people try to walk away with their dignity, or not make themselves look any worse.
Instead, blunder-foot and his fanboys keep digging their hole, and actually believe the dirt they’re throwing is landing on FtB. They can’t win, and they can’t change anything. All they’re doing making themselves look more and more pathetic.
I’m glad I was never involved in that brouhaha.
Besides, Rebecca Watson is slender enough, and our esteemed host otherwise, that Prof. Myers would never fit into her pants.
This twitter campaign by thunderdolt and some of his more intellectually limited followers is beyond the pale, quite embarrassing actually. And it’s also interesting to see how Blackford et al are asking for his support there, I see the foundations of a “I was shown wrong by PZ Myers and his commenters” network. Not a particularly promising prospect.
In the immortal words of the Prophet Mohammed*: The sun shines on every dog’s arse some day.
Also on the “PZ kicked TF to get into RW’s pants” thing, well, duh! Even gay men want to get into RW’s pants, she’s the reason for EVERYTHING. Feeling horny? Rebecca Watson. Feeling sad? Rebecca Watson. Feeling mad, feeling glad, feeling bad? Rebecca Watson.
Louis
* Not that one, different guy. This one quite liked women, was markedly pro-peace and didn’t really require anything of his followers except “Be excellent to each other”. I may have got confused somewhere…
Hairhead
Oops.
I owe you an apology Ace of Sevens.
I should have known Ace of Sevens (it was a familiar sounding handle) I guess I’ve seen regulars turn evil before though, like gayhedbri on the old site.
But otherwise this is true; I’ve seen links to Abby Smith speculating about PZ and Watson before, which is why I mentioned her in the response.
I certainly hope this is the last time on the blog and in the comments that I hear about him. He clearly doesn’t get it, and I’ve lost count how much he’s double downed on this topic instead of trying to learn why people value social justice issues in general and harassment in particular.
I hate that I read his FTB posts multiple times to make sure that I didn’t, as he accused his critics, of misreading what he wrote. I’m confident that I read it exactly the way he intended and I came away being unconvinced that he has anything relevant or interesting to say on the topic.
To me it looks like at this point Thunderf00t doesn’t want to learn about this topic, he wants to seek out opinions that reinforce his own, which explains the few “HEY PZ CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO” tweets I’ve seen.
Rorschach,
Well since PZ is a mangina, but at least a man, this is the worst kind of wrong you can be. Obviously it is impossible for a Wimminz using her Pink Fluffy Lady Brainz to prove these Menz wrong, that sort of nonsense cannot even be entertained. But PZ is a Peepee Haver and, Manginity aside, must be taken sort of seriously. Especially because he is not Of Teh Ghey either, because we all know they don’t count. And foreigners. Also: disabled people. And liberals. And Europeans. And….well look the list is pretty long, but I all think we know what it is.
Louis
I made the mistake of trying to comment on his latest ZOMG SKEPCHICKS ARE TEH DUMBZOOORZZZZ post.
Don’t make that mistake.
I had one of these moments. My husband was talking about something enthusiastically and then said, “Right?” I blankly stared and knowing I was guilty of not listening and had to fess up, “What are you talking about again? I wasn’t paying attention. I was thinking about Rebecca Watson.” We laughed, having discussed even before the hashtag that Rebecca is the source of all things bad and joked, “Rebecca Watson ruined our marriage!” But more accurately, I was deep in thought imagining what it must be like to recieve so much hate. So really it was the fault of her more vile critics.
Initially I defended his posting of the picture of a personal friend that it was a consensual act, because I knew both of them in real life. She has become a unwitting meme in this, and her picture is in a lot of the discussion of Thunder’s antics. And too, Thunder doesn’t go around willfully sexually harassing people that I know of, and that wasn’t the point of the picture.
He then posted 2 more posts and 3 videos in a week each progressively worse, more vitriolic, and unnecessarily personal. I didn’t disagree with banning him from FtB. He did come out fighting, and I thought perhaps it was because he felt backed into a corner because people were already criticizing him before he said anything. After this post and others all on the same topic, I am not so sure.
Aron tried to tell him to let it go. He told him that he doesn’t live his life for his approval. He has done things in the past that make you wonder what he thinks about. This is another one of those moments. His thoughts on science can have such clarity, and he can be so funny. It’s a shame, but I am throwing in the towel. I won’t discuss it anymore.
I guess I’ve never understood this attitude. He’s been around the skeptic world for a long time…..at this point, it would simply be impossible for people to criticize him “before he said anything” because he’s been a relatively public figure (admittedly anonymous for a while) in the online atheism community.
I forwarded thunderfoot to manboobz. I think my email might not work with his though, I haven’t been accepted onto the forum either. I think manboobz is the correct forum for dealing with TF and his stupid bullshit. It is moving more towards the outrageous end of the MRA spectrum with each post/vid.
Also, TF clearly isn’t able to deal with failure. How said for him. Most of us can screw up something and then move on or learn something from it. Instead he just keeps frothing at the mouth and insisting that he was correct all along.
@aleph Before he said anything at FTB. I don’t want to debate that because I admitted I may have been mistaken.
Didn’t we already go over this? Basically, what aleph squared said,
Or are you talking about the back-channel again?
I am still troubled by this statement (made before in other threads). Thunderfoot had a reputation as a blogger and/or Youtube blogger before he was invited to be a part of FreeThoughtBlogs. Many were troubled by some of his writings and videos long before he was invited to FTB. As has been pointed out by PZ, by you, and by others, the FTB group knew that there was the potential for discord or more with Thunderfoot a member of FTB. To claim that he was being criticized before he said anything is disengenuous. In fact, he was being criticized before he said anything on FTB which is an important distinction.
No, I get that, lilandra.
My point is that I don’t understand that as an excuse…..like, I get not wanting a new venue or whatever to be turned against you before you even interact there, but one of the perils of being a public figure is that people will, generally, already be aware of your views before they meet you.
I mean, when I heard that thunderf00t was joining FTB I already knew what he thinks about science, creationism, Islam, etc. etc. because I’ve seen his videos. I already knew a lot about him. I don’t think he can use “but I hadn’t said anything on FTB” as an excuse for being upset that people judged him on his prior work. That would be like asking us to not criticize, say, William Lane Craig if he got a FTB blog because he “hadn’t said anything on FTB” before.
Which would be ridiculous (not least because the thought of WLC on FTB……)
Like a few people have mentioned, I used to enjoy TF. His “Why do people laugh at creationists” series is great and one of the reasons I now frequent youtube. But just in the last year I have found his videos to be not as good. And this just clinched it for me. I’ve unsubscribed and don’t really care to hear or see anything from him again.
I disagree. If your satire/sarcasm relies on people knowing your past record in order to recognise it as such, you have no complaint if people take it literally.
You mean to tell me… he didn’t get her consent before drafting her in his war against Skepchick, FTB, and feminism?
Color me shocked.
It’s a rationalization. Lilandra is still having a hard time admitting she badly misjudged Thunderfoot’s character. She’s working on it. You’d think that, having been a creationist, she’d be acquainted with the process of admitting error, learning from it, and moving on, she’d be familiar with the process. However, it doesn’t appear so.
Antiochus Epiphanes — thanks for reminding us that there are more important fish to fry & better frying pans to be used.
lilandra, it still seems like you are defending TF against claims no one is making against him.
AFAIK, no one was implying that what was going on in that picture was not consensual. What was being criticized was TF’s broad claims, that getting permission to touch other people, and that having a harassment policy basically harshes the mellow of the party.
That really sucks. She does not deserve the unwanted attention and to be used in flamewars.
I don’t think anyone is claiming that he is. You don’t need to defend TF against claims no one is making.
I agree with this assessment, except I wouldn’t use the word “banning” to describe TF no longer being allowed to host a blog here at FtB.
As has been explained ad nauseum on the (war on smug?) thread, and by aleph squared and ogvorbis in this thread, TF has a history that people are allowed to comment on. You should also clarify your statement more, considering that discussion in the “Smug” thread. Are you talking about criticism of TF on the back-channel (which we are not supposed to know of)?
Maybe I am thick, but I don’t understand what this means. Not so sure of what?
I think it is great that Aron tried to help TF see the error of his ways. TF has doubled down, and dug deep enough, that I no longer wonder whether his sexist statements are intentional. Of course they are. By this point it is clear as day. As clear as his Islamophobia.
That is fair. You have no obligation to try to parse through TF’s gaffes to figure out the exact level of his depravity. It can be frustrating to watch a friend put their foot in their mouth. It is hard to rationally balance defending someone you see has generally decent person and criticizing what is clearly harmful, distractive behavior.
You’ve taken a couple baby steps in the right direction, lilandra. Thank you. Just please try to understand how insulting it is to suggest those who concluded Thunderfoot was an inappropriate addition to FTB prior to his arrival here did so “before he said anything”. He had said a LOT elsewhere, which many people had been privy to and some of it had set off alarm bells. That’s what the criticism was based on, not nothing.
Shit comments like this make me want to find a bat and hit myself with it until I forget that I read the original, bleedingly stupid shit comment.
Did PZ use his powers as a member of a government to lock tf00t up in jail? No!!! So PZ did not fucking violate tf00t’s right to free speech. Señor f00t still has the right to express his own opinions on a nearly infinite number of platforms and will not be imprisoned or fined for expressing them in any of these fora. See, the First Amendment protects individuals from prosecution and a denial of liberty for merely holding and expressing controversial opinions. It does not give anyone the right to say whatever the hell pops into their head and remain free from social consequences.
If I went into an NAACP meeting and started yelling out hateful, racist things, I would have no right to be upset if the NAACP members asked me to leave, or had security remove me if I refused to do so. I would have the right to be upset if I were charged with a crime called “Saying hateful things” because then, and only then, would my right to free speech be infringed upon. (Note: I would do none of these things because, though I do live in Missouri, I am not a fucking racist idiot).
There’s a reason why everyone takes history and government classes in high school. I wish more people would fucking pay attention.
Well now that you’ve explained it, the butthurt complaints are sure to stop :P
@Crommunist any day now, lol…
Ahh, but has Thunderfoot asked for an expensive camera and/or lens yet? If not, he should.
But surely, any such request would be a joke. He would show that comment to several of his friends, and all of them would recognize it as an obvious joke that only an idiot would take seriously.
Also, something about Frank McCourt.
Well Paul, he does seem to be reaching Kw0k levels of hysterics at this point. Nothing would surprise me.
Did TF go to school with anyone famous? Or even anywhere famous? Isn’t that a predicate for camera requests?
Louis
“it’s not just with me, it’s with the whole damn network of about 40 writers who were unhappy to be saddled with a flaming asshole.”
I feel like I need to say something simply because I am one of the writers here. I was never unhappy to be saddled with Thunderf00t. In fact, I was very unhappy when he got kicked. At that time I said that kicking him won’t lead to anything good, and thus far it didn’t. I also think that sometimes it’s good to have a dissenting opinion on a certain topic in an otherwise “homogeneous” group, because this generates conversations, which IMO is always a good thing.
I also think he is dead wrong on this issue (sexual harassment policies, and probably views on feminism judging by the videos he recently favorited). But I don’t think he’s a flaming asshole. I remember when I had similar views just a couple years back. At that time I too posted those views online, and just like him, I received support from the vast majority of my viewers (which in my mind re-confirmed that my views were correct). It took me quite a long time to realize how wrong I was and how flawed my perception of reality was. If I had gotten kicked out of YouTube after that video, I would have probably reacted the same way he did. Who knows, maybe I wouldn’t have ever re-considered my position if that happened. When you feel like a great injustice has been done to you, it’s hard to evaluate with an open mind the arguments which your “oppressors” (QUOTE MARKS, OK?) put forward.
Hardly anybody changes their views during a heated argument. Even more so, if they get fired/kicked for those views. People change their mind when they don’t feel the pressure of defending themselves, when they are at peace and have time to reflect on what “the other side” is saying, without feeling like they have to think of counter-arguments.
Anyway, I just needed to say this. I do think he is wrong. But I don’t think he’s an asshole. He is also my friend. I’m sorry he got kicked.
P.S. : About his writing skills, I honestly don’t think mine are any better.
Are you scouring WND or Answers in Genesis to get bloggers to join here? Why not get the Atheist Turned Catholic or S C Cupp? If not then you’re bullshitting. There are clearly topics off limits to further discussion for you to which you don’t feel the ‘conversation’ is a good thing.
Frankly it’s annoying that women and brown skinned people are those who are the topic of ‘the conversation’ that is always good to have.
FTB desperately needs some anti-gay atheists now. The conversation is always a good thing.
You know that Stephen Fry’s question to the Catholic Church can be turned back on skepticism here? “THEN WHAT GOOD ARE YOU!?”
But people, I gather, were critisizing him for things he did say. He may not have said them here. He said them in his Youtube videos, but that doesn’t matter. People were familiar enough with Thunderf00t’s material so ‘before he said anything’ isn’t really true.
I get what you’re saying though. You know him personnaly and wanted to stick up for a friend. It must all have been very unpleasant for you.
I have to agree with PZ, when he says that they should have checked Thunderfoot out more carefully before having him join. (Like watched hs islam videos or his discussion with DLandonCole, in which he, in my opinion at least demonstrate having some problems with Freethought) Then none of this would have happened.
Cristina, yes they are. Much better. Hate to brake it to you, but Tfoot was writing like a teenager on 4chan.
True, but there were plenty of people trying to engage with him in a calm and civilized manner. He kept focussing on PZ. For the longest time he comletely ignored Greta Christina and Richard Carrier for example.
He probably isn’t an asshole accross the board. He may well be a very likeable fellow in real life, but in all this he sure did behave like an asshole.
By the way, I feel I must stress that he didn’t get kicked for merely disagreeing. It’s the way he did so, and his profoundly non-Freethought behaviour that got him kicked.
@73 I would not encourage the recruiting of devout catholics to a website called “FreeThoughtBlogs”, since that would be ironic. I would also not encourage the acceptance of hate speech. But Tf00t was not directing “hate” or promoting discrimination against anyone. He was just wrong about sexual harassment.
And by profoundly non-freethought behaviour, I mean, among other things, that pathetic youtube poll he did. He totally crossed a line there.
@Cristina: I’m sympathetic as I used to hold similar views, too. When people told you you were wrong, you didn’t respond by straw-manning them and insinuating they were just being emotional instead of a rational like you. That’s the important difference.
How can you possibly write those sentences, one after another?
You also didn’t make fun of people for getting upset when they got harassed.
Which was my point. It is not as you said, always good to generate a conversation. There are views that are off bounds to you. What is your criticism to people who feel that sexism is one of those views for them? What exact criteria do you have to say that is wrong?
Gay rights right now are THE big political issue, so why not have some anti-gay atheists on board to talk about it and generate teh discusion?
I disagree. The person used to be an atheist and is now a catholic. Isn’t that an important discussion to have? If freethought led them to religion shouldn’t we know and talk about it? Why is this discussion off limits but others are not? What is your criteria for when a conversation is a good thing to have?
There’s plenty of other atheists with diverse view points that I don’t think you’d want on the network. Black Atheists of Atlanta could be invited to talk about their different views on race and homosexuality for example. De Button has very different views on sex than Gretta and very different views on religion than most people here.
Cristina, like you I was surprised and a little disappointed that it came to what it did, but I have to stress here that it was not because he was “just wrong” about a topic. When your response to being wrong is to fire up the airboat engine and scatter-spray your vitriolic shit all over everyone, you’ve moved well beyond “just wrong” and into the “really freakin’ scarily wrong”. If you show up with an agenda to piss off the world and then your response to the world being pissed off is to amp things up to the next level, you’ve demonstrated a lack of both collegiality and basic sense.
You are mostly right to criticize the description of his writing as “hateful”, but the consequences of the arguments he was making will amount to the same outcome as if he was being actively hateful, so the distinction between the two may not be meaningful.
I also disagree with your comparative analysis of your various writing abilities, but I have a decidedly small sample from which to judge.
I also repeat the question. If we dont’ hold people who self label as skeptics to be mature enough not to go into an ego spiral and dig their heels in rather than accept evidence as given what POINT is there to skepticism? It seems like a failure on every goal it’s set out to do to me? (both little goals ala bigfoot and big ones ala critical thinking)
@83 Please read my comment again. I never implied there that he got kicked because he was wrong about sexual harassment. I responded to another commenter who compared him with hate-groups.
Yeah actually you did
Please read my comment again because you missed the point or are dishonestly representing me.
Cristina
PZ Myers explained the rational for Thunderf00t’s firing here. The impression that I have gleaned is that he was not fired for his views, but rather his persistent and belligerent reassertions of his views and inability to let the issue drop.
I get that it can be hard to reexamine an idea while arguing about it. On the other hand, if you find yourself arguing heatedly about an issue with people you otherwise respect and consider friendly, you might want to put the issue on hiatus for a time so that you can cool down and do some serious thinking and reexamination. I understand that disengaging is difficult, but I don’t think invoking one’s wounded ego is sufficient defense for failing to think critically about an important issue, and making a mess of the discussion in the process.
TF was totally hateful. When someone tries to mansplain to me that sexual harassment isn’t a problem, when I fucking saw it repeatedly, and a bunch of other women tell him that too… to ignore that requires something more than disrespect or disagreement. It requires a low opinion of women as a whole. I experience sexism as hate for me based on what I am. Is his intent what makes it hateful, or is it the effect? I tend to think effect is more important when labeling a piece of writing hateful, because otherwise no one would really be considered hateful (except maybe the westboro baptist church).
Hey PZ,
I’m a thunderf00t fan. I’ve watched his youtube series on creationism multiple times. I found out about this blog because I saw your cameo in one of his Dawahfilms vids. I was really excited to see him join this blog network.
I was very confused when he made the first post regarding feminism. Usually he only talks about science and religion. Not social issues. And it seemed pointless and out of place.
I was also surprised to see you react to it with such hostility. Outraged over someone criticizing a sexual harassment policy. And it was after he responded to your second angry rant that you said he was on the way out.
Well PZ, when someone criticizes you and you know you’re right there is very little reason to lash out with anger as you did. If there is good evidence or a good argument in your favor then you should be happy to present it. On the other hand, when someone can’t back up what they’re saying very well thats when you normally see one get angry or appeal to emotion.
Compare your behavior to that of Dawkins, Harris, or Tyson. If someone made a case that their beliefs were wrong would they get outraged and insult or vilify them? Is that how adults should act in those situations?
I also noticed that in your responses you weren’t linking to sources like you normally do. So when you said sexual harassment really is a problem at conferences I went to google to find out what you were talking about. Most of what I found was drama over this “ElevatorGate” thing. The few anecdotal stories I found online and via here were all from feminism bloggers who were very much biased.
Of course, its a big problem if all the evidence is corroborated through the feminism blogosphere. There can only be one truth, and all evidence must converge to that truth. If the problem exists in reality and is as bad as you say there will be evidence of it from multiple places that aren’t tied to feminism in any way. Shouldn’t the conference organizers be saying this too? Why are some saying the opposite when they have no motive to lie?
It seems to me that you’re not being objective here, PZ. You and everyone else here just feels like its a problem. And thats good enough to overlook making a case based on evidence. After all, why would you disagree unless you’re a misogynist? This seems to be the attitude here. This lack of skepticism does you no favors in seeing the reality of the problem.
Finally, I do think you to some degree kicked thunderf00t out for disagreeing with you. Think about what it would be like if his second post was in favor of the harassment policy. I think you and this entire network would be circle jerking all over him. You wouldn’t be saying “we had to let him go over bad grammar, bold caps lock, and a bad graph.” You’d be praising his endless wisdom for agreeing with you because a lot of people here are irrational regarding their views on feminism.
Ok, I need to clarify. I didn’t mean to imply that Tf00t got kicked for having a difference of opinion. I know why he got kicked. However I do think that when making the cost/benefit analysis, it would have been better if he weren’t. I don’t think his views would have been regarded as a reflection of FTB, since everybody could see the other bloggers disagreeing with him. I think the cost of keeping Tf00t here would have been smaller than the cost of kicking him. The cost of kicking Tf00t is, as you can see, a whole lot of people regarding FTB as a censorship-friendly forum, where free speech is smashed if you don’t agree with the crew. I am not saying this is how things are. I am saying that this is how things appear to be to a lot of people, and even if they are wrong, this incident HAS affected the overall image of this website. You may argue if it was worth it or not, but please don’t start arguing with me about Tf00t not being kicked for speaking his mind, I KNOW HE WASN’T.
Cristina
By my reading you did so here:
Fair enough. Ignore my last comment.
he says, trying to pretend that last 1.5 years didn’t happen.
Troll, be smarter.
The ever dishonest peter hearn is back. We know you are dishonest when you put these two things together in the same post:
You are lecturing PZ about how to react to criticism? He did so in a calm reasoned way, with more patience than most of us would have ever given him.
The way I know you are full of shit is that you don’t point the same critique at TF. Did you not read TF’s posts? They all insisted that everyone at FTB that had (nearly identical) problems with his post were incapable of reading correctly. He did that multiple times in different posts. He never actually read a harassment policy until the last post, a basic piece of information needed to discuss the issue to begin with.
It wasn’t just a disagrement about a policy either. He started the first god damned post with a sexist joke macro. Then he used an image without permission and got mad when the person owning the copyright asked him to take it down. Then he got mad at FTB for not defeding him against the person who owned the image (wtf). You want to pretend this is about professionalism? Fine. FTB and PZ did a great job and thunderf00t acted like a moron. I think any way you try to spin it, people will reach the exact same conclusion.
By stepping up to the plate on YouTube, and becoming a public figure, Thunderf00t has literally put his own life at risk for atheism and humanism. That has to be worth something.
Naw. Fuck that. Let’s just bitch at him and tear him to shreds for being an igno-misogynist instead. NEXT VICTIM, PLEASE !
This “movement” is beginning to resemble something that regularly occurs in metazoan bowels.
@Cristina in #90:
Word.
besides women, what other people are worth throwing under the bus in the name of hero worship?
(i’ll ignore the hyperbole for now. yeesh.)
DON’T YOU KNOW WHAT PZ MYERS HAS DONE FOR ATHEISM AND HUMANISM? DOESN’T THAT COUNT FOR SOMETHING?
Seriously, dude, this movement needs fewer morons, not more. If you cannot get through a three-paragraph comment without undercutting your own point, then find a floor to mop or something, and leave the talking to people who aren’t fucking idiots.
@91 I think that’s pretty much Q.E.D. about my initial point that I am a bad writer :)
Strawman.
Sorry, strawperson. Terribly sorry about that slip-up. I really, really meant STRAWPERSON.
Ten bazillion apologies for my blatant igno-misogynism.
I clearly missed the memo – when did speaking one’s mind via YouTube become reason for praise?
@98:
Why does it have to be either/or, fuckwad?
I never said PZ Myers hasn’t done anything for atheism and humanism.
What kind of idiotic reply was that?
You tell me, shit-for-brains. You’re the one who wrote this bullshit:
peterhearn
Oh, bullshit. People don’t have to be robots to be on good logical and evidential footing.
The reason you hear more about sexual harassment on the feminist blogs is because those bloggers actually care enough about sexual harassment to report on it. That fact doesn’t call the authenticity of the documented cases of sexual harassment occurring at conferences into question.
peterhearn: here is my first response to Thunderf00t. Any hostility there is to an extremely bad, uninformed, ignorant argument.
If his second post were a complete capitulation to the views of others, I’d be worried about his mental health. That’s not what I expected. I expected rational arguments, instead of that fratboy nonsense he offered instead.
While I did not expect your version of a weird surrender, I was hoping he’d set his priorities straight and talk about the stuff for which he’s valued. He did not. As has become increasingly clear, he really really hates everything about FtB. We were best off getting rid of him.
Brownian – don’t be silly. Nohellbelowus knows what PZ has done. He just doesn’t give a fuck about *women*. See, the true tragedy here is that an untalented one-trick pony wasn’t allowed to stink up the place with his inane, ignorant ramblings about how much bitchez ain’t shit. Bitchez just bitch cuz their bitchez. *giggle giggle* its so edgy to say it! Bitches! Teehee!
@103:
Nice comeback. Whatever it meant. Dweeb.
how was your argument mischaracterized? (I’m guessing you just don’t know what that word means…)
You are too stupid to understand the implications of your own arguments. Its become clear(er) that you aren’t worth talking to at all then.
You insist it is an either/or for Thunderf00t. You seem incapable of internalising the idea that just because a person is good at something it does not mean they are good at everything. And even people who have done good in the world can hold opinions, attitudes and beliefs that are harmful. What is wrong with saying that Thunderf00t has done some good work but he really screwed the pooch on this? Or would that be admitting your hero is human?
It’s all a great pity.
I was impressed by Thunderfoot’s creationist videos, and he was wrong about sexual harassment.
He was even more wrong, though, in his reaction to criticism, his continually upping the ante, and his reactions off FTB since the great falling out.
So it goes.
Smart people who know they are smart sometimes, it seems to me, find it difficult to re-evaluate opinions, and tend to assume they are right about everything.
But they ain’t, always, about everything.
Not even me.
David B
LOl yeah the poor little diddums clearly does not understand what a strawman is.
C’mon you edgy totally cool dude – give us some more daring bigotry! it’s so fresh, and so new! And manly! Don’t forget manly!
Yeah. Too bad spewing insults on an electronic blog doesn’t for one femtosecond resemble an actual conversation with a real human being.
You saved me the trouble of asking you politely to fuck off. Thanks!
peterhearne:
Try here or here or here.
Perhaps you should have looked a tiny bit harder, rather than assuming that those biased feminists were making it all up. What is your line of reasoning here? Were they all on their periods do you think? Perhaps they were just being uppity and hysterical like women usually are?
As for Elevatorgate, Rebecca Watson gave a minor rebuke in response to a minor incident. That was it. In return she was bombarded with hatemail, and received death threats and rape threats. No problem with misogyny there at all…
It was an honest observation of your behavior. You made a post, and when people pointed out the implication of the post you either said “strawman” or became puzzled at the response. It demonstrates a stupidity problem on your part. You could prove me wrong by demonstrating some understanding of the implication of your initial post, but you haven’t (and you seem intent on refusing to do so).
@ nohellbutmywriting
I love unintended ironies.
nohellbelowus:
You could try to answer the substance of the argument rather than having a temper tantrum over tone?
Too bad most people on this blog couldn’t swim 50 yards without a reserve oxygen tank, because Pharyngula could field one hell of a badass co-ed rugby team.
This kind of trash-talking is reminiscent of the great Chicago Bears teams of the mid-1980’s.
@117:
Sorry, femtosecond was intentional, dumbass.
I think we just got called fit. Win.
Does anyone have the fainted idea what “nohellbelowus” is talking about?
faintest rather.
I’d like to thank Thunderf00t for his contribution to fapping fanbois everywhere.
Thanks, Tunderf00t. Thanks for putting up YouTube videos, for all the cowardly pieces of shit and their tough guy fantasies.
That’s his O-face.
A trillion pardons, and pleeeeeeze don’t interpret the following as an igno-misogynistic slur, but…
I have laundry to do.
Tolja it was his O-face.
I feel exactly the same way about Thunderf00t as I do about TheAmazingAtheist: They’re both horrible, rancid assholes who could do so much more if they were just better people.
Shit, as much time as you spend in here, Brown-nose-ian, the word tough probably isn’t even in your dictionary any more.
Get some sunshine, sunshine.
LMAO.
I know what a femtosecond is, o illuminated one. I’m laughing at the fact that you apparently came to this blog to trash talk us, and now you are whining about people “spewing insults on an electronic blog”.
nohellbelowus:
Your argument here seems to be that, since Thunderf00t is a public figure, an atheist, and runs the risk of bodily harm for his outspoken riducule of creationism, he should be allowed any mistake, any misjudgement, anything. So if he wants to think that published and enforced harassment policies do nothing to promote a safe atmosphere at conventions, he can do that because he is a publicly recognizeable atheist and is thus in small but real danger. You are willing to throw women under the bus because of previous good that Thunderf00t has done.
Then, when your position is ridiculed via this:
you replied:
impying that, although Myers has done good things for atheism and humanism, you can still throw him under the bus, insult him, ridicule him.
So why can Thunder00t be forgiven anything because of his actions but PZ Myers, and the regular commentes, are fair game for puerile and ifantile isults, to whit:
Yes, I am overweight. How does that have any bearing on my comments (unless you are heading down the ad hominem track)?
Troll Level: Fail.
I thought he was just here to show off his expert ability to name the powers of 10?
@130:
I wasn’t whining about it, asshat, I was saying it wasn’t the same thing as a face-to-face conversation.
“I have found some very interesting numbers”
“Ha-ha, you’re doing the same thing I’m doing, but you suck for it.”
Ah, where did I put that 72 oz bag of popcorn and the keg of Grog?
I’m sure this is about to be entertaining.
****
Rev:
There are significant numbers of people who need to take this class.
Perhaps one of the bloggers here will do a post on what Free Speech means.
****
PZ:
You really should spread your Desecration Love around. I hear Mohammed needs some loving.
Can someone explain to me just how you desecrate a dead man?
****
Zeno:
You never see the two of them together. What could that mean?
Thunderf00t is Superman.
I’ll take my No-Prize.
****
Jasper of Maine:
What if we had some fried TF chips? I’m sure Louis would munch on some ThunderFEET.
****
I’m up to post 40 and haven’t needed to break out the popcorn yet. C’mon, surely someone other than PZ’s Mindless Minions will post here.
My grog is getting warm.
****
Louis:
Uh, not this gay man.
Just because I haven’t gotten laid in 8 months doesn’t mean I’m ready to hop the fence.
****
Cristina:
Among my gripes concerning TF: he wasn’t a Freethinker.
He’s an atheist.
They aren’t the same.
He demonstrated within his first post that he wasn’t a freethinker. Where was his use of logic and reason to arrive at his conclusion on sexism? From all indications, he’s still not a freethinker, given that he still asserts that sexism is not a problem.
His dissenting opinion wasn’t the problem. He could have had a dissenting opinion, but backed it up with some reason and logic, and he might not have been kicked out of FtB*.
*I hope we’ve seen the last of people referring to TF being banned (I’m not directing this at you, it’s just a meta comment). Banned =/= kicked out.
I don’t know what standards you may be using to determine this, but from what I’ve read, your posts don’t employ copious amounts of ALL CAPS. That right there is enough for me to consider you a better blogger. Also, I don’t believe bloggers have to be English majors to post here.
Do you think your friendship with him is coloring your view of his decidedly anti-progressive views? He doesn’t believe sexism is a problem and he has some strong racist tendencies. While those two on their own don’t necessarily make him a flaming asshole, they also don’t make him someone I would want to associate with. Certainly not a friend. Think about it. This man that you consider a friend holds views that are antithetical to the feminist movement. In effect, he’s saying that you and all other women aren’t facing any problems. This is where he enters asshole territory for me. His privilege is blinding him to the reality of sexism and misogyny.
****
Finally!
After 89 posts, we have a winner. Err, loser!
:::grabs the popcorn:::
Careful, Grizzly Adams. You’ll lose that manly tan if you stay here much longer.
Wow. That’s so utterly witty and original. I mean, has anyone here ever seen feminist concerns over sexist language parodied like that before? Eat your heart out, Oscar Wilde.
I’ve seen us called the Squid Squad, which I will take over Mindless Minions and Horde.
If it walks like a misogynistic douchebag, and talks like a misogynistic douchebag, then don’t try to tell me it ain’t a misogynistic douchebag.
And a dishonest douchebag as well–he never should have accepted the offer to join FTB, given how much he obviously despises FTB.
But then, it was pretty clear that TF was a racist douchebag a long time ago, and misogyny and racism often go hand in hand.
Yup.
Oh, you were being rhetorical.
Just to make him work to come up with something better, I’m going to predict that his response will be along the lines of “I don’t need to be witty and original for the likes of you morons.”
It can be, but I doubt you have much experience with either, so I can understand how the comparison might be difficult.
I think overweight people have it the worst, because the tendency towards acquiring excess body fat is genetic and is explained well by evolution in food-scarce environments.
You have my sympathy. I’m alcoholic, addicted to marijuana, and I’m clearly sex-addicted, just to name three. Plus, I play golf, and therefore I’m an enemy of the environment, and I have respect for thunderf00t, which clearly shows that I’m a woman-hater.
I still want a secular, peaceful world. I just don’t see this path getting us anywhere close.
Brownian: Really? I’d like to lay a bet for another invitation to some feat of physical prowess.
Another unevidenced assertion.
Please shut your piehole, before you make a bigger ass out of yourself.
Aaaaaand I called it.
D’awwwwww, obvious troll is obvious. and boring.
I drink too much, smoke too much pot (and do both while playing golf) too, but I can at least remember as far back as comment 119, you fucking bag of shit.
Fuck.
[Hands mouthyb a fifty.]
oh hey, I went looking for citations for peterhearn and found I’d already cited a bunch in the Defcon thread, where he *also* was pretending evidence doesn’t exist.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/30/at-least-our-cons-are-better-than-that/comment-page-1/#comment-416673
nohellbelowus: Actually, there’s no way to have a secular, peaceful world without addressing the concerns of more than just a small subsection whose lives are characterized by receiving advantages over other groups. I’m pretty sure I’ve said this on threads where you were before, but feel free to visit the feminist and social justice link roundups on the Pharyngula wiki for evidence that these are necessary goals for both peace and a secular world.
@149:
C’mon Brown-nose-ian, you can do better than that, given all the practice?
I’m disappointed in that last one. Have another go.
Brownian: I take your fifty and buy booze for tonight’s Rifts game. Also, I <3 your nethack references from yesterday.
and this gem, in response to “Why do I have the feeling that if I ask you for examples you’re gonna link to feminist blogs?”
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/30/at-least-our-cons-are-better-than-that/comment-page-1/#comment-416855
You think people who are overweight have it worst but have no problem with a fat shaming joke? This
can be interpreted as fat shaming or ageist. Which is it? Who were you trying to insult? Or were you just claiming that we are all fat or old and thus our opinions do not matter?
Yeah. The idea that a woman should be able to go out in public, without a proper chaperone, without being hit on, harassed, fondled or groped does absolutely nothing to bring us closer to a secular and peaceful world. Those objecting to the idea of anti-harassment policies at atheist conventions are trying to protect their privilege — privileges that are rooted in the patriarchy of Abrahamic monotheism. To me, supporting feminism, supporting equal rights is part and parcel with dismantling the toxicity of religion in modern culture.
Shove it. I do not need or want your pity.
No. It shows that you are willing to forgive egregious behaviour because you like and respect him. His racism and sexism, which are on display in many of his videos, do nothing to forward the goal of a secular and peaceful world. He may have done things to help, things to move the envelope in the right direction, but he also has no problem with women feeling uncomfortable and unsafe at conventions.
Nohellbelowus, #119,
I will take many things in terms of tedious abuse from internet trolls, but I will not have my rugby abilities mocked.
Out to the training paddock now, young troll. It’s time for an hour on the scrum machine followed by tackle drills.
And then back to the clubhouse for a nice big soapy bath with all my friends which is totally not homoerotic because we drink beer and sing about ladies’ privates.
Louis
What clearly shows that you have a problem with women is the bullshit you’ve posted here about the topic.
If this is the caliber of Obvious Troll (TM) that Thunderf00t has to respond to on his vlog, no wonder he doesn’t bother to punctuate.
As always, a HUGE thanks to the brilliant, courageous, and astoundingly tolerant and prolific PZ Myers, for allowing me the opportunity to vent some frustrations on his minions today.
A set of minions to which I still consider myself a member, despite written objections from the Bored of Directors.
And even if I don’t agree with Professor Myers in every last detail, I would still take a bullet for him, merely for the sake of his contributions to atheism thus far.
See y’all in another thread!
@157:
Count me in!
You know, the thing which most annoys me about the whole ‘I win because I can do a physical thing’ argument is that it’s based on the idea that to be young and physically fit is the best commodity ever, far better than to be scrupulous in data collection, or to be thorough in thinking, or to be logical, or to be responsive to the concerns of others, etc. Because being young and/or physically fit makes one automatically ‘smarter’ or more insightful than anyone else.
Of course.
Really?
How very manly.
Louis
Christ, what an asshole.
Brownian,
I’d take a bullet for you.
Louis
So why do you insist that we agree with your precious Thunderf00t in every last detail? You are allowed to disagree, but I am not? You’re denser than neutronium.
Obvious troll is now admitted obvious troll.
QFFT.
What it really means, the subtext, is “I could silence you by force or humiliation.” I dunno about rugby, but I could give this jerk what for on a hockey rink; but I wouldn’t sully my arena by engaging such an arrogant asshole.
Louis
if you two start singing that damn whinging song, I’m finding out how the killfile works.
peterhearn:
Why?
He’s racist and sexist.
I guess you have no problem liking someone like that.
I do.
So you weren’t confused based on what he wrote?
You were confused that he chose to write about something outside his normal purview?
Here at FtB, many of the bloggers frequently discuss social issues. This isn’t a site that *just* discusses atheism. If it were, it would be AtheistBlogs.com. An initial post discussing sexism isn’t out of place at a blog where issues of social justice are routinely discussed.
Hostility?
Really?
How do you think PZ’s initial responses to TF were hostile, when PZ has said several times that he was a defender of TF ?
Also, PZ wasn’t the only FTBlogger who criticized TF.
In addition, TF was criticizing sexual harassment policies yet he had never read one. He formed an opinion about these policies made up out of whole cloth.
Right from the beginning, he displayed irrational thought processes, and was not open to logic and reason.
What about the numerous commenters and bloggers who did. just. that? What about all the women who chimed in to say that sexual harassment *IS* a problem at these conventions? That’s called evidence. Written evidence might have accompanied those anecdotes but for the fact that too many cons didn’t have sexual harassment policies in place and thus there was no official documentation for many of these incidents. If women don’t have any recourse to deal with the harassment, how are they supposed to have the problem dealt with? How would there be any official documents of the complaints?
Responsible, rational adults also don’t respond in the way TF and you are doing. Both of you are commenting about things that you haven’t done proper research on. Go back and read all of TF’s posts. Go read all the responses. Let the complaints of various women soak into your brain. Understand that sexual harassment at conventions is a problem. Understand that Thunderf00t isn’t just wrong. He’s horrifically wrong. He’s also a man with the privilege of never having been subjected to sexual harassment at these conventions, so he wouldn’t have firsthand knowledge of this problem. So he shouldn’t spout off at the mouth in his initial post and assert that sexual harassment isn’t a problem.
Now I know you’re arguing dishonestly.
I just did a search for ‘sexual harassment at atheist conventions’ and the first 3 hits gave the very evidence you said you couldn’t find.
As I mentioned above, without any harassment policies in place, there wouldn’t *be* official documentation. All you would have are anecdotes. So what you’re saying is there isn’t enough evidence to corroborate the personal experiences of the women who have been subjected to harassment. You would deny that harassment occurred because there isn’t paperwork? Do the feeling of women mean so little to you that you would dismiss their concerns so easily? If a woman told you she experienced sexual harassment would you ask for some proof?
Let me tell you a story.
Several months ago, I became aware of a sexual harassment problem at my job. I work at a bar/restaurant, and as many who have worked in those environments know, sexual harassment can be a problem. It’s often written off with a joke (as if intent is magic). Well when our new General Manager finished training, within the first week he slapped the butt of a female bartender. I heard about it a day later. I didn’t ask for paperwork. I took the woman at her word. Just like I would do if someone told me their house was broken into. Or if someone I care about were in a car accident. This same GM went on to harass a friend of mine several days after the first incident. He attempted to kiss her and she shot him down. He berated her for rejecting his advances. He attempted to touch her inappropriately by pulling the ‘you’ve got something on your chest’ game that 10 year olds play. She told me about these incidents and you know what? I believed her.
I didn’t question her.
I didn’t ask her if she asked for it.
I didn’t ask her if she led him on.
I didn’t ask her if she was wearing something inappropriate.
I simply took her at her word.
Which is what you’re supposed to do.
Yes, I’m talking about a work situation, not a convention situation, but my point is that you take the complaints seriously and deal with them appropriately. If there is no policy in place, what exactly is the victim supposed to do? What action can the convention take against the harasser?
Thankfully, my place of establishment has clear sexual harassment policies and that manager was fired within a week.
I wonder what recourse women at conventions had before policies were instituted?
Oh fuck, I hope not.
But you are welcome to take a bullet from me, should you be out, and I have one to give. You’ll probably do more with it than me. I’m shit at the range.
One last one:
Lack of cardio-vascular fitness due to sitting in the blogging chair all day long is what I was suggesting, and that applies to thin people as well.
So it was an insult applicable to most everybody in here, except Louis, apparently.
XXOO
mouthyb
Agreed, its an amazingly stupid thing to argue from. It would even be stupid if it was argued in meatspace where the ability to do the ‘physical thing’ could actually be verified.
If you need a right defenceman (or a second rower), I’m in.
I fibbed. One more:
“Sully my arena.”
An ice-hockey player said that?
LMFAO
Ah yes. Because following a thread means one obviously has no time to work out for, say, an hour out of the 24 in a day. Obviously.
By the same reasoning, no one around here has a job. We are supported by PZ.
I can read a thread and comment in a fraction of the time it would take to listen to one of Thunderf00t’s monologues.
That’s probably why I’m not a fan of his.
Well, that and I’m literate.
Fuck you. My cardio-vascular fitness (despite a scare two months ago) is fine. I am a park ranger. I present walking tours. I am a wildland firefighter. I am also overweight and part of that is a service connected disability. So fuck you.
That is what is referred to as an ad hominem fallacy. Your implication, that we are out of shape and, because of that, our writings can and should be ignored, is ableist. So, again, fuck you.
It would have been nice if you had actually engaged the substance of those disagreeing with you but, no, you looked for ways to show your sexism and your ableism. We’ll never know if you had anything useful to say because you decided to troll rather than engage. So, finally, fuck you.
Why?
As I asked peterhearns, I’ll ask you:
Why do you respect a racist misogynist?
Which should read: I am also overweight and part of the reason for that is a service connected disability.
And, applicable to yourself. You Thunderdouche suckups are not very smart, huh.
Uh-oh better bust out the bigotry in response! Show up how original you are by saying the exact same thing a third time.
His assertion of his opinion is unevidenced? Riiiight.
I note that you have failed to respond when the hypocrisy of your argument was pointed out in post # 131. All you managed to respond to was the final paragraph. At this point, my opinion (yet another “unevidenced” assertion, of course) has begun to lean decidedly in the direction of the other responders – You don’t understand what you’re reading well enough to follow the conversation.
Thankfully for me, that makes it easy to know whether or not to give heed to your complaints, now or in future. Thanks for saving me the time so early in your posting career!
Oh, come now. Do you really think xe will fail to stick the flounce a fourth time?
Pteryxx: Yep. The subtext is always violence in that argument, and I am not impressed.
Hurin: I think he hopes that we envy him.
Brownian: Damn that literacy. Damn it all to hell. It so gets in the way of flexing one’s muscles or threatening as a way to win arguments. (In Greek, this fallacy was called bia; it was explicitly characterized as a non-argument.)
nohellbelowus:
Did you have any fucking thing to contribute or were you here to troll? You answered NONE of the questions directed you way and did nothing but lob insults towards various people (people, I may add, who offered you civility with their initial responses; something which you did not do in return).
We get it.
You think atheism is it.
Everything is golden as long as you’re an atheist.
Sexual harassment is not a problem.
Thunderf00t is your god.
Sexism and misogyny are not problems worth dealing with.
Don’t you have a Slymepit to slither back to?
A GOALTENDER said that. *smacks chest with stick*
Obviously you’ve mistakenly assumed feminists and smart folks can’t also play manly-man sports. It’s just YOU that sacrificed your brains and empathy for something you could’ve done regardless. What a pity.
Oh, and I’m also an MLP fan. *watches jackass head explode*
nohellbelowus:
Thanks a lot you fucking douchebag sack of shit.
Thanks for judging a whole group of people you don’t even know.
God fucking damn it, what is wrong with people like you?
The poverty of thought becomes even more apparent when you consider that on a national scale, if physical fitness trumps blogging poindexterism, then the tiny subgroup of science-loving atheists should just STFU and let the theists do what they like.
You’re the one who apparently thinks rugby takes place underwater.
I blame the consumer advocacy groups that put those “This is not a toy” warning labels on dry-cleaning bags.
Pteryxx:
Sooooooo glad the head ‘sposion occured outside of The Lounge. I think it’s my turn at clean up duty.
For a fellow who berates others for being on the internet, he sure seems to know a lot about what Louis and I do in the privacy of our specially-built scrumming and rucking pool.
Wouldn’t one spend MORE time sitting at their computer, watching Thundy’s videos than one does reading blog entries?
Brownian: Yet another reason I’m getting out of teaching. I’m tired of having to lay the intellectual beatdown on my students to convince some of them that they actually have to learn, instead of either flexing at me, memorizing and refusing to consider the concepts I present, and trying to use the Bible as a reference book. (Let alone the sexual comments, as they try to put me in my ‘place’.)
An awful lot of people think that intellectualism, research, freethinking or atheism are obviously worthless skills/modes of thought.
/bitter
Maybe…I do chores to youtube fairly often. I listened to some truly wonderful alfie kohn lectures a few weeks back while I cleaned up a cluttered room.
I’m sure any of us could attain his level of lucidity with the help of a few skillfully made incisions…
marinerachel
…with Teletubbies playing in the background….
I’ve got Chuck Palahniuk’s “Choke” on audiobook reserved for once I’ve moved and begin unpacking.
yeah but did it raise their standardized test scores, hmmm????
(jk of course)
Brownian! You promised you wouldn’t tell.
Now, in the interest of freedom of information, I’m going to have to publish videos and blow by blow accounts complete with Scratch and Sniff stickers. (For the kids…and great justice…naturally)
I am shocked I tell you. Shocked.
And appalled.
And shocked.
Shocked and appalled.
General appalledness and shockery is what I am trying to get across.
Louis
Hurin: I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t make those arguments falling down drunk, so there may need to be incisions involved.
See, THAT was an “unevidenced assertion”, a statement of fact, as opposed to a statement of opinion, like Brownian’s comment. The only thing you know about any of us is that some of us post here during the day, -exactly- as you are doing now. That tells you absolutely nothing else about the state of our physical health, so no, that doesn’t make the insult applicable to everyone here, just because we’re here.
Will you now rethink your comments, or will you double-down and and press on just as you are? I know where I’d put my money, were I a betting weasel!
skeptifem: I’m relatively sure that what I’m teaching is bad for standardized test scores. I keep asking old fashioned questions (not on new exams) like “Why do you think this way? Why do you believe these things? What do you think about these concepts?”
We all know this gets in the way of regurgitating stuff on tests.
Louis: Scratch and sniff stickers? How many stickers do you need for sweaty jockstrap/armpits?
Pteryxx wrote:
Certainly made my head explode. I never would have guessed you were a My Little Pony fan!
Could someone point me in the direction of the video PZ talks about in his opening paragraph? It doesn’t seem to exist.
That’s true, skeptifem. There are good reasons for vlogs. I don’t listen to them myself, but I apologise for impugning them and their listeners.
Collateral damage FTW!
as a violent-team-sport-player AND cute pastel pony fan, I recommend the episode “May the Best Pet Win.”
youtube full ep – thank you Hasbro!
It also has one of the BEST songs!
(Seriously, any manly-man lurkers out there hurking up a lung at the thought of ponies? Start here. Rainbow Dash is your pony.)
My fingers were crossed. I know you couldn’t see them, but I thought you would have felt them.
True, though the population of those who think that they’re inherent attributes you gain when you declare yourself a skeptic is entirely too large for my liking.
@nohellbelowus
I will not stand for someone mocking my physical capabilities! I can deadlift a truck, therefore I am right!
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go spend an hour lifting a heavy thing and then putting it back down.
Brownian: People seem to want to align themselves with the path of least resistance, don’t they? They accept an idea which is not easy, and believe that this entitles them to take the easy route in every other related mode of thought.
Lazy fucking cowards, the lot of them.
bwhahahahaaaa! awesome.
on that note, I’m going to the gym.
Hmmm… yeah, I can see how punishing myself with TF videos would make me finish chores faster. Or make me smash something. Probably smash something. Sorry, skeptifem, it doesn’t work.
Well, there’s one possible explanation that comes to mind.
I’ll be doing that soon as well.
When I’m done, I’ll get off.
For someone who wants nothing to do with thunderfoot, PZ keeps mentioning thunderfoot. It’s kind of odd.
eleutheria: Feel free to provide a count of TF posts, versus other posts.
And also to, you know, read them. You apparently didn’t read this one.
What’s odd about it?
PZ also wants nothing to do with Ken Ham. Yet he keeps mentioning him.
Come on, PZ. As a biologist, you know that pirouetting up one’s own anus is physically impossible.
If you don’t want to talk about thunderfoot, don’t talk about thunderfoot. who’s he writing to? what thunderfoot fan is here that wants to be further informed as to thunderfoot’s non-status? he’s giving this guy bloghits every time he mentions (non-mentions) him. i get herbal homeopathy spam in my email box, but i don’t mention it; i just delete it. well, perhaps this will be the Very Last Thunderfoot Entry. one can hope.
Ken Ham? Hell, religion in general. Or conservatism.
It’s almost as if bloggers write about the things and people with which they disagree as well as those with which they agree.
I actually read BBC World on my phone when lifting. Something to think about between sets and my timer’s already there Better than the crappy games or music videos they have on.
Huh. On a gaming forum I read, someone casually referenced one group “raping” another and it was called out as inappropriate use of rape language. I has a happy.
Oh, and the Rationalia troll kicked again on the war of the smug thread. I has a sad.
Also, I’m pretty sure that the ‘don’t feed the trolls’ thing has been thoroughly debunked here at the FTB.
/off topic
Pterryx is a hockey goalie, likes MLP:FiM, and is an advocate for feminism and equality???
You are totally awesome and made this thread 20% cooler.
It’s been debunked from a couple of angles, too:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2012/02/28/dont-feed-the-trolls-is-bad-science/
and more to the point of the shutupsters:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/21/why-i-have-hope/
and specifically:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2011/07/12/why-we-have-to-talk-about-this/
eleutheria:
Perhaps you didn’t read PZ’s post. There are two relevant sentences you may have missed:
For your statement to be true, we have to determine what you mean by “keeps mentioning”. Does that mean you believe PZ talks about TF every day? Every other day? Every week? Every other week? Three times a month?
Or is it possible you’re being selective in your readings of what PZ writes about? Maybe you’re only *looking* for those posts that deal with Thunderf00t.
Can someone help me out here?
What bias is that again?
I’m bored, so let’s see what we can find…
8/1/12-Biblical Marriage, Botanical Wednesday, Free Book, The Only Abortion Argument That Counts, Ark Park News, Thunderf00t Fans Stuff It, Why I Am An Atheist, Gore Vidal…A Great One Gone
Out of 9 posts just for today, PZ has talked about TF in *one* blog post.
7/31/12-Oh god oh god oh god, Is this cannibal week and no one told me?, I agree with Larry, Context is everything, Portrait of a young hoggler, Why I am an atheist – Melissa
Out of 6 posts yesterday, TF was not the subject of any of PZ’s posts.
I don’t think I need to keep going, as we’re 15 posts in and only one of them deals with Thunderf00t.
It may be time for you to rethink your position.
It happens in government, too:
I’ll just note here that women in the office warned each other not to get into an elevator with Regan.
Pteryxx keeps the ice from melting.
*blush* well I’m not playing *now* since I blew out my knee in a game a while back (and finished the game on one foot; how’s that for manly-man-man points?) :p
but if some sneering jackass wants to come in here and pretend his sports prowess makes him superior to all those wimpy feminists and intellectuals, well…
*deep growl voice* His assumption is unjustified. ~;>
Wow, this is getting out of hand. All I see on these forums is shit about that sexual harassment thing.
But, I watched PZ’s video response on why he kicked out TF and all his reasons were lame. You’d think for someone who argues with retarded theists all the time, he wouldn’t make the same mistakes in logic.
If you don’t like TF, just man up and admit. Quit justifying it with faulty reasoning. It just makes you look bad.
BTW, did PZ ever respond to TF’s vid response to PZ’s vid? TF basically poked holes in all of PZ’s arguments and provided evidence to back it up. What has PZ done other than create strawmen and hide behind his fans?
…he can watch me drive a golfball. I’m a terrible golfer and I’ve got a helluva slice, but when I tag it that fucker goes.
Can fuckheads like you do anything but assert shit, or do you not know what a fucking argument is?
Tony, good job. You’re right. This is the first time PZ has brought up thunderfoot. My bad.
wow, timing!
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2012/08/olympic-weightlifter-to-sexist-trolls-what-makes-you-think-we-care/
Examples, asslicker?
EXAMPLES, asslicker?
Aaannnd here’s another one who can’t seem to read what PZ writes, and is apparently unable (like all the rest of them) to point out a single -specific- point of contention. I know, every time someone does that, it gets refuted immediately, but that doesn’t absolve you gits from presenting evidence either! What specific reasons were “lame”? What specific mistakes in logic did he make? Haven’t you learned YET how this works?
*sigh* You haven’t.
With this lot coming out of the woodwork every day, why does -anyone- wonder why PZ must occasionally make mention of the details that they so continuously ignore?
Oh, right – because they’re idiots.
Did you watch TF’s response vid? He shows the emails promising that he would basically have free reign over his blog.
BTW, from your profile pic you might wanna try Rogaine… Asslicker. LOL.
Oh, you must be new here. I’m sure you have a lot of new and interesting ideas to contribute.
In TF’s vid he dissects PZ’s points one by one. I mean, it’s fucking obvious. Are you that much of a blind, fanboy idiot?
Anyways, I don’t really care about what you fucknards think about TF’s vid. I just wanted to know if PZ ever replied to it, instead of just whining about TF in this latest post.
I seem to recall an argument about how similar statements shouldn’t be used as pejoratives. You wouldn’t want to make Colonel Angus cry, would you? He can’t help his given name.
I… uh…
I won’t even bother.
Man, all the other atheist blogs outside of FTB are right about you scumbags. You’re like starved animals climbing over each other to get a morsel of food from their master. So sad.
You can have ALL the manly-man-man points for that, if you want them! I have much love of hockey, although I haven’t played since intramural in college (intramural champs woot! one year, anyway) but I only ever tried playing goaltender once, and damn do I have a lot of respect for them now.
I could seriously just keep going on and on about hockey though, so rather than derail everything I will just go back to lurking and let you and Brownian growl at all the sneering jackasses :P
I for one, can’t understand why Thunderf00t would want to have anything to do with PeeZuss’s “Freedom from Thought Blog.”
TF’s videos are awesome because they’re awesome. Why no, I’ve never paid any attention to how to formulate an argument or read any research studies, why do you ask?
/ignorant and proud troll
If that’s all the trolls have, I’m going to laugh my way through the rest of this thread.
Aww, thanks Alukonis; but as you see from the squawking little turds that embrace it… *supercilious stare about the comment thread* … I spit on the manly-man-man competition. If I could, I’d make a stack of my manly-man points and burn it in their faces, just to watch them go slack-jawed in shock. (There’s a reason I keep mentioning MLP when macho posturers show up.) ~;>
—
So PZ’s only made *one* thread responding to TF in the last however long, but TF’s made how many videos, blogposts and tweets slamming PZ? Double standards much, flea circus?
Quit doing the Gish gallop, by having us watch Thunderf00t’s whole video. Just blockquote the strongest refutation Mr. F00t’s got and maybe we’ll move on from there.
Yeah, that was PZ’s mistake in bringing the illiterate fuck here in the first place.
Swing and a miss.
Tell me, is there a fan of T-f00t’s who’s not a complete moron? Or are you pathetic tread marks the best he’s got?
Frankly, I don’t know either. It’s like Thunderf00t doesn’t actually have any substance of his own.
I was taught to enjoy hockey by someone who had played as a goalie. They get a little more time to watch the game. I’m sure more women would enjoy the finer points if they knew the rules and strategy.
Pteryxx, you’re doing that James Tiptree Jr. biography trick, aren’t you?
Hello everyone! Hi, Brownian and Louis! Hi, Alukonis; I don’t think we’ve met. Carry on, everyone.
Well, you keep showing up and posting free from thought posts yourself. Try setting a standard. If you don’t have a link to evidence, shut the fuck up before you start. Otherwise, we know your OPINION is lies and bullshit, with junk like the quote as prima facie evidence.
“Quit doing the Gish gallop, by having us watch Thunderf00t’s whole video. Just blockquote the strongest refutation Mr. F00t’s got and maybe we’ll move on from there.”
LOL, the dude shows PZ’s emails saying that he’s allowed to say whatever he wants basically. Is it really that hard to understand?
Look, I’m just saying that it seems PZ is creating a bunch of strawman arguments, instead of just plain out admitting he booted TF because he doesn’t agree with him. PZ just needs to man up, apologize for real and get over it. Instead, he gives no evidence to back up his claims. He only whines. This is sad coming from a guy who devotes a lot of his time dogging on theists who make the same mistakes.
Brownian, are the last remaining figments of your brain seeping out of your balding head along with your hair follicles?
You’re going to call me an asslicker in your response, then act like you the upperhand, or some undeserved sense of superiority?
We got that one. You said T-f00t poked holes in PZ’s arguments one by one. Did he just keep showing the email over and over, or is there more?
Still looking for real evidence from TF defenders. You know, literature citations, not videos of a loudmouth giving inane OPINIONS, like they are facts.
Oh, and the TF defenders remind me of all the MRA/PUA fuckwits since elevatorgate. Short on evidence, long on noise and blather.
If you had bothered to read PZ’s OP,instead of acting like a fuckwit, you might have noticed this;
Got any more strawpoints for me to burn?
So apparently all you have is “TF has e-mails saying he’s allowed to say whatever he wants on his blog, basically”. Wait, basically? You only manage to make ONE point, and you admit that you’re paraphrasing even then? And *that’s* the only answer you’ve got when asked multiple times for specifics and quotes?
Here’s another one that I don’t need to waste any time with. At least they make that clear about themselves from the get-go, unlike some of the trolls of yesteryear.
John Kwok you ain’t, bub.
*plonk!*
Oh, no choice foul words in that post, Brownian? The balding comment hit home? Loser.
I’m starting to doubt any of your scumbags have even bothered to watch TF’s response, or otherwise I’d doubt you’d still be defending PZ to this extent. I’ll rewatch TF’s vid and relay the juicy bits after I get done with dinner. Peace.
And apparently Thunderf00t took that as a challenge.
It’s like arguing with fucking Republicans.
Do you not know what ‘swing and a miss’ means, shitwad?
Predicting robdixxo will devolve into mouth-frothing hate in the time it took me to read the comments and post this.
Almost. Not mouth-frothing hate, just garden variety insulting. Meh.
Fuck off Turd. Linking to evidence is something you accuse others, but rarely do youself. We saw Thunderf00t’s video, we all know Pee Zuss lied.
Translation: I don’t remember what all the amazing points of Thunderf00t’s that I alluded to.
If PZ told Thunderf00t he could have free reign, that was PZ’s fault. I acknowledge that.
But I read the dipshit’s angry crayon scribbles when he was here. PZ’s foolishness doesn’t elevate Thunderf00t to the level of sentient. The guy’s a fucking tool. Years of sycophantic praise for his ability to outwit creationists (like, seriously, creationists) have apparently convinced him he’s something like smart.
robdixxo: Even if Brownian were bald as a cue ball, he’d still have the ghey sex queue. His brains is sexy and stuff.
And I don’t think you understand how to insult people and why.
Here, let me demonstrate: I find your posts to be purile, the quality of your thoughts to be abysmal and the ideas behind them to be as well articulated as arguments for the aether in 17th century alchemy diaries. In sum, I find you a most wasteful example of a human being and a shame to your family and your teachers.
Good day, sirriah, and may the boils on your hindquarters which have so effected your pitiable excuse for a brain all burst at once.
The video is OPINION, not evidence, which requires documentation. Why can’t you even link to the video? But then, I don’t click on links from fuckwits who don’t know much, as they tend toward malware instead of evidence from proper sources, showing that misogyny is not a problem…
Oh goody, ericatkinson the he-man gun enthusiast, has decided to demonstrate his lack of reasoning skills…again.
Yeah, you do that, I’m not sure I’ll care by then because something shiny is bound to enter my field of vision, but give it your best shot.
Happily, others speak up.
I do hereby stipulate that yes, I told Thunderf00t he could say whatever he wanted on the blog. I agree and do freely confess that I told him that. That was never in question.
He was allowed to say whatever he wanted. He did say whatever he wanted. It turned out that what he said was shit, and we were embarrassed to have him here on the network. So we told him to go say it somewhere else.
His blogging style was certainly, um, vloggish.
Thunderf00t should stick to science and creationist debunking, and those videos with his rc plane.
He needs to shut the hell up about gender relations for a while.
I certainly hope you didn’t expect anything more from people who think the comments on YouTube are the height of reasoned discussion.
As I said in my first post in the thread, “I know, every time someone does that, it gets refuted immediately” – and here we see excellent proof! The one specific point our new friend RD was able to come up with, elegantly and succinctly refuted in minutes. ‘They said they weren’t gonna censor me!’ doesn’t change things in the slightest, as TF was never censored. Not even once.
And now you’ve got nothing left and we all know it, since that was the only specific argument you were able to come up with.
Well, now you’re left with hyperbole and outright fabrication. You’ve just been asked for specifics and had the one point you were able to come up with roundly shot down. What are you going to do now?
I see. Well, I certainly won’t trust any more paraphrasing from you, if -that’s- how you see the interaction on this thread. You’ve gone right over into hallucination territory there.. Carry on!
ericatkinson, #249, wrote:
If you’re just going to list the things you don’t understand, I suspect we’re going to be here for long, long time.
More importantly: if it’s so important to you, why not ask Thunderf00l yourself?
From PZ:
It is amazing how many people don’t fucking get this very simple point.
“Free speech” does not entail speech free from criticism, from pushback, from negative responses of any kind and if your monumental-yet-fragile ego can’t handle criticism or people telling you you’re wrong (i.e. using their own free speech), perhaps it’s better if you just don’t say anything.
TF’s handling of criticism and disagreement on the tube was already pretty woeful; seeing it in print in his middle-school syntax and creationist-style formatting was, to put it mildly, an eye-opener. ZOMG. What. A. Drama. King.
Fear not, PZ: just like VenomFangX and DawahFilms, TF’s priapic incendiary revenge kick for you will de-tumesce, in time. Perhaps he will indeed start his own blogswarm with KirbFordRoom and eventually one of them will disagree with – I dunno – his assessment of his favourite cheese, and then it’ll be all “FFS PAULA KIRBY GORGONZOLA IS THE SHIZZZ YOU STo0PIDZLOL!!!111”.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: getting excited about a scientist–Thunderf00t is a chemist, right?–demolishing creationist arguments is like getting excited about an Olympian athlete beat a third grader at kickball.
It’s very amusing how Tf00t’s fans mistake assertions for arguments. Much like the guy they’re defending, they don’t understand how argumentation actually works.
I get the feeling that they’re not expecting anything more than “NUH UH YOU SUCK” from us, to which they’d reply, “YUH HUH TF00T IS AWESOME” and then they’d be in more comfortable territory.
Oh well. Sucks to be them.
This whole business – not just Thunderf00l – has exposed a big chunk of the atheist/skeptic movement for what it is: a bunch of people who have no more come to their conclusions through analysis or introspection than the religious have, yet somehow feel this makes them the smarter of the two.
It’s also revealed that they have no interest in real ‘freethought’; rather, they just want to be told they’re clever for not believing in god.
Amusingly, as angry as Tf00t seems to be about his termination, the man himself has never come back here to rebut any of PZs posts about him. Maybe I missed it; I don’t always have a lot of time to devote to blog reading.
All I ever see are enraged imbecile fans telling us they’d kick our asses in sports, and making jokes about people’s hairlines.
As to whether we should go look at Tfoot’s video responses, life is too short for that. I unsubscribed from Tfoot over a year ago because most of the new videos he was posting seemed to be 10 min long tantrums about how Muslims (all of them apparently) are trying to take away his freedom of speech, and crusades against other users.
Tfoot fans, if you want to transcribe his disordered histrionics, feel free. I’ll address them if you post them here, but you can be the ones skin diving in that sewer, since you are evidently enjoy swimming there.
It isjust like that.
Exactly. I’m not saying that creationist-debunking is worthless or anything, but the sheer worship this man seems to inspire for debunking easy-to-debunk arguments is frankly surprising to me.
I’m just going to pop in and say LOL at this thread. YouTubers in the blogosphere, it’s like a sewer backed up or something…
Why is it that a handful of people who hate PZ always show up here? I mean, tell me if I’m wrong, but I’m under the impression the FTBullies don’t run to Rational Skepticism or Rationalia or Thundy’s YouTube channel and spew bile all over the place when they hear or read something that mortifies them. They shake their heads and discuss it here.
A good number of forum residents and Thunderf00t fans, without fail, show up here as soon as their buddy or community is held accountable for behaving badly or tolerating bad behaviour though and call us names. It’s bizarre.
284 Wowbagger:
Abso-freaking-lutely.
I think this spat might end up a positive thing in the end, once this current tribal shitstorm passes through (might take a while, I realise that).
Eventually people will see that, just like with religious people, there is a skeptical/atheist spectrum, with thoughtful progressive-across-the-board types at one end and your kneejerk, one-issue douchewads who want a cookie for growing out of superstition but can’t be arsed doing any intellectual hard yards on any other matter at the other. No prize for guessing which end Joe and Jane Public are going to gravitate towards (and already do).
Rose-coloured goggles aside, that’s why I think FtB is so valuable now, and potentially invaluable in the future: it’s not just atheism and stoushing with creationists here, it’s feminism and liberalism and sex-positivism and LBGT-positivism and education and every other positive, progressive value that I think modern skeptics should be familiar with and/or at least concerned about. If blokes like TF and his boosters don’t want to be a part of that – don’t want to be a part of publicising positive, broad skepticism – or don’t think those things are even worth discussing, then fine. We’re frankly better off without the dead weight.
I do think we need various styles of engagement, from firebrands to softly-spoken thinkers, but what I think we categorically do not need is thin-skinned one-issue trolls who arc up and flame out as soon as they’re challenged.
It’s the YouTubeZone vs. Teh Blogosphere!, and I’ll tell you: The intellectual capital is asymmetrically distributed here.
Chas: it’s a gamma distribution with a k of one.
*snap*
You in the tail, YToobers!
What you gonna do now?
in the FUCKIN tail!!
I <3 stats jokes.
“Amusingly, as angry as Tf00t seems to be about his termination, the man himself has never come back here to rebut any of PZs posts about him. Maybe I missed it; I don’t always have a lot of time to devote to blog reading.”
Actually, PZ made a video detailing everything he had against TF and it all amounted to a bunch of strawman arguments and whining. TF replied and tore apart everything PZ said AND backed it up with emails written by PZ that showed PZ’s hypocrisy.
Comments 291 through 294. Brilliant timing. Read those four out loud.
Awesome. Made the thread.
Yeah, you told us that part. You said you’d come back from dinner with juicy details.
robdixxo
PZ does not “own” FreethoughtBlogs.
PZ was not alone in firing TF.
Why are you stalking PZ?
Do you “like” him?
It’s a perfectly good song…
…but it ain’t no “Winter Wrap-Up”!
The only thing I found annoying about that episode is that it very closely echoed a facfic I wrote, so now I can’t post it anywhere without everyone assuming I’m ripping off the ep…
Um, we’re not actually talking about this in this thread, are we?
Let’s see, then…
. . .
Oh?
Ok, cool.
Summarize the best three. Really, we’re interested. Just quick little bits like “PZ said that TF’s writing was of startlingly poor quality, when actually, TF demonstrated that…” or maybe “PZ said that TF refused to listen to the folks at FTB when he was asked to not double down on the sexism, when what really happened was…”
That kind of thing.
Yanno, I feel like an idiot for even bothering to ask. If you’d had good points, you’d have presented them up front.
I’m taking a break from watching the Godfather. I’ll dissect the video tomorrow. Had a long day.
And I’m not stalking PZ. I actually haven’t been to this blog in a long time. I just checked it today to see if there was anything on that whole Chic-Fil-A controversy.
So, you know, I read Thunderf00t’s blog here. He had ample opportunity to impress everyone with his wit and charm.
He failed, spectacularly.
So, you can make your case that Thunderf00t was misinformed by PZ, unless he said “Please write like an incompetent”, this duplicity of PZ’s does not suddenly elevate Thunderf00t to the level of competent writer or thinker.
Robdixxo, it’s cool that you wanna hang out, really, but people really want to deal with the specific claims you have.
So you do “like” him.
I submit that you don’t know what a strawman argument is. Nor do you know what hypocrisy is. Also I submit that you didn’t actually pay attention to the CONTENT of either video but simply responded the overall tone and emotional presentation of each in a sort of Pavlovian hindbrain stimulus-response fashion.
Otherwise, you’d have been able to summarize, broadly, ONE example of what you consider a strawman from PZ, and ONE example of how Thunderf00t “tore apart” what PZ said.
Please, feel free to show that I’m wrong by presenting actual quotes, examples, and arguments backed up with evidence.
Because that’s how we roll at FreeThoughtBlogs, mothafuckaaaaaa!
SallyStrange @283 wrote:
robdixxo @295 helpfully provides an example:
No doubt an evidenced, cogent and incontestable disquisition is forthcoming, tomorrow.
<snicker>
Rarely comment here but this is a most amusing thread, I have read most of it but it always gets ahead of me by 30 or so comments and then another 30 or so whilst I try to say something.
I am not going to be citing any data or linking any place else that provide analysis, I am just going to state an opinion. I like the idea of FtB and find it a valuable resource, not only for learning but also for comprehending what for lack of a better word I would call the zeitgeist of the blogosphere. By that I mean that I can understand why a certain faction frequents these fora who’s intent or objective is to provoke dissension, distraction and ultimately deprive those who mostly just read and never comment, from anything useful, informative or interesting.
I don’t really think they are succeeding but I do want to suggest that overzealous smackdowns of patently trollish comments are not as effective or informative as more contemplative and even if somewhat paranoid thoughts, greater understanding of what is really going on.
I admit, I have not had the time or emotional energy required to follow this whole thunderfoot thing backwards, let alone the underlying but far more important issue of misogeny and sexism.
What I would have liked to see more of, and I do hope this is not interpreted as tone trolling, is more discussion of why this thunderfoot individual accepted the invitation to join FtB in the first place if the current interpretation of his actions here is that he is desireous of demeaning the network and impugning its credibility by being outrageous.
That to me, seems to be the gist of the OP.
So this is my opinion in that vein (ha I worked in a geological referent). People like thunderfoot and those who come here to draw fire away from the main point do so because the main point is really too close to home. I have read and posted on the Internet for close on 20 years and never once in that time have I gone to a news group, blog, forum, website etc. with which I disagreed substantially and deliberately tried to provoke a shouting match. I have a few times commented in a reasonable way to point out obvious mis-statements of fact, logical fallacies, and now and then intellectually dishonest arguments. I have never once engaged in prolonged back and forth insult duels. I don’t find it productive.
Once years ago I did engage with a creationist ‘science teacher’ on talk origins in a long and confused series of threads. It was interesting because none of the usual prolific commenters jumped in and took sides. After a while I got the impression everyone else was just watching the spectacle more or less to see how it came out. The upshot was, said teacher had made a vague reference to a paper that he claimed proved the historical truth of the great flud. He made the error of giving enough specifics that I was able to find the paper. So I challenged his claims. It never came to a satisfactory conclusion because of course he never admitted that he was either mistaken or worse, lying.
The point of my digression is simply this, a lot is to be gained by people of widely differing experience, knowledge, culture, and so on having a means of discussing ideas and issues in a collegial atmosphere such that overall awareness, mostly on the part of the silent readers is raised.
This is not at all very important but I think those of us who come here for intellectual stimulus should be aware that it is not at all beneath the groups of people who oppose reason, humanism, logic, and self reliance to pose as atheist, or free thinkers, or whatever, while sewing bile, vitriol and dissention instead of anything that might be constructive.
To take my opinion one step further, it is my view that the groups I refered to, favor this kind of tactic, as opposed to legitimate argument, because they have no legitimate argument.
I realize this is a one off kind of post, but since it is one of those rare posts here where opinion has a little traction, I was inclined to jump in. Biology is not my field so I mostly read here for insight and have nothing much to contribute.
I should perhaps close by saying that PZ’s biologic posts never fail to attract my attention as he conveys concepts of a truly alien nature to me with clarity, simplicity and honesty, and that is what the Internet is for.
I’ll give a wave to Louis – we crossed paths over at Panda’s Thumb a while back.
“We are all sockpuppets, but some of us are looking at the connection logs.”
Disclaimer: this comment was not proofread for stupid mistakes.
Funniest thing is that this is so very true:
@John
Yep. Assertions, not arguments.
(emphasis for humor)
Yanno, I’m going to agree with this.
PZ invited TF to FTB because PZ was under the impression TF would be a good writer, a strong, intelligent, interesting skeptical voice to add to the group here. TF disagreed with PZ on this point.
PZ then said that TF should be given a chance to walk back what he said, that he probably would take a more reasonable course, or at least use better arguments. Once again, TF disagreed.
Finally, PZ said directly to TF that he should quit slagging a group that invited him to further his voice and lent their credibility to him. Guess what happened next.
So, in a way, you’re right – PZ thought TF would be bringing quality work. TF disagreed.
FIFY
John, 307:
I just got that. Nice.
SallyStrange
You actually read that?
Wait, what? The last video about this crap Tfoot made was a month ago, there’s no new one.
Right, again:
Meaning Tfoot has not returned to FTB to rebut PZ in the comments. I know he made another blustery video on youtube, I was talking about it, when I said this:
If you want to post specific arguments from that video, we can talk. I won’t be wasting precious minutes watching him diatribe at his webcam.
PZ meant he made a new blog post, not video.
Thunderf00t and his fans seem to think that drawing inferences is the same thing as a straw-man. It isn’t. For instance, while he didn’t say that his “study” of his viewers was scientifically accurate, the fact that he offered it as evidence (said it was good enough for a prima facie case even) shows that he thought it proved something.
Is there loss in translation?
TF and minions do video, We do text.
I read enough. I got to the part where he said he didn’t have the time or energy to follow this whole thing, and so didn’t really know what he was talking about, but was going to offer his teal deer opinion anyway, and said, “this is stupid.”
I tried to watch the latest t-fool video, but I only made it to the Plato quote.
I had to shut it off at that point due to derp contagion concerns. I suppose our latest trolls think misleading, inane propaganda is a valid argument as long as it’s delivered in an British accent.
It’s as if the Monty Python argument sketch has come to life.
I told you once.
SallyStrange
Yeah. Me, too.
Ace @ 315:
Ah, yes, TF’s poll of his tubers. A better example of selection bias I could not imagine. TF might as well have asked his mum who the handsomest and smarterest boy in the world was.
Y’know, maybe he did just that once before, got the answer “You are dear, of course,” took it literally and never looked back.
@ Chigau
I guess we’re both bullies then?
SallyStrange:
No, you didn’t.
SallyStrange
re: bullying
Do I hafta get up?
There’s a cat on my lap.
krubozumo
How would any of us comment on Thunderfoot’s motivations for comming to FTB? If you want a comment on that, you should send him a pm on youtube.
Well, me obviously.
Rev
TF’s mum thinks that you are handsomest and smarterest boy in the world!
No wonder TF is in such a state!
Seconded. I would gladly have Louis take a bullet for you.
Hurin,
Well I rather thought that PZ’s op made the point.
Sally strange, how apt, you didn’t address a single thing I said except a simple mea culpa that I am not a perfect typist.
krubozumo, was it not you who wrote “I am not going to be citing any data or linking any place else that provide analysis, I am just going to state an opinion.”?
Now you querulously accuse someone else of merely stating an opinion?
<snicker>
krubozumo
I assume PZ is basing his inferrence that “[Tfoot] doesn’t want to be part of [FTB], except to destroy it” on the fact that Tfoot used all but one of his posts to piss on sexual harassment policies being proposed for conferences and overtly state that sexual harassment is a non-issue.
I’m confused as to what you think we should be adding to that. Obviously we don’t have privileged access to this guy’s motivations so we wouldn’t know if he really was actively trying to depreciate the value of FTB, or if he just kneejerked his way into a hole of stupid.
I’m sorry you are getting blasted about this. As much as I appriciate his contribution, I have no patience for this BS conflict.
Since people are calling on robdixxo to summarize Thunderfoot’s best counter arguments against PZ, and robdixxo hasn’t done so, I figured I’d delurk and help him out.
Here’s a summary of the main points in PZ’s video, and Thunderfoot’s responses to them. For ease of navigation, Thunderfoot does not respond to points 1, 2, 3, and 6. He does respond to points 4, 5, and 7.
1… Freethought does not mean free speech, but refers to a specific movement advocating reason, science, AND social justice. This point is ignored by Thunderfoot.
2… Thunderfoot is inconsistent, because he does not demand that FTB allow creationist / religiously dogmatic bloggers. Point ignored by Thunderfoot.
3… PZ admits that Thunderfoot was mistreated by the FTB community before he ever posted. Thunderfoot also says this, but doesn’t acknowledge PZ’s mea culpa.
4… Thunderfoot is a shitty writer / blogger, who overuses allcaps / italics / bolding. Thunderfoot responds to this by pointing out that PZ uses comic sans font to quote people.
5… The real problem was Thunderfoot’s
Thunderfoot responds to this by forcefully insisting that PZ did strawman him, giving the specific example of PZ’s counterargument on the rape threats / harassment of Rebecca Watson. To refresh, Thunderfoot didn’t take Watson seriously because she hadn’t reported the harassment to the FBI. PZ summarized Thunderfoot’s argument as “ignore all threats except the ones where you get to bring in the FBI.”
6… PZ points out that Thunderfoot strawmanned the harassment policies, and provides a graphic with bright red arrows and commentary to show exactly where and how Thunderfoot was strawmanning. Thunderfoot ignores this completely.
7… PZ says the final straw was Thunderfoot’s online poll, which had “extraordinary selection bias.” Thunderfoot responds that all polls have some bias, and he believes that his poll was not biased enough to cast doubt on his point, which is that FTB is not representative of the wider community. He also claims more strawmen from PZ on this point:
PZ says that the poll was to determine who was right, PZ or Thunderfoot, when actually it was to provide prima fascia evidence that freethought blogs is not widely representative of the wider rationalist community;
the second supposed strawman is essentially the same as the first;
the third, PZ states that Thunderfoot claimed the poll was free from conformational bias, when Thunderfoot actually claimed that the poll was free from conformational bias due to banning people.
the fourth is a snarky comment from PZ that Thunderfoot takes literally: “because apparently the wider rationalist community is entirely the youtube commenters on his channel.” Thunderfoot goes on at length about how he didn’t say that.
This was one of Thunderfoot’s main arguments, but it wasn’t covered above:
PZ said I could write whatever I wanted. (PZ has responded to this directly in this thread, #276).
Aww, thanks Joda! Almost makes me want to break my rule against watching preachy blustery Youtube videos. I prefer my youtube videos to have cute animals or good music. For detailed intellectual arguments I prefer print.
Thank you, joda.
Ing, #328,
Harsh but fair.
Louis
What’s this obsession with ‘reflecting the wider skeptical community’ and how does that have any bearing on the argument?
It’s very odd.
To some extent I think this falling out was largely misunderstanding and TF’s ‘Nevar back dowwwn!’-ness turned it stupid and maybe things could have been avoided. I still don’t get what he wants here. I wonder if he even knows himself actually. Just fist pumps from the cheer squad I guess.
I miss the old Thunderf00t, the guy who used to debunk creationists on youtube. He seemed rather clever.
What happened to him again?
mickll, the feet were clay.
I went back and read through TF’s posts. Rarely have I seen such childish drivel. It was particularly when responding to PZ that TF’s inability to stay on topic and hold a modicum of civil discourse shone through. He had nothing to do on freethoughtblogs.
krubozumo,
You seem like a nice enough guy, so I feel I should warn you that I don’t know how to not be blunt. So continue at your own peril,
I personally got incredibly bored a little over halfway through the first sentence of your first comment. I’ve got a little tough in me though so I kept plugging along.
Somewhere around your how-is-this-relevant? inducing anecdote about battling a creationist somewhere out in the internets I literally said out loud, “make a fucking point”.
At the end, somewhat exasperated, I wasn’t at all clear what your main point was, or even if there was a point at all. But I decided I really wasn’t interested enough to go back and try to find one.
Then I noticed the above quote that you wanted something you said addressed, so I decided to have another go.
The best I can gather,
is one of your points. Because you say it is a point.
Which you follow directly with,
I’m inclined to agree. Banal, obvious, milquetoast “point”.
And this,
When I combine it with this,
(*sigh* I, seriously, just got bored again… *deep breath*)
paints me a picture that maybe your main point was, “some trolls may be trolling just to subvert other discussions, and engaging the more obvious amongst them isn’t effective”.
Maybe that’s your point. There’s a whole lotta fucking words going on in your post and very little I can glean as actual claims or questions.
So, if indeed my paraphrase was your point: you’re wrong.
So, I’ve tried to address what you’ve said.
If I haven’t, try to be more terse and direct in making your point. If you can’t, just ball your fist, extend your index finger and make one that way and save me some fucking time
Get out. Now.
ericat:
Oh gee, look who’s back.
And xe still doesn’t understand what freethought means.
You’re the one using ableist slurs and displaying your sexism, and somehow we’re the scumbags.
I should have realized people like you respect racist sexist people like Thunderf00t.
chigau:
Given the fourth grade level of discourse the nitwit brings here, I’m guessing xe is stuck in the elementary school flirting by way of insults.
Why Thunderf00t is respected, and how he lost it
Back when YouTube started out the major figures on the education channel were the creationists. When he started arguing with them, and pointing out just why they were stupid, in real terms he was the first one doing it.
That took guts, and it took brains, as he began to turn the tide until right now, picking on creationist on YouTube is like shooting fish in a barrel. People forget it wasn’t always thus, and there was a time when creationist channels were dominant.
So in real terms, denigrating that contribution because you don’t like the guy? There are a fair few people who remember what YouTube was pre-Thunderf00t.
His battles over false DMCAs and censorship on YouTube have saved the bacon of more than one contributor, and he has proven a very capable activist on that website.
He earned every bit of the respect he has gotten – and unfortunately once having gotten that respect he let it go to his head.
Thunderf00t faced his first major atheist community backlash in the battle over Islam, and his treatment of Dawahfilms. Dawahfilms made a video threatening to kill Thunderf00t if he tried to “awaken the sleeping giant” – in other words change his political stance to that of a hawk.
The douchebags who had adopted Dawahfilms as the pet theist accused Thunderf00t of sexism while calling his mother a whore. A few of them also went after Christina Rad, claiming her following was due to her good looks. They also accused him of racism, while utterly failing to note the difference between the Islamic and Arabic world.
When Thunderf00t spoke about his experience with those terms; that is the history he was referring to.
The thing is, Thunderf00t was right about the Dawah issue, as a lot of people noticed at the time, and thus he got strenuously defended over it as well as strenuously attacked.
Dawahfilms would eventually prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Thunderf00t was right, and thus the atheists who sided with Dawah ended up looking like total douchebags (apart from those who apologised to Thunderf00t as Dawah’s douchery became more pronounced.)
It was ultimate victory for Thunderf00t, and ultimate defeat for his detractors. The trouble with this is, okay just put yourself in this frame of mind:
You have just gone through two years of endless streams of shit, with death threats, people making porn accounts in your name with fake porn pictures of you loaded up on them, people trying to get you fired, people trying to get your account banned etc….
And it turns out you were 100% right, the people who went after you have been hoist by their own petards, and you have in the long run come out maybe a bit scuffed but largely undamaged.
How do you react when next you face a big backlash?
The whole sexism issue is that Thunderf00t has been armoured by being right on one issue, against the idea he may be wrong on another.
And oh boy is he wrong on sexism.
And he has been armoured in a way that leaves his supporters supporting him against any criticism, because of the sheer assholery that was on display in the previous criticism. Sure there were reasonable critics here and there, but they were a distinct minority.
Now this might sound like I am defending him, like I think he should be viewed as some sort of wounded victim. No. Thunderf00t is an object lesson. He could have gone the other way – he could have listened, he could have used his experiences to fuel his empathy.
Barring his occassional use of sexist epithets, if any man should have come out on the other side of this argument it was Thunderf00t.
Instead he is facing people who face the same shit he did, and he is adding to that shit. He should know better, and I think deep down he possibly does know better, and he is adding to that shit. He had the ability to be more, and chose to become something much less.
That same history he has every right to be proud of has stripped him of any excuse.
His good work should not be forgotten, his videos on creationism and his DMCA battles virtually made the respectable side of the YouTube atheist community and he deserves credit for that. To some extent public outreach is more important that the court battles, because without that outreach the law will eventually be changed.
The court battles are all very well and good for now, but the future requires public support.
He did that outreach at a popular venue where few others were, in an accessible manner that shut down a lot of the most popular liars there, not through censorship but information.
One should also note the importance of the lesson he represents for the rest of us, that even after facing massive, unjustified and unjust criticism, we need to be wary of armouring ourselves against the justified and just criticism lest we end up like him. We can all start off great, only to degenerate into a rotted parody of what we once were.
@346: That is not entirely accurate. The sleeping giant quote was Thunderf00t’s, not Dawahfilms. Thunderf00t started the death threats, then cried death threat when Dawah films said Muslims would fight back against an invasion.
Also, do you have any evidence of a connection between people who called Thunderf00t a racist and people who said Cristina was too attractive to be taken seriously? I don’t dispute that both exist, but I am not aware of any connection. Here is a series of videos with Thnderf00t’s prominent critics laying out their complaints with him. Were any of these people involved?
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
So, Thunderf00t’s view is more representative of the general skeptic community? The “general skeptic community” can stuff it then. Fuck them.
If I were to fall to the “my club is bigger” version of the argumentum ad populum, I would still be a Catholic.
Ace of Sevens, I really hate to defend Thunderf00t, because as of this whole mess with him joining and leaving TFB I’ve pretty much done everything I can to distance myself from him, and even before this I’d been having trouble defending him.
But he made not a single damn death threat against Muslims that I can ever recall, although he has made some statements regarding Muslims that struck me as borderline racist. The “waken a sleeping giant” line, while being a bunch of melodramatic tough-guy talk, and stupid to boot, was not a death threat, it was a statement that using violence to suppress or discourage people exercising their freedom of speech, as some radical Muslims do, will incur a big tuffman response.
DawahFilms took it out of context or perhaps just misinterpreted it, as it appears many did, then made a statement which looked far more like a death threat than anything Thunderf00t said. “We’ll send you to the god you wish you knew”. Hah.
Both of them are fucking clowns.
@350: As now, Thunderf00t wouldn’t come out a clearly state his position, but keep in mind the origin of the sleeping giant phrase. I don’t think DawahFilms’s interpretation was unjustified. Also, watch his interview with DLandonCole where he talks about how we would be better off with fewer Muslims and beats around the bush when pushed for clarification.
I’m not arguing that Tf00t isn’t a huge Islamaphobe. That came across fairly well the more he talked about Muslims. I just never once was able to see how the first time he used the sleeping giant phrase could ever come across as a death threat. He was very specific in his usage in that particular video. Talking specifically about those who use violence to try and suppress free speech etc.
It was still very stupid, and I’m not arguing is Islamaphobia and racism, I’ve accepted them now, and it’s another reason I no longer support or even like him. But that video, that incident with DawahFilms? You really needed to stretch or ignore the bulk of what Tf00t was saying to interpret any sort of general threat against all Muslims from his statement.
brucegorton,
That does not mean he wasn’t a sexist (after all, if he wasn’t then, when and why did he become one?).
Stone me, not this stupid crap again. Every fucking racist living now trots out the “But Muslims aren’t a race” line. True, and utterly irrelevant. In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities. They are, therefore, racist acts, regardless of intent. Those who persistently perform such acts despite being warned about this are, therefore, racists.
I still follow Thunderfoot on youtube in the (slowly dwindling) hope that he will get back to making cool science videos. Unfortunately he seems to be stuck on this misogynistic crap and hung up on the fact that FTB won’t play with him. I’m reaching the end of my patience with his childish tantrums.
elliemcfarlane, I don’t know about you, but is it really worth being subscribed to a misogynist, racist ass-hat just because once upon a time he made good science videos and funny mockery-of-creationist videos?
To me it wasn’t. After he posted his “MISOGYNIST!” video and the related blog post I instantly hit the Unsub button and haven’t looked back. I feel my life has improved since. You may feel the same.
Do you know the origin of the “sleeping giant” phrase? It’s when the US bombed the shit out of Japan after they provoked us into WW2. You have to be generous not to see this as advocating war against the various Islamic states.
The sleeping giant phrase is inherently a threat, both in its usage and in its history. It is a warning of willingness to engage in total war. TFoot was expressing his acceptance at the prospect of killing lots and lots of people because they piss him off. Yet somehow defenders turn this into a Muslim threatening him. Because, frankly racism.
Even putting his life at risk doesn’t automagically make him not an asshole.
It hardly even makes him a type V antihero.
Also, it’s funny that you complain about someone else being called a misogynist when you yourself use “bitch” as an insult…
~:-|
Lack of cardiovascular fitness is an insult?
:-D :-D :-D
Actually, it’d help if he learned some science about gender relations.
*like*
:-D
“In Poland, everything is possible! Even a potato can be president!”
– Told to me in Poland in 2007 when I discovered that the box of wine bottles claimed to be from 2008. The potato in question is the round face of whichever of the Kaczyński twins it was.
:-D Prima facie. Look up fascium and facies in an online dictionary.
But anyway, thank you, joda! (Yoda?)
Confirmational. Bias towards that which would confirm the preconceived opinion.
It’s an attempt to isolate the target and make them feel that nobody will back them. “Because if it’s just you alone, you’re not as much of a threat.” /hp
Has robdixxo actually come back with any specifics on TF’s arguments? No? Quelle suprise!
If joda is correct, then this is untrue. TF replied to highly selected points, not all. Furthermore, his case on those points he answered appears unconvincing.
The one thing that is true, and is conceded in PZ’s original post here, is that TF was given free rein to say what he wanted, which was granted. However, that was not a licence for him to stay on FTB in perpetuity, and PZ has already admitted that admitting TF was an error.
TF is an islamophobe. If you look at his youtube video on the “ground zero mosque” he basically says “sure, you have the _right_ to build a mosque 3 blocks from ground zero, to exercize that right is a “dick move.” i wonder if he’d say the same thing about blacks trying to eat a sandwich in a white restaurant in the South in the 50s? because it seems exactly analogous.
As he goes on, you can tell he’s bought in to the idea that the mosque is “a victory mosque” instead of what it is: a “mosque.”
christopher hitchens made the same mistake. was absolutely disgusting to see hitch and dinesh d’souza disagree on the “christianity:sacred or bullshit?” question, but they’d both heartily agree on “islam being bullshit.” hitch didn’t find it at all disconcerting.
anyway, TF got it totally wrong on the ground zero mosque.
@360: Most of his info in that video came from Pamela Gellar.
You know this is exactly how HITLER sounded when he kicked out all the bloggers!
(Hoping Godwin’s Law will put an end to this)
You haven’t been reading your Paula Kirby.
“High standards don’t really make sense when you have such a borderline-repulsive physicality and outright repulsive personality. I could do better, and I’m missing a piece of my face. Look at her face. It’s like some kind of potato.”
“I know this sounds like I’m just being mean here…but I’m a hideously disfigured old man, and I still could do better than her.”
Ahhhh, YouTubers.
@ 357 David Marjanović
It was late at night, and writing that post had taken longer than expected, so I was lazy with the spellchecking. Sue me =P
That one I misspelled intentionally. “Conformational” was how Thunderfoot spelled it. I should have put “sic” in front of it, I suppose.
“High standards don’t really make sense when you have such a borderline-repulsive physicality and outright repulsive personality. I could do better, and I’m missing a piece of my face. Look at her face. It’s like some kind of potato.”
“I know this sounds like I’m just being mean here…but I’m a hideously disfigured old man, and I still could do better than her.”
Ahhhh, YouTubers.
And this is exactly why I left youtube.
Aaaand, we’ll try that again:
And this is exactly why I left youtube
I know the origin of the phrase. I also know how he used the phrase, and he specifically said that those who use violence to suppress free speech would “awaken the sleeping giant” with their violent actions.
You are seriously fucking stretching to derive a death threat against all Muslims from that, and we should make a stand against those who would use violent means to try and silence criticism of their sacred cow.
Do I think Thunderf00t’s usage of the term was stupid? Yes. Excessively melodramatic? You betcha. Do I think he is a racist, Islamaphobic, misogynist shitstain? I sure do! But you’re ignoring the context of what he said and how he said it. It was not a statement directed at all Muslims, it was a statement directed at those who use violence to silence free speech.
Just because you dislike a guy doesn’t justify twisting shit he said to make it look like he said something else.
[OT]
joda:
Seems to me you’re trying to excuse your ignorance by pretending it wasn’t.
(You’d have done better not to attempt such)
This is hilarious. Just because there used to be fewer people addressing creationist arguments doesn’t mean the arguments were ever any less ridiculous and easy to refute.
Fuck your hero worship. If it weren’t Thunderfoot it woulda been someone else.
Sorry I couldn’t respond earlier…
Aceofsevens
Two examples were Ashelstheraven, who referred to Christina Rad as “boob, cleavage and a bit of a sexy accent”, and Shredderisalive, who was the guy on the BlogTV session that came before DLandonCole’s.
The basic source of the problem, I think, was Coughlan’s Pwnage Olympics, which was designed specifically to promote trolls. These trolls took Coughlan’s side in the argument, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t have other “projects”. Coughlan’s own mysogyny didn’t help either. Because of that overlap, there is a strong view that TF’s critics tend to be hypocrites, which provides him a fair degree of shielding both on YouTube and within his own mind.
KG:
The Arabic World has a specific meaning – it is not the entire Islamic world, it is essentially the Middle East. The Islamic world is far larger. Thunderf00t’s criticism at the time was of the Islamic world, not the Arabic world and to conflate the two is in fact ignorant and racist because it ignores the fairly large chunk of the Islamic world that is not in the Middle East.
As to your stance on the issue of Islamophobia, I have to say Maryam Namazie makes a fairly good case as to why that is pretty far from being as enlightened as you think it is.
While I agree that racist groups do use criticism of Islam as a cover for their racism, one cannot thus rule out criticism of Islam. There is some really fucked up shit done in the name of Islam, much as there is with Christianity.
While I strongly disagree with people who see Christianity as being milder than Islam, Islam should not have the added shielding provided by conflating criticism of it with racism.
brucegorton,
in fact does not make any argument against these facts:
SallyStrange: Elite Femi-Fascist Genius
Then why wasn’t it? I mean it is very easy to say it would have been someone else, but why wasn’t it?
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
http://maryamnamazie.com/articles/cultural_relativism_fascism.html
I’ve seen it, and I repeat:
Maryam Namazie does not in fact does not make any argument against these facts:
You can’t coherently stretch her words the way you’re trying to.
brucegorton, note that by the time YouTube came about, talk.origins was old, old hat.
(You reckon the thunderpod did things de novo?)
Also, this is hilarious:
since KG did not in fact conflate the two.
You are not much of a reader, are you.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
Ahem:
And…
http://maryamnamazie.com/articles/condemning_Islam_not_racist.html
Accidents of history, dude. It is easy to say because it is so obviously fucking true. It’s not like Tf00t was ever the only scientist out there paying attention to creationists. And you seem to be avoiding the point that debunking creationists is child’s play, no matter how numerous they are.
Drop the hero worship.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
I didn’t say KG did.
John Morales
And it wasn’t particularly big on YouTube, which was new media at the time.
SallyStrange: Elite Femi-Fascist Genius
ahem:
In other words, I think he is a fucking douche, and his history of doing good stuff makes his douchyness worse.
So Tf00t took old arguments and put them in new media.
Big fucking whoop.
Someone would have done it eventually. Probably lots of people were doing it, and Tf00t happened to blow up quicker than the other ones.
He does not deserve to be lionized for this underwhelming accomplishment.
That’s just my opinion. If you want to lionize him for it, go ahead, but it makes you look silly. In my opinion.
Either way, it doesn’t make him any less wrong about sexism and Islamophobia.
I’m sorry, Bruce, I did read that part, but I got off track because I don’t understand how people can be so impressed by what he did. I guess I had to be there, and I wasn’t. It just seems so banal, these days–ranting at creationists on youtube.
I don’t think so, I think it takes a specific type to be the first one on the dance floor as it were. Also, his DMCA fights helped clear the way for other channels.
He’s still a douche, that much is beyond contention at this point, its just he wasn’t always a douche and what he did before turning into a douche deserves some credit.
The fact that you can talk about “types” undermines your claim that Thunderf00t was really the One and Only. Sure, most people are not early adopters. But early adopters are a type. Bombastic douchebags with a pugilistic style of argumentation are a type.
brucegorton, not much of a reader,
Of course, KG didn’t claim that “exposing reactionary beliefs serves racism.” I remember for certain that he points people toward Southall Black Sisters, and (in this case I’m nearly certain) RAWA.
What he said was true: “In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities.”
That is not a justification for every conceiveable attack on Islam. You would do better to deal with what KG is saying rather than fall back on vague words, written on some other topic (the circumstances surroudning Jackie Ballard), by someone who doesn’t always take care to understand the issue she’s writing about.
Ah, so you were just making an irrelevant comment to no one for no reason.
KG was responding to this:
And I was explaining why I think conflating the two terms is racist, not that I thought he did so.
The point of his I was contradicting by pointing to Maryam Namazie’s arguments was:
Which is an attitude that does in fact build an extra taboo against criticising Islam, which Maryam Namazie specifically addresses.
brucegorton:
Only against unwarranted and harmful generalisations, not against warranted and helpful specificities.
(Also, I note you didn’t dispute the truthfulness of KG’s claim, but rather appealed to an unsubstantiated consequentialist claim)
And his reply was correct:
«Stone me, not this stupid crap again. Every fucking racist living now trots out the “But Muslims aren’t a race” line. True, and utterly irrelevant. In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities. They are, therefore, racist acts, regardless of intent. Those who persistently perform such acts despite being warned about this are, therefore, racists.»
So you were making an irrelevant comment to no one for no reason.
Bullshit.
What Namazie addresses is opposing the rape of a child in Iran, and so on.
Thunderfoot was advocating war. And Thunderfoot was advocating a racist war. You do not have anything from Namazie — who, again, is not beyond criticism — saying that opposing racist war is morally wrong.
SallyStrange: Elite Femi-Fascist Genius
I know, I am one (bombastic douchebag that is).
But the thing is I think we need the early adopters in order to encourage other people to speak out. It is one of the reasons I have such massive respect for the current crop of atheist feminists.
Sure feminism has been around for a while, but within the atheist community it took serious courage to break the silence around feminist issues, to even get the discussion started on something as basic as harassment policies at conferences.
It is a kind of courage I personally think I lack.
And to be honest I think the feminist movement is going to win the online fight. I think one day we are going to see someone saying “Well taking on sexists is easy” because a group of great people had the courage to break that silence.
It is not going to be quick or easy, but I think that day will come.
And Thunderf00t, for all his great following, and all the people defending him for the reasons I laid out, he is going to go the way of VenomFangX. Unless he changes but, frankly at this point I doubt he will.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
Yes and she is opposing it in articles about the dangers of multiculturalism.
She is citing people being reluctant to criticise the rape of a child in Iran, as a consequence of automatically conflating criticism of Islam with racism.
Thus “They are, therefore, racist acts, regardless of intent” is a problematic attitude. One needs to take intent into account.
No, those articles you cited were about cultural relativism.
Not the same thing.
Now, let’s get back on track. KG said: «In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities.»
Not cultural relativism. (Not multiculturalism, either, sad as it is that you don’t know the difference.)
KG said: «In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities.»
Wrong. And your “thus” is a non sequitur.
Quoth John Morales:
His claim so far as I can see is accurate. Criticism of Islam in the US is often used as a fig leaf to racism. Where I disagree with him is that generalized criticism is thus always racist regardless of intent.
My issue is a consequentialist one – I don’t want a situation where we will criticise Christianity in a very general sense, but not criticise Islam in the same sense because we fear sounding like we agree with racists.
I could of course be reading more into what KG was saying, than he was actually saying.
You could.
KG said: «In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities.»
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
Lets say person X says they are worried about Shariah law being applied to Britain. They say Islamic courts are already in place, and through the arbitration act these courts are enforcing Shariah on a civil law level, there are specific rights issues with that form of law, and some communities pressure members into using those courts rather than the more fair and reasonable secular ones.
Now would this person be being racist? The criticisms of Shariah are general to Islam, and they phrase the people putting pressure on community members to use Shariah courts as “imposing their values on others” – would it be racist? Would an attempt be made to spin it as racist?
brucegorton, I don’t live in the UK and I’ll let KG answer.
I will say that you are a racist because of the way you’ve tried to spin this; the issue was about Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, not some subset of Muslims somewhere. Your failure to differentiate is racism.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
Actually I do differentiate between Islam, and Muslims. One is a specific set of beliefs, another is people.
Much the same is true of Catholicism, Mormonism or any other religion.
No group of people is ever really monolithic, and that is kind of the point now isn’t it?
I think criticism of beliefs, even if the criticism is wrong, overblown and stupid, is not racism and to phrase it as such holds dangers for minorities within a given belief system who would criticise that system as a whole.
It normalises the whole “well that is critical of X, therefore racist”, instead of dealing with what is actually wrong with the given criticism.
A simple rephrasal will suffice, then:
I will say that you are a racist because of the way you’ve tried to spin this; the issue was about Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, not some subset of Islam practiced by some Muslims somewhere. Your failure to differentiate is racism.
It is if it has the effect of reinforcing existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities, because that’s what racism is.
What rubbish. This is not a thing that happens. Nobody thinks that Muslims criticizing Islam are being racist.
Sometimes it’s important to say that what you’re saying is racist, as well as pointing out what’s wrong with it.
Do you really want to use that word?
Sure. I’m prepared to ridicule you with exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis if you come up with any counterexamples.
Come on now, make me laugh.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
Nobody is an absolute term, exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis wouldn’t actually work with it.
Okay we are going to go with your definition of racism here:
So, how about that Islamophobia Watch?
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2011/8/19/maryam-namazie-and-her-allies.html
Namazie isn’t called a racist but an ally to racists, which under your definition is the same thing. She is being accused of precisely the same thing you accuse me of.
And that is the special threat I was referring to, not the accusation of being racist, but an ally to racists.
You’re tragic but hilarious. Trust me, it works just fine.
Immediately you make the mistake of assuming that everyone who practices racism is a racist. That is not the case. Everyone practices racism; not everyone is worth calling a racist therefore.
Bad start, every presumption which follows is wrong.
I don’t believe you, since I ran a Ctrl-F on that and didn’t see any instance of “ally” or “allies” being used to say that she is an ally to racists. Quote me the part you think makes that claim.
No, it isn’t, and you clearly don’t understand anything about my definition.
If she’s being accused of being an ally to racists — and again, I don’t believe you until you quote this — then she’s not being accused of the same thing. I am calling you a racist full stop.
That is a retcon. This is the first time you’ve made any claim at all about alliance. What you were in fact referring to is the following:
Nothing about alliances; you responded to Thunderfoot being called a racist full stop.
Which he is.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
Ah, so not calling them allies after all.
I frequently try to give assistance to people who are making arguments I agree with. Doesn’t mean we’re allies.
+++++
Btw, I love how your position is that we should not call racists racists when they’re being racist to people who are also Muslims.
ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
In those arguments? It kind of does. But aside from that, it would still fall under your definition of racism.
That is precisely what you are accusing me of doing.
Also, read the whole article.
No, my position is that opposition to Islam (as in the religion) and racism are not the same thing, and they shouldn’t be treated as the same thing.
No it does not.
Immediately you make the mistake of assuming that everyone who practices racism is a racist. That is not the case. Everyone practices racism; not everyone is worth calling a racist therefore.
Bad start, every presumption which follows is wrong.
+++++
By the way, you know this is a dead end, don’t you?
I said: Nobody thinks that Muslims criticizing Islam are being racist.
Even if you could show someone calling Namazie a racist, Namazie is not a Muslim. She is an atheist.
Again, no. You have not even bothered to ask what I am accusing you of donig.
I am accusing you of being a racist, like so:
«In North America and western Europe, the practical effect of indiscriminate verbal attacks on Muslims, and of propagating the view of Islam as an evil monolith bent on imposing Shariah on all of us, is to reinforce existing injustices suffered by ethnic minorities. They are, therefore, racist acts, regardless of intent. Those who persistently perform such acts despite being warned about this are, therefore, racists.»
No, it’s long. You allege the article demonstrates something; it’s your burden to prove it. If you want to quote something, quote it.
No, your position is that we should not call racists racists when they’re being racist to people who are also Muslims: “His claim so far as I can see is accurate. […] My issue is a consequentialist one”.
You are wrong and immoral.
If someone is doing something racist, we should say so.
I really didn’t want to have to dig up Tf00t’s drivel, but I think this discussion of whether or not Tf00t is actually a racist, or just criticizing Islam should leave the realm of abstractions.
Here is a short (less than 2 min. – so don’t worry too much about losing IQ points) video in which he covers the relationship between Islam and Science.
The real threat from Islam
Some quotations:
“It really doesn’t matter if you subdivide the Muslims into moderates and extremists, Islam as a whole as is practiced now and as has been practiced for the best part of the last 800 years, is the kiss of death for the very wellspring which made modern civilization flourish”
“Obviously the world would be a better place in 50 years if this anti-science attribute of the religion is either diminished or the number of people practicing the religion is diminished“. [emphasis mine]
He then goes on to ask an open ended question as to how to accomplish these things without specifically ruling out violence or other coercive action.
I think Tf00t’s concerns about anti-intellectualism in Islam are legitimate and well founded, but I’m not comfortable with the way he uses blanket statements in discussing the issue. And the last part wherein discusses reducing “the number of people practicing the religion” broadly as opposed to deconversion specifically is fucking creepy at best.
More crap:
Tf00t buying into the “Ground Zero Mosque” disinformation
“Burning half a million Korans”
“Do I support Jones’s [Koran burning Florida pastor] motives, no, do I think he has performed a valuable service, definitely”. Refers to Muslims broadly as “these barbaric folk” (5:49)
“Is Islam a hate crime?”
“And yes if that [killing apostates] is a central tennet of your religion, then the very practice of your religion is a hate crime” (1:29)
Conclusion:
I would conclude that I am against almost every aspect of Islam that Tf00t is against. I would also conclude that in almost every video Tf00t makes about the subject he uses inflammatory rhetoric and images to gin up hate and fear, while making broad brush statements about Islam and Muslims. He is also willing to support the approaches and repeat the rhetoric of right wing extremists if they are challenging Islam or Muslims.
Hurin, Midnight DJ on the Backwards Music Station
I will say he is a definite xenophobe – which is not quite the same thing as racist but just as bad. I also agree that trying to promote a violent response to Islam, is basically evil. It is the same thing as what we object to with Islamist extremists.
In other words, well said.