201. Comment #130593 by TonyA on February 21, 2008 at 1:12 am

wooter:

Please make sense when you write.

Much logic avoids friendly with wooter. Unhappy puzzle? God says he is good, but you are not god, not are you good. Do you jealous from God happiness? Does god punish the logic for fear of math? It is the way to god being not smart. You go towards god, swiftly?

god says other gods are not him. Does god not alone? why god silly, not? I have to call you mr. Logic Knot!

Perfect art of desert dunes proves designer. Can sand arranging in pretty waves by itself? Logic says no.

is god beyond reality? If I make a model of god, using smoke, mirrors and plastic shapes glued together with a sticky adhesive material. Is it not real? God is not god unreal indeed, he is made of plastic from junkyard tornado.

Is god is number one mathematician knows pi is 3.0, god is rational, not like atheist who want to make pi irrational? Logic denies your reply.

"a priest and another priest says one to another, god is great, no?" A wise man says no is like not. Logic and a priest says god not great? The logic hurts you. You cannot breath from the big logic explosion.

You are confusing again. Snowflakes exactly similar like to fingerprints. god know which snowflake is which, he much busy to name them all, so make them unique instead. What can say I to you? Blind snowmaker, good chances, luck did it, no... god remembers all snowflakes. God, too, sees all children starve and die and he sees priests hurt their wooters, and he says that it is good.

The logic makes you weep. Be best to answer without funny. A fairy tale of god by created man's or mind creates god in his own image... your brain is tiny like a fingernail. Is this logical, NO! Nobody would believe your brain better than logic.

Almost more than 76.3% of world not christian.. It seems like miracle, or chance, not blindwatchmaker. dumb world, dumb logic or dumb christ? We dying to know. Explain us if you can. Please tell your logic so I can tell my kids I teach what logic from god says.

Math, can god explain it? Logic is bigger than god. Not me, I am simple guy but the logic has got a high opinion of itself.
god wants a new captain of the logic team. Who is the one to blame?

freewill, ha, will free, no. conscious, can god explain it? relation of brain to god, is god logic to say it? Does god stay in his little pond? Does god have a wooter? logic says no, can you refuse the logic?

You can look in mirror to see the wooter logic created by god. Another puzzle?

Forbidden thinking, red alert. junk yard 747 requires designer, but it does not complete amino acid chain. 747 is not life? but monkeys are in the way of the genomes. Blame not me, talk to the logic. Exploding Sun requires a designer keep the explosions smooth, not big bang with damaging sound waves. Do you hear loud explosions? No, says logic god, silence them.

No logical questions can escape the swirl of the snowflake tornado. I am sorry. your snowflakes forgot the logic, but god does swirl them together like smart smoke. Tornado requires a designer. See Ice Age to know evolution is unnatural selection.

My students say snowflake is made from ice, not snowflake made from god. Explain us? beware of false alarm.

Queen bee hears engineering words from god? yet most man has no steering words from god. god prefers bees to most mans?

Eyes are perfect camera with 8000 lenses, with auto-focus logic. math creates eyes? you god fear truth of logical math who creates eyes better than god does, does god?

I am just kidding. Of course not! Your god logic is like 475 fish floating on top of water when dynamite blows up. It cannot go beyond any logical stand.

Other Comments by TonyA

202. Comment #130596 by Diacanu on February 21, 2008 at 1:15 am

Hahahahahhahaaaa!!! I can't fucking breath!!

Other Comments by Diacanu

203. Comment #130600 by MPhil on February 21, 2008 at 1:28 am

B-E-A-UTIFUL!

Other Comments by MPhil

204. Comment #130603 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 1:34 am

but monkeys are in the way of the genomes.

I am not quite sure why, but this alone had me weeping with laughter. I had a vision of creationist monkeys with plackards: "We don't want no stinking genomes!"

Other Comments by Steve Zara

205. Comment #130607 by irate_atheist on February 21, 2008 at 1:39 am

225. Comment #130548 by wooter -

Irate: you know the rule; bad words and bad slanders belong to the mouth they popped up. Let me make you busy with you something. It is better than swearing:

Scientists found a very big frog lived 70 billion years ago and it is same as the living ones today? Another puzzle?

More complete fucking bollocks from wooter logic. The frog species is 70 million years old and is more than twice the size of any current living frog species. I'm more than happy to swear at you, you prick. The big problem is that you are, as ever, spouting shit.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

206. Comment #130614 by AllanW on February 21, 2008 at 2:04 am

TonyA; if this site had the equivalent of the Molly award as pharyngula does, my vote would be for that post. I don't know how long it took you or how you had to twist your mind to produce it but it was great; many thanks :)

Other Comments by AllanW

207. Comment #130616 by irate_atheist on February 21, 2008 at 2:43 am

229. Comment #130603 by Steve Zara -

Steve, I assumed it was a misprint and should have read:

...monkeys are in the way of the gnomes

They're not above using blocking tactics, these pesky monkeys.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

208. Comment #130735 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 8:04 am

How do you explain this mR swear?

Just for once, how about you explaining something? "I don't believe it" is not a suitable counter to a theory. To do that, you have to come up with another theory that has predictive power.

So, I have some tests for your "God" theory. You assume that God controls everything. To assume this, you must have both evidence for it, and some theory as to how he does it.

So, I would like you to give some predictions, to match those made by scientific theory.

1. Could you please give the God Theory prediction of the mass of the Higgs Boson, and the reasons for this prediction? We expect to find it in a few months using a large physics experiment.

2. There may be small chance of (harmless) black holes being produced in that experiment. Does the God Theory predict this, and if so, what will be the frequency of production?

Changing subject:

3. As God controls development, and clearly to say this you must know how, could you please give the God Theory stance on in-womb gene therapy for cystic fibrosis. Is this therapy going to work (which would require God to keep his hands of the fetus just a bit)?

I do hope you will indulge me in this. I am sure you realise that unless you can provide predictions, the phrase "God did it" is as meaningless as "millenium hand and shrimp". The God theory will not only be a poor challenge to science, it won't be useful for anything at all.

Thanks for listening. I await your response.

Steve

Other Comments by Steve Zara

209. Comment #130736 by al-rawandi on February 21, 2008 at 8:06 am

wooter,


They found that frog like two days ago.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

210. Comment #130738 by Quetzalcoatl on February 21, 2008 at 8:08 am

Steve-

I am sure you realise that unless you can provide predictions, the phrase "God did it" is as meaningless as "millenium hand and shrimp".

Are you comparing Wooter to Foul Ole Ron?

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

211. Comment #130740 by hungarianelephant on February 21, 2008 at 8:10 am

TonyA - Please! I'm trying to work here. How am I supposed to do that when I'm rolling on the floor crying with laughter?

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

212. Comment #130748 by The Reverend Dark on February 21, 2008 at 8:23 am

Wooter decides to be an ignorant butt-munch and takes a big bite.

How do you explain this mR swear? Evolution took a break that time or what? The frog is diffrent only size and rest of its structure is same as the frogs of our time?

Wooter, have you actually read the paper associated with this discovery? Judging by the shite you posted above, you did not. The differences between the Beelzebufo Ampinga and modern frogs/toads are legion. There are significant morphological differences, not even counting the size.

You are speaking from a position of ignorance. That is not unusual, as it is your usual position. Your hands on the keyboard, your head up you arse, and your brain locked into the sad, sick, god-loop that you call logic, but is more accurately characterized as 'complete and utter Wooter crap.'

Oh, I am still waiting for your evidence of creationism in the lab; though my hopes are not particularly high that you will come through with anything except your normal nonsensical ravings.

For those interested in reading the excellent paper on Beelzebufo Ampinga, you can find it on www.pnas.org

Cheers,
The Reverend Shayne Dark

Other Comments by The Reverend Dark

213. Comment #130749 by irate_atheist on February 21, 2008 at 8:23 am

233. Comment #130720 by wooter -

Despite our best efforts, and that of thousands of scientists, you clearly have no idea what evolution is.

It's only twice the size? Well, matey, if your kids were twice as tall as you or anyone elses, you might regard them as being 'a bit different'. Especially if they couldn't breed with normal people and had to find similar sized individuals to mate with. This, by the way, practically one way of defining a 'species'.

And what's your point anyway about the frog - or are you just trying to showcase the breadth and depth of your colossal ignorance?

Other Comments by irate_atheist

214. Comment #130750 by irate_atheist on February 21, 2008 at 8:26 am

236. Comment #130738 by Quetzalcoatl -

Buggrit.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

215. Comment #130752 by irate_atheist on February 21, 2008 at 8:28 am

234. Comment #130735 by Steve Zara -

I await your response.

So do I. But in the same way that I look forward to encountering dog turds on the pavement.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

216. Comment #130763 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 8:55 am

Are you comparing Wooter to Foul Ole Ron?

[Steve attempts to look innocent]

I must, of course, be serious. I mean, if God Theory is the explanation for not just the orbits of the planets, but the shape of snow and the process of development amongst other things, it must be a very powerful theory indeed. And clearly, no-one would just make things up about something as useful. There sure are some Nobel Prizes lined up for wooter, and I would be the first to congratulate him.

The alternative is he is just deluded, but shame on me for thinking that. However, I have given him his chance. Let us see what follows.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

217. Comment #130766 by Quetzalcoatl on February 21, 2008 at 9:00 am

Steve-

Let us see what follows

I'm pretty sure I can guess what it will be. It would be nice to be wrong, though.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

218. Comment #130767 by Tyler Durden on February 21, 2008 at 9:02 am

Comment #130763 by Steve Zara:

Let us see what follows

The end of the world as we know it?

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

219. Comment #130770 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 9:05 am

I'm pretty sure I can guess what it will be. It would be nice to be wrong, though.

[Don't worry, I am not serious. Just an attempt at distraction]

Other Comments by Steve Zara

220. Comment #130771 by Quetzalcoatl on February 21, 2008 at 9:08 am

Steve-

while I think of it: been following the debate on your blog with interest. I've also linked to it from mine, so don't be surprised if any of BillySands, LeeC, Phillip1978 or BAEOZ turn up at some point- hope you don't mind!

EDIT- Corylus too.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

221. Comment #130789 by Geoff on February 21, 2008 at 9:37 am

226. Comment #130593 by TonyA

Shame on you; you started another of my asthma attacks!

That was hilarious!

Post of the year? Oh yes!

Other Comments by Geoff

222. Comment #130793 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 9:42 am

Quetz: You got me all shy now.

No, seriously, if I post anything that you think is mistaken or even nonsense there, I would be very happy to hear about it. I have no pride, and having a lot of fun learning about some new topics (such as the subject of that debate)

Other Comments by Steve Zara

223. Comment #130794 by al-rawandi on February 21, 2008 at 9:42 am

Steve,



Can you post a link to you blog?

Other Comments by al-rawandi

224. Comment #130798 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 9:52 am

Al - I have utterly shamelessly done it on the "Fleabites" thread. But I am now ashamed of my shamelessness. So, I'll change it to something else in 5 mins.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

225. Comment #130801 by al-rawandi on February 21, 2008 at 9:53 am

Steve,




Too late, I found it on the other thread.

Ruthless self promoter.... Steve, I am proud.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

226. Comment #130820 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 10:30 am

Of course, now I shall have to start writing stuff, or at least a bit more than is up right now. Please ignore the initial post about the nature of self-cleaning ovens. Not quite PZ Myers.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

227. Comment #130823 by Quetzalcoatl on February 21, 2008 at 10:34 am

Steve-

Unfortunately when I try shameless self-promotion of my blog it never quite works. I tried it on that thread where I asked the question about Hell (EDIT- it was the "are the new atheists avoiding the real arguments" thread)- there have been no comments since!

Don't knock your initial post. There may be people out there who want to know about self-cleaning ovens.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

228. Comment #130824 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 10:39 am

I could write a lot about tiles too, having just put up over 1000 in my new kitchen.

Hmm.. maybe I need to learn about "tagging" posts...

Other Comments by Steve Zara

229. Comment #130829 by al-rawandi on February 21, 2008 at 10:57 am

Queztalcoatl,



post the link to your blog. I will take a gander.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

230. Comment #130830 by Quetzalcoatl on February 21, 2008 at 11:03 am

Al-rawandi-

http://www.musingsofastrangemind.blogspot.com/

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

231. Comment #130843 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 11:39 am

Quetz: Thanks. Bookmarked.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

232. Comment #130852 by al-rawandi on February 21, 2008 at 11:54 am

Nice blog, now you need to get some theistic ass clowns to start posting willy nilly.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

233. Comment #130862 by Quetzalcoatl on February 21, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Steve-

thanks very much. I've also added your blog to my permanent "links of interest" section.

I could write a lot about tiles too, having just put up over 1000 in my new kitchen.

What colour tiles? :-)

al-rawandi-

cheers. But I don't want Wooter and his ilk. The religious people who post on my blog (about 3 or 4) are very decent people.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

234. Comment #130869 by Steve Zara on February 21, 2008 at 12:14 pm

What colour tiles? :-)

Small, about 1" square, and multi-coloured glass.

I am afraid I have a thing about coloured glass having been raised a catholic, and so having sat for so long looking at stained glass windows.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

235. Comment #130932 by TonyA on February 21, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Thanks for the comments on my faux-wooter. I worried that I should not post it.

After a wootering like that, I slept well.

Other Comments by TonyA

236. Comment #131597 by Steve Zara on February 22, 2008 at 4:27 pm

Now remember what I say using your memory. Speaking of memory, how does ET explain memory?

Sorry, I used to know this, but I am afraid I have forgotten.

One thing I have remembered though is a little challenge I set you:

So, I would like you to give some predictions, to match those made by scientific theory.

1. Could you please give the God Theory prediction of the mass of the Higgs Boson, and the reasons for this prediction? We expect to find it in a few months using a large physics experiment.

2. There may be small chance of (harmless) black holes being produced in that experiment. Does the God Theory predict this, and if so, what will be the frequency of production?

Changing subject:

3. As God controls development, and clearly to say this you must know how, could you please give the God Theory stance on in-womb gene therapy for cystic fibrosis. Is this therapy going to work (which would require God to keep his hands of the fetus just a bit)?

Other Comments by Steve Zara

237. Comment #131601 by Mark Smith on February 22, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Wooter
If I had a god, it would be you. In fact, I think I may have seen the light. Until now I have been afraid to speak. But I must confess, you really are marvelous to behold. Every time you post I see more of the truth. Your logic is unarguable. You are the way, the truth and the life. I believe in you. I really do. Please, never stop posting.

And my fellow believers, please keep on responding to His holiness the Wooter. If you don't He might not return. For He is a jealous Wooter and great beyond compare.

Wooter must be god. How else can we explain the fact that Josh lets it keep posting?

Other Comments by Mark Smith

238. Comment #131608 by Mark Smith on February 22, 2008 at 5:02 pm

Sorry about that last post folks. I think a few beers combined with Wooter have driven me a little crazy.

Other Comments by Mark Smith

239. Comment #131614 by Diacanu on February 22, 2008 at 5:44 pm

wooter-

The big frog is asking big questions?
1.Why was not evolved? What is wrong with me?
2.Why was I the same as the living ones today?

We could explain it, but well, no nice way to say it, you really would be too stupid to understand.

You've had evolution explained til people were blue in the face, and you still keep going back to the same old creationist drivel as if no one said anything.

So, pick up your anti-education hump, and go piss off.
You're not here to learn, you're just a troll.

Other Comments by Diacanu

240. Comment #131616 by Steve Zara on February 22, 2008 at 5:47 pm

Well done wooter. You have finally and conclusively shown that you are just making things up. Any time you claim that God is responsible for something, this is just fantasy.

Your God Theory explains nothing and has no predictive power.

"I just don't believe it" is not a reason to invoke an arbitrary cause.

Amd. if you are going to claim the existence of a designer, you need to directly show the designer. Pointing at the supposed designed objects is not enough.

Ah well. You bore me. Have fun with other people.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

241. Comment #131619 by Radesq on February 22, 2008 at 5:56 pm

wooter I'm going to try to explain this in a way that you might understand.

The cherries are upside down when the boat goes along the tortoise of the mind of the sausage maker's camel. There absolutely no is fine of the one who says he does when he is and that is a lie. When you try to wrap your icebox around the music that comes from the depths of the lettuce saddle monkey half-time show you see that the imprint of the elevator talks in the speech of the divinity of the sand. This is too much for you to admit in the kleptch of your karnenflugle kooklebinker.

Are we agreed?

Other Comments by Radesq

242. Comment #131680 by Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2008 at 2:17 am

I got this comment on my blog last night:

Hi there. My name is curious. I am just curious? what are you doing here?
a. Trying ot refute logic and accepting a fair tale of Evolution theory .E.T
b.Trying to find out who made the pperfect design from atoms revolving around the nucleous, to the planets revolving around the sun?

I think I've been Wootered.

I feel violated.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

243. Comment #131700 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 3:13 am

TonyA #262 & #266

Two more brilliant ones, but how did you manage to post them using wooter's username?

Quetz: yep, the tale of the curious wooter, indeed.

Other Comments by Geoff

244. Comment #131708 by Steve Zara on February 23, 2008 at 3:32 am

I think I've been Wootered.

You poor chap. Wooter seems a bit like a verruca. Irritating and very hard to get rid of, and contagious.

If you like, I'll come along and yell "Higgs Boson mass?" at him, but I suspect that will have no effect.....

Other Comments by Steve Zara

245. Comment #131710 by Brian English on February 23, 2008 at 3:50 am

I think I've been Wootered

Quetz. I feel like I've known you a while, but not in the biblical sense, more the internet sense. Strange that I would feel this. By the way, nice avatar. May I suggest a good dose of quinine and boutique beer, then a shotgun to counter the particularly virulent strain of wooterism going around. Just recently, I was about to take my daily constitutional,when lo and behold, a dirty little wooter was just floating there in my toilet. I did what any reasonable clear thinker like David Robertson would do. I thanked god for granting me this turd of salvation. Then, being an irreligious type. I flushed the wooter and gave god the bird. :)

Other Comments by Brian English

246. Comment #131712 by The Reverend Dark on February 23, 2008 at 4:00 am

Wooter decides that he is Jim Henson and sticks his hand up a giant frog's arse in order to hold a rana-tastic puppet show.

After monkeys talking, now it is time for frogs talk and ask"

The big frog is asking big questions?
1.Why was not evolved? What is wrong with me?
2.Why was I the same as the living ones today?
3.Where is Darwin? I need to talk to him.

Oh, froggy, you should not have gone a courting, not have gone to ride. Uh huh. Your sword and your pistol by your side should have been put to greater use.

1.) Fear not, you did evolve; you were not created instantly by some cretinous sky fairy, filling the sea with his drool and giving dominion to the goggle-eyed simian purported to be made in his image; we can place you in the long and proud timeline of froggy history. Your modern descendents are found in South America, this demonstrates rather nicely that Madagascar and South Amercia and Africa were still tenuously connect prior to seperating in late Cretaceous/early Cenozoic eras.

2.) You are not the same as modern frogs, there have been many changes in you since then. I would direct you to the paper 'A Giant Frog with South American Affinities from the Late Cretaceous of Madagascar' for an accounting of them. It is by Susan E. Evans, Marc E. H. Jones and David W. Krause. You can access it, which is more than that gibbering bag-of-stupid Wooter has managed to do, if he had, he would already know the answer to this question and would not have to resort to muppeting you in this manner. Perhaps he just likes it.

3.) Darwin is dead. I am sorry no one told you. You can read his book, the Origin of the Species online. Which is more than Wooter has done. Of course you are an extinct frog species that currently exists as a handful of bones, while Wooter is presumably still living and breathing.

Therefore you have an excuse for not having read the work. He does not, and his continued ignorance on these matters is both amusing and deeply sad.

It prevents him from asking interesting questions; instead all we get is infantile puppet shows and puerile assertions of design.

Wooter, you puss filled boil on the otherwise immaculate arse of intelligent coversation, where is our proof of creationism in the lab?

Oh wait, you just said what?

The eyes who wanna see God creating in a lab corner are no different than the ones who look for God in the universe creating all planets; eyes looking for God in HIS own creation.

Remember when Diacanu (he of the most excellent hat) asked this question? "So, wooter, how about you think up some creationism based experiments for us to try out?"

You answered

If you prove any evolution ideas in the lab, then, you can ask this question to me.

Evolution in the lab was demonstrated rather conclusively; and suddenly you are backpedaling and trying to change the conditions of the question. This demonstrates what a brazen, little liar that you are.

And not just a liar. A plagiarist, as has been demonstrated again and again.

Then there is your pathetic quote mining, most recently of Darwin, who, like Dawkins, you have claimed to have read, but obviously have not. Your parroting of his comment on the eye. Classic. Such breathtaking ignorance.

Wooter. I like you. This is not a love your neighbour, Christian sort of fondness. I like my neighbours, I sometimes shovel out their parking space for them. No. I like you because you demonstrate that my occasional moments of stupid are as a single raindrop. You are an ocean of stupid, on which the tiny paper boats of your breathtakingly grotesque analogies bob momentarily, before being decimated by the fleet guns of rational thought, clear science, logic (the real meaning of the word, not the strange one you assign to it), and careful, peer reviewed science.

You dear Wooter, are a miserable shite, a malignant turd left steaming and stinking on the sidewalk. A turd crawling with flies (cough...wipeout...cough), a turd that no mongrel, sick and debased, would lay claim to having squeezed out. You wallow in your own filthy ignorance, trying to elevate it into 'logic', but you are still playing in the grogans, holding them up as if they were fine jewels, unaware that you are holding up the intellectual and logical equivalent of a freshly rolled bum cigar.

Wooter, you make yourself a target to all those who would seek to educate, enlighten, and bring forward to the 21st century.

I like these targets; and therefore like you.

You arsehole.
Cheers,
The Reverend Shayne Dark

Other Comments by The Reverend Dark

247. Comment #131715 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:08 am

Thank you, Reverend, for that carefully thought out
prose. I'm unsure as to where it ranks in the POTY competition, but certainly in the top 10. I think TonyA still leads, though.

Other Comments by Geoff

248. Comment #131716 by Brian English on February 23, 2008 at 4:12 am

I'm unsure as to where it ranks in the POTY competition, but certainly in the top 10. I think TonyA still leads, though.

I would formally like to register a protest. The Reverend used my toilet to gain his experimental data about the wooter plague. Apart from providing the location. I provided video footage and recorded notes, as well as statutory declarations regarding the veracity of same that wooter is a turd. I feel it's unfair that the Reverend claim credit for my hard work during the daily constitutional. After all. The wooter was a pain in my sigmoid colon.

Other Comments by Brian English

249. Comment #131730 by Geoff on February 23, 2008 at 4:50 am

Agreed, Brian, and apologies! It was this line that stood out for me. though:

No. I like you because you demonstrate that my occasional moments of stupid are as a single raindrop. You are an ocean of stupid, on which the tiny paper boats of your breathtakingly grotesque analogies bob momentarily, before being decimated by the fleet guns of rational thought, clear science, logic (the real meaning of the word, not the strange one you assign to it), and careful, peer reviewed science.

Other Comments by Geoff

250. Comment #131733 by Steve Zara on February 23, 2008 at 4:54 am

Reverend:

Your posts bring me great joy. I thank you.

Other Comments by Steve Zara