208 Comments »

Myers Summed Up said:
This quote from a fellow ATHEIST pretty much sums up P.Z. Myers:
“If it weren’t for him “being” an atheist he’d be exactly what he is – some associate professor at some small time school playing with squids.”
http://www.atheistrev.com/2011/02/idiot-of-week-pz-myers.html
WINNER!! ::   +28
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:22 pm
@Myers Summed Up ::
… so sad for the squids … they’re smart and deserve better.
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:38 am

Barbara said:
A thousand points of light he’s not. I’ve found it amusing how many other atheists hate this guy. When you’re hated by people who should form your core constituency you know you’re doing something wrong.
“For sure, atheists for a long time have been unfairly stereotyped in the mainstream media and in popular culture. But we also have a lot of lousy self-proclaimed spokespeople who do damage to our public image. They’re usually angry, grumpy, uncharismatic male loners with a passion for attacking and ridiculing religious believers. Any fellow atheist who disagrees with their Don Imus rhetoric, they label as appeasers.”
“These “new atheists” are the dark under belly of atheism. In books, blogs, and public statements, they sell us ideological porn, sophomoric rants that feed our dark sides and reinforce our own unfair stereotypes about the “other,” i.e. the religious.”
http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/2008/08/two_images_of_atheism_hate_ver.php
And this is from a fellow traveler(!), be sure to check out the alluring photo of PZ that accompanies this article.
WINNER!! ::   +25
[Reply]

Hal (the original Hal) Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:07 am
@Barbara,
Thankfully it wasn’t a bare chest.
  +3
[Reply]

Wyrd Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:20 am
@Barbara,
“These “new atheists” are the dark under belly of atheism. In books, blogs, and public statements, they sell us ideological porn, sophomoric rants that feed our dark sides and reinforce our own unfair stereotypes about the “other,” i.e. the religious.”
http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/2008/08/two_images_of_atheism_hate_ver.php
Yes, thank you! That’s what I was trying to say in the reply-post I just finished a minute ago. (Well, I was trying to say half-a-dozen things, but that was one of the more important bits.)
The problem of PZ Myers: “ideological porn”, “sophomoric rants”, “feed our dark sides and reinforce our own unfair stereotypes about the “other”” — yeah that was it. That’s the problem exactly.
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
WINNER!! ::   +15
[Reply]

stoic Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 11:16 am
@Barbara,
Here a good observation from the comments on the blog you referenced:
–PZ’s core audience is a bunch of adolescents and suspended adolescents, deeply Oedipal types who love atheism primarily because they think it upsets someone–they think it’s some kind of rebellion. The confrontation is an essential part of the ballgame for them. They and the rabid fundies are counterparts–the atheists while constantly crowing about their intellectual superiority, are nearly all intellectual mediocrities who don’t read well and can rarely make anything but the grossest kind of distinction. The rabid dogs on both sides deserve each other, really. It’s just too bad they aren’t fighting each other physically: both those herds can use some culling.
WINNER!! ::   +14
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
@Barbara ::
Ha! t-shirts … I fucking knew it!!
@Stoic ::
It was quite telling how they lashed out at us as religious freaks. I can agree that this site is confusing … but I’m positive that it can’t be confused as a Christian site.
[Reply]

Allyn Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 6:57 am
@SD, interestingly enough, it’s easy for me to see how outsiders could see this as a “Christian based site” minus the colorful language.
Christ went about cleansing, and not just the souls of men. Do you know the story where He cleansed the temple?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple
Your mission here is similar – maybe you are the jesus or the interwebs? :)
AL
  +5
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 9:28 am
@Allyn, I guess it’s ok, because I don’t think SD wil go onto claim to be bigger than jesus or to actually be Jesus like AJ (a.k.a. “Aint Jesus”), the crazy compound-building, children-collecting, family-destroying nut of Divine Truth does.
  +4
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:44 am

Zack said:
From Christopher Hitchens:
“When I go to the mosque, I take off my shoes. When I go to the synagogue, I cover my head…Religious faith is, precisely because we are still-evolving creatures, ineradicable. It will never die out, or at least not until we get over our fear of death, and of the dark, and of the unknown, and of each other. For this reason, I would not prohibit it even if I thought I could.”
Egotistical narcissist Paul P.Z. Myers, on the other hand, is not only a bigoted, disrespectful asshole, but he revels in that distinction. He is unfit to empty Christopher Hitchens’ refuse bin.
WINNER!! ::   +17
[Reply]

Module_One Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:11 am
@Zack, it’s called respecting differences and P.Z. is incapable of doing it. I agree with Hitchens in showing respect for other people’s beliefs.
But how do you respect an atheist, who has no belief in God? I mean, I’m not going to punch someone in the nose but if they are vocal about not believing, I’d just say, “Of course, it’s your right to believe whatever you want to believe.”
What ticks me off is that they’re employing the same tactics they accuse Christians of — which is trying to “control” others and force their beliefs on them. Really, it’s laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.
WINNER!! ::   +13
[Reply]

PZ is a hypocrite Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
@Module_One,
This windbag hates religious people because he feels that religious people should keep their beliefs to himself…so what does jackass do…he spreads his gospel of atheism
Nothing like despising behavior in others then doing exactly what you say you despise.
Respect is easy to give if you’re comfortable in your own beliefs…obviously he is not
Naomi has played this buffoon like a fiddle
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

PeeWee Myers Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 2:37 pm
@PZ is a hypocrite < Nuff said
This blog is great for notfreethinkingpeoplelikeme.com who enjoy the fake ramblings of a fake robot, or sumfing.
  0
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
@Module_One ::
Oh but it is laughable for sure. And they do it all with such a sense of unjustified superiority … and snittiness. It’s much more pathetic than religious fundamentalists who aren’t making a pretense of intellectualism.
[Reply]

Module_One Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:03 pm
You don’t frighten us, English pig dogs. Go and boil your bottoms, you sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called “Arthur King,” you and all your silly English K-nig-hts.
Can’t help myself. I had this picture in my mind of PZ and his followers, trying to break into a castle. My excuse is a nice glass of red wine.
It’s just a flesh wound!!
  +6
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:45 am

Hal (the original Hal) said:
“Sounds like they really got a handle on this situation. Why bother KNOWING when you can spend your time SAYING instead. Saying is so much easier than knowing.”
That pretty much hits the nail on the head. Their self indulging rhetoric fills a room like a bad fart … smelly, yet devoid of substance.
I couldn’t even get a nibble from the least of the GasBaggers on the previous thread.
Maybe we should consider you bastions of scientific knowledge a “punk eek” blip on this blog … or in layman’s terms … the absense of proof is proof of that which is absent.
Heeeere troll …. c’mon boy. ;-)
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:46 am

Walt said:
Atheist: “The Case for Firing P.Z. Myers”
“Myers is calling for us atheists to lie, to steal and to participate in a massive act of collective disrespect of our religious neighbors. It is outrageous.”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/07/11/549959/-The-case-for-firing-PZ-Myers
WINNER!! ::   +15
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:44 pm
@Walt ::
What’s the big deal … it was just a fucking cracker?
That’s why he put a rusty nail in it … cause that’s what you do with crackers.
[Reply]

Bix Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:45 pm
@SD, It’s pretty sad when an “ace professor of squids” has to eat rusty nails and donated crackers just to get by. Although to look at him, you’d think he’s eaten a LOT of them.
  +4
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 9:08 am
@Bix, It seems like so much work just to get free food, but probably he doesn’t know about the Catholic food banks to help him out.
  +3
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:54 am

Module_One said:
Oh, yes. Big Fun.
I couldn’t believe that post on being nice. You know, for most people, it isn’t a college-level course. They show courtesy and politeness because that’s what was modeled to them through school and (most of the time) within their homes. Aside from the highly dysfunctional families, being nice is kind of a given. No one really wants to be thought of as a dick unless you’re talking about Rambo being one because some bigoted small-town sheriff decided he didn’t want a smelly, dirty, long-haired “other” walking through his town.
I love Rambo.
But PZ ain’t Rambo. It isn’t obvious (at least to me) why he is such a dick AND so proud of it. Like it’s some damn secret ingredient to win the Nobel Prize. At least Salty has a very good reason for being a dick. Quite simply, those in the IM scamming universe deserve it. Someone has to call them out on their crap and thankfully, we have a very smart Droid to do it.
Here’s how I see the difference between Salty Droid and PZ. Some here will undoubtedly (heh) think of more:
PZ “Atheist With An Attitude” : Posts dopey photos of sea animals that have been dead for thousands of years. Then encourages his gullible followers to make fun of religion by stealing what is considered holy just so he can throw it in the trash. Wants the whole world to know he’s an atheist dick and that’s he’s not a nice person and dammit, quit trying to cramp his style by laying out silly expectations like common courtesy and civility in discourse!
The Salty Droid “Robot With An Attitude”: Posts researched articles exposing scam artists on the Internet who promise “rainbows and unicorns” (instant success, instant wealth, instant chick-magnet). When scam artists destroy lives (and sometimes kill them), will unleash an entire garage of whoop-ass by posting incriminating evidence.
The Droid is on a mission to set the IM captive free. PZ just wants the captives to switch membership cards.
I still don’t get the whole “activist atheist” schtick. What the hell are they fighting about over there? Seriously? Is anyone pointing a gun to their head and making them sing “Jesus Loves Me?” Good grief, people. You don’t believe in a god. Some people do. So what? Anything done “against religion” exposes you as an immature jerk who probably didn’t get as many cookies on your plate as your favored sibling.
Go to a therapist, already.
WINNER!! ::   +20
[Reply]

Carol Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:09 am
@Module_One, Egotistical bully P.Z. Myers and his sycophants aren’t fighting for their right to practice or not practice religion. They already have that choice. Instead, they are fighting to dictate to others what their choice should be.
P.Z. Myers’ biography would best be titled: “Millions and Millions of Doors Slamming.” Of course, his ego would demand the subtitle: “And how I broke in through every back window and terrorized the occupants anyway.”
WINNER!! ::   +17
[Reply]

Module_One Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
@Carol, I love that last one. He’s starting to remind me of the Grinch who would love nothing better than to throttle little Cindy Lou Hoo because she had the audacity to believe something good would happen.
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:15 am
@Module_One,
Here’s a voice at Atheist Revolution giving his take on PZ:
“There are many reasons why someone is an atheist, but PZ Meyers will only accept that people must have a reason that suits him. The ‘examined life’ bullshit he spews is yet another clear example of his robot-like way of thinking. The only emotion PZ has is hate. Otherwise, he acts and speaks like a machine. In fact, he’s very much like a very limited computer. He is locked into his self-imposed, militant atheist programming and clearly doesn’t have the desire to deviate at all from the limits of that programming. He sees things as his way or the highway. Yep, just like a lot of religious zealots do. It’s no wonder that many religious people accuse people like PZ Meyers of having their own religion; the ‘religion’ of atheism, masked by an alleged basis in science. In other words, people like PZ pretend to be scientists who only think rationally and logically, but spreading blind hate and being a malignant narcissist isn’t rational or logical. When it comes right down to it, it wouldn’t matter if science even exists. PZ would still be an arrogant blowhard who expects everyone else to kiss his ass and worship his every word. PZ is as obsessed, self-righteous, and arrogant as any proselytizing street corner evangelist, or any political loudmouth like Palin, O’Reilly, or Limbaugh.”
(written by Pachyaena)
A lot of atheists feel that PZ Myers is doing tremendous damage to the whole subject of atheism. He claims he’s helping them come out of the closet. I wonder how many he’s driving into the closet.
WINNER!! ::   +15
[Reply]

Module_One Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:20 pm
@Barbara, I’m on the side of the wiser atheists. From the links others have found, it would seem that there atheists who honestly want a dialogue with faith-based organizations and find common ground. Someone like Myers only drives a wedge between the two and leads many to assume all atheists behave like that.
I’d never insist that someone would believe what I believe. In fact, that takes away the whole element of faith. It’s deeply personal and not something you “get” from someone else. It’s another aspect of Myers fight that is so wrong-footed. Just as you can’t force someone to believe something, you certainly can’t force them to disbelieve it. Faith is mysterious and it alights upon someone’s soul with surprise. It certainly isn’t a bulldozer, which seems to be Myers’ vehicle of choice.
I do find it fascinating that no matter what someone believes (or doesn’t believe), there is always the desire to connect with others and find community. Perhaps that is a good common ground to focus upon. But as you said, Myers seems driven by chaos.
  +5
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
@Module_One ::
At least Salty has a very good reason for being a dick. Quite simply, those in the IM scamming universe deserve it.
Probably true they deserve it. Some law school graduated asshole like Luis Li would call that retributive justice.
But I’m not really too into that. I’m so committed to being a “take them down a notch” dick because it has a very powerful realtime effect on the ongoing harm itself.
[Reply]

Module_One Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
@SD, you’re right and I stopped too short. I like that you “take them down a notch” because I consider myself as one of the ones “flushed” out of the Matrix. Thank you. (If I haven’t said that before.)
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:58 am

Wyrd said:
You’re not a liar.
I like what you do here, @SD. I think it is more useful/important/relevant than what PZ Myers does. Further: anyone that’s doing any kind of investigative journalism in a manner that’s not totally crappy is necessarily practicing critical thinking skills (yay skepticism) whether they’re wearing a t-shirt or not. (No, I’m not Captain Obvious, but I might be his cousin.)
Sensationalism has always been a most effective means of getting peoples’ attention. Short, “punchy” statements are easier to process and they leave stronger impressions on the mind.
You, PZ Myers, and Naomi Dunford all use sensationalism to grab eyeballs. The thing that differentiates each of you is your goals.
Naomi’s goal is to get as many people as possible to buy her BS fake products and, more importantly, to get folks on that mailing list so that her “associates” can sell Naomi’s victims customers.
PZ’s goal is… I dunno… It looks like his goal is to promote his beliefs and interests. Which is pretty typical for the cult of personality type thing, which so easily turns itself into the online marketing scam type thing. Many of his posts aren’t about hating on religion. But whenever a post referencing religion does show up, you can bet it’s going to be full of piss and vinegar and other awful crap.
@SD, your goals are very clear as specifically laid out on the ABOUT :: WTF? page.
I thought the Aslan stuff was funny. It was disheartening that so many of the PZ followers clicked over, saw Aslan and all the colons, and assumed for some odd reason that, that meant you must be a crazy religious type.
It would be great if more of PZ’s loyal band of “free thinking” followers could see past the colons, but I kind of doubt that’ll happen.
As to the t-shirt skeptic that said “we should all just be nice”: Sure, @SD, you’re right I guess that nice doesn’t get as many page views.
But never mind about websites for the moment. A lot of the skeptic, atheist, free-thinker types, especially the PZ Myers ones, they wouldn’t be nice to granny on the airplane. No.
If the granny-on-the-airplane said:
“I hope you have a good Christmas and God bless you,”
the PZ Myers-following skeptic, atheist, “free-thinker” would look that nice old lady square in the face and, while smiling, say
“I’m not Christian. I think believing in God is a sign of weak, pathetic ignorance. And I resent that you’d talk to me that way. And now I’m going to go post to PZ Myers so he can unleash the hoards of free-thinking liberal skeptic ninja monkeys on you and your family!”
Or something. Ok, so maybe they wouldn’t. I dunno. My real fear is that, that’s something that I would do, and then feel bad about having done it. ’cause granny’s just trying to be friendly. I don’t follow PZ Myers though.
So if you want to be all mean on your website, then fine. I guess. Not really. But it does get page views. But once the atheist types feel like it’s “ok to be gayatheist” they often don’t know when to STFU. When nice granny is on the plane, they are like to lambaste her. And that’s not right. One of the scariest things in the world is a self-righteous person. I don’t think it’s healthy for PZ to embolden that mind set. I don’t know if it’s healthy for you to do it either, @SD, except that at least in your case most of your targets have actually committed actual crimes.
Btw–did you accidentally get some details wrong in your last post as to the number of daily page views FreeThoughtBlogs PZ’s site gets?
–
Loyally addicted to your blog, but never just loyally parroting your thoughts, even though I might get -50ed for it…
Furry cows moo and decompress.
WINNER!! ::   +11
[Reply]

Cameron Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:16 am
@Wyrd, Myers’ apparent goal has become little more than “to service his own ego.” To do that, he has cultivated an angry choir, which sings back and forth to each other, while occasionally assaulting the unsuspecting to achieve hollow ego gratification. There is no honor in what he represents, even among genuine free thinking rationalists.
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
@Wyrd ::
I think “sensationalism” doesn’t apply here at all. This is a very serious subject with copious horror and death … and almost no one else is talking about it. The stories end up quite sensational because that’s what they are … there’s nothing unnatural or exploitative about it.
I recently did that interview with Aaron Wall :: but prior to that I’d never done one … and not because I didn’t have offers. I’m sitting on hundreds of GREAT stories that I’ll never get to tell. In fact :: I can say without reservation I’m sitting on all the best stories. But I can’t tell them for various reasons having to do with always putting the mission first.
I hope this becomes the biggest blog on the Internet :: but I’m going to get there by focusing on doing the right thing. Because IMO that’s what the future Internet is going to be all about. Something genuine … something people can get behind … and stay behind … because it’s real.
And sometimes I give coy answers :: but there is only one reason this blog is so popular. Jokes. Period. Jokes are a high value item that people can’t resist no matter how sad the underlying story. Complicated comedy isn’t “sensationalist”.
Btw–did you accidentally get some details wrong in your last post as to the number of daily page views FreeThoughtBlogs PZ’s site gets?
Did I?
I looked his blog and then Alexa and said I thought 100,000 pageviews per day sounded delusional. I don’t have admin access so I have no way of knowing.
But … a first hour proxy comment defending the 100K figure makes me wonder if there might be a fun story there.
PZ is usually flaming religious or atheist types. But now he’s in a flame war with someone who investigates Internet fraud. I’m familiar with multitudinous ways to game almost every metric. And I noticed some very bizarre things about the incoming traffic stream from his link. I’d say it was a very bad idea to give me that data … but I know PZ Myers doesn’t have ideas.
[Reply]

what?? Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 9:33 am
@SD,
You’re right. Sensationalism doesn’t apply here. At all.
But, although you are ridiculously talented and hilarious, I don’t think jokes are the only reason this blog is so popular.
So, as this blog’s 117th biggest fan…I respectfully disagree.
  +3
[Reply]

117th Biggest Fan Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 11:20 am
@what??, Now hold on there just a minute. I’ve fought many a crowd to get where I am, and I’m not about to give up my coveted slot now.
  +4
[Reply]

what?? Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 11:27 am
@117th Biggest Fan,
Oops…I didn’t think you’d see that. Fine. I lied. I’m really only the 118th biggest fan…or at least in the top 120ish.
  +5
[Reply]

Wyrd Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 9:53 pm
[I wrote this late yesterday. I just wasn't able to get it posted right away.]
@SD,
I think “sensationalism” doesn’t apply here at all.
Well, ok. It’s true your site differs greatly from some sensationalist rag both in that you have real information and facts and that you have a real altruistic goal instead of just some profit motive.
This is a very serious subject with copious horror and death … and almost no one else is talking about it.
Yes. That’s true, and I apologize for disrespecting that in my post.
I recently did that interview with Aaron Wall :: but prior to that I’d never done one … and not because I didn’t have offers. I’m sitting on hundreds of GREAT stories that I’ll never get to tell. In fact :: I can say without reservation I’m sitting on all the best stories. But I can’t tell them for various reasons having to do with always putting the mission first.
Translation: If you were just in it for the titillating, sensationalist angle, you could go on forever and probably get rich just from a simple AdSense thingie. Ok, I gotcha.
Because IMO that’s what the future Internet is going to be all about. Something genuine … something people can get behind … and stay behind … because it’s real.
Yes, I agree. Of course, there’ll probably always be some random cheap trick to grab a higher page rank, but the tricks-that-still-work will probably get fewer every year and the amount of boost they give a site will diminish as well.
And sometimes I give coy answers :: but there is only one reason this blog is so popular. Jokes. Period. Jokes are a high value item that people can’t resist no matter how sad the underlying story. Complicated comedy isn’t “sensationalist”.
Humor is certainly important to me. In fact it could be said comedy is my religion, or at least a significant part of it.
The “how you like me now, Naomi!?” was definitely funny. The Aslan bit was funny. The little robot logos in the images are cool, cute and funny. The humor also serves the very important role of softening the horrible-ness so that the people that don’t like to stare at “copious horror and death” can stay here long enough to learn about what has happened.
So the jokes might be a necessary condition, but IMHO, I don’t believe they are sufficient. That is: Ok, you need jokes, but if you only had jokes, I wouldn’t be here.
I mean you are the person/robot actually running your site, so I guess you’d know best. But if this site were just some joke site, I don’t think I’d be so addicted.
I think the hook is the triple threat of: humor + real, actual evidence-based content + serialized one-dribble-at-a-time delivery format that has me in its clutches.
Btw–did you accidentally get some details wrong in your last post as to the number of daily page views FreeThoughtBlogs PZ’s site gets?
Did I?
I looked his blog and then Alexa and said I thought 100,000 pageviews per day sounded delusional. I don’t have admin access so I have no way of knowing.
(There’s that coy answer thing. ;-) )
But … a first hour proxy comment defending the 100K figure makes me wonder if there might be a fun story there.
PZ is usually flaming religious or atheist types. But now he’s in a flame war with someone who investigates Internet fraud. I’m familiar with multitudinous ways to game almost every metric. And I noticed some very bizarre things about the incoming traffic stream from his link. I’d say it was a very bad idea to give me that data … but I know PZ Myers doesn’t have ideas.
Ah. Clearly I am still being too naive when I look at the comments on the site. I know very little about how to game the metrics. But it looks like a good thing to learn about.
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
  -2
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
@Wyrd,

“You, PZ Myers, and Naomi Dunford all use sensationalism to grab eyeballs. The thing that differentiates each of you is your goals.”
More about ability to read, research, and make good-creative jokes toward the right end-game-pieces are some things I think about when I go on thinking about the differences.
100,000 pageviews/day was on PZ Meyers’ wish-list and simple to calculate as improbable thru compete & the double-click adplanner which you can get into for free.
  +4
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 8:08 am

Petroglyph Ontomancer said:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I defended you on a couple of skeptic/atheist blogs earlier during this mess (using a different handle, so don’t bother searching). I argued that I’ve only ever seen you go after real scumbags, exploitative villains preying on the vulnerable for monetary gain, and then only after you’ve done your homework.
Whatever else PZ Myers is, he is not that. This isn’t worthy of you, SD. Shame.
LOSER!! ::   -8
[Reply]

Gestalt Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:51 am
@Petroglyph Ontomancer, Oh, but P.Z. Myers is quite the scumbag. If you follow the real thinkers among the rationalist community, you know Myers is like the toilet paper stuck to the bottom of the shoe.
WINNER!! ::   +14
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:56 am
@Petroglyph Ontomancer,
The scurrilous attack on Anthony Navarro was completely indefensible. PZ Myers did not make any effort to find out the facts he just had a knee-jerk reaction to Anthony Navarro’s biblical quotations.
I think that made PZ a perfectly reasonable target for the Droid’s wrath. It wouldn’t have taken more than ten minutes of PZ’s busy day to acquaint himself with this sad story.
I’m sure the squids would have waited.
WINNER!! ::   +20
[Reply]

Whatthewhat Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 9:07 am
@Petroglyph Ontomancer, If one where looking at this merely as salty & PZ each putting up posts saying the other is an idiot and having a fight online over that I’d have to agree. But that isn’t what’s happening here.
This situation was related to greater goal of this site (even if tangentially) because PZ broadcast harmful misstatements about Anthony Navarro, who, as salty has ready reported was yet another victim of the IM machine trough the craziness that erupted within his family when Dave ran off to get his Internet moniez.
I was surprised to see this situation show up on a blog that, at first glance, didn’t seem to have anything to do with Internet unicorns & the reach of Dumford’s lies & scam stories is pretty crazy. In short: victim bashing is right up salty’s alley. And entirely worthy of his time
WINNER!! ::   +15
[Reply]

Wyrd Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 10:25 am
@Petroglyph Ontomancer,
PZ Myers echoed Naomi Dunford in labeling Anthony Navarro as a crazy religious guy who tried to have his brother committed against his will, etc, etc.
I do not know where the truth really is in all that or if there is any truth to it. I have to intentionally set aside my own personal bias against religious folk. Once I do that, I see that there really isn’t any public evidence around to support Naomi’s version. There’s the one Biblical passage with the highlighted section. Also there’s Naomi/PZ’s assertion that Anthony Jr believed or stated “mom got what she deserved,” when she was murdered by a hitman hired by Anthony Sr.
That’s a damning claim, yeah. But that assertion comes from a highly unreliable source (Naomi) and @SD (who seems way more reliable to me) emphatically disputes the assertion.
So.
What all this means is that what PZ Myers did amounts to victim bashing (i.e. Anthony Jr is another victim of the evil IM MMO machine vicariously through all the crap that’s happened/happening with his brother.)
And that’s where the Droid comes in. It’s right there in ABOUT :: WTF? (emphasis added):
:: Things that may earn you a Shame Cannon barrage ::
>> scamming people who can’t afford to be scammed
>> attacking the weak, desperate, or hurting without adequate provocation
>> attempting to develop your own nuclear weapons program {I’m talking to you Wayne Jenkins from Kenosha, WI}
>> using sham & spam tactics to build a cult-of-personality :: then cashing in on it like a Pathetic LIFE DRAINING Parasite
See? @SD is being totally true to his clearly stated goals as PZ Myers’ poorly researched blog post is causing further defamation of Anthony Navarro Jr.’s character and is therefore an example of “attacking the weak, desperate, or hurting without adequate provocation”.
Natch. It’s like proving stuff in math class or something. Now I wanna cookie and some milk as a reward.
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
WINNER!! ::   +16
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 2:53 pm
@Petroglyph Ontomancer ::
How many times are you going to say that same thing? I answered you the first time.
To add to what everyone else has said :: and to repeat myself to you :: this isn’t just some random victim … it’s someone who got pulled into MY story specifically. PZ Myers saw LettersToDaveNavarro because of me and my actions. His fucked up hate could easily start a whole new viral hate campaign against an innocent person.
The Navarros took a risk for the greater good by allowing me to write about this even though I warned them that it would probably get crazy nasty and gave them a veto right. They’ve shown genuine concern for other’s stuck in this same sad loop to their own very real detriment … most people don’t do that.
So I have zero choice. I broke it … I bought it.
[Reply]

Petroglyph Ontomancer Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 12:40 am
@SD, Three times, usually.
You’ve made yourself clear, though, so I’ll settle for two this time. You won’t hear from me again.
  -1
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 8:32 am

Rafael Marquez said:
Those Pissy Myers fans are a lot dumber than they appear to be if they can’t figure out what Salty Droid is about.
WINNER!! ::   +16
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 4:05 pm
@Rafael Marquez, It was my first thing to think, too when reading the comments from them they made. The list put up in the original SD post was seeming to me like a literal litter of illiteracy.
  +3
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
@Jack ::
I really appreciated your “literal litter of illiteracy” alliteration … it’s almost as funny as troll haikus.
Speaking of t-shirts and haikus …
http://www.threadless.com/product/623/Haikus_are_easy_but
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
@SD, It’s a good one for me to print to put up onto the refrigerator, but also it made me think about a haiku I saw here at SD once when mikefilsaimeinsider said, “Video boss can’t be in video because video is pond scum and no boss but an elf floating with the gnome and Jeff cult creeper Walker.” where he ended with the power-haiku:
“no boss but an elf
floating with the gnome and Jeff
cult creeper Walker”
  +5
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 8:49 am

MissingThePoint said:
Here’s where I think PZ’s followers are missing the point of these articles:
Where did PZ get a supposed private communication between Anthony and his brother *from* and what purpose did it serve to “out” Anthony as a “scumbag” this late in the game?
As far as I can see, there are three sources for the quotes. Anthony wouldn’t; Dave might; Naomi definitely would – and why? – in order to derail and defame.
So, kudos to those of you who are falling for this tactic by Naomi. She’s successfully derailed the discussion of her lies, her scams, and her house-wrecking ways by tossing religion into the mix.
Personally, I don’t care what PZ Myers thinks of Anthony Navarro. Trying to discredit what Naomi thinks of as SD’s source in this expose won’t work – SD has proof, SD has research, and SD has the law on his side. Naomi? She has a record of lying and using people, and PZ is just her latest mouthpiece.
Nice try, Dunford & crew. It was a worthy effort, but I’m not falling for it.
WINNER!! ::   +12
[Reply]

too much credit Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 2:52 pm
@MissingThePoint, You speak that like spider-tubs knew what she was doing, and was not simply flailing around wildly, looking for anything.
I agree with your general thinking, that it could be a manipulated ploy – but I think you give the rotund one and the flaccid one much too much credit.
She is likely trying anything that waters-down the truth…the shittiness her business has as its earned legacy. ShittyBiz just lacks “pop” so a manipulated PR spin drive makes more sense.
PZ is simply dredging the dumpsters like always, so of course he found spider-toad in there somewhere, and found plenty of half-stories to latch on to. He likes shouting more than thinking, so he jumped right in – and now we are here.
So not against you, MTP – but don’t think of them as Svengalis, crafting it all into place and pressing “send” to make the chaos erupt. More like, a scheming shithole was used by a weak-minded, inflammatory opportunist.
Feel free to interchange their names. It doesn’t really matter.
But always remember to flush twice when finished please – as a courtesy.
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:49 pm
@too much credit ::
Agreed :: she panicked … and then tried her normal tactic turned up to 11 … and it failed to 11. She should have paid Irwin $10,000 for an hour of consulting so that he could tell her … “never say his fucking name … never … ever … ever … never say his name.”
Or she should have paid Perry Belcher $50,000 for an hour of even better consulting so that he could tell her … “back down … or at least pretend to … he’s too much trouble.”
But no.
I really don’t get PZ though … I agree about him lingering in dumpsters … but no one volunteers for me. Don’t get it.
[Reply]

RT Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
@SD,
Didn’t Brownson’s dumb ass sort of sign up for you :)
  +3
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 12:18 am
@RT ::
Tru dat :: but he was kinda all in already … the big mean robot messing with the gravy train.
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 8:50 am

Barbara said:
I love the fact that The Pope of Atheism is defending that queen of rationality and science, Naomi Dunford. Because you know what rational folks like Naomi and PZ do when they have a stubborn question? You’re probably thinking things like “Construct and test a hypothesis, gather and analyze data.” But you’d be wrong. They have an Akashic Record Reading:
“I signed up for an Akashic Record Reading after my husband raved about his. Since he is pretty much the Most Practical Living Human, I figured if it was good enough for him, it’s good enough for me. I was mildly skeptical, but I didn’t want to be unsupportive, so I tried to have an open mind.”
“Honestly, in the month or so after having our records read, it felt like our lives fell apart all at once. Whole sections of our families disowned us with seemingly no provocation. My biggest client very nicely fired me for no real reason. Another company I was doing work for went out of business, totally unexpectedly. My blog — which is my livelihood — came under major public attack. It was unbelievable. The crap really hit the fan.”
“BUT. In the context of the things that Akemi and I talked about, it all made sense. All of those relationships that were toxic and draining — gone. All of the clients I wasn’t happy about working with — gone. All the fears that I had associated with my career and my public image and all that stuff — it all just got, I don’t know, dealt with. It was like God or the Divine or the Whatever You Want To Call It said, OK. Now that you’re ready, I’ll put things in order for you.”
“I don’t usually go in for stuff like this. I get freaked out by things I don’t understand. But honestly, I’ll pay whatever Akemi charges because it worked.”
Naomi Dunford Testimonial
Akemi says: ** Premium Package is also available for $995 for those of you interested in the expansive transformational process. **
“I have had to increase my rate multiple times due to high demand. Someday I may have to stop or severely limit the number of new clients to focus on providing the best service to my existing clients and their referrals. So please do not inquire about discounts. The only discount is the package deal with Spirit Guides Coaching.”
http://www.akashicrecordreading.com/
***************************************************************************
Naomi used the G word, “God or the Divine or the Whatever You Want To Call It said”, not only that but she claimed God spoke directly to her. I’m sure ordinarily PZ would be in full vein-throbbing mouth-foaming rage about language like that but since it’s Naomi it’s okay with him.
And Spirit Guide Coaching?! Wasn’t Coach Brownson enough of a coach? I really hope one of Naomi’s spirit guides was a “Red Indian” like the crackpot medium scammers used to conjure up.
And family members disowned her with no provocation? Come on, Naomi. With the wrecked lives you leave in your wake I’m sure there was plenty of provocation. As for Naomi keeping an open mind…I think her brain fell out.
So, PZ, you fucking hypocrite, tell me: Why is it acceptable for Naomi to speak TO God but Anthony gets savaged for speaking about him?
WINNER!! ::   +21
[Reply]

Yvette Scott Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 10:49 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Barbara,
There is something white in the corner of your mouth. Athough,I haven’t seen a single post from Mr. Myers defending anyone you are shouting about, I have seen Jason Jones’ posts on innocent victims like Linda Eaves. I found that scurrilous and indefensible considering he knew he was exposing her to the vitrol of his regular readership.
Anyone with a negative exposure to a fundamentalist Christian belief system, when they read the letter or watched the Christmas eve video, had their hair raise on the back of their neck.
Your statement of being a buddhist without belief reminds me of a quote “Those who stand for nothing, fall for anything.”
LOSER!! ::   -15
[Reply]

Shorty Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
@, your post shows you have failed to understand what you’ve read here. (Assuming you have actually made the effort to read the Linda Eaves post and comments).
When SD first posted about Linda, I, like several other readers, didn’t understand why the focus was going to such a “small fish”. But as the conversation evolved, it became obvious that the purpose was to vividly show how IMers like Naomi victimize good, hard working people. Linda was not exposed to vitriol. In fact if you read the comments, you would have seen that the prevailing sentiment at the end was one of sympathy and compassion for Linda.
WINNER!! ::   +14
[Reply]

Yvette Scott Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Shorty,
I get the “end justifies the means” attitude.
LOSER!! ::   -9
[Reply]

Shorty Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:49 pm
@, well that’s not how I would characterize my attitude about it. I can’t speak for SD of course.
Your comment implies that harm was committed which I take to mean your claim that Linda was subjected to the vitriol of the readers of this blog. However, this vitriol you speak of is a myth. Again, if you read the comments, the readers here were by and large very gentle towards Linda.
Don’t expect every group of blog commenters to behave the way PZ’s mob does.
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
@Anonymous,
And the white showing at the side of your hole is from your latest Meyers indoctrination injection I imagine?
  +6
[Reply]

Yvette Scott Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Alley-Cat,
LOL. I was thinking more along the lines of spittle from being so ignorantly indignant but I can see the humor in your adolescent question.
LOSER!! ::   -8
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
@Anonymous,
Got to be honest I thought it might just be that, but I let my adolescent side get the better of me.
  +5
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
@Anonymous ::
So you intentionally disgusting fucks are going lecture us on niceness now? Does your hypocrisy have no bounds?
Let’s pretend for a moment that you actually care about reason and science and protecting people from delusion :: which I don’t believe :: but let’s fucking pretend. In that context :: let me explain what this place is in terms you’ll understand …
The fake robot blog is as if more than half of PZ Myers’ audience were fundamentalist Christians who were like … “I want to hate this bastard … but I can’t … I love him to much to hate him.”
Linda doesn’t hate that post about Linda because she can feel the uncomfortable unspokens in the creepy IM world like everyone else can. We’re all here talking about it … and it’s helping … unlike you slime sucking slime suckers.
[Reply]

Yvette Scott Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 12:57 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@SD,
Good effort if I was part of Mr. Myers’ crowd. I’m not. Actually, I am one of your dissenting regulars. Don’t you have some sort of giant IP address notebook so you can check that out. I keep looking for reasons to like you. But I will speak out when I think you are wrong and I think you are wrong about how you went about that. I know you think the end justifies the means but I think you lack perspective on how hurtful and damaging posting those videos could be. You posted about how you agonized over drawing other innocent people in to this mess yet you dismiss how this may have affected this woman. So yes, I call bullshit on that. Your ability to do some good is lessened by your refusal to take responsibilty for your readership.
LOSER!! ::   -7
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 1:17 am
Well @Yvette Scott :: I do take responsibility for my readership …
Like when I made it clear that we wouldn’t be making fat jokes about Linda. And like when I bitch and whine about people making stupid fucking prison rape jokes.
And how I take the time to tell you to shut up … almost every time you pop in.
Thanks for your continued concern trolling … I’m sure it’s very useful.
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 2:40 am
@Yvette Scott ::
Well … I just went and looked at all your comments … and then used your email address to figure out who you are.
I’m not sure why you hate me so much Yvette … but I think I’ve misread you … so brace yourself for this Yvette … I apologize for taking such a firm tone with you. It’s very hard to guess who are the full on trolls … and who are the confused … especially when they are flooding in like they have been for the past month or so.
I don’t think the hostility that you’ve been exhibiting toward me is your normal way of being … so I hope maybe you’re at least thinking about why that’s happening.
Maybe this will make you hate me less …
http://saltydroid.info/debbie-does-witchcraft/
… that was a secret message for Jason’s wife … this blog’s number one fan … when she got Insane in the Membrane. She was really excited about it … and that post made her smile.
Wanna hear something super sad though Yvette? I just went to find that post for you … and I noticed that I wrote it on Dave’s last day at home. A great fun day for me was the beginning of Alison’s horrible nightmare. Life is so rude and unfair like that.
You’ve told me lots of times you don’t think this is a real problem and that I should be talking about something else. I think you’re wrong about that. I think that thinking about Alison makes me think that you are wrong about that Yvette.
[Reply]

Yvette Scott Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 10:59 am
@SD,
I accept your apology and I apologize to you. I have been hostile towards you. I tend to hold very high standards for people I admire. You are actually someone I see as an advocate for the underdog. I do not envy your position because I think you have set very high standards for yourself as well. I think that what you are doing here is real, important, necessary, and serves a high purpose. I hope you will always continue to fight for what you believe in and fight for the people you believe in.
Life is unfair and rude. My heart breaks for all people who experience the harshness of it. I think that when I read some of the comments my need to fight for the underdog kicks in. I respond in a way that it appears that I disagree with the heart of the post when really my beef is with the way the commenter presented their opinion. I will be more careful about that.
As you asked, I thought about my hostility. I think I have answered it for myself above but I find it bears repeating. I think what you are doing on this blog is real, important, necessary, and serves a high purpose. I admire you for doing it. I do not believe in unicorns but I do believe in people. I will continue to read and I will continue to question. I will call you out if I think you are wrong. But I will try and make sure that I am questioning from the right place because I believe in Jason Jones. Thank you for what you are doing for those who can not do it for theirselves.
Please tell Jason Jones’ wife grats on the title. I fully understand and appreciate the effort that took and the accomplishment that it is, not to mention the coolest title ever. If someone like that is married to Jason Jones then I can’t help but like and admire him. :)
  +6

Lanna Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
@Barbara,
The “Premium Package” is $995 and doesn’t even include a Soul Retrieval? I’d shop around for a better deal.
This has nothing to do with anyone’s personal spirituality, atheism or fundamentalist Christian beliefs, though. This is just The Syndicate conducting their business-as-usual mutual-promotion circle-jerk. It makes strange bedfellows.
Naomi recommends D-team blogger, “eBook on spiritual entrepreneurship” author, and “life coaching business and then . . . soul reading service” entrepreneur Akemi, and Akemi interviews Naomi on her blog.
(Akemi blogs in a blog post about blogging, that when it comes to starting a business, “Naomi Dunford used the analogy of having a baby.” Milk it for all the money and attention it’s worth for a couple years and then pawn off the responsibility on some dude? Yeah, that sounds like Naomi.)
Akemi also interviewed Naomi’s gal-pal James Chartrand, and she ironically repackaged Jeff Walker’s “your family is poison” message that Dave Navarro spewed at his own children as “Dodging The Many Forms Of Psychological Manipulation”.
To paraphrase The Doctor, it’s a big ball of wibbly wobbly, slimy wimey scammers. Now just where does squid-handler PZ Myers fit in? I have faith that the Droid will find out – eventually.
WINNER!! ::   +13
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
@Lanna,
It is the same dozen or so names and the same websites in an endless round robin. Naomi morphs and twists herself to be whatever she thinks the person she’s talking to wants her to be. She’ll be all new-agey to talk to “Akemi”, she’ll be a concerned mommy for Janet Fraser, she’ll be “shakin’ her scantily clad thang” for any male.
She reminds me of a certain song by Lykke Li…anyone know which song I’m thinking of?
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]

Anna Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 10:03 pm
@Barbara, of all the gems you’ve dredged up, the one on Akashic Readings takes the cake. Her husband was The Most Practical of Human Beings? Sounds more like she was trying to allay any reader suspicions regarding her testimonial before they even got there. And fired by a client, ties cut by family for no reason? That’s either disingenuous or shows a significant lack of insight. Either way it is no good.
  +5
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 9:36 am

what?? said:
I don’t get it. First we’re ‘human filth’ and then we’re ‘well-washed hordes’. It’s all very confusing.
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 10:05 am

Barbara said:
The Nitty Gritty Heart: Naomi Dunford
interview with Mark Silver Sufi spiritual nut
MARK: – She is a shining example of someone who is very heart-centered, very connected to spirit..”
NAOMI – “I used to work with hospice patients and, to this day, they are the single greatest Teachers I’ve ever had. Dying people don’t have time or energy for B.S., for everything they say is incredibly meaningful and candid. They are clear like water. And they spoiled me. They left me craving that kind of urgent interaction — honest and savory. You remind me of their candor and clarity (minus the terminal part). So, to be able to glean spot-on business advice through your raw, uncensored filter… it is dynamic spirituality that commands my highest respect.”
http://www.heartofbusiness.com/2010/the-nitty-gritty-heart-naomi-dunford/
**************************************************************************
There is a half hour interview with Naomi on spirituality and business and the Divine. I couldn’t listen to it.
I really, really hope she’s lying about having worked with terminally ill patients. The thought fills me with dread, those poor people. But I don’t believe it. She’s said she dropped out of high school, has no job skills and had to lie her way into a waitressing job. The only thing she’d be qualified to do in a hospice setting would be housekeeping or delivering trays. That hardly qualifies as “working with patients” as she claims.
Again PZ has no problem with all of his “activist atheism” trashing Anthony Navarro and lauding Naomi, despite her connection to the Divine and her Spirit Guides. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, right PZ? Oh wait…Emerson was a Transcendentalist, that makes him tainted.
WINNER!! ::   +13
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 10:24 am

Alley-Cat said:
Just popped over to the Meyers Cult site. In the Compulsive obsessive Kook Post they’re trying to impress each other with their knowledge of which punctuation book is best.
Another amusing book on punctuation: The Well-Tempered Sentence: A punctuation handbook for the innocent, the eager, and the doomed, by Karen Elizabeth Gordon (who might disagree with my punctuation of the subtitle).
Apparently the misuse of punctuation over there is considered to be almost as bad as being a Christian.
So I tried to liven up the conversation a bit. Doubt if it will work though
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
@Alley-Cat, About the punctuation…I want to wonder what is it abuot them where they can’t want to engage in some more deconstructive behavior?
  +4
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 11:22 am

hrmmm said:
It’s okay, PZ-philes. I had a hard time understanding what was going on here, too, when I first found this site.
Reading is a hell of a drug.
WINNER!! ::   +16
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 11:46 am

Jeffrey said:
The ‘Droid rules and schools the fools and the tools!
  +6
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 1:26 pm

Unaspammer said:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.


Sounds like they really got a handle on this situation. Why bother KNOWING when you can spend your time SAYING instead. Saying is so much easier than knowing … and it leaves more time for donuts.
On that topic, I just love how you’ve now written two long-winded blog posts SAYING stuff about what a dick PZ is being to you, and meanwhile he’s posted exactly one paragraph about you. Have you looked in a mirror lately?
LOSER!! ::   -13
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:57 pm
@Unaspammer,
He’s probably off somewhere writing that E-book/DVD course he’s about to sell you. Or maybe he’s doing a speaking engagement in a pub somewhere.
Like he style though.. He comes on, writes 20 lines and chucks you a morsel to get you guys into a feeding frenzy and then fucks off.
There then follows 90 something comments by his disciples about “sharpening their teeth” having their “razor whet” ready, “chew toys”, god fearing hordes, the coming shit storm etc. and then nothing happens.
You guys get bored with discussing the best punctuation book, and correcting each others posts, come over here, try to game the voting system, (it normally works when you’ve done it on other occasions but not here), and then you get the shit kicked out of you, in a virtual sense or course.
You then go running back to fartyculia and cry about how unfair it all was…
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]

Lanna Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 3:23 am
@Alley-Cat,
The E-book seems more and more likely. Like Rowse and Vaynerchuk before him, I think he’s poised to write the “and you can too” course on successful blogging. With National Geographic acquiring ScienceBlogs, he could spin himself as the Arianna Huffington of science, but, judging by the comments left by his supporters, he’s really more like Miss Ittybiz than Miss HuffPost.
On October 5, crassj wrote, “scienceblogs piggybacks off the pharyngula brand – not the other way around. that’s why PZ has graciously agreed to continue writing some posts for SB as it transitions to a new owner.” How nice. That’s exactly what Miss Ittybiz offered Dave in the Spider Shit Storm chat log.
Miss Ittybiz would surely agree with pelamun’s October 5 explanation that, “A blog owner is by definition the most important person on a blog.”
On October 6, pelamun wrote, “Also what PZ Myers advocates is technically not manipulating, as calling a poll to the attention of the visitors of a high-traffic website such as pharyngula is not manipulation.” PZ has no compunction about “not”-manipulating his readers into “not”-manipulating others. This will be good for his affiliate program.
Notice how pelamun snuck “high-traffic” into there. In the GasBag Bigotry post, SD set out a number of baits (“[A] blog he called Pharyngula after one of the lesser known Popes” was my fave.), but dismissing the claimed pageviews got more bites than I expected. On October 4, Bob from Texas said PZ gets “170,000 hits a day,” and the next day research? said it’s “150K pageviews” a day. On October 9, unbound wrote, “100,000 page views per day isn’t all that much, and is about what you would expect for an Alexa rating of 38,000 to 39,000.” (Those arguments were all effectively counter-argued by SD regulars in the original threads, BTW.) Why would PZ’s camp care unless he needs those stats to position himself as an expert?
Ah, yes, the expertise. According to Bor – the first man’s October 5 comment, PZ’s published papers have been referenced by other scientists at a rate above average. On October 9, John Morales let us know PZ “has an asteroid named after him” and received the “Humanist of the Year award in 2009, and the International Humanist Award in 2011.”
I’m anxiously awaiting PZ’s guest article on Copyblogger. I’m guessing it will be titled “The Cephalopod Guide to Squirting Ink.”
  0
[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 4:59 am
@Lanna,
“In developmental biology, the pharyngula is a stage in embryonic development.”
So I think you’re right about Myers’ ambitions in marketing himself to the rabid atheist crowd as the owner of a prime piece of internet real estate–which could explain his strange bed-fellowing with Donefor and her circle jerk of pro-bloggers and akashic record chanellers.
He already has the requisite cult following prepared to defend his every idiocy, all that remains is to ‘monetise’.
He is already in the seminar business, collecting 300 followers to visit and jeer at the creationists and their museum. I wonder what the mark-up was for PZ when he got a discount on the block booking entrance fee?
It’ll be ‘Scientific Warrior’ sweat tents next, for the really committed atheists.
  0
[Reply]

Stoic Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 5:03 am
Duh, Stoic, try to remember to fill in the field next time.
  0
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 1:53 pm

Unaspammer said:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
As for the rant about commenters, as if PZ controls them, maybe you should look at your own comment section before complaining about the speck in somebody else’s eye. This is from the first comment in the other thread:
I noticed it took two people to hoist that fat ass onto the dinosaur, maybe P.Z.’s ancestor’s riding them caused extinction…he’s a load, Fred Flintstone looks svelte compared to P.Z. It’s such a lovely thing for him to have done, gone to this museum, abused the trust of the people there and then to write scathingly about their beliefs. Whatever you think of their beliefs they did not invite the scorn of this wide-assed loser.
I thought making fun of Dr. Myers’ colleagues was especially classy:
Here’s a quote from an academic colleague:
“The most exciting thing about biology is that it does stuff! —Van Gooch
professor of biology
And accompanying that quote is a photo of Van Gooch holding a rather large fish. It sounds like University of Minnesota Morris is the Harvard of the Gopher State. (or the North Star state as they now prefer to be called)
I’ll bet The Van Gooch is awesome … I want him to teacher me something right now.
Maybe he oversees the fermentation lab.
That’s just the top of the barrel. I could keep going and spend a lot of time on this as you did, but I hope you get the picture.
LOSER!! ::   -9
[Reply]

_cartman_ Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 2:55 pm
@Unaspammer,
I thought making fun of Dr. Myers’ colleagues was especially classy:
I did not see any direct indication that the people claimed to be “making fun” of Dr. Meyers colleagues. You are interpreting the data based on your interpretations of those statements, and not the statements themselves.
[[ie: if you see sincerity, it's because in a similar situation you would be sincere. If you see sarcasm, it's because in a similar situation you would be sarcastic. I believe it's referred to as projection. When you take a comment and define it by "projecting" your emotions into it]].
We spoke about your interpretation of what constitutes harassment yesterday, based on the exact same thing. Do you recall that? How does that make you feel?
_cartman_ CoD
WINNER!! ::   +15
[Reply]

Unaspammer Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@_cartman_,
I did not see any direct indication that the people claimed to be “making fun” of Dr. Meyers colleagues. You are interpreting the data based on your interpretations of those statements, and not the statements themselves.
What is your interpretation of those statements then?
We spoke about your interpretation of what constitutes harassment yesterday, based on the exact same thing. Do you recall that? How does that make you feel?
No, you spoke about it. I didn’t find it worth a response. But considering your obsession with projection, I can see how you would make that mistake.
LOSER!! ::   -10
[Reply]

_cartman_ Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 3:43 pm
@Unaspammer,
What is your interpretation of those statements then?
Sorry, I don’t make assumptions. Assumptions enter the arena of beliefs.
No, you spoke about it
I did not state you responded, I stated we spoke about it. You made a point, I countered.
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

Unaspammer Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@_cartman_,
Sorry, I don’t make assumptions. Assumptions enter the arena of beliefs.
Everybody makes assumptions. Most of them are reasonably well-founded. You assume that the food you eat is not poisoned. You assume that the sun will come up tomorrow, and so you set your alarm clock. You assume that others may appreciate the avatar you have selected for yourself, and will not find it offensive. You assume that if you jump off a bridge, you will die, or at least be severely wounded. Without assumptions, we could not function.
Not wanting to make assumptions is reasonable when the outcome is in significant doubt, and there is a lot riding on not being wrong. Since you have not offered any believable alternative interpretation to the comments, the former is not at issue. And for something so insignificant as the interpretation of a handful of comments on a blog, the latter is not either.
So I have to interpret your statement as “I don’t want to express an actual opinion because I’m afraid of being wrong.” Sorry, that doesn’t score any points with me.
I did not state you responded, I stated we spoke about it. You made a point, I countered.
“We spoke about” implies that we spoke to each other. I did not speak to you. Therefore “we” did not speak.
LOSER!! ::   -11
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
@Unaspammer ::
Nobody is trying to “score points” with you d-bag :: you’re proving yourself ignorant … and we are laughing at you. This blog is very complex :: and it has has approx 3 textbooks full information and story. You don’t have to read it … but talking about it before you have … while pretending to be some kind of “thinker” … is totally hilarious.

_cartman_ Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
@Unaspammer,
Everybody makes assumptions.
I stated….
Assumptions enter the arena of beliefs.
you stated….
You assume that the food you eat is not poisoned.
That’s a belief. Until someone eats it, in which case it is a fact, or a bad case of E-coli.
I thought I said belief. Oh yes I did, and you validated it for me. Thanks.
All assumptions are beliefs until they are proven facts.
“We spoke about” implies that we spoke to each other. I did not speak to you. Therefore “we” did not speak.
Implies?? We are passed implies since I informed you…
I did not state you responded, I stated we spoke about it. You made a point, I countered.
Regardless. I will address “implies”.
You spoke about your “reasoning”. I spoke about your “reasoning”. Ergo, “we spoke about” your “reasoning”.
“We spoke” does not imply interaction.
eg; You speak about your “reasoning” in a lecture, I speak about your “reasoning” in a lecture…ergo, I can make the statement, “We spoke about your reasoning”
No interaction is required. You are introducing your own “parameters”, in an attempt to make your point.
[[ie: see assumption above]]
If I stated “we had a discussion”, a discussion would necessitate interaction, since it is [[by definition]] a debate. If I stated “we debated”, a debate requires interaction.
Well that was fun. Thank you.
WINNER!! ::   +11

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
@Unaspammer ::
Hey SpecialSauce :: you just quoted me guessing that The Van Gooch was awesome … that was a genuine sentiment. He hasn’t been attacked here :: he’s been mentioned so that he’ll notice. Cause I’m gonna make sure that everybody PZ doesn’t want to see his massive hate based fuck up :: sees his massive hate based fuck up.
That’s how I roll …
[Reply]

Unaspammer Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@SD,
PZ’s colleagues already receive large quantities of hate-mail about him. They would probably prefer that you not add to it.
LOSER!! ::   -12
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
@Unaspammer ::
There’s a big difference between hate mail and my thing … and I’m sure they’d prefer I didn’t. They can fire hate filled bigot PZ Myers :: and then I won’t … otherwise I’m mos def gonna.
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
@Unaspammer,
PZ’s colleagues already receive large quantities of hate-mail about him. They would probably prefer that you not add to it.
Strange that,
It is probably due to fact that while he is a “teddy bear stuffed with science” to the people who worship the ground he walks on.
He’s just a hate-filled, bigoted, rude, arrogant c**t to the rest of us.
Mind you that’s only my unscientifically proven opinion so it could be wrong, I guess…
WINNER!! ::   +13
[Reply]

Pee Wee Myers Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
@Unaspammer,
The proper use of the scripture you failed to use properly goes something like this: ” remove the log in your own eye before attempting to help remove the speck in your brothers”, and before you accuse me of being a religious zealot, I am not. I can’t cite the verse oe chapter and am too lazy to look it up, but I understand what the point of that particular verse is – don’t be a hypocrite! If you had any critical thinking skills whatsoever, and wasn’t just following your leader blindly, you’d figure out how retarded it is to try and silence other points of view by forcing your own down their throats. That is the height of hypocrisy.
Oh you can go and tell your leader I just gave him some link juice ;)
  +2
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 2:07 pm

Barbara said:
PZ Myers wrote: Demand Higher Standards for Home Schooling!
“Their “advantage” and “success” is completely artificial, the product of years of gutting standards so they can cultivate these little, self-satisfied, ignorant homeschooled kids in a hothouse of ignorance…and then they need to set up special colleges to maintain the illusion that they know anything.”
“At my department, we just got the requirements for state licensure of education students, and we’ve been given the task of making sure our course content delivers what future teachers will need. It’s not trivial getting licensed to teach; but any idiot can declare themselves to be a teacher for purposes of homeschooling, and apparently many idiots do.”
“A religious exemption? I call that the freedom to abuse children. This is shameful…if a district doesn’t have the resources to monitor the competence of homeschool teachers, they ought to simply refuse to allow the kids to be pulled out of school.”
“Some states say you need a high school diploma,” Slatter says. “But we really don’t have many problems getting people, shall we say, qualified.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/11/demand_higher_standards_for_ho.php
That’s a valid concern only I’d go further and say the whole concept of vouchers and charter schools should be abolished and this country’s public schools should be financed instead of these crappy alternatives. I understand PZ Myer’s concern that a parent without a high school diploma can homeschool their child.
Why does that sound so familiar?
Danielle LaPorte:- “What are you positively addicted to?”
Naomi:-”The other thing is education. I dropped out of high school to give birth to my oldest son and get married, and I never went back. Now I sit around scouring wikipedia and strange sections in the bookstore. I’m homeschooling my son and really trying to push my own boundaries with regard to learning. But learning something completely and utterly new? Exhilarating.”
**************************************************************************
PZ Myers has really been had by Naomi Dunford. This believer in “God or Whatever”, Spirit Guides, mediums, Akashic record readers, life coaches, homeschooling, homeopathy,etc. has this supposed rational scientist defending her. At the end of the day, PZ is just another victim of Naomi’s scamming. Only he still hasn’t seen behind the curtain.
WINNER!! ::   +20
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 4:37 pm
@Barbara ::
Ha! Epic!
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 2:07 pm

Alley-Cat said:
It’s fun over there with the Meyers disciples. I’ve been called a moron and an idiot more times than I can count. It must be true though, I mean they’re so edufukated and that.
Some guy even thinks I’d make a good cook (or was it kook?) Isn’t that great!
The Alex traffic stats are all fucked as well apparently, as, in the little comparison I posted Salty’s site ranks higher than them, so I suppose it must be fucked (them being all so clever an’ puctuationists an’ stuff). I mean Alexa.com counts for fuck all doesn’t it?
The E-Peen waving is hilarious.
Back to my edufukation.
  +6
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 6:27 pm
I am now a:
particularly pathetic popped poxy pustule apparently
I’m quite proud of that, I must have said something right at least.
  +5
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 3:45 pm

Glad I Was Broke said:
What is the deal with PZ wearing a Red Scarf over his arm? What is he, a part of the fucking Resistance (Terminator reference)
  +4
[Reply]

Babbs Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 11:06 am
@Glad I Was Broke, Or maybe if he wasn’t so resistant to fucking he wouldn’t be so fucking resistant.
  -1
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 4:42 pm

Module_One said:
This may have been mentioned already, but I have a question.
How did PZ and Naomi Dunford meet? What were the circumstances? I’m wondering if somehow he discovered her while searching the web for ways to start your own business online?
It’s a very odd pairing.
Unless Naomi was searching for the most obnoxious, hater of religion on the Internet, found Myers, and then fed him the poisoned version of Dave Navarro. I sense a whole bunch of hidden agendas swimming in murky waters. I’ve become familiar with ND’s style. But the partnership with Myers genuinely puzzles me.
  +2
[Reply]

Kevin Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:16 pm
@Module_One,
Maybe P.Z., like a squid to herring, was drawn to Naomi Dunford’s blog posts about “urinating under her kitchen table into a juice pitcher,” or “getting her child high.”
You know, stuff that might interest an associate professor of squid who has some idle time to internet surf and spew hate tweets.
  +3
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 7th, 2011 at 8:31 pm
@Kevin,
I think you may be on to something. PZ could have been idly perusing golden showers and struck real gold with a woman who writes lyrically about urine-filled juice pitchers.
In that same blog post she wrote about how on other occasions she had urinated into every cup in her kitchen but complained that none of them held enough. She IS very productive, you see.
Word to the wise: if you’re invited to the spider’s house DON’T drink the tea.
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 7:53 pm

Barbara said:
Naomi writes on unschooling:
“What kind of a word is “unschooling”, anyway?”
“According to http://www.unschooler.com, “Unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with doing school.’”
“Galileo, a definite unschooling proponent, said “You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him to find it within himself.” That’s the idea.”
***************************************************************************
Choke on that PZ, your favorite spider bitch is telling you things you never knew about Galileo. She’s probably channeling him with the help of one of her Spirit Guides. I’ll bet you never knew Galileo was “concerned with not doing school”.
Leap to her defense now, you shrill, shrieking, shriveled, shabby shrew. (that was for Alley-Cat)
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 12:02 am
@Barbara ::
Would love to hear Naomi’s unschooled peejar spirit guided thoughts on Principia Mathematica :: maybe she’s got an ebook on it or something that I could send over to PZ as peace offering.
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 8:25 am
@SD, Probably the unschooled peejar spirit guide lives within the realm that can finally get all round the limitations of the socratic method debated for much too long and make reading it fun & easy.
  +4
[Reply]

Lanna Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
@Jack,
I was concerned about the nice atheists over on that other blog just accepting Neigh-Neigh’s version of events as the squids’ honest truth, and I wanted to ask them about it. I didn’t want to seem like a concern troll, though, so I asked myself WWJD – what would Jack do? I thought Jack might seem a little bewildered and possibly employ some of that socratic method his grandmother taught him about. I did try that and one of the nice atheists took pity on my glacial slowness, but he didn’t seem very much at all bothered that their chief squid wrangler only offered up the channeled ramblings of the unschooled peejar spirit as proof of that e-message that Dave’s brother sent to Dave.
P.S. I really enjoyed your blog article of reengineering the alphabet, and I understood the new Venn diagram just fine.
  +5
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 8:31 pm
@Lanna, As another said it made me wonder about how he got the phd. Also, venn diagram was wrong AGAIN, but probably prof squid would still use it as accurate in his teaching/scoldings.
  +5
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 1:48 am
@Lanna, your questions got answered, did they not? ;)
  0
[Reply]

Lanna Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 12:08 am
@John Morales,
Yes, they did. Welcome to Salty Droid, and may I say I like your avatar because it reminds me of my other favorite fake robot – Geoff Peterson on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson.
  0

mirele Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 8:57 am
@Barbara,
Of course, this all goes to show that PZ didn’t do his homework before throwing his “support” to Dave and Naomi. No, he saw Dave’s brother express concern for Dave in religious terms, and that was totally unacceptable to PZ, so he went off on it. Now he’s backed in a corner and he’s linked up to not only scamarific Internet “marketing,” but also beliefs he’s denounced as false in the past. This is what happens when you don’t do your homework. How this guy got a Ph.D is beyond me.
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 12:46 pm
@Barbara,
LOL thanks.
  +2
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 8:18 pm

MazeMan said:
The new atheists (insert whomever you choose – Dawkins, Harris and the rest) often make the mistake of attacking the character of the person making the argument rather than taking on the merits of the argument itself. You only have to read the snippets of Meyer’s reader SD posted.
None of them addressed the argument that PZ Meyers wrongly characterized the situation with Anthony Navarro. Instead, they spend their time criticizing those on the opposing side.
PZ Meyers said:
“And I find the thought of anyone trying to tell us all that there is a certain range of acceptable behavior for skeptics or atheists or whatever rather ridiculous, especially when the whole raison d’etre of such people is to criticize the comfortable, and doubly ridiculous when you can’t even concretely define what that behavior is.”
PZ makes a self-refuting statement. PZ, are you saying you can concretely define what is NOT concretely definable behavior?? Because if you can, then the behavior is concrete because it can be defined. If you can’t, then how can your statement be true?
  +4
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 12:49 pm
@MazeMan,
Of all of the breathtakingly obnoxious remarks from Myers’ mouth the one that really shocked me was when he was attacking what he calls “dictionary atheists”, (people who are atheists because they do not believe in any God), and he said that when you do atheism right…and I stopped reading in shock. “Do atheism right..?” PZ really does believe he’s the Grand Vizier of atheism, oops,I mean Atheism.
I also realized reading his blog with his slavering adherents reminded me of another unpleasant destination in cyberworld, Conservatives4Palin, or the sea of pee as it’s sometimes called. The leader speaks, PZ or Palin, and the choir responds. No dissent is tolerated.
Then I found this:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithhammers/2011/02/13/pz-myers-shouldnt-sound-like-sarah-palin/
“What bugs me about this is that he casts the issue as an either/or between listening to criticism on the one hand and standing up for what he believes is true on the other. The false equivalence here is that to actually consider whether he was wrong would be a matter of apologizing to an offended group instead of being truthful. So, of course, PZ the non-accommodationist extraordinaire chooses bravely to fight for truth rather than mollycoddle those whose delicate feelings will be all upset by such forthrightness.”
“Like Sarah Palin herself, he really does pitch himself as an embattled truth-teller whose enemies never make an argument genuinely worth taking seriously. The impression he likes to give is that everyone else just wants him to be quiet just because they can’t handle the truth.”
And, keep in mind, this was from one of PZ’s admirers. I wonder if he is now persona non grata.
  +5
[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
@Barbara,
“… The impression he likes to give is that everyone else just wants him to be quiet just because they can’t handle the truth.”
I bet this they is the same they that Kevin Trudeau exposes for hiding the cures of diseases from us.
  +3
[Reply]
# 7 October 2011 at 9:49 pm

Gv said:
  +1
[Reply]
# 8 October 2011 at 6:33 am

Barbara said:
PZ Myers’ work isn’t all bad, he’s best when he sticks to subjects closest to his heart and on which he’s a true authority… and I don’t mean squids.
The man DOES know his Saturday morning cartoons. He wrote rather convincingly on The Corruption of Scooby Doo.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/06/the_corruption_of_scooby_doo.php
  +4
[Reply]

Zack Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
@Barbara, I’m not sure I’d give partial credit to P.Z. Myers. After all, he’s perfectly willing to tell a partial story, and that’s more than a partial problem.
  +3
[Reply]

Wyrd Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 1:18 am
@Barbara,
Sarcasm and satire do not always translate well. I can’t be sure if I’m reading your post correctly, but I am thinking that the gist is: “well he’s ok so long as he’s just rambling about Scooby Doo.”
I’d like to go on what will seem like a 167.5 degree tangent from your post. (I do stuff like that sometimes.)
In the article you reference,
P.Z. Myers writes
I’m not going to be quite as down on the supernatural in fiction as Mooney is — I do like a good cheesy horror flick now and then
Now my question to P.Z. Myers would be: P.Z., here you are expressing something that looks like a tolerant position. I.e., even though you are 100% certain that the supernatural doesn’t exist, you are ok with the supernatural being portrayed in TV shows. Even though such a portrayal might, over time, lead to an increase in belief in the supernatural in the general viewing public. If you’re capable of seeing the middle ground here, then why are you not capable when it comes to religion? Why do you seem to believe that all religious persons are worthy of such massive scorn and derision? To put it bluntly: What religion-related event fucked you up so badly when you were a kid that you feel a need to go to verbal jihad on all religion?
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
  +4
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 1:12 am
@Wyrd ::
But he’s not really expressing a tolerant position … cause here’s the key section of that quote about horror movies …
“I do like …”
He has tolerance for exactly one person’s positions.
[Reply]
# 8 October 2011 at 1:27 pm

Alley-Cat said:
Well as he and his disciples are considered to be something of a cartoon character (and an embarrassment) in the skeptic/atheist world, it’s pretty apt that he should know know something about them.
A cartoon script written by the followers of Phartyculo (if you know Italian, you’ll see what I did there), would be all about spelling and punctuation.
And possibly about why you shouldn’t try to chat up women in elevators…. ;) (but that’s another story).
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
@Alley-Cat,
And a hilarious one at that. Personally, I think it all depends on who is doing the chatting. If he’s wearing a filthy raincoat and mumbling to himself…well, I wouldn’t board the elevator in the first place. But a reasonably decent looking fellow with a good line of chat, where’s the harm in that?
  +4
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 8th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
@Alley-Cat,
There’s a funny cartoon here:
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2011/07/27/girls/
After the elevator incident some women did not entirely agree with the woman at the center of this mini-storm. PZ then took it upon himself to lecture women on how to be proper feminists. We’ve come a long way, baby…as the cigarette ads say.
  +6
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 3:30 am
@Barbara,
LOL thanks for that.
The whole so called elevator-gate scandal is just another example of how these people have have got their heads stuck up their own self important arses.
Apparently very politely asking a woman to come back to your place for coffee now means you are sexually objectifying her (or something).
Maybe these people need to get out more.
  +4
[Reply]
# 8 October 2011 at 2:56 pm

Barbara said:
I think the actual reason PZ aligned himself with the Spider Bitch is because of her phony death threats claim. After PZ so boldly and bravely desecrated a Communion host he received an email that he considerd a death threat. It gave Myers until the first of the month to resign from his position at the University. “You have two choices,” the e-mail read. “You can quit your job for the good of the children. Or you can get your brains beat in.”
Unlike Naomi, PZ Myers promptly published the IP address and email address of the sender. It seemingly came from Melanie Kroll, an employee of 1-800 Flowers. She was bewildered and immediately sent him an apology and a promise to look further into the incident.
It turned out her husband had used her computer with neither her knowledge or her consent. She was fired from her job, despite her apologies to Myers and her lack of participation in sending the email.
So why doesn’t Dunford follow his example and publish details on which one of us, (because she claimed it was a Droid “follower”), sent the supposed death threats?
Come on, Naomi, publish or perish. (not to be construed as a threat, by the way, as a self-described intellectual Naomi will understand the reference to academia)
WINNER!! ::   +11
[Reply]
# 8 October 2011 at 3:02 pm

John Morales said:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Heh.
I came to take a look; much as I expected.
Have any of you noted that PZ Myers was the recipient of the Humanist of the Year award in 2009, and the International Humanist Award in 2011?
(Not as unacceptable to everyone as to you, apparently)
LOSER!! ::   -8
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 1:41 am
@John Morales, So you came unto us to defend via “appeal to authority”?
  +4
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 1:52 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Jack, nope.
LOSER!! ::   -5
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 5:07 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hm, interesting.
[Jack] @John Morales, So you came unto us to defend via “appeal to authority”?
[me] @Jack, nope.
I am bemused that this simple response to a yay or nay question was downrated.
(A simple answer to a simple question)
LOSER!! ::   -6
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 12:25 am
@John Morales ::
Your simple answer got down voted because it was incorrect. It only takes one word to be wrong.
Is your mommy prettier than my mommy too?
Can PZ hold his breath underwater for longer than I can?
Just in case you wanted to answer any more questions that you weren’t really being asked.
The post about Anthony is disaster of bigotry and ignorance and slop. As long as it stays up … you can bet that the next group of fools that votes PZ Myers anything other than Douche of the Year … will be hearing from me.
Most of the people I try to stop have nothing to lose :: are not constrained by any rules or laws … and have no reputations to maintain. It makes things quite challenging … but there’s still a heap of big victories here. PZM is in a considerably more vulnerable position … he should consider removing his puny little stick from the lion’s den. Unlike Aslan :: I’m a merciless and mean lion.
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 1:49 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@SD,

[1]Your simple answer got down voted because it was incorrect. It only takes one word to be wrong.
[2] Is your mommy prettier than my mommy too?
[3] Can PZ hold his breath underwater for longer than I can?
[4] Just in case you wanted to answer any more questions that you weren’t really being asked.
[5] The post about Anthony is disaster of bigotry and ignorance and slop. As long as it stays up … you can bet that the next group of fools that votes PZ Myers anything other than Douche of the Year … will be hearing from me.
[6] Most of the people I try to stop have nothing to lose :: are not constrained by any rules or laws … and have no reputations to maintain. It makes things quite challenging … but there’s still a heap of big victories here. PZM is in a considerably more vulnerable position … he should consider removing his puny little stick from the lion’s den. Unlike Aslan :: I’m a merciless and mean lion.
1. My original comment certainly was not an appeal in any sense, since it was but a truthful statement of fact, nor could it have been an argument (fallacious or otherwise) for the same reason.
I cannot see what justifiable basis you or others have for considering my response about my own motive to be “wrong”.
2. I lack sufficient information upon which to make such a value judgement; you can remedy this by posting a picture of your mommy.
3. I likewise lack sufficient information upon which to make such a determination.
4. You are factually incorrect, I directly answered the question posed to me.
5. Are you suggesting that this is the basis upon which my response was down-voted?
(If so, the implications are less than flattering to those who did so)
6. Of what relevance is this to the down-voting of my simple negative?
LOSER!! ::   -7

SD Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 2:06 am
@John Morales ::
Guess what fuckhead? This isn’t a 7th grade debate club competition … this is deadly serious. The situation with the Navarros still hangs in the balance … and you pricks continue to totally ignore that fact.
If that’s the best you can do … then go away … go back to your t-shirt club and parse semantics with the other illiterates. I much prefer my normal trolls … for whom I can at least muster compassion and pity.

Anonymous Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 3:07 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@SD, “parse semantics with the other illiterates”?
I am amused.
I much prefer my normal trolls … for whom I can at least muster compassion and pity.
Your apprehension of what constitutes trolling is no less impressive than your conceit that illiterates “parse semantics” (the former relates to syntax, the latter to meaning).
(And, of course, one can only feel compassion and pity for one’s lessers)
–
Nonetheless, your plea is unambiguous, and I am not lacking in magnanimity — hence, I depart forthwith.
LOSER!! ::   -6

SD Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 3:16 am
@John Morales ::
Thanks for making no points while you were here t-shirt club.
Parse semantics wasn’t exactly right :: but I thought I’d leave it in there so you could orgasm on your way out.

Jack Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 6:56 pm
@SD, re: parsing debate is I think he probably forgot you are a robot and discusion-ideas about integrated syntactic and semantic parsing with-in computational linguistics is the important one for robots or maybe even the fake robot.
  +1

Wyrd Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 2:22 am
@John Morales,
I came to take a look; much as I expected.
It’s funny how first impressions can be so very, very misleading. Particularly when one is accidentally practicing confirmation bias. You came here expecting to see a bunch of angry, crazy folk screeching against the evils of PZ. Now you believe you saw exactly that. hmmm…
Have any of you noted that PZ Myers was the recipient of the Humanist of the Year award in 2009, and the International Humanist Award in 2011?
Well, thank you for rectifying the record in that regard. But could you provide a link? I did a quick google. I found this. The page says the award “recognize[s] a person of national or international reputation who, through the application of humanist values, has made a significant contribution to the improvement of the human condition.”
A couple points:
While the award may go to recognize someone of international reputation, the organization in question is actually known as “The American Humanist Association”.
The page shows PZ as receiving in 2009 and Bill Nye recipient in 2010. It doesn’t show 2011, but perhaps they just haven’t got round to updating it yet
And to that whole thing, I still feel inclined to say ‘big whoop’. I would like to know what PZ has done that has “made a significant contribution to the improvement of the human condition”.
IMHO, the AHA oughta get a clue. I’d nominate @SD for the award based on his work on this site. @SD’s mission of going after online internet scammers that ruin peoples’ lives and occasionally get people killed seems a lot more useful to society than simply being a dick to religious people.
I don’t know if @SD would go for it though. I mean even he got the award, all that’d happen is he’d wind up on a list on a page that isn’t even up to date and that has PZ Myers’ name on it. Not really a win all in all.
(Not as unacceptable to everyone as to you, apparently)
Actually I don’t find P.Z. Myers unacceptable. When he’s talking about science-y things, he seems ok to me. Heck, he’s even kind of cool.
His attitude on religion goes way too far though. That kind of unnecessary dick-headed-ness is counter-productive to any and all of the freethought, skeptic, and/or atheist movements.
Worse even, in this particular case, PZ’s very large bias against all religion and all religious people caused him to fall for a liar’s story hook, line, and sinker.
As a result of PZ’s rash and careless action, a person who is (according to @SD) not a crazy fundamentalist is going to have to suffer through even more scorn and ridicule from clueless people like you (might be). That is to say: people that blindly follow their cult leader PZ Myers.
I think it should be ok to poke fun at religion in general. There are a lot of things about specific religions that are silly, outdated, and/or dangerous. There really is a difference though between doing that and simply yelling: “You’re wrong! You’re wrong and you’re stupid!” over and over again. The first is satire, the second is bigotry.
I’ll finish with this really cool quote from Chris Hitchins that another commenter recently pulled up:
“When I go to the mosque, I take off my shoes. When I go to the synagogue, I cover my head…Religious faith is, precisely because we are still-evolving creatures, ineradicable. It will never die out, or at least not until we get over our fear of death, and of the dark, and of the unknown, and of each other. For this reason, I would not prohibit it even if I thought I could.”
The reality is: There’s a very, very large number of people on this planet that believe in god (or gods–or something ineffable that’s spiritual–or reincarnation, etc, etc). Framing things as Us vs. Them when there’s such a very small number of Us’s is incredibly foolhardy. Especially since we can’t really expect to get out of it via deus ex machina.
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 2:50 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Wyrd,

You came here expecting to see a bunch of angry, crazy folk screeching against the evils of PZ. Now you believe you saw exactly that.
Whence this inference?
How would you characterise the OP?
(Not exactly an encomium, is it? ;) )
Well, thank you for rectifying the record in that regard. But could you provide a link?
I already did — click on his name in my comment; it’s a hyperlink to the Wikipedia entry on him.
While the award may go to recognize someone of international reputation, the organization in question is actually known as “The American Humanist Association”.
Indeed. But the international award was given by International Humanist and Ethical Union.
And to that whole thing, I still feel inclined to say ‘big whoop’. I would like to know what PZ has done that has “made a significant contribution to the improvement of the human condition”.
For the latter, you might wish to start with the link I’ve helpfully provided; for the former, I merely stated it as a fact (admittedly, with an observation which is entailed via said fact).
His attitude on religion goes way too far though. That kind of unnecessary dick-headed-ness is counter-productive to any and all of the freethought, skeptic, and/or atheist movements.
Worse even, in this particular case, PZ’s very large bias against all religion and all religious people caused him to fall for a liar’s story hook, line, and sinker.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, as those organisations are to theirs.
I further note he has also won other honors (he has an asteroid named after him, for example), so your opinion clearly is disputable.
I’ll finish with this really cool quote from Chris Hitchins that another commenter recently pulled up:
This may surprise you, but I have encountered that quotation before.
(It’s Christopher Hitchens, by the way)
Framing things as Us vs. Them when there’s such a very small number of Us’s is incredibly foolhardy.
Perhaps. Others think it’s courageous.
LOSER!! ::   -13
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 3:54 am
@John Morales,
Have any of you noted that PZ Myers was the recipient of the Humanist of the Year award in 2009, and the International Humanist Award in 2011?
So what?
I further note he has also won other honors (he has an asteroid named after him, for example), so your opinion clearly is disputable.
So one of your fellow sycophants named an asteroid after his/her great leader? So?
He’s still a bigoted prick.
  +6
[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:07 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Alley-Cat,

So what?
So, it’s truthful information about the regard in which others hold him.
(Admittedly, it seems… um, incongruous, given the OP here)
So one of your fellow sycophants named an asteroid after his/her great leader? So?
Sycophant, I? Heh.
I grant that David Healy being a PZ sycophant is not out of the question — but I very much doubt he is.
He’s still a bigoted prick.
In your not-so-humble opinion, of course.
(I have shown others don’t share it)
LOSER!! ::   -10
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:17 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
[clarification]
Ack, pardon my carelessness.
As I hope my gravatar evinces, though it reads “Anonymous”, I was the author of the previous comment.
(I should pay more attention)
LOSER!! ::   -8

Shorty Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:32 am
@, I wasn’t aware that it needed to be shown that PZ sycophants existed. It seemed pretty clear to me from the original post’s reference to t-shirt clubs that there are those out there unaware of the Dino-rider’s douchiness. Why don’t you work on proving a point actually in dispute, like whether or not PZ did thoroughly research his Navarro post or just knee-jerked it.
  +4

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:42 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Shorty,

@, [1] I wasn’t aware that it needed to be shown that PZ sycophants existed. [2] It seemed pretty clear to me from the original post’s reference to t-shirt clubs that there are those out there unaware of the Dino-rider’s douchiness. [3] Why don’t you work on proving a point actually in dispute, like whether or not PZ did thoroughly research his Navarro post or just knee-jerked it.
1. I’m not aware of it either; who here claimed “that it needed to be shown that PZ sycophants existed”?
2. Yes, but was the information I provided utterly irrelevant to how he is perceived by prominent organisations?
(I adduced it de novo, here)
3. Mainly, because so far, there hasn’t been one.
As it is, I’m but responding to people’s comments; as I noted above, I merely stated it as a fact (admittedly, with an observation which is entailed via said fact).
(You’d rather I did not respond?)
LOSER!! ::   -8

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:45 am
@John Morales,
Your cult leader has also made some serious errors of judgement lately.
In “your” world he’s made a complete fool of himself and demonstrated to many skeptics/atheists just what kind of attention seeking whore he really is by jumping on the “elevator-guy scandal” bandwagon.
In his latest little “look at me! look at me!” escapade, he manages to associate his brand name with an internet scam artist who hawks products like “soul-reading” (only $995 while stocks last).
I really hope he isn’t paying her for advice or involved in some kind of quid pro quo scheme to launch some kind of product (David Navarro’s failed IM business). Now that would be hilarious.
His other error of judgement was to piss off SD, the not so fake robot.
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:55 am
@John Morales,
In your not-so-humble opinion, of course.
(I have shown others don’t share it)
However, there are huge number of skeptics and atheists out there that do share my not-so-humble opinion.
Aren’t there John?
  +5
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:59 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Alley-Cat,

However, there are huge number of skeptics and atheists out there that do share my not-so-humble opinion.
Aren’t there John?
I doubt that, but you can surely show me wrong.
LOSER!! ::   -8

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 4:56 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Alley-Cat,

Your cult leader has also made some serious errors of judgement lately.
He’s not my cult leader, nor am I cultist.
(But your opinion is duly noted)
In “your” world he’s made a complete fool of himself and demonstrated to many skeptics/atheists just what kind of attention seeking whore he really is by jumping on the “elevator-guy scandal” bandwagon.
(I note in passing that your employment of scare quotes is rather idiosyncratic)
Upon what basis do you impute such opinions to me?
His other error of judgement was to piss off SD, the not so fake robot.
How so, and do you care to indicate what the consequences of this purported error have been (or shall be)?
LOSER!! ::   -4
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 7:56 am
@John Morales,
“Your” world – intended as the scientific/skeptic/humanist world. Not intended to scare anybody. A bit paranoid aren’t we?
  +3

_cartman_ Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 8:27 am
@John Morales,
I came to take a look; much as I expected.
Are you usually in the habit of “thinking” out loud?
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
@_cartman_, I think what it means probably is that he was expecting to come take a look and then he did take a look just like he was expecting to do.
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]

SD Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 11:41 pm
@_cartman_ ::
I think @Jack must me right :: because a fake robot would be a very strange thing to expect.
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 12:37 am

Shorty said:
@,
1. How odd you were not aware of what you were doing. Did my use of the term sycophant confuse you? Let me simplify. Your post is summarized by “I have shown others don’t share it.” It being the opinion that PZ is a prick. No duh. No need to prove the obvious. I think everyone here is well aware some people don’t share SD’s opinion of PZ.
2. Not utterly, but close to it. Do you think anyone gives a fig about some lame award that doesn’t even make the AP newswire? Even if he was awarded the Nobel, it still wouldn’t negate the wrongness of his Navarro post.
3. Again you fail to see. The dispute is at the center of SD’s first post regarding PZ. But please, let’s not get bogged down in pointless debate about where or when it was brought up. The real argument here is does PZ know enough about the Navarro situation to comment intelligently or did he go off half-cocked? That is the true crux of this controversy.
  +5
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 5:49 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Shorty,

1. [a] How odd you were not aware of what you were doing. [b] Did my use of the term sycophant confuse you? [c] Let me simplify. Your post is summarized by “I have shown others don’t share it.” It being the opinion that PZ is a prick. No duh. No need to prove the obvious. [d] I think everyone here is well aware some people don’t share SD’s opinion of PZ.
a. Whatever makes you think I was unaware of what I was doing?
b. No.
c. Not an unfair characterisation.
No need, but given that the OP was unremittingly negative towards PZ, I felt it helpful to note certain facts. It was my pleasure to be informative (to the casual reader, at least).
d. Now they have evidence that prominent humanist organisations, not just individuals, likewise don’t share that opinion; indeed, quite the contrary.
2. [a] Not utterly, but close to it. Do you think anyone gives a fig about some lame award that doesn’t even make the AP newswire? [b] Even if he was awarded the Nobel, it still wouldn’t negate the wrongness of his Navarro post.
a. Why, yes, the evidence is clear on that point.
b. Actually, that is alleged wrongness, and has got nothing to do with anything I’ve written, has it?
3. [a] Again you fail to see. [b] The dispute is at the center of SD’s first post regarding PZ. But please, let’s not get bogged down in pointless debate about where or when it was brought up. [c] The real argument here is does PZ know enough about the Navarro situation to comment intelligently or did he go off half-cocked? That is the true crux of this controversy.
a. What is it that I supposedly fail to see?)
b. What does that have anything to do with what I’ve written?
c. For the third time: I’m but responding to people’s comments; as I noted above, I merely stated a fact (admittedly, with an observation which is entailed via said fact) — a fact that’s not in contention.
(A fact you grant was not utterly irrelevant — i.e. was somewhat relevant)
LOSER!! ::   -8
[Reply]

Shorty Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 6:06 am
@John Morales, you make too much of the relevance of PZ’s awards. I’d more impressed with a few Boy Scout badges. For the second time, stop parsing to make extraneous points and address the real issue in SD and others’ comments, i.e. PZ failed to do due diligence before writing his Navarro post and reacted to half truths from a scammer.
  +4
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Shorty, no, I didn’t.
This is what I made of it:

(Not as unacceptable to everyone as to you, apparently)
(Indeed, I could hardly have made any less of it than a brief parenthetical observation)
LOSER!! ::   -8
[Reply]

Shorty Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 3:26 pm
@John Morales, another extraneous point? Why do you continue to avoid addressing the main argument here: PZ Myers is a hack who wrote an inaccurate rant about Anthony Navarro based on Naomi Dunford’s fake cries of wolf? Oh, maybe it’s because PZ’s position is indefensible. Well, carry on with your dancing around the subject then if that’s all you’ve got.
  +4
[Reply]

Shorty Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 6:06 am
@John Morales, you make too much of the relevance of PZ’s awards. I’d more impressed with a few Boy Scout badges. For the second time, stop parsing to make extraneous points and address the real issue in SD and others’ comments, i.e. PZ failed to do due diligence before writing his Navarro post and reacted to half truths from a scammer.
  +2
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 5:32 am

Alley-Cat said:
@John Morales,
I doubt that, but you can surely show me wrong.
A science blog that does actually contain some science (and some other stuff)
They really do not like you guys over there do they?
There are several more threads there about Myers and Phartyculo. By the way what does MRA mean?
Posted by Barbara earlier in this thread:
A nice little cartoon for you
An interesting elevator-gate article with some even more interesting comments
There are lots more out there John. Want me to post some more? We could wait for our Barbara, she’s our Ace shit-digger-upper. I’m sure she’s got plenty on file.
Just in case you missed the reference in my early comment, go here to learn about the kind of shit (my humble opinion of course) Myers has associated himself with:
Akashic Record Reading
Good innit?
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]

Wyrd Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 10:57 am
@Alley-Cat,
Wow that #ElevatorGate thing is a damn mess. Seems like a good thing to not be stuck in the middle of.
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
  +4
[Reply]

Jack Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 11:08 am
@Alley-Cat, Probably he might want you to go about evincing more evincingly.
  +2
[Reply]

sandiseattle Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
@Alley-Cat,
MRA
legitimate meaning: Mens Rights Advocates
Pharyngula meaning: Most Righteous Assholes
  0
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 4:19 am
@sandiseattle,
Thanks very much for that.
  0
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 7:44 am

Marky Mark and the Marketing Bunch said:
I lump PZ Meyers and his following into the “needs to feel superior or one-up the Jonses” buyer category. The need to feel superior, you see, is one of a handful of powerful psychological motivators (whether you believe in it or not).
I shall now relentlessly market not-god seminars, a dealing with difficult Christians e-book and a punk eek for the soul series to the lower end of his ilk. The higher end will require a more sophisticated campaign.
Monetize baby!
(Of course, research shows that PZ and friends don’t like to feel categorized or controlled. So let’s just keep this between us.)
  +6
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 1:04 pm

Barbara said:
John Morales,
Yes, I was awre of the award PZ Myers was given by the AHA, an organization with a whopping 11,000 members. Currently they are asking their members to vote on another matter of vital interest:
“American Humanist Association:
Calling all Trekkies! What’s your favorite Star Trek episode? We’re putting together a list of the best Star Trek episodes in honor of George Takei receiving the 2012 LGBT Humanist Pride Award at our conference in New Orleans next June!”
Remember, as PZ always says, vote early and vote often!
The AHA states: “Humanism is nontheistic. By this, we don’t mean to say that there is no God. Instead, we say that there is no proof for the existence of God, any gods, the supernatural or an afterlife. There is no conspiracy by humanists to force people to reject religion.” (PZ clearly does not agree with some of their stated objectives)
Anyway, awards and their importance aside, PZ Myers did not investigate the Dunford debacle and jumped aboard the wrong train. In his efforts to disparage and discredit Anthony Navarro, a Christian, he has made common cause with Dunford. Dunford is a crystal gazing, akashic record reading, homeschooling, God believing, homeopathic hot mess.
WINNER!! ::   +12
[Reply]

Bill Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 11:39 pm
@Barbara, That was priceless!!!
  +3
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 2:05 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Barbara,

The AHA states: “Humanism is nontheistic. By this, we don’t mean to say that there is no God. Instead, we say that there is no proof for the existence of God, any gods, the supernatural or an afterlife. There is no conspiracy by humanists to force people to reject religion.” (PZ clearly does not agree with some of their stated objectives)
Nonetheless, they did give him the Humanist of the Year award in 2009.
(What do you make of that?)
LOSER!! ::   -4
[Reply]

Luther Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 4:00 am
@John Morales,
“Nonetheless, they did give him the Humanist of the Year award in 2009.”
Is that kind of like if you got poked in the eye with a sharp stick, and someone told you that wasn’t very smart, and then you said, but nonetheless, I got poked in the eye with a sharp stick? I was looking at your picture there and it looks like you maybe got poked in both your eyes with a sharp stick so I’m not sure you will even be able to see my point about your point not really being a point.
  +3
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 4:49 am
@John Morales,
I think you’ll find that outside of your little Myers cult, nobody else gives a shit.
  +3
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 7:29 am
@John Morales,
Well, actually John, I think it shows that The AHA is either not true to their own mission statement “There is no conspiracy by humanists to force people to reject religion” or they are willing to overlook the fact that the man they chose as humanist of the year does see it as his mission to force people to reject religion. But I suppose since PZ states his objective openly then they are correct that there is no conspiracy.
More importantly for this discussion, do you think Myers did adequate investigation into the Navarro/Dunford debacle? How do you feel about PZ Myers aligning himself with a new-ager who believes in every goofy fad under the sun?
  +3
[Reply]

Luther Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 10:28 pm
@Barbara, I was thinking about that American Humans Association, and then I saw where the American Rabbit Breeders Association has over twice as many members. So maybe P.Z. should have tried to become the Rabbit of the Year because it would be more impressive.
  +3
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 1:40 pm

Barbara said:
John Morales,
And as for that asteroid naming business, I just thought you should know, these make lovely gifts:
http://www.starregistry.com/
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
@Barbara,
You go girl!!!
:)
  +6
[Reply]

John Morales Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Barbara, the asteroid-naming was done by its discoverer, David Healy.
LOSER!! ::   -7
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
@John Morales,
Yes, believe it or not I’m aware of the junk bond observatory and I’m willing to talk about PZ Myers’ awards, commendations, honors, etc. for as long as you want but, please, let’s not lose sight of the point.
PZ Myers is wrong about Anthony Navarro. PZ Myers is wrong in his assessment of Naomi Dunford. PZ Myers did not check his facts before he reacted by writing an emotion-driven screed fueled by his hatred of all organized religion.
That’s not cool for anyone but particularly a purported scientist. Clearly PZ Myers was not at his best when he wrote that post. He was blinded by hatred and not blinded by science. (thanks Thomas Dolby)
WINNER!! ::   +10
[Reply]

You're so silly Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
@Barbara,
Can I just say your choice of the word screed made me fall in luv with you all over again?
  +1
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 7:39 pm
@You’re so silly,
Usually it’s preceded by “hate filled” but this sentence seemed to need it. Now I’m happy I chose it instead of rant.
  +2
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 1:47 pm

Barbara said:
Well, damn, now I am impressed:
“CFI–Northeast Ohio Humanism Award Banquet”
“In honor of Page Stephens
with guest speaker PZ Myers”
“Crowne Plaza in Independence,
I-77/Rockside Rd.
7:00—10:00pm”
“Center for Inquiry–Northeast Ohio’s 6th Humanism Award will be presented to Page Stephens, PhD, who, as co-founder and 17-year president of the now-disbanded South Shore Skeptics, was instrumental in cultivating a burgeoning skeptics community on the southern banks of Lake Erie, and proved himself a staunch defender of science over pseudoscience.”
“Guest speaker: infamous biologist and blogger PZ Myers!”
************************************************************************************
This event took place September 30 2011. PZ traveled to glamorous Cleveland Ohio to present an award to the founder of a group that no longer exists, could you BE anymore important!?
What the hell is an “infamous biologist”?
WINNER!! ::   +12
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
@Barbara,
OOPs!
Definition of INFAMOUS
Merriman Webster Definition
1: having a reputation of the worst kind : notoriously evil
2: causing or bringing infamy : disgraceful
Sounds about right….
  +5
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 2:06 pm

Alley-Cat said:
Definition of INFAMOUS
Merriman Webster Definition
1: having a reputation of the worst kind : notoriously evil
2: causing or bringing infamy : disgraceful
Sounds about right….
  +3
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
@Alley-Cat,
Since we ran out of room on the Mother Teresa thread I just wanted to say that I’m happy to hear that you did further research into the subject. That’s one of the major differences between the Droid’s audience and that of PZ Myers’ fan club, here people are willing to listen to dissenting opinions respectfully and sometimes even change their minds. You’d never find that happening among the hidebound and rabid fanboys of PZ’s.
  -1
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 2:26 pm

Barbara said:
When PZ Myers made his triumphant pilgrimage to the Creationist Museum despite his contempt for the owners he still was parsimonious enough to ask for, and recieve, a group discount.
(“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.” Matthew 7:7 for the believers out there)
He still paid ten dollars a head for the 300 atheists that accompanied him. He put $3,000 into the coffers of the creationists. That’ll show’em.
And the creationists laughed all the way to the bank…
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Rube 98 Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 11:53 pm
@Barbara, So P.Z. Myers supports creationism after all!
  +5
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 5:44 pm

Barbara said:
PZ Myers thought it was appropriate for him to weigh in on a family matter of the Navarro’s. Yet when people criticized his daughter’s views on bestiality PZ went medieval on thir asses. He did not appreciate anybody censuring or condemning his daughter for her views, why can’t he extend the same courtesy to other people’s families?
Skatje Myers on the crucial to all of us issue of bestiality:
“Animals can approach humans for sexual reasons too. Ever owned a dog? They’ll come right up to you and start poking at your crotch. What if you don’t have pants on at the time? And what if you maybe enjoy a little complication-free oral sex? You go to jail for it? It’s not like you shoved your meat into their face and raped them. The animal isn’t hurt, so animal abuse doesn’t apply.”
“I just don’t see any reason to ban it other than the same reason things like homosexuality and sodomy were banned: it’s icky.”
“Sexual relationships between humans and animals come as such a shock to people, but it doesn’t to me. There can be very deep, meaningful relationships between humans and their pets. Obviously they can’t obtain the same level a deep human-to-human relationship, but loving your pets isn’t anything unusual. People care for their pets, talk to them, spoil them, feel relaxed in their company, and mourn them when they die. This relationship is so underestimated. Why does it come as a surprise that when someone feels a deep connection to their pet, they might be interesting in doing something more expressive and intimate like we do in human-to-human relationships?”
http://sd-10807.dedibox.fr/show_items-feed=b8f260ba6c2ca74f75f0ec7dd4fee078?page=2
It seems the apple doesn’t fall too far from the tree, anything for a little attention, right Skatje? Mom Myers must be so proud! (is “icky” a scientific term Dad taught her? It’s so expressive!)
( please share your favorite sheep-shagging jokes )
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

Shorty Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 6:15 pm
@Barbara, If I could undo reading a post, this would be it. That girl’s sentiments are beyond disgusting.
  +5
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
@Shorty,
Yeah, I know, it doesn’t make for pleasant reading. But I hope my point isn’t overwhelmed by the disgust factor.
PZ loves his daughter and does not want her to be the object of ridicule, scorn, censure or hostility. Anthony loves his brother and wants him to rejoin his children and his wife.
Why can’t PZ Myers understand that?
WINNER!! ::   +8
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 4:34 am
@Barbara,
Well at least we now know what Ms Myers does in her free time.
  +3
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 7:26 pm
@Alley-Cat,
Well, everybody needs a hobby. I’ll bet their neighbors have one hell of a privacy fence though.
  +2
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 6:07 pm

Barbara said:
Yes, I know PZ’s daughter is only twenty-one and was, I think, just eighteen years old when she made these remarks.
My point is there are children in Dave and Anthony’s families as well. They are hurt by this crap.
I actually knew about this brouhaha before the subject of PZ Myers came up here at SD and had thought I wouldn’t post this. But after reading crap at his blog about other people’s families and lynching and sterilizing them…well, I reconsidered.
WINNER!! ::   +9
[Reply]

You're so silly Reply:
October 9th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
@Barbara,
But see, in PZ Meyer’s world of relativism, nothing is absolutely wrong. Wrong, as a label, is relative to your viewpoint or vantage point given a set of circumstances.
In fact, PeeZee might applaud your diligence and research were it not the crack between his milky white haunches up which your shoe is planted.
  +6
[Reply]
# 9 October 2011 at 6:14 pm

Alley-Cat said:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Here’s what Myers has to say about Mother Teresa:
First, never quote Mother Teresa at me — she was an evil hag who worshipped poverty, who did not help people except to encourage them to suffer more for her faith, while she lived in comfort and traveled far and wide to receive the accolades of the gullible. I would never find the words of that wicked woman persuasive.
This lady was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1979/teresa-bio.html
But hey.. Myers had a lump of dead rock floating around in space after him. So he must be important eh?
Nope, he’s just a despicable shit-head.
LOSER!! ::   -4
[Reply]

Clark Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 7:26 am
@Alley-Cat,
He’s right. Read Hitchens’ “The Missionary Position”, it explains in detail what’s wrong with the hype around Teresa. In short: Letting people slowly die in isolation and pain, because you think it’ll bring them closer to Jesus, ain’t help. It’s disgusting, and so was her public support for fascist tyrants who happened to agree with her on abortion.
And btw, why the fuck would someone care WHO says something? You accept a position because it’s where the evidence leads, not because PZ, a Nobel Committee or somebody else says its true.
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 8:03 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Clark,
Thanks
I’m well aware of the criticisms surrounding Teresa’s work. But when you cut through all the religious bollocks she still did far more good than harm [in my opinion of course].
LOSER!! ::   -4
[Reply]

Module_One Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 8:23 am
Pearls before swine.
It must gall some people that Mother Teresa did more in one day that they’d ever do their entire life. She was a great humanitarian and a tireless advocate for the poor. But don’t let something silly like the Nobel Peace Prize deter you haters.
It gives me great joy to know that if she had met you, she would have treated you with the greatest degree of respect. love, and compassion. Even if you acted like a jerk.
And you just hate that, don’t you?
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/architects-of-peace/Teresa/essay.html
Muchly debated. What do you think?   -3
[Reply]

Roger Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Clark is deeply biased. His comments have been reflexively anti-religion, with selective rhetoric that reflects his bias toward those who practice it.
Although, I must admit, it has made me even more skeptical.
Skeptical of the existence of humanity.
Or should I have faith that it exists?
  0
[Reply]

Clark Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 6:11 am
@Roger,
My “bias” against religion is the same bias other people would have against people who think vaccinations are just a big conspiracy and cause autism.
@topic:
I don’t wish any harm on any individual believer, but I also want to point out that these beliefs can (and often do) lead a well-meaning person to do wicked and harmful things.
“Where’s the harm”, you might ask. Well, let’s stay with the example:
Imagine Teresa hadn’t believed that suffering was intrinsically good and instead of leaving the dying lie in agony, she’d done their best to get pain medication and let them live their last days in peace.
Imagine she hadn’t associated herself with far-right dictators like Duvalier and given their despicable views on human rights a cloak to hide under, but called them out on their misdeeds, even if that’d decreased her media attention.
Imagine she’d focused on supporting the rights of the poor, instead of calling abortion “greatest destroyer of world peace today” and opposing contraception as some kind of moral evil.
In all of these cases, her beliefs ended up hurting her causes – and the people she wanted to help. Just imagine what she could’ve done, had she held a secular belief or just kept her religion to herself and focused on the medical needs of the poor. Here’s someone with the ability to do outstanding things and they’re pretty much wasted on spreading dogma and suffering, and I find that incredibly saddening.
And again, stop thinking about what some committee thinks. Kissinger and Obama both received a nobel peace prize for God’s sakes, how much more worthless can this prize become?
  +4
[Reply]

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:15 am
@Clark,
You make some very valid points.
However, if you are starving and living in a gutter in some slum in Calcutta and nobody gives a fuck, perhaps you won’t really care very much who the person that offers you some form of sustenance hangs with.
It’s unlikely they even knew or cared that Haiti even exists, or what her views on abortion were.
The fact that a religious leader of some kind, states that a particular type of behaviour is evil or sinful or whatever does not always mean that the religion’s followers stop doing it.
I live in Italy where around 88% of Italians claim to be Catholic but their fertility rate is one of the lowest in Europe. Believe me they are not practicing abstinence.
In the 30 years I have lived here, I have yet to meet an Italian who believes in creationism. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but they are very few and far between.
  -1
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:13 am
@Alley-Cat,
Actually Clark makes some excellent points. I had intended to stay out of the Mother Teresa debate but since you mentioned where you live, I thought I’d tell you something that happened in my neck of the woods.
I live in Cincinnati Ohio. Charles H. Keating was one of the earliest Savings and Loan owners to bilk people out of their life savings when he crashed Lincoln Savings in the early 1980′s, right here in Cincinnati. I know people who lost their everything they had in that horrific fraud.
He also was a Catholic. When he was on trial for defrauding his own neighbors for billions of dollars Mother Teresa wrote to the judge pleading for clemency for Keating because he had donated $1.25 million to her, of course that money was never his to donate in the first place…but I digress. Where was her concern for the 17,000 people who were cheated?
And as someone who has worked in the medical field I deplore Mother Teresa’s withholding of treatment for pain. To my point of view that is tantamount to torture. Because she personally felt suffering was ennobling she forced others to endure agony. I find that unconscionable.
WINNER!! ::   +11

Bonnie Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
@Barbara
It is well known that Mother Teresa herself questioned her own faith — although it was covered up as much as possible until after she died, and is still somewhat trying to stay hidden from most people who don’t know to look. It doesn’t matter what anyone’s beliefs are, she was a phony and a fraud, and only interested in her own fame and glory — at the expense of others, and on others’ dime. I often thought her belief in making people suffer needlessly was in the same vein as James Arthur Ray’s narcissistic cruelty and sick enjoymemt of watching people suffer.
WINNER!! ::   +7

Alley-Cat Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
@Barbara, @Bonnie, @Clark et al
I’d like to say that having read your comments I went away and did more research.
You were far more informed than I was with regards Teresa and I would like to thank you for adding to my education. Basically I was wrong and you were right.
It doesn’t change the fact that I think Myers is a bigoted prick though… :)
WINNER!! ::   +7
# 10 October 2011 at 5:16 am

Barbara said:
I was curious about the American Humanist Association and how award recipients are chosen. I was particularly interested in knowing whether members voted but that question remains unanswered. But here’s what I do know:
“Barbara,
There is an awards committee on our board of directors that makes decisions about who is offered what award. The entire board is involved in the process.
We occasionally call upon members for nominations, but are always willing to accept nominations. If you have a recommendation i’d be happy to pass it on to the awards committee.
-Roy”
—
Roy Speckhardt
Executive Director
American Humanist Association
http://www.americanhumanist.org
***************************************************************************
If anyone has suggestions send them on to Mr. Speckhardt. I just wish he had told me if members vote on the final selection. Does anyone here know? (and it isn’t in their FAQ’s)
  +5
[Reply]

Irv Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 8:58 pm
@Barbara, In other words, mistakes can happen, and in one case, did.
  +2
[Reply]
# 10 October 2011 at 8:23 am

Not-PZ Myers said:
Fellow Trolls,
A short excerpt from the Not-PZ Myers guide to academic salesmanship:
“If you have nothing to say…use big words to say it. Using fancy multisyllabic verbiage always looks like you put great thought and effort into your writing…even if you didn’t. And it makes you appear intelligent…even if you’re not.”
I’m droppin’ pearls on ya today ladies…PEARLS.
You can thank me on the tweeter – http://twitter.com/#!/pzmyers
Athiestically,
Not-PZ Myers
  +2
[Reply]

_cartman_ Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
@Not-PZ Myers,
I’m droppin’ pearls on ya today ladies…PEARLS.
dude…[[trolls...master baiting & pearls...oh my]]!!
As an academiatician, I am driven in my pursuit of intelligentically honest frivolity. I feel that any other pursuit is antithetically inclined, and would be ocularized through the opus latericium of total absurdity.
  +6
[Reply]
# 10 October 2011 at 2:16 pm

mojo said:
While I find the sudden onslaught of Narnia references mildly amusing, I admit I was somewhat disappointed to read that the Droid is apparently identifying with Prince Caspian. Yuck. Not really a fan of Prince Caspian, especially in the bad Disney movie a few years back, where the poster has him looking all supermodel pouty.
I ask you to consider going with Reepicheep instead. Prince Caspian is rather humdrum run-of-the-mill stupid royalty that you forget almost immediately, whereas Reepicheep throughout the whole (okay, so it’s not my favorite) book series and (even less favorite) movie series is just an adorable little bundle of AWESOME.
  +4
[Reply]
# 10 October 2011 at 2:49 pm

Barbara said:
For me this sums up the last word on PZ Myers:
“For too long, people in the science blogosphere have tiptoed around Myers. After all, he can send a lot of angry commenters your way. And he, and they, are unrelenting in their criticisms, their attacks, and so on. Just read our threads over the last week–it’s all there, the vast majority from people who have not read our book and do not seem inclined to do so.
But we’re not afraid of Myers or his commenters. They can leave hundreds of posts on our blog–we readily allow it–but our book will be read by a different and far more open-minded audience. It’s already happening. And that audience will largely agree that Myers’ communion wafer desecration was offensive and counterproductive, and that more generally, he epitomizes the current problems with the communication of science on the Internet.
We know how many others agree with us, because we have heard from them. We also know the standards of intellectual decency, fairness, and so on that we’ve learned from years of journalism and in academia. And if, as our book proposes, we are going to be training young science communicators, they must learn at least two basic lessons they will not be getting from Myers: civility and tolerance.
Our core concern, though, isn’t really about Myers or his blog. What worries us is what they say about the world of American science as it appears on the Internet. For Myers is, as we all know, the most popular blogger on the most popular science blogging site–and has a horde of loyal followers who see themselves as the disciples of reason, and swear by “science” (when they’re not just swearing).
And this is his most famous performance: Desecrating a communion wafer.”
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2009/07/15/pz-myers-vs-unscientific-america-part-iii/
Myers’ audience has obviously dropped off in numbers considerably since this was written. He certainly was not able to scrounge up more than about a half dozen hard core followers to carry water for him on this site. I think he seriously underestimated the offensiveness of desecrating a Communion wafer both to believers and non-believers alike. He came off like a twisted, bullying, little freak instead of the Man of Science he so longs to be.
And now he has made two consecutive major blunders, first by supporting Rebecca Watson in her fit of pique after being invited for coffee on an elevator which she equated to an act of near-rape, and now by his complete misunderstanding of the Dunford /Navarro situation.
Soon it will just be PZ and his twelve apostles of hate, (approximate number).
  +6
[Reply]

hrmmm Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
@Barbara,
What worries us is what they say about the world of American science as it appears on the Internet. For Myers is, as we all know, the most popular blogger on the most popular science blogging site–and has a horde of loyal followers who see themselves as the disciples of reason, and swear by “science” (when they’re not just swearing).
This is what really concerns me as well. I’d also like to add there’s a sort of assumed hyper-masculinity that runs through Internet Science like butterscotch ripple. To the point that women-run skeptic blogs are the target of insane misogyny – the kind that ND tried to cash in on.
It really does happen. It happens to me when I dare to open my mouth on a topic that I have an actual education in. I’m stupid and can’t possibly understand science because I am not a dude. Also, I deserve to be fucked or else I’m totally not fuckable, and either way I should basically just shut up and remember that I’m only good for one thing.
Internet dudez who have no actual training in/understanding of science (and I’m going to guess that large contingent of PZ Meyer’s audience might meet this criteria) are the ones who seemingly become the most enraged when women talk about science.
This entire culture of Armchair Internet Scientists needs an overhaul, badly.
WINNER!! ::   +7
[Reply]

Barbara Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
@hrmmm,
Yeah, I know, there are still quite a few places on the internet that are boy’s playgrounds, try talking about gaming sometime. I was advised long ago to use a non-gender specific name in order to lessen that type of abuse.
And I do know what you mean, I’ve been called a cunt so many times I’ve lost count. I think it’s one of the reasons I have had such a strong anti-Dunford stance. I really, really hate the way she has used sexuality as bait and then as a shield.
I am hopeful when I see the way the number of his followers have dropped off in the last two years. And I’m hopeful because of blogs like the one we’re talking on where women have a voice and aren’t shouted down. But I also think looking for civility on the internet is a job for Diogenes. ( now excuse me, I’m going to go scribble on some dollar bills)
  +3
[Reply]
# 10 October 2011 at 8:30 pm

SaltyDroid and PZ Myers -- Same Evolutionary Path said:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Pharyngula called — PZ Myers wants his online personality back.
LOSER!! ::   -5
[Reply]

Rebootist Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 2:27 am
That would take a “miracle,” considering P.Z. Myers’ online personality IS his actual personality, as opposed to say, a fake robot persona. But you already knew that, tool.
  +3
[Reply]
# 12 October 2011 at 9:59 am

Tthhpoop said:
I LOVE INTERNET MARKETING UNICORNS
  -1
[Reply]
# 20 October 2011 at 10:36 am

chick confused said:
I just read this again. Is it just me or were the PZ Myers peeps insulting me?
  0
[Reply]

Peter Reply:
January 11th, 2012 at 8:16 pm
@chick confused,
I have to say, I think Wyrd wins the award for hardest hitting comments in this thread. I really enjoy his ability to stay level headed and maintain his argument without stooping into PZ Myers level retardation.
I didn’t think there were any insults directed at you, personally, but threads like these always confuse me so I might have just missed them. You’re a part of a team effort here, and they were just slinging mud at the team.
In the words of Jesus Christ, “Fuck PZ Myers, and his piece of shit followers.”
  0
[Reply]
# 11 January 2012 at 5:33 pm

Wyrd said:
(cross-posted from the first PZ article)
Interesting (kinda) development.
P.Z. Myers divorces himself from the “skeptic movement”
And nobody cares.
http://www.saramayhew.com/blog/index.php/2013/05/pz-myers-divorces-skepticism/
–
Furry cows moo and decompress.
  +1
[Reply]
# 5 May 2013 at 3:21 pm

Say Something!

{ commentators }

{ subjectories }

Aaron Parkinson Andy Jenkins Angel Valley Anik Singal Anthony Morrison Bill Harris bleep bloop BlogWorld Bob Proctor Boiler Rooms Brad Fallon Brian Clark Chicken Soup for the Soul China Chris Brogan Colleen Conaway Copyblogger copyright credit cards Crystal Cox Cults Dan Kennedy Darren Rowse Dave Navarro David Schirmer David Sipes Dean Graziosi Decor My Eyes Dennis Karganilla DMCA Don Lapre Eben Pagan Ed Dale Ed Magedson Eliot Bernstein Featured Frank Kern Free Speech FTC Gary McCaffrey Get Motivated Google Greg Hartle Harlan Kilstein Headline Herbalife Hope HSBC IM Warfare Internet Marketing Interviews Ivy Capital Jack Canfield James Arthur Ray James Chartrand James Malinchak James Ray Trial Tweets Jeff Johnson Jeff Walker Jennifer Horton Jeremy Johnson Jimmy Davis Joe Vitale John Assaraf Johnny Truant John Raygoza John Reese John Swallow Josh Fredrickson Julian Assange Kajabi Kevin Trudeau Lanny Morton Laura Roeder Lawyers Leonard Coldwell Magic Bullet Maria Andros Mark Fabiani Mark Shurtleff Mark Victor Hansen Matt Bacak Matt Cutts Matt Harward Megan Fredrickson Michael Johnson Michael Martine Michael Savage Michelle Goulet Mike Dillard Mike Filsaime Mike Koenigs minions Mitt Romney MLM Munger Tolles & Olson Naomi Dunford Oprah Pat O'Bryan Paulie Sabol Perry Belcher Peter Diamandis Peter Wink PowerPay Professional Marketing International Prosper PushTraffic PZ Myers Rachael Acklin Randy Garn Rhonda Byrne Rick Calvert Rip-Off Report Robert Hirsch Russell Brunson Ryan Deiss Scams Scamworld Scientology Scribe Sean McAlister Sean Stephenson Secret Millionaire Senen Pousa SEO Sheeple Sonia Simone Stephen Pierce StomperNet Tedd Johnson Tellman Knudson the media The Secret The Syndicate The Tax Club Tim Brownson Tony Alessandra Tony Parinello Tony Robbins Trolls Twitter Utah Video Vorys Sater Seymour and Pease WikiLeaks Yanik Silver