Why is the Terrestial Forum more frequented ...

[_marg]

For the record this is what I'm talking about (I've only taken out short excerpts):

http://www.lextek.com/clark/10912.html

(This is from 2007 ...and this campaign has been going on since then as well. I'm not saying it's continuous but it's there at various times.)

Bob McCue: Gad, I don’t recall meeting you before. Perhaps under another name. However, someone forwarded me a long time ago a link to lengthy exchange you had with a lady named "marg" where the points I just made were pounded in time and time again in different ways. You didn’t get it there - or so it seemed - and so I don’t expect you to get it here. But in any event, let me set it out one more time in the simplest possible form:


Gad: I'm sorry if I had to do battle with you through Marg, but I was one of the first to post a rebuttal, fairly short, to your infamous "postmodern fog" lecture on FAIR (under the name sidewinder) and I don't remember you staying around to defend your position. So, what can I do?
>>
DCP, who leads FARMs and is head of the pack of the new apologists, despises postmodernism and nothing I've ever read from him could remotely be compared to it anymore than you could find a link to anything else if looking hard enough. DCP is perfectly easy to understand. Derrida - I admit I still don't get him. Though I get him a heck of a lot better than Marg. :)



Bob: But you still seem to have missed Marg's basic point. That is, the worst postmodernism is ridiculously relativistic. Susan Haack makes the point very well. I could have simply said "postmodern fog machine". However, since Derrida is infamously opaque and relativistic in some senses, and is also a postmodernist, I tossed his name in for good measure. Technically correct? No. Descriptive, evocative, provocative? Yes. And you didn't have to do battle with me through Marg. I simply read your exchange with her.

[_EAllusion]

You aren't sorry EA.

Sorry as in, "I'm sorry, but you are wrong."

You have been on a concerted campaign for quite sometime

We campaigners like to wear toy solider uniforms and call ourselves The Apostles.

I see that your reading of my motives is as good as your reading of MsJack's

[_EAllusion]

If you recall Ray I've been an atheist all my life as well.

[_RayAgostini]

If you recall Ray I've been an atheist all my life as well.

No, I don't recall. My memory is that you, at least, flirted with Mormonism on ZLMB due to a "relationship" with a Mormon?

In any case I'll be blunt, that I've generally found you to be a "snobby" atheist. I've never felt that way about marg, the "village idiot atheist".

I'll admit I may need to learn a lot more about you, and maybe I should give you some more leeway, but really, there seems to be little to gain in attacking marg as the "village idiot atheist". It's almost like "snobby" Mormon scholars looking down on the "simple true believing sheep", but maybe you don't see it.

[_marg]

I see that your reading of my motives is as good as your reading of MsJack's

Well let it out EA...state for the record your motives.

[_EAllusion]

No, I don't recall. My memory is that you, at least, flirted with Mormonism on ZLMB due to a "relationship" with a Mormon?

Nope. I was in a relationship with a Mormon, though. I also lived on a fundamentalist Bible camp for a period of time, which your memory may have confused with me being a fundamentalist. But I've never been religious.

I just find it interesting to contrast your defense of marg as some true blue atheist because she's never been religious with your attitude towards me even though I've always been an atheist.

Marg gets flak from people like Stak because she is very arrogant and frequently mean while arguing extremely poorly. In particular her reading comprehension and critical thinking skills leave a lot to be desired. She also embodies some bad stereotypes of atheists as thinkers that normally aren't true. From my end, I view marg as the atheist equivalent of juliann at MADB. Regarding the "village idiot" comment, I was explaining what Stak said to marg because she misread it. She kinda asked me to correct Stak, if you recall.

[_EAllusion]

Well let it out EA...state for the record your motives.

I wanted an example of an illucid poster of the sort DCP would engage like a cat with a ball of yarn. Your name came to mind. I understand you feeling insulted, but there's no campaign here marg.

[_RayAgostini]

I wanted an example of an illucid poster of the sort DCP would engage like a cat with a ball of yarn. Your name came to mind. I understand you feeling insulted, but there's no campaign here marg.

Perhaps DCP feels that marg is actually more of a threat to his beliefs than "systematic arguments" for atheism and against belief?

[_Doctor Scratch]

I wanted an example of an illucid poster of the sort DCP would engage like a cat with a ball of yarn. Your name came to mind. I understand you feeling insulted, but there's no campaign here marg.

Perhaps DCP feels that marg is actually more of a threat to his beliefs than "systematic arguments" for atheism and against belief?

You think that Dan Peterson views marg as a "threat to his beliefs"? I bet that's news to him. Hilarious, hilarious news.

[_EAllusion]

Perhaps DCP feels that marg is actually more of a threat to his beliefs than "systematic arguments" for atheism and against belief?

A walking, talking strawman who frequently misreads comments, argues poorly, and is ignorant of topics she is actively engaged in doesn't strike me as a huge threat to him, but hey, that's totally plausible. I mean, it's not like DCP's eyes would go as wide as saucers if he saw an atheist say they don't care for philosophy because it reminds them too much of religion or anything, right?