Gemli, and attacking those who make sense.

[Lem]

This exchange was pretty weird, even for the blog comment section in question:

gemli Ideeho • a day ago

Disagreements about whether something exists are settled by presenting definitive evidence for its existence. Stories of evidence don't count. They're the very things that require evidence.

http://disq.us/p/

----
Ideeho gemli • a day ago

Nope. Again not even close. You don’t get to move goal posts or concoct burdens or standards for the rest of us. You don’t get to be the czar determining definitiveness. You’re not trustworthy or capable enough to do so. Your zealous denial mantras are again noted, but they do not Trump the evidences shared to date nor the revelations persons seeking God have received. Noted and pitied.

What did gemli say that warranted this? His comment was very reasonable. Ideeho's assertion that presenting evidence is some thing gemli invented is just bizarre.

[Lem]

In keeping with our Bayesian discussions, gemli's comment here is relevant:

gemli Ideeho • 2 days ago

The evidence that you present for gods, angels and golden plates has little weight to it, while the evidence that people fear death and create discrepant religions by the score is quite strong.

http://disq.us/p/2hzr6te

[Philo Sofee]

Wow, the church has done quite a job on Ideeho to make him so suspicious of evidence! This is a testimony against Mormonism pure and simple.

[Dr Moore]

Ideeho has been practicing as Kiwi’s understudy in santimonious comment nannying and bad mind reading for some time. Maybe he’s taking midterm exams right now?

[Dr Exiled]

I think we are seeing some cognitive dissonance pains. Ideeho is a little too aggressive here, a little too frustrated. Perhaps Ideeho needs to rethink his assumptions. Perhaps it doesn't withstand scrutiny? Perhaps Gemli's points are worthy because Mormonism isn't?

[Gadianton]

Nope. Again not even close. You don’t get to move goal posts or concoct burdens or standards for the rest of us.

Kiwi could help Ideeho out as he would not make this mistake. Moving goalposts is a fallacy one commits with their own arguments. It doesn't make any sense to say that Gemli is "moving goal posts" for the apologists.

[Moksha]

Ideeho is a little too aggressive here,...

That is what makes him a worthy sidekick for Kiwi when Louis passes from this side of the veil into the decantankerizing holding chamber.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ideeho is a little too aggressive here,...

That is what makes him a worthy sidekick for Kiwi when Louis passes from this side of the veil into the decantankerizing holding chamber.

That dude will never chill out. I’m fairly certain that Louis “dry drunk”* Midgley will, upon his passing, spin in circles and slap himself on the head with glee when he finds out there’s a Tomas de Torquemada internship available to be filled. God will need a little help in the run up to Judgement Day.

- Doc

* Dr. Stak’s description of That Little crap is only surpassed by his epic lolcow thread with regard to Mr. Peterson.

[Kishkumen]

These back and forths between gemli and the apologists are largely pointless, and it always feels like both sides really have no idea what they are up to.

[Physics Guy]

Yeah, gemli doesn't really seem to have a lot of points to make, and yet he keeps on hanging out with these clowns, exchanging the same kinds of barbs. He reminds me a bit of this awesome old website about tinfoil beanies and microscopic black helicopters. At first it was hilarious satire of internet wackiness, but then it went on so long, after the joke had been made, that you couldn't help wondering whether the author didn't just have some different form of the same kind of wack.

EDIT: That old site is still there!