I'm Disappointed, Fellow Atheists

[The Felonius Pope]

To say the least...

AronRa has recently been criticized for his handling of the discussion with Randy. An examination of the comments section on Randy's video, however, is suffice to prove that Aron is handling the situation much better than some people would. Here's what some of my atheist brethren have written:

yet another worthless, creatard... sigh

I know, you saw the word "Creatards" and you said to yourself, "Hey, that's, me !!!"

shut, the fuck up.

Hi Randy. Your a idiot., Bye Randy

Usually i would ,try to make some remark to maybe try and be sarcastic or at least try to make you aware, but you know what, you're a fucking moron, there is no help for you.

Have you ever articulated an original ,thought of your own?No, I thought not.

"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked. "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice. "You, must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."I can quote from a fictional book as well as you can; you fucktard!

stop, quoting the fucking bible ! it's just a book used to manipulate the ignorant ! fuck it who the hell am I kidding the ignorant will always be ignorant ! continue on with your pathetic excuse for a life!

Seriously, one glance and you know it's a, moron.

You all do not deny God becasue of lack of evidence" So you accuse us of lying to people on, a daily basis when we honestly state that we just don't see any reason for believing? "He is moral and demands you to be moral, so you deny His existence" So you accuse us of being immoral and denying god's existence because we're supposedly immoral and don't want to be held accountable, and base this assumption solely on our disbelief? Seriously... up yours.

-Emphasis mine

I would like to apologize to everyone for making such a useless thread. It's just that... these sort of comments have no place in an intelligent conversation. Randy is full of shit, but I take pride in setting an example. Maybe I'm wrong, but this is not the sort of example we atheists should be setting.

 

[evilotakuneko]

Who expects intelligent conversation in youtube comments?

 

[Prolescum]

That's the thing about atheists... they're just like everyone else.

I always think it's incredibly funny when people say things like "this is not the sort of example we atheists should be setting" as if atheism usually breeds a better moral character.

 

[The Felonius Pope]

Who expects intelligent conversation in youtube comments?

Ha! I guess you're right.

I always think it's incredibly funny when people say things like "this is not the sort of example we atheists should be setting" as if atheism usually breeds a better moral character.

All right... You've got me there. These people's behavior just shocks me. You aren't going to instill someone with critical thinking and an open mind if your method of rehabilitation involves calling that person a fucktard.

 

[Prolescum]

I totally agree, but as the other chap above says, the level of conversation on YouTube rarely rises above bum level.

 

[Laurens]

Personally I'd be more disappointed by influential atheists such as Sam Harris, Pat Condell and Thunderf00t.

If only because it means I constantly have to justify myself that my opinions aren't the same as theirs (particularly with Harris)...

 

[Dogma's Demise]

I suspect some of these atheists are just frustrated with having to debate the obvious so that's why they resort to one-liner "fuck you" YT comments instead of forming some kind of constructive criticism.

 

[Frenger]

I suspect some of these atheists are just frustrated with having to debate the obvious so that's why they resort to one-liner "fuck you" YT comments instead of forming some kind of constructive criticism.

I don't know if that's true. In my experience "internet atheists" (whatever that means) seem to be under the impression that by simply being atheist they own the higher ground and don't need to form arguments, why would they? Anyone who believes a in a god must be stooopid so wouldn't understand an argument anyway.

I suspect this is because they couldn't actually form an argument. They see Dawkins and Hitchens on tele and think "yeah, I'm one of them so I win by default" when really they just ended up looking like bell-ends.

That's what I think anyway.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Well that's a possibility too, I won't deny that.

But take for example a more extreme situation: Let's say you see a video made by some YT white supremacist and he makes some half-assed argument along the lines of "look at Europe, look at Africa! SEE? THAT PROVES THEY'RE INFERIOR!" or just spouts the same old mantra "anti-racist is code word for anti-white" or posts Detroit's crime rate as supposed "evidence" that blacks are inferior.

I doubt the first thing that will come to your mind is to engage him in a polite discussion. It will probably irritate you enough to post a one-liner insult. Most people will just click dislike and post a one-liner and be done with it. They'll probably not go into a long discussion about the social, economic, historical factors he's ignoring, the bias, the fact that science doesn't back up these racist theories, the ethical considerations etc.


I can have similar reactions sometimes, like if I see another Ontological argument video or "Atheist = Communist" video I might post a one-liner scoffing it. That doesn't automatically mean I have nothing of substance to say, in fact I've addressed these arguments before on my little YT page.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

First of all, who the hell is Randy, Secondly, I can't pass judgement on things out of context, can you provide a link to the thing in question?

 

[The Felonius Pope]

First of all, who the hell is Randy, Secondly, I can't pass judgement on things out of context, can you provide a link to the thing in question?

Randy is the guy AronRa just had a discussion with. He's the subject of the thread 'Reasoning with one who protests reason'. Here's the video I copied the comments from:



The comments are on these pages:
1. Page 3
2. Page 7
3. Page 9
4. Page 16
5. Page 15
6. ? (My apologies, I seem to have lost track of this one.)
7. Page 17
8. Page 18
9. Page 20
10. Page 3

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Although some of it is not totally unwarranted, the vast majority is stated out of the blue and there is really no justification for it. But given the way it is presented in a YouTube comment section, you should really not expect to get something sensible. There are trolls everywhere, and is the sort of comment that you should shrug and move on feeling that the time you took to read it was time wasted. Do not feel a shame on behalf of them nor should you be considering them as your brethren, they have nothing in common with you despite the fact that they are atheists and on that grounds do not think that they could represent you.

 

[Frenger]

Well that's a possibility too, I won't deny that.

But take for example a more extreme situation: Let's say you see a video made by some YT white supremacist and he makes some half-assed argument along the lines of "look at Europe, look at Africa! SEE? THAT PROVES THEY'RE INFERIOR!" or just spouts the same old mantra "anti-racist is code word for anti-white" or posts Detroit's crime rate as supposed "evidence" that blacks are inferior.

I doubt the first thing that will come to your mind is to engage him in a polite discussion. It will probably irritate you enough to post a one-liner insult. Most people will just click dislike and post a one-liner and be done with it. They'll probably not go into a long discussion about the social, economic, historical factors he's ignoring, the bias, the fact that science doesn't back up these racist theories, the ethical considerations etc.


I can have similar reactions sometimes, like if I see another Ontological argument video or "Atheist = Communist" video I might post a one-liner scoffing it. That doesn't automatically mean I have nothing of substance to say, in fact I've addressed these arguments before on my little YT page.

You're probably right, I suppose it's a mix of the two, although the nature of the argument will leave us guessing exactly which kind of "internet atheist" our one liner friend is.

 

[Gnug215]

It's early, and I have to get to work, but I just watched 1 minute of that guy's video...

... and I gotta say... I feel like calling him names.

I'm not gonna... ... to his face, but I'll call him an idiot here, because to me, the definition of the word "idiot" fits him quite well.

At least, what he said is really idiotic. I guess that's a better thing to say? I mean, then I distinguish between his whole person, and between the few statements he made that to me seem idiotic.

In terms of statements made, I guess we all can be a little idiotic from time to time. (I mean, hey, Prolescum just dissed Metallica in another thread, as if ignoring MoP, AJFA and the Black Album entirely, and well... that's pretty damn idiotic, right? Doesn't make him an idiot, though. Certainly, not everyone he does or says is idiotic. For one, he breathes, just like that Randy guy, and that's pretty dern smartn with edumashun if yer askrs me...)

Something something. But wow, the idiocy of that idiotic Bible verse.

I'm actually surprised some of those commentors weren't more... uncivil. In my view, the largest problem with those comments is actually that they're really unimaginative and boring. Just plain old insults. No creativity, no wit, no panache, no underwear-given-while-in-a-mall.

I might watch the remaining two minutes of the video when I get home, just because morbid curiosity. Who doesn't like a little stupidity outrage now and then? It's what made the atheist community on YT, anyway.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Certainly is a poster-boy for a Tortucan (Trap)!

Kindest regards,

James

 

[The Felonius Pope]

I think he's an idiot too Gnug, but if you look through the comments section you'll see that Randy is responding to some of the people. He's seeing the things that people are writing about him. I can't help but feel that will damage his perception of the skeptic community.

 

[Gnug215]

I think he's an idiot too Gnug, but if you look through the comments section you'll see that Randy is responding to some of the people. He's seeing the things that people are writing about him. I can't help but feel that will damage his perception of the skeptic community.

Oh, it definitely will. I think you will find that most of his reasons for holding the beliefs he does is split into two camps:
1: He likes his identity as a theist, and the people he identifies with, and he feels good about it.
2: He dislikes his opponenst, and he can't imagine ever identifying with them.

When I read The Creationists by Ronald Numbers I remember finding some examples where it was clear that a large part of the motivation for many of these active creationists was some kind of negative encounter with atheists/non-believers/evolutionists/skeptics.
Some even directly stated things along the lines of how the arrogance and vitriol of certain atheists/etc. was what got these people into the game. I seem to remember Henry Morris saying something like that, but I'm afraid I cannot dig up such a quote. While I highly recommend Numbers' book, it is almost 500 pages, so I'm not reading it again any time soon.

But well, generally, I think this phenomenon is pretty simple, psychologically speaking. Antagonism breeds resistance. Sometimes I find myself defending/attacking something much more vehemently than my feelings about it would justify, but once you get into the role of opposition, you tend to polarize. Just take Democrats/Republicans as an example. I mean, in theory, both sides want what they think will most benefit their society.

I'm sure someone with some basic knowledge about psychology would have something to say here.

 

[Deleted member 619]

I suspect some of these atheists are just frustrated with having to debate the obvious so that's why they resort to one-liner "fuck you" YT comments instead of forming some kind of constructive criticism.

I don't know if that's true. In my experience "internet atheists" (whatever that means) seem to be under the impression that by simply being atheist they own the higher ground and don't need to form arguments, why would they? Anyone who believes a in a god must be stooopid so wouldn't understand an argument anyway.

I suspect this is because they couldn't actually form an argument. They see Dawkins and Hitchens on tele and think "yeah, I'm one of them so I win by default" when really they just ended up looking like bell-ends.

That's what I think anyway.

Dunno, mate. I think this might just be because of the corners of the web where you hang out. My experience of internet atheists is generally good. It has already been pointed out that the level of the comments on YT is, on average, beneath deserving of a point of view, and that's not an insignificant point.

 

[Lowpro]

This is why. AronRa and Randy both have no anonymity, but the peanut gallery has just their name and a pocketful of fucks they don't give.