It’s hard for me to take him seriously when he’s got “global warming alarmist” in his thread title. I find that deliberately provocative.
I will concede that iiandyiiii may be right and CP may also be a racist bastard.
It’s hard for me to take him seriously when he’s got “global warming alarmist” in his thread title. I find that deliberately provocative.
I will concede that iiandyiiii may be right and CP may also be a racist bastard.
You’re both right.
He’s one of the board’s long-standing scientific racists. I didn’t even know he was still posting. I must have put a mental ignore on him years ago, I thought he was long gone.
But he is trolling too. He enjoys pissing people off and he is actually a douchebag in real life. These qualities are most definitely not mutually exclusive.
Not quite a troll, but Sarahsparkles is going to be an–um–“interesting” poster. (I noticed the post where she said that confederate monuments were probably the only thing holding slavery back from returning before she made her most recent post as of this writing, where she seems to reveal being a middle school student.)
Hey, it’s the Pit. People practically see abrasiveness as a requirement.
After years of discussions I agree with researchers and science writers that concluded that cranks of one crackpot idea are themselves crank magnets. It is not just one item where their loopiness concentrates.
The question to me, and what I do investigate for, is if the crankiness leads to the current prevalent style of conservatism/republican party or if it is their ideology the reason why crank ideas are considered and adopted.
Contemplation with yet another gem: “Is it easier for women to sit with their legs closed?”
Did someone in this thread do some analysis that seemed to show that protoboard and Contemplation were remarkably similar posters? Sock-like, even? I may be mis-remembering.
MAN TRAP was scolded by a mod and his thread closed this morning, told not to start any more threads with unsupported assertions.
Google sez that was here: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=20364642#post20364642 but there was just the one post asserting that and one later post in agreement.
That’s 2 months, 13 pages, and ~700 posts ago. Who knew we had so many trolls or that troll-beefing was such a popular hobby here?
Oddl close to when brazil84 decided to check back in. Scientific racist convention, or something more?
Risked a suspension accidentally on that guy, thinking the thread was in the Pit.
Colibri put it very well;
Moderating
You’ve been given many factual answers to your questions, which you refuse to accept as valid. What you consider “bullshit mathematical nonsense” is actually science. Since you do not accept the factual answers to your questions, I see little point in continuing this discussion. This is closed. Enough is enough.
Do not start addition threads in this forum unless you are prepared to accept factual and scientific responses to your questions.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Basically “I don’t understand the answer, so it must be bullshit.” We see a lot of those people flow through this site. Gosh, perhaps the reason these people have these questions in the first place is because they’re too fucking stupid to understand the answers. No, there isn’t a simpler explanation. If you can’t understand Red Shift, or DNA, or Brownian Motion, it doesn’t mean it has to be wrong and there must be an easier solution. The Universe is complex, not simple.
I sometimes wonder about the people who build those massive crackpot delusions of knowing great truths that The Establishment is refusing to accept–do they keep at it for the rest of their lives hoping to finally be accepted for the revolutionary geniuses that they are? Do they shut up but stew in anger and bitterness about it? Do they put it behind themselves as a “what was I thinking” phase of their lives?
I’m sure it varies–I have no doubt that Archimedes Plutonium and Ed Conrad and Nancy Lieder and Dennis Markuze will go to their deathbeds convinced they were right, but somewhere out there, is “blue blood is black blood” guy and “geyser pyramid” guy and “spacetime is a fluid” guy at this very moment stewing over the fools, all of whom he will show?
Looks like** Okrahoma** is worried about his job.
Meanwhile, American Trump supporters have become focused on the fearless leaders balls. I saw several social media posts claiming that the reason most Americans can’t stand Trump is “because he has balls”. They seem to have realized that any claims of his effectiveness, or really any positive quality, will be refuted the next morning during Trump’s dump/Tweet time.
Clothahump got the memo but as usual couldn’t quite get it right.
Quote:
“Colin K. should have been fired the first time he did it. Trump’s statement was exactly correct. The NFL is taking it in the shorts because the league has no balls.”
And this billfish678 guy is one of the biggest tools/morons in the RW drooling gallery here, which for here is saying something. Doesn’t even grasp how a comments section like Yahoo’s works.
He’s certainly got the misogynist thing going on. Although he claims it’s all due to an insane ex- and he doesn’t blame the whole female race*. Not that I quite believe him about the second part of that.
======
Yesterday I noticed a new poster, Pleet Bai, who seemed sane, so I welcomed him to the SDMB.
Too soon, it turns out. His third post is a screed against breast cancer charities.
Link: Real Breast Cancer Awareness
It will be interesting to see if he has other complaints or is just a breast guy.
Seems more like an anti-medicine woo type. I’m sure they have many interests besides breasts. And I’m sure we’ll hear all about them.
Allow me to share billfish’s thread “Ask the Asshole”. I love the Dope.
I don’t disagree with everything he says in there, I have a gut-level certainty that a lot of those charities, at the “corporate” level if you will, are far more interested in maintaining their own existences than they are in curing cancer.
But that’s just the cynic in me.
Do my eyes deceive me, or, is Scylla trolling? Here, specifically.