There are lots of people on the SDMB, and some of them are idiots. How could I know you weren’t one of them? I have a poor memory for names, and I can’t be asked to remember every poster’s posting history. Taken on its own, your post could very well be the ravings of an ignoramous.
Sorry I mistook you for an idiot.
Certainly anyone who mocks superstition on a rationalist message board dedicated to fighting ignorance should be assumed to be an ignoramus unless you know them well.
Making the assumption that you didn’t know the origin of the quote seems pretty reasonable to me given what you said.
You seem to be saying that Shodan needs to grow up and you seem to be attributing the words to Shodan. Few of us have memorized Hamlet. The phrase was familiar to me, but I had to Google it to find out its source. Acting like a fool because someone you appear to dislike used a quote that mentions angels makes you look foolish and ignorant. Does a mention of Santa Claus set you off the same way? You acted like an ass in the other thread, and now you just go on and on with it. Before you popped off in the other thread, did you notice that the phrase had quotes around it in the thread title?
Wow. For an atheist, you sure do love hanging on that cross.
Hold on - I’ve figured you out. You believe that every single atheist is *a priori * smarter than every single theist, right? Guess I didn’t make much of a mistake after all.
Hold on. That’d be like a strawman, right?
So who said them? The hamsters? Did you think Shodan was some sort of mouthpiece automaton who had no say in the quote he chose to use?
No, I don’t know anyone over the age of about ten who believes in him.
No, it’s safest to assume that anyone you don’t know well has the powers of observation of a sea cucumber.
I’m feeling safer and safer in feeling that you’re an irritating idiot.
So despite the fact that I’m an idiot, you’re the one who has no rational response, other than to call me names. Noted.
How many angels can dance on Princhester’s head?
Regards,
Shodan
OK, idiot, I’ll respond to your moronic reply to my post.
It appears to me that nobody said anything. Shodan typed a quote, that much was clear to almost everyone. No hamsters were involved, as far as I know. Shodan selected the quote with some care and wit, IMO.
So you resist the temptation you must feel to lambaste parents who perpetuate the myth? You aren’t completely ticked off every time you hear an adult sing a Christmas song that mentions Santa but doesn’t include a disclaimer about the mythical nature of the subject? Good for you.
I’ve never met a sea cucumber, but I know a few idiots. I don’t know you, but so far, you’re looking pretty much like an idiot to me.
So you admit Jesus was a actual guy. Ha!
Seriously, why so upset about a fairly clever use of Bill’s words as an op title. I would think **Shodan ** must have provided some more pittable fodder somewhere along the way for you. This is a pretty lame pitting and makes little sense.
Are you upset that a conclusion was made that you did not recognize the quote or that someone had the temerity to use the horrible word Angels in a thread title?
Jim
Remind me not to invite Princhester to attend Angels in America with me.
He will interrupt the performance to inform everyone that there are no angels.
Regards,
Shodan
You’re a fuckwit. I didn’t say that. It was just a quote from a movie I once saw. I’m sure you’re not really a fuckwit. But you take my point, right?
Sure. Was there an element of mockery involved?
All I’m getting out of this thread is that **Princhester ** believes in hamsters but not Shakespeare.
This whole “upset” thing is a meme that seems to have originated from others assumptions.
Go back and read the OP. It contains clues, both as to what the OP is about and whether I am, in fact, upset.
From your op it appears you are ‘Upset’* that **Shodan ** made the mistake of thinking you did not recognize the quote. Why was that an unreasonable assumption?
Additionally there are strong tones that you were upset by the use of the word “Angels” in a thread about BadChad an Atheist. You brought up the Sky Pixies.
I was surprised that thread was even allowed to remain open as long as it did, but the title was fairly clever use of a classic line. Sorry I cannot agree with your complaints in this case.
Jim
Finally someone who understands me.
As to taking your point, no, I’m not getting it. Everything you’ve posted in these two threads appears pretty pointless to me. It is possible that I’m simply dense. Maybe not. And yes, I believe that Shodan intended a bit of mockery.
Regarding your reply to What Exit?, you might want to look up the word meme in a dictionary. It definitely doesn’t mean what you think it means. And since the word “annoying” was in the first sentence of your short OP, and the third sentence starts with “WTF” used in what looks more like an angry than an incredulous way, it is not surprising that a number of people have reached the conclusion that you’re cheesed off about something.
Before, or after, I quote Shakespeare to him and it explodes? These details are important to constructing a rational, non-supersititious answer, you know. 
Again, the idea that I was upset about the use of the word “angels” is one that seems a persistent meme in this thread, but is not the thrust of what I said. Read the whole of my first post in the original thread again. Particularly the last sentence. **Shodan ** wrote a smug OP, with a cute religiously referenced title, to celebrate the departure of a prickly atheist. The point is not “angels”. The point is that badchad’s departure doesn’t help the fundamentally childish and silly nature of superstition, be it a belief in a god or angels or pixies or whatever.