Author Topic: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition  (Read 2929 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« on: April 14, 2009, 01:22:17 PM »
I'm trying for a successful sticky, we'll see if the quality holds up :P



Val's Law of Convergence (as pointed out by Tails_155 and named by William)

The poster in question turns every topic into whatever the topic they started that annoyed the most people was about, often through digression or a constant misunderstanding of what is fact.

The Law of Many Ones (a.k.a. Val's Law of Redundancy)

If, at any time, a poster, especially on the topic of theism and objective morals goes into a chant of "one [noun], one [noun], one [noun]...," likely ending in "one [god]" that post may be ignored without remorse.

Hermes' Law

The Great Flood story is nothing more than a laughable piece of fiction, and anyone who believes it should be laughed at relentlessly.

"Noah's ark is a joke.  It's amazing that anyone believes it actually happened.  If I believed in it I would never admit it, because I would expect to be laughed at."

Godwin's Law

Any statement involving an unwarranted reference to Hitler or the Nazi Party shall instantly be discredited on the grounds of silliness.

The Law of Dudes

Any statement including the word "dude" may instantly be taken with extreme skepticism on the grounds of meaningless expletives.

The Law of Walls of Text

Any situation in which a person produces an excessively long, rambling, senseless string of text which does nothing more than exhaust the reader to the point of submission on the grounds of minimal stamina causing the reader to either lose interest or skip around and not actually read the whole thing because it is so stressful on the eyes to read word after word of meaningless drivel which rarely amounts to more than a long run-on sentence or twenty five thousand that have almost nothing really to say except how little they have to say for hours and hours of reading and yielding nothing of any actual value. Walls of text are rarely ever credited for being anything but a waste of time on the reader's part and are likely quoted from someone else anyway and aren't the "writer's" actual words. Spacing is a highly unique thing to discover in anything defined as a wall of text, but is not necessarily impossible to find as sometimes the writer will instead establish a bunch of miniature walls of text. The few people who actually take walls of text seriously often go insane far before anyone can finish reading the words all the way through. Most people don't even realize if all of the text is actual words or just simple fake epwe nwaoslw saoralw bisconusia bala lorem ipsum gargling banter. Whether the reader does actually read the entire extension of a wall of text or not is a moot point, anyway, since there is, as stated before, little information in the extensively exhaustive measure of text. Walls of text are likely to repeat themselves many times, sometimes word for word, as if copied from an earlier part of the wall of text. Walls of text are likely to repeat themselves many times, sometimes word for word, as if copied from an earlier part of the wall of text. Usually the majority of it is intended to be well thought out but ends up being anything but. There is minimal value in a wall of text because the end result is everyone wastes their time. Walls of text are likely to repeat themselves many times, sometimes word for word, as if copied from an earlier part of the wall of text.

The Law of Smilies

Any time you come across a :D in a conversation that is intended to be serious, or give some irrefutable proof, don't hold your breath. When a :) is discovered in any extensive explanation, the reader is inclined to believe that the writer doesn't take the subject seriously, therefore neither should the reader.

The Law of Excessive Punctuation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Any time more than two or three punctuation marks is used for a single sentence ending........ You can bet that the writer either has little to say, or doesn't really have anything to say at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THE LAW OF YELLING

ANY TIME AN ENTIRE TEXT IS WRITTEN IN CAPITALS THE READER WILL RARELY GET TWO OR THREE SENTENCES IN BEFORE FINDING IT A WASTE OF TIME. IT IS EXHAUSTIVE TO READ ENTIRELY CAPITAL STRETCHES OF LETTERS, AND COMES OF VERY SIMILAR TO A WALL OF TEXT. CAPITALIZATION IS BEST LEFT TO THE FIRST LETTER OF A SENTENCE, OR OF A PROPER NOUN. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE...

The Law of Capital H "He"

Any time an atheist of a certain type reads a capital H "he" anywhere but at the start of a sentence, it loses all merit of being important. This also goes for him, his, himself, and in a far rarer situation, hers, she, her, and herself.

The LAW of CAPITAL EMPHASIS

Whenever a WRITER on the FORUM uses CAPITAL LETTERS to emphasize SPECIFIC words in the sentence INSTEAD of BOLD, ITALIC, or UNDERLINE functions, it makes the writer seem ANGRY, and therefore is taken less SERIOUSLY.

The Law of Random Chance

Whenever a bumbling creationist brings up the words "random chance" in a discussion about any form of scientific study, the believers in science are allowed to shamelessly call their opponent, unstudied, an idiot, or just plain stupid.

The OneTrueBeliever Axiom (Velkyn's Law)

Whenever a SPAG is encountered, or someone calls a group of their fellow religious believers, "not true believers," a minimum of one person will reply in the fashion of having discovered the OneTrueBeliever™ or something to that flavor, likely adding more and more words until it becomes a completely silly string of words meaning almost exactly the same thing.

The Law of Evillution (The Law of Evillusion)

Any time a poster considers science or evolution evil, or the work of the devil, he or she is no longer worth reading for any reason because they are deluded beyond saving.

The Lw ov Spelugn

Anytiem a psot hs mor that five typoa in t, it cn be discredidet aas nonsense.

Th Lw o Ch@spek!

Ne time a post iz totall n ch@spek!, it duz not need 2 b red bcuz it haz nuffin useful n it.

The Law of Laughter

Any time "lol," "ha ha," or any form of the concept is established within a post, likely in a condescending matter, it is not worth reading because the poster is most likely just a cocky closed-minded nutcase with a keyboard and nothing to say.

The Law of Ability to Answer

If a poster says "that's easy to answer/refute" etc., but doesn't even make an attempt, they can be exiled from serious conversation on the grounds of most likely being just a cocky closed-minded nutcase with a keyboard and nothing to say.

Exception of Ability to Answer

If the easy-to-answer post breaks any of the other laws, no answer is necessary.

The Law of Not Proving Anything

A poster stating "that doesn't prove anything" can be seen as a poster saying "I admit you are correct" unless they provide some explanation for the prooflessness of a statement.

The Law of Evidence Versus Proof

Evidence is provided for science, proof is provided for math, getting the terms mixed up warrants ridicule, and that will likely be administered immediately.

The Law of Persistent, Progressive Irritation

Every so often, a poster will come along who only gets more and more annoying and less and less productive; these select few can be defined as a nonthreat and be ignored, or approached as a way to increase the blood pressure of oneself.

The Postulate of Scooby Doo

Language does not make humans not animals any more than it makes Scooby Doo not an animal. (This assumes cartoon representations of creatures qualify as examples of those creatures)

The Law of Coincidental Ocular and Otic Presence

Evidence of a situation holds more merit than witness testimony to an event.

The Law of Faithlessness Versus Quality of Living

Not believing in skymages is not the same as misery. Bill Gates and Richard Dawkins seem quite satisfied with life.

The First Law of Faithlessness Versus Mania (a.k.a. The Law of Desire for Equality)

Demanding separation of church and state is not the same as being angry.

The First Law of Faithlessness Versus Mania (a.k.a. The Law of Projective Perception)

Projecting a tone on input when reading does not mean that tone was present in the writer's mind.

The Law of Philosophy Versus Religion

Believing in a deity is not the only way to arrive at a personal meaning of life, the only difference is that believing in a deity often assumes an objective meaning of life, which will likely be imposed on those who disagree.

The First Law of Carpet Claims

One stating he or she does not believe in a whole complex subject does not constitute a worthy discussion.

The Second Law of Carpet Claims

One stating that he or she does not understand an entire subject without supplying specific examples is a waste of text.

The Law of Panoramas

Saying "look around you" is an infraction worthy of ridicule.

The Law of Cerasus Orchard Harvest

Cherry picking one's holy book of choice is a felonious act worthy of exile from serious discussion.

The Law of Wonky Sentence Structure

Writing a statement in a way which following is highly difficult is a think which exile is the proper action. Anyone of which that produces bizarre sentences, types which proper understanding requires glances tenfold a first read, that statement becomes a glaring spotlight demonstrating stupidity or an argument from verbosity.

Yahweh's Law (a.k.a. The Axiom of the Incompetent Omnipotent)

Being all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and all-loving requires jealousy, arrogance, inability to control anything, hatred, false claims about reality (and a respect for ignorance, by extension,) and absolute stupidity.

The Personal Law of Bracket and Smiley Symmetry

Unclosed, open brackets, and faces which can be mirrored (o_O O_o) may irk fellow posters with a compulsion for controllable symmetry, should they 'correct' these actions it is due to their own psychosis, and is not meant to offend.

The Law of Evasive Digression

If a poster changes subject while plurality rules in favor of more elaboration or closure, the subject change is understood of concession to the opposing view.

Sam's First Law of Debate (a.k.a. The Law of Lying)

Calling something a lie does not make it a lie.

Sam's Second Law of Debate (a.k.a The Law of False Projection)

Saying someone believes in something doesn't mean he or she believes that thing.

The Law of External Citation Quarrying

Any poster who commits to quite mining any source automatically loses all credibility in debate and risks exile from serious discussion. If this law is broken, the offending poster must register with the Quote Mine Offender's Registry, and must wear the ceremonial dunce cap for at least one year.

The Law of Relationships (a.k.a. Old Jeezy's Law)

Christianity is a religion.

Caterpie's Law (a.k.a. The Law of the Theory of Pokémon Evolution)

Metamophosis and evolution are different things.

The Law of Crocoducks (a.k.a. Potholer54's Law of Interspecies Nookie)

Chimera so extreme as the crocoduck cannot and will not exist.

The Law of Carbon Dating (a.k.a Potholer54's Law of F***ing Carbon)

Carbon-14 must be present to perform carbon dating. If there's no f***ing carbon, carbon dating will not work.

The Law of the Burden of Proof (a.k.a. The Pastafarian Postulate)

To claim something absolutely does or does not exist requires absolute evidence; claiming disbelief in unproven things does not.

The Law of Responsibility

Anything a poster says can and will be used against them, and if a poster starts a discussion, whether overwhelmed by posts or not, it is their obligation to answer questions presented.

The Law of the Invisible Comfort Blanket

Wishful thinking is not a valid premise.

The Law of Deck-of-Cards Probability

Drawing any hand in a game of cards with a casino-legal deck is just as likely as drawing any other hand.

The Law of Subjective Probability Versus Faith

Subjective probability, not faith, provides the rationality of crossing a street without being hit by a bus.

The Law of Faith Versus Disbelief

It requires no faith to be unconvinced of an evidenciarilly unsupported phenomenon.

The Law of Weak Atheism (AronRa's Law of Disbelief)

Atheism alone is no more a religion than health is a disease, one may as well argue over which brand of car pedestrians drive.

The Law of Categories (AronRa's Law of Primateness)

Demanding an ape-man is actually just as silly as asking to see a mammal-man, or a half-human, half-vertebrate. How about a half dachshund half dog? It's the same thing. One may as well insist on seeing a town halfway between Los Angeles and California.

The Law of Shoddy Gambling Tactics

Anytime a post expresses the benefit of believing versus not believing based on the grounds of being correct upon fatality, the poster in question fails at debate, and must wear the ceremonial dunce cap for a fortnight.

The Three-Chance Corollary

If, after three attempts to explain something, a debater still insists on using a false, or strawman example of a phenomenon, that debater fails at debate forever.

The Law of Word Ownership

If a poster attempts to refute an argument without providing his own explanations, that post may be completely ignored.

The Explanation Exception

If, however, a video is meant for an immediate explanation or example that requires no clarification, the video should at least be watched and considered, or article read.

The Exception of Explanation Exception (The Exhaustion Exception)

If a poster does link several videos, especially in numbers over ten, no one is required to watch them, because the poster has not stated anything, only flooded other people's words. (Any number below this is up to the other posters' discretion)

The Law of Sin

All sin does not explicitly, nor implicitly cause suffering, and it certainly does not cause suffering of an unrelated sort. E.g. homosexuality does not cause starvation, blasphemy does not cause cancer, etc.

The Law of Love and Wind

There is evidence for love, it's a chemical reaction, there is scientific explanation for the phenomenon. There is evidence for wind, explainable sensation, and scientific study of the phenomenon.

The Law of Absolute Evil (Form I)

Yahweh is alone, because nothing lives up to Yahweh's standards.

The Law of Absolute Evil (Form II)

Evil is subjective, therefore only specific people find everyone evil.

The Law of Atheism Versus Satanism

An atheist cannot worship the devil, an atheist does not believe in the devil.

The Law of Atheism Versus Deic Disobedience

An atheist cannot scorn, in actuality, nor intentionally disobey, a deity. An atheist doesn't believe in that deity.

The Law of Atheism Versus Nihilism

Not believing in deities is not the same as believing in nothing.

The Law of Atheism Versus Narcissism

Not believing in deities is not the same as only believing in the importance of oneself. In fact, most atheists see believing that humans are perfectly designed pseudoavatars is far more arrogant.

The Law of Composition

One person of a group is not the whole group.

The Law of Apostrophes, Plurals, and Possessives (NonStampCollector's Law)

It is it's if it's "it is." It is its if it's its possessive. They are they're if it is "they are," their if it is their possessive, and there if it is over there. You are using you're if you're using "you are," you are using your if you're using your possessive. Apostrophes on words are for possessive outside this (mostly) "Joe's bike," plurals have NO apostrophe "the cars," unless it's a plural possessive, which is the same as a possessive ending in a letter s "the Stevens' house" or "the boss' office."

The Law of Passive Voice

"It has been" anything will immediately be accepted to have not been so.

The First Law of Imperative Language

Telling someone to do something without a sensible reason makes a poster come across as arrogant.

The Second Law of Imperative Language

"It kind of makes you" does not. Subjective thoughts are not objective situations.

The Corollary of the Thrice Ignored

Any question ignored upon a third repost, especially if reposted by other posters can safely be assumed to have stumped the opponent.

The Anti-Axiom of Gaps

"I don't know" is asynonymous with, and does not postulate, divine intervention.

The Law of Delusionary Success

Because a poster thinks they won a debate does not mean he or she did, in fact, win.

Nye's Law

Science Rules.

The Law of Superlatives

Hyperbolic speech is the most overused type of speech ever.

The Law of Disagreement Versus Oppression

Disagreement is not oppression.

The Law of Protest Versus Oppression

Protesting the injustice of something is not oppressiong the people who support that something.

The Law of the Lord

Deities, apparently, don't sin even though they do.

The Law of Breaking Down and Breaking Down

If a debate becomes tedious for a debater, and many flaws are present in the opponent's arguments, a breaking point may yield a deconstruction of the opponent's argument, pointing out fallacies, typos, contradictions, nonarguments, and anything else which throws up a red flag.

Poe's Law

When it is impossible to tell whether something is serious or a parody, it is defined as a Poe.

The Law of Trolls

Don't feed trolls.

The Law of Absolute Tedium

If a debate gets nowhere for a very long time, backing down isn't necessarily concession, it may be an insult to the opponent implying s/he is displaying closed-mindedness and/or a distaste for his/her nonsense.

Pony's Law of Understanding and Diction

To avoid Atheist / Theist miscommunication, all posts by theists are to be properly translated before the formulation of a reply. The following resources may be used for assistance: 1, 2

Astreja's First Law of Terse Ambush

The probability of finding two contradictory statements in the same Wall of Text post is directly proportional to the length of the post.

Astreja's Second Law of Terse Ambush

As a user's post count increases, the probability of finding a self-contradicting post approaches 1.0.

Astreja's Third Law of Terse Ambush

Effectiveness of a rebuttal to a Wall of Text can be determined by the formula:



How about the Law of Bible Verses-atility

Any randomly chosen verse from the bible is considered a legitimate response to whatever the atheist says.

Nam's Law of Objective Idiocy

Everyone, at any given moment, is an idiot.

The Law of the Newly Unoriginal (The Law of the Shiny New Dead Horse)

Any new poster on the forum will inevitably post on topic that has already been done to death.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2009, 10:11:25 AM by Tails_155 »
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2009, 01:35:22 PM »
Examples of law violators and other goofy stuff

Laws Continued

Tony's Law of Deluded Delusion (TBright's Law of Special Pleading)

All those other religions are bats*** insane, the stuff they say is impossible and stupid.

I am scarred deeply by my religious upbringing and I am currently rebuilding my life and slowly discovering how beautiful life can actually be, once you take away religion.

I can understand how one could be scarred deeply from a cult like Mormonism. But please don't mistake that experience with Christianity.

Tony's Law of Caustic Banter

As long as you blame the person you insult, it is okay to insult them for no reason.

TBright's Law of TrueChristian™ Absolute Correctness

Just because you've proven a TrueChristian™ wrong doesn't mean you've proven them wrong, it actually means you are stupid, apparently.

Wazamino's Law of Total Refutation (as clarified by tperl)

If you just spam your holy book's words, ignore everything, call people "Brother," and plagiarize, you are so totally absolutely correct I can't disagree.

The Law of Atheism

Atheists are people who do not believe in gods. Nothing else need be in common between any two atheists, as that is the only thing atheist means.

Nam's Refined Theory of Atheism

Atheists do not believe in god or gods. That's it. It doesn't mean that they think that life will be a Utopia if everyone was an Atheist. Atheists are just like any other person out there. They have good points, and they have bad points. Just like those who are religious, some are greedy and power hungry. However, to point out specific people and state they represent Atheists or Atheism is the same as if Atheists pointed out specific people who were religious and used them as representatives of all those with the same ideology.

The Law of Evolution (Or what it would say, if there were any reason to make a law for it)

Things evolve.

The Law of the Effects of Gay Marriage

Gay marriage only affects homosexuals' rights to get married.

The Rule of Crashes

Any real poster has text file copies of any post over a paragraph in size, due to the risk of something going wrong. This text file will likely be saved every five minites


The Law of Quotes Proper

Quote
Quoting is to look like this, anything else and it should be ignored, it becomes too difficult to read

The Law of Civil Disagreement

An answer to your questions or statements that do not agree with your opinion or facts doesn't mean that civility has been left at the door. What you perceive to be rude and inconsiderate may come off as you being rude and inconsiderate.

Law of Verbosity

Adding big words doesn't make a statement smarter, or truer; eschew obfuscation.






Vocabulary

bm - bookmark, saving the page to return to it at a later time for input

SPAG (a.k.a. Burger King Christianity/Islam/etc.) - Self Projection As God, when the writer assumes that his or her interpretation of biblical law is absolutely correct, and the only possible interpretation.

VFX - VenomFangX, see PCS

PCS - Posterboy for Creationist Stupidity, see VFX

NSFW - Not Safe For Work, something obscene ahead

Theory - To scientists, a theory provides a coherent explanation that holds true for a large number of facts and observations about the natural world. (See link for more)

Law - A scientific law is a statement that describes the behavior of some particular thing or set of things within the natural world

Hypothesis - a tentative statement or supposition, which may then be tested through research.

Fact - Something able to be considered true beyond reasonable doubt.

True - The absolute truth, holding no falsehood.

Versebombing - Whenever a theist quotes their religious text of choice to those who do not believe in said book.

Versebombing in the form of John 3:16 - When a Christian quotes the most well known, and least meritous of biblical lines

Versebombing in the form of Deuteronomy 6:16 - Irrefutable proof that testing gods is not to be performed

Facepalm - When a statement is made that is so stupid, no words can make a valid reply. (See Headdesk)

Headdesk - When something so ridiculously stupid is stated, and the only way to relieve the brain is to strike one's skull against a hard object.

Double Facepalm - The rarely warranted action in which something so gloriously stupid perverts the mind into meaningless grotesqueries, and the only option left is slapping oneself in the face, twice, simultaneously, and holding cupped hands over both eyes in preparation for the potential tears of pain that may result from the previously unleashed stupidity.

QFT - Quoted for truth

tl;dr - too long.  did not read

Cookies - (1) Absolutely awesome dessert delights, deliciously delightful, delighting devices
(2) when presented, or recommended to a person, a statement of strong agreement

Nong (by request of William) - (1) an individual who argues a matter with such conviction only to find themselves corrected with a single sentence or argument. they are then on labelled as a "nong". in extreme cases of argument, they are named the nongiest of the week.
- (2) in Australian slang, nong is used as a pretty mild and/or endearing insult. a bit of a twit, or idiot. nothing too mean or horrid is meant by calling someone a nong




(Some verbose law titles inspired by JaguarJ0nes' speech format in his videos)
« Last Edit: April 26, 2009, 12:05:43 AM by Tails_155 »
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2009, 01:39:01 PM »
You've misstated Godwin's Law.  It only applies to unwarranted reference to Nazis or Hitler.  For example, in this thread, Godwin's Law does not apply, simply because of the thread's topic.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2009, 01:43:42 PM »
Fixed. Updated.
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2009, 01:49:27 PM »
Might want to fix the red text, too.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline subtleinspiration

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2600
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2009, 02:10:34 PM »
The Law of TBright - A theist who becomes increasingly idiotic and/or annoying in conjunction with the length of their stay.
"As a God fearing Christian,  you should never ever date an Atheist. One night alone with an atheist is enough for you to lose your faith and to be converted into one of the spiritually dead."

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12210
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #6 on: April 14, 2009, 02:14:06 PM »
The ones that involve peoples' names should have some humor attached to them, at least.  See Valbernados' entry.  The tbright one is just crass.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #7 on: April 14, 2009, 04:14:02 PM »
Updated, I hope Jynnan can delete that post at some point in case I need a second post
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6856
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #8 on: April 14, 2009, 04:54:41 PM »
Possible contradiction:


Quote
The Law of Ability to Answer

If a poster says "that's easy to answer/refute" etc., but doesn't even make an attempt, they can be exiled from serious conversation on the grounds of most likely being just a cocky closed-minded nutcase with a keyboard and nothing to say.

May contradict this, among others:

Quote
Hermes' Law

The Great Flood story is nothing more than a laughable piece of fiction, and anyone who believes it should be laughed at relentlessly.

"Noah's ark is a joke.  It's amazing that anyone believes it actually happened.  If I believed in it I would never admit it, because I would expect to be laughed at."

I find the flood story laughable and may say that I could disprove it, but not bother on the idiot (as I am able to label her according to my reading of The Law of Random Chance).

You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2009, 04:58:07 PM »
I will extend the Law of Ability to Answer, then :P
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1731
  • Darwins +81/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2009, 04:58:47 PM »
Updated, I hope Jynnan can delete that post at some point in case I need a second post

?

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2009, 04:59:41 PM »
There's a maximum character limit, if I breech it, I'd prefer to have my posts back to back
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1731
  • Darwins +81/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #12 on: April 14, 2009, 05:02:36 PM »
There's a maximum character limit, if I breech it, I'd prefer to have my posts back to back

Ah.

Ok, if someone tells me how, I'll delete it.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #13 on: April 14, 2009, 05:12:37 PM »
Oh, crap, I forgot this forum doesn't allow a poster to delete his or her post >.<
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1731
  • Darwins +81/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #14 on: April 14, 2009, 05:14:41 PM »
Oh, crap, I forgot this forum doesn't allow a poster to delete his or her post >.<
sorry. Maybe you can edit/tighten up your OP a bit to get everything in.

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6856
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #15 on: April 14, 2009, 05:16:37 PM »
New rule:

Pony's Law of Understanding and Diction

To avoid Atheist / Theist miscommunication, all posts by theists are to be properly translated before the formulation of a reply. The following lexicon is suggested:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forum/index.php?topic=1998.msg23116#msg23116

New international version:

http://www.atheistthinktank.net/thinktank/index.php?topic=1146.msg19766#msg19766
« Last Edit: April 14, 2009, 05:33:26 PM by Ambassador Pony »
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline FinallyFreeFromFaith

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • FinallyFreeFromFaith
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #16 on: April 14, 2009, 06:29:23 PM »
I admit that I constantly break the Law of Capital H. I don't think if it comes from my many years of indoctrination. I just feel as though I'm butchering the rules of writing if I don't. And, that would drive me crazy.
The best advice I can give is this...Assume everyone is an idiot, unless they can prove otherwise.

Offline Kodanshi

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Let’s start the Party!
    • Rascaduanok
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2009, 06:46:12 PM »
I deliberately spell god and allah with small letters, even when at the start of a sentence. As for the original post… tl;dr.

Just kidding. Great stuff! ;)

Offline subtleinspiration

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2600
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2009, 06:47:34 PM »
I admit that I constantly break the Law of Capital H. I don't think if it comes from my many years of indoctrination. I just feel as though I'm butchering the rules of writing if I don't. And, that would drive me crazy.

Same here too, FinallyFree. Twenty-three years of that same way of thinking still manifests itself sometimes. Hell, at very rare times, I even get a thought in my head to start praying, only to laugh at it and go on my way.
"As a God fearing Christian,  you should never ever date an Atheist. One night alone with an atheist is enough for you to lose your faith and to be converted into one of the spiritually dead."

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2933
  • Darwins +237/-1
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #19 on: April 14, 2009, 07:46:48 PM »
Astreja's Laws of Terse Ambush:

1.  The probability of finding two contradictory statements in the same Wall of Text post is directly proportional to the length of the post.

2.  As a user's post count increases, the probability of finding a self-contradicting post approaches 1.0.

3.  Effectiveness of a rebuttal to a Wall of Text can be determined by the formula:

   Word count in Wall of Text
   --------------------------
     Word count in rebuttal




Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #20 on: April 14, 2009, 07:55:58 PM »
Tails, you done good. A few tweaks here and there and we should be able to get it out of Beta. I'll give it some thought.
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline deconvertedone

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • My dog isn't an atheist, he thinks I'm God.
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #21 on: April 14, 2009, 08:27:56 PM »
Very entertaining and educational too Tails, thank you, that was a lot of work.
The memory of my own suffering has prevented me from ever shadowing one young soul with the superstition of the Christian religion.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Offline Emily

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5657
  • Darwins +49/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #22 on: April 14, 2009, 09:22:04 PM »
You should define //facepalm//. I find //facepalm// an important gesture, much like the middle finger (but that's not relevant here), and I often find myself doing it in the mailbag, however //facepalm// can be apply anywhere.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2009, 09:24:58 PM by Emily »
"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #23 on: April 14, 2009, 09:35:46 PM »
Max character limit, expanding to my second post (separated by one post fttb)
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline ksm

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1592
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #24 on: April 14, 2009, 09:36:22 PM »
Excellent work. This needs to be sticky.

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #25 on: April 14, 2009, 09:53:49 PM »
If you have any other math stuff, use the Wikipedia sandbox and make an image, it reads more conveniently
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1731
  • Darwins +81/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #26 on: April 14, 2009, 09:59:19 PM »
Sorry I couldn't delete my post to enable you to get it all in back to back...I just edited it, though, to hopefully at least make it flow a little better!

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #27 on: April 14, 2009, 10:08:23 PM »
Definitions of self-harming actions produced by utterly stupid statements added

Hah, this has produced a 3000 word random project XD
« Last Edit: April 15, 2009, 01:27:37 AM by Tails_155 »
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?

Offline Tails_155

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1754
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • L!5
    • The Enigma Puzzle
Re: The Vocabulary of Debate and Mail - WWGHA Edition
« Reply #28 on: April 15, 2009, 07:29:12 PM »
Any more input?
Live! Learn! Laugh! Love! Lead!

I'm not all analysis, I like art, too: See?