Fundamentalist Christians on Twitter worth a good laugh (at) Part 1

@Starchasr
Lying for Jesus comes so naturally to this bozo you almost feel like he might be just a genius of satire trolling for trolls. But Poe’s law aside, every now and then he pipes up with true classics.
For example: “Yes! Sorry what do they have to do with evolution?” in response to the question, “You ever heard of chemistry, biology, geology, genetics and palaeontology?”

@JuanitaBerguson
Filled to the brim with hatred for anyone who isn’t as brainwashed as she is, particularly if they’re any more intellectually curious than a liverwort. Also noted for her complete lack of honesty when asked direct questions and explosive righteous indigence when the same is done to her.
For example: “Sorry I don’t read atheist propaganda” when directed towards a wikipedia page explaining the Haldane and Oparin experiment.

@meganphelps
Everything that she stands for is repugnant and vile. But she is a Phelps after-all, so it’s par for the course. Loves her Granddaddy (and yes I do mean in the biblical sense) even though he’s a closeted, self-loathing puke who enjoys physically abusing his own children. She’s typically unaware of how hilarious her lack of honesty is.
For example: “@almightygod Since you’re obviously unmoved by truth or facts, I have a better question: why not stop looking for excuses & just obey?”

5 comments on “Fundamentalist Christians on Twitter worth a good laugh (at) Part 1

  1. I have to comment on this because some of it seems quite unfair

    In regards to ‘Starchasr’, is it really necessary to resort to ad hominems when somebody expects clarification over such a grand and over-arching, generalised question? I think that is a little unfair over a platform like twitter which is designed for conciseness.

    For JuanitaBerguson, by ‘Haldane and Oparin experiment’ do you mean Miller-Urey? At least this is more focused than just name checking various fields of scientific endeavour as if that alone proves your point! However taking into account the fact that ‘chemical evolution’ is only necessary to provide the atheist with a mechanism which could potentially account for the origins of life via a naturalistic process can you not see how that (extremely flawed btw) experiment would be utterly irrelevant to a Christian?

    In a way it is akin to a Christian sending you a link to a ‘Genesis’ webpage! You would both ultimately be making a mere assertion… ‘See, it COULD have happened like this!’
    (and this is without taking into account the fatal problems of the aforementioned experiment, such as the flaws with the assumptions made in the chosen ‘early atmosphere’, the unnatural conditions set up to isolate the products, the fact that the amino acids predominantly produced were dextro-isomers, the absence of a mechanism for polymerisation etc etc)

    I fail to see how a reluctance to be drawn into such an irrelevant debate over twitter denotes dishonesty?

    However…

    For the treatment Megan & Fred Phelps………Fair play, your comments are no worse than the kind of things they say all the time :-)

  2. I take your point on sending links to people that might appear to be self-serving. But I really don’t see how peer reviewed articles on matters of basic chemistry are serving any hidden agenda. If someone is self-censoring themselves against evidence that completely debunks their mistaken thinking, as @JuanitaBerguson consistently does, by posting statements which are sceptical of scepticism, there is no way to reason them out of that position, because they clearly haven’t reasoned themselves into it in the first place. She actually once said, “I never tried to say I was open minded”, and wasn’t joking. Scary.

    @Starchasr, on the other hand, simply doesn’t think before he posts. If I posted something like, “All scientists are right and all sceptics are wrong”, that would be something I should expect to be challenged on. But with @Starchasr and all too many like him, there is an expectation that simply because someone asserts something on religious grounds, they are automatically entitled to be taken seriously—even though they have no idea how seriously they would be entitled to be taken, if what they had to say actually made any sense. It is the fact that they have no idea how far they have to go in proving their opinion valid, which makes them such easy game; it is not what they say, but why they say it.

    Turning this fact around upon those who cite scientific evidence as their authority upon which to speak, is a logical fallacy. Because it assumes that superstition and personal opinion are equally valid starting points upon which to build a working theory as are scientific falsification and arithmetic logic. Which is the very presumptuous arrogance “they” so readily accuse in others and completely fail to see in themselves.

  3. Hi Jim and Michael….

    Truth is that Jim and others like him are not used to my in your face approach and the fact I really dont care what people think of me or my tweets….I have absolute belief in my faith and I will not water that down because some silly scientists say we used to be apes and then try to take the intellectual highground….

    At its most basic level evolution really is the daftest idea ever and I am not afraid to say so.

    If you dont like the attitude Jim change your own….

  4. Your faith is not in question. But what you believe to be true, in comparison to what you can prove to be so, does not constitute a reasonable basis upon which to build an argument. You can believe there are fairies living at the bottom of the garden if you want—in fact I would celebrate your right to do so. What I would never support is your right to teach my children that fairies are real simply because you say they are.

    If you can not provide positive evidence of your claims against the fact of evolution by means of natural selection, it is your prerogative to continue thinking whatever you want about that—but don’t cheat yourself into thinking this somehow makes your position true, simply because you don’t understand the contrary evidence offered to you by people who do. That is the very definition of close mindedness—the self-same quality you identify so quickly in others, while failing to recognise it in yourself.

  5. “””Your faith is not in question. But what you believe to be true, in comparison to what you can prove to be so, does not constitute a reasonable basis upon which to build an argument.”””

    Thats funny I could say exactly the same to you Jim…

    Difference is I say it as been proven 100% to me I’m not saying I can prove it to you and then resorting to insults when you dont accept my evidence…You are….

    “””You can believe there are fairies living at the bottom of the garden if you want—in fact I would celebrate your right to do so.”””

    Dont be silly….They would fight with the elves and goblins…;-)

    “””What I would never support is your right to teach my children that fairies are real simply because you say they are.”””

    If evolution is right then it doesn’t matter but since I AM right then lives are at stake….My preaching and teaching is life saving work…

    “””If you can not provide positive evidence of your claims against the fact of evolution by means of natural selection,”””

    See what I mean? There is no proof of the “fact” of evolution…

    “””it is your prerogative to continue thinking whatever you want about that—but don’t cheat yourself into thinking this somehow makes your position true,”””

    No the spurious science and conjecture does that..

    “””simply because you don’t understand the contrary evidence offered to you by people who do.”””

    I understand I just dont believe…

    “””That is the very definition of close mindedness—the self-same quality you identify so quickly in others, while failing to recognise it in yourself.”””

    Hey your the one whos so close minded you ignore any contrary evidence to hang on to your “fact of evolution.”

    I’m just as open minded to evolution being right as you are to it being wrong….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s