In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 47707 comments on the Spiked story from Apr 11, 2012, titled In America, atheists are still in the closet. In it, Spiked reports that:

So do many other interest and identity groups. Complaint is our political lingua franca: it's what Occupiers, Tea Partiers, Wall Street titans, religious and irreligious people share.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Spiked.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47215 Feb 11, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<Showing me three different links that all copy-paste from Wikipedia
Prove it.

Your assertion.

Prove it.

PS: Let's look at the quote again:

YOU SAID:'Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim;'

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47216 Feb 11, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
I see that the quote is there. I also see a lot of quotes located there in many other famous peoples' biographies that all come straight from Wikipedia.
Most people are smart enough to know that Wikipedia isn't the original source, that people quote other sources.

I pointed out the footnote two weeks ago, you stupid f*ing hump.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHA!

PS:
YOU SAID: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

I'll point to how you changed "unanimous choice" to "popular choice" after your error was pointed out to you.

And remind you how you are unable to admit you are wrong.

Say your goodbyes: stop posting, Welsher!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47217 Feb 11, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
If this conversation never happened then you would not be desperately trying to avoid admitting that you got the Macmillan quote from Wikipedia.
QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

I told you weeks ago I didn't use Wikipedia as the source for the quote and you insisted I did.

Let's look at that quote again:

QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

Now I have shown you FOUR places (and there are many more).

It was STUPID of you to insist not only did I get it from WIKIPEDIA, but that it was the ONLY place that I could have gotten it.

Let's look at that quote again:

YOU SAID: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

Say you goodbyes, SuperFAG.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47218 Feb 11, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Make me, manchild.
Make you?

You m/f c/s liar: your word is worthless.

HAHAHAAHAHAHAH!

What makes you think ANYONE believes you would keep your word?

HAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAAHAHHA!
SupaAFC

Glasgow, UK

#47219 Feb 12, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
SupaAFC wrote:
You most likely do not have the physical copy of the source - Wiki does not even quote it because the author of the article, whether citing it or not, wrote his/her own version of the statement;
Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim;
And yet the links you provided are pastejobs from Wikipedia.

I do not know how you found them, but Wikipedia is the only source that pops up when copy-pasted into Google - certainly for me.

Also, I was addressing your claim that you did not get the quote from Wikipedia. So if you did get it from one of those links - which was it?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
QUOTE:
...Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim;
Good job avoiding the argument by jumping onto semantics again.

I made this conclusion based on the fact that when pasted into Google, Wikipedia was the only source that came up.

Are you going to show me which of the links you got the quote from if not from Wikipedia? It really makes no difference considering they all are all pastejobs from Wikipedia.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I gave you the source.
~stomp stomp stomp~
That Facebook page is not EB.

I gave you EB's biography of Eden straight from EB's website. Your quote is not present.

Are you still going to pretend that EB used your quote?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at that quote again:
QUOTE
Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim;
And all your links are pastejobs from Wikipedia, so whether you got the quote from Wikipedia, a blog or Facebook, it makes no real difference considering they are all from Wikipedia in the first place!

Which one did you get it from? Stop dodging the question.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
Your assertion.
Prove it.
PS: Let's look at the quote again:
YOU SAID:'Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim;'
When you still cannot admit to being wrong about universities not giving out politics degrees, or that the Weimar republic was not a democracy, or that your Facebook page is -not- EB, or that Constitutional monarchies are democratic, then what good would it be going on another wild goose chase when you change your demands every five minutes?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Most people are smart enough to know that Wikipedia isn't the original source, that people quote other sources.
Most people are honest enough to not make up strawmen.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>I pointed out the footnote two weeks ago, you stupid f*ing hump.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHA!
I pointed out that you did not come across the statement from the original source. That is the point. You got it online, whether from Wikipedia or a link that pastejobs from Wikipedia, and contradicted yourself after repeatedly ignoring people's arguments supported by Wiki or any online source at all.
SupaAFC

Glasgow, UK

#47220 Feb 12, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
PS:
YOU SAID: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim
I'll point to how you changed "unanimous choice" to "popular choice" after your error was pointed out to you.
And remind you how you are unable to admit you are wrong.
Say your goodbyes: stop posting, Welsher!
You do realise that all you accomplish by continually ranting about semantics is show the world that you have nothing to say against the arguments themselves, right?

Barefoot logic: scores a point, claims knockout.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim
I told you weeks ago I didn't use Wikipedia as the source for the quote and you insisted I did.
Right. Notice that despite all your ravings and high post content, you have -still- not declared where you got the quote from?

Wiki? Non-EB Facebook? Random blog? An internet forum? Where was it?

Then explain why it even matters considering they -all- copied from Wikipedia anyway.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>It was STUPID of you to insist not only did I get it from WIKIPEDIA, but that it was the ONLY place that I could have gotten it.
Let's look at that quote again:
YOU SAID: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim
Say you goodbyes, SuperFAG.
Where did you get the quote from? You do realise that I am still aware that you have not actually answered this question, right?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Make you?
You m/f c/s liar: your word is worthless.
HAHAHAAHAHAHAH!
What makes you think ANYONE believes you would keep your word?
HAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAAHAHHA!
Speaking of words, are you going to define democracy yet?
Lincoln

United States

#47221 Feb 12, 2013
You
are
amusing ...
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll bump this as an example of something that you repeat but still cannot find me denying the UK is a constitutional monarchy because- and this is the tricky part- I haven't said that.
Putting aside the UK does not have a constitution.
Siro

Brisbane, Australia

#47222 Feb 12, 2013
I see the maltheists are resorting to their usual M.O. in trying to bore barefoot2626 off topix with the usual spamming of rehashed and redefined rants and diatribes as well as irrelevant posts.

Unfortunately barefoot you must realise now if you havent already and as I was once told....
"you will never win an argument with a stupid person"

How true that is, we believers see it everyday with the maltheist perverts on this site

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#47223 Feb 12, 2013
Siro wrote:
I see the maltheists are resorting to their usual M.O. in trying to bore barefoot2626 off topix with the usual spamming of rehashed and redefined rants and diatribes as well as irrelevant posts.
Unfortunately barefoot you must realise now if you havent already and as I was once told....
"you will never win an argument with a stupid person"
How true that is, we believers see it everyday with the maltheist perverts on this site
Go away theist troll, your arguments have already been defeated. Instead of getting angry at atheists, try and get better from your faith based mental illness.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47224 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet the links you provided are pastejobs from Wikipedia.
Prove it.

Putting aside I have already
a) Proved that the Wiki entry is a compilation of posts, including my source
b) did you already forget to told us there were no other sources that I could have possible gotten my quote from?

Why are you still posting?

Welsher!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47225 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
I do not know how you found them, but Wikipedia is the only source that pops up when copy-pasted into Google - certainly for me.
QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

PS: I GAVE YOU THE LINKSA, Welsher!

HAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Here's a thought, dumbpqhuq: I didn't go looking for the quote, I already had the quote.

I didn't know or care that it was ALSO in Wikipedia, ya dumbphuq.

Why are you still posting, Welsher?
Siro

Brisbane, Australia

#47226 Feb 12, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Go away theist troll, your arguments have already been defeated. Instead of getting angry at atheists, try and get better from your faith based mental illness.
Well you obviously defeated all my arguments because.....because....ummm... ..because.......YOU SAID SO!
Gee...what other evidence is necessary?
As you are the self proclaimed fountain to truth and absolute wisdom!

You hate God because you hate competition.
So now oh great red comrade, how are we to worship your regal narcissim?

Seriously you suck.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47227 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Good job avoiding the argument by jumping onto semantics again.
You mean by taking EXACTLY what YOU said and proving you to be a liar?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47228 Feb 12, 2013
Siro wrote:
<quoted text>
Well you obviously defeated all my arguments because.....because....ummm... ..because.......YOU SAID SO!
You notice that?

Even when you prove the NotBot to be wrong - or to be a liar... again... here's their excuse: you are using 'semantics'...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47229 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Right. Notice that despite all your ravings and high post content, you have -still- not declared where you got the quote from?
You do remember insisting that the ONLY place I could have possibly gotten it from was Wikipedia?

And I gave you FOUR more web sources with the link...

And you still insist that it isn't possible that I got this quote from any other place except Wikipedia?

WELSHER!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47230 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Then explain why it even matters considering they -all- copied from Wikipedia anyway.
QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

I told you weeks ago I didn't use Wikipedia as the source for the quote and you insisted I did.

And I already PROVED Wiki wasn't the original source.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47231 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
I pointed out that you did not come across the statement from the original source.
QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

TRUE OR FALSE?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47232 Feb 12, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
I do not know how you found them, but
BUT I FOUND THEM BEFORE YOU EVEN LOOKED!

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!

QUOTE: Wikipedia is the -only- source where the quote shows up ad verbatim

TRUE OR FALSE?

WELSHER!
Siro

Australia

#47233 Feb 12, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You notice that?
Even when you prove the NotBot to be wrong - or to be a liar... again... here's their excuse: you are using 'semantics'...
And yet they use marxist dialectic to redefine whatever rants they post to suit their supposed point of the time, even though they might produce contradicting/opposing points of view in their argument. They will still hold these points as being simultaneously absolutely true.
They are easily to predict because they all are schooled in atheist or so-called 'rational' thought in the same way.
It is them that are indoctrinated in a cult like process - not us.
SupaAFC

Glasgow, UK

#47234 Feb 12, 2013
Siro wrote:
I see the maltheists are resorting to their usual M.O. in trying to bore barefoot2626 off topix with the usual spamming of rehashed and redefined rants and diatribes as well as irrelevant posts.
I see that you have no qualms with ignoring Christian doctrine to satisfy your own prejudices.
Siro wrote:
Unfortunately barefoot you must realise now if you havent already and as I was once told....
"you will never win an argument with a stupid person"
How true that is, we believers see it everyday with the maltheist perverts on this site
When calling atheists stupid, make sure to re-check which side believes in magic.

That would be -your- side.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr thetruth 244,817
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 hr thetruth 10,732
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr DanFromSmithville 20,565
Atheists should stop feeding the stereotypes 6 hr Shizle 15
Atheists and the "Moses Syndrome" 7 hr Thinking 9
Santa vs. God: logic? Wed Shizle 2
Is the Christian god good? Wed Shizle 4
More from around the web