Bravado Incarnate
Warning: If you click the links, you will be subjected to strong profanity.
One of the most obstreperous atheists (who
- Rude
- Arrogant
- Prideful
- Self contradicting
- Broke basic rules of logic
- Interrupting and talking over the show's host right after bragging, "We don't do that in the UK"
- Creating new definitions of terms that only exist in his mind
- Bouncing around topics like a table tennis ball in a clothes dryer
- And, the most typical is the refusal to even consider the possibility that a Christian can be right about anything
If you want to see his profane bravado, you can go here, here, here and here the targets of the links proving my points have been disabled. I can guess why... What an astonishingly huge ego! If you see the stunningly vapid comments (including "Matt Slick was pathetic"), there is an accusation in the newest one by one of Norman's sock puppets that a commenter is Matt himself. Now, why is it inconceivable (yes, that word does mean what I think it does) that more than one or two people can disagree with an atheist?
There is an amazing accusation that the Weblog owner made against another atheist that it was me in disguise (I get accused of using multiple fake names all the time by people who use multiple fake names. However, most of mine are clearly marked so they can be traced back to me.) Here, they are accusing someone else of being Matt Slick. Guess what, Poindexter? Matt told me personally that he does not post comments because there are impostors.
There is an amazing accusation that the Weblog owner made against another atheist that it was me in disguise (I get accused of using multiple fake names all the time by people who use multiple fake names. However, most of mine are clearly marked so they can be traced back to me.) Here, they are accusing someone else of being Matt Slick. Guess what, Poindexter? Matt told me personally that he does not post comments because there are impostors.
Also, the comments are full of braggadocio and of vacuous atheists uniting in hate. My feeling is that people who would not be able to tolerate each other in other things are self-congratulating, "Good job! You really told him!", for the sake of hating God. What is it with pride and egos with these atheists? The ones who want real discussions should stay far away from this type!
By the way, Slick said to him, "You hate God". He denied it. Liar (link disabled).
Now, I hate to tell Matt this, but I felt that he dropped the ball on a couple of points. But he's the one that has done real debates, not me. And this was a "cold call" from a revved up, angry hatebag who had prepped himself for the call.
So, if he thinks Matt was not a challenge, he should move up the ladder. I would like to see this deluded egomaniac humiliate himself further (even though I spanked him several times in public myself, but he still could not learn basic logic). How about calling Greg Koukl at Stand to Reason? Or better yet, call another outspoken Calvinist and apologist, James White? They would send you crying and hiding in Norman the Paranoid Troll's basement with the poisonous talking wall fungus, and you would still scream, "Victory is mine!" Or even go on "Unbelievable" with Justin Brierley and show the world what an intellectual giant you really are.
By the way, Matt told me to tell you (remember, he does not post himself) that he wants you to call back and show people again what atheism does to the mind.
Anyway, I am done with this brain damaged maniac and liar. I have better things to do; harvesting my crops on Farmville is more intellectually stimulating that dealing with this clown, capice?
Safe link: If you want to listen to the "discussion", click here, it starts about 17 minutes 55 seconds in.
Addendum: He's laughing at me laughing at him (also disabled). For students of logic, take a look. Count the ad hominem attacks (from the beginning), look for straw man arguments, misrepresentation and just downright bad writing. Reinhold Niebuhr said, "No amount of contrary evidence seems to disturb humanity's good opinion of itself." That is definitely true of this blighter.
Addendum:
Comments
He KNOWS there is no god.
I now wish I'd finished it last night but my eyelids got too heavy!
Its hard to type on the nods!
Besides, it would prove nothing to his microcephalic mind.
You provoke them so!
But if you ever throw a "sockpuppet" party- I better get an invite so I can see if I can figure out who is really who!
Maybe Matt should update his website that says:
"Matt also uses pseudonyms when exploring, gathering information, testing ideas, and generally does not affirm or deny who he is or isn't regarding pseudonyms on the internet."
A more accurate update of his statement would be helpful, however, I agree to that extent.
Twat.
Now I can further humiliate you by showing your lack of logic and put something on record:
* YOU are the clown that was whining that the Please Convince Me Weblog was not satisfying to you.
* I was not the only one to urge you to call Matt Slick.
* I am not the one with the massive ego, trying to be the smartest blighter on the 'Net.
* Elsewhere I stated that I have doubts about the usefulness of debates.
* If they are as arrogant and illogical as you, I could trounce them as well, but they would not even understand it. At any rate, I have heard "debates" with AE. Nicky and I have been involved with knife fights in the schoolyard that have more dignity.
Your latest go at Matt was better than the first one, and very entertaining. It further illustrates how atheism causes brain damage. Did you look up lamarckianism yet? You were preaching it, Matt was describing it, you were disagreeing and putting words in his mouth. Again. Dolt.
Now go away, or I shall taunt you again.
List the logic fallacies, gang. I'll start: False dilemma. Who's next?
I hope the Atheist Experience people have a better grasp of reality and logic than you, for their sakes. But from what I've heard from them in debates, I strongly suspect that they are only slightly better than you.
Why do people insist on reading bad philosophy by Daffy Dawkins and substituting that for their own thought processes?
OK, door's closed. No more comments from you allowed.