Skip

wtf quonsar November 13, 2007 12:48 PM   Subscribe


Wankity wank wank all around.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 12:53 PM on November 13, 2007


Not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I would say that of any creationist. He's pretty funny sometimes.
posted by jeblis at 12:54 PM on November 13, 2007


He could be neither. He could be espousing his point of view.

But y'all -- and it pains me to say this -- are being terribly backwards about all this. Let him be. He's got a point.
posted by koeselitz at 12:55 PM on November 13, 2007


He's got a point.

And that would be?
posted by Pope Guilty at 12:56 PM on November 13, 2007


He's got a point.

???
posted by rtha at 12:57 PM on November 13, 2007


Why does this need to splinter off into MetaTalk? If you are puzzled by his views, engage him in the thread, or e-mail him. It looks like you're just looking to instigate a pile-on here.
posted by brain_drain at 12:58 PM on November 13, 2007


it's at the tip of my shiny head.
posted by quonsar at 12:58 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


I bet he's fun to drink with.
posted by jeblis at 12:59 PM on November 13, 2007


He has a Jesus fish in his pants.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:00 PM on November 13, 2007 [7 favorites]


I find that as people near the end of their lives they often long for the reassurance and comfort that religion brings. If finding Jesus helps quonsar come to terms with his imminent mortality, then I don't think that we should take that from him. That would be like taking away his applesauce or his hemorrhoid pillow.

quonsar's old
posted by ND¢ at 1:01 PM on November 13, 2007 [5 favorites]


quonsar is quonsar. He's unique, and not to be tampered with.
posted by konolia at 1:02 PM on November 13, 2007 [5 favorites]


LALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
posted by homunculus at 1:02 PM on November 13, 2007


Dangit, quonsar, quit expressin' beliefs that diverge from those of your fellow mefites, or it's back in The Hole again.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:02 PM on November 13, 2007 [12 favorites]


"you couldn't investigate reality if it was homosexually raping you" is expressing a divergent belief?
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:04 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


quonsar's old

and not as funny as he used to be.
posted by quonsar at 1:05 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


Well, an assload of reality is awfully hard to investigate without pulling your back.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:06 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


his point sounds enormously agnostic (and I can't help but sympathize if it is), and this sounds like a case of "I don't like what he's saying and I don't like how he says it so I'm gonna whine in MeTa!"

what do you want to have happen in here? he thinks it's silly to think the existence of god has been disproven because his/her/its existence hasn't yet been proven. and you know what? he's right. so he says it in annoying ways? hey, that was another atheism thread, yeah? when are they not annoying? you can feel completely free to bitch all you want in the thread, you won't stand out in there. why does this thread exist?
posted by shmegegge at 1:06 PM on November 13, 2007 [8 favorites]


assuming of course, that you didn't just want to have some kind of sanctioned space to call another mefite retarded. that's not why you made this thread, right?

right?
posted by shmegegge at 1:07 PM on November 13, 2007


expressing a divergent belief?

some gluteal divergence is required by the very nature of the act.
posted by quonsar at 1:07 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


quonsar, are you trolling or just dumb?

False dichotomy. I think he believes what he espouses. And you brought him to MeTa for daring to say it.

"you couldn't investigate reality if it was homosexually raping you" is expressing a divergent belief?

Well, that part is just q being q.
posted by rocket88 at 1:08 PM on November 13, 2007


How come he gets The Hole!?! quonsar always gets The Hole!!! NOT FAIR!!!!!!!
posted by yhbc at 1:08 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


this thread selfcreated out of the primordial blue
posted by exlotuseater at 1:08 PM on November 13, 2007 [8 favorites]


why does this thread exist?

There was a big bang. Excuse me. *cracks window*
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:08 PM on November 13, 2007 [4 favorites]


He's a floor wax and a dessert topping. But he used to be shinier and taste better.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 1:08 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


...And the angel of the lord came unto me, snatching me up from my place of slumber. And took me on high, and higher still until we moved to the spaces betwixt the air itself. And he brought me into a vast sealands of our own North-West. And as we descended, cries of impending doom rose from the soil. One thousand, nay a million voices full of fear. And terror possesed me then. And I begged, "Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?" And the angel said unto me, "These are the cries of the pants-fish, the cries of the pants-fish! You see, Reverend quin, tomorrow is harvest day and to them it is the holocaust."

And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat like the tears of one million terrified brothers and roared, "Hear me now, I have seen the light! They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the Intelligent Designers homosexually rape reality! Save our brothers!"

posted by quin at 1:09 PM on November 13, 2007


Keep away old man, you won't fool me
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 1:10 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Flat out trolling missing any of his signature witty or cryptic one-liners. Homosexually raping? Speaking of fantasy...
posted by mek at 1:11 PM on November 13, 2007


I've always seen reality as being a woman. A woman who looks like Tori Welles, circa 1990. So she would be heterosexually raping me. But she wouldn't me raping me at all.

No, man, not at all AT ALL.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:11 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Pull God's finger.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:12 PM on November 13, 2007


wtf this callout?
posted by OmieWise at 1:13 PM on November 13, 2007


brain_drain writes "Why does this need to splinter off into MetaTalk?"

It's the next evolutionary step of the discussion.
posted by never used baby shoes at 1:15 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


It's quonsar's Hole, we're all just living in it.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:16 PM on November 13, 2007


It's callouts like this, that make we wish we still had an image tag.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 1:19 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


The irony is that God made Pope Guilty post this callout.
posted by mullingitover at 1:19 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


Oh, look!

I appear to be lying at the bottom of a very deep dark hole.

Why don't I climb out?

Why don't I just doze a little while?

Does it matter?

Even if it does matter, does it matter if it matters?
posted by everichon at 1:22 PM on November 13, 2007


I bet he's fun to drink with.
posted by jeblis at 3:59 PM on November 13 [+] [!]


he's a teetotaler.

he's also just messing with you, likely because the LOLXIANS threads irk him.
posted by caddis at 1:23 PM on November 13, 2007


Why does this need to splinter off into MetaTalk? If you are puzzled by his views, engage him in the thread, or e-mail him. It looks like you're just looking to instigate a pile-on here.

Good point brain_drain .
posted by nickyskye at 1:23 PM on November 13, 2007


If only I was at home instead of work so I could settle in happily now with popcorn, beer and a scorecard. Dangnabit, can't you call quonsar out after 5 pm eastern time?
posted by mygothlaundry at 1:24 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


This quonsar does seem to be quite the controversial fellow!
posted by Abiezer at 1:24 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


the subject line of MeTa topic is inflammatory, but I'd rather the underling argument was based overhear then in the Mefi thread.
And q does tend to get a pass from a lot of people that other members wouldn't
posted by edgeways at 1:24 PM on November 13, 2007


"No, it wouldn't. You do not have a right to force public schools to teach fantasy as science.

it already does, it merely happens to be YOUR fantasy. the one about the primordial ooze evolving by happenstance into the human spirit. what a hoot that one is!"


I believe, and Quonsar can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but his point is that Evolution is a Theory. Just as Creationism is a Theory. Evolution is backed up by the archeological record. The Geological Periodic Time Table. Creationism is backed up by one of the oldest texts known to Man. Admittedly, that text can't be held up as authentically genuine because of multiple translations and political socioeconomic factors which are prevalent throughout the book's history.

Evolution's record has been subjected to countless global and regional geologic shifts, only some of which we can actually read in the rock, and there's no one hundred percent certainty we are reading that rock correctly. There comes a certain point where we have to accept what we see before us on faith and interpret it as best we can, but the actual truth still eludes us. There is no certainty outside of faith.

A true scientific mind would look at the evidence laid out before us and say simply, "I don't know." Anything beyond this, is speculation; Guesses, sometimes educated.
posted by ZachsMind at 1:30 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


And q does tend to get a pass from a lot of people that other members wouldn't

What is it that he's getting a pass from in that thread? Disagreeing with Pope Guilty?
posted by OmieWise at 1:30 PM on November 13, 2007


And q does tend to get a pass from a lot of people that other members wouldn't

oh. boy. Is that true.
posted by tkchrist at 1:30 PM on November 13, 2007


You mean the Glory (of everlasting God) Hole?
posted by absalom at 1:31 PM on November 13, 2007


Wow quin, just like that, I'm in 11th grade again, sitting in my car, stoned, sweaty and disheveled, trying to get it together enough to drive home from school, and thinking for some reason that blasting Tool at top volume is going to straighten me out. Thanks for the memories.
posted by saladin at 1:31 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar's crime is offering opinions different from yours. Your crime is using the blink tag coupled with the bold. Let's call it a wash.
posted by Terminal Verbosity at 1:31 PM on November 13, 2007


Creationism is backed up by one of the oldest texts known to Man.

HAHAHAHAHAHA...

Ooooh... sorry. Your serious?
posted by tkchrist at 1:32 PM on November 13, 2007


ZacksMind: Oh, and sorry, not even CLOSE to one of the oldest texts written by man. Just off the top of my head: Illiad, Odyssey, Aeneid, Gilgamesh, the Torah, the I Ching, Historia, the history of the Persian wars, hundreds of texts by Aristotle. . . I mean, I suppose I could keep going.

Hell, and speaking of Aristotle, that guy was taken as canon for over a thousand years and just about every one of his testable hypotheses were flat out wrong. Funny, that, when you take something on authority simply because it's old.
posted by absalom at 1:35 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


God bless you for starting this thread.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:35 PM on November 13, 2007


Metatalk is just so harrogatha! Harrogatha!
posted by vacapinta at 1:37 PM on November 13, 2007 [7 favorites]


He's unique, and not to be tampered with. I agree; the q-man has tampered with himself plenty more than any of us ever could. The mix of his recently-born-again spirituality and his still-strong skill at being outrageous-bordering-on-offensive* is as unique as they come. And he has never really minded being sent to the Hole, but Courtney Love is pissed.

Myself, I don't ever worry about my beliefs diverging from those of other MeFites, since I have a surprisingly comforting lack of belief in much of anything**. And I am not encouraging anybody to join me. If people (especially at MetaFilter) started being genuinely sensible, it'd bore me to death.

*often crossing the border pursued by the INS

**but if forced to take a side, I'll go with the theory that we are all in a giant computer simulation based on a novel cowritten by the Cosmic Cory Doctorow and the Cosmic John Scalzi.

posted by wendell at 1:37 PM on November 13, 2007


Here we go, teachin' French to a pig again.
posted by klangklangston at 1:39 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


Funny, that, when you take something on authority simply because it's old.

You know who else had authority simply from being old? That's right: The blind watchmaker.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:39 PM on November 13, 2007


absalom: "Hell, and speaking of Aristotle, that guy was taken as canon for over a thousand years..."

Wrong-- his texts didn't really even exist in the West until the early 1000s, and then, they only featured highly for a few hundred years. (They would still, if people didn't lack intelligence on the grand scale that they do.)

"...and just about every one of his testable hypotheses were flat out wrong."

Wrong again. Most of the "testable hypotheses" that were "proven wrong" were just enlightenment bluster designed to piss off the professors when kids like Descartes were rebelling. Plenty of Aristotle's positions were actually more deeply thought than those of modernity. See also this or this.

Sorry. I just fucking hate it when people talk this way about Aristotle.
posted by koeselitz at 1:42 PM on November 13, 2007 [4 favorites]


No need to apologize, koeselitz. I'm the same way when it comes to John Ritter.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:44 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]




I actually believe quonsar started this thread.
posted by French Fry at 1:45 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


A true scientific mind would look at the evidence laid out before us and say simply, "I don't know." Anything beyond this, is speculation; Guesses, sometimes educated.

I keep saying this about the idea that the US govt blew up the WTC, but everyone says I'm a crank! Unfair!
posted by OmieWise at 1:47 PM on November 13, 2007


I believe what koeselitz is trying to say is that YOU'RE LUCKY HE EVEN PHILOSOPHIZED FOR YOU BASTARDS! LEAVE ARISTOTLE ALONE! PLEASE!
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:48 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


I'm just annoyed to see him troll yet another thread, and the "homosexually raping" line irks me. As has been said in this thread, quonsar gets a pass for this sort of shit for some reason.
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:55 PM on November 13, 2007


How long since the last quonsar callout? It's been a while, eh?
posted by turbodog at 1:56 PM on November 13, 2007




ZachsMind: A true scientific mind would look at the evidence laid out before us and say simply, "I don't know." Anything beyond this, is speculation; Guesses, sometimes educated.

Please, don't make me go all science ed. on your ass here.

Or to be blunt, there is considerably more evidence supporting the theory that contemporary biodiversity arose from a process of descent with modification from a common ancestor, than there is to support the theory that there are volcanoes on a major moon of Jupiter. For that matter, there is more evidence in support of the theory of evolution than there is to support the existence of the moons of Jupiter. So if you want to go all skeptical on us, then do us a favor, be consistent about it, and sit in the corner and gibber mindlessly to yourself.

But on the other hand, you know what we need to save this thread? Putting Pope Guilty and quonsar in the rollerball arena with a bunch of satanic shriners on PCP. Because it's going to take bloodthirsty fat little killers in fezes to counter the extreme black-hole lameness created by both quonsar and Pope Guilty here.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 1:57 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


How come he gets The Hole!?! quonsar always gets The Hole!!! NOT FAIR!!!!!!!
posted by yhbc

speaking of which, How's Yer Hole?
posted by micayetoca at 2:02 PM on November 13, 2007


Ultimately what it's about is frustration at thread after thread where creationist arguments are shredded, refuted, and debunked, and every time the creationist squad is back with the same lies and distortions and logical fallacies. I've seen quonsar do it time and again and I can't help but come to the conclusion that he's just a troll who writes funny things on occasion.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:04 PM on November 13, 2007


If reality is a Doctorow novel, I'm outta here.
posted by Skorgu at 2:04 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Pope Guilty is the new skallas.
posted by Stynxno at 2:08 PM on November 13, 2007 [8 favorites]


If reality is a Doctorow novel

Reality, maybe not, but this thread kinda fits his ouvre, seeing as how both the mountains and the molehills here are actual characters (in multiple meanings of the term).
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:09 PM on November 13, 2007


Koeselitz: Well, I didn't mean any harm to the old man. I freely admit he was a revolutionary and brilliant thinker. His ideas on drama and taxonomy, for example, are peerless in the ancient world. I'll even credit him for most of the natural sciences, but I'll stand by what I said. I mean, for God's sake, Aristotle flat out said logic was superior to experimentation to finding truth. He asserted as fact concepts that could easily be disproven by simple experimentation (the rate of falling bodies, for example)

And, honestly, I don't pin this on the A-man so much as on Plato. I'm uncomfortable going into this, since I cannot immediately produce a source, but it is my understanding that, roughly concurrently with the "Golden Age of Philosophy" in Athens, some pretty innovative ideas were coming out of the Ionian colonies (perhaps influenced by their proximity to Persia) in regards to observation and, more importantly, experimentation.

I mean, this is clearly an open ended issue here. That's the history game, you get used to it. Hell, I might be totally off base and misinformed, but I'm not by any means being simply snarky or pithy in the prior comment, so you can reserve the attitude for someone more deserving.

Oh, and as an addendum, I believe he said oldest texts "in the world," as did I. In fact, I went so far as to include examples from multiple world cultures, and never said anything about Aristotle in the "West." Simply his being taken as canon. Not only were his texts taken as authoritative in what I assume you would call the "East," but the specific point of the discussion was that things being taken as fact because they are old is foolish. A point that would have much more to do with the date of authorship than the date of regular circulation, no?

Now, if you want to be the happy pedant, you go ahead, but if you want to be a dick to boot, don't expect that I'm someone who just believes cute little things on a lark. (Ignore this last if I misread your tone.)
posted by absalom at 2:10 PM on November 13, 2007


Pope Guilty is the new skallas.

oh good god no
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:11 PM on November 13, 2007


Because it's going to take bloodthirsty fat little killers in fezes to counter the extreme black-hole lameness created by both quonsar and Pope Guilty here.

I dunno, I think the thread on the blue improved in tone quite a bit. I suppose that's reason enough to appreciate this divergence in MeTa.
posted by Brak at 2:13 PM on November 13, 2007


not even CLOSE to one of the oldest texts written by man. Just off the top of my head: ... the Torah,

ummm, torah is precisely the text he was referring to absalom! uh, you know, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. i'm now very curious - what text did YOU think ZachsMind was referring to?
posted by quonsar at 2:13 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


You called out, quonsar.

That's just... adorable.
posted by cedar at 2:13 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Pope Guilty is the new skallas.

oh good god no


too late.
posted by Stynxno at 2:13 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Pope Guilty: "Ultimately what it's about is frustration at thread after thread where creationist arguments are shredded, refuted, and debunked, and every time the creationist squad is back with the same lies and distortions and logical fallacies."

You're tilting at windmills, friend. Not a one of Metafilter's legion religious conservatives even appears in that thread. You don't even have konolia in there to kick around. And q and I are obviously not holy rollers.

But what do I know? I'm just another Aristotle-loving fundamentalist, right?
posted by koeselitz at 2:13 PM on November 13, 2007


absalom: heh, oops, i meant to add to the end of the second paragraph an insinuation that Aristotle's views on observation vs. experimentation were inspired by his teacher's views of the nature of reality. Sorry about the confusion.
posted by absalom at 2:13 PM on November 13, 2007


I like Aristotle, Jesus Jumping Christ! I just think he was a bad scientist!
posted by absalom at 2:14 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


"If reality is a Doctorow novel, I'm outta here."

Cory or EL?
posted by klangklangston at 2:17 PM on November 13, 2007


Not a one of Metafilter's legion religious conservatives even appears in that thread. You don't even have konolia in there to kick around. And q and I are obviously not holy rollers.

I certainly count quonsar in that group, as I've seen him post the same kind of nonsense in other such threads.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:20 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar: Good point, I suppose. I sort of view the Torah as being a different document from the, ahem, "Hebrew Scriptures," which have a highly variable accuracy rate. None of which actually disproves the notion that thinking something is authoritative simply because it is old is silly.

But, someone said you are old?
posted by absalom at 2:20 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar's old

Bah! He's but a callow youth.
posted by timeistight at 2:21 PM on November 13, 2007


absalom: "He asserted as fact concepts that could easily be disproven by simple experimentation (the rate of falling bodies, for example)"

First, sorry, absalom. Sometimes it's easy to forget who I'm talking to in MeTa. It won't happen again.

Second, in the first book I linked, David Bolotin makes a very persuasive argument that Aristotle didn't mean to argue any such thing about the rate of falling bodies. I recommend the book highly. And I really believe it's flat-out true that thought is superior to experimentation in finding truth; experimentation can't occur without thought.

I wasn't trying to make any overarching point about the thread. But even in the "east" (if by that you mean the Islamic world) Aristotle was viewed with a mixture of enthusiasm and hatred, since he represented the innovative and revolutionary Greek philosophy as over against the Islamic faith. It was much the same in the West when he arrived.
posted by koeselitz at 2:22 PM on November 13, 2007


You called out, quonsar.

That's just... adorable.


I should have asked for his trolls' guild card. I didn't realise he was paid up through '09.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:23 PM on November 13, 2007


Cory or EL?

Does it matter?!
posted by milarepa at 2:24 PM on November 13, 2007


And I really believe it's flat-out true that thought is superior to experimentation in finding truth; experimentation can't occur without thought.

You are using "thought" in a different way from how Aristotle uses it, though- you're implying that experimentation has a place.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:24 PM on November 13, 2007


I like Aristotle, Jesus Jumping Christ! I just think he was a bad scientist!

"Bad Scientist!" is what my lab assistant used to call me before turning on the juice. It was one of our little... experiments. Call it an empirical search for God. "Life! Give my creation... LIFE!" Grrr!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:25 PM on November 13, 2007


And, absalom, in case there's any confusion: my "aristotle-loving fundamentalist" snark was really in response to Pope Guilty's rather odd comment that my original comment about A "explains so much about me," which i confess I don't understand
posted by koeselitz at 2:25 PM on November 13, 2007


Pope Guilty: "You are using "thought" in a different way from how Aristotle uses it, though- you're implying that experimentation has a place."

Maybe you can explain to absalom and myself exactly where Aristotle says that observation and experiment aren't important. On the contrary, Aristotle seems to value observation more highly than any of the ancients, and while an 'experimental' regimen wasn't part of how he did things necessarily, did he ever really say experimentation was verboten?
posted by koeselitz at 2:28 PM on November 13, 2007


And, absalom, in case there's any confusion: my "aristotle-loving fundamentalist" snark was really in response to Pope Guilty's rather odd comment that my original comment about A "explains so much about me," which i confess I don't understand

I was laughing mostly at "(They would still, if people didn't lack intelligence on the grand scale that they do.)" and "Plenty of Aristotle's positions were actually more deeply thought than those of modernity.", both of which line up exactly with my impression of you.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:28 PM on November 13, 2007


He certainly didn't think that it occupied anything like the central place that it occupies in any serious study of reality.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:29 PM on November 13, 2007


Pope Guilty's rather odd comment that my original comment about A "explains so much about me," which i confess I don't understand

It means you're obviously not the neoclassical synthesis Keynesian we all thought you were.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:31 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


yhbq. hth. hand.
posted by flabdablet at 2:32 PM on November 13, 2007


I sort of view the Torah as being a different document from the, ahem, "Hebrew Scriptures," which have a highly variable accuracy rate.

hrm. well, what Zach'smind said was creation theory was supported by one of the world's oldest texts. since the creation story is found in genesis, and genesis is the first book of torah, i'm still confused as to what you were thinking.
posted by quonsar at 2:33 PM on November 13, 2007


And q does tend to get a pass from a lot of people that other members wouldn't

He's earned it. Pope Guilty, not so much. Dumb callout, and the thread could be a lot more entertaining. I'm enjoying the Aristotle sidebar, though. If it gets any more heated I'm gonna have to start quoting him in Greek.

Y'all do realize he discussed blogging?
posted by languagehat at 2:36 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


koeselitz: No prob. I forgot this is MeTa and we hand out "fucks" like candy. Heh.

See your point in the large term, especially when you think about someone like Einstein who did most of his productive work with "thought experiments." Hell, my understanding of quantum physics (which, presumably, is none) practically requires the use of such thought experiments.

Oh, and as to your last point, it's kind of funny because it actually does touch on the main point: that of antiquity being authority. I was under the impression that the reason religious scholars bent over backwards to justify using pagan texts was because of their age.

Heh, hell, on a totally divergent but no less topical point, the whole reason we're having this ID debate is because Romans generally distrusted new things, especially religions, and association with an ancient source was necessary to get any sort of tractability into the Roman Gentile population. I mean, yeah, sure, Jesus came from the Jewish tradition, but once the early Christians*viewed themselves as something different and new, they could have credibly dropped Torah altogether. Especially considering how much friction and complication it caused in the early church. (The circumcision issue alone!)

(* For the most part. You can't really talk about Christianity being any sort of cohesive religion until at least somewhere in the 3rd or 4th centuries, IMHO)

PS: I am not so arrogant as to expect that you were aware of my existence at all before this exchange. ♥
posted by absalom at 2:37 PM on November 13, 2007


I was unaware that an extensive post history earned one the right to threadshit.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:38 PM on November 13, 2007 [4 favorites]


quonsar: Oh, and I was thinking that an appeal to authority based simply on something being old is a totally baseless premise. You will have to forgive me if that point did not come through the first several times I made it. I am not a skilled writer.
posted by absalom at 2:39 PM on November 13, 2007


Pope Guilty: thanks.
posted by koeselitz at 2:40 PM on November 13, 2007


Marshmallows, annyone?
posted by ericb at 2:42 PM on November 13, 2007


I was unaware that an extensive post history earned one the right to threadshit.

The More You Know
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:42 PM on November 13, 2007


I should have asked for his trolls' guild card. I didn't realise he was paid up through '09.

1. He's not trolling. You just don't like him.

2. quonsar has gotten enough shit over the many years he's been here to have earned his quirky behavior pass.

3. Your comment doesn't make any sense. Did you suspect him of trolling without union membership? Did you believe that membership to the trolls' guild affords one some kind of immunity to metafilter discipline or something? That's like someone saying "oh sorry officer, you can't arrest me, I'm paid up with the thieves' guild till '09." He would be more of a target for disciplining around here if there were documented evidence of his belonging to a guild for trolls! The whole idea is preposterous I tell you! Preposterous!
posted by shmegegge at 2:43 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


I was unaware that an extensive post history earned one the right to threadshit.

just one more chunk of reality you've closed you mind to, mate.
posted by quonsar at 2:45 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD's side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of quonsar gathered themselves together unto him.

And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.

posted by seanyboy at 2:49 PM on November 13, 2007


1. He's not trolling. You just don't like him.

I linked to several individual comments that were trolling, but here, examples:
church is not mandatory. for many, public school is the only option.

you couldn't investigate reality if it was homosexually raping you.
The others are subtler trolls, but those two are pretty damn obvious.

2. quonsar has gotten enough shit over the many years he's been here to have earned his quirky behavior pass.

The fact that he's been posting random, occasionally amusing crap for years makes trolling okay? Alright, then.

3.

This is what I get for making Pratchett references in public.

Anyway, I thought calling quonsar out for trolling was a good idea. I guess I'll remember not to do it again.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:56 PM on November 13, 2007


Kirk

The first five books of the Christian bible IS essentially the Torah, which Muslims and Jews also revere. Actually the Old Testament is supposed to be from the same source material as that which the other religions utilize. There are some differences in interpretation, but essentially all three religious views agree up to the point of Abraham's children. One child represents the nation of Israel. The other represents the nation of Islam. Christianity essentially follows with the nation of Israel historically, up until the days of Caesar.

Those who are arguing against creation as a viable theory are fighting against millenia of ingrained dogma. I strongly urge everyone to review the film Contact, written by Carl Sagan. It deals with this issue quite deliberately. The end result may surprise even you. Whoever you are.
posted by ZachsMind at 2:59 PM on November 13, 2007


Really, the sensible solution would be to end the teaching of anything other than contraception and combat skills in public schools.
posted by Abiezer at 3:00 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


Pope Guilty: "I was unaware that an extensive post history earned one the right to threadshit."

I don't know if quonsar is trolling in this case or not, but it's not the case that an extensive post history gives one the right to threadshit. However, it is the case that quonsar gets some sort of dispensation. This has been discussed many many times in MeTa. Some people think he rocks. Some people think he sucks. He has been tempbanned many times.

So, yeah, there's really nothing you could do about it even if you were to try. Just know that, for whatever reason, quonsar does have a kind of dispensation.
posted by Bugbread at 3:01 PM on November 13, 2007


church is not mandatory. for many, public school is the only option.

Why is that trolling? From what I saw, quonsar was running with the (itself outlandish and clearly rhetorical) argument that as tit-for-tat on ID instruction in schools, biology teachers should teach hard science in church. It was a silly equivilance to which he was responding realistically. Is there some subtext here?
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:05 PM on November 13, 2007


For the record it is not my intent to come here to defend or hang Quonsar. I am not here to bury Caesar. I'm simply pointing out that for better or for worse, the theory of creation is long imbedded in the consciousness of humanity, and a few hundred years of rock interpretation are not going to mollify it.
posted by ZachsMind at 3:06 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Why is that trolling? From what I saw, quonsar was running with the (itself outlandish and clearly rhetorical) argument that as tit-for-tat on ID instruction in schools, biology teachers should teach hard science in church. It was a silly equivilance to which he was responding realistically. Is there some subtext here?

I didn't see that he was doing that at all, and absent that context, it looks like the sort of fake-idiot post trolls make to get responses. Even if he was responding seriously, it's still fake-idiot-style trolling.
posted by Pope Guilty at 3:09 PM on November 13, 2007


Speaking of other things of Dr. Sagan's worth reading, might I suggest Demon Haunted World?
posted by absalom at 3:10 PM on November 13, 2007


I linked to several individual comments that were trolling, but here, examples:

those are not examples of trolling. the homosexual rape thing is an example of flaming, yes. and yes, he gets a pass on sometimes saying things like that because he's a longstanding member who has taken his lumps and even been banned in the past. It's like when Wendell sent a stupid joke to dozens of mefites who didn't want it. It was a bad thing to do, and he got away with it because he's a long standing member and not a total asshole. You can feel free to say "I think it's pretty fucked up to talk about homosexual rape the way he did," and you'd be on much more solid ground. But the way to handle situations like that is not to say "wtf, are you dumb or what?"

to be clear: trolling is when someone adopts a position they don't believe in just to stir up people who believe passionately in something. quonsar believes what he's saying. he just disagrees with you. You really really need to understand this distinction if you want anyone to take your claims here seriously. further, it would help you to understand that quonsar is not a creationist in the sense you're thinking of. I see nothing in that thread where he claims that creationism or ID is fact, or that evolution or atheism is bullshit. He is pointing out a logical fallacy inherent in the position that atheism is somehow logically correct, or that science is in some way an infallible entity. It is a central tenet of real, plausible science that there is always a possibility of error. Science only progresses by having scientists be even more vigorous in their self examination than the rest of the world is in examining them.

so yeah, he gets a pass for mentioning homosexual rape, the same way no one's given you much shit for seeming to be at the center, lately, of a lot of the more tumultuous religious flame wars that have been going on here.
posted by shmegegge at 3:14 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


But if it does makes sense as a rational response in the context he posted it, how can you dismiss it as disingenous trolling? That's where I'm lost.

quonsar can be a pain in the ass, but I feel like you're declaring that he must be trolling because he is a troll, QED, and that any alternate explanation can be discounted because see above. The guy is allowed to not believe the same things you (and I) believe about the creation of the universe.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:15 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


You know who says how old the texts are? SCIENTISTS, that's who!
posted by 31d1 at 3:15 PM on November 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


quonsar must be a MeTa genius, he so handily diverted this thread from a discussion about his trollishness to a callout of Aristotle that it's like he didn't even have a hand in it at all!
posted by baphomet at 3:20 PM on November 13, 2007


bugbread writes "Just know that, for whatever reason, quonsar does have a kind of dispensation."

But the Pope hands out dispensations. And here the Pope did the call-out. My head hurts - I never did get how the Church works.
posted by never used baby shoes at 3:24 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


I say you're all just shadows showing on a cave and I'm...no wait that's not right..... You're chained to the cave and evolutionists walk in front of a fire and their shadows...no, hold on.... Ok, so this guy is getting homosexually raped but only as a shadow and in real life it's just the way he's walking in front of the cave entrance and so....ach, forget it. You guys know what I mean.
posted by Salmonberry at 3:26 PM on November 13, 2007 [8 favorites]


Aristotle? Don't even get me started on Speusippus. That ignorant fuck couldn't philosophize his way out of a Bacchanalian goat fucking.
posted by absalom at 3:27 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Do not feed the quonsar.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 3:28 PM on November 13, 2007


Ultimately what it's about is frustration at thread after thread where creationist arguments are shredded, refuted, and debunked, and every time the creationist squad is back with the same lies and distortions and logical fallacies. I've seen quonsar do it time and again and I can't help but come to the conclusion that he's just a troll who writes funny things on occasion.

First, you're not shredding, refuting or debunking creationist arguments. All that foot-stomping evolutionists ever do is show that creationism is not a scientifically testable theory. That's it. That doesn't mean that people have to drop it as a belief, no matter how much you want them to.

Second, all you've seemed to do here is yell "Nuh-UH you idiots, he is TOO a troll." Prove something or admit that other people's suggestion (that he is a jerk who disagrees with you in earnest) is a perfectly logical explanation of the situation.
posted by 23skidoo at 3:36 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


Why is that trolling? From what I saw, quonsar was running with the (itself outlandish and clearly rhetorical) argument that as tit-for-tat on ID instruction in schools, biology teachers should teach hard science in church. It was a silly equivilance to which he was responding realistically. Is there some subtext here?

precisely what i said in thread.
posted by quonsar at 3:37 PM on November 13, 2007




He can be all the above. He is a jerk who disagrees in earnest. And, in terms of this topic, an idiot.

You want "idiot" proof?

Quonsar was basically saying Intelligent Design SHOULD be taught in public school as a science not becuase of it's merits as a "Theory" but becuase the po' lil' Christian kids are forced to go to public school and can't affort'd to be larnt'd in that thar Sky God Church or Jesus Private School.

Um. What?

Somebody else said something that stupid in this place and guys would be on him like Christian Flies on Biblical Shit.
posted by tkchrist at 3:43 PM on November 13, 2007


church is not mandatory. for many, public school is the only option.

If you think that's trolling, you're an idiot. And if you think the previous sentence is trolling, you're a bigger idiot. Grow a hide and learn some dialectics.
posted by languagehat at 3:45 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Quonsar's not a troll, but he's not nearly as funny as lots of people seem to think he is. He'd be the funniest guy ever in 5th grade. Except we're not in 5th grade anymore.
posted by Justinian at 3:49 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


tkchrist: "Somebody else said something that stupid in this place and guys would be on him like Christian Flies on Biblical Shit."

I regularly say things that stupid, and the only person who brings me to MetaTalk about it is myself.
posted by koeselitz at 3:52 PM on November 13, 2007


Quonsar was basically saying Intelligent Design SHOULD be taught in public school as a science not becuase of it's merits as a "Theory" but becuase the po' lil' Christian kids are forced to go to public school and can't affort'd to be larnt'd in that thar Sky God Church or Jesus Private School.

Ooooh, can I do one?

Quonsar was basically saying that Intelligent Design was the only subject that should be taught in public school because everything else is unimportant. Oh, and that scientists rape babies with toilet plungers when no one is looking.
posted by 23skidoo at 3:53 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


"quonsar, are you trolling or just dumb?"

Mu.
posted by Eideteker at 3:55 PM on November 13, 2007 [4 favorites]


Ooooh, can I do one?

quonsar is by design a baby plunging toilet raper!
posted by quonsar at 3:56 PM on November 13, 2007


this is fun!
posted by quonsar at 3:56 PM on November 13, 2007


I hate that toilet rap music.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:00 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar is by design a baby plunging toilet raper!

DO NOT WANT
posted by Brak at 4:19 PM on November 13, 2007


C'mon people, quonsar is obviously a troll.

Trolls live under bridges. Water flows under bridges. Fish live in water. How else do you suppose he has access to all those fish with which he stuffs his crotch?

On a more serious note:

... trolling is when someone adopts a position they don't believe in just to stir up people who believe passionately in something.

I don't think that emphasized part is a prerequisite for trolling. You could easily be an ardent anti-fan of Radiohead and stir up fans with a series of increasingly antagonistic "your favourite band sucks"-esque comments. Would that not be trolling?
posted by CKmtl at 4:20 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar and methylviolet should mate.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:21 PM on November 13, 2007


I don't think what quonsar did there was so bad. Pope Guilty, on the other hand, was a bit too quick with the silver bullets. Still, even that's not as bad as shifting a perfectly tranquil post about the Osmonds into a shouting match over whether the stripy-shirt Beach Boys were bubblegum.

(They're pink, they're chewy, I say yes.)

Quonsar was basically saying Intelligent Design SHOULD be taught in public school as a science not becuase of it's merits as a "Theory" but becuase the po' lil' Christian kids are forced to go to public school and can't affort'd to be larnt'd in that thar Sky God Church or Jesus Private School.

Um. What?

Somebody else said something that stupid in this place and guys would be on him like Christian Flies on Biblical Shit.


True. (P.S. Anyone who truly believes in intelligent design would surely think that kooking, kleaning and kids are mom's job, and wouldn't believe in publicly-funded anything besides.)
posted by Reggie Digest at 4:29 PM on November 13, 2007


You know, Pope Guilty, there is a way to deal with quonar's trolling and lies.

How much do you value your right hand?
posted by Krrrlson at 4:31 PM on November 13, 2007 [5 favorites]


How much do you value your right hand?

I can't see how anything that starts with this sentence can go wrong!
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:33 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar is fine. He's more than fine, he's sublime. But that Aristotle son of a bitch has a lot to answer for, damn his eyes. Freakin' taxonomic thinking screwing up our cognitive processes... grumble mumble curse
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:34 PM on November 13, 2007


Aristotle was viewed with a mixture of enthusiasm and hatred, since he represented the innovative and revolutionary Greek philosophy as over against the Islamic faith

Aristotle (among other Hellenes) formed the basis for much of early Islamic philosophy and science ("Falsafa"). Their works were known, analysed, revisited, and elaborated upon throughout what passed for the civilised world during the medieval era. Spain was a notable focus of neo-Aristotelian philosophy until new barbarian invasions precipitated a societal collapse that gradually extinguished the great centres of learning.
posted by meehawl at 4:35 PM on November 13, 2007


You know, regardless of whether or not quonsar is a troll, the simple fact is that Radiohead sucks.

(And having the username "Pope Guilty" could be interpreted as a troll in and of itself, could it not?)
posted by The World Famous at 4:54 PM on November 13, 2007


Here we go, teachin' French to a pig again.

le oink!

*snuffles truffles*
posted by jonmc at 5:00 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Still, even that's not as bad as shifting a perfectly tranquil post about the Osmonds into a shouting match over whether the stripy-shirt Beach Boys were bubblegum.

As your therapist, I think it's time you moved past this. Sail on. Sail on, Sailor.
posted by jonmc at 5:02 PM on November 13, 2007


Quonsar was basically saying that Intelligent Design was the only subject that should be taught in public school because everything else is unimportant. Oh, and that scientists rape babies with toilet plungers when no one is looking.

That's SHOCKING!

Nah. I'm sure he meant it all metaphorically. Like the bible!
posted by tkchrist at 5:07 PM on November 13, 2007


Oh crap! Potshots at Pope Guilty! I will enjoy it!
posted by rockhopper at 5:09 PM on November 13, 2007


you close your mind to whole swaths of reality because you cannot epistemically test it
It's hard to imagine what it is to 'epistemically test' something. Does that just mean 'be able have a reason to believe it'? If so, I wholeheartedly endorse everyone closing their minds to every last stinking swath of reality that they are not able to have a reason to believe in.

All that foot-stomping evolutionists ever do is show that creationism is not a scientifically testable theory. That's it. That doesn't mean that people have to drop it as a belief, no matter how much you want them to.

Well, you have to stop believing in it insofar as you are rational at that point, because pretty much everyone who worries about theoretical rationality thinks that continuing to hold beliefs that are unjustifiable in principle is irrational. Sure, people tend to be systematically irrational, but I've never heard that appealed to as a virtue in an argument before. In other words, I say "It is impossible in principle that anyone could ever justify believing in creationism; by continuing to believe in it you are being irrational" and you say, "Oh yeah, people hold irrational beliefs all the time!" That seems like a pretty uncomfortable place to make your stand, doesn't it?

Also, though Aristotelians are fun, Quine was right: no one needs to learn any history of philosophy to do good work. And, historical exegesis bores me to tears. And, this is a dumb callout; you should know quonsar gets a free pass, Pope.

That's everyone I can think of to irritate right now; anyone else want me to do them?
posted by Kwine at 5:09 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Pope Guilty, you seem like an OK guy, so let me tell you this. Quonsar is an extremly funny man and an extremely talented writer (one of maybe 10 or so who regularly humble me here) who is a master and at getting people to betray themselves with earnestness, expose their rigidity and hypocrisy or otherwise make them look foolish. Keep that in mind.
posted by jonmc at 5:10 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


I'm just glad PG is stalking someone else for a change.
posted by rockhopper at 5:25 PM on November 13, 2007


JESUS SAVES
but Gretsky scores on the rebound
CLAPTON IS GOD
but God says Neitzche is dead
FREE QUONSAR
limited time only, limited to one per family

Okay, I got nuthin'
posted by yhbc at 5:29 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Anyway, I thought calling quonsar out for trolling was a good idea.

it's really that hard for you to conceive that someone might disagree with your hard earned wisdom, isn't it?

once in awhile, just once in awhile, you should try putting yourself in the shoes of someone who believes things that you find ridiculous and repugnant and then try to figure out WHY they think that way and HOW they arrived at those thoughts

negative capability - it's not just for poetry anymore
posted by pyramid termite at 5:40 PM on November 13, 2007 [8 favorites]


Quine was right: no one needs to learn any history of philosophy to do good work.

I always understood the study of the history of philosophy to be both for giving a background and a wealth of material to draw upon and reference and so forth.

Also so that we have millennia of shitty arguments that have been previously shown to be shitty so that we don't make the same mistakes as were shown to be mistakes six thousand years ago or however long ago.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:40 PM on November 13, 2007


once in awhile, just once in awhile, you should try putting yourself in the shoes of someone who believes things that you find ridiculous and repugnant and then try to figure out WHY they think that way and HOW they arrived at those thoughts

this mah speaketh truth, ruth.
posted by jonmc at 5:42 PM on November 13, 2007


I really have nothing to add, and that's all the time we have. I want to thank everyone for turning out for the show. There is punch and pie being served in the lobby, you've been a great crowd, thank you and good night!
posted by nola at 5:43 PM on November 13, 2007


Quonsar may be a troll, but he suffers from chronic halitosis, so maybe you should take that into consideration, pope douchy.

And quonsar definitely adds more to the site than your sophomoric little tirades and finger pointing. Grow the fuck up and learn how to live and let live you tiresome little pissant.
posted by vronsky at 5:45 PM on November 13, 2007 [4 favorites]


In other words, I say "It is impossible in principle that anyone could ever justify believing in creationism; by continuing to believe in it you are being irrational" and you say, "Oh yeah, people hold irrational beliefs all the time!" That seems like a pretty uncomfortable place to make your stand, doesn't it?

Not at all. The scary place to make a stand seems to be whatever Vulcan Pedestal of Rationality you're standing on too look down your nose at people who believe things they can't prove. Things like first impressions. Or doubts that your lover is cheating on you. Or love. It may be completely rational to believe only provable things, but it's also freaky and weird.
posted by 23skidoo at 5:54 PM on November 13, 2007 [4 favorites]


I'm glad you brought up the right hand issue, Krrrlson. It just isn't a righteous quonsar call out without some limb severing and blood letting. I feel cheated.

Pope Guilty, 152 comments is long past time for you to volunteer to sever a body part as proof of your convictions.
posted by madamjujujive at 6:07 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


When God hands you lemons, find a new God.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:16 PM on November 13, 2007


My penis is quite large.
posted by Meatbomb at 6:20 PM on November 13, 2007


My ass is quite small.
posted by jonmc at 6:24 PM on November 13, 2007


*fires up Photoshop*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:26 PM on November 13, 2007


The nerve!

I was happily waxing my stash to a frankly thrilling set of artistic erotic prints -- furries, if you must know, and cetaceans at that -- no, I know cetaceans aren't really furry, but if you've ever seen dolphins get it on you'll know what I mean when I say these pictures were exciting; at any rate, I was priming my charge to a delectable tableau of anthropomorphic dolphins deploying their flexible charms on a most satisfied-looking non-anthropomorphic orca, and had just turned the leaf to a deepwater stag still of a narwhal and a beluga in the kind of stimulating pose that inspires nature to be more like art, when AROOGA! AROOGA! Emergency lights flashed and the klaxxon I hooked up to alert me when a Metatalk thread approaches the 150 comment mark started blaring; I leapt from the couch, the novelty "Leaping Flipper" paperweight that had been keeping my root such fine company came flying out of my holey of holeys, my previously prehensile prick sagged, and I leapt across the cabin to the control board, where I shut off the alarm and accessed this page to see what was the matter.

And I find this small-dick palsy of a callout was all the rush? This hurty-hurty "I have a rash from Quonsar's lick" nutsuck of a post is what distracted me from gorgeous sea mammals frolicking with one another's exquisite genitalia? This grab-ass complaint garnered enough strokes to put me off mine, not to mention my Flipper is now shattered into a thousand shards of dolphin soul.

You monster, you've emerged from the depths with your chitinous beak of a mouth and chummed my prospects of a sweet evening in my coral playground, just me and a few porpoises, that's all; why can't you let a man be?
posted by breezeway at 6:28 PM on November 13, 2007 [10 favorites]


I'm having a hard time knowing what to do with the knowledge that breezeway is Anthony Kiedis.
posted by The World Famous at 6:40 PM on November 13, 2007


Well, I'm pissed. Breezeway has been to my house numerous times and he's never shared his heroin.
posted by jonmc at 6:44 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


My penis is quite large.

My ass is quite small.


paradox. she's a bitch.
posted by quonsar at 6:50 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


Pope Guilty, 152 comments is long past time for you to volunteer to sever a body part as proof of your convictions.

I need my body parts, though. For things.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:51 PM on November 13, 2007


It may be completely rational to believe only provable things, but it's also freaky and weird.

Point of order sir, that would indeed be peculiar as very little is actually provable. On the other hand, believing in only things that could in principle be disproved strikes me as eminently rational.
posted by Skorgu at 6:56 PM on November 13, 2007


I need my body parts, though. For things.

Rational, scientifically testable things, I hope.
posted by The World Famous at 6:58 PM on November 13, 2007


This is like calling out water for being wet. I am thunderstruck!
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:22 PM on November 13, 2007


My penis is quite large.

My ass is quite small.

paradox. she's a bitch.r


Ow. That hurts.
posted by caddis at 7:33 PM on November 13, 2007


I'm having a hard time knowing what to do with the knowledge that breezeway is Anthony Kiedis.

not to dis breezeway, but q is the only one here making a noise like Anthony. hmmm. they are both from GR.... maybe q is Anthony's father?
posted by caddis at 7:38 PM on November 13, 2007


Quonsar is being a provocateur, and he is lazy about it, so it comes off as trolling.
posted by LarryC at 7:50 PM on November 13, 2007


Quonsar is being a provocateur

He's a Mormon fashionista? That explains so much.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 7:57 PM on November 13, 2007


I could never tell if konolia was quonsar's sockpuppet, or the other way around.
posted by b1tr0t at 8:02 PM on November 13, 2007


He's a Mormon fashionista?

I think you're thinking of a provolone. They're incrutahble.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:04 PM on November 13, 2007


once in awhile, just once in awhile, you should try putting yourself in the shoes of someone who believes things that you find ridiculous and repugnant and then try to figure out WHY they think that way and HOW they arrived at those thoughts

But I haven't yet fully figured WHY I think the way I do and how I arrived at my thoughts! Past attempts at understanding others have only caused severe headaches and clinical depression. And forget about another person's shoes; I can't find any that fit ME.

And I was not referring to a "Doctorow novel", I was referring to a "Doctorow/Scalzi Collaboration", which we all know is impossible in a universe with less than seven dimensions. Aristotle would understand. Come to think of it, no he wouldn't.

And Pope G., I appreciate your passion and dedication, but it is truly wasted when attacking the quonsar.
posted by wendell at 8:04 PM on November 13, 2007


*wipes baby jesus' eyes*
posted by mediareport at 8:07 PM on November 13, 2007


Quonsar is an extremly funny man and an extremely talented writer (one of maybe 10 or so who regularly humble me here) who is a master and at getting people to betray themselves with earnestness, expose their rigidity and hypocrisy or otherwise make them look foolish.

It also takes brass balls to be a master exposer of rigidity and hypocrisy and foolishness, while at the same time circling ever closer to the drain of fundie nutjobbery. It'll end in tears.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:14 PM on November 13, 2007 [3 favorites]


Quonsar makes baby Jesus drool and fart.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:24 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


As SCIENCE flamewars go, this one is a bit dull.
posted by meehawl at 8:27 PM on November 13, 2007


CKmtl writes "I don't think that emphasized part is a prerequisite for trolling. You could easily be an ardent anti-fan of Radiohead and stir up fans with a series of increasingly antagonistic 'your favourite band sucks'-esque comments. Would that not be trolling?"

There are two definitions of "trolling". The original one, probably originating with alt. folklore.urban, was exactly that: saying something you don't believe in order to troll people in ("troll" being used in the fishing sense). Later, some people took "troll" to mean phrasing what you say in an intentionally ruckus-inducing way, whether you believe what you're saying or not. There is a lot of disagreement about which is the "correct" definition (I used to read a.f.u, so I still think of "troll" as meaning the a.f.u sense), and since language is defined by usage, until the balance sways strongly one way or the other, it's best to think of these as both being correct definitions, like "saw" means "past tense of see" as well as "tool for cutting wood".

Still more recent groups have taken to defining "trolling" as just saying something which you know will cause a ruckus, even if that isn't your goal. For example, some people would consider any conservative posting on a liberal discussion board, or vice versa, as a troll because they are aware that what they say will cause a shitstorm, even if that isn't their objective. However, this definition is commonly considered to be just plain incorrect.
posted by Bugbread at 8:57 PM on November 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


In this episode the role of Dios will be played by quonsar.

You start a MeTa thread but you know the echo chamber of metafilter gets boring after a while.
posted by 517 at 9:07 PM on November 13, 2007


But if you have a duck, he can quack and it doesn't echo, right?
posted by wendell at 10:03 PM on November 13, 2007


quonsar could be my dad or one of my dad's friends. they like to get online and search out anti-religious forums and argue creationism. it's all very spiritual for them, holy warfare and whatnot. they like nothing more than stirring up indignation.

my father's favorite line: "pearls before swine"
posted by M Edward at 10:16 PM on November 13, 2007


HURF DURF QUONSAR HOLY FOOL SUCKJOB NUTSACK SHITWANGLE EVOLUTION
posted by lalochezia at 10:23 PM on November 13, 2007


In this episode the role of Dios will be played by quonsar.

*pbbbtttt!!!!*
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:34 PM on November 13, 2007


I think now would be a good time to begin a discussion of the pros and cons of a Ron Paul candidacy.

Also, I flagged this Pope Guilty comment as an HTML/display error, out of charity.

Now, I'd like flag all of his shrilly rantings that hinge on personal attacks, but his particular brand of zealotry is so strong that the scent scares me away. He's like a cracked out Lazarus Long who did too much speed and just won't shut the fuck up.

He seems incapable of participating in a lengthy discussion of any kind without eventually descending into screaming the moment there is a serious criticism of one of his many outlandish statements. One wonders what about his upbringing led Pope Shrillty to become this way. Was it nature or nurture?
Pope Guilty's Totally Excellent Journey

One thinks he must have been born on the floor of the NYSE and raised on the mean streets of Baton Rouge, attending cockfighting matches as a toddler, and then moving on to the École Douchebag Supérieure for his grammar school training, where he learned that arguments are not won by making and defending claims, but by replying to arguments with any form of audible sound until the opponent yields from exhaustion. From there, he completed his more advanced studies in the comforting environs of Philosophistan, where he learned that there is one collectivist anarchy, and Thoreau is its prophet, and that words mean things, sometimes. This is where he finally learned absolute truth, which he still carries around in his backpack as he journeys the countryside looking for dragons to slay and attempting to no avail to woo the womenfolk...
Clearly, Pope Guilty needs a girlfriend, and he needs to spend less time on the internet. His output ratio is so very intense, one wonders if he actually attends class or works; maybe he is cybernetically jacked in to the internet.

His callout of quonsar is shallow and predictable. Pope Guilty can't handle satire, parody, or criticism, three things quonsar does on MetaFilter. It leavens the bread. MetaFilter needs quonsar. He keeps us honest and fresh. Pope guilty is making much ado about nothing, and at the end of the day I am concerned he is taking the internet way too seriously. If I thought that prayer actually worked, well, let's just say it's a good thing it doesn't, eh?

Stop snitchin Pope Hulga. Nobody buyin that shit you slingin.
posted by chlorus at 12:27 AM on November 14, 2007 [5 favorites]


Sorry, I fell asleep there. Has anything happened yet?
posted by Joeforking at 1:21 AM on November 14, 2007


quonsar has a god in his pants

let him show you it
posted by blasdelf at 1:58 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


Quonsar is a badger fingerer!

(I herds it on teh internets)
posted by Sparx at 4:14 AM on November 14, 2007


Dammit. I was looking forward to dragging out my custom made FREE QUONSAR t-shirt. Guess I'll have to stick it back in the closet for the next encounter.

I got your back, you old loveable Q-tip.
posted by triv at 5:26 AM on November 14, 2007


It also takes brass balls to be a master exposer of rigidity and hypocrisy and foolishness, while at the same time circling ever closer to the drain of fundie nutjobbery. It'll end in tears.

having a little trouble with the gray areas, are we? things just not black and white enough for the broad liberal mind? you missed the teary ending 3 years ago when i abandoned the fundie nutjobbery of certainty. i haven't had to cry since.
posted by quonsar at 5:41 AM on November 14, 2007


but thanks for caring! :-)
posted by quonsar at 5:41 AM on November 14, 2007


Do you know, in some way I think we all care.
posted by h00py at 5:53 AM on November 14, 2007


There are more things in quonsar's pants, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
posted by Abiezer at 5:59 AM on November 14, 2007


you missed the teary ending 3 years ago when i abandoned the fundie nutjobbery of certainty.

Yeah, I kind of skipped over you during the Mathowie Look At Me Damnit! years. Glad to hear it all worked out.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:37 AM on November 14, 2007


here are my pokemons.

let me show you them.
posted by Stynxno at 7:10 AM on November 14, 2007


I can't help but come to the conclusion that he's just a troll who writes funny things on occasion.

You aren't here for the hunting, are you?
posted by octobersurprise at 7:17 AM on November 14, 2007


HURF DURF QUONSAR HOLY FOOL SUCKJOB NUTSACK SHITWANGLE EVOLUTION

I'm not sure you did that right.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:51 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


MetaFilter needs quonsar. He keeps us honest and fresh.

That and Massengill.
posted by pardonyou? at 8:02 AM on November 14, 2007 [2 favorites]


Come on, ya'll! FIVE MORE until 200!

WE CAN DO IT!
posted by absalom at 8:20 AM on November 14, 2007


Really, now. It's just childish to add meaningless comments to reach an arbitrary numbered goal. Aren't we better than that?
posted by languagehat at 8:38 AM on November 14, 2007


Besides, you miscounted.

200!!
posted by languagehat at 8:38 AM on November 14, 2007 [5 favorites]


}hands Q a nappy}
posted by clavdivs at 8:40 AM on November 14, 2007


CLAVDIVS IS GOD
posted by quonsar at 8:42 AM on November 14, 2007


So I'm too lazy to read the thread. Can someone give me a two-second recap? Did Pope Guilty flameout? Did quonsar beg for forgiveness? Did cortex type a bunch of nonsense like a man with a stuck CAPS LOCK key? Was there the chopping of hands and the burning of tanks?
posted by eyeballkid at 8:56 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


no. it pretty muched sucked a bucket of cock.
posted by quonsar at 9:02 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


no. it partly mulched a stuck budget clock.
posted by shmegegge at 9:16 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


Well that's disappointing. It's been a long long time since we had a good flameout.

*sigh*
posted by eyeballkid at 9:17 AM on November 14, 2007


Can someone give me a two-second recap?

quonsar:

not the sharpest tool in the shed
shiny head

not as funny as he used to be
an assload of reality

Did you suspect him of trolling without union membership?
old loveable Q-tip.

Illiad, Odyssey, Aeneid, Gilgamesh,
He keeps us honest and fresh.

Wankity wank wank all around
but Gretsky scores on the rebound

Was there the chopping of hands and the burning of tanks?
Pope Guilty: thanks.

Bad Scientist!
why does this thread exist?

thread selfcreated out of the primordial blue
oh. boy. Is that true.

I actually believe quonsar started this thread.
but God says Neitzche is dead

And terror possesed me then
teachin' French to a pig again

he can quack and it doesn't echo, right?
thank you and good night!
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:22 AM on November 14, 2007 [5 favorites]


Can someone give me a two-second recap? Did Pope Guilty flameout? Did quonsar beg for forgiveness? Did cortex type a bunch of nonsense like a man with a stuck CAPS LOCK key? Was there the chopping of hands and the burning of tanks?

Sure; nope; heh; no, I was just quoting; and yes, somewhere, we can hope.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:29 AM on November 14, 2007


Clavdivs, Clavdivs...is that Welsh? Georgian?
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 9:39 AM on November 14, 2007


meehawl: "Aristotle (among other Hellenes) formed the basis for much of early Islamic philosophy and science ("Falsafa"). Their works were known, analysed, revisited, and elaborated upon throughout what passed for the civilised world during the medieval era. Spain was a notable focus of neo-Aristotelian philosophy until new barbarian invasions precipitated a societal collapse that gradually extinguished the great centres of learning."

Starting with al-Farabi, who initiated the movement, Aristotle was indeed popular amongst the "Falasifa," the proponents of Falsafa. But it's wrong to suggest that they were the central or most powerful intellectual leaders in the east. Al-Farabi was viewed with great suspicion by Islamic leaders from the start; this suspicion crystallized in that great work of al-Ghazali, Tahafut Al-Falasifa, 'The Incoherence of the Philosophers.' And while it can be said that the barbarian invasions precipitated societal collapse in Spain, it's hard to say that neo-Aristotelianism reached its end in popularity there because of them; the decline of neo-Aristotelianism had more to do with the turning of Caliph Abu Yusuf Ya'qub al-Mansur and his banishment of Averroes.

Even when Aristotle, and 'Averroism,' came to the west, and to Paris, they weren't received without great suspicion, as the numerous condemnations show.
posted by koeselitz at 9:54 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


STYNXNO:

FOR YOU.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:08 AM on November 14, 2007


lol
posted by exlotuseater at 10:09 AM on November 14, 2007


His observations on catfish, electric fish (Torpedo) and angler-fish are exceptional, as is his writing on cephalopods, molluscs, octopus, sepia (cuttlefish) and the paper nautilus (Argonauta argo). His description of the hectocotyl arm (see cephalopod) was about two thousand years ahead of its time, and widely disbelieved until its rediscovery in the nineteenth century. He separated the aquatic mammals from fish, and knew that sharks and rays were part of the group he called Selachē (selachians).[13] He gave accurate descriptions of ruminants' four-chambered fore-stomachs, and of the unusual mammal-like embryological development of the hound shark Mustelus laevis.[14]

Quonsar...or Aristotle?
posted by clockzero at 10:30 AM on November 14, 2007


cedar: You called out, quonsar.

That's just... adorable.


This pretty much just says it all, AFAICS. quonsar is mefi's sacred cow: unless ye be admin, trifle with him at risk of censure. And even if you're an admin, it's pretty risky.

I have my own theories about why this is true, but since it would be quite foolish to cast any aspersions on quonsar, it would be unwise to discuss them.
posted by lodurr at 10:35 AM on November 14, 2007





















































































moo.
posted by quonsar at 10:39 AM on November 14, 2007 [5 favorites]


Why buy mefi's sacred cow, when you can get the milk for free?
posted by taz at 10:44 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


youlk and meelk and hottyhamyum
posted by exlotuseater at 10:45 AM on November 14, 2007


Whatever faults quonsar may have, he always pays his protection money promptly on the first of the month.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:51 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


Case: rested.
posted by lodurr at 10:56 AM on November 14, 2007


... though, I do want to say that I find "you couldn't investigate reality if it was homosexually raping you" to be a really, really interesting thing to say.

Really, it's pretty profound. And packed with lots of logical goodness! After all, what can you investigate while it's homosexually raping you? So maybe quonsar really is being uber-conceptual, there, and arguing that no one can investigate reality, ever. Including him.

Or maybe not. Moo.
posted by lodurr at 11:02 AM on November 14, 2007


mu.
posted by exlotuseater at 11:04 AM on November 14, 2007


μ
posted by exlotuseater at 11:05 AM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


It also indicates that quonsar knows the gender of reality. Which is fascinating to contemplate.
posted by The World Famous at 11:15 AM on November 14, 2007


Well, it implies that the gender of reality is the gender of the person perceiving it. (Though admittedly I'm stretching it to apply the term "homosexual rape" to a woman.)

Kind of a solipsistic vision.
posted by lodurr at 11:17 AM on November 14, 2007


homosexual masturbation! what.
posted by exlotuseater at 11:20 AM on November 14, 2007


no μ
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:21 AM on November 14, 2007


That would be "monosexual", exlotuseater.

As in, "Because he could not get a date, Melvin was a practicing monosexual."
posted by lodurr at 11:24 AM on November 14, 2007


Well look at that. Monosexuality is a real thing. "[I]t is widely considered to be an ideologically loaded word intended to privilege bisexuality over other sexual orientations."

Well, can't complain about that!
posted by exlotuseater at 11:29 AM on November 14, 2007


Shit. That's not what he told me it meant. I feel so dirty, now.
posted by lodurr at 11:37 AM on November 14, 2007


Not at all. The scary place to make a stand seems to be whatever Vulcan Pedestal of Rationality you're standing on too look down your nose at people who believe things they can't prove. Things like first impressions. Or doubts that your lover is cheating on you. Or love. It may be completely rational to believe only provable things, but it's also freaky and weird.

This is the usual misunderstanding, and skorgu already set you right, but you probably still aren't set right so I'll try again. It's not that you only believe in things that you know are provable--because that's an awfully tough standard, as skorgu points out--but that you don't believe in things that you know aren't provable. I'm not confident that creationism isn't provable, but you seem to be. If you're sure that it isn't provable, you shouldn't believe in it. That's the thesis, and it's pretty weak.
I have no reason to think that beliefs about first impressions or my lover's habits can't be proven. I believe in them just like I believe in love; just ask Huey fucking Lewis.

Here's the way you would be resisting me if you understood:

23skidoo: Kwine, Godel proved that any mathematical system that is powerful enough to prove simple arithmetic cannot be proven to be consistent. Should we give up using arithmetic then?
Kwine: Nope. We should no longer believe that mathematical systems can prove themselves to be consistent; that doesn't entail giving up on the practice.
23skidoo: But if there was anything that we thought could be proven, I would have thought it was that! Shouldn't that result make us think that unproveable things are everywhere--that, maybe, there are no proofs to be had?
Kwine: Well, skepticism is a tough, pervasive problem. One way to resist it is to revise our concept of 'proof': to relativize it to epistemology rather than metaphysics. We should evaluate proofs in terms of the explanations that they provide; the reasons that they give us for thinking that things are a certain way, rather than thinking that they give us a grip on some independent 'reality'. It turns out that that notion of reality wasn't as important as we thought.
23skidoo: But now there's a basic division between epistemology and metaphysics--a skeptical divide that can't after all be bridged! Doomsday!
Kwine: Well, Hume sure thought that. That's why he drank a lot. But there are still moves to be made, ...

My advisor cancelled a meeting today, but I'm already keyed up for talking with him. I guess this is the result.
posted by Kwine at 11:40 AM on November 14, 2007


αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν εἶμι, κρατερὴ δέ μοι ἔπλετ' ἀνάγκη.
posted by koeselitz at 11:43 AM on November 14, 2007


Kwine: Well, Hume sure thought that. That's why he drank a lot. But there are still moves to be made, ...

Certainly. So go on, make your move. This game of backgammon is getting quite boring.
posted by koeselitz at 11:51 AM on November 14, 2007


this suspicion crystallized in that great work of al-Ghazali, Tahafut Al-Falasifa, 'The Incoherence of the Philosophers.'

Well, entitling your reposte The Incoherence of the Incoherence is bound to piss off some people - not good marketing. Both these guys were enacting a familiar debate between rationalist- and faith-based philosophy but their struggles also took place within specific historical contexts. The temporary banishment of Ibn-Rushd stemmed from the ascension of the conservative Almohads, who came to power precisely because the liberal, multicultural Islamic states proved unable to resist invasions from the north because of internal dissension and intra-state warring. The unitarian Almohads promised to unite the western Muslims under a single banner of religious orthodoxy that could respond in kind of the religious orthodoxies being promulgated by the christian invaders. A similar external threat in the East (the Mongols) enforced a trend towards social orthodoxy and rigid hierarchies, especially after the sack of Baghdad. For cultures to trend towards conservativism when threatened by outside forces is quite common.

It's also ironic that al-Ghazzālī, a Sufist, tended to view neo-Aristotelianism with suspicion. Personally, I see a lot of Persian Sufism as stemming from Zoroastrianism, and in this al-Ghazzālī was continuing the ancient Persia/Greek grudge match between rationality and gnosticism. Al-Ghazzālī's work provided an obvious foundation for Aquinas to rip in his efforts to draw a line under the veneration of the "Hellenes" (especially considering the loss of half of Christendom to the Schismatic Greeks/Romanoi) and establish a new Christian philosophy based on a personal knowledge and internalisation of God. Orthodox Christianity had long favoured internalisation of religious experience through, for example, the practices of the Hesychasts. Late medieval Christianity and Islam seemed to have evolved along quite convergent paths even as the theorists within both cultures went to some length to deny any cross-fertilisation. It was their different societal and medical responses to the crises of the 14th century that set them on more divergent paths.

This is verging into FPP stuff.
posted by meehawl at 11:56 AM on November 14, 2007 [2 favorites]


koeselitz:
1. E4-E6
posted by Kwine at 12:01 PM on November 14, 2007


Oh fuck, fucked that up completely. I should stick to checkers.
posted by Kwine at 12:02 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν εἶμι, κρατερὴ δέ μοι ἔπλετ' ἀνάγκη

This thread needs less Homer and more Simpsons.
posted by meehawl at 12:04 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


Don't feel too bad, Pope Guilty. Consider it a learning experience about the power of reason and solid facts. (THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH)

You know what I'd like to see? A debate about the Existence of God between quonsar and George Carlin. I guarantee nobody in the audience would have their opinions swayed, but we'd all learn something and it'd be awesomely entertaining.
posted by wendell at 12:07 PM on November 14, 2007


*lipsyncs to wrong track, does hillbilly dance, calls agent*
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:08 PM on November 14, 2007


A debate about the Existence of God between quonsar and George Carlin

and the hippy dippy weather man saw the light and it was good.
posted by quonsar at 12:21 PM on November 14, 2007


meehawl: This thread needs less Homer and more Simpsons.

You win. Come to Colorado and I will buy you beer.

The unitarian Almohads promised to unite the western Muslims under a single banner of religious orthodoxy that could respond in kind of the religious orthodoxies being promulgated by the christian invaders. A similar external threat in the East (the Mongols) enforced a trend towards social orthodoxy and rigid hierarchies, especially after the sack of Baghdad. For cultures to trend towards conservativism when threatened by outside forces is quite common.

You're right, of course. I only meant to point up the fact that Aristotle wasn't accepted blindly and universally. I do agree that the relative openness of the Caliphate before the Almohads was a fine thing, and greater than the Christian West could envision at the time.

"It's also ironic that al-Ghazzālī, a Sufist, tended to view neo-Aristotelianism with suspicion."

That seemed ironic to me, too. And while I don't doubt that there's plenty of irony in the Tahafut al-Falasifa, the fact is that his turn to Sufism, and the years of mendicancy that it initiated, actually took place years after he'd written that work. They say that his later works have a different feel; therein, he is said to have taken up the task of squaring Sufism with the movements within Islamic scholasticism, making it mainstream, and rationalising it. I have to confess that I often wonder how al-Ghazali, who was a homeless wanderer during this period, managed to continue writing books. An inspiring example, nonetheless.

Unfortunately, I don't know a jot of Arabic. And I haven't seen translations of his other works into English, though I'm sure they must exist.

meehawl: This is verging into FPP stuff.

Well, one of us ought to do it.
posted by koeselitz at 12:30 PM on November 14, 2007


Unreal Tournament 2004
posted by jfuller at 12:31 PM on November 14, 2007


Here's my proof:

1) God made man in his own image
2) Men are pigs
3a) Pigs are filthy animals
3b) Bacon tastes gooood! Pork chops taste gooood!
4) Cleanliness is next to Godliness
5) God does not contain Godliness
6) Q.E. Fuckin' D.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:37 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


Do it. This place needs a good discussion of medieval Islamic philosophy. I'm particularly intrigued by meehawl's "I see a lot of Persian Sufism as stemming from Zoroastrianism." I can see the attraction of the idea, but I'd want a bunch of evidence.
posted by languagehat at 12:40 PM on November 14, 2007


Also:

meehawl: Orthodox Christianity had long favoured internalisation of religious experience through, for example, the practices of the Hesychasts.

I've been rereading the Philokalia recently, and am amazed that I was struck by the same thing: the near-Sufism of many of the Hesychasts.
posted by koeselitz at 12:44 PM on November 14, 2007


Geez, this is good stuff.

meehawl: Late medieval Christianity and Islam seemed to have evolved along quite convergent paths even as the theorists within both cultures went to some length to deny any cross-fertilisation. It was their different societal and medical responses to the crises of the 14th century that set them on more divergent paths.

I should point out that this isn't limited only to Christianity and Islam. Judaism was tied in deeply to this as well; and, while it may seem a commonplace observation that Orthodox Judaism is tied to the Medieval, it's not often talked about that many Jews were involved in Sufism. The Treatise of the Pool, an apparently Sufist work, was written by Obadyah Maimonides, the very grandson of Moses Maimonides; Moses Maimonides' son, too, was involved with Sufism. I've got a copy on my desk at home; it has a fantastic introduction detailing the long history of the intertwining of Judaic mystical movements with Sufism.
posted by koeselitz at 12:53 PM on November 14, 2007 [3 favorites]


4) Cleanliness is next to Godliness
5) God does not contain Godliness


Of course not. Sets can't be members of themselves.

And what does the fact that God is next to Cleanliness have to do with anything?
posted by lodurr at 12:58 PM on November 14, 2007


And what does the fact that God is next to Cleanliness have to do with anything?

Cleanliness is like God's sanitizing ring. For your protection. It keeps the filth away. But since man is the filth, and the filth was made in God's image, God must also be the filth, but no filth can reach God, so God cannot exist.

/random bullshit
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:06 PM on November 14, 2007


I was gonna say it's just helpful to know if you have to reshelve one or the other.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:09 PM on November 14, 2007


We don't really shelve the Cs next to the Gs, now Dewey.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:12 PM on November 14, 2007


You do if there's no Ds, Es, or Fs, bucko. It's a sparse library.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:15 PM on November 14, 2007


I don’t put the Reality Investigators on my résumé anymore. It doesn’t take away from my pride. I actually was a Reality Investigator. It’s kind of weird to be part of that legend. It’s pretty spectacular, and it’s all about timing. Quonsar was the king of celebrities at that point. Newspapers were full of pictures of elephants in urinary distress, pictures of fish in pants.

Quonsar loved the Reality Investigators. He was, like, our rehearsal director when dad and my brother weren’t there. And my mother, and my nana—weren’t there. I was on his show. He said it wasn’t a ‘taped show,’ but we, like, did a show. . . . It was his office, but he had a bed in it, like a couch, that he called Uncle Q’s bed for little people.


Quonsar homosexually raped me. And I couldn't investigate reality anymore.
posted by Sparx at 1:20 PM on November 14, 2007


Wow. This thread did not go as I'd expected.
posted by miss lynnster at 1:25 PM on November 14, 2007


I'm reading this thread backwards for maximum suspense via the Memento effect.
posted by Dr-Baa at 1:50 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


Lots of filth, not so much fury. For some reason I feel cheated.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:53 PM on November 14, 2007


Metafilter: Lots of filth, not so much fury. For some reason I feel cheated.
posted by The World Famous at 2:00 PM on November 14, 2007


αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν εἶμι, κρατερὴ δέ μοι ἔπλετ' ἀνάγκη.

οὐδέ σέ φημι, αὐτὸν νοστήσειν, μενέεις δὲ σύ γ᾽, ἔνθα περ ἄλλοι.

and a good thing too, we've seen many mefi threads redeemed by their comments, nice to see a Meta thread be likewise resurrected.
posted by atrazine at 2:46 PM on November 14, 2007


the near-Sufism of many of the Hesychasts.

Maybe within that region it's convergent evolution stimulated by the surrounding Eurasian mountain and desert topography combined with the enduring proximity of Hinduism (which tends to throw off ideas and sects like a sparking motor)?

I hadn't heard of The Treatise of the Pool but it looks cool, thanks.
posted by meehawl at 3:12 PM on November 14, 2007


"I see a lot of Persian Sufism as stemming from Zoroastrianism." I can see the attraction of the idea, but I'd want a bunch of evidence.

Well, they both share Nowrūz, so that's a start. I'm going on a hunch here - roughly contemporary moment of eclipse for Z as the Persian state religion and the emergence of S, from my cursory read they share a bunch of vaguely similar metaphysics. It took several centuries for most of Persia's population to convert to Islam after 650 or so, and during that time there must have been massive hybridisation ongoing, especially considering that Z had already demonstrated an impressive ability to mutate (The Zurvanist vs Mazdainist split was still ongoing when the Arabs invaded). The fact that the Shāhnāme emerged near the culmination of the Islamisation of Persia yet managed to contain so much pre-Islamic history and philosophy seems to indicate there was a relatively strong core culture capable of syncretisation.
posted by meehawl at 3:52 PM on November 14, 2007


and so airhead, king of the airheads, pronounced his doom - you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave
posted by pyramid termite at 5:38 PM on November 14, 2007


Well, they both share Nowrūz, so that's a start.

Not really. Nowruz is the holiday of Persian civilization; you might as well say "well, they both speak Persian, so that's a start." But yes, there was a lot of hybridization going, and I'm willing to entertain the hypothesis that the Z tradition somehow made them more susceptible to Sufism, but there are a lot of elements of Persian culture that could have made them susceptible, not to mention the inherent attraction of Sufism to anyone who felt oppressed by the official culture (as Persians felt oppressed by their Arab conquerors). Any more direct causal relationship is going to take a lot of work to make plausible.
posted by languagehat at 5:50 PM on November 14, 2007


This is certainly one of the stranger MeTa threads in recent memory, but in a good way.
posted by languagehat at 5:50 PM on November 14, 2007


I know we can make 300.
posted by languagehat at 5:51 PM on November 14, 2007


MADNESS?!
posted by shmegegge at 6:05 PM on November 14, 2007


As long as it's meehawl and koeselitz that fill up those comments, I'm totally on board. The most interesting derail I've seen in a long time.
posted by absalom at 6:09 PM on November 14, 2007


Uh...is somebody gonna cut off their hand? This party SUCKS.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:11 PM on November 14, 2007


Even though the original quote is from (shudder) Gallagher, it must be said:
"Cleanliness is NOT next to Godliness. Cleanliness is next to Cleavage and Godliness is next to Goggles."

And it all begins to make sense.


No, not really.
posted by wendell at 6:12 PM on November 14, 2007


the near-Sufism of many of the Hesychasts.

and their leader, Josie.
posted by jonmc at 6:32 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


and their rivals, the banana shi'ites
posted by pyramid termite at 6:45 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


In summation: Even Metafilter cannot escape the dastardly clutches of Internet Retard Syndrome.
posted by wierdo at 6:55 PM on November 14, 2007


270!!!
posted by delmoi at 6:56 PM on November 14, 2007


shut up, delmoi.
posted by quonsar at 7:31 PM on November 14, 2007


just this once.
posted by quonsar at 7:31 PM on November 14, 2007


300? I have pleaded for more Simpsons, and SCIENCE. Don't make me activate the Dawkins Golem.
posted by meehawl at 7:47 PM on November 14, 2007


Any more direct causal relationship is going to take a lot of work to make plausible.

I'm dubious that broad religious transformations can ever be said to have direct causal relationships (I mean, look how much debate exists about the Jewish Christians!), but as soon as I get another lifespan or two I'll get right onto this.
posted by meehawl at 7:51 PM on November 14, 2007


but as soon as I get another lifespan or two I'll get right onto this.

I'll tell those Chinese gold farmers to work harder so you can get on it quicker.
posted by The World Famous at 8:08 PM on November 14, 2007


A true scientific mind would look at the evidence laid out before us and say simply, "I don't know." Anything beyond this, is speculation; Guesses, sometimes educated.

I see your point and it's worth making but it rapidly devolves into "well we just can't know anything." I think this is easy to arrive at if you don't have a lot of practice in the sciences but what's cool about science is that those who practice it dare to claim you, yes you, can actually know things. The scientific method is incredibly open and simple and you too could arrive at a certainty about many things that would be hard to dismiss as speculation if you practiced it with your own two hands. It's great to have an open mind but agnosticism could easily be carried too far - a sort of mind-stuck-in-the-open-position syndrome.

As for quonsar, I can only quote Star Trek:

"I miss the irrepressible Q"

Oh wait. He's still irrepressible. Huzzah!
posted by scarabic at 9:21 PM on November 14, 2007


This is certainly one of the stranger MeTa threads in recent memory, but in a good way.

With this, I can wholeheartedly agree.

*agrees*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:33 PM on November 14, 2007


It could also have been a lot simpler if the Manicheans hadn't burst out of Persia and run all over Europe and Asia like some kind of wild army of William Burroughs-inspired religious cut-up artists mixing up everything. Actually, in and around Persia around that time you had the Yazdans, the Mandaeans, and my favourite, the Mazdaks, who were into communal property, vegetarianism, and polyamory... a kind of late-Antiquity Persian Raël gig. Quite an interesting time.
posted by meehawl at 9:42 PM on November 14, 2007


279, I'll stop now.
posted by meehawl at 9:45 PM on November 14, 2007


280 shall be the number of the commenting, and the number of the commenting shall be 280.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:05 PM on November 14, 2007 [1 favorite]


(xus 281 knilb)
posted by Reggie Digest at 10:32 PM on November 14, 2007


двести восемдесят два
posted by Krrrlson at 10:50 PM on November 14, 2007


σπγʹ
posted by languagehat at 6:33 AM on November 15, 2007


"WHY WON'T THEY STAY DEAD!"
posted by lodurr at 6:39 AM on November 15, 2007


§285. LIST OF THE PRINCIPAL IRREGULAR SUBSTANTIVES

1. Ἄρης (ὁ) Ares, stems Ἀρεσ-, Ἀρευ- from Ἀρες f-. G. Ἄρεως (poet. Ἄρεος), D. Ἄρει, A. Ἄρη (poet. Ἄρεα), Ἄρην. Epic G. Ἄρηος, Ἄρεος, D. Ἄρηι, Ἄρεϊ, A. Ἄρηα, Ἄρην. Hdt. Ἄρεος, Ἄρει, Ἄρεα. Aeolic Ἄρευς, Ἄρευος, etc.

2. ἀρήν (ὁ, ἡ) lamb, sheep, stems ἀρεν-, ἀρν-, ἀρνα-. Thus, ἀρν-ός, ἀρν-ί, ἄρν-α, ἄρν-ες, ἀρν-ῶν, ἀρνά-σι (Hom. ἄρν-εσσι), ἄρν-ας (declined like a subst. in -ηρ). Nom. ἀρήν occurs on inscript. but ἀμνός (2 decl.) is commonly used.

3. γάλα (τό) milk (133), γάλακτ-ος, γάλακτ -ι, etc.

4. γέλως (ὁ) laughter, γέλωτ-ος, etc. Attic poets A. γέλωτα or γέλων. Hom. has D. γέλῳ, A. γέλω, γέλων or γέλοι (?) from Aeol. γέλος. Cp. 257 D.

5. γόνυ (τό) knee, γόνατ-ος, etc. Ionic and poetic γούνατ-ος, γούνατ-ι, etc. Epic also γουν-ός, γουν-ί, γοῦν-α, pl. γούν-ων, γούν-εσσι (250 D. 2). The forms in ου are from γονf- (37 D. 1, 253 c); cf. Lat. genu.

6. γυνή (ἡ) woman, γυναικ-ός, γυναικ-ί, γυναῖκ-α, γύναι (133); dual γυναῖκ-ε, γυναικ-οῖν; pl. γυναῖκ-ες, γυναικ-ῶν, γυναιξί, γυναῖκ-ας. The gen. and dat. of all numbers accent the last syllable (cp. ἀνήρ). Comic poets have A. γυνήν, γυνάς, N. pl. γυναί.

7. δάκρυον (τό) tear, δακρύου, etc., in prose and poetry. δάκρυ (τό) is usually poetic, D. pl. δάκρυσι.

8. δένδρον (τό) tree, δένδρου, etc. Also D. sing. δένδρει, pl. δένδρη, δένδρεσι. Hdt. has δένδρον, δένδρεον and δένδρος.

9. δέος (τό) fear (δεεσ-), δέους, δέει. Hom. δείους, 55 D. Cp. 265.

10. δόρυ (τό) spear, δόρατ-ος, δόρατ-ι, pl. δόρατ-α, etc. Poetic δορ-ός, δορ-ί (also in prose) and δόρ-ει (like ἄστει). Ionic and poetic δούρατ-ος, etc., Epic also δουρ-ός δουρ-ί, dual δοῦρ-ε, pl. δοῦρ-α, δούρ-ων, δούρ-εσσι (250 D. 2). The forms with ου are from δορf- (37 D. 1).

11. ἔρως (ὁ) love, ἔρωτ-ος, etc. Poetical ἔρος, ἔρῳ, ἔρον. Cp. 257 D.

12. Ζεύς (ὁ) Zeus, Δι-ός, Δι-ί, Δί-α, Ζεῦ. Ζεύς is from Διευς, Δι-ός, etc., from Διf-. Ionic and poetic Ζηνός, Ζηνί, Ζῆνα.

13. θέμις (ἡ) justice and the goddess Themis (θεμιδ-), θέμιδ-ος, θέμιδ-ι, θέμι-ν. Hom. has θέμιστ-ος, etc. Pind. θέμιτ-ος, θέμι-ν, θέμιτ-ες. Hdt. θέμι-ος. In the phrase θέμις εἶναι fas esse (indic. θέμις ἐστί), θέμις is indeclinable.

14. κάρᾱ (τό) head (poetic) used in Attic only in N. A. V. sing., but dat. κάρᾳ. Other cases are from the stem κρᾱτ-, G. κρᾱτ-ός, D. κρᾱ-τί; also τὸ κρᾶτ-α N. A. sing., κρᾶτ-ας A. pl.


Epic shows the stems κρᾱατ-, κρᾱτ-, καρηατ-, καρητ-. N. κάρη, G. κρά̄ατος, κρᾱτός, καρήατος, κάρητος, D. κρά̄ατι, κρᾱτί, καρήατι, κάρητι, A. κάρ. N. pl. κάρᾱ, κρά̄ατα, καρήατα, and κάρηνα, G. κρά̄των, καρήνων, D. κρᾱσί, A. κρᾶτα.

15. κύων: (ὁ, ἡ) dog, κυν-ός, κυν-ί, κύν-α, κύον; κύν-ε, κυν-οῖν; κύν-ες, κυν-ῶν, κυσί, κύν-ας.

16. λᾶας (ὁ) stone, poetic also λᾶς, G. λᾶος (or λά̄ου), D. λᾶϊ, A. λᾶαν, λᾶα; dual λᾶε; pl. λᾶ-ες, λά̄-ων, λά̄-εσσι, λά̄-εσι.

17. μάρτυς (ὁ, ἡ) witness, μάρτυρ-ος, etc., but D. pl. μάρτυ-σι. Hom. has N. μάρτυρος, pl. μάρτυροι.

18. Οἰδίπους (ὁ) Oedipus, G. Οἰδίποδος, Οἰδίπου, Οἰδιπόδᾱ (Dor.), D. Οἰδίποδι, A. Οἰδίπουν, Οἰδιπόδᾱν, V. Οἰδίπους, Οἰδίπου. [p. 73]

19. ὄνειρος (ὁ) and ὄνειρον (τό, Ionic and poetic) dream, ὀνείρου, etc., but also ὀνείρατ-ος, etc. τὸ ὄναρ only in N. A.

20. ὄρνῑς (ὁ, ἡ) bird (257). A. ὄρνῑθα and ὄρνῑν (247). Poetic ὄρνῐς, A. ὄρνῐν; pl. N. ὄρνεις, G. ὄρνεων, A. ὄρνεις or ὄρνῑς. Dor. G. ὄρνῑχ-ος, etc.

21. ὄσσε dual, two eyes, pl. G. ὄσσων, D. ὄσσοις (-οισι).

22. οὖς (τό) ear, ὠτ-ός, ὠτ-ί, pl. ὦτ-α, ὤτ-ων (252 a), ὠσί; from the stem ὠτ- contracted from οὐ(ς)ατ-, whence ο'([υγλιδε])ατ-. οὖς is from ὀος, whence also the Doric nom. ὦς. Hom. G. οὔατ-ος, pl. οὔατ-α, οὔασι and ὠσί.

23. Πνύξ (ἡ) Pnyx (128), Πυκν-ός, Πυκν-ί, Πύκν-α, and also Πνυκ-ός, Πνυκ-ί, Πνύκ-α.

24. πρεσβευτής (ὁ) envoy has in the pl. usually the forms of the poetic πρέσβυς old man, properly an adj., old. Thus, N. sing. πρεσβευτής, G. πρεσβευτοῦ, etc., N. pl. πρέσβεις, G. πρέσβεων, D. πρέσβεσι, A. πρέσβεις (rarely πρεσβευταί, etc.). πρέσβυς meaning old man is poetic in the sing. (A. πρέσβυν, V. πρέσβυ) and pl. (πρέσβεις); meaning envoy πρέσβυς is poetic and rare in the sing. (dual πρεσβῆ from πρεσβεύς). πρεσβύ̄της old man is used in prose and poetry in all numbers.

25. πῦρ (τό) fire (πῠρ-, 254 b), πυρ-ός, πυρ-ί, pl. τὰ πυρά watch-fires, 2nd decl.

26. ὕδωρ (τό) water, ὕδατ-ος, ὕδατ-ι, pl. ὕδατ-α, ὑδάτ-ων, etc. Cp. 253 b.

27. υἱός (ὁ) son has three stems: 1. υἱο-, whence υἱοῦ, etc., according to the 2nd decl. 2. υἱυ-, whence υἱέος, υἱεῖ, dual υἱεῖ, υἱέοιν, pl. υἱεῖς, υἱέων, υἱέσι, υἱεῖς. The stems υἱο- and υἱυ-, usually lose their ι (43): ὑοῦ, ὑέος, etc. 3. υἱ- in Hom. G. υἷος, D. υἷι, A. υἷα, dual υἷε, pl. υἷες, υἱάσι, υἷας.

28. χείρ (ἡ) hand, χειρ-ός, χειρ-ί, χεῖρ-α; dual χεῖρ-ε, χερ-οῖν; pl. χεῖρ-ες, χειρ-ῶν, χερ-σί, χεῖρ-ας. Poetic also χερ-ός, χερ-ί, etc.; dual, χειρ-οῖν. Att. inscr. have χειροῖν, χειρσί. Hom. agrees with Att. prose and Hdt. except that he has also χερ-ί, χείρ-εσσι χείρ-εσι.

29. χρώς (ὁ) skin, χρωτ-ός, χρωτ-ί (but χρῷ in the phrase ἐν χρῷ), χρῶτα. Poetic χρο-ός, χρο-ί̄, χρό-α, like αἰδώς, 266.

posted by koeselitz at 7:48 AM on November 15, 2007


Hoof. It's all greek to me, buddy.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:50 AM on November 15, 2007


Thanks, koeselitz! Now I can throw away my Smyth!
posted by languagehat at 8:36 AM on November 15, 2007


THIS!
posted by shmegegge at 9:21 AM on November 15, 2007


IS!
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:46 AM on November 15, 2007


100100001
posted by meehawl at 9:47 AM on November 15, 2007


Dammit, 100100011.
posted by meehawl at 9:48 AM on November 15, 2007


(And now for something completely different, check out this superlative example of implausible but grammatically correct repetition:

"I'm not persuaded by the the the makes it good crowd, but I don't find oddman's argument convincing either..."

Up for discussion is whether "the" is, by virtue of being what it is, responsible for the positive connotation of "the shit" vs the negative connotation of "shit".

So you've got this definite article, "the".

Is the the responsible, then? Some folks think so. They think that the the makes it good.

And that crowd of folks?

They're the the the makes it good crowd.

Wonderful.

Of course, you could mark it up with some quotes for clarity—the 'the "the" makes it good' crowd or such—but that's less fun.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:51 AM on November 15, 2007 [1 favorite]


IS!
posted by shmegegge at 10:07 AM on November 15, 2007


REALLY, REALLY IS!
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:14 AM on November 15, 2007


(Addendum: running with the premise of the original asker in that thread, the the the makes it good crowd would be just about the most awesome fucking crowd you could hope to be in. Hipsters, take note.)
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:20 AM on November 15, 2007


Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
posted by languagehat at 10:41 AM on November 15, 2007 [1 favorite]


You know, I'm trying to leave 300 for somebody else, since I snatched up 200, but you slackers are making it difficult.
posted by languagehat at 10:50 AM on November 15, 2007


Three
posted by OmieWise at 10:55 AM on November 15, 2007


Where by "leave" you mean "slowly advance, under pretense of restraint, toward" and by "somebody else" you mean "myself, ha ha ha, suckers".
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:55 AM on November 15, 2007


Hund
posted by OmieWise at 10:55 AM on November 15, 2007


red?
posted by OmieWise at 10:55 AM on November 15, 2007


SPARTA!
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:55 AM on November 15, 2007


Cortex you suck.
posted by OmieWise at 10:55 AM on November 15, 2007


Like a Hoover.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:56 AM on November 15, 2007


Ooh, now you're getting me hot.
posted by OmieWise at 10:56 AM on November 15, 2007


cortex totally stole my thunder, but thank god he did, because i got completely slammed at work and would have missed it. all that effort...
posted by shmegegge at 11:01 AM on November 15, 2007


No we're in 300 territory, the 300 movie: absurdly anti-Iranian propaganda or just an excuse for unbridled depillatory homoeroticism? Discuss.
posted by meehawl at 12:16 PM on November 15, 2007


Meh. I know it when I see it.
posted by The World Famous at 12:21 PM on November 15, 2007


meehawl, why must they be mutually exclusive?
posted by lodurr at 12:44 PM on November 15, 2007


What are you people on about now? Quonsar as depilated homoeroticist?
posted by dersins at 1:42 PM on November 15, 2007


Something is happening here, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mister dersins?
posted by languagehat at 1:45 PM on November 15, 2007


What it is ain't exactly clear.
posted by dersins at 1:50 PM on November 15, 2007


THERE'S A MAN WITH A GUN!
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:00 PM on November 15, 2007


OVER THERE!
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:00 PM on November 15, 2007


*stops*
posted by dersins at 2:01 PM on November 15, 2007


What's that sound?
posted by dersins at 2:01 PM on November 15, 2007


*looks*

What's goin' down?
posted by breezeway at 2:13 PM on November 15, 2007


*steps out of line*
posted by dersins at 2:17 PM on November 15, 2007


I've come to take you away.
posted by The World Famous at 2:21 PM on November 15, 2007


whoa, I think it's time...
posted by lodurr at 2:21 PM on November 15, 2007


Beware-- 2 Triple-O is here.
posted by dersins at 2:25 PM on November 15, 2007


And that's just a sample of how I entail a derail.
posted by dersins at 2:25 PM on November 15, 2007


Free samples? You should do an FPP about it.
posted by The World Famous at 2:26 PM on November 15, 2007


RARR I AM A TIGER
posted by Kwine at 4:27 PM on November 15, 2007


*grabs Kwine by the tail*

Gotcha!
posted by quin at 4:45 PM on November 15, 2007


Racist!
posted by dersins at 4:55 PM on November 15, 2007


Bassist!
posted by languagehat at 6:15 PM on November 15, 2007


Trout!
posted by dersins at 7:39 PM on November 15, 2007


Steve!
posted by jonmc at 8:15 PM on November 15, 2007


Stella!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:19 PM on November 15, 2007


Stella? Overpriced and overrated here. I hear it's cheaper in Europe, which makes a lot more sense.
posted by dersins at 8:30 PM on November 15, 2007


Kowalski!!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:39 PM on November 15, 2007


Kapowski!!
posted by Reggie Digest at 8:52 PM on November 15, 2007


why must they be mutually exclusive?

Depends on whether you're using a disjunctive or exclusive or I guess. There was a case of unbridled depilatory zoophilia today.
posted by meehawl at 9:07 PM on November 15, 2007


just dumb.
posted by quonsar at 8:04 PM on November 16, 2007


Well, then, I think we're dumb here.

No, wait. Done.

I think we're done here.
posted by dersins at 10:01 PM on November 16, 2007


Think again, bat-brain!
posted by breezeway at 8:45 AM on November 17, 2007


Curse you, breezeway, and your thread-extending ways!
posted by dersins at 9:50 AM on November 17, 2007


Seriously. WTF.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:32 AM on November 17, 2007


No, you.
posted by languagehat at 11:08 AM on November 17, 2007


No, sir; I think that, upon careful re-examination of—and honest self-reflection on—the present circumstances, you will, if you have any honor whatsoever, be compelled to acknowledge that, in fact, you.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:15 AM on November 17, 2007 [1 favorite]


Whoa, whoa; enough about me. Let's talk about me, shall we?
posted by breezeway at 1:43 PM on November 17, 2007




All around the world
Every boy and girl
Taking lessons from me
Do the Stupidity

-- King Solomon Burke
posted by breezeway at 9:50 PM on November 17, 2007


This really turned into a mess, it's like the Cat in the Hat went nuts with a box of markers and enough peyote to keep him awake for 2 weeks straight.
posted by baphomet at 10:52 AM on November 19, 2007


You call that a mess? I call that the best two weeks of my life!
posted by languagehat at 11:24 AM on November 19, 2007 [1 favorite]


Hello, everyone in Recent Comments!
posted by Kwine at 2:12 PM on November 19, 2007


How ya been, Kwine?
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:14 PM on November 19, 2007


I'm thinking of trying a new hairstyle. What do you guys think?
posted by vronsky at 5:33 PM on November 19, 2007


I think your hair will grow into and around your ears, strangling them until they fall off into a bag of dried apricots you just gave to your one true love.

The rest is up to you.
posted by breezeway at 11:08 PM on November 19, 2007


Needs more tonsure.
posted by meehawl at 8:38 AM on November 20, 2007


END TONSURSHIP
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:52 AM on November 20, 2007


OK, I can see you're disguising a message there, but which is it?

RODENTS PUNISH
PRUDISH SONNET
HOUND SPINSTER
DUNNO HIPSTERS
ROTUND HIPNESS
PROUD THINNESS
TURD PHONINESS
HIDE NUNS SPORT
HIDES PORN NUTS
HORNED TIN PUSS
HORDE SPITS NUN

I'm onto you, cortex! It's only a matter of time before I decipher your vile plan!
posted by languagehat at 10:24 AM on November 20, 2007


HIDES PORN NUTS

Don't we all?
posted by meehawl at 1:50 PM on November 20, 2007


It's actually the superpositioning of all those possibilities at once, lhat.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:37 PM on November 20, 2007


Wait a second, this is still that quonsar thread? Jesus.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:42 PM on November 20, 2007


Ha ha! Got you back into it!
posted by languagehat at 3:00 PM on November 20, 2007


No, I set up this whole string of responses via a cron job, days ago. You're just that predictable.

*turns Mind Ray up to 11*
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:08 PM on November 20, 2007


AAUUUUGGHHH!!!!

*desperately stuffs tinfoil into hat, hides under bed*
posted by languagehat at 3:14 PM on November 20, 2007


Wait a second, this is still that quonsar thread? Jesus.

No, quonsar. Pay attention, man.
posted by The World Famous at 5:29 PM on November 20, 2007


While fashioning a bit of fluff to latch onto this dust trail of a thread, I first typed "cotex," then "coertex," and then gave up, mission accomplished.
posted by breezeway at 9:11 PM on November 20, 2007


ROD HUNTS PENIS
HIP NERD SNOUTS
NUDE PISS THORN
SO THUNDER PINS
SNIPS HER DONUT
SHORN NUDIST EP
NUNS POSE THIRD
THIS ROUND ESPN
SPUDS IN THRONE
SIP RENT HOUNDS
posted by Reggie Digest at 10:41 PM on November 20, 2007


RUNTS PHONE SID
HIS PRUDENT SON
PINNED SO HURTS
SHUNS OPEN DIRT
HONED IN SPURTS
DUPONT SHINERS
STUPID HOSER NN
PERSON HUNTS ID
PUSH SOD INTERN
O THINNED SPURS
RUSH ENDS POINT
STUNNED HIS PRO
posted by Reggie Digest at 11:32 PM on November 20, 2007


It can't possibly have been more than 12 hours since someone commented in this thread. Someone should carry the torch!
posted by Kwine at 12:19 PM on November 21, 2007


"ROD HUNTS PENIS"

Heh. I used to work with a guy named Rod Hunt.
posted by klangklangston at 12:29 PM on November 21, 2007


Okay, dammit. I tried to read through, but got lost amongst all the footnotes.

Someone spoil it for me- was quonsar....

A) Trolling

B) Plain dumb

????????????????????????
posted by Dr-Baa at 1:24 PM on November 21, 2007


False alarm. It turned out he just had a fish in his pants.
posted by languagehat at 1:52 PM on November 21, 2007


i had a just fish in my pants.
posted by quonsar at 3:26 PM on November 21, 2007 [1 favorite]


PLEASE ADJUST THE FISH IN YOUR PANTS.
posted by languagehat at 5:09 PM on November 21, 2007


I remember the Fish of Justice... played by Abe Vigoda, right?
posted by wendell at 7:12 PM on November 21, 2007


Is that a fish in your pants, or are you just happy to see Condoleezza?

*ducks*
posted by Reggie Digest at 8:11 PM on November 21, 2007


*throws turducken at Reggie Digest*
posted by wendell at 8:52 PM on November 21, 2007


My brain persists in seeing the first syllable of turducken as 'turd'. Which it is, I guess.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:52 PM on November 21, 2007 [1 favorite]


This thread should never die. It takes our care and feeding to keep it alive, let's all do our part.
posted by Meatbomb at 1:08 PM on November 22, 2007


My biggest regret about this thread is that I can only favorite it once.
posted by mullingitover at 1:57 PM on November 22, 2007


The q-man will never die. He's like Rock and Roll, Twinkies and UFO Conspiracy Theories. Especially now that he has mastered making a pooping elephant in ASCII art. However, Meatbomb is an endangered species, for violating the first rule of "Rick Rolling" - LIE ABOUT THE LINK. And now, your moment of zen. (Godwinized for your protection)
posted by wendell at 2:57 PM on November 22, 2007


However, Meatbomb is an endangered species, for violating the first rule of "Rick Rolling" - LIE ABOUT THE LINK.

That's faux-Ironic Postmodern DeRecontextualization, man. Meatbomb's all about the faux-Ironic Postmodern DeRecontextualization.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:00 PM on November 22, 2007


[IMG]
posted by Eideteker at 5:32 AM on November 23, 2007 [1 favorite]


The q-man will never die.

Signs point to "You're kinda wrong."
posted by dersins at 1:56 PM on November 27, 2007


.
posted by team lowkey at 3:01 PM on November 27, 2007


This shit is ridiculous.
posted by breezeway at 1:10 AM on November 28, 2007


My shit don't stink.
posted by OmieWise at 6:16 AM on November 28, 2007


This stink is Technotronic.
posted by team lowkey at 12:06 PM on November 28, 2007


Electrological!
posted by breezeway at 9:14 AM on November 30, 2007


« Older Hey guys, have any tips for im...  |  Mefi better journalists than P... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments

Post