align-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcamerachatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-crosscrosseditfacebookglobegoogleimagesinstagramlocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartwitteryahoo
Purley, GB
Post #: 936
Nice one Brian! (and yes I saw it)

I am posting the entire thread of the conversation with Lisa the idiot - it's now definitely concluded as you will see!

I noticed the other day she said "...I never paid for the medium's services" were her exact words. Whether any money changed hands is unimportant, as someone can still be conned. There is bound to be someone reading about the experience that will influence them to visit (and pay) a medium for her/his services (for want of a better word!).
Group Organizer
London, GB
Post #: 766
The whole thing showed her to be a moron from the very first smug comment she made to claiming her mate had explained Higgs-Boson to her so she didn't need to watch Sean Carroll's lecture which explains why there is no afterlife and why there can't be. And then she has the gall to say I was being belittling and insulting when she is basically saying both the scientific community and I are idiots for not allowing people to think and talk bollocks without pulling them up on it. I can imagine that if she really did have any contact with Derren Brown he is not as forthright as me but I expect he would have been humouring her at best if he didn't tell her she's an idiot to her face. We can only hope our ancestors are giving her mum a hard time in the afterlife that can't exist LOL.

There's now a page 4 in this ridiculous exchange: Page4
Georgi L.
London, GB
Post #: 1,926
I wouldn't have handled it this way Adrian, but all the woo and wolly phrases she cites does indeed make her look like an idiot. Especially the bit about her mate having explained Higgs Boson to her such that she didn't need to challenge what she 'knows'. In the words of Seinfeld, "Serenity now", LOL. biggrin
Group Organizer
London, GB
Post #: 768
Georgi: I know you wouldn't have handled it like I have. But you know me - once someone identifies them as an idiot I can't resist driving a horse and carriage through the place where their brain should be. The really sad thing here is that she's almost there. She knows the words, but not their significance or which order to put them in, except to satisfy the rules of grammar.

Add to that she then has an emotional response basically moaning like a child that I'm being horrid. There is no place for emotion in debate. Emotion is almost as bad as faith for driving us away from knowledge. Perhaps she's a really friendly person and it's a delight to be in her company, but if she looks like an idiot and quacks like an idiot then she's an idiot too. In her case I would say she's made that decision, in other words she chooses to favour her new age bollocks experience over scientific proof. It probably goes back to some childhood experience and she thinks she's balancing the world by challenging science or something. I can guess which sibling she is. Her friend getting in on the act and being emotional too just shows a big reason we're not yet having the national debate that needs to take place about the role and future of religion in our society.

Oh and she has a vote confused
London, GB
Post #: 112
Adrian the only recommendation I can make is that when talking to someone that has been affected with the confusedconfused virus, (this is the teacher in me talking) is to say YOU ARE TALKING LIKE AN IDIOT, then explain they should re consider point X then it gives them the chance to 180 without loosing face.
Group Organizer
London, GB
Post #: 774
I know Brian you're right, but where's the fun in that lol. I don't respond well to idiocy and she was saying some very stupid things which got exponentially more stupid each time she posted. Obviously my sarcastic comments were entirely for my own amusement, and certainly not constructive but you know she started it by saying something smug and stupid in a public forum. After that all bets are off really. Another day I might have done it differently. I have to say I didn't really use the Boghossian method here...

However she was basically having and argument with Sean Carroll and the whole of CERN by proxy, and still thought she had a tenable position. That's why I couldn't take her seriously. Collateral damage is the phrase I believe!
Jarvis L.
user 105997992
London, GB
Post #: 6
.. if she looks like an idiot and quacks like an idiot then she's an idiot
Adrian, it's not very subtle or refined, but my mate agrees with your "you're an idiot method"

user 85062902
London, GB
Post #: 30
I have just read the full transcript. I am sorry but the part about the dog is just too much. I fell off my seat. She is also walking around knowing when she is going to die!!
user 33309642
London, GB
Post #: 357
IMPORTANT INFORMATION - not everybody is totally sane.
Alex D
London, GB
Post #: 405
MORE IMPORTANT INFORMATION: almost 50% of people have below average intelligence.
(A point I think made by someone else recently.)

I think I often make a mistake by assuming the people I am debating with are as intelligent as me. Their otherwise perplexing irrationality might be explained by the fact that they find themselves in a gunfight armed only with a penknife: non sequiturs, tantrums, abuse, false accusations and walking off in a huff being them resorting to "non-conventional weaponry" as their only option.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION - not everybody is totally sane.
I contend that nobody is totally sane, since the human brain is irrational by design. I think instead of "sanity" the best we can do is try to assess how well an individual is able to look after themselves - "functionality"?

The most well-adjusted, psychologically healthy, high-functioning, admirable person I know also believes in angels; go figure. And they don't reveal to her the secrets of the universe or help her solve world hunger - they help her find parking spaces.
Yet rational me is the one with psychiatric problems.

(N.B. On looking briefly into whether to use 'psychiatric', 'psychological', 'mental' or 'emotional' in the sentence above, I discovered: "The term [Psychiatry] was first coined by the German physician Johann Christian Reil in 1808, and literally means the 'medical treatment of the soul'." Oh dear.)
Powered by mvnForum

Optional Contribution

GBP10.00 to

This covers: This is to help with LAAG's activism and the Ministry of Reason project.

Payment is accepted using:

  • PayPal
  • Cash or check - “Please email us and we'll send details. Or see us at any LAAG own meetup (i.e. not EXTERNAL events etc.) Again if in doubt email us.

Refunds are not offered for this Meetup.

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy