Random Meme Saturday

My Atheist Experience

"The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God'." - Psalm 14:1

"They aren't fools because they say 'There is no God'. They say 'There is no God' because they're fools." - Citizenfitz

I've had many interactions with atheists. Hell, I was once one myself! Sort of.... More of an agnostic, really. But religion was nothing to me. I never went to church. Not even on Easter Sunday. So, in practice if not in doctrine I was an atheist. I lived my life as if God didn't exist. In truth I'd have saved myself a whole lot of grief and regrets had I started contemplating God sooner than I did. But that didn't really happen until I was about thirty. So... I too was a fool. In my defense I was brought up in an irreligious home - where talk of God was non-existent.

There's an old saying, "Sin clouds the intellect." But sin doesn't necessarily cloud ALL of one's intellect. Just parts here and there. Think of clouds in an otherwise blue sky. And the more sins the more clouds in one's intellectual sky.

For an example, the famous "atheist", Christopher Hitchens' intellect worked very well on some levels. Very poorly on others. He was a good writer, a great public speaker and had a quick wit. However, he had no use for facts - unless they were profitable to him; and he fell into all sorts of philosophical errors. When I read his book, God is Not Great I grew exhausted noting all the intellectual fallacies he engaged in. And that was just the first chapter. Then there were his historical errors....

But Hitchens was an unusual man and atheist. I still agree with him on quite a few things. His reflections on Mother Teresa for example. His low estimation of Bill Clinton. He also famously opposed abortion and once penned a poignant argument against it. And unlike the great majority of atheists today, he usually kept his cool when challenged. Given all this, hopefully he got a cooler place in Hell.

My experience in dealing with atheists is that only a few - around ten percent - don't go primate when their assumptions are tickled. This can get entertaining, as it did in my recent kerfuffle with YouTube luminary, "Professor Dave". Dave isn't a professor at all and in fact has only a BA. He was in a debate recently with a famous scientist, who has a PhD in Chemistry, about the origins of life. It was more a train wreck than a debate. The moderator went MIA and both of them did poorly. It was akin to watching a couple of Protestants excommunicating one another for heresy. To his credit, Dave got in a good burn. But when I went to his YT channel and challenged him regarding his spin on the "debate" he grew very angry and vulgar. Before long he deleted the thread. Even his fan boi's comments - and there were a lot of them. Then he blocked me. Probably a good thing too, otherwise I'd still be there, mocking him. You can go here to see it:

https://citizenfitz09.blogspot.com/2023/10/my-debate-with-crazy-dave.html

But I know how to beat atheists. It's really not that hard. You have to keep things simple, direct, philosophical and on topic. Otherwise they'll just dodge all over the place. In short, the atheist's argument is this: A. "If God exists then I would see Him." B. "I do not see Him." C. "Therefore, God does not exist."

This is called a Modus tollens fallacy: "If P, then Q. Not Q. Therefore, not P." The old argumentum ad ignorantiam. Recognizing this, it's a good way to beat them. Not to say they don't engage in lots of other philosophical errors: fallacious appeals to authority, tautologies, straw man-ing, ad hominems, self-contradiction, Masked Man fallacies, the No True Scotsman fallacy, evasion, proof by assertion, lying....

They sometimes don't know the difference between "evidence" and "proof" and will present some debateable slice of evidence as PROOF there is NO God. Then declare themselves the winner! Sorta' like Dave did.

On the other hand they'll demand endless lines of evidence from the theist. If you cite a book about a miracle, they will say the book is anecdotal and demand photographs. Show them photographs and they'll reply they could have been doctored. When you say the pictures were published in an anti-religious newspaper they'll demand to see the video. When you show them a video, they'll say videos can be faked. Should they see the miracle with their own two eyes they'll start talking about optical illusions. There isn't enough evidence in the known universe to dissever them from their intellectual conceits.

They do like to think of themselves as intellectual giants. Compared to theists anyway. As a very good rule it won't be long, long at all, before they're calling the theist "stupid", "uninformed", "a whack job" or something similar.

I like to ask them,"Can you prove there is no God?" To which they'll usually answer: "It's up to you to prove there IS a God!" In fact, I can't recall one "atheist" who's admitted he can't prove there isn't a God. They'd probably rather be burned at the stake. Sometimes they'll counter with "Which god?" Fair enough. To which I respond "The REAL God", then let them take it from there. There's a trap for them hidden in it.

Agnostics for their part are at least honest enough to admit they can't prove God doesn't exist.

Anyway, the point is that saying "There is no God" is no less a philosophical assertion than saying there IS a God. They HAVE TO defend it. Some negative arguments can be proved but this isn't one of them. So even if they refuse to give you a straight answer (almost certain) you'll still have them on the back foot and can use it to boss them around.

Looking back on my own agnosticism I believe now it came from two specific causes: sexual sins; and intellectual pride. I'm confident those are the two loci of the atheist weltanschauung. When all is said and done, they're just lusters, masturbators, fornicators, adulterers... who see themselves as geniuses.

And you might have noticed how most atheists don't really speak about God as if He doesn't exist. No, no, no! They GRIPE about Him constantly! About His "cruelty". About how "unjust" He is. A "sadist!" They'll go on almost forever complaining to anyone who'll listen about someone they claim doesn't exist. Kind of strange, that.

Hitchens was the guru of that line of reasoning. Hey, he titled his book "God is Not Great". Does that sound remotely atheistic? His defenders will say it was against *religion* - but you cannot have a religion without a deity. So, if you say *religion* is bad, the implication is that it comes up short of its divine mandate. Ergo, God IS great! The problem is "religion". But Hitchens wasn't an "atheist", he saw himself as an "anti-theist"... a God hater. Which is a more accurate description of things.

Like Hitchens, "Professor Dave" comes up with some good stuff at times. He's not dumb. He just imagines himself much smarter than he actually is. Like every foolish atheist who's ever lived.


Fitz

The Star (of Remphan) Spangled Banner

Oh, say can you see such a damnable sight
All the congressmen bowing to Israel's vast scheming
Whose dark frauds and sharp knives prove a perilous fright
Oh, the preachers bow too, with palms out and eyes gleaming

And the common folk who, mesmerized by the tube,
Pay for their own chains to some far away Jews
Oh, see how that six pointed Star of Remphan waves
O'er the heads of popes and kings
And the toiling wage slaves

Fitz

Goodbye...

I'm saddened to say that Brother Nathanael’s greatly underappreciated site, Real Jew News, is no more. He took it down about three weeks ago. Not just stopped producing material… it got holocausted! An internet search for RJN now leads nowhere.

Happily, you can still find it at The Wayback Machine. Real Jew News is a hidden treasure of a sort. Definitely worth viewing and reading. Both +BN's take on things, and the many comments:

http://web.archive.org/web/20230000000000*/www.realjewnews.com

And Brother Nathanel seems to be doing fine. His YT channel Bible With Brother is still up and running:

https://www.youtube.com/@BibleWithBrother

I suspect the lack of contributions to RJN turned into a drought. Brother Nate had been saying he was in poor shape financially due to declining contributions there towards the end. The Jews probably saw this and approached him with an offer he couldn't refuse. At least that’s how I see it.

Failed Messiah's owner supposedly received - and took - an offer too. Someone wrote an article about it, saying some Orthodox Jews offered him a s*** load of shekels - somewhere around one quarter million USD - to take it down (it has since re-surfaced as an archival project).

https://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/archives.html

If that's what happened with RJN then I hope Brother Nathanael got at least that much, and will get to enjoy his golden years with peace of mind. He deserves to.

Another great site that seems to have folded the tent is The Irish Savant. While the site is still easily accessible online, the Savant hasn't posted an article in over four months, which is highly unusual for him. He mentioned that he was moving abroad but would be back to blogging in less than two weeks. At my age it's a worrisome sign when people disappear like that. Keep him in your prayers.

https://www.irishsavant.net/

Of course there are still lots of good sites out there for those of us who reject imposed narratives. But there are lots of false front websites too... pretending to be something they're not. I can promise you though that this blog isn't one of them.

Fitz

Some Good Advice

Tip o' the hat to Vern St. Cloud over at Identity Dixie for this gem!

Don't want to get drafted and sent off to die for Israel? Avoid military service with these simple tricks:

1. Have DIXIE installed as the ringtone on your phone.

2. Have a copy of MEIN KAMPF installed on your phone.

3. Wear a Confederate Battle Flag t-shirt to the induction center.

4. Upon arrival at the induction center, ask when breakfast will be served and say: “I’m hungry enough to kill a Mandingo fighter for a Hardee’s biscuit!”

5. Greet any colored officer or NCO with the phrase “Hey boy!”

6. Whistle at any attractive female officer.

7. Tell anyone who’ll listen that the holocaust never happened and even if it did you’re sure that the Jews asked for it.

8. Tell anyone who’ll listen that the American Colonists were right to burn homosexuals.

9. Tell anyone who’ll listen that you hear voices who tell you to do “bad things, man”.

10. Request to be deployed to the Southwestern US Border to machine gun Mexicans or any other invaders.

My "Debate" with Crazy Dave

Some of you know of Matt Walsh. Walsh is an author, video producer, YouTube creator and public provocateur. Libs hate him with a passion because he goes after them like a pit bulldog after a pet poodle.

Walsh wrote a best seller called Johnny the Walrus:

https://www.amazon.com/Johnny-Walrus-Matt-Walsh/dp/1956007059/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1VJTATTALWFH5&keywords=johnny+the+walrus&qid=1697225777& sprefix=johnny+the+walrus%2Cspecialty-aps%2C112&sr=8-1

He followed that up with a documentary called What is a Woman?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_a_Woman%3F

In What is a Woman? Walsh asks people, some with multiple advanced degrees, to define their terms and propositions regarding women, transgenderism and child "sex re-assignment surgery". As expected, the liberals interviewed failed spectacularly. The traditionalists on the other hand had no problem explaining themselves coherently.

The point is that the liberals Walsh spoke with weren't anomalies. Libs are often incoherent when pressed to explain their premises and conclusions. I've known this forever. But Walsh is able to expose them in a way I can't. He has a huge platform and is able to project 3D images of their madness for all the World to see.

Well, as soldiers of Christ we must slog on.

Enter Dave Farina, an internet/YouTube personality going by the name, "Professor Dave". Professor Dave actually isn't a professor at all. He doesn't have a PhD. He doesn't have a MS either. Nope, Dave has... a BA! But he also has an electronic pulpit, from which he likes to expound on a great many things. In fact if you ask him about ANYTHING - Dave will expound on it! Whether he actually knows much about what he's expounding on is open to question. But he IS able to SOUND like he knows what he's talking about; and so has been able to acquire a large audience of people who like to listen to people who sound like they know what they're talking about.

Last year Dave did a YT episode in which he attempted, in his smug way to dismiss Walsh's What is a Woman? documentary and the arguments against "transgenderism" (more accurately "transvestitism" with a profoundly perverse twist). He failed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpGqFUStcxc&t=15s

Walsh then did an episode mocking Professor Dave's anorexic video. It is well worth a look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Y_V7CgmTg&t=624s

Professor Dave then immediately released a counter-video of his own: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uZOLtdIA7Y

Tellingly, he soon disabled the comments sections in both of those videos. Walsh's comments section remains open to this day.

Then Dave engaged in a "debate" with a REAL Professor - Rice University's James Tour, PhD: https://www.jmtour.com/ - regarding the origins of life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvGdllx9pJU

Both debaters performed poorly. Tour for letting Dave slip through his fingers and get away with his dodges, losing his cool, not questioning Dave's academic credentials, and not slamming him as a smug, pretentious weenie when he was handed the opportunity to do so.

And Dave for giving a tour de force performance of a dodgy, rude, know-it-all. And he definitely made use of his opportunity to insult Tour. Maybe the high point of the evening! BTW - when prodded by someone to say something nice about your leftist adversary, DON'T! Instead, INSULT them. But do it in a witty way.

Anyway, watch the video and observe how Dave never went anywhere near the problem Dr. Tour posed to him in the chemical formulae he wrote out on the chalkboard. Dave didn't because he couldn't. And he knew it! Instead he resorted to a gamut of dodges, ad hominems, false appeals to authority and ipse dixits. Unfortunately, Tour let him get away with it. Getting led down a blind alley when he should have been hammering Dave, mocking his inability to bridge the formulae; and for descending into ad hominems.

Professor Dave has since gone on to release a series of videos in which he practically declares himself the Heavyweight Debating Champion of the World: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=professor+dave+vs+james+tour

But Professor Tour has defenders too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu4PEE5UHzo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyGRTn1d0TA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rMaxWiBmbo

After watching some of these I went to the "Professor Dave Explains" YouTube channel comments section and the following exchanges occurred - which you my friends might find interesting:

Me: They both won! Dave for his majestically supercilious ad hominems. And Tour for his unparalleled ability to let victory slip from his grasp.

PD: Slip from his grasp? When was his grasp anywhere near victory, kiddo? He's a lying fraud.

Me: Then you should have gone up to the chalkboard and completed his formula. ???

PD: What formula, dumbass? What did you want me to write with chalk? Be very specific or admit that you have absolutely no clue and fell for a dumb stunt because you're stupid.

Me: Dave... Dave... Dave.... I can understand why you're still smarting from the shellacking Professor Tour put on you. Just go to the chalkboard and put your PhD to work... and fill in the missing formula. Instant win!

PD: (crickets) As stated earlier Dave only has a BA.

New thread:

C'mon man! All Dave did was repeatedly appeal to authority, without actually explaining anything his authorities claimed; then repeatedly insulted Tour and the audience for not being as "smart" as he is. Tour for his part let Dave off the hook at the very start - then began bellowing angrily as Dave lured him down to his level of madness.

PD: Um, James is a walking appeal to authority, and referencing actual science in this field is not an appeal to authority, and I explained all the science immaculately, you're just fucking stupid. Stick to your echo chamber, dipshit.

Me: I really liked how "professor" Dave resorted to lashing out at the audience in the "debate". What more proof do we need that he won? And its "hamsters"... not "hampsters" as Dave stated. You're very welcome.

PD: Whining about how I shut down some brainwashed hecklers and harping on a spelling error, this is the best you dumb fucks can do 😂

Me - responding to another commenter: Unfortunately, Tour let Dave go, when he had him by his tiny balls.

PD: Yeah if by "let me go", you mean he shrieked like a toddler and shit his pants while playing with chalk for two hours 😂 how many papers has James written on origin of life you dumb cunt? Oh right, zero? Because he's clueless about the field and exclusively lies about it? Sit down and shut the fuck up you brainwashed moron.

Me: You're making a habit of dodging, Dave! Now put your PhD to work (you do have a doctorate in biochem, right?) get your little self to the blackboard and fill in the blanks Tour left you. And you never thanked me for telling you how to spell "hamster" correctly.

PD then blocked me and removed all my comments - as well as all the responses from his silly fan club.

Dave blocks people and resorts to ad hominems not because he's winning, but because he soon runs out of bluster. Along with his intellectual conceits you probably noticed the coarse, angry person that violently surfaced when I tickled him. Hardly the genial atheist!

But atheists usually become coarse, angry and violent when confronted about their inanities. Not all, but enough, so that this ugly personality trait can be used as a handy way to ID them.

It's actually a point of pride for me to be cursed at, blocked, even threatened by people like Crazy Dave. A reverse benediction of a sort. But in truth people like him are easy to beat in debates: because their positions are often extremely irrational. Just wait for them to say something stupid, illogical or self-contradictory - because they will. Then, pit bull-like, attack them and don't let go until they cry uncle or run off.

Like Dave ran off from me. And all the others who've called his bluff.


Fitz

Identity Dixie

I've recently become acquainted with and a fan of the website, Identity Dixie: https://identitydixie.com/2023/10/12/red-october/#comment-23947

Lots of thought provoking and well written commentaries on our dying World.

If you're reading this you might want to visit them too.


Fitz

Random Meme Wednesday