Gotard of the day
 

Hey guys I made gotard of the day. This guy totally made a fool of me in some chat room and POSTED IT ONLINE ON HIS GOTARD.COM WEBSITE TO HUMILIATE ME.

I thought that you guys would appreciate me being made a philosophical fool! THIS MAN IS A GENIUS, AND IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME, YOU CAN VIEW HIS 700 WEBSITES ABOUT HIMSELF AND HIS CHRONICLES OF STUPID PEOPLE.

I'm only Gotard for a single day... so as they say, carpe diem.

http://gotards.com/Intangible_chaos

IM ON A WEBSITE.

here's a condensed version, I'll skip the leadup:
13.43.59 gremlin_net: [11] Apparently, intangible_chaos regards goblins to be as likely as deities.
13.43.59 intangible_chaos: Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause. Premise 2: The universe began to exist. Conclusion 1: Therefore, the universe must have a cause.
13.44.06 intangible_chaos: How so, gremlin?
13.44.15 gremlin_net: [12] intangible_chaos: You never answered the question.
13.44.15 intangible_chaos: WHAT ABOUT THE TOOTHFAIRY can you see me rolling my eyes
13.44.24 gremlin_net: [13] intangible_chaos: What logical evidence points to deities while excluding goblins in the same role? <— repost
13.44.29 intangible_chaos: there are differences between a god and goblins, don't try to draw false analogies.
13.44.55 gremlin_net: [14] intangible_chaos: What are the differences? That's pretty much what I was asking.
13.45.08 intangible_chaos: What are the differences between God and HUman beings?
13.45.23 gremlin_net: [15] intangible_chaos: I'll wait here for you to think up an answer....
13.45.40 intangible_chaos: You're the one who has to show me how they are at all similar
13.46.04 gremlin_net: [16] intangible_chaos: They're both unproved, unevidenced myths believed in my a minority.
(deities are believed in only my a minority :posh AN EXTREMELY SMALL MINORITY LIKE .0000001 percent of people believe in gods thats it. Statistics from gremlin.net)
13.46.33 gremlin_net: [17] intangible_chaos: Horses have an atomic weight of twelve, and proved under controlled conditions.
13.46.36 gremlin_net: [18] as*
13.47.14 intangible_chaos: okay, well t he most obvious difference between goblins and god i sthat GOD may have been a necessary component in order for the universe to have existed
13.47.19 gremlin_net: [19] intangible_chaos: Have deities got an atomic weight of twelve? Yes or No will do.
13.47.23 intangible_chaos: whereas goblins are unnecessary and their existence serves no purpose
13.47.38 intangible_chaos: I don't know if they have an atomic weight
13.48.09 intangible_chaos: Do goblins or the fey world serve a NECESSARY purpose in order for the world to have possibly even begun?
13.48.10 intangible_chaos: no
13.48.17 gremlin_net: [20] intangible_chaos: So the exclusion of universebuilding goblins relies on your personal, subjective definition of goblins, while deities build universes by your other personal, subjective definition. How logical.
(THIS IS WHERE THE GENIUS BEGINS TO SHINE. CHECK THAT SHIT OUT. DEITIES AND GOBLINS ARE SO SUBJECTIVE YOU CAN CALL THEM WHATEVER YOU WANT AND GIVE THEM WHATEVER QUALITIES YOU WANT)
13.48.36 intangible_chaos: Well, if goblins built the universe, then they could be analogous with god
13.48.42 intangible_chaos: and would have to have the same form as god
13.48.55 intangible_chaos: So you might as well call them God instead of Goblins
13.49.23 intangible_chaos: and your analogy of approaching me with something of goblins, something which isn't god, and then changing the definition of them to something similar as god, is ridiculous
13.49.29 gremlin_net: [21] intangible_chaos: But they'd be called goblins. And you'd be boasting that you have logical evidence of goblins. That you summarily reject goblins as universebuilders without reason tells me about your logic.
13.49.47 intangible_chaos: because we weren't considering goblins as universe builders
13.50.00 gremlin_net: [22] intangible_chaos: And, that you led with that stupid a priori logical evidence tells me that you've got nothing better ready to go. Ge back to me when you think of something less flimsy.
13.50.14 intangible_chaos: YOU SAID THAT HORSES HAD AN ATOMIC WEIGHT BUT MAYBE I DIDNT MEAN THOSE HORSES MAYBE I MEANT THE IMAGINARY HORSES
13.50.18 intangible_chaos: that tells me something about your logic
13.50.32 gremlin_net: [23] intangible_chaos: So you're moving your goalposts? Whee. Tell someone stupid.
(Oh, he's NOT stupid. I FORGOT SOMEHOW)
13.50.44 intangible_chaos: you moved your goal posts
13.50.51 intangible_chaos: you talked about goblins, something which have a definition other than god
13.50.56 intangible_chaos: and then changed the definition to god
13.50.58 intangible_chaos: thats ridiculous
13.51.17 gremlin_net: [24] intangible_chaos: No I didn't. Goblins remain goblins: mythical, unevidenced creatues.
13.51.37 intangible_chaos: so what? A unicorn is an unevidenced creature but i wouldn't say that it is identical to a piece of shit
13.51.51 intangible_chaos: because there is a popular conception of what a unicorn is, a definition
13.52.00 gremlin_net: [26] intangible_chaos: You're unaware of the evidence for shit? You're an idiot; we're done here.
(:lol I d idn't even know what shit was)
13.52.09 intangible_chaos: if you are going to break the bounds of definitions whenever it is convenient for you then there can be no logical argument
13.52.14 intangible_chaos: Okay, how about GOBLIN SHIT
13.52.38 intangible_chaos: anyway, thats kinda my point. I could just change the definition of God to human beings and then look GOD EXISTS and it was just your subjective definition of GOD which meant that he didn't exist.
13.52.42 gremlin_net: [27] Anyone else got evidence of deities? Someone selfaware, perhaps? No? Right. What else is new....
13.53.07 intangible_chaos: your logic fails, gremlin
13.53.14 intangible_chaos: especially your gigantic fallacies...
13.53.18 gremlin_net: [28] Nevermind. This is stupid enough that I'm keeping it. Be back in a bit....

Guys I'm so ashamed how am I gonna live with myself :(

If you guys would like to know more about this master of philosophy, this genius of stupidity, this fellow of unlimited ingenuity, here is a few pictures and profile stuffs!

http://f33.yahoofs.com/coreid/49c1b8...AQpxKB5UqbhjMR
He has a big reptile and wears dark clothing cuz hes atheist. He hides his face because he's so fucking attractive and brilliant if you saw it directly with light reflecting off of it into the camera lens your face and eyes would MELT due to its irradiance. Reptiles have evolutionary resistances to such things, though.
That's why he made friends with them.
:lol just kidding he's eating that motherfucker.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/gremlin_net
http://f33.yahoofs.com/coreid/49bbbf...AQpxKBwFcrE2vo
His woman is a beautiful high class lady and is nothing at all like a white trash hobag.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/hunter_the_crazychick

Here is where he MKES FUN OF US RETARDS:
gotards.com

here's where he makes fun of more stupids people and also shares his opinions about movies and how important he is. He even has a message board where he says things like, "Theories are a collection of facts."
gremlin.net

Here's where he makes tshirts of his own websites and other clever atheistic stuff like wearing blaack shirts and being cool and hating the stupid folk:
wastedinc.com
Personally I want a button that says gremlin.net cause ive never been so horribly refuted in an argument before :) plus his website is soo popular im sure among CERTAIN SOCIALLY ENRICHED PERSONS IN THE UPPER CUSPS OF SOCIETY

I wonder what a person like that does for a living. Do you think he would put this website on his resume?

I wish to US were more like the countries where that kind of person would be jailed for having too many opinions.

i think he makes money selling clever t-shirts and receiving donations :Lol
I dont know though.

i told his girlfriend last night that she looks like whitetrash and she tried to lie about having that picture in her profile. Then she tried to do that thing where you don't lie because of SEMANTICS but you are still being deceptive :lol

next time i see her im gonna tell her that she wears coochie cutters

Sounds like it's easy to get on there. Argue the guy into a corner and he says I win and puts it on his page.

yea, pretty much. Everybody thinks he is some kind of genius, though. He is reported to have said that he has a 200 iq, and he wrote a book and had it published. The book is about stupid people.

my favorite thing is how he saves these arguments, and in a lot of them its so obvious that he's wrong. There's another one on there where he argues with this guy and says that jehova is not the same god as allah. And that allah is a "moon deity," whereas jehova is a "Solar deity."

thats what a 200 IQ will get ya.

He must have the missing gospels that the Catholic church banished.

and he must have missed that islam is an abrahmic monotheism professing faith and submission to the god of abraham claiming their race came from... some guy in the bible and call the jews and christians brothers of the book. i almost typed boob heh :(

i think he reads too many stupid popculture things and then tries to pretend like they are his own or something, not understanding that popculture is usually ridiculous. cause eveeeryyyoooonnnne in that chat room uses the same terms, ideas and arguments, even when they are inappropriate.

the worst thing about all of that is that he never even refuted the argument that it is necessary for the world to have been created. He just said that GOBLINs created it (total strawman, too). Its so ridiculously easy to disprove, too. You just have to say that the world was never created, it always existed.

the difference between gods an goblins is the definition of the words. and since goblins don't exist and goblins aren't god that means god exists. looks like i win you're going on the website

God is a fictional character, mew, just like goblins.

either way begging of the question is involved.

lol ok some more updates on this genius since he has been talking about himself a lot. He wrote and published his first short story at the age of four. He gets mad reading other people's books because it bothers him that they do neat things younger than he did.
He is upset that he is two years behind mozart as far as the piano.

he has a new book which he is working on:
http://www.lulu.com/content/5477535

Awww. Precocious little fuckwit, ain't he? I'd like to take a bat to his Frankensteinian Monster head.

People need hobbies. I think he needs to build model planes.

And at least you have friends here who will insult him without question and affirm your superiority for you.

Yea. I'm sure that people here would insult him without question. Because this is such an accepting, uncritical message board. And all of my other threads are always so well received.
along with all of my arguments which are also always well received.

He needs to be invited here. I want to argue with this person on subjects which I am clearly wrong about, but getting him upset anyway.

And then guess his password

heh heh I'll draw his attention here maybe, eventually. I'm sure if he found out that i made a thread about him he'd have to point out how upset I must've been and how pathetic i am for making a thread about him; and that wow he must be awesome if he can have that sort of affect on people and gain such internet publicity.

I want to engage him in "conversation" and do nothing but cut and paste from smarterchild software. Lets see him win an argument against a computer! It's like playing chess against deep blue.

Fucking loser - that's parroted straight out of the gospel according to Jack Chick. Yeah, what an original concept - NOT.

200 IQ? If you divide it by 2, maybe. Fun factoid, genius - if you have to brag about your IQ, chances are you're NOT SMART.

Do it, and see if he EVER realizes he's arguing against a machine. I'm betting no.

You think he calculated his IQ from one of those banner ads that say such and such person's (usually Paris Hilton) IQ is 150, are you smarter then them?

No way to prove it, but yes, I believe that would be likely. :dunce

I don't know what an IQ has to do with philosophy anyway. IQ is related to problem solving and spatial thinking.

thats kind of what i figure when anybody says what their iq is. But i've heard people also say that they were accepted in to mensa or whatever its called.