The Depths to which Atheist Hate Will Sink

these atheists morons really willing to compare true social science to KGB propaganda

We can see clearly the evil hatred of atheists in how readily they are willing to hurt others just to win cheap victories on message boards. Here is HRG who is almost worshiped as the atheist guru on CARM atheist, he defiantly the "grand old man" on the board for atheists. Although he's not so old. They all look up to him as a major thinker a real scholar. A mathematician with Physics degree. Yet when we look at the lengths he's willing to take how he doesn't care who hurts to proves he's smarter than me, that's pretty pathetic. He's once again leading the hate minute section on my 200 studeis. He's never read one, he has no idea what is invovled in the feild of psychology of religion. He's so certain the studies are no good, merely becuase I used them to back my arguments on God, that he's willing to slander and libel the major researchers in the field. He does this by making a false comparison between their claims those of the persecutors of soviet dissidents. There's no basis for the comparison an din fact the major researcher he's libeling is not even a member of any religious group and is not a Christian.

HRG:

Ridiculous. Those studies are of the same reliability as the studies by Soviet psychiatrists who showed that people who dissented from communism were depressed and mentally ill. The only difference is that the authors of your studies did not have the political power to lock people up in psychiatric hospitals.

I remind him he has not read the studies:

Originally Posted by HRG

Just you haven't read a single case study in the Soviet Journal of Psychiatry. Neither of us is a psychologist;

Meta:

that's an unwarranted assertion of the fallacy guilt by association. There's no reason why I should link this major researcher in a valid academic field who is lauded as top of the line, with being like some group of political hacks that he's nothing like. No reason to lump his work in with such deeds. Only becasue another little hank wants to use shameful and totally immoral tactics in destroying his reputation among a public of ignorant savages who don't' give a **** about truth.

what you are doing to destroy this guy's rep for no better reason than that you want to take away the ability to use his work of support a belief you don't like is a crime against academic work. It's an atrocity. You should be deeply of depths to which your immoral and unethical warped little mind will plunge.

you are totally unscholarly and unethical.

HRG:

however, there are people who are knowledgeable in that field (at CARM and at home - my wife has a PhD in psychology); and they have looked at some of your studies and concluded that they are either scientifically worthless or do not state what you claim they state.

Meta:
That's a ridiculous charge. If I got them you can get them. you don't want to find them that's the problem. i can get your wife on a conference call with Ralph Hood. I can get her on a conference call with other people who support Hood. ask her if she will talk to the guy If I set up OK?

Ive quoted other studies that say Hood is great. do you not remember that?



HRG

But you do ? Tee-hee. Where is your degree in psychology ?

where is your conscience liar? unscholarly hack.

My BA is in sociology

HRG:

P.S. And my self-esteem is higher than yours, neener-neener ...

Meta:

that's a mark of really poor self esteem. you have to best everyone else. you are willing to destroy the reputation of an academic whose work you never read, just to save face and prove you are smarter than a guy on a message boards. it's pretty transparent people with good self esteem don't act this way.

you are neither a gentlemen nor a scholar.

it saddens me deeply to see how totally unethical Hans is and how far he's willing to sink to hurt someone who he's never met and whose work he's never read. this is a real guy. He has relation to KBG or anything Russian. There is no basis for the fallacious guilt by association fallacy that Hans uses becasue there's no association. He's totally based it on hermeneutic of suspension, meaning, he has no reason in hell to make the association.

Hood is a real guy. He's done a lot of great scientific work and Hans is willing to damage that just to show that he's smarter than me! that's so stupid and unfeeling, unethical and sick.

I demand that he apoplectic now. Stop the little stupid charade trying to pretend that you've disproved a body of work you are not willing to study or read or understand or even hear about.

what this proves to me is that atheists have no morality. Is this the act of a person who is secure int his own sense of who he is?

so desperate to prove he's smarter than some buy on a message board that's he's willing to hurt someone whose work he's never read?

Look also at how unfair they are in argument. They can't just get the study and read it. They have been doing this same tactic for three years now. They never get a study they wont read a link but they keep saying the same things over and over again. They keep acting like they know all about the studies but they wont read one.

The bull shit lie that his wife has a Ph.D. in psychology but she can't get these studies that I got on inter-library loan. That's so stupid. I bet he never asked his wife.