The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread

[Eater of Clowns]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Yeah, but Christopher Hitchens never posted on the board while touching himself.

I DEFY YOU TO FIND ME ONE MAN WHO HAS NOT POSTED ON THIS BOARD WHILE TOUCHING HIMSELF, SIR!

I DEFY YOU!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Yeah, but Christopher Hitchens never posted on the board while touching himself.

I DEFY YOU TO FIND ME ONE MAN WHO HAS NOT POSTED ON THIS BOARD WHILE TOUCHING HIMSELF, SIR!

I DEFY YOU!

You bring up an excellent point.  I am in fact touching myself as we speak.

But I'm not a fat nasty manchild snuff freak that makes people ill.  I am in fact sexy, though not as sexy as LMNO (but who is?), and therefore am not repulsive in the same manner.

[Eater of Clowns]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Yeah, but Christopher Hitchens never posted on the board while touching himself.

I DEFY YOU TO FIND ME ONE MAN WHO HAS NOT POSTED ON THIS BOARD WHILE TOUCHING HIMSELF, SIR!

I DEFY YOU!

You bring up an excellent point.  I am in fact touching myself as we speak.

But I'm not a fat nasty manchild snuff freak that makes people ill.  I am in fact sexy, though not as sexy as LMNO (but who is?), and therefore am not repulsive in the same manner.

I've ruined so many keyboards.   

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Are you actually so stupid that you're overlooking the obvious use of "over the top rhetoric"? Or so malicious that you've excused yourself from reading the statements (some here in this thread, I believe, or else one with a similar title) that explicitly state that it is meant to be over-the-top rhetoric, for those too dull to pick up on that fact independently?

Or perhaps so deluded that you don't care, and are hoping for some uncritical readers to jump on your fallacy so you can ride it all the way to "alpha"?

Maybe you can present an alternative explanation that doesn't make you sound pathetic.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Hitchens was a disgusting human being. Dawkins is a disgusting human being. If either of them were standing in front of me, healthy and presenting their repugnant arguments, I would take pleasure in touching them on the face with a shitty stick.

But the thing about "I'm glad he's dead, I hope he rots in hell" is religious. It's like a dog rolling in shit.

I don't know either one of them, so there's a limit to how much I care what happens to them.

But the writing style on that blog is fucking fantastic.  Not talking about content, here, talking about sheer bombastic hate-shitting prose of the first order.

Oh, the blog is delicious. Especially when you're looking for a dose of validating rhetoric.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

I ignored those portions, just as I ignore any celebration of death on this forum. What interested me was the comprehensive timeline and illustration of his racist and sexist tendencies. I agree that the style and humor were not stylish or humorous; if you know of a critical analysis that doesn't come from a religious perspective I would like to read it. I was particularly interested because several scientists who I follow closely (PZ Myers, ND Tyson, etc) have stepped up after his death to praise his vision. If he was not the person that they present him as, this effects my opinion of these scientists and their ability to see through charisma to substance.

"those portions" were pretty much the whole thing. Maybe you can quote the not-hate-rhetoric-filled portions for me, so I can see what I missed.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Way to totally ignore the central point, alleged PD intelligentsia.

Oh, but it's different when someone we hate dies. Ook, ook.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am going to pose one simple question: Am I wrong? Can you explain why?

[Eater of Clowns]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Are you actually so stupid that you're overlooking the obvious use of "over the top rhetoric"? Or so malicious that you've excused yourself from reading the statements (some here in this thread, I believe, or else one with a similar title) that explicitly state that it is meant to be over-the-top rhetoric, for those too dull to pick up on that fact independently?

Or perhaps so deluded that you don't care, and are hoping for some uncritical readers to jump on your fallacy so you can ride it all the way to "alpha"?

Maybe you can present an alternative explanation that doesn't make you sound pathetic.

I think it's very telling that you jumped to stupid, malicious, dull, deluded, and pathetic instead of me just saying something tongue in cheek.  It's like you're unwilling or unable to make the leap that other members of the board might not have it out for you.  You know, I recall you mentioning things about reality tunnels being challenged recently.  Maybe you should be examining your own to figure out why you're seeing ill will where there isn't any.  Other than, apparently, your own.

Anyway, I'm glad Roger got it.  I thought our subsequent joking might explain it a bit, but you seem awfully determined to be mad about something.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Are you actually so stupid that you're overlooking the obvious use of "over the top rhetoric"? Or so malicious that you've excused yourself from reading the statements (some here in this thread, I believe, or else one with a similar title) that explicitly state that it is meant to be over-the-top rhetoric, for those too dull to pick up on that fact independently?

Or perhaps so deluded that you don't care, and are hoping for some uncritical readers to jump on your fallacy so you can ride it all the way to "alpha"?

Maybe you can present an alternative explanation that doesn't make you sound pathetic.

I think it's very telling that you jumped to stupid, malicious, dull, deluded, and pathetic instead of me just saying something tongue in cheek.  It's like you're unwilling or unable to make the leap that other members of the board might not have it out for you.  You know, I recall you mentioning things about reality tunnels being challenged recently.  Maybe you should be examining your own to figure out why you're seeing ill will where there isn't any.  Other than, apparently, your own.

Anyway, I'm glad Roger got it.  I thought our subsequent joking might explain it a bit, but you seem awfully determined to be mad about something.

Is it telling? Can you answer the questions asked? Can you tell the difference between attacking your comment and attacking your person? I'm running those lines pretty close because I'm fucking sick of people confusing the two.

You really think there's no ill will from the ONE person I have accused of it?   I tend to imagine the best of people, so it pretty much takes someone saying shit flat-out for me to detect that they actually have it out for me.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Also, once again, way to dodge the central question. Need me to repeat it for you, or can you read back and ignore it all on your own?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Are you actually so stupid that you're overlooking the obvious use of "over the top rhetoric"? Or so malicious that you've excused yourself from reading the statements (some here in this thread, I believe, or else one with a similar title) that explicitly state that it is meant to be over-the-top rhetoric, for those too dull to pick up on that fact independently?

Or perhaps so deluded that you don't care, and are hoping for some uncritical readers to jump on your fallacy so you can ride it all the way to "alpha"?

Maybe you can present an alternative explanation that doesn't make you sound pathetic.

I think it's very telling that you jumped to stupid, malicious, dull, deluded, and pathetic instead of me just saying something tongue in cheek.  It's like you're unwilling or unable to make the leap that other members of the board might not have it out for you.  You know, I recall you mentioning things about reality tunnels being challenged recently.  Maybe you should be examining your own to figure out why you're seeing ill will where there isn't any.  Other than, apparently, your own.

Anyway, I'm glad Roger got it.  I thought our subsequent joking might explain it a bit, but you seem awfully determined to be mad about something.

Or, perhaps you think that joking around will mahadgiqually derail my disgust, and I will drop my objection and turn into an amiable pussycat on command. Was that it? Some precious jovial peacemaking middle child action?

[Eater of Clowns]

Oh, do you mean can I kindly respond do the series of questions that are specifically designed to talk down to me and insult my intelligence.  Yeah, I'll get right on that.  I'm so sorry that nobody is playing by the rules that you've made up.

I mean, my post has nothing to do with insulting the person or insulting the argument at all.  You're bringing that one in because it's apparently some burden that you're bringing into the conversation and you aren't able to converse without throwing it around.

And this

You really think there's no ill will from the ONE person I have accused of it?   I tend to imagine the best of people, so it pretty much takes someone saying shit flat-out for me to detect that they actually have it out for me.

sounds just plain delusional.  Note here that I'm saying that's what the argument seems like, and not to indicate that you might be.  The implication that a delusional person would say a delusional thing is not withstanding, as I'm sure it isn't in any of the many posts you've made to where you very specifically insult the argument just so that you can fall back on that safety net.

Did I even say there isn't one person who has it out for you?  I didn't.  I said you're finding people who have it out for you who DON'T.  There might be one, there might even be (gasp) two, but it doesn't mean that everyone is, and it certainly doesn't mean that I am.

Please, stop assuming everyone you're talking to is a fucking moron.

[Lord Cataplanga]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Way to totally ignore the central point, alleged PD intelligentsia.

Oh, but it's different when someone we hate dies. Ook, ook

It's very simple, really: They were sick of stupid people rejoicing at the death of Bin Laden, and stupid people feeling sorry that Hitchens died. Basically they fell for the "Reverse Stupidity" trap.

[Phox]

I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Today you encouraged BH to kill himself.

Are you actually so stupid that you're overlooking the obvious use of "over the top rhetoric"? Or so malicious that you've excused yourself from reading the statements (some here in this thread, I believe, or else one with a similar title) that explicitly state that it is meant to be over-the-top rhetoric, for those too dull to pick up on that fact independently?

Or perhaps so deluded that you don't care, and are hoping for some uncritical readers to jump on your fallacy so you can ride it all the way to "alpha"?

Maybe you can present an alternative explanation that doesn't make you sound pathetic.

I think it's very telling that you jumped to stupid, malicious, dull, deluded, and pathetic instead of me just saying something tongue in cheek.  It's like you're unwilling or unable to make the leap that other members of the board might not have it out for you.  You know, I recall you mentioning things about reality tunnels being challenged recently.  Maybe you should be examining your own to figure out why you're seeing ill will where there isn't any.  Other than, apparently, your own.

Anyway, I'm glad Roger got it.  I thought our subsequent joking might explain it a bit, but you seem awfully determined to be mad about something.

Is it telling? Can you answer the questions asked? Can you tell the difference between attacking your comment and attacking your person? I'm running those lines pretty close because I'm fucking sick of people confusing the two.

You really think there's no ill will from the ONE person I have accused of it?   I tend to imagine the best of people, so it pretty much takes someone saying shit flat-out for me to detect that they actually have it out for me.

Actually, Nigel, I have to say, your comments towards EoC weren't attacking the comment. Maybe that was your intention, but your phrased it in such a way that it's a personal attack. "Are you so stupid..." =/= "That was a stupid thing to say".  And now you are being needlessly contentious about... er, everything.

To address your questions, no you are not wrong. And no, I cannot explain why. Personally, I am not celebrating any one's death. I mean, Hitchens was an asshat, but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw a party over it. I mena, he was a human being, and honestly, no one should have to suffer through cancer.

However, I really think you are a reading more into some of the comments than is actually there.