Boojatta got PPR'd....

[PassingFair]

He always irritated me.

[rrneck]

1. 'bout. time

I got tired of those screwy mind fuck posts and polls.

[PassingFair]

2. Here's one of his later annoyances:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=thread&info=1&address=124053455

[rrneck]

4. LOL!

Did you notice the first reply? I liked the idea myself, given the number of "what have the atheists done" threads that seem to show up. But you've got a point there. If it he ran it Rod Serling would go nuts in there.

[PassingFair]

6. Yeah...funny!

He was a weird one.

[Curmudgeoness]

3. I'm surprised. Boojatta has been around a long time.

Although he was often "in your face", I wonder what he did that was the last straw.

[PassingFair]

5. This:

His problems start at Post 19

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=thread&info=1&address=124074677

[Curmudgeoness]

9. Well, that certainly was a shitfest!

Or should I say another shitfest. He loved to stir the pot.

Oh well, I won't miss him. I avoided him and would not even reply to anything he ever posted---self-preservation.

[laconicsax]

7. DU3 has seen the demise of several long-lived trolls. n/t

[JNelson6563]

36. Yes, with more to come I hope.

I think the months ahead will prove interesting and, I daresay, revealing.

Julie

[Fumesucker]

8. I liked some of his (?) offbeat philosophical questions..

Plus now "who are you and what have you done with Boojatta?" just won't sound the same..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2375976

[ZombieHorde]

10. Sad. He'll be missed. nt

[darkstar3]

11. Well, that took years.

[Odin2005]

12. Good riddance, he was a shit-stirring troll.

[cleanhippie]

13. No shit? For what, being obtuse?

While I never like but a single one of his posts, he never crossed the line, IMO, to get the boot.


On edit: I take it all back after reading his latest spew in H&M. Looks like he was trying to go out in a blaze of, well, something.

[laconicsax]

14. I'd call it a blaze of honesty. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

15. I can't find anything he should have been booted for.

Is obtuseness a crime here now?

[dmallind]

16. I doubt it, but it has potential

Anybody who has ever used the term "quantum" outside the context of particle physics (or James Bond movies) should be given cause for concern

[Fumesucker]

18. Quantum biology is a legitimate field of study..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_biology

Many biological processes involve the conversion of energy into forms that are usable for chemical transformations and are quantum mechanical in nature. Such processes involve chemical reactions, light absorption, formation of excited electronic states, transfer of excitation energy, and the transfer of electrons and protons (hydrogen ions) in chemical processes such as photosynthesis and cellular respiration.[1] Quantum biology uses computation to model biological interactions in light of quantum mechanical effects.[2]

Some examples of the biological phenomena that have been studied in terms of quantum processes are the absorbance of frequency-specific radiation (i.e., photosynthesis[3] and vision[4]); the conversion of chemical energy into motion;[5] magnetoreception in animals[6][7] and brownian motors in many cellular processes

[laconicsax]

19. Something funny about that...

Chemistry is applied quantum electrodynamics, so of course biology, largely being applied chemistry, is affected by quantum mechanical processes.

[dmallind]

20. Which of course all boils down to physics

Things like quantum souls and other woo blather do not.

[tama]

37. Censureship

and personilized attacks against discussing quantum biology, quantum cosmology, quantum mind etc. are nothing new and there seems to be a connection to dogmatic positivism and materialism in that attitude.

[laconicsax]

38. What on Earth are you talking about?

Do you know where you are? Do you know what's being discussed here?

[dmallind]

39. What the fuck is "personilized" about calling woo what it is?

"Quantum mind" twaddling that imagines any "other way of knowing" or worse yet post-mortem or extra-cranial consciousness is utter shit on its face, without a glimmer of connection to everything we actually KNOW about the brain. There are indeed fascinating potential discoveries at the quantum level but none have any fucking thing at all to do with replacing or rendering invalid the perfectly simple, relatively speaking, neurochemistry involved in how the brain thinks.

Now I promise to you openly and sincerely. I'll donate $100,000 to the woo-woo group of your choice if you can tell me what the fuck is personal about the above paragraph, that mentions not a single person or personal pronoun.

And yes I am dogmatic about reality. If you want to talk quantum mechanical speculation reasonably, feel free to talk about any one of the number of exciting possibilities of quantum cryptography or quantum computing or even Everett's multiverse ideas. We could even get into the biology of olfactory perception. These have real science behind them. I personally am far from an expert, but I get the basic idea. The silly pipedream of quantum effects at so systemic a level as consciousness on the other hand has nothing behind it but charlatans and magic.

[tama]

40. This is thread

where many posters fucking celebrate the "PPR" (what's the acronym for?) of a fellow participant in discussions and a fellow human being, and there was clear enough innuendo that those who don't limit talk of quantum to particle physics should deserve a similar fate. With all the ad hominem personalized emotional garbage that certain posters habitually throw against me and many others and the censorship of discussions related to quantum biology in science group, I maybe stupid... but not that stupid.

Quantum theory and its philosophical implications are hard to digest, especially coming from the materialist reductionist "main-stream" paradigm and extremely infected religion-vs.-science battles of US, where science becomes easily just a weapon against biblical literalists, and many babies get thrown away with the washwater of hard-line 'us-against-them' attitude (while law of the excluded middle does not hold in quantum logic, which of more of the 'law of the included middle' kind logic together with fascinating orthogonal leaps into new dimensions).

I've read lately a lot of forefront science from various approaches towards GUTs and TOEs, including from sworn reductionists, and there is very little of the emotionally hostile attitude that is so pervasive in DU guardians of the layman's distortion "orthodox" materialistic science. And when even a glorified preacher of the "skeptic" movement speaks about "zero-energy ontology" collapsing into plus-minus energy ontology of time and space and matter by "spontaneus symmetry break" linked to vacuum quantum fluctuation (very Buddhist and dialectic notion of causality), it should be clear that in terms of scientific progress we are now in the middle of the second quantum revolution, as the philosophical understanding and ability to speak about quantum theory and it's relations to other fields and theories has significantly progressed during these 100 years. Quantum phenomena can no longer honestly be boxed into just sub-atomic phenomena, just to preserve and protect classical notions of causality in macro world and laymans physics still glued to newtonian views of order, time and space. As a reductionist physicist beautifully said, quantum theory is the canvass on which we paint rest of physics. It's so far our most fundamental theory of natural philosophy, and as it demands to change our views on causality, objectivism etc. that are so dear to materialist, positivist etc. dogma of classical mechanics and the technocratic dream of fully predictable control over nature, then let it. And let go of outdated views that have long time ago ceased to be functional in terms of evolutionary adaptation and cocreation of more humane and coherent ways of life. Quantum theory is the way of the possibilian, reductionistic classical mechanics the dead end.

Not apologising for this rant and putting lot of emotion into it. I have potential to contribute a lot to these discussions on DU, but there is also a limit to my tolerance of emotionally hostile garbage thrown at me. As a possibilian I can't deny that it is possible to also shut me up. But frankly, that would be more loss for you and your fellows and many others than for me.

[Goblinmonger]

41. This is not the place for this rant

Do you understand that? This is a safe haven group. Believers are certainly allowed to post here, but not the confrontational stuff you are posting.

Please know I don't want, in any sense, to get into some pomo discussion with you about what rant means, or what any other thing means.

[tama]

42. I understand this is a safe haven

for badmouthing, backstabbing and ridiculing fellow posters in the spirit of mutual support for excluding the targets of personal attacks from these discussions.

And no, I don't have to like how you are behaving here.

[Goblinmonger]

43. So, if I went into a safe haven group for something that protects your belief

and posted the exact same type of thing you are posting here, what would your reaction be? What do you think the hosts of the group should do to protect the safe haven?

[tama]

44. I'm not into safe havens

and protecting belief systems, so no reaction.

[Goblinmonger]

45. Well, you are in a safe haven right now

and I'm trying to make sure you understand the rules of it and if you can adhere to them. So is it fair to say that your answer is "No, I won't adhere to the rules of this safe haven"?

[skepticscott]

48. Time to declare

that rounds are over.

Remember the lesson of the psych ward.

[dmallind]

47. Which all boils down to:

"because the constituent particles of atoms that combine to form oil can have complex waveform functions, we should be open minded to the possibility of an internal combustion engine that can have the same properties" What is the difference between that utter shite (please tell me you realize it is so) and a "quantum mind"?

Sorry but you don't get to play the tired "it's too hard for you to understand" crap unchallenged. "Reductionism" is the codeword of woo-idiots from Ignatius Donnelly to Ken Hamm and it's still bullshit. I'm perfectly prepared and willing to discuss the potential of quantum mechanics from my limited laymen's perspective (which absent a PhD in theoretical physics and a few decades of lab work, you share) as long as it's based on accepted science. Anybody can do the trippy divorced from reality druggy woo shite about us all being some kind of floating eternal consciousness, but they can't expect people to take it seriously when they go A.B....Z without caring about or understanding or even acknowledging C through Y. That's not "positivist bias". That's rationality.

[laconicsax]

17. In H&M:

The post that started it all:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/124074677#post19

Be sure to read the original version.

[cleanhippie]

21. How is it that Bojatta got PPR'd, yet this guy is bragging about 8 hidden posts, in one day, in one

thread? (read his comments through out to see more bragging)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=75562

And here is the thread where his posts were hidden...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=29715

And that is only AFTER he started to self delete. Look at the posts that were hidden.

FUCK YOU YOU GODDAMN MUTHAFUCKING ASSHOLE TAKE YOUR GODDAMM FUCKING CLAPPING HANDS AND SMACK YOURSELF. YOU STUPID PIECE OF SHIT

and

YOU ARE GODAMN RIGHT I KNOW WHAT THE FUCK I AM DOING. NO ONE MADE ME DO A GODAMN THING. I DID IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO DO IT. I CLAIM IT. I OWN IT AND MUTHERFUCKER IT FELT GOOD TO TELL YOU WHAT A LOWLIFE PIECE OF SHIT YOU ARE.

and it goes on and on and on....


Did Boojatta come anywhere CLOSE to this kind of shit? What. The Fuck.

[frogmarch]

22. WOW. That person

must be one of DU's Anointed Ones. Boojatta got the boot, but the other person is still around? WOW.

[laconicsax]

23. Boojatta got PPR'd for posting homophobic garbage.

Posting homophobic garbage is against the TOS. Being an complete asshole isn't.

[skepticscott]

25. What was even more amazing

is that some jury members thought those posts were not a problem at all.

[2ndAmForComputers]

24. That's one that only posted disjointed dumps of WTF, right?

[skepticscott]

26. More people need to learn the lesson of the psych ward

There's no profit in arguing endlessly with crazy and deluded people, trying to make them see reason, because they never will. It doesn't matter how much rationality you throw at some people...it will never make an impression.

Such a discussion need go on only long enough to show the sane people reading who the doctor is and who the patient is.

[PassingFair]

27. Are you saying I should stop going to the R/T room?

Or that I should keep my visits brief....?

[skepticscott]

28. I'm saying that

there are certain posters there (whom I hardly need name) that there's no use getting into protracted exchanges with. It's hard to resist, when there is so much nonsense and obfuscation being spewed, but there's just nothing to be achieved after a point. if I do feel the need to respond to such people, I focus on making my point for anyone reading who has a glimmer of rationality, and after that, rounds are over.

[laconicsax]

29. That's an expected authoritarian power play from a True Atheist like you.

It's because of your devotion to imperialistic authoritarian positivism that you close your mind to the truth about organized atheism, particularly the violence of the society of the godless and Stalin.

Einstein once said that god does not play dice with the universe and it's your skeptical imperialism against freethinkers like Chopra and Sheldrake that makes you unfit to participate in philosophical discussions of the epiphenomena of consciousness and telepathy.

I count 16 attacks on Christians in your response and quantum theology clearly shows that you are a bad person who isn't interested in thoughtfully agreeing with everything I post, no matter how incorrect, false, and offensive it is.

And for the sake of the jury that's been called in on this by our group's serial alerter, I'll include what the group regulars already know:

[skepticscott]

30. Wrong

There were only 15 attacks.

Other than that, you pretty much have this mean ol' (but True) Atheist nailed.

[ElboRuum]

32. Quantum theology shows nothing clearly...

It's neither here nor there... or maybe it is here but not there? It's a question of probability, I suppose.

[Trajan]

31. I dont like calling out ... Even for those tombstoned away ....

But I have always found his/her posts to be ridden with logical errors and ill conceived assertions.

I have tried to understand them, but I find nothing that makes sense in those statements.

It was a waste of time to try to plumb the depths of much of that illogical nonsense ... I gave up years ago ....

[Leopolds Ghost]

34. My understanding is that Boojatta's post in Mineral Man's thread

was intended as "satire" of actual homophobes, but was worded in a foul manner all the same

As the posters on that thread themselves noted.

On Edit: Then again it's hard to tell what the intent was.

But the gist of the thread was they were assuming he was being (inappropriately) sarcastic.

[laconicsax]

35. He had ample opportunity to make that clear.

The moral of the story is that if you're going to satirize positions that are against the TOS and people are confronting you, don't escalate then edit your posts to make them seem less offensive.

That assumes that Boojatta was indeed satirizing homophobes.

[trotsky]

46. "Then again it's hard to tell what the intent was."

I think you just described every Boojatta post there ever was.