User talk:Ace McWicked/Archive20

Sorry
I shouldn't have permabanned you and I would like to start on a new footing. Peace? — Oxyaena Harass  19:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * sure. Acei9 20:30, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Great, who wants ice cream? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:31, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ice Cream? What are we? 10 years old? I'd prefer a steak and a whisky. Acei9 22:00, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

“I don’t speak Nazi”
You must be new around here. This is the fundamental "argument" of Rationalwiki, reductio ad Hitlerium. Those more familiar with real history rather than PBS specials made by Jews (it takes a lot of study, sophomores) will know the Nazis were the good guys. 82.132.212.80 (talk) 09:07, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * "You must be new around here." Lol. 12:34, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Nassim Haramein page - validity of claims and sources
Hi, I followed up on your comment on the Talk page of the Nassim Haramein page, regarding the validity of Haramein's claims and use of sources to back up such claims. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Nassim_Haramein#physicsessays.org Based on my points on this Talk page, let me know if this meets your guidelines and if this information and reference can be added again to the page without flagging or removing it. Thanks. Jahub (talk) 22:17, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 Mod Election
--RWRW (talk) 11:13, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you should know that Oxyaena likes to be referred to as "she". I'm giving you the chance to change the pronouns in your anti-endorsement now to nip any unnecessary drama in the bud. Spud (talk) 05:12, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I did it before you asked. I forget and I don't do it because I'm an asshole, I genuinely forgot. Acei9 05:18, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I know. Let me give you a virtual pat on the shoulder. Spud (talk) 05:23, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Tokyo
Tokyo is a sockpuppet of Michael Coombs, he's been blocked here on thousands of accounts.Chtonic (talk) 21:15, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * OK. AceMcWicked 21:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

trolls
i dont understand why u like the trolls here so much tbh. however, there are very few people creating a lot of accounts most the time so dont mistake it for legitimate activity. EK (talk) 10:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * He does because he has a soft spot for Nobs in his heart. It's a beautiful love story. sniff — Oxyaena Harass  13:05, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Please, if we're psychoanalyzing Ace, he's nostalgic for the glory days of the wiki when his friends were still here and it was fun and he was young and carefree, and surely if just the right things about wiki protocol go back to how they were he'll stop getting older and having to go to work every day. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Or maybe he's just too drunk to do real work, so he comes over to help us out a bit.Ariel31459 (talk) 16:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Or maybe he’s a communist infiltrator using this wiki as a tool to undermine the Western world! 18:09, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * All of the above. AceMcWicked 21:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Check your email Ace
I'd like to have an adult conversation with you about the state of Rational-Wiki, without any bullshit interjections from the peanut gallery. Yakusaaa (talk) 01:12, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This guy is a cyberstalker btw, Dysk knows all about him. I'll have send you the info if need be. — Oxyaena  Harass  01:16, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Fuck off Oxy. I'm an adult so can handle myself just fine. AceModerator 01:19, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't believe his slander, you don't have the full context. — Oxyaena Harass  01:21, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Fuck off Oxy. I'm an adult so can handle myself just fine. AceModerator 01:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll fuck off when you stop being such a stubborn shit refusing to bend to the will of the mob. — Oxyaena Harass  01:24, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oxy, fuck off. The mob willed me as moderator and until such a time as you take me to the Coop and in front of the mob then I'll carry on as I have been. AceModerator 01:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. — Oxyaena Harass  01:34, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Good - have fun. AceModerator 01:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * What a fucking pussy, cooping a mod for being willing to talk to someone you don't like. That's some real George W. Bush shit there. 2607:FB90:915C:224E:0:F:8C37:7501 (talk) 02:29, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Given your habit of sealioning and gaslighting, I'm not very sympathetic to your plight Morris. Also you were banned years ago for harassment. So there is that. 02:34, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Not really. Dysk & Co really has you brainwashed. He finally found a wiki with people stupid enough to buy his shit. Can you imagine how much less drama there'd be if y'all would just shut up and ignore trolls like Ace proposes? I can tell you, you're heavy handed shit makes trolling more fun, I mean, back in'16 when I was being naughty can you imagine the power it gave me seeing JorisEnter hardblock an entire state university campus simply because I was visiting there and mocked him a little from their wifi? 2607:FB90:915C:224E:0:F:8C37:7501 (talk) 02:43, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Believe it or not, I used to be like Ox and JorisEnter, the heavy handed wiki ninja type myself, until I realized I was just giving trolls like Keegscee a good show and getting innocent people caught up in IP blocks. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 2607:FB90:915C:224E:0:F:8C37:7501 / talk

Who else thinks...
We should just all have a beer and pretend this shit never happened? 2607:FB90:915C:224E:0:F:8C37:7501 (talk) 02:51, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No. 04:11, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * We can have a beer, but we can't forget. Cosmikdebris (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

DMorris
You see why he's persona non grata now? He likes to stir shit up and start fights. I'd advise at least telling him to piss off, or he'll use you as a shield to keep heckling and egging crap on, but that's ultimately your call. 04:23, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No I really don't care - I can ignore. AceModerator 04:25, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You can do that, don't force your "solution" unto others. — Oxyaena Harass  11:43, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * just keep banning his new accounts its not hard EK (talk) 12:28, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Block
I changed the block setting to "one hour," I`m willing to talk this through to a resolution. I blocked the bon in the first place because the edit consisted of vandalism, specifically of punching down, not punching up. At the very least the edit was rather insensitive, if you still feel that the block was unwarranted go ahead and change it of course, but I'd advise discussing it through before making any hasty actions. Also Nobs is back should you wanna go say hello. — Oxyaena Harass  07:02, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * All the user did was add a true piece of information. That is not block worthy at all. If you felt it insensitive just revert and talk to the user. It wasn't vandalism in the slightest. AceModerator 07:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in talking to Rob either. AceModerator 07:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair. I won't revert your decision, then. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  07:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Morris
The troll left u this message if u care to read it. Ta EK (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Jimmy Dore and Syria reporting
So I am over at the talk page discussing the OPCW leaks about the surpession of the engineers report of the Duoma attacks. I have a number of complaints, and that is why I am reaching out to another moderator. First, I cited the leaked report and the leaked emails about the cover up. I was told that WikiLeaks has been blacklisted by this site, although none of the reasons supplied did anything to show that WikiLeaks has every released falsified materials. The reason given for blacklisting seem not to be very rational in my estimation. That being said, I then supplied reports done by award winning journalist Robert Fisk for the Independent, which were ignored, then Comrade said either about WikiLeaks, Jimmy Dore or myself, I am not sure, were empowering fascists. A lot of red herring arguments and attack the messenger fallacies, but when I employed that same logic backwards by saying if this report was falsified and it indeed was used as a pretext for a attack in a UN member state without security council resolutions na, then it would qualify as an act of aggression as outlined in the UN Charter, at Nuremberg and the elaborating n of the ICC's Rome Statute. So if we are saying that challenging the supression of the engineers report and ordering if a cover up lead to a war crime, wouldn't carrying their arguments be empowering imperialists and war crimes? Well, comrade took this very personally, which it was not meant to be, just a demonstration of how that logic would have to be applied evenly and what the implications would be in the other direction.

Now, I have been called a "truther" as a smear I suppose. Perhaps even been accused of empowering fascists, if I understand Comrade's responses to do so correctly. I think I have conducted myself with reason and fairly and with a pretty even tone. Is there any room on this site to have a debate about the findings of the OPCW's report and their methods, or is this pointless and no countervieling information will be considered? Feel free to respond here or on my talk page. Also feel free to give this to another moderator if you feel they are willing to discuss this rationally.24.238.78.48 (talk) 22:07, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Here we go putting words in my mouth again. I said WikiLeaks was blacklisted, I never said by whom. And you never asked. I do know that several other editors have a low opinion of Assange and WikiLeaks, but I don't have a site-wide consensus. I did however point out WikiLeaks' fuckups, and just because you're too disingenuous to admit that doesn't change the fact that I did. Again, I really do love how them causing the deaths of civilians because they were sloppy, and the fact that they released thousands of mostly useless emials (of which you allege only a small handful had any value, thus damning WikiLeaks further since that means they just dumped it all with zero vetting, again, sloppy), isn't good enough for you to warrant them as a sketchy source. Also, as you well know, classified documents can neither benot be varified, so yeah, you ask the impossible, and when I explain my reasons (because that is what I can prove), you say it isn't enough to discredit them. Sorry if I have something resembling ethics, since that stands between you and your heroes. Fucking Truthers... Also at no point was I acting as a Moderator, so yeah, you can fuck right off with that nonsense. 23:33, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * When you said "Edit request denied" this lead me to believe that you were doing so as a moderator. I interpreted that as you exsersizing your power to deny someone as a moderator. This also lead me to believe that you were referring to an official blacklisting. Apparently I was wrong in interperating it that way. The "fuck-ups" you brought up once again have no bearing on the veracity of the leaks they publish and neither does your opinion of Assange as an individual. You seem to want to make this about something other than what it is about: the revelations about the OPCW report in Douma and the whistleblowers coming forward. Again, you place blame on the actions of other parties on Assange and WikiLeaks, yet when asked about that logic being applied to the OPCW report and the French, US and UK strikes on Syria (a war crime) you call this whataboutism. I think it shows a double standard, bais and hypocrisy. I actually think a number of the DNC emails revealed important information, such as how Sid Blumenthal and Hillary talked about how hey knew the charge that Gaddafi was giving Viagra to rape gangs was just a rumor, but Robert Gates pushed it anyway: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12674
 * How the Democrats appeared to award ambassadorships and federal appointments based on those who were big donors: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/07/leaks-show-dnc-asked-white-house-to-reward-donors-with-slots-on-boards-and-commissions/
 * That Obama's entire cabinet was named in an email from Citigroup during his transition: https://www.google.com/amp/s/newrepublic.com/amp/article/137798/important-wikileaks-revelation-isnt-hillary-clinton
 * That Hillary and the Obama administration knew the Saudis were backing ISIS: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-email-isis-saudi-arabia-qatar-us-allies-funding-barack-obama-knew-all-a7362071.html?amp
 * A number or revaluations about the bais of the primary process that was enough to force DNC chair Wasserman Schultz's resignation. And I could go on. Some of the revelations are "regular" legal corruption, some are very serious looks into how duplicitous the Democratic Party and Obama and Clinton are. However, I am not interested in debating you on that at the moment, because I am certain you have already made you mind up no matter what is mentioned, and second and most importantly, none of that has any bearing as to whether the OPCW leaks are true and what they contain. You hate the phrase, but those are red herrings.
 * Not all leaks by WikiLeaks are of classified documents, like emails. If they are false, the parties themselves could release the true emails to disprove them, yet they do not. In fact, in the case of the OPCW report the OPCW didn't even bother to deny the authenticity of the report, they said they were going to look into the leak, this confirming it is a leak and not a fabrication: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/opcw-chemical-weapons-watchdog-douma-chlorine-gas-wikileaks-russia-syria-claim-bias-today-2019-11-25/
 * The above CBS article begins with "The head of the world's chemical weapons watchdog said Monday he stands by a report on an alleged attack in Syria despite leaked documents casting doubt on its conclusions." And later states: "The OPCW has already launched an internal investigation into the leak of the earlier document by a member of the Douma team raising similar concerns."
 * So if even CBS, a pro-Western outlet that has time after time pushed regime change and pro-war propganada be repeating establishment narratives uncritically (like during the lead to the invasion of Iraq and also pushing the false narratives about the state of the Afghan War, we now know thanks to the Afghanistan papers), isn't claiming that the OPCW documents are a hoax and neither is the head of the OPCW. So why are you seemingly insisting that they are? That is the only issue of relevance: what the OPCW leaks show and if they are true.
 * You want to talk about sketchy sources, then why are you seemingly hand-waving the institutions and outlets that pushed the false narratives and "intelligence" that caused the invasion of Iraq and the false natives about the Afghan War for the last 19 years revealed in the Afghanistan Papers? It seems to me you have one set of standards for those advancing regime change and pro-intervention narratives but a separate standard to those who challenge their narratives. What is so ethical about that?2600:1002:B01A:25A9:2C3C:EC98:1BED:C277 (talk) 06:05, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Uh, do I have to do anything here? AceModerator 22:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * GC has it handled, I think.Ariel31459 (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Um... I dunno? I don't even know why I'm being accused of being "pro-western". I mean, for fuck's sake, all I did was point out that WikiLeaks isn't some kind of saintly organization, a revelation that seems to have certain people in a frenzy because... it means Dore is still a conspiracy theorist and a hack journalist? I have no idea what any of this was supposed to prove, really. I'm going back to figuring out how much trouble the latest Mid-east fuckup has caused, since that's verifiabley real and all that. 22:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I already made it clear that I wanted nothing further to do with this BoN/Truther. I also don't want them lying about me. Again, I layed this out on the talkpage for the Dore article, just because one scandal maybe happened (again, maybe, because I don't just assume people like WikiLeaks are saints) that doesn't mean Dore isn't a conspiracy monger. It at most means we have a stopped clock situation, and that's it. I also stated that I don't trust WikiLeaks due to severe fuckups on their part, which was handwaved away (guess all those LGBT+ and Jewish people in the middle-east don't matter when you're big shots like WikiLeaks, even if you're the ones who doxxed them.) with such arrogance that I was left almost speechless. If Ace wants to deal with this mess, fine by me. 22:35, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Whatever you think of Dore, and I don't think much of him, the Bon is a conspiracy nut. You can tell by the serial of unrelated facts presented in his posts. He tries to overwhelm the reader with trivia and the implication it all fits into a pattern of some kind. What is he doing? I don't know, but he shouldn't do it here.Ariel31459 (talk) 23:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * OK then I won't do anything. AceModerator 05:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

We need you back so freaking bad
What the fuck is this bullshit, blocking someone for "pointless edits"? Why don't we just block Bongolian (admin responsible for the block) for pointless pointless greenhouse gas emissions. ProductOfTurkey (talk) 02:55, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * So... Your argument against a 9 hour block is that you don't like it? Did you go through the disputed edits? Did you actually look anything up? Did you make an account solely to throw a tantrum? Seriously, if it was the last one please go away. I hate people who engage in that kind of pointless stupidity. 04:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * it looks to me like straight up newbie biting, but what do I know? And the answer to your last question is no. ProductOfTurkey (talk) 13:05, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Carry on then. 13:51, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry I've been busy. Moving out of NZ to another country which is taking a hell of a long time. 9 hours doesn't seem to bad to me so maybe chill for a bit, take a back seat and relax into things. The fact you hit me up straight away suggests you know your way around already so, you know, chill. AceModerator 02:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

As moderator…
You seem rather absent. You might care to speak up about this situation, which is heating up: Talk:Joe Biden. Bongolian (talk) 16:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I've been extremely busy. AceModerator 01:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I had a look and it's just oxy being a hysterical dick again. Nothing new there nor anything that requires mod intervention. AceModerator 01:09, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

A quick question
What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is true?

By the way, "Dark matter has so far defied every type of detector designed to find it." - Scientists hunt for dark matter signals in existing data, The Week, May 6, 2020. Old earthers are still hunting for their Unholy Grail!

And a naturalistic explanation of first life is still untenable (see: Origin of life). Olé! Olé! Olé!GiuocoPiano (talk) 06:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Why are you bothering my drunk slumber? AceModerator 08:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * We met again at last. The circle is now complete. I caused "pretty large wholesale change" at this wiki and despite being a Sysop and longstanding active member of this wiki, you were powerless to stop it. When we were at astorehouseofknowledgeinfo, I was but the learner, but now I am the master! Your powers are weak RationalWikian!


 * The mob can't win. They attempted to strike me down via creating capricious and tyrannical rules, but I became more powerful than they possibly imagined. Their new capricious rules, which will drive away quality editors and be counterproductive to resolving conflicts optimally, are not even a pyrrhic victory as I had no intention of being a significant long term editor. So capricious and uncivilized are their new rules and we both know this.


 * Mob, I feel your corporate anger. I was defenseless. They struck me down with all of their hatred and rule changes and my victory over the mob was made complete!


 * They wanted to dominate, but have inherited the wind! When will they let go of their hate?GiuocoPiano (talk) 01:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ace, my Star Wars like post above was tongue in cheek. When I posted some factual material about atheism, I had no idea at the time that it would cause RWians to pass rules which are capricious and authoritarian.GiuocoPiano (talk) 01:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Ken, I've replied to your responses. Would you kindly continue our debate? I feel like we still have more to discuss. 01:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * No. After reading your first reply to me, it was clear no productive dialogue is possible with you. GiuocoPiano (talk) 01:36, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ken, you wanted a debate and I stepped up to engage with you. I have also been as polite as I felt I could be, but I must correct any errors you make in order for the discussion to have any productivity. 01:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Copied from WIGO CP talk page.
So Ken's "sock" has block rights, something I have not be offered in 5 years. I guess I am out of, or never have been, in favour. He could block me, nobody would notice and my time at RW would be over. Seems unfair to me.--Mercian (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2020 (UTC)--Mercian (talk) 16:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't want to block and would only do so in extreme circumstances. I just don't want to be blocked by a troll.--Mercian (talk) 00:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Chicken coop
20:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is true?
Quoting your own work here..atheism is -
 * a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
 * a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
 * Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods
 * a person who maintains that there is no God

So what you are asking is "What proof and evidence do you have that a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods is true?"

So the question become meaningless. AceModerator 02:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Partially quoting my work will get you nowhere. After all is said and done, most so-called atheists are trying to be agnostics and trying to look tough, but knowing that God exists.


 * "The Scripture saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God; it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it....It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man." - Sir Francis Bacon, his essay Of Atheism


 * The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states:


 * "In 1885, the Duke of Argyll recounted a conversation he had had with Charles Darwin the year before Darwin's death:


 * In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilization of Orchids, and upon The Earthworms, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature — I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away. ”(Argyll 1885, 244)"


 * Researchers at Oxford University have reported finding children who, when questioned, express their understanding that there is a Creator, without having had any such teaching from parents or teachers about this matter.


 * The Pacific Standard reported:


 * A recently published study from Finland finds that even atheists have a hard time asking God to harm their loved ones.


 * The heads and hearts of atheists may not be on precisely the same page. That’s the implication of recently published research from Finland, which finds avowed non-believers become emotionally aroused when daring God to do terrible things.


 * “The results imply that atheists’ attitudes toward God are ambivalent, in that their explicit beliefs conflict with their affective response,” concludes a research team led by University of Helsinki psychologist Marjaana Lindeman. Its study is published in the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion."GiuocoPiano (talk) 02:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yah, and Darwin was a white male imperialist anyway. nobsFree Roger Stone!'' 15:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

DJ Rolando - Jaguar
Thanks for introducing me to the song DJ Rolando - Jaguar. I put it on one of my favorite YouTube playlist. Christian Smith & John Selway - Total Departure is pretty good too.GiuocoPiano (talk) 02:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ken, this could be something we can share. I know of a lot of good techno. No UFOs by Model 500. AceModerator|
 * We probably share much of the same thoughts about Oxy too, but I have only a cursory acquaintance with Oxy's posting. It seems like there is a lot of pointless drama created by Oxy.GiuocoPiano (talk) 03:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * again - we agree. Amazing Ken, after all these years (12 by my count) we could be friends. AceModerator 03:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have thought the same. I actually have a self-proclaimed atheist friend now. She is pretty influential in the USA. She doesn't broadcast her views on religion/irreligion. She knows about my postings about atheism on the internet. It's not something we discuss though. For a lot of self-proclaimed atheists, their atheism is not something that defines them as a person or is important to them.GiuocoPiano (talk) 03:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If RW didn't pick a battle with me and persist in it a number of years ago, I probably would have posted less on the topic of atheism. I offered a detente a number of years ago to RW, but it was rejected. Regardless, I produced a lot of factual and well-researched material on atheism.


 * Right now, I know I need to focus on 3 things. And atheism or pointless online battles is not among those 3 things.


 * In addition, I am much more into the cost/benefit of matters both in relation to myself and its effects on others. I decided that starting tomorrow, I am going to be more disciplined in terms of time management. At the present time, one of the people I interact with most is a person who is a very productive person and a good time manager. Who you choose to surround yourself has an effect on you. And I have decided to be more judicious in who I interact with.GiuocoPiano (talk) 04:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing with me the song "No UFOs by Model 500". It has a good beat.

I created a mini techno library at: https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Music_various_types#Techno

I like classical techno the best.GiuocoPiano (talk) 04:23, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Is User:GiuocoPiano = Conservapedia:Conservative = User:Newton? Bongolian (talk) 06:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I had trouble accessing the website via User: Newton and eventually the password was lost. I am one of the editors of the User: Conservative account at Conservapedia. GiuocoPiano (talk) 06:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

One of the editors of the User: Conservative account. Knock if off. You're not fooling anybody. Like I said, how can one person who identifies as a group possibly mock misgendering? Spud (talk) 11:27, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Try searching Gamma Player Blue Potential on YouTube. It is Jeff Mills (a legendary techno DJ) playing his track Gamma Player with a full orchestra. AceModerator 08:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I gave someone access to the User: Conservative account. Why is that so hard to believe? It's worked out nicely. When people do ad hominem attacks and engage in armchair psychology as far as the account, I just laugh. In total, I gave 3 people access to the account, but only one other individual decided to use the account.GiuocoPiano (talk) 11:38, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * In addition, it's great to know that when I pass away, the account will live on. TK did not have enough foresight to think ahead. Legacy! Legacy!GiuocoPiano (talk) 11:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I regret to say that pronounce usage will be more difficult with my/our account than with Oxy
This editor is considering allowing more than one editor use the account.

Since more than one gender may use the account, this account would prefer a gender inclusive pronoun be used to address this account.

As a result of this potential state of affairs, instead of he/she or other such pronouns be used in relation to this account, this account prefers to be referred to as "bimsasbet" when a pronoun is to be used and not zie/zim/zir because these have an annoying sounding zzzzz sound to it. It reminds me of bees and pests the letter z.

The wonderful thing about bimbsabets, is bimsasbets is a wonderful thing! We're bouncy, trouncy, flouncy, pouncy. Fun, fun, fun, fun, fun! But the most wonderful thing about bimsasbets is we're the only unique and special collective called bimsasbet!GiuocoPiano (talk) 22:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll just refer to you as Ken. AceModerator 00:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I will likely be the only person editing the account. The post above was a joke.GiuocoPiano (talk) 02:15, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Very funny Ken. 02:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't do this joke again in any other form. 02:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

A suggestion
Perhaps RW would have more popularity and editors if it attacked only things that were clear pseudoscience, quackery and scientific frauds.

For example, astrology is seeing a rise in the USA and many millennials are buying into it. My guess is that when fake "liberal Christianity" dies, in many cases people adopt things like astrology, superstition, etc.

But some liberal Christianity adherents adopt a more conservative Christianity and these type of Christians are less likely to hold to superstition than the nonreligious/irreligious it seems (see: Irreligion and superstition).

My guess is that there are evangelical Christians and conservative religious people who would go to a website and even contribute to it if it only addressed things that are clear pseudoscience, quackery and scientific frauds.

When RW goes into more speculative/controversial areas in terms of what is pseudoscience, etc., it limits your editor/reader base. The USA has a very big portion of the Anglosphere and a minority of people in the USA are atheists/agnostics.GiuocoPiano (talk) 02:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I personally, thank you for your concern Ken. We are currently fine, though your advice will be remembered (by me at least) should we encounter difficulty in the future. 02:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I continued the discussion HERE.GiuocoPiano (talk) 11:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

A request from User: GuiociPiano
Ace, you wrote: "again - we agree. Amazing Ken, after all these years (12 by my count) we could be friends. AceModerator 03:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC)"

Ace, if you wish to, please give me an email address or Skype name by which I can reach you. If you don't wish to, no big deal.GiuocoPiano (talk) 12:00, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I for one am shocked, SHOCKED that 🇰🇪 is lonely. Also, Ace, just an FYI, somebody blocked him and you're probably one of the few users that will unblock him-- "Shut up, Brx." 20:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Ken, if you wish to contact me pls use ace_mcwicked@yahoo.com AceModerator|

Coop/Sysoprevoke
In case you are willing to coop Oxy, also said they would coop her over her sysop abuses. Not sure how any of this works but if you need help to make a case, let me know. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 12:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What part of "leave me alone" don't you understand? — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  15:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I thought you were retired? Anyhow, nobody talked to you. You are just stalking me around at this point. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 15:50, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You're the one mentioning my name. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  15:52, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oxy you don't have to respond if someone says your name. But to the point - I am not going to start a coop because Oxy voluntarily gave up tech right and a discussion is ongoing about what it means to be a tech. So there is enough discussion going on already without needing to throw a coop case in on top of fit. AceModerator 20:24, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Although I didn't mean immediately as of now, fair enough. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 03:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Update: Oxy requested a permaban and her sysop was revoked. So no need for that anymore. Down goes Oxy! Down goes Oxy! — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 04:48, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Seriously, how old are you? Fucking 13? Beyond Reality (talk) 12:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Where did you come from? Who summoned you? What is the purpose of this? — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 14:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Reinstatement of Oxyaena as a tech
Oxyaena was recently reinstated as a tech by D, despite apparent consensus against restoring her tech toolset at least until after the vote. I don't think this change by D is good for RationalWiki, hence why I come to you about this matter.&mdash; Unsigned, by: Fawcett / talk / contribs
 * I'm also somewhat gobsmacked by this action.Scream!! (talk) 20:56, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I removed it. I'm not sure what consensus or vote you're referring to, but there's not much support for reinstating her at least from here and I'm not getting much of an enthusiastic air from here either. Clarification helps. 21:00, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * My work here is done. AceModerator 21:18, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination
—cosmikdebris talk stalk 14:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I understand that you and Oxy are really not on good terms...
...but is it really necessary to continue to misgender her? She has made it abundantly clear that she uses she/her pronouns. We really don't need to descend to something that low, do we? RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:03, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Where did I do that? I went through earlier to change "he" to "she" where I hadn't done so. So I am confused. AceModerator 04:15, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * And I have never misgendered Oxy on purpose. AceModerator 04:26, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I was referring to an earlier incident which you seem to have corrected, which I'm glad you have done. And yeah, I know that you're trying to remember, but I know that she doesn't like it at all, understandably so. Just please try a little harder? I'm sorry if I am making an unreasonable request, but accidentally misgendering her will probably only make her more suspicious of you at a time when the wiki needs to defuse tensions. I apologize for being accusatory earlier. I should have assumed good faith. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:33, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I don’t care if Oxy wants to be called him, her or you there - what ever she prefers I’ll call her that. AceModerator 04:57, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You've done it at least three times since the last time I asked you to respect her preferred pronoun at which point you had misgenerded her more than three times. The explanation then was I didn't mean to do it but you keep doing it. At some point, even of it isn't being done on purpose, it really looks like you're doing it on purpose. Just double check your comments related to Oxy. Shabi  DOO  07:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Double check my comments? You mean exactly what I did today? I'll get right on that. AceModerator 07:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No Sorry I misstated that. Double check anything you write bout Oxy before you post it. Shabi  DOO  11:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Why
Are you editing an archived coop case? Editing archives is usually not looked at so kindly.-Flandres (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Why would anyone care about editing an archive? AceModerator 22:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Er...have you just never seen what happens when someone does?-Flandres (talk) 22:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No and I don't care. There is no rule that says as much so...who gives a shit. AceModerator 22:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay. If you are so desperate to start more shit with oxy you have to go to a dead dispute that has just been buried...well, I leave you to your pitiable vindictiveness.-Flandres (talk) 22:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I missed the whole thing. Inputted my thoughts, it got reverted and I don't care. All is right with the world. AceModerator 22:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And another thing. I should be allowed to give my thoughts on Oxy. I don't actively seek her out to abuse her. The conversation was about Oxy and I commented along with many, many other people. It was reverted, ok mea culpa. AceModerator 22:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, that reversion of your edit was just me having a sausagefingers moment on my phone’s touchscreen. Sorry about that. 23:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem my man, no problem at all. AceModerator 23:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Unban from the discord
Hi, I wanted to ask you if you could unban me on the Support chat? There was no vote to ban me (and this is an explicit rule, since Oxy was tempbanned by vote). Aside form RWRW and LGM (who banned me without proper cause), you are the only moderator in this case that could unban me. 13:07, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please ignore. Issue solved thanks to Duce. 17:14, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Iiiit's the CP editor shitshow! LT and everyone's favorite: 🇰🇪!
You wrote on my talk page: "Given there is no god...".

Please stop pretending to know something that you definitely do not know. And God is spelled with a capital G!Terrafirma (talk) 03:49, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No I absolutely do know there is no god. Well, specifically, there is no Christian god. AceModerator 04:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * And how praytell do you know that? Did you live 2,000 years ago? I think not!


 * "Oh yes I'm the great pretender (ooh ooh). Adrift in a world of my own (ooh ooh)". - The Platters.Terrafirma (talk) 04:17, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * God has only existed for 2000 years..?The Christian god is logically inconsistent and there is absolutely no evidence of a god. AceModerator 04:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "How do you know? Were you there?" No, but was! Bongolian (talk) 04:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The Christian god is logically inconsistent? There is absolutely no evidence of a God?


 * Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit.


 * I hope this clarifies things for you.Terrafirma (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh man do religious people and atheists still debate each other?--Hastur! (talk) 05:44, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This wiki truly is a relic of the 2000s. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  05:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I so agree. It's weird that theists still try to push their point.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:00, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I was there 3500 years ago when Zeus and Appolo and Hades and the whole bunch were around making all sorts of trouble for us puny humans. I was there and saw it. I wasn't around in the Middle East 2000 years ago...because honestly who the fuck would have wanted to hang out with uneducated provincial semi-desert-dwelling semi-nomadic nutcases? But I guess having witnessed the Greek God's being real...it's unlikely that the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God is real. Unless maybe the Christians got some (or all) of their facts wrong. I mean it was a different time. Writing down stuff...you know...you wrote whatever the fuck you wanted to...or whatever would sell your religion. But the Greek Gods...totally fucking true. I swear to the God's they are real. Zeus has the biggest penis and he doesn't ever wear clothes. I actually mated with a few demi-Gods and got pregnant (somehow) and gave birth to magical half-unicorn half-Gargoyle children (very painful labour). And Athena was pretty much exactly like a smokin' Xena warrior. True story. Don't believe me? Well were you there? How do you know? Shabi DOO  06:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The Christian god is logically inconsistent. For example - god can’t be timeless or outside of time and also be interventionist. AceModerator,
 * God works in delirious ways, my friend. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  08:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Friend now? It’s a miracle. Now I believe in God. AceModerator 09:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Now wait a minute, don't get your hopes up. "My friend" is a common English manner of speaking. If we are now friends, I can officially say God is a drunk. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  14:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "What may be the dominant view of philosophers today is that he is temporal but everlasting; that is, God never began to exist and he never will go out of existence. He exists at each moment in time.


 * William Lane Craig’s own position includes another variation. He holds that God is temporal in that he is within metaphysical time. This feature of God’s life is due to the creation of time. Once God created the universe, he became temporal. Prior to creation, God was timeless. Of course, it is not right to say “prior to creation” in any literal sense. The way Craig describes his view is that God without creation is timeless; God with creation is temporal."


 * Checkmate atheist!Terrafirma (talk) 11:28, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

You're just repeating what some people said in a despsrate attempt to square a circle...therefore it's true and we've solved the problem. Please quote Bible passages that clearly back up this bit of sneaky theology. Anyone can insert some magical premise to explain away fatal flaws. We don't need some persons idiosyncratic appology. Even if this solved the answer to Ace's rightfully pointing out inconsistency of God's attributes there are still hundreds of more problems that need being addressed (without sneaky idiosyncratic argument bending). In fact God is nothing but an enormous dumpster landfill of absurd conflicting qualities and absurdities. An all powerful all great being that gives easily into fits of murderous genocidal rage over his imperfect creations misdeeds? Immorally dooming all of humanity to original sin over one person eating an apple? An obvious "religion spreading tactic" of having An all loving being eternally torturing his children for not buying the evidenceless story of his existence? An all moral being that violates a virgin without her consent to pointlessly endure suffering torture and his own suicide to take away that originally sin he needlessly created in the first place? A God that demands belief but never shows himself or unambiguously communicates with humanity or shows incontrovertible evidence of his existence...who cannot be found in the sky. What the fuck is this pile of bullshit? What is wrong with humanity that billions swallow this bullshit in the age of reason? Shabi DOO  12:16, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * God has spoken to me. He says I should be declared emperor of RationalWiki. 13:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "Checkmate atheists"? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, ", I accuse you of being Ken DeMyer." Spud (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * User: Shabidoo, if your looking for an enormous landfill of absurdity, look no further than atheist, commmunist controlled China.


 * Who unleashed the coronavirus pandemic by their crude food science practices and their unusual dietary habits? China! It's the China virus!Terrafirma (talk) 00:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Fuck off Ken. I told you to stop emailing me because you're a dishonest shit so now I am telling you to fuck off from my talk-page. AceModerator 00:28, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice, now you’re being racist towards Chinese people. Go fuck yourself, miserable little pile of shit. 01:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I just come to say that he is trying to get a reaction with his racism; reacting to his despicable opinions is exactly what he wants. Just collapse his gross words, block indef and move on. Don't give racists any enjoyment or validity. 01:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Gentlemen, the country of Tawain which is not atheist controlled is just as Chinese as mainland China and they controlled the coronavirus pandemic magnificantly. Nice try trying to accuse me of being a racist, but you miserably failed.

Ace, you are the one who first posted on my talk page. Furthermore, pointing out the failures of an atheist controlled country in a factual way is not dishonest. Just because various facts are unpleasant to you, does not make them untrue.GeorgeOrwell732 (talk) 08:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I only commented on your talkpage because I didn't know it was you. Secondly the staunchly atheistic country of NZ has almost become covid free for a second time running. So fuck off you worthless meat-bag. AceModerator 01:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

A successful country has to be both secular (not necessarily atheist you idiot) and an open society at the same time. It doesn't matter what kind of worldview you have in terms of religion or non-belief if you're not an open society, it is bound to fail. Do you not know anything about it the history of authoritarian governments and religious influence? If you consider the success record of countries which are both secular and open societies for example most of Scandinavia and increasingly Western European countries, Canada, NZ, Taiwan, Japan....then you'll find the kindest and amongst the most prosperous advanced forward developing, knowledgeable, inclusive, caring societies the world has ever seen. Just compare all those religious Christian Americans loving thy neighbor by ignoring homeless people and letting them rot in the street and not helping people who are sick by giving them medical insurance and a very slow embracing of human rights compared with humanist secular European and other countries and you'll see religious societies fuck up everything. The most religious countries in the European Union are also amongst the least developed, have the least open society and are by far the most racist homophobic and generally intollerant. In any case none of this s*** matters you're just deflecting away from the absurdities of your own belief by saying well hey the alternative to my own worldview also has problems therefore I don't have to respond to any of your challenges or deal with them. Well your worldview is a massive pile of garbage absurdity. The only difference between you and me is I don't believe in the garbage absurdities that you do. In place of most of that I have the ability to say I don't know when I actually don't know the answers and fill the rest with reliable observable verifiable information. Checkmate religious f***wad. Now why don't you go forth and impose your religious absurdities on the rest of society? Shabi DOO  08:52, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Shabidoo, the secular left through atheistic communism was responsble for more needless death than any other ideology. And no amount of whitewashing will erase that fact. A midpoint estimate is that atheistic communism was responsible for 110,286,000 people losing their lives between 1917 and 1987.


 * "Apparently it was just an amazing coincidence that every Communist of historical note publicly declared his atheism … . There have been twenty-eight countries in world history that can be confirmed to have been ruled by regimes with avowed atheists at the helm … These twenty-eight historical regimes have been ruled by eighty-nine atheists, of whom more than half have engaged in democidal acts of the sort committed by Stalin and Mao…


 * The total body count for the ninety years between 1917 and 2007 is approximately 148 million dead at the bloody hands of fifty-two atheists, three times more than all the human beings killed by war, civil war, and individual crime in the entire twentieth century combined.


 * The historical record of collective atheism is thus 182,716 times worse on an annual basis than Christianity’s worst and most infamous misdeed, the Spanish Inquisition. It is not only Stalin and Mao who were so murderously inclined, they were merely the worst of the whole Hell-bound lot. For every Pol Pot whose infamous name is still spoken with horror today, there was a Mengistu, a Bierut, and a Choibalsan, godless men whose names are now forgotten everywhere but in the lands they once ruled with a red hand.


 * Is a 58 percent chance that an atheist leader will murder a noticeable percentage of the population over which he rules sufficient evidence that atheism does, in fact, provide a systematic influence to do bad things? If that is not deemed to be conclusive, how about the fact that the average atheist crime against humanity is 18.3 million percent worse than the very worst depredation committed by Christians, even though atheists have had less than one-twentieth the number of opportunities with which to commit them. If one considers the statistically significant size of the historical atheist set and contrasts it with the fact that not one in a thousand religious leaders have committed similarly large-scale atrocities, it is impossible to conclude otherwise, even if we do not yet understand exactly why this should be the case. Once might be an accident, even twice could be coincidence, but fifty-two incidents in ninety years reeks of causation!"GeorgeOrwell732 (talk) 09:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You're full of fucking shit you liar. Communist China, North Korea, Vietnam (and a few little others) and their sad history of death and destruction (not even 100 years) cannot compare to the murderous rampage of Islam over the last 1300 years and can't even hold the tiniest light to 1000 years of Midaevil misery in Christian Europe. Are you that much of an ignorant moron you'd compare small beans of communism to the utter death factory of 2000 Yeats of Christianity and Islam? Fuck off and take your falsehoods where ignorant people will believe you ya stupid asshole. Shabi  DOO  09:35, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't have time for this, Fuck off Ken. AceModerator 09:56, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * So you concede? Checkmate atheist! LTMay Dataclarifier be well! 20:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

To cheer myself up...
...I have taken the liberty of posting porn on your talkpage! Have a good one. - Rairyu75  ( Talk ) 23:09, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks I guess. AceModerator 23:19, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

The fuck?
I know you play kind of loose with handing out user rights at least until they're clearly abused. And you gave me the mop too after my rant against you two months ago, for which I'm greatful. But is | this really a good idea when dealing with a person who | admits to vandalizing this wiki and was paroled from the bin only 2.5 weeks ago? Especially when his last edit before you gave him the mop was to | vandalize another editors userpage. He's also recently | vandalized other users sandbox, and even though he | reverted the wandalism himself, I don't think this user is ready the mop yet. Hell, almost all of his recent contributions are concern trolling. Would you please reconsider this. 23:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The links you have sent me don't show any diffs so I have no idea what you're trying to show me. AceModerator 00:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what happened there. Anyway, here are the diffs in same order:


 * Fuck, still missed the one about him admitting to being a vandal. Here it is.
 * I don't see anything here particularly terrible. If this user carries on it's easy enough to vandal bin - sysop or no. AceModerator 00:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I had no idea sysops could be vandal binned. Couldn’t they just take themselves out? 01:08, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, if not I'll remove the sysop bits and vandal bin. AceModerator 01:11, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) I didn't delibrately vandalise Smith's userpage, I acted in good faith by placing a sockpuppet template, as the account, User:Flight was in fact a sockpuppet of User:Tobias, 2) I didn't do wrong in the second diff, 3) I accept the point, and could have done better, but I made a good faith mistake there, in that I forgot I shouldn't have been editing that page, I'm sorry that I made that mistake, and will try to avoid making these mistakes in the future. Kiko4564 (talk) 21:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Too late. AceModerator 21:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * OK that's fine, I'm now back from my LANCB. Just for the record, I only LANCBd because Nutty advised me to, not because I was unhappy with being promoted to autopatrolled. I can live without sysop, so will stay here. Hopefully I will get demoted back to sysop one day. I live in hope. Kiko4564 (talk) 11:17, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * ok great. Thanks, well done.AceModerator 11:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Wrongly blocked by LGM
Hi Ace, I am here to make you aware that LGM blocked me wrongly for no valid reason other than "being a moron", not once but on two separate occasions. The first time was in relation to a message on my own talk page in which I basically asked why she felt a need to "face slap" me. The second time was in retaliation for me protesting against this wrongful block. I know that the block lengths were 40 minutes in total (one 30 minutes and the other 10 minutes), but I'm afraid that I'm not happy with being wrongfully blocked, as that really does cross the line in my opinion. Kiko4564 (talk) 09:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't care - case dismissed. AceModerator

MRWGA
Keep 'em honest, Ace. Sterile (talk) 01:13, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Goddamned right my friend. Miss you pal. AceModerator 05:44, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Beware the ides of the 2040s and 2050s irreligious New Zealander
The article Developed countries may become more religious in 20 years indicates:


 * "Researchers from HSE University and RANEPA found that in high-income countries, age, rather than the cohort effect, has more impact on religiosity. They predict that this may have an impact on societal structure in the future. The study was published in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.


 * It has long been observed that older people tend to be more religious than younger people. However, it is still disputable whether this fact should be attributed to people generally becoming more religious with age per se (age effect), or to the process of secularization, wherein earlier cohorts (to which the now older people belong) used to be more religious than those that appeared later, i.e. younger cohorts (cohort effect). HSE University scholars decided to analyze this issue using data from six waves of the World Values Survey (2016) in high-income OECD countries. A total of 16 countries were studied, including Australia, the USA, Canada, Great Britain, Israel, New Zealand, Japan, Germany, as well as other European countries.


 * The researchers used logistic models and multiple linear regression to determine that the age effect has a higher impact on religiosity than the cohort effect. Older people are more inclined to believe in God, attend church, and believe it is important to instill religion in children.. The cohort effect impacts other factors analyzed by the scholars, such as church attendance and a belief in religion's importance in life, but the age effect still strongly prevails over the cohort effect...


 * The transition from religious to secular values may slow by 2040 in high-income OECD countries and, probably, there will be a resurgence of religiosity, the symptoms of which can be observed in Japan. On the other hand, widely divergent socio-cultural settings in different countries have an impact on religious behavior and attitude, and this must be taken into account in further research.

Concerning the future of religion/secularism in Europe, Professor Eric Kaufmann wrote:


 * "We have performed these unprecedented analyses on several cases. Austria offers us a window into what the future holds. Its census question on religious affiliation permits us to perform cohort component projections, which show the secular population plateauing by 2050, or as early as 2021 if secularism fails to attract lapsed Christians and new Muslim immigrants at the same rate as it has in the past. (Goujon, Skirbekk et al. 2006).


 * This task will arguably become far more difficult as the supply of nominal Christians dries up while more secularisation-resistant Muslims and committed rump Christians comprise an increasing share of the population.

The evangelical Christian and Muslim populations are increasing in New Zealand as they are resistant to secularization.

In April 2010, Kaufmann, who is an agnostic, declared "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of Protestant Europe and France."

The future of irreligion in New Zealand is bleak.DArtagnan (talk) 04:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hahahaha oh dear Ken. Still this mystical magical thinking about how things will change, always just around the corner. Sorry bud - I go on hard facts, not this wishy washy bullshit. Every single trend over the last 30 - 40 or so years shows NZ is becoming less and less religious with Christianity being the biggest loser of adherents. And those are the facts, it doesn't matter how you dress it up (we all remember "Project 200", your various plans, your constant "something something likely to happen" and the "operations" you used to say were going to destroy evolution on the internet and not once have you been able to provide the slightest piece of evidence as to anything ever happening) this is no different. I go on what is happening not what might happen. I have to declare victory once again. Ole! Ole! Ole! AceModerator 05:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Every single trend? Like the trend of evangelical/born again Christians, Sihks, Hindus and Muslims increasing year after year in New Zealand?


 * "There are none so blind as those who will not see." - John HeywoodJosephEvansSagebeer (talk) 05:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes Ken, every single relevant metric shows religion on a consistent downward trend. It doesn’t matter if evangelicals are increasing because they total amount of identified christians is dropping. So the growth of evangelicals isn’t relevant to the discussion. Try to keep up. The most relevant metric is the growing no religion population which has been growing for decades. It doesn’t matter how many times you post the same Kaufman quote over and over, I made a prediction before the last census came out that once again religion would show a decline while no religion would increase... and I was completely right. You completely wrong. I’ll make another prediction now - the next census will show a greater still decline in religious belief and that NZ, which already has recently removed abortion from the crimes act and legalised euthanasia (two more things I predicted would happen) will continue further into left wing and secular values. Neither of the evangelical political parties got 1% in the election. Ken, it’s happening in your face. So yeah, you’ve lost massively. AceModerator 05:49, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The irreligious/nonreligious and nominally religious having abortions and engaging in euthenasia are your "arguments"? That just means they will have less children and the future will be more religious in coming generations! Born again Christians who are resistant to secularization are being fruitful and multiplying! One reason the Roman Empire was Christianized was that the Christians were more pro-natal than the Roman pagans over time.


 * "Today, values play a more important role in fertility behaviour, throwing the contrast between religious pronatalism and secular low-fertility individualism into relief. Over several generations, this process can lead to significant social and political changes. Early Christianity’s exponential rise during its gestation period from 30 to 300 A.D. has been traced to its superior demography (fertility, mortality and female sex ratio), which maintained a rate of growth similar to contemporary Mormonism: 40 percent per decade. For Christians, this led to a jump from 40 converts to 6 million inside three centuries. (Stark 1996) Christianity became the religion of an empire and a continent. In the United States, conservative sects increased their share of white Protestantism from roughly a third to two-thirds during the twentieth century – largely on the back of higher fertility. On the other hand, sects like the Shakers and Cathars, which permitted entry only through conversion, rapidly faded from the scene. Demographic religious revival is a medium and long-term phenomenon, but awareness of shifting population composition can lead to political soul-searching and instability well before the full impact of demographic change takes place. This is clear in ethnically-tense societies like Israel, Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Lebanon, Cote D’Ivoire or Assam." - Eric KaufmannJosephEvansSagebeer (talk) 06:42, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No, Ken. No. The abortion and euthanasia law changes are due to the changing secular morals of society itself because these we things people voted on. And the parties that planned to reverse these new law changes received below 1% of the vote. Your Kaufman quotes are merely speculation that fly in the face of the hard evidence. Come back to me when you have an actual argument and are able to make predictions. AceModerator 06:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The world as a whole is experiencing desecularization. The former secular Soviet Union geographic area is being desecularized. Protestant Europe and France is now experiencing a rate of zero secularization and will experience desecularization. China is experiencing desecularization.

So what makes you think new Zealand is going to be an exception to eventual desecularization? There is nothing special about the atheism/agnosticism of New Zealanders. New Zealand atheism/agnosticism will be ground up in the meat grinder of world desecularization. Every religious immigrant coming to New Zealand is a herald of things to come.JoseCapablanca (talk) 08:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way, the creationists are winning the war!


 * Globally, creationism is seeing a rapid increase.


 * In Europe, creationism is seeing a rapid increase.


 * Johns Hopkins University Press reported in 2014: "Over the past forty years, creationism has spread swiftly among European Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, and Muslims, even as anti-creationists sought to smother its flames."JoseCapablanca (talk) 08:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * dude, just fucking stop man. You’re wrong. You have always been wrong. You’re embarrassing yourself. Spending so much time on trying to prove the unprovable. Everyone who has tried to help you, provided evidence to support their claims, tried valiantly to help you, you’ve just spat in everyone’s eyes with a refusal to even engage with the evidence in front of you. All you do is make the same vague claims and make yourself look like the idiot. You don’t debate anyone - you make silly claims that your position is so strong that not even Richard Dawkins or Penn Gillette have the courage to face you. Maybe they don’t face you because you’re a no one. A nothing. They don’t even know you exist. Ken.... I hate to be the one to tell you this... you have no impact on the world. Neither do I, currently, but at least I know it. Ken... stop man. Take a proper look at yourself. Then change accordingly. AceModerator 09:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The Question Evolution! Campaign shot up the web traffic for the website of Creation Ministries International! And it stumped evolutionists as they could not satisfactorily answer its 15 questions.


 * The internet is a big place. Am I increasing the web traffic of various websites? "...when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near." - Sun Tzu. "Secret operations are essential in war; upon them the army relies to make its every move." - Sun Tzu. "Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." - Sun Tzu.


 * By the way, who is Richard Dawkins? Last time I checked, he suffered a dramatic decline of public influence. Did someone help spark a feminist revolt againsst him? Monica Shores wrote a Ms. Magazine article titled Will "New Atheism” Make Room For Women? It was one of the first articles criticizing the New Atheism movement for being sexist. She cited Conservapedia in her article and indicated: "The lack of lady presence is so visible that Conservapedia commented on it by noting that Dawkins’ website overwhelmingly attracts male visitors." Ace, you might as well face the fact that feminist, atheist women are putty in the hands of the User: Conservative collective! They are the puppets and User: Conservativedom is the puppeteer!JoseCapablanca (talk) 11:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way, have you seen THIS!!!!


 * I found this gem at a well-known search engine that begins with a G!JoseCapablanca (talk) 11:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * P.S., have you seen THIS.


 * As much as I hate to do it, I am afraid I am going to have to declare victory!


 * "There is no substitute for victory." - Douglas MacArthur.JoseCapablanca (talk) 12:09, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ken...no one cares. AceModerator 22:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * To quote my favourite film...Ken you're a thumbprint on the window of a skyscraper. A smudge of excrement on a tissue surging out to sea with a million tons of raw sewage. Nothing, a no one who no one either believes or respects. This is why I ceased emailing you. You're a dishonest piece of shit and no one gives a fuck about you. Fuck off from my talkpage. AceModerator 22:30, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Ace, if you don't want to hear from me, then posting a message about me at "What is happening at Conservapedia" was not a great way of going about it. The truth is that you don't want to hear from me when I easily beat you very badly in debate due to the weakness of your argumentation. It is not due to my debating prowess that I easily and effortlessly beat atheists in debate, it is due to their weakness of atheistic ideology and the weakness of atheist debaters.

As far as your allegation that I am dishonest, consider the fact that unlike you I don't make unsupportable and contrafactual claims like "all the trends are in my favor" (I am paraphrasing you). The fact remains that evangelicals, Muslims, religious Filipinos, Sihks and Hindus are increasing in your country year after year and the world as a whole is experiencing desecularization. Over time, religious groups resistant to secularization will overtake NZ atheists/agnostics/nonreligious due to their higher fertility rates and due to religious immigrants.

With the above being said, feel free to crawl back into your intellectual bunny hole. But keep this in mind, cacooning yourself from reality does not change reality!KennethGMcLeod (talk) 00:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way, your feeble "best of the atheist public" attempts to contradict what the scholars are saying about the future desecularization of New Zealand and the Western World as a whole are not convincing. I doubt you are even convincing yourself which is why the future desecularization of New Zealand remains a bee in your bonnet that you keep commenting on (your latest post to "What is happening at Conservapedia", etc.).JurgenHabermas (talk) 01:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No you have failed. You are wrong - consistently and always. So fuck off you pathetic shit-stained knob goblin. AceModerator 01:20, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * remember that time you challenged RW to debate then failed miserably when someone took you seriously? That was fun. AceModerator 01:22, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You wanted me to debate you at RationalWiki. My only reticence to edit RationalWiki again was due to not wanting to reveal my IP address. Once that hurdle was overcome, I took you up on your challenge. A Conservapedian claimed that after he edited RationalWiki, he was hacked. Whether or not that was the case, I don't know. But better safe than sorry.


 * Later, when I did take you up on your offer and debate you at RationalWiki (as I had overcome the revealing the IP address issue), the "pearl clutching pansies" (your words not mine) at RationalWiki, kept banning/blocking me. As far the editors of RationalWiki, keep this in mind, "Birds of a feather, flock together!". I feel sad for you that you plan on being a long term editor of a wiki that is filled with pearl clutching pansies.


 * I did taunt you during the time I hadn't overcome the revealing my IP address issue by stating that you had to pony up something like $20,000 to be donated to my favorite Christian charity to have the privilege to debate me, but you never came up with suitable arrangements to have the money donated to such a chartiy and provide proof of doing so.EdwardOlmos (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

How do you find the time to troll websites Ken. Why can't you just listen to Ace and fuck off? Shabi DOO  02:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Good god man, fuck off. And he has the time because he has no one in his life. No wife, no girlfriend, no children, no friends. AceModerator 02:03, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Ace, I see you haven't lost your penchant for making claims that you do not provide evidence or proof for. If only you had shown that I have no friends or romantic involvements. Then you wouldn't have more egg on your face. Sad!

By the way, a sure sign that someone has lost an argument is that they resort to personal attacks that have absolutely no evidence supporting them!

P.S. Have a nice day!CharlesTaylor’ (talk) 02:29, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ken, you lost the argument yesterday sop I have nothing to lose by insulting you. You're just a sad lonely man. AceModerator 03:04, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

elections
Ariel31459 (talk) 19:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

We are the champions
Ace, you wrote: "Wow Ken is so powerfully pathetic. Running the same shtick for 12 years without changing his style, learning from his failures or growing as a person. Just the same old crap he has been spouting for years and years now. Always claiming to have won some kind of imaginary battle. AceModerator 01:31, 11 November 2020 (UTC)"
 * Ace, numerous atheists have indicated that the atheist movement is now dead in the Western World. See: Decline of the atheist movement. On top of this, the percentage of atheist in the world is experiencing a long term decline that is expected to go on into the future.


 * Evangelical Christianity is alive and well. And it is growing rapidly in the world.


 * Christianity is true and has a great wealth of evidence and sound arguments to support it. See: Evidence for Christianity.


 * 2020 was a terrible for atheists on the PR front due to atheist controlled China causing a worldwide pandemic. And I predict that 2021 is also going to be a bad year for atheist activists.


 * Feel free to claim all you want that there is an imaginary battle between the camps of atheism/theism, but if you do so it is because your side is losing so badly! As far as any victorious battles I have had over atheists/agnostics, it is not due to my debating prowess, but due to the utter weakness of atheists/agnostics and their bankrupt ideologies.


 * My team is winning and it is made up of winners! It is the secular leftist activists of the world that are pathetically pathetic! So very pathetically pathetic it is has now reached biblical proportions!JackLondon (talk) 06:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You can repeat that the sky is green a million times and yet...it is not green. There is something wrong with your head when every statistic out there shows atheist numbers growning and christian numbers falling and yet consider that a victory. Also...weren't you asked to fuck off like a dozen times? Are you incapable of fucking off? Shabi  DOO  07:04, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The scholars agree with me. The irreligious/nonreligious are going to shrink as a percentage of the world's population.


 * Pew Research - Why people with no religion are projected to decline as a share of the world’s population (Statistics include atheists/agnostics)


 * Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia founded by an atheist and agnostic, now has articles on: "Growth of religion"; "Postsecularism" and "desecularization".


 * Shabidoo, get out of your secular leftist cacoon and embrace reality. Reality will receive you with open arms! Give reality a chance. You will be glad you did!MarkRogers (talk) 15:00, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the United States and western democracies. I'm sure you really must look at religious countries with growing religious numbers along with population such as Nigeria, Pakistan and El Salvador with nothing but admiration for all the great things their religious zeal and increasing numbers have achieved. I would say the "reality" there is a lot less palatable than you would like. Also...how many times must we ask you to fuck off before you fuck off? Shabi  DOO  15:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The secularization rate is now zero in France and France is experiencing a rapid increase in evangelicals, pentecostals and Muslims. In April 2010, Professor Eric Kaufmann, who is an agnostic, declared "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of Protestant Europe and France."


 * The majority of atheists in the world are East Asians and Christianity is seeing explosive growth in China and Christianity growing in East Asia as well. The Economist published this article in 2020: Protestant Christianity is booming in China.


 * "Evangelical and Pentecostal Christianity is growing more quickly in Asia than most parts of the world, with over 200m adherents in 2015, up from 17m in 1970. The largest congregations are in South Korea and the Philippines, where dazzlingly large mega-churches hold tens of thousands of people." - The Economist, 2018


 * Why Christian expansionism is a quiet storm in Southeast Asia, South China Morning Post


 * Shabidoo, secular leftism is losing badly in the world - very, very badly!Manius Manilius (talk) 16:01, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * What about theistic leftism? You know, that thing you couldn't refute the existence of? 16:07, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh nice we have a cherry picker here. How about you fuck off already? Fuck off means go away. Why can't you go away? Or do your Christian values compell you to stay where you aren't welcome? Shabi DOO  16:32, 11 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Cherry picking? Most of the world's atheists live in East Asia and Europe. And Protestant Europe and France make up a large part of Europe.


 * The icing on the cake which I didn't even mention is Christianity is experiencing an increase in Eastern Europe which were former Soviet block countries. Christianity is growing in Russia as well.


 * Pew Research, 2017:


 * "In many Central and Eastern European countries, religion and national identity are closely entwined. This is true in former communist states, such as the Russian Federation and Poland, where majorities say that being Orthodox or Catholic is important to being “truly Russian” or “truly Polish.” It is also the case in Greece, where the church played a central role in Greece’s successful struggle for independence from the Ottoman Empire and where today three-quarters of the public (76%) says that being Orthodox is important to being “truly Greek.”


 * Many people in the region embrace religion as an element of national belonging even though they are not highly observant. Relatively few Orthodox or Catholic adults in Central and Eastern Europe say they regularly attend worship services, pray often or consider religion central to their lives. For example, a median of just 10% of Orthodox Christians across the region say they go to church on a weekly basis.


 * Indeed, compared with many populations Pew Research Center previously has surveyed – from the United States to Latin America to sub-Saharan Africa to Muslims in the Middle East and North Africa – Central and Eastern Europeans display relatively low levels of religious observance.


 * Nonetheless, the comeback of religion in a region once dominated by atheist regimes is striking – particularly in some historically Orthodox countries, where levels of religious affiliation have risen substantially in recent decades."WilliamTell (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I note your trying to avoid a discussion involving theistic leftists. I wonder why... 18:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * What's your point? That historically religious countries tend to be religious? That people previously or currently under totalitarian regimes tend to seek things that are forbidden, like religion? Or even more basic, that people seek what is socially or legally forbidden? Or are you perhaps determining truth by a popularity contest? Are you supposing that a given faith, or faith in general, must be correct, simply because it is currently popular? If so, then your "evil secular leftists" should always win in American presidential elections, and the values you claim to be against (sexual impurity, extramarital sex, etc.) are undeniably true, as the majority practice them. Continuing your logic, gay marriage should be legal in America, and possibly the entire world(if you were to sum up all those supporting and all those against). IveBeenFrank (talk)
 * Ivebeenfrank, you are not frank! I was very clear. Christianity is true, well-supported and growing in the world. Atheism is declining in the world as a percentage of the world's population. The largest regional populations of atheists in the world by population are seeing desecularization and a rise of evangelical Christianity, Orthodox Christianity and religious fundamentalism.


 * I hope this further clarifies things for you. I realize that people that are indoctrinated by public schools are often resistant and have reading comprehension issues, but you must try harder!FullCourseMeal (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Rather inadvertently, you proved my point. You argue that the truth of a religion is directly correlated to its popularity. As for reading comprehension, whether you didn't read my post or couldn't is irrelevant, as nothing in your response addresses the question I posed to you as to whether you would approve of other things through argument ad populum. So, dear sir, I suggest you return to public school. It may not look much, but it can teach you how to read!IveBeenFrank (talk)
 * Listen cherry picker, Ace doesn't want you on his talk page so, seriously, for the last time... FUCK OFF . Shabi  DOO  18:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Ken you are and always will be wrong. Fuck off. AceModerator 23:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Swear Ken's argument was so full of logical fallacies, PRATTs and non-sequiturs doing one of RW's drinking games to it would've killed my lightweight ass. The arguing power of evangelicals ladies and gentlemen. Evilatheistheathen (talk) 02:52, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Walrus
(:3｣∠)_ 05:10, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

E equals M C squared
Hi, I made some corrections to your essay on E = m c^2. But it is your personal essay so maybe you disagree. Anyway, that's why I let you know.

You said that what goes on in the sun is the same as what goes on in an old-fashioned nuclear bomb. Well, it's kindof the same but also kindof different. Fusion is not fission. And you said "twice the speed of light' but it's the speed of light, squared. Gill110951 (talk) 10:29, 20 November 2020 (UTC)


 * As much as I agree with your corrections, you should not have tried to make them yourself; RationalWiki essays are the author's intellectual property, and only having one or a small handful of authors is kind of the whole point of them here. Do not try to edit other people's essays unless they make them public. However, you may bring it to the essay's talkpage as constructive criticism. -- Goatspeed. 18:21, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah rather you didn’t fuck with my essays. It’s just a very simple explanation- it’s not meant to be university level stuff. AceModerator|

Request of advice in avoiding hangover
You seem to be the pre-eminent go-to guy here when it comes to alcohol and the side effects of alcohol. We're about the same age and have similar personal experience with alcoholism, but you're probably more highly educated than me (I'm a two time business-college dropout). So I'm asking, is there any scientific basis to the idea that maintaining some level of drunkedness over time provides immunity to hangovers. I generally imbibe beer and scotch and don't get hangovers, but I ran out of scotch last monday, so I was restricted to beer. Yesterday I went to buy another bottle of scotch, had one shot, and immediately developed an evening hangover that carried out into today. Can I avoid this evil hangoverdemon by drinking hard stuff every day? Please advice. 15:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't suffer from hangovers anymore and I am not sure if there is any trick to it. The most hungover I ever get is feeling extremely tired the next morning. I also avoid spirits for the most part. Over the weekend I drank a few litres of vodka but that is rare for me. I mostly drink wine. AceModerator 19:49, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I got a serious hangover like twice or something before I turned 30. These days it's extremely random. Sometimes I have 10 pints of beer and couple and whiskies...maybe even a glass or two of wine on top of that...and nothing happens. At other times I get a serious headache from couple of beers. Recently I had been maintaining a steady diet of few pints of beer and 2-3 shots of scotch a day and had no problems. Then I ran out of scotch last Tuesday and had to make do with beer 'till Saturday when I bought another bottle of scotch. Got a massive hangover just about an hour after taking that one shot. I think I'm starting to kick it off now after bunch of ibuprofen and steady drinking. Growing old is such a fucking menace. 00:58, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't drink at all during the work day (occasionally I might have a couple beers at lunch but that is a rare occurrence) then in the evening I have a couple beers and two bottles of wine between 5:30pm and 11:00pm. I try keep it to that because I need to perform at a high level at work. All bets are off in the weekend though and I rarely get hangovers. I am thus far enjoying the aging process. AceModerator 01:01, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * a pint of water before bed, and plenty the next day. AMassiveGay (talk) 01:08, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * In my student days I honestly found drinking a cold beer or two helped with the hangovers. Also...as AMG says a litre of water before bed helped me at least. Pacing yourself helps a LOT! Shabi  DOO  01:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah I must admit a hair of the dog works wonders but the problem is once you start with a drink in the morning you need to remain drinking small amounts throughout the day to keep the hangover at bay. That can be difficult when, if like me, your job consists of meetings, emails, traveling and schmoozing with potential clients. AceModerator 01:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I suppose you could not get "hang-over" drunk the night before you have to work. But that is a terribly inconvenient limitation isn't it? Shabi  DOO  01:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Pfffft that'll never work. AceModerator 01:54, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I voted for you, you prick.
Don't forget it. -- MtD Bogan   00:42, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * When the great reckoning comes your name will be written in the book of the living. AceModerator 04:08, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You were my second choice. What do I get? Twodots (talk) 05:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I voted for you too, fuckhead. Where's my kickback? —cosmikdebris talk stalk 05:42, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The bastard never appreciates us. I demand compensation. Twodots (talk) 05:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations
Please send all kickbacks of tequila or related substance to —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Good lad. AceModerator 03:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Congrats on your reelection, Mr. Moderator. -- Goatspeed. 05:45, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Help with navigation popups
I need some help with enabling navigation popups, which are extremely helpful. I have the gadget enabled, but it doesn't work. Any tips?

Thanks

--Redactedentity (talk) 01:02, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * True, they're helpful but we're waiting for a wiki guru to update our software. Until then they won't work. Sorry Scream!! (talk) 01:11, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks for quik feedback .--Redactedentity (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What are they? And how can they be installed by someone? Should I talk to the Moderator noticeboard or the technical support for this? 02:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I really don't know. AceModerator 02:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The Technical Support page is the place for this. The foundation board just met recently and one of the topics was prioritizing an upgrade to the server software. If you and/or others post this request on the Tech Support page, the techs responsible for the upgrade will make sure this is on the list of capabilities to implement when the upgrade happens. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:01, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cosmik. AceModerator 08:21, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey, you.
I need your help, dude. Shit's about to go down. Twodots (talk) 15:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I’m housed on dark rum egg nog. This place still sucks. Nutty Roux (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you sharing? 71.215.100.2 (talk) 03:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Today I turned 40. I’m drinking a big glass of whisky. AceModerator 05:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Happy Birthday man! Enjoy the booze. 05:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

2020: A horrible year for New Zealand atheism
Look at the Google trend graphs for the terms atheism/atheist in New Zealand from 2004 to 2020: Google trends for the terms atheism/atheist from 2004 to 2020.

The last 4 years has seen a significant drop in the number of searches for atheism/atheist in New Zealand.

The Battle of Stalingrad was a turning point for the Nazis' demise. Despite vicious attacks on Stalingrad, the Nazis could not take the city. Let that be a reminder to RationalWikians who want to destroy a certain wiki that begins with a C and has a lot of informative content on atheism!Johnmarston (talk) 21:35, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Interesting that you compare Conservapedia to the Soviet Union.
 * Take a look around at people's userpages. You see that little box that says "Free speech for everyone - including idiots," which means that they don't want your site to be taken down?
 * The statisticians are weeping. You use a Google Trends aggregator to determine how many people are atheist in New Zealand? Google Trends only measures current Google Searches for information. Perhaps atheism is so prominent in New Zealand that people don't need to Google it. Or perhaps it isn't, but people find out about it through YouTube, TV, video games, or other online platforms, and so don't just Google it. IveBeenFrank (talk) 21:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * And even if atheism were declining (which it isn't), that proves nothing about the existence of your god, as reality is not a popularity contest. Oh, and here's my response to your cut-and-paste bullshit:


 * -- Goatspeed. 22:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This is pathetic even for you. Like I have told you over and over again. Religious belief in NZ has been dropping for decades and "no religion" now accounts for almost 50% of the population with Christianity slipping further to under 50%. You're using a google trend to argue against the actual fucking census? Fucking pathetic man, fucking pathetic. When I was studying for my Political Science degree I wrote a paper on Religion in NZ Politics and if I had used Google search trends to support my work I would have been laughed out of the course. Fucking loser. AceModerator 21:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

There is more than one court system in the USA
Grover Cleveland served 2 nonconsecutive terms as president of the United States.

If Donald J. Trump doesn't win in the legal courts in 2020/2021, he may very well win in the court of public opinion in 2024 - especially given the rapidly deteriorating Joe Biden. MAGA!GroverCleveland2 (talk) 22:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What an exceptionally banal turn of phrase! You must be so proud, devoting all your limited brainpower to come up with that little ditty. Also, why MAGA and not KAG? Oh, I know: because Trump's term of office has made America less great, necessitating someone to make America great again. While that person may not be Joe Biden, it is certainly not Trump. Also, cope harder. IveBeenFrank (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If Donald J. Trump doesn't win in the legal courts in 2020/2021 He didn't. he may very well win in the court of public opinion in 2024 He wont. AceModerator 00:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Brexit and Donald Trump opened the spigot of right-wing populism wider in the Western World and the world at large.


 * And Trumpism is not going away anytime soon. The genie is out of the bottle and will not be put back in the bottle again.


 * In 2019, John Feffer wrote at the left leaning The Nation: "In the Americas, the Trump tsunami has swept across both continents and the 'pink tide' of progressivism has all but disappeared from the southern half of the hemisphere... In this planet-wide rising tide of right-wing populism, the liberal left commands only a few disconnected islands — Iceland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Uruguay... Worse, crafty operators with even more ambitious agendas stand ready to destroy the liberal status quo once and for all."


 * And New Zealand is going to face desecularization sometime in the twentieth century according to the social scientists. Accept the findings of the social scientists, Ace.  Stop hating science. Don't fear demography. Don't fear the projections of demographers which are based on long term trends. Genie351 (talk) 01:11, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And New Zealand is going to face desecularization sometime in the twentieth century according to the social scientists. No it isn't. Secularisation has grown and has continued to grow for decades. I've already proven this. AceModerator 01:18, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see those predictive models. 01:27, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * He doesn't have any predictive models. He just repeats over and over what one professor said in 2006. AceModerator 01:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Well that's dumb, not to mention boring. 01:33, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I know, right? Statistics older than this very site. -- Goatspeed. 01:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Ace is under the impression there is a bottomless pit of Anglicans who will secularize and that the flood of immigrants who are resistent to secularization will stop. As long as atheists/agnostics/nonreligious continue to have below replacement level of births, those immigrants who have higher birth rates tban seculars are not going to cease. Checkmate, Ace.Kelvin838 (talk) 01:40, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that isn't how demographics work. First and sometimes second generation immigrants tend to have issues integrating, but past that (presuming that they aren't raging xenophobes like the US) they tend to integrate just fine, usually adopting shared socio-cultural signifiers. 01:53, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * No Ken, as I have shown over and over and over - over the past few decades NZ has become less religious, not more so. Before the census results were released earlier this year I predicted that people indication 'no religion' would grow and guess what - I predicted correctly. You lost. AceModerator 01:50, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Nah Ace, I wouldn't bother; you may as well debate a quote generator:




 * And in regards to our alleged decline, 🇰🇪 omits that Conservapedia's most recent edit was like, two weeks ago; at least we're fairly active in the afternoons (in the LA timezone) and mornings. The only times where this wiki sees less activity is at night (again, LA time)- when the vast majority of our North American editors are asleep. Even if there were no DDoS attacks on CP, they still have very few active editors left; at least we've gained some new ones over the past few months (e.g. Kevlarstar, Twodots), and some of our older ones have now returned. (Not to mention Jancarcu, another new arrival who's been expanding our religious apologetics-related articles with frightening efficiency, and has even started a Chinese translation of one of our gold articles, breaking what is arguably a quite significant language and cultural barrier- assuming that the mainland Chinese government doesn't block us for our anti-communist views of course.) -- Goatspeed. 03:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ken, why do you keep going on about the size of a faith and the size of atheists in New Zealand? The size of a faith or it's growth does not determine its truth. After all, Christianity started with just 12. If you truly wish to defeat atheism, then debate atheism on its merits and philosophy, not on public opinion. Public opinion, remember, sentenced Jesus to death. IveBeenFrank (talk) 11:51, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

New Zealand
A land of paradise where the indigenous Maori are still treated like second class citizens. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  19:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That article was from three years ago. | This is from after this years election. 19:39, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, | New York Times article about the same thing tells us just how diverse their parliament and government currently is. 19:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Overrepresentation of Maori in New Zealand criminal justice system — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  19:47, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * So I argue that a 3 year old article might not reflect the situation now and you counter with a 13 year old report. I've no time to search for more current criminal statistics from New Zealand while I'm at work, but I recommend for the sake of your own credibility that you stop living so far in the past. 20:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's a fact that the Maori are an economically disadvantaged underclass in New Zealand society. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  21:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oxy, why are you bothering me with this shit? AceModerator 01:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You're a Kiwi and Oxy is Oxy. Picking fights is what she does. 01:21, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah but Oxy should know better than to pick a fight with me. It never ends well for her. AceModerator 01:22, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Oxyaena
Oxyaena is a drama queen. The more you complain about Oxyaena, the more the drama queen is getting a hit of the narcotic attention. So your complaining is reinforcing a vicious circle.

Unless you can marshall enough RationalWikians to defang/ban Oxyaena, your resistance to Oxyaena is futile and self-defeating.

Much of the left now consists of drama queens who complain about their plight instead of taking constructive actions. Coffeedrinker (talk) 16:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * And AceMcWiked isn't a lover of attention and showboating? Anyone who talks in such gross generalisations about the "left" or "right" is talking nonsense out their anus. Shabi  DOO  17:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "Oxy both you and Ace have an extremely exaggerated and extremely one sided view of your history on this site. Neither of you seem capable of seeing the truth which lies in between." - ShabiDOO 11:27, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Shabidoo, you appear to be saying that users Oxaena and Ace McWicked lack self-awareness and/or are unfair people who stack (cherry pick) information/arguments. Say it isn't so!Coffeedrinker2 (talk) 18:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Will there be a third coffee drinker? Shabi  DOO  18:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Recent comments
It seems a troll is adding comments to your talkpage using multiple accounts in a rather crude attempt to play both sides. I've reverted a few, but I won't contest it if you want to add them back. 17:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * fuck the troll. They are right. Oxy has got to leave. AceSimple Maze 17:52, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If it were a necessity for Oxy to leave, it probably would have happened by now.


 * RationalWiki has changed. Oxy is symptomatic of the change.Coffeedrinker2 (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Nah, we've always had weirdos like Oxy. If Oxyaena is banned, that would be a symptom of change.  Much like RobS' ban-Hastur! (talk)  19:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Template:Troll Collapse
Can just anyone hit-and-run this on talk pages? Like in this case? Do people who have opinions that conflict with those of other RW users who know "fancy" templates can get their opinion hidden at a whim? I'm writing here because I don't want to start an edit war. I want to express my opinion on the internet like any honest person and while this is a step above just deleting comments others don't like, it's not that far from it. --2A0B:F4C1:0:0:0:0:0:8 (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "But muh freeze peach onoz!" -- Goatspeed. 17:05, 11 February 2021 (UTC)


 * }

🇰🇪 still has nothing better to do
On July 24, 2020, the atheist PZ Myers wrote about atheism: "Deep rifts, ongoing fragmentation, and crumbling reputations seems to be the order of the day in atheism."

Your thoughts?JonathonWinters (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ummm.... I don’t care. AceSimple Maze 21:09, 20 February 2021 (UTC)


 * No one in the atheist world has given a shit about what PZ thinks for years. The man lives so far in the past and has alienated so many of his friends and colleagues that most have now lost all respect for him. And when were we ever not "divided"? Just because we all agree on one thing doesn't mean we agree on everything else. (Heck, while I know you'll probably just twist my words and quote-mine this as per usual, we atheists have a joke that trying to unite our community into one monolithic entity has always, and likely will always, be "like herding cats".) However, this does not mean that it isn't possible for us to form organizations that succeed in advocating for our rights. And also:


 * I don't know if you will read this in full, but I'll write it here nonetheless, since I have a day off work... Are you feeling fine? No no, don't roll your eyes at your screen, I'm not being snarky. It's rare that a day goes by when you don't come along to post something here to troll us. Why? Out of all the things you could be doing, like reading a book, playing a game, watching a movie/cat video or going for a run, why in the name of Goat do you feel the need to sit down, find some random link and post it here? It just seems... boring to me. The act is not visually engaging. It doesn't make a pleasant sound when you hit that "save" button. Nobody here actually cares. True, some of my mates will look and roll their eyes, but of the dozens of people who will see your material 99.9% won't even stop for a second to glance at your stuff.Now you are thinking to yourself: "But, but I made you guys ANGRY! Isn't that fun?!" Well, nobody is angry. We just feel mildly sad... "AHA! So I did trigger you snowflakes" No my friend, we don't feel sad because we were "destroyed" in a Ben Shapiro-esque manner by your logic and irrefutable, high-quality, trusworthy sources. We feel sad because every time you post here, we are reminded that there is someone out there in this world who is feeling alone and angry and that there is nothing we can do to help them. EVERY TIME I see one of your posts I feel like I have let you down stranger, because maybe there was something that I could have done to help you. Something to cheer you up in your boredom or your sadness; something to alleviate the crushing sense of loneliness and despair you are feeling every time you sit down in front of your computer to troll others. I look out my window and see the people right now, chatting with their friends, kissing their girlfriends, walking their dogs, taking their kids to school, and I know that you aren't one of those people Newton, I just know you aren't. Because if you did have friends who wanted to be near you, a certain someone who loved you, children you needed to care for, or just someplace fun to be, then the idea of trolling others on a wiki nobody reads wouldn't have been anywhere near the top of your to-do list. I am genuinely sorry I couldn't help you. Sincerely. The end. And I know you probably hate me right now; but I don't hate you back. Maybe at some other time I would, but I just can't find it in me right now. Goatspeed, Newton. - [4 tildes here] -- Goatspeed. 22:31, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't get why Ken thinks what some guy say says about atheism is somehow going to force me into questioning my belief system (or lack thereof). AceSimple Maze 22:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If Ken finds the right quote from the right person, he'll be able to singlehandedly destroy atheism forever. He doesn't need a reason to believe this. He has faith. 22:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Fuck off Ken Shabi  DOO  01:41, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Are you the Ace of legend?
I mean, of the old guard. The one who was around in the beginning. UninspiringNickname (talk) 22:37, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes. Yes I am. AceSimple Maze 23:01, 23 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I remember you well. I've been lurking for more than a decade (I no longer even have the foggiest idea of where I heard of RW to begin with), even if my account is more recent. I'm very happy to see you around, and even more motivated to stay (even if your profile picture threw me off. I always thought you looked like this :-)). I just thought you'd like to know. UninspiringNickname (talk) 23:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You thought I looked like Captain Flashhart? Be keen to know why. I did sit in a backseat at RW for awhile, couple years lurking and popping up sporadically but then I saw some horrible fucks derailing the RW ethos and have come back and a Mod ever since...AceSimple Maze 02:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll just say I meant that in the nicest possible way :-) I stopped lurking here for a bit (there were a few editors I couldn't stand to read, a Mona and some Ryu guy come to mind - sorry if they ever read this, but jeeze). I wouldn't mind at all a return to the old days of RW, some things have changed and maybe not for the best (how on Earth is there something so tragically wrong and anti-scientic like this doing here?) Are there more of the old guard around? UninspiringNickname (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Nutty Roux pops in now and again to talk about how shit the place is but I mainly chat with him via messenger and the occasional phone call. I'm friends with a bunch of the old guard on FB like Human, Pysgremlin (who is the only RW user I have met in person when I was in Johannesburg), Nutty, Sophie and few others. Like I said, yes the early days were pretty free wheeling I left for a bit but came back some fucktards were fucking with some long standing traditions. I got pretty pissed off at the time and my then girlfriend was concerned at my completely out of context and over the top physical rage when she asked why I had hurled a half empty beer can at a tree. AceSimple Maze 00:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Re. Captain Flashheart, you certainly seem to have his panache. If I'd expect someone to show up from an explosion to seduce another mans bride off from an altar, I'd think you'd be the prime suspect. And I mean that as a compliment. 00:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Any sentence containing the word "...explosion..." would no doubt have "...Ace..." also. AceSimple Maze 01:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Here you go!  01:46, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to picture Flashheart with an aussie / kiwi accent. I think it'd still fit the character, though. Is Brx now old-guard too? I'm well-impressed with his new self. UninspiringNickname (talk) 15:56, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * And, since you seem to travel a bit, if you ever find yourself on the northern regions of the saddest side of Europe, I'd be happy to buy you a shot of Devil's Blood (or two. or five). You can ask me what's in it, but I'm sure you'll like it. Just don't chuck the glasses at the nearby trees, ok? I'll get kicked out of the bar for good, they've been wary of me since I brought my ex there. UninspiringNickname (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Travel is out during this time of Covid. I was supposed to be in Hawaii right now. AceSimple Maze 21:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)