OT: Low-IQ Simulation of the Month (Sep. 2018)

[Peter Nyikos]

Last week, I did a similar post to this one, using "Simulator" rather than
"Simulation", but I am withdrawing that award for a number of reasons [1],
and substituting this one. As with the other one, this is a nomination
and I welcome other nominations.

[1] One is that it focuses on a single post rather than a person,
and thus is not burdened with implications that there are other
simulations by the same person during the month. Other reasons
will be given in a subsequent post to this thread.

The post that is being nominated is the following:


https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/zFfUhJZG1dk/DzvlbkV7CQAJ
Subject: Re: OT: The Casanova-Jillery-Oxyaena Axis
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 13:58:26 -0400
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <pnopvq$3p4$2...@news.albasani.net>

Unfortunately, the post I've linked is not self-contained,
so I am replying to it here with some necessary additional information.

_______________________ begin reply__________________________

On Monday, September 17, 2018 at 2:00:03 PM UTC-4, Oxyaena wrote:
> On 9/17/2018 12:45 PM, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 13, 2018 at 3:05:03 PM UTC-4, Oxyaena wrote:

> >> Comparing me to Nazis pure bullshit,
> >
> >
> > Watch me compare you to Donald Trump.
>
> Psychological projection noted.

This singularly inappropriate rejoinder simulated a low-IQ misunderstanding
of the following one-line comparison of Oxyaena with Trump:

> > I am sure you both exist.

The point I was making here was how utterly ridiculous
Oxyaena's use of the word "comparing" was. The quote
below explains that further.


>
> https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law
>
> You've just forfeited the argument by calling me a Nazi.

This silly comment simulated a low-IQ misuse of "calling me a ______",
inasmuch as my only mention of anything connected
to Nazis in the whole thread was at the beginning of the OP:

The Subject line is, of course, reminiscent of the
Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis and the "Axis of Evil" which
included North Korea and Iran. The Axis in the
Subject line could be called "The Axis of Pretending
That Truth Is Falsehood, And Falsehood Is Truth."

================ end of reply ====================

Back on the original thread, Oxyaena gave tortuous rationalizations
for why I supposedly associated her with Nazis, but they fell
well short of the criterion for "calling me a Nazi," hence
the evidence for that being a low-IQ simulation remains unscathed.


Peter Nyikos

[vtand...@gmail.com]

I don't think she has a low IQ. I think she is taking illegal drugs. She exhibits the extreme excitability, hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or Methaphetamines.

[vtand...@gmail.com]

I also think she is an habitual LIAR.

[Oxyaena]

[snip off-topic spam]

Is it your life's work to fuck with me?

[vtand...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 2:25:03 AM UTC-7, Oxyaena wrote:
> [snip off-topic spam]
>
> Is it your life's work to fuck with me?

Obviously, you don't consider personal insults "off-topic" when you throw them at us. Right, hypocrite?

[Oxyaena]

"The Subject line is, of course, reminiscent of the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis
and the "Axis of Evil" which included North Korea and Iran. The Axis in the
Subject line could be called "The Axis of Pretending That Truth Is
Falsehood,
And Falsehood Is Truth."

Bob Casanova in particular has had lots of fun acting the role.
The incident which sparked an orgy of it was initiated by
the following pretense by Oxyaena, repeatedly supported by Bob.

Oxyaena pretended that the following was true:

In short, another demonstration of your
dishonesty, blatant distorting of the facts, and outright slander.
I could sue you for libel, Peter, but unlike you I`m a decent person so
I won't.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/Xub9hqEyM0A/l7gpBG1zCAAJ


The "demonstration" consisted exclusively of the following statement by
myself:

you *also* showed your ignorance about when life
could reasonably be expected to arise and evolve in our universe.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/jI6KRtcqX30/0E97QgICBwAJ


That ignorance was exemplified by the following statement, which Oxyaena
kept pretending to be true:

Considering that the universe is only 13.8 billion years old, and the
universe only settled down enough for life to develop some 4.5 Ga, ala
when our Solar System formed, this makes sense.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/talk.origins/jI6KRtcqX30/AFA8Mn3LBQAJ


While the opening clause is as close to the truth as any estimate of
the age of the universe, the rest is, to put it mildly, way lower
than all respectable estimates. I gave a rather lengthy explanation
of that here, where all of the above were analyzed:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/Xub9hqEyM0A/l7gpBG1zCAAJ
Subject: Re: The evolution of the bacterial flagellum: For Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2018 10:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <8174902f-492c-4d99...@googlegroups.com>

Jillery actually concurred with the bulk of my analysis, and
Oxyaena went along with that, inasmuch as jillery gave no
clue whatsoever that she was elaaborating on something I had
written. Perhaps she didn't even realize she was doing it.

But both of them stuck tenaciously to the claim
that I had libeled Oxyaena.


Since then, there has been a veritable orgy of pretending that
truth is falsehood, and falsehood truth, most of it going
back to Oxyaena's pretense described above on the "...bacterial
flagellum... thread, and most of the rest to be found in the
"More Dawkins" thread.


All of which goes to demonstrate what a hellhole talk.origins
could become if most participants were as vocally unscrupulous as this
"Axis."
Fortunately, only a very small minority are.


Peter Nyikos
Professor, Department of Math. -- standard disclaimer --
U. of South Carolina"

The nomination is put forward by Oxyaena in honor Peter "King of Deceit"
Nyikos, in recognition of his paranoid tendencies and irrational hatred
of a small section of the posters of talk.origins. Here is a LOW-IQ
simulation of him libeling three individuals, imagining that they were
all part of a conspiracy (or "axis", a la Godwin's Law) against him.

[jillery]

My impression is you're projecting your own personal flaws and
history.

--
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Attributed to Voltaire

[jillery]

To paraphrase someone you hold in high regard: He was talking to
Nyikos the peter, one person.

And how is it that you get your panties in a twist over Oxyaena's
alleged insults, but completely ignore those posted Nyikos the peter?
Or for that matter, yourself? Tu quoque much?

[vtand...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 4:25:02 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 03:04:33 -0700 (PDT), vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 2:25:03 AM UTC-7, Oxyaena wrote:
> >> [snip off-topic spam]
> >>
> >> Is it your life's work to fuck with me?
> >
> >Obviously, you don't consider personal insults "off-topic" when you throw them at us. Right, hypocrite?
>
>
> To paraphrase someone you hold in high regard: He was talking to
> Nyikos the peter, one person.
>
> And how is it that you get your panties in a twist over Oxyaena's
> alleged insults, but completely ignore those posted Nyikos the peter?
> Or for that matter, yourself? Tu quoque much?
>
> --

Don't tell me what to post, you fucking asshole.

[vtand...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 4:15:03 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT), vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 2:05:03 PM UTC-7, vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> I don't think she has a low IQ. I think she is taking illegal drugs. She exhibits the extreme excitability, hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or Methaphetamines.
> >
> >I also think she is an habitual LIAR.
>
>
> My impression is you're projecting your own personal flaws and
> history.
>
> --

So what?

[jillery]

Never have, never will, you fucking asshole.

[jillery]

So you admit you take illegal drugs, and exhibit extreme excitability,

hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or

Methaphetamines, and also think you're a habitual LIAR.

So that's what. You're welcome.

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:47:02 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.user>:

Sorry, but even though I'm part of the subject of Peter's
rant I can't support this as award material; it's simply too
common in his posts.

--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Bob Casanova]

On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:45:20 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Peter Nyikos
<nyi...@bellsouth.net>:

I agree that your post is exactly as you characterize it in
your chosen "Subject:" field.

[Peter Nyikos]

That's why I wrote "simulation". Oxyaena is simulating someone with
a very low IQ -- whether intentionally or unintentionally, I do not know.

> I think she is taking illegal drugs. She exhibits the extreme excitability, hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or Methaphetamines.

This is possible, but it is also possible that Oxyaena is subject
to extreme mood swings typical of certain forms of bipolar disorder.
The old term for bipolar disorder is "manic-depressive psychosis,"
but I think nowadays it is not classed as a psychosis.

Here is something Oxyaena wrote at one point last week:

I *hate* these flame wars, and
I WANT THEM TO FUCKING STOP. STOP. STOP. Just fucking STOP.
I'd get more enjoyment out of burning myself alive than I would
from you flaming me.

Up to that last sentence she may have been sincerely expressing her momentary
feelings, but that last sentence inadvertently gave her long-term
game away: as you saw on a thread where Oxyaena attacked both of us
AFTER she posted this, the enjoyment she gets out of flaming people
evidently far exceeds the discomfort of being flamed by them.

And so, her comment about wanting the flamewars to stop translates
simply into her wanting me to stop exposing her libels, her cowardice,
her illogic, and her (possibly unintentional) low-IQ simulations.

Peter Nyikos

PS The post by Oxyaena from which I took that quote does seem to suggest
a person out of control in the midst of a drug binge. I'll let
you judge for yourself how little or how much out of touch with
reality Oxyaena seems to be in it:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/Rm4t6MoUezE/_zeCgIbQCQAJ
Subject: Re: OT: Below-50-IQ Simulator of the Month (Nomination)
Lines: 206
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:58:04 -0400
Message-ID: <pnu67h$sk1$1...@news.albasani.net>

[Peter Nyikos]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 11:10:03 AM UTC-4, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:47:02 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.user>:
>
> Sorry, but even though I'm part of the subject of Peter's
> rant I can't support this as award material; it's simply too
> common in his posts.

Wrong, Bob. I almost *never* have such an open-and-shut case for
the two of you pretending that truth is falsehood, and falsehood
truth. Oxyaena reposted the open-and-shut case against herself below,
and now you've done some of my work for my case against you.

More about that if you disagree with what I wrote just now.
For now, I will show how Oxyaena actually *strengthened* my open-and-shut
case against her.

Oxyaena is using "paranoid" in the standard way scoundrels like the three
individuals use it: as a talisman to ward off legitimate criticism.
Back when she went by a different moniker beginning with "Thri" and ending in
"odon," Oxyaena voluminously demonstrated irrational hatred towards me which
I did not reciprocate

> > Here is a LOW-IQ
> >simulation of him libeling three individuals,

The above is, LITERALLY, a simulation, because I am documenting nothing
but the truth about Oxyaena; and I can easily document
the truth of what I said about you, Bob, and about Jillery too.

And so, Oxyaena is simulating a belief that these documented truths
are libels. IOW, pretending that truth is falsehood, and falsehood truth.

> > imagining that they were
> >all part of a conspiracy (or "axis", a la Godwin's Law) against him.

Oxyaena is not only inept at reading my mind here: she is actually
saying something that I refuted in the following post about
the talisman "conspiracy" that Oxyaena is using to ward off the
truth about herself:


https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/zFfUhJZG1dk/1p5ZeCA3CAAJ

Subject: Re: OT: The Casanova-Jillery-Oxyaena Axis

Lines: 53
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 07:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <62905dba-c872-4c4f...@googlegroups.com>


Peter Nyikos

[Peter Nyikos]

Jillery's comments in the post to which I am replying are being
nominated.

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 8:10:03 AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 04:36:00 -0700 (PDT), vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 4:15:03 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
> >> On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT), vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 2:05:03 PM UTC-7, vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >> I don't think she has a low IQ. I think she is taking illegal drugs. She exhibits the extreme excitability, hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or Methaphetamines.
> >> >
> >> >I also think she is an habitual LIAR.
> >>
> >>
> >> My impression is you're projecting your own personal flaws and
> >> history.
> >>
> >> --
> >So what?
>

I am nominating the following low-IQ simulation by you:

> So you admit you take illegal drugs, and exhibit extreme excitability,
> hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or
> Methaphetamines, and also think you're a habitual LIAR.

> So that's what. You're welcome.

You had been telling Vtandofsky what your IMPRESSION was. He was saying,
in effect:

So that's your impression -- so what?

People make far less obvious blunders about you than the one you made just now,
and you very competently nail them for the kind of illogic you have displayed.
I know you don't have a low IQ -- but you sure simulated having one.


Peter Nyikos

PS At the moment, I can't judge which of my two nominations is better;
as with Chez Watt, others might have their own ideas as to which
better simulates a low IQ. And there is still time in September for
more nominations to materialize.

[Oxyaena]

I still hold to it that the title of your "award" is extremely ableist,
and would likely get you socked in the face by anyone who actually
suffers from intellectual disabilities.

>
>> I think she is taking illegal drugs. She exhibits the extreme excitability, hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or Methaphetamines.
>
> This is possible, but it is also possible that Oxyaena is subject
> to extreme mood swings typical of certain forms of bipolar disorder.
> The old term for bipolar disorder is "manic-depressive psychosis,"
> but I think nowadays it is not classed as a psychosis.
>
> Here is something Oxyaena wrote at one point last week:
>
> I *hate* these flame wars, and
> I WANT THEM TO FUCKING STOP. STOP. STOP. Just fucking STOP.
> I'd get more enjoyment out of burning myself alive than I would
> from you flaming me.
>
> Up to that last sentence she may have been sincerely expressing her momentary
> feelings, but that last sentence inadvertently gave her long-term
> game away: as you saw on a thread where Oxyaena attacked both of us
> AFTER she posted this, the enjoyment she gets out of flaming people
> evidently far exceeds the discomfort of being flamed by them.

Can you stop baselessly speculating about me? You know nothing about me,
and here you continue your years-long campaign of shitting all over me.
Fuck you.

>
> And so, her comment about wanting the flamewars to stop translates
> simply into her wanting me to stop exposing her libels, her cowardice,
> her illogic, and her (possibly unintentional) low-IQ simulations.

Your over-inflated sense of accomplishment and self-worth duly noted.

>
> Peter Nyikos
>
> PS The post by Oxyaena from which I took that quote does seem to suggest
> a person out of control in the midst of a drug binge. I'll let
> you judge for yourself how little or how much out of touch with
> reality Oxyaena seems to be in it:

Since when has "justifiable aggravation" turned into "drug-induced
rage." Since now, apparently. (Or alternatively, and far more likely, is
that two implacable trolls are taking turns taking potshots at me.)

[zencycle]

On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 4:50:03 PM UTC-4, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> Last week, I did a similar post to this one, using "Simulator" rather than
> "Simulation", but I am withdrawing that award for a number of reasons [1],
> and substituting this one. As with the other one, this is a nomination
> and I welcome other nominations.
>

I nominate both of these "simulation" posts for this years biggest waste of bandwidth.

[Oxyaena]

Seconded.

[Peter Nyikos]

I hope you think differently about the following nomination, where
I caught jillery doing the sort of thing that made you quit
talking to her in disgust a while back:

_________________________ repost _______________________________

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 8:10:03 AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 04:36:00 -0700 (PDT), vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 4:15:03 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
> >> On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT), vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 2:05:03 PM UTC-7, vtand...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >> I don't think she has a low IQ. I think she is taking illegal drugs. She exhibits the extreme excitability, hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or Methaphetamines.
> >> >
> >> >I also think she is an habitual LIAR.
> >>
> >>
> >> My impression is you're projecting your own personal flaws and
> >> history.
> >>
> >> --
> >So what?
>

I am nominating the following low-IQ simulation by you:

> So you admit you take illegal drugs, and exhibit extreme excitability,

> hyperactivity and poor concentration of someone taking Cocaine or

> Methaphetamines, and also think you're a habitual LIAR.


> So that's what. You're welcome.


You had been telling Vtandofsky what your IMPRESSION was. He was saying,
in effect:

So that's your impression -- so what?

People make far less obvious blunders about you than the one you made just now,
and you very competently nail them for the kind of illogic you have displayed.
I know you don't have a low IQ -- but you sure simulated having one.


Peter Nyikos

PS At the moment, I can't judge which of my two nominations is better;
as with Chez Watt, others might have their own ideas as to which
better simulates a low IQ. And there is still time in September for
more nominations to materialize.

================================== end of repost of post archived
in
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/talk.origins/IuWbwG0En70/3PlqO9OlCwAJ
Subject: Re: OT: Low-IQ Simulation of the Month (Sep. 2018), Nomination Number Two
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <9b91bb3f-81f9-46a4...@googlegroups.com>


You may have missed it, if you have a newsreader which
starts a new thread with every change of Subject line.


Peter Nyikos

[Oxyaena]

Obviously you know next to nothing about *actual* cognitive science.
What you think "simulates" a low IQ is not an actual simulation of
people with low IQs, what instead would be better described with:

a) being literal-minded

b) tired of dealing with your word games

c) tired of your fucking bullshit

d) sick of your ableist crap

You've obviously never met a person with a low IQ, have you, Peter? At
least most of them have common decency, something you don't.

[Peter Nyikos]

"evidently" is based on the mountain of hate you've leveled my
way (and, to a lesser extent, viandofsky's way) not just here
but also in sci.bio.paleontology AFTER you posted the above.


You even took to telling Harshman falsehoods about me behind my back
in a thread you set up in s.b.p.

You are a glutton for punishment. Do you imagine that people
are supposed to roll over and play dead when you tell one falsehood
after another about them?

>
> Can you stop baselessly speculating about me? You know nothing about me,

As your loyal defender Mark Isaak put it, actions speak louder than words.
Your actions in deciding a number of years ago to mercilessly attack
me for unknown reasons, and your numerous libels about me this past year,
and you inept handling of so many scientific issues, tell an awful lot
about you.

> and here you continue your years-long campaign of shitting all over me.

I only started to retaliate in earnest after a year of you puking all
over me, and even after that, you puked all over me far more than I
denounced you for dishonestly doing it. [This denouncing is what you
call "shitting".]


> Fuck you.

You forgot to add, "... you goddamn moralist."

>
> >
> > And so, her comment about wanting the flamewars to stop translates
> > simply into her wanting me to stop exposing her libels, her cowardice,
> > her illogic, and her (possibly unintentional) low-IQ simulations.
>
>
> Your over-inflated sense of accomplishment and self-worth duly noted.

Farcical description of what I actually wrote, duly noted.

>
>
> >
> > Peter Nyikos
> >
> > PS The post by Oxyaena from which I took that quote does seem to suggest
> > a person out of control in the midst of a drug binge. I'll let
> > you judge for yourself how little or how much out of touch with
> > reality Oxyaena seems to be in it:
>
>
> Since when has "justifiable aggravation" turned into "drug-induced
> rage."

Since libels were counted as "justifiable aggravation." IOW, in
The World According to Oxyaena, Formerly Banned by DIG
when you posted utter bilge under a different moniker.

> Since now, apparently. (Or alternatively, and far more likely, is
> that two implacable trolls are taking turns taking potshots at me.)

Correction: you've been gleefully and trollingly taking potshots at the two
of us in other threads. You can dish it out, but you can't take it.

You are so bad at taking it, you are projecting your trollhood onto us.

This was the post from which your rant was taken:

> >
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/Rm4t6MoUezE/_zeCgIbQCQAJ
> > Subject: Re: OT: Below-50-IQ Simulator of the Month (Nomination)
> > Lines: 206
> > Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:58:04 -0400
> > Message-ID: <pnu67h$sk1$1...@news.albasani.net>

And then there is the OP which you self-destructively reposted to
this thread from the thread about Casanova and Jillery and yourself.
You ARE a glutton for punishment.

Peter Nyikos

[zencycle]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 4:20:04 PM UTC-4, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 2:50:03 PM UTC-4, zencycle wrote:
> >
> > I nominate both of these "simulation" posts for this years biggest waste of bandwidth.
>
> I hope you think differently about the following nomination, where
> I caught jillery doing the sort of thing that made you quit
> talking to her in disgust a while back:

This will be my last 'contribution' to this thread, since I don't want to get caught up in the irony of contributing to the waste of bandwidth -

Jillery and I were in an exchange regarding an issue salient to the purpose of this news group.

These two threads are total garbage: Not only completely off topic but created with the purpose of _attempting_ to humiliate another member of the group.

At least if these threads were rooted in threads germane to T.O, you might have some justification in claiming those precursors were worthy of some some sort of dubious distinction.

But the precursor to these two threads was itself an off-topic rant started by you that contained nothing but attacks on other members of the group.

The fact that you've now posted three off-topic threads that are obvious attempts to sooth your damaged ego really doesn't paint you in a very positive light.

So, no, I don't think differently of these two threads. They're a complete waste of bandwidth, and if I were a moderator, they would be ferme.

[satoshi]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 3:20:03 PM UTC-6, zencycle wrote:
> if I were a moderator

...

[jillery]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 13:19:43 -0700 (PDT), Peter Nyikos
<nyi...@bellsouth.net> continued to ejaculate his
repetitive irrelevant spew from his puckered sphincter:

>On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 2:50:03 PM UTC-4, zencycle wrote:
>> On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 4:50:03 PM UTC-4, Peter Nyikos wrote:
>> > Last week, I did a similar post to this one, using "Simulator" rather than
>> > "Simulation", but I am withdrawing that award for a number of reasons [1],
>> > and substituting this one. As with the other one, this is a nomination
>> > and I welcome other nominations.
>> >
>>
>> I nominate both of these "simulation" posts for this years biggest waste of bandwidth.
>
>I hope you think differently about the following nomination, where
>I caught jillery doing the sort of thing that made you quit
>talking to her in disgust a while back:

Liar.

[jillery]

You could as correctly include almost any of Nyikos the peter's posts.

[jillery]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:01:47 -0700 (PDT), Peter Nyikos

<nyi...@bellsouth.net> continued to ejaculate his
repetitive irrelevant spew from his puckered sphincter:

<snip irrelevant spew>

>The above is, LITERALLY, a simulation, because I am documenting nothing
>but the truth about Oxyaena; and I can easily document
>the truth of what I said about you, Bob, and about Jillery too.

Really? I challenged you to document the truth of what you said about
me at the time you first posted it. As of this posting, you haven't
even replied to my challenge, nevermind documented any truth to your
self-serving Big Lie. And it's almost certain that you never will,
because you lack the personal integrity and honesty to do so. That's
another characteristic you share with your strange bedfellows.

More generally, what you posted is exactly the kind of trivial
pedantic molehill on which you build your Big Lies. Even if you
showed what you claim is an actual lie, a falsehood with intent to
deceive, it doesn't even rise to the level of Truth. It is at most a
difference of opinion on what was the most likely case in the past,
for which the most that can be shown is the best inference based on
current evidence, about which people in good faith can reasonably
disagree.

But NOTA stops you from posting and re-posting your Big Lies into
threads and topics they have nothing to do with, without even once
backing them up. That's how you continue to ejaculate your repetitive
irrelevant spew from your puckered sphincter.

<snip remaining irrelevant spew>

[jillery]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:15:56 -0700 (PDT), Peter Nyikos

<nyi...@bellsouth.net> continued to ejaculate his
repetitive irrelevant spew from his puckered sphincter:

<snip spew>

>PS At the moment, I can't judge which of my two nominations is better;
>as with Chez Watt, others might have their own ideas as to which
>better simulates a low IQ. And there is still time in September for
>more nominations to materialize.

In your haste to post yet another Big Lie, you conveniently forgot to
identify what you think is my blunder. For someone who proves time
and again your inability to read minds, you're very confident in your
interpretation of V's vague challenge. And since it wasn't you who
posted it, but instead was posted by someone who delights in being
deliberately vague, my impression is you're just whistling in the
dark.

This is exactly the kind of trivial pedantic molehill on which you

build your Big Lies. Even if you showed what you claim is an actual
lie, a falsehood with intent to deceive, it doesn't even rise to the

level of Truth. Your version is at most an interpretation of a vague
challenge, and not even the most likely interpretation. My impression
is V isn't capable of the nuanced meaning you describe, but instead
posted his two word phrase as a mindless retort because he had nothing
intelligent to say.

But that won't stop you from posting and re-posting your Big Lie into
threads and topics it has nothing to do with, without even once
backing it up. That's how you continue to ejaculate your repetitive

irrelevant spew from your puckered sphincter.

[Oxyaena]

In the category of "could this line of reasoning be any less insane":

[Oxyaena]

On 9/25/2018 4:44 PM, Peter Nyikos falsely accused Oxyaena of the following:

V deserves it, he's an utter troll who cracks and insults us whenever we
refute his nonsense and demand proof of his allegations, sort of a less
sophisticated version of yourself.

>
> You even took to telling Harshman falsehoods about me behind my back
> in a thread you set up in s.b.p.

Documentation please.

>
> You are a glutton for punishment. Do you imagine that people
> are supposed to roll over and play dead when you tell one falsehood
> after another about them?

Do *you*? Because I haven't been lying about anybody, *you* have.

>
>
>>
>> Can you stop baselessly speculating about me? You know nothing about me,
>
>
> As your loyal defender Mark Isaak put it, actions speak louder than words.
> Your actions in deciding a number of years ago to mercilessly attack
> me for unknown reasons, and your numerous libels about me this past year,
> and you inept handling of so many scientific issues, tell an awful lot

> about you.\


Like your utterly inept handling of the issue of irreducible complexity
and abiogenesis at the hands of zencycle and myself, you hypocritical fuck.

>
>
>> and here you continue your years-long campaign of shitting all over me.
>
> I only started to retaliate in earnest after a year of you puking all
> over me, and even after that, you puked all over me far more than I
> denounced you for dishonestly doing it. [This denouncing is what you
> call "shitting".]

As I've told you before, and as you've snipped and ignored before, I
wouldn't be so hostile towards you if and only if you knocked this shit
off.

>
>
>> Fuck you.
>
> You forgot to add, "... you goddamn moralist."

You're not a "goddamn moralist" in any sense of the word, you're more of
a "goddamn troll".

>
>>
>>>
>>> And so, her comment about wanting the flamewars to stop translates
>>> simply into her wanting me to stop exposing her libels, her cowardice,
>>> her illogic, and her (possibly unintentional) low-IQ simulations.
>>
>>
>> Your over-inflated sense of accomplishment and self-worth duly noted.
>
> Farcical description of what I actually wrote, duly noted.
>
>

Peter's denial of the obvious duly noted.

>>
>>
>>>
>>> Peter Nyikos
>>>
>>> PS The post by Oxyaena from which I took that quote does seem to suggest
>>> a person out of control in the midst of a drug binge. I'll let
>>> you judge for yourself how little or how much out of touch with
>>> reality Oxyaena seems to be in it:
>>
>>
>> Since when has "justifiable aggravation" turned into "drug-induced
>> rage."
>
> Since libels were counted as "justifiable aggravation."

Document just one of these so-called "libels". I dare you.

> IOW in, The World According to Oxyaena, Formerly Banned by DIG

> when you posted utter bilge under a different moniker.
>

The only purpose of this mindless retort was to insult me. Classy.

>
>> Since now, apparently. (Or alternatively, and far more likely, is
>> that two implacable trolls are taking turns taking potshots at me.)
>
> Correction: you've been gleefully and trollingly taking potshots at the two
> of us in other threads. You can dish it out, but you can't take it.

I've been "trolling" the guy who accuses me of being a drug addict, fuck
you.

>
> You are so bad at taking it, you are projecting your trollhood onto us.

Psychological projection noted.

>
> This was the post from which your rant was taken:
>>>
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/Rm4t6MoUezE/_zeCgIbQCQAJ
>>> Subject: Re: OT: Below-50-IQ Simulator of the Month (Nomination)
>>> Lines: 206
>>> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:58:04 -0400
>>> Message-ID: <pnu67h$sk1$1...@news.albasani.net>
>
> And then there is the OP which you self-destructively reposted to
> this thread from the thread about Casanova and Jillery and yourself.

That OP was filled with nothing but insults toward us.

> You ARE a glutton for punishment.

You're far more of a glutton for punishment than I am. What response did
you expect, in a thread dedicated to humiliating me?


>
> Peter "King of Deceit" Nyikos
>

[Oxyaena]

On 9/25/2018 2:15 PM, Peter Nyikos wrote:
[snip mindless bullshit]

None of us did anything of the sort that you're accusing us of, and
you're original "nomination" was taken from a thread dedicated to
attempting to humiliate us, which hasn't worked BTW, to heal your
bruised ego, you fucking narcissist. You're projecting your narcissistic
rage unto us, the targets of your irrational, paranoid hatred.

[vtand...@gmail.com]

There is another issue, too. Both Oxyaena and jillery show very poor reading comprehension, as you just proved above. When I talk about someone else, they
mistake it for comments about myself. and call it "projection."

[satoshi]

On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 2:50:03 PM UTC-6, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> Last week, I did a similar post to this one, using "Simulator" rather than
> "Simulation", but I am withdrawing that award for a number of reasons [1],
> and substituting this one. As with the other one, this is a nomination
> and I welcome other nominations.
>
> [1] One is that it focuses on a single post rather than a person,
> and thus is not burdened with implications that there are other
> simulations by the same person during the month. Other reasons
> will be given in a subsequent post to this thread.
>
> The post that is being nominated is the following:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcIoHNzzbLk

[jillery]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 02:21:00 -0400, Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.user>
wrote:

>In the category of "could this line of reasoning be any less insane":

You might want to review past Chez Watts, if only to get a better
sense of what qualifies. Although you nomination certainly is a
head-scratcher, my impression is it's too long to develop the
necessary snap. It's like the difference between a shaggy-dog story
and a pun.

Also, Nyikos the peter has been posting that kind of repetitive spew
for a long time now, so it almost never rates a second glance.

Of course, I could be wrong.

[jillery]

It's so nice that you two strange bedfellows finally found each other.
You have so much in common.

[satoshi]

you guys act like peas in pod here

[jillery]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 07:04:37 -0700 (PDT), satoshi
<biggda...@gmail.com> wrote:

>you guys act like peas in pod here

You're entitled to your opinion.

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:49:01 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by zencycle
<funkma...@hotmail.com>:

Haven't been following satoshi/StanFast, have you? ;-)

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:01:47 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Peter Nyikos
<nyi...@bellsouth.net>:

>On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 11:10:03 AM UTC-4, Bob Casanova wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:47:02 -0400, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.user>:
>>
>> Sorry, but even though I'm part of the subject of Peter's
>> rant I can't support this as award material; it's simply too
>> common in his posts.
>
>Wrong, Bob. I almost *never* have such an open-and-shut case for
>the two of you pretending that truth is falsehood, and falsehood
>truth. Oxyaena reposted the open-and-shut case against herself below,
>and now you've done some of my work for my case against you.

Your "open-and-shut case" is the product of your
imagination, based apparently on misinterpretations of posts
filtered through the paranoia you exhibit when contradicted
and/or challenged, and your accusations, implicit *and*
explicit, of "collusion" among those who contradict and/or
challenge your assertions. Keep that in mind. Also keep in
mind that I disagreed several times with the
characterization of your posts as either "libel" or
"slander", and even had a discussion about it.

>More about that if you disagree with what I wrote just now.
>For now, I will show

....for values of "show"...

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:22:16 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by satoshi
<biggda...@gmail.com>:

>On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 3:20:03 PM UTC-6, zencycle wrote:

>> if I were a moderator

>...

That's the most intelligent thing I've seen from you so far.

Ellipses rule!

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:15:56 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Peter Nyikos
<nyi...@bellsouth.net>:

<snip Peterisms>

>At the moment, I can't judge which of my two nominations is better;

Neither is worth the time to read it; HTH.