From my time interacting with the atheist science troll community (ASTs) I have seen the same responses, jibes and insults so many times that it clearly indicates a pattern. Indeed, some responses are very carefully worded and crafted yet Tweeted by people who, it turns out, didn’t even understand what they Tweeted. It would seem that many of these responses have been learned by wrote. Obviously, Atheist masters of the past won victory over some inadequately prepared Christians and their stinging rebukes or tactical rhetoric have passed on into Atheist Lore.
Based on the repeating patterns and levels of complexity I have begun to piece together the Atheist Science Troll Handbook. Note that it is possible to make combo attacks, such as combining 101 and 301. Which would be when an AST tells you that you are ignorant and then depends on a superficial understanding of the subject matter.
Section 100 Basic Insults
All phrases should be preceded by “You are…” “You are a…” or “You have…” so that the grammar works properly.
- 101 – you are ignorant
- 102 – you are as ignorant as bronze age goat molesters
- 103 – your ignorance is bronze-age
- 104 – you have the bronze-age goat herders best guess at the meaning of life
- 105 – you are as ignorant as goat herders who didn’t know where the sun went at night
- 106 – you are an ignorant goat herding retard
- 107 – you are as ignorant as primitive superstitious goat herders
- 108 – you are as ignorant as simplistic sheep and goat herders
- 109 – your ignorant stupidity
- 110 – That–I think you’ll agree–is the least of the many problems one faces when sharing Bronze Age folklore w/ an atheist in 2017.
- 120 – the Bible was written by ignorant goat herders
- 121 – the Bible was written by uneducated goat herders
- 122 – you have 2000 year old goat herder mentality
- 130 – you are illiterate.
- 131 – you are semi-literate.
- 132 – your demonstrated science illiteracy
- 133 – establishes your science illiteracy
- 134 – you are a science-illiterate lying liar who lies
- 135 – assumptions a layperson religist like you are unequipped intellectually and educationally to dismiss
- 136 – that comment reeks of a warped confirmation bias and a lack of knowledge plus a failure to comprehend the scientific method you criticize
- 137 – wrong again… like I said… your comprehensions/critical thinking skills are virtually non existent. Like your god
- 138 – no you do not or you would know that you are not equipped in any way to be an arbiter of truth re scientific theory. Only scientists do that
- 140 – you are a lying liar who lies
- 141 – your stupid and insipid claim…
- 142 – you are being dishonest
- 143 – and explains why you lie so much
- 144 – you always lie
Section 200 Basic Scientific Concepts
All phrases should be preceded by the accusation “You don’t understand…”
- 201 – evolution is not about origins
- 202 – evolution and abiogenesis are different things
- 203 – evolution is about change over time
- 204 – you don’t understand what evolution actually is
- 273 – you don’t understand basic science concepts
- 274 – you don’t understand evolution
- 275 – you don’t understand science
- 276 – your inanely stupid falsehoods about evolution
- 276 – you don’t understand that you don’t need a mass at F2.
- 277 – you don’t understand that you need to grasp the whole to get to the specifics.
- 278 – you don’t understand the word “scientifically”.
- 279 – you don’t understand uniformitarianism.
Section 300 Superficiality
When referring to basic science concepts doesn’t work ASTs are trained to resort to superficiality. This is an increased level of bluster and bravado to conceal the fact that there is absolutely no knowledge of the subject matter. The instruction in the manual must be “Just be superficial and glibly dismiss your opponent, then tell yourself that you won the argument.” Unfortunately, in making the glib dismissal the AST reveals that their grasp of the subject matter is superficial. It’s an ironic example of circular reasoning.
- 301 – Apply superficiality.
- 302 – Tell me how physics is wrong about constant radioactive decay rates.
- 303 – Dating methods were not developed to specifically determine that the earth is old.
- 304 – Radio carbon dating has been cross-confirmed using tree ring dating, etc.
- 305 – Radiometric dating is consistent with Milankovitch cycles, which depend only on astronomical factors.
- 306 – Radiometric dating is consistent with the luminescence dating method.
- 310 – If hell is expanding then it would be cooling.
- 311 – The expansion of hell must be endothermic.
Section 400 Uniformitarianism
Some ASTs attempt to push on into knowledge based discussions. These can play out with hilarious consequences. Frequently ASTs resort to 19th Century Uniformitarianism as a way to oppose the reality of a young earth. The basic idea of Uniformitarianism is that the conditions on earth that we see today have persisted for such an enormous amount of time (measured on the geological scale) that measurements that we make to day are a good predictor of the condition at any time in the past that we happen to be arguing about.
- 421 – The calculations in the articles are based on the observed distribution of radioactive isotopes in earth.
- 451 – Rapid decay would have melted the entire earth.
- 452 – You’ll just claim that radioisotopes were concentrated in the core, but that doesn’t fit today’s observations.
Section 500 Foundational Theories
These are the pillars of the theoretical foundation of modern science that all ASTs believe. They are all wrong. However, everybody believes it anyway, they just don’t know why.
- 501 – The gravitational constant.
- 511 – Heliocentricity.
- 512 – Proof only exists in the area of mathematics. The evidence of heliocentricity is overwhelming.
- 521 – Stars are suns.
- 531 – The decay constant.
- 541 – The evolutionary origin of humanity.
Section 600 Super Superficiality
This is when an AST has had enough of a whoopin’ and they are just desperately hanging on so that they can be the last person to post in a thread and claim victory. It’s pathetic, and they start to throw out a lot of insults and profanity. The appeal to superficiality is in the form of a rejection of one of my blog posts as a source of anything worth considering. This is ironic, because I have spent 20+ years researching the work in my blog, but the ASTs will think nothing of posting the first article they find on a google search, even though they haven’t read it and aren’t familiar with the nuances of concept or meaning.
The real irony is when, in 503 for example, the AST is complaining that they want links to “real peer-reviewed research,” when the post is a list of links to “real peer-reviewed research.” An appeal to peer-review is the AST version of “special pleading.”
The Pink Unicorn defense happens right before an AST stops posting, having suffered such an overwhelming defeat that they attempt to trivialize the entire discussion.
- 600 – I’m not goin to visit your little blog
- 601 – The only thing you send me is your sad blog
- 602 – You gave me apologist gobbled gook in your blog
- 603 – Show evidence from the ocean depths not your crackpot blog
- 604 – Links to your own crackpot blog aren’t scientific basis
- 605 – Prove it. And not with some Christian blog
- 606 – Do you have a retarded blog post explaining this fresh idiocy?
- 607 – Do you have any other evidence other than your ridiculous blog?
- 630 – It’s just that it isn’t really necessary to bother giving a detailed debunk to an unfounded assertion
- 650 – Get some peer-reviewed research out there
- 666 – and you can’t prove I don’t have Pink (rainbow or unspecified color) unicorns
- 667 – prove to me I don’t have an invisible dragon living in my garage
- 668 – next week finding unicorns using felching!
- 669 – The existence of goblins, fairies, werewolves, leprechauns, poltergeists, psychics and gods has never been proven.
- 670 – I could just say dinosaurs live in my backyard.
- 690 – The napkin religion is the one true religion because it says so right on this napkin.