duderonomy Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 This is just for fun and entertainment, but I have to wonder if 'redross' and 'Asimov' are the same person. Here are the clues... 1) They both have the same style of nit-picky debating. 2) They both have the same style of writing in their posts. 3) Asimov has a Swastika in his signature. redross spelled backwards could be seen as 'ss order'. 4) One says 'he he...Jerk', while the other says 'hahaha...Jerk' 5) Asimov in one post says to redross that they have a lot in common...'we agree on nearly every issue', and thus have no room to debate each other. 6) On one thread, Asimov explains to me what redross 'means' in a certain post, although redross himself has never failed to represent himself with no help needed...like hiding in plain site, if you will. 7) Has Asimov not always posted with an avatar showing Jesus in some way, and recently hasn't he been seen here with a new avatar showing Jesus? Redross also has such an avatar. Either way, right or wrong, I seem to have WAY too much time on my hands right now! Duder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redross Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Haha. The truth is, we've been best friends since junior high. We talk very often and agree on a lot of the same issues because we think the same way and have discussed many of the issues covered on this site privately. He is more informed on matters of theology than I, and I am more informed on matters of philosophy than he. Together, we are a great team that challenges one another. We often play devil's advocate just to push the other person to explain his position clearly. We are not the same person; we do actually disagree on some stuff (although that stuff usually only concerns degrees of punishment. I'm the more radical). I'm glad I've made some impression on this site. BTW, thanks for (6). I try to represent myself adequately. You still have a great name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 (although that stuff usually only concerns degrees of punishment. I'm the more radical). What could be more "radical" than sticking it in someone's butt for punishment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 What could be more "radical" than sticking it in someone's butt for punishment? Stickng it in someone's butt sideways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Duder... very insightful! Wow... nothing gets past you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 6) On one thread, Asimov explains to me what redross 'means' in a certain post, although redross himself has never failed to represent himself with no help needed...like hiding in plain site, if you will. Yes, I felt it was necessary at the time since ryan was limited in the responses he could make (due to an issue) and I felt like I knew what he was talking about. We do have a lot in common...except I'm sexier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachelness Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 This is all very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted October 11, 2006 Author Share Posted October 11, 2006 Thanks for responding redross and Asimov (and others). I'm not ready to let go of this quite yet though, because since I've become an Ex-Christian, conspiracy theories are hard to come by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Why did Asimov answer a post that was clearly addressed to redross? Redross, I'm curious to know if you think that as a society, should we show any signs of compassion at all? Should retribution be the total foundations on which we stand? What message would that send to society? How are these comments above different than how the "criminal" thinks? Compassion goes to victims of immorality. Why should we show compassion to people who commit crimes? They are different than how the criminal thinks because people who are victims of criminals don't deserve what happens to them, they have moral status and they haven't abandoned their moral responsibility. What message would it send to society where we don't take a moral stance on a crime? I am considering to also believe they are one and the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearview Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 I might as well admit this right now: I'm Asimov, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redross Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 I might as well admit this right now: I'm Asimov, too. Hahaha. I've just indoctrinated Asimov into believing the same things I do. He thinks that since I'm in University I must be right (in his defense, I am) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 I've done things like making another username and arguing as another person. I can't stop bolding my posts on here and ryan writes differently than me. Besides, his IP is in Alberta, mine is in BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted October 12, 2006 Author Share Posted October 12, 2006 Asimov, You said, "I've done things like making another username and arguing as another person. I can't stop bolding my posts on here and ryan writes differently than me. Besides, his IP is in Alberta, mine is in BC." So then, let's look at this... 1) You admit to doing such things as this. 2) You can't stop bolding your posts? What a red herring. Of course you can. 3) 'ryan' writes EXACTLY like you. 4) I wouldn't know an IP addy from a hole in the wall. Or maybe you travel a lot, and have differing I.P.'s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Asimov is stupid. Redross is not. Case closed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted October 12, 2006 Author Share Posted October 12, 2006 Fwee, You are a moderator here, it seems. Thus, your assesment of who is 'stupid' and who is not is invalid, unless this is a board of and for the Mods. And that would take all of the fun out of Ex-C. Because as a moderator, you need to be moderate, not absolute. So, with all 'due' respect I must wonder why you seem to be covering for those in your circle of friends! Duh! Are you part of and party to this conspiracy? Case NOT closed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redross Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Fwee, You are a moderator here, it seems. Thus, your assesment of who is 'stupid' and who is not is invalid, unless this is a board of and for the Mods. And that would take all of the fun out of Ex-C. Because as a moderator, you need to be moderate, not absolute. So, with all 'due' respect I must wonder why you seem to be covering for those in your circle of friends! Duh! Are you part of and party to this conspiracy? Case NOT closed! No! No! Let her post! And we do NOT write exactly the same. I'm better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Fwee, You are a moderator here, it seems. Thus, your assesment of who is 'stupid' and who is not is invalid, unless this is a board of and for the Mods. And that would take all of the fun out of Ex-C. Because as a moderator, you need to be moderate, not absolute. So, with all 'due' respect I must wonder why you seem to be covering for those in your circle of friends! Duh! Are you part of and party to this conspiracy? Case NOT closed! No! No! Let her post! And we do NOT write exactly the same. I'm better. Fwee's a dude. 1) You admit to doing such things as this. Yea, once. And it was as a christian. What reason would I have to create two of me who do the same things? 2) You can't stop bolding your posts? What a red herring. Of course you can. No, I really can't. Not bolding my posts is like not wearing pants. 3) 'ryan' writes EXACTLY like you. Nu-uh! 4) I wouldn't know an IP addy from a hole in the wall. Or maybe you travel a lot, and have differing I.P.'s? Hehe, so the mods can check it. And we do NOT write exactly the same. I'm better. Whatever, you're like Tolkien to my Robert Jordan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Fwee, You are a moderator here, it seems. Thus, your assesment of who is 'stupid' and who is not is invalid, unless this is a board of and for the Mods. And that would take all of the fun out of Ex-C. Because as a moderator, you need to be moderate, not absolute. So, with all 'due' respect I must wonder why you seem to be covering for those in your circle of friends! Duh! Are you part of and party to this conspiracy? Case NOT closed! You're stupid, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted October 13, 2006 Author Share Posted October 13, 2006 Fwee, You're DAMN RIGHT I'm stupid! I've lost a wife, jobs, money, time and my sanity thanks to Christianity. I'll be damned if I let anyone take away my stoopidity! Although, for all of the philisophical types here...could I pick your brains? Is there a website that you know of that explains 'conspiracy theories' in the Christian experience? I guess I was only half joking when I said that becoming an ex-C left me without any good ones. What I mean is, is there a correlation between Christianity and conspiracy theories? Has it been shown that believing in the last days and all of that (fundie-mentalism), or the same in religion in general contributes to seeing bogeymen in the woodpile? I could Google it, but since I have no clue about the subject, which sites would I click on? It would also make a cool thread or debate issue IMHO, but I'm in no shape to start one on that subject. It would be great to hear from both of you, or even...one of you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redross Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Woohoo! 100 posts! As for your question, I'm not sure. Google it. I just noticed point number 1. We are a lot less nit-picky than most. I only nitpick when it matters. You also forgot point number 8: they are right an inordinate amount of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Fwee, You're DAMN RIGHT I'm stupid! I've lost a wife, jobs, money, time and my sanity thanks to Christianity. I'll be damned if I let anyone take away my stoopidity! No, you're not stupid. You're not stupid because, I, a moderator, am the one who said that you're stupid. And since you said this: You are a moderator here, it seems. Thus, your assesment of who is 'stupid' and who is not is invalid, What I said (about you being stupid), is meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted October 15, 2006 Author Share Posted October 15, 2006 Fwee, Huh? I don't get it. I'm not stupid? I hate to argue with moderators here, but yes I am, damn it! I found this Baptist site with this David Cloud guy, or something like that. It's not conspiracy related yet, but it does seem that we are all going to Hell, Christians, non-Christians, and even if you are Christians. Now, to our dueling philosophy majors, which came first, the chicken or the egg? The answers they posit may reveal the truth about whether they are one...or twain.... Duder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redross Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 Now, to our dueling philosophy majors, which came first, the chicken or the egg? The answers they posit may reveal the truth about whether they are one...or twain.... Duder Correction, I'm the only philosophy major. Asimov just sucks knowledge from my mental teet. To steal the answer from 'Corner Gas', the egg predates the chicken by millions of years thus giving way to the possibility that, through evolution, out of one of the eggs came a modern-day chicken (or at least a relative of it). Booya! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorena Rodriguez Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 I've done things like making another username and arguing as another person. I can't stop bolding my posts on here and ryan writes differently than me. Besides, his IP is in Alberta, mine is in BC. Hmm... I thought all Shaw IP's were in Alberta because the servers are there. So, technically, you could be posting as Asimov from a Telus account and as, what's his name, from a Shaw account. I do hope you are two different people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redross Posted October 15, 2006 Share Posted October 15, 2006 Wow, you guys really put a lot of thought into this. On one hand, I'm glad I made such an impact on this site in such a short time and on the other hand...I'm scared. And yes, we are different people; you can tell because I'm more hardcore and radical in my beliefs. And Asimov is black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts