Posted by Damien [24.159.250.195 - 24-159-250-195.jvl.wi.charter.com] on 06 March 2003 at 07.21.57 ZuluTime:

Thankfully I found Brenton to be entertaining enough to save his quotes for future use. So, back by popular demand, it's the Brenton Spears quote collection. (Actually it's kind of dated now, considering the wealth of idiocy that's come from his keyboard in the past couple of days.)

brenton_spears: but we know enough about the litte we have observed about it to conclude that the universe itself may not have been characterised by the various sorts of physical law which may be held to be operative within it presently...for none of these laws have the character of necessary truths..they may well have been otherwise than as they are...furthermore we do know that nothing can look to itself for the reason of its own existence....and since there cannot be in principle a necessary existent within the universe ..and since further a iinfinte regression of contingent beings is impossible wherein each is dependent for its existence upon some other or others temporally prior to itself ...
     brenton_spears: the system as a whole cant account for itself..because the system here is nothing other than its parts...and no one of its parts can account for itself..not even with reference to any or all of the other parts....and it is true that coffee can be found sloshing in a cup which does not for its part however likewise slosh
     brenton_spears: gremlin thinks that because God's presence is not open to empirical detection..it would follow therefore that his existence can be proven..but in so thinking this he has necessarily conflated empirical detectability with the act whereby an object may be shown forth on rational grounds to exist....
     brenton_spears : i have replied to your assertion that a transcendent base is unnecessary ...because 'nature'..the law of nature..the way things work...can constitute an adequate base...by pointing out to you that it is a category mistake to argue that the structure of material reality as we observe it..serves to disclose to us...the sort of behaviour which it should be incumbent upon us morally to enact....if moral dictates are to be universally binding they can't be somehow derived from a universe whose so-called physical laws, as these have been uncovered by physicists, are not necessary truths.....because quite simply.....physical theories describe the way things are....but yet ..contrary to hawking's naive claim concerning a unifield theory....they are not of such a character as that we should not be entitled to suppose that they could have been constituted otherwise than as they have actually been found by us to be...

brenton_spears : sorry but now that i am here i can ferret out your various atheistic misrepresentations of my faith ....and then expose them publicly for what they are...
     brenton_spears : i said grem that you would be liable to make me a worthy opponent ...but i would not be so optimistic as you seem to be about your chances of prevailing over me in debate....because of course my designation of you as 'worthy' in that regard is intended merely to signify the notion that you might pehaps more adequate to the task of defending a position coherently than your various collaborators should be

brenton_spears : please i did not that was afraid per se of encountering you in whatever sense of that term it may please you to assign to it...what i said specifically wsa that i might be apt to regret the consequences that an encounter between ourselves might have for certain of my associates.,.

brenton_spears : thanks for quoting me accurately fred....and yes my opinion of my erstwhile debate with him remains unchanged..he lost hard........though he certainly put up an admirable defense...read the relevant trasncript and learn
     brenton_spears : its great though that gremlin has managed to finally find his voice...instead of remaining silent and and all but invisible behind his (sub)human shields

brenton_spears : yeah but how can the way we are neurally wired posit a base for ethics..if anything it would posit rather a justification for doing anything that we happened to find ourselves 'neurally' inclined to do..or (as the case may be) to think of as right...and if u say this can be avoided by the device of 'customizing' our respective neural systems.....the question would need then to be asked whether the specifications according to which our neural systems should thus be customized....are susceptible of moral description....in a word according to whose idea of morality should they be determined...and how do we have any assurance that this idea itself is not the product of imperfectly configured neural systems/

brenton_spears : I HAEV PREVAILED O ROOM OVER INDON,,,'
     IndonDasani : brenton; wrong.
     brenton_spears : one of this room's hardest and toughest 'nuts'......
     brenton_spears : imagine that
     brenton_spears : i have proven my first thesis...
     brenton_spears : look anyway guys do me a favor...dont post anything else on gremlin's board about me...ok...
     brenton_spears : because i only exchange written communications with people belonging to a select circle....
     brenton_spears : i hope that those who read the transcript of my debate with indon..will come away realising that i won
     brenton_spears : cos slipknot proclaims people=shit and such like things..and this guy in our group tried to tell me about how extreme this band was....i in turn tried to tell him that slipknot denies the imago dei...the concept of man as the image-bearer of God..and that this places slipknot's ideology at variance with biblical thinking and more specifically aquinas' account of it
     brenton_spears : itska.,.youre entitled to your opinion..but i think the facts dont bear it out....it's a pity though that you dont seem able to grasp them...
     brenton_spears : look the bottom-line is that i certainly feel that i fairly won that debate....i addressed adequately all of indon's objections..and his last one that i didnt appear to respond to, contenting myself instead, such as i should have done at the time with declaring myself the victor of that debate.....that last objection i didnt respond to because i deemed it an inept recapitualation of an earlier objection of indon's that had already been thoroughly refuted by myself

brenton_spears : i mean i cant be expected to respond to every raving statement that finds its way out of indon's mouth along with his epileptic foam..a time-out has to be called...more than that..a time has to be appointed for the debate to be brought to a close..it seemed to me, with that time having arrived,,..that whatever else indon might thereafter set fit to insanely sputter in response...i should not be obliged to gun it down...
     brenton_spears : yeah cos ive not met up with behe platinga et al..yet...i met whitcomb.,...when i was very young.....like maybe in 95 i think.....
     brenton_spears : at a church camp i attended whitcomb was a speaker...at that time i wasnt a committed christian yet...and so i had all sorts of questions about the faith..not irreverent ones....to be sure.,.but questions which suggested to whitcomb that i was very precocious...
     brenton_spears : i must tell u something though....hunter...that guy gremlin..whoever he is.....he would make a worthy opponent of someone like myself....though i think he is dead wrong....he makes the kinds of points that beg for a high-level refutation of the sort of which i should be capable of giving.....

brenton_spears : gremlin not only hass the requisite intellectual tools at his disposal to mount an atatck against christianity..he has also the means for ensuring that this attack of his should prove as destructive as possible by way of the exposure it should receive through sliipknot's public endorsement of it

brenton_spears : only one man can deal with gremlin and slipknot combined...only one man can withstand gremlin';s powerful onslaught.....and give as good as he gets.....that's me..cos like gremlin i have an impressive array of intellectual defenses...a formidable intellectual arsenal...and just like gremlin too....i have a way of bolstering my argument with rhetoric of the incendiary kind which slipknot is adept at purveying through their music

brenton_spears : anybody can claim the ability to challenge anyone else...the just about everybody would possess such an ability....the relevant question is: do u have the ability to mount a challenge against the likes of gremlin successfully?...and i submit that i do

brenton_spears : no i dont want to...gremlin is like a public figure with ties to slipknot...what if word gets out that i am taking on someone like that...i might attact to myself unwarranted attention.......detractors of me who know me personally..might post revealing peresonal details about me.....ex-girlfirends might too if they learn of it..
     brenton_spears : i have to protect my name u know....no i cant face down gremlin in his lair....not because i am scared of him...indeed i am confident of victory...but because of the impact this could have on my loved ones...
     brenton_spears : i mean my crew will definitely get involved too...they'll be mobilised...and i wouldnt necessarily want that to happen....but because gremlin might bring in corey...they would feel that they had to step in...even if i said otherwise......because this is big game

brenton_spears : the concern is if corey enters the fray...plus there'll be hunter's assistants as well.....they wont shut up obviously they might chime in with remarks of their own.,.and so obfuscate the laserlike pinpointedness of my assault on gremlin which would necessarily not have as its object anything other than gremlin himselgf
     brenton_spears : and then my crew would get mixed up...trouble is normally i can caommand them...but when im going up against the likes of someones liked to corey/...they''ll think that it is an allout war and that therefore all bets are off..the saving of my name is at stake and even if i tell them to do otherwise theyll still enter the fray
     brenton_spears : cos in my battles i tend to go at it alone...
     brenton_spears : thats what im afraid of.....hunter....and with me vs gremlin.,...the intensity will be really ratcheted up.....even corey taylor might get involved and then my crew would go ballistic
     brenton_spears : no no it's perfectly acceptable that gremlin be apprised of my confidence in my ability to trounce him in debate.i have obections though to my debating him via the forum hosted on his website...because of the level of publicity thiss is liable to attarct and of wthat that in turn might entail my crew in enduring..not to mention the possible tranishing which the name of my family might be likely to suffer thereby
     brenton_spears : i am also concerned about the possible involvement of corey taylor in the debate...yeah hunter i dont want this posted this remarks of mine are directed only to yourselves.....i dont want to be notuiced yet by those who are christ's avowed public enemies...my hour for cponfronting them publicly has yet to come
     brenton_spears : gremlin is conflating is subjective lack of sympathy which is understable given his not having been personally acquianted with any of the citims of the tragedy in question..with the fact that it should be possible neverthless to posit objectively such a tragedy as one which is truly deserving of being named such..so that even though his lack of sympathy is understabdable and indeed also justifiable...it could not follows from this that the victums of this tragedy do not comprise worthy objects of a person's sympathy in an objective sense

brenton_spears: anyway i dont think i could make u cry hunter....youre not a crybaby..and dmien....please u werent here to witness my trouncing of indon...im too tired for an encore performance....but i relayed the gist of it to some of my rew and they were all of the unanimous opinion that i acquitted myself very well, having sucessfully mounted a case for the christian position as opposed to indon's position