The World According to Nicole Campbell.

-

Greetings. Civil conversations, a conversational pathway that seems to be lost on many people in today's society, including Ms. Nicole Campbell. 

Ms. Campbell, who started following my Facebook blog platform just a few days ago, didn't lose any time making her feelings known about the existence, or non-existence of god, with Ms. Campbell clearly falling on the side of a believer. At first, I thought that Ms. Campbell was going to be an active reader of my articles, participating in the commentary and considerations, but I could not have been more wrong. 

During the course of my interactions with Ms. Campbell, at least initially, she seemed strongly convinced of the validity of her beliefs, which all of us are at one point or another, but only five, yes five comments into the conversation, she labeled yours truly, and I quote "A sad old man." The conversation up to that point had been focused on the issues at play, and nothing more than that. Evidently Ms. Campbell felt that a personal comment was warranted, which boggles the mind. However, it is not overly surprising, when one considers the way that so many such exercises quickly descend into intellectual chaos.

I always encourage my readers to offer their thoughts and opinions on the articles that I compose. While I don't always agree with some of the comments, I respect their right to freely express themselves, openly and with respect. The vast majority of my readers are fully capable of exchanging ideas and opinions without allowing the conversations to get personal. That is a credit to them, and I am proud of each and every one of them, regardless of their individual positions. Having said that, I don't allow anyone to act in an immature, belligerent manner towards anyone. My readers deserve respect. Period. 

Why are so many people simply incapable of engaging in a civil, productive manner? Why do those same individuals resort to personal commentary and character assassinations at the drop of a hat? Are they unwilling, or unable to conduct themselves in a kind, civilized manner? 

I don't have the answers. 

I won't resort to calling Ms. Campbell any rude, abhorrent names, for I am an adult gentleman, but it should be said that in my experience the most judgmental people in society today are those that hold religions beliefs. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why do Hoaxes Never Die?

-
Image
Greetings. Hoaxes. Whilst a statistically insignificant aspect of the UFO picture, some of the more well-known historical UFO cases on the books are known to be hoaxes. Despite the complete lack of tangible proof or evidence to support their validity, and the mountain of information strongly suggesting that the cases in question are not valid, but rather hoaxes perpetrated for unknown reasons, these cases have become legendary in their stature, and are seemingly eternal in their lifespan. Let's take a look at the current, and historical, situation.  The list of known historical hoaxes is not really that long, but their notoriety is certainly something to behold; Aztec, Aurora, Trinity, Kingman, Del Rio, Maury Island, San Agustin, among a few others. Their collective cashe of supportive evidence is almost nonexistent, void of valid corroborating documentation, lacking in physical, tangible, and falsifiable evidence, and wanting of any reasonable continuity among the alleged witness ...
Read more

Andre Skondras: A Furuncle on the Arse of Ufology.

-
Image
Greetings. Andre Skondras. An irritating boil on the ass of ufology. An individual who deflects and directs. Or at least attempts to.  I have had the "pleasure" of encountering this particular piece of excrement only occasionally on social media, but recent events took that to an entirely new level. My wife, Venus Miranda, and I are administrators of several Facebook groups, mostly focused on the UFO problem and its attached subculture. A few weeks ago, Mr. Skondras joined our "Is Ufology Dead? A Candid Consideration" and promptly began to commence bullying and directing the other members. Almost immediately we limited his ability to interact, not in an attempt at censorship, but to simply provide some reasonable protection for the other members, who we hold in high regard and are deserving of respect and consideration.  Mr. Skondras subsequently began to cry and cry and cry, throwing accusations around like a child throwing a ufological tantrum. Censorship! Bullyin...
Read more

Hitchens' Razor: Kyptonite for the Fringe Communities.

-
Image
Greetings. Hitchens' Razor. Hitchens' razor is an epistemological razor that serves as a general rule for rejecting certain knowledge claims. The razor states: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." The razor is credited to author, critic, and journalist Christopher Eric Hitchens. It declares that the burden of proof regarding a claim lies squarely with the individual making the claim. If this burden is not satisfied, then the claim is deemed to be unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens used the phrase specifically in the context of refuting religious belief. The razor appears in Hitchens' magnificent 2007 book "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything."  The term "Hitchens' Razor" itself made its first appearance in an online forum in October of 2007, and was later popularised by evolutionary biologist and atheist activist Jerry Coyne after Hitc...
Read more