Irony is Feyn by me

(((Reposted 2/23/17 as “You don’t really Know, but do you even want to?)))

From a post on THIS blog… (a response (?) to my post, now ‘Purged’ in the Monthly Reset)

​Dear Leader,

Any scientist who holds confidence in some faith-based belief does so only by segregating this belief from the rigorous method of science, and so their scientific credentials do not play any part in supporting their religious beliefs.

What was said most likely in irony is probably the most accurate and salient point of the post. Now THAT is irony in action. Freudian Slip? -kia

John’s post was seeming to say the scientists MUST have as much or possibly more faith than Christians for what they believe because, wait for it, wait for it … 


Or at least that’s how I understood his transparent and somewhat less than clever attempt at silencing those who criticize modern Christian Apologetics tactics, especially on the Internet. 

My original post, now Purged in the Monthly Reset, was to pass on the quote above that drew the difference in comparison with Questions that cannot be answered, and yet many people engage in the inquiry called scientific discovery in the attempt, and those Answers which cannot allow or stand questioning, criticism or evaluation, mostly religious or Faith Based answers.

John’s post seems to be creating a “Strawman of Ignorance”, as one commenter stated

Feynman’s quote: “…answers that can’t be questioned.” 

JB’s comprehension of the quote: “… answers that don’t need questioning.”

‘Can’t’ is not synonymous with ‘don’t need’. Honest.

So the rest of the post is based – as it very often is – on JB’s problematic reading comprehension, one that regularly and reliably produces straw men points, one that substitutes what he believes is the case but doesn;t bother to check is the case. His belief is good enough for him… 

I believe there might have been an additional point in there about using such tactics to ‘shame people into silence’… but either it’s been removed or I may just be mistaken. Either way, that would also be an equally salient point demonstrating the current tactics or many Amateur Internet Apologists today. It’s as if they are saying to those who would dare Question or Challenge what they just “Know by Faith” is True ™

“Strawman them, twist their words, mock them until they just go away and bless us with their absence and silence.”

Well, you don’t get to use  the Argument from Ignorance to support what you don’t know for fact, but only by Faith. Yes, there are a lot of things that science and scientific inquiry hasn’t yet figured out or discovered, that’s why people like Nobel Prize Winner in Physics Richard Feynman still Ask Questions. 

But just because they don’t have the Answers yet, doesn’t give the weight of evidence or validity to your positions that you only “Know” by Faith Alone. You don’t get to claim yours is True just because the other guy is either wrong or doesn’t yet have the Answers he’s looking for. That’s the point that JB needs to understand.  

(((Updated for a response to a response post to mine and my comment back to her)))

Thx for the link. I appreciate the delicacy of the situation of asking questions who’s ‘answers’ must not be questioned for fear of the possibility that they are wrong and I’ll founded in reality.

I guess it comes down to the question of whether you would really want to know if what you believe about God and reality is true or not. I believe it’s important to know, or at least want to know. 

For you, and many like I was once as well, it seems to be out of bounds to even want to know what you say can only be known by Faith. Thus, I conclude… you don’t want to know and don’t care about what is true or not in reality.

I am sad for you, but hopeful. At least you know what is at stake. -kia


The problem is that you don’t really know what you think you ‘know by faith’. The other problem you seem to have is even though you know that you don’t, you don’t seem to care that you don’t.

What do you think? What not tell me in the comments below. And thx for reading, Liking, and Following the Recovering Know It All.



61 thoughts on “Irony is Feyn by me

  1. Just read his comment about ‘sissy-boys’ – reminds me of that reptilian Mark Driscoll. That John Branyan is a shithead and that confirms it. I’ve been thinking that for awhile now. 😦

    KIA, you are so far above him and his ilk.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. John Branyan is a lying piece of shit trying to use my words from previous posts and comments I made there and repackaging them and then presenting them as if his own… and in some way relevant to some comment criticism aimed at his post.

    It’s meant to be confusing. It’s meant to be diversionary. It’s meant to be dishonest and deceitful. It’s meant to be a childish way of getting back at me by misrepresenting in one venue something said in another. Branyan doesn’t have the intellect to compete, compare, and contrast his bad ideas against better ones and so he turns to being snide and condescending as a handy stand-ins for his lack of integrity and honesty and intelligence. This tactic of John Branyan captures just how disrespectful he is of understanding and respecting what’s true and disrespectful of others who dare point out his deceitful ways.

    And note how fawning his daughter – Amanda, aka ‘mrsmcmommy’ – is of supporting her dad’s intentional lying. Look how faithfully she stands by her father and tries to support his lies not by caring for what’s true but solely in the spirit of allegiance to her dear old dad. Amanda does not stand up for any principle of fairness, equity, and respect for others, nor have any desire to learn more about things she knows little about – you know, things most parents would hope their adult kids would do – but becomes an extremely unlikable snarky brat to anyone she perceives as a threatening the pedestal upon which she has placed her father. Does it surprise anyone that such a fuckwit as John Branyan thinks this is good? Does anyone other than some other evangelical paternalistic dicknob think that raising a daughter who shied away at the last moment from committing suicide as a new mom because she found Jesus-sort-of and is now the paragon of a devout daughter and devoted pious mother is a parenting achievement?

    You get what you pay for and Branyan thinks he’s really the cat’s ass when it comes to being both an evangelic apologetic messenger and a comedic hipster. Just get rid of any care about what’s true and refuse any and all criticism about simply making shit up to falsely advertise the merit of your religious beliefs and, Presto!, you get the full measure of John Branyan… a man with neither the brains nor talent to actually be funny but enough piety to be a lying piece of shit and proud of it.


    • If posts at the Comedy Sojourn started disappearing, you (ALL of you) would make a big stink. Just like you’ve made big stinks in the past when you thought there was even a slight chance that MAYBE something fishy was happening.

      Your bias is showing.

      Whenever a mistake has been made on my blog, I’ve owned it and fixed it. That’s integrity. But your pal KIA is deleting posts to save his own pride. That’s cowardly. Posts that feature when he has tangoed with a “soft target” will stay public. But he gets rid of the ones that make him look bad.

      Of course, it’s his blog. So he’s free to do that. But, a person with integrity would fess up. They wouldn’t give some vague answer like “[it’s] my method alone….” and then insist it has been “clearly explained.” If you buy that excuse, it’s because you’re still playing your “Cheerleader” part perfectly. Cheerleaders always jump for their favorite team…even when there’s no hope for a win.


      • No amanda. If posts started disappearing on yours or John’s blog, with explanations for doing so… I’d probably accept your explanation unless it was shown to be in error. But that’s just me I guess


  3. Pingback: Again? So soon? – The Comedy Sojourn

  4. My comment on their post that may not be allowed…
    She didn’t question me. Well, she did and I answered. But apparantly she wanted to believe my motives were more nefarious than I told her they were, even after repeated attempts to clarify for her. Then she accused me of what she wanted to believe my motives were.
    Nice ‘little girl’ you raised there john.
    I was trying to show her how it felt to be accused falsely with no evidence at all. I didn’t actually accuse her, I questioned, she never answered. Didn’t expect her to, she didn’t have to. The point was to help her understand it’s not nice, polite, kind or ‘christian’ in the least to accuse someone falsely with no evidence and someone’s explanation that what you are accusing them of is simply not true.
    I give you the benefit of doubt as a father, her father, that you didn’t raise her that way. But Alas, she seems to be that way. Enjoy the day and lesson learned


Please comment Responsibly and Respectfully

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s