Anyone attending The ( grotesque) Amazing Meeting 9 in Las Vegas?

[Open Minded Atheist]

The Amaz!ng Meeting | Workshops
Paul, Arouet, Really, Porker, any of you attending, can you please do us a favour, please keep us updated on the talks, i am particularly interested in what Steve Novella, Joe Nickel, Richard Dawkins, DJ Goerthe and the infamous PZ Meyers have to say.
Please keep us updated by posting videos if you can and notes, let us all critically analyse their bogus claims.

[vikki]

I think Paul's still there - probably guarding the hot tub....

[Open Minded Atheist]

[QUOTE=vikki;53575]I think Paul's still there - probably guarding the hot tub....[/QUOTE

LOL

[really]

OMA you should consider changing your screen name.

I could keep you informed but I've taken an oath if I should let be known the really good stuff I'll have to swallow a cyanide capsule and then I'll have to kill everyone I tell. Now you wouldn't want that would you ?

[Open Minded Atheist]

Originally Posted by really

OMA you should consider changing your screen name.

I could keep you informed but I've taken an oath if I should let be known the really good stuff I'll have to swallow a cyanide capsule and then I'll have to kill everyone I tell. Now you wouldn't want that would you ?

LOL, I can’t change my name, I tried to but the forum does not allow us to change our names,
Death is not the end

[IscopeU]

Now that was funny.

[Pollux]

I wonder how the Watson vs Dawkins scenario is gonna play out.
Maybe they are smart and downplay it, and not let it be one of the focus point of TAM.
Or, maybe they f**k it up and go full-contact karate on each other, and put a rift through the whole community.
The whole Christian-sceptic debate last year (or the year before) was a summer breeze in comparison with this recent issue.

*pulls out the popcorn*

[vikki]

Originally Posted by Pollux

I wonder how the Watson vs Dawkins scenario is gonna play out.
Maybe they are smart and downplay it, and not let it be one of the focus point of TAM.
Or, maybe they f**k it up and go full-contact karate on each other, and put a rift through the whole community.
The whole Christian-sceptic debate last year (or the year before) was a summer breeze in comparison with this recent issue.

*pulls out the popcorn*

It's interesting that when you look up the speakers' biographies Rebecca Watsons name does not appear although she is apparently leading a workshop.
I wonder if she will even show up. I wouldn't blame her if she didn't.

Without wishing to bring the whole fiasco up again, IMO Dawkins was the one who over-reacted. Reading some of the misogynist comments on Watsons blog and other atheist sites just illustrates that gender prejudice continues to fester in every corner of our alledgedly 'free and equal' society.

[Pollux]

Originally Posted by vikki

It's interesting that when you look up the speakers' biographies Rebecca Watsons name does not appear although she is apparently leading a workshop.
I wonder if she will even show up. I wouldn't blame her if she didn't.

Without wishing to bring the whole fiasco up again, IMO Dawkins was the one who over-reacted. Reading some of the comments on Watsons blog and other atheist sites just illustrates that gender prejudice continues to fester in every corner of our alledgedly 'free and equal' society.

Yeah, I kind of agree with you.
Watsons initial report of what happened was quite modest and just a nudge "guys dont do that".
I think Dawkins response was more a reaction to the rest of the community going of rails in the commentaries following.
But..Watsons following response to Dawkins was just ridiculous were she claimed to have been sexually objectified and felt harassed and almost threaten.
A guy flirted with her in an elevator, the step from that to be physically assaulted with a knife in a back alley and raped are astronomic, yet that is what the rhetoric almost reflected from most of the commentaries to that blog.

All kinds of sick, evil and twisted things happens to women everywhere, all the time and it is horrendous, so a little perspective would be appropriate.
I think that that was what Dawkins referred to, not the initial youtube clip from Watson.
As you say, some very hateful things against women where posted in the commentaries and was quite distasteful to read.

Yet I kind of find it a bit amusing that the skeptic movement get a feel of its own hatred projected against each other, so they get a sense how their opponents feel on regular basis when it comes to paranormal claims and such. *evil grin*

[vikki]

Originally Posted by Pollux

Yeah, I kind of agree with you.
Watsons initial report of what happened was quite modest and just a nudge "guys dont do that".
I think Dawkins response was more a reaction to the rest of the community going of rails in the commentaries following.
But..Watsons following response to Dawkins was just ridiculous were she claimed to have been sexually objectified and felt harassed and almost threaten.
A guy flirted with her in an elevator, the step from that to be physically assaulted with a knife in a back alley and raped are astronomic, yet that is what the rhetoric almost reflected from most of the commentaries to that blog.

All kinds of sick, evil and twisted things happens to women everywhere, all the time and it is horrendous, so a little perspective would be appropriate.
I think that that was what Dawkins referred to, not the initial youtube clip from Watson.
As you say, some very hateful things against women where posted in the commentaries and was quite distasteful to read.

Yet I kind of find it a bit amusing that the skeptic movement get a feel of its own hatred projected against each other, so they get a sense how their opponents feel on regular basis when it comes to paranormal claims and such. *evil grin*

I hear you Pollux (particularly the last paragraph referring to the 'pack' turning on itself) but the subject matter itself hits too close to home.

I understand that there are women in the world who have experienced unbelievable injustices, but to use this to minimize the fear felt by women anywhere over what 'could happen' does not work. They are pieces of the same picture, and Dawkins does not recognize this.