Essay: RationalWiki admits it has a weirdo, pansie infestation
Administrator of RationalWiki indicates their website attracts "all sorts of weird people"
RationalWiki administrator Oxyaena wrote: "it's just that i am probably raging too much most of the time to form coherent sentences."
RationalWiki editor Amassivegay wrote: "I am never sure I am even coherent most of the time."
Gentlemen: Birds of a feather, flock together
New atheist Sam Harris on the label of "atheist"
Scientific proof that atheists are mutant weirdos
See also: Atheists and genetic mutations
- Defending Atheist Mutational Load Theory: Part 1 by Dr. Edward Dutton and Professor Guy Madison
- Defending Atheist Mutational Load Theory - Part 2 by Dr. Edward Dutton and Professor Guy Madison
Of Mice and Men
Gentlemen, full exoneration. Just like I expected!
Administrator of RationalWiki calls its editors "pearl clutching pansies"
RationalWiki is an atheist/agnostic wiki.
On May 23, 2020, an administrator of RationalWiki who goes by the moniker Ace McWicked, admitted that its editors are a "bunch of pearl clutching pansies".
The comment was made on its moderation page.
After losing a series of debate exchanges with one of the editors of the User: Conservative account at Conservapedia, RationalWiki administrators block him from their website and then cede the moral high ground
RationalWiki administrator admits its website is becoming an echo chamber of its most prominent administrators
Atheist Joshua Kelly says atheists are more "docile" and "politically correct" now
In 2015, the atheist author Joshua Kelly wrote:
|“||...since the death of Hitchens: angry atheism lost its most charismatic champion. Call it what you like: New Atheism, fire-brand atheism, etc., had a surge with the Four Horsemen in the middle of the last decade and in the last four years has generally peetered out to a kind that is more docile, politically correct, and even apologetic.||”|
Docile, politically correct and apologetic = Pansie! I rest my case, gentlemen! Olé! Olé! Olé!
A message to RationalWikians from an editor who uses the User: Conservative account
Message to Ace McWicked from User: Conservative
It is my hope that if you spend some time with User: RobS, User: Karajou and User: VargasMilan at Conservapedia, some of their machismo may rub off on you. One of the definitions of machismo is an "exhilarating sense of power or strength."
People often become like they people they hang around. Show me your friends and I will show you your future (see: You’re NOT The Average Of The Five People You Surround Yourself With). It is time you left RationalWiki before its too late.
Christianity's margin of victory over atheism
Spuriousness of atheism
Napoleon Bonaparte quote
Sun Tzu quote
Douglas MacArthur quote
George S. Patton quote
Dwight D. Eisenhower quote
Gentlemen, I hope you are deeply embarrassed by your kangaroo court. Shame, gentlemen! Shame!
- 1 Administrator of RationalWiki indicates their website attracts "all sorts of weird people"
- 2 RationalWiki administrator Oxyaena wrote: "it's just that i am probably raging too much most of the time to form coherent sentences."
- 3 RationalWiki editor Amassivegay wrote: "I am never sure I am even coherent most of the time."
- 4 Gentlemen: Birds of a feather, flock together
- 5 New atheist Sam Harris on the label of "atheist"
- 6 Scientific proof that atheists are mutant weirdos
- 7 Gentlemen, full exoneration. Just like I expected!
- 8 Administrator of RationalWiki calls its editors "pearl clutching pansies"
- 8.1 After losing a series of debate exchanges with one of the editors of the User: Conservative account at Conservapedia, RationalWiki administrators block him from their website and then cede the moral high ground
- 8.2 Atheist Joshua Kelly says atheists are more "docile" and "politically correct" now
- 8.3 A message to RationalWikians from an editor who uses the User: Conservative account
- 8.4 Message to Ace McWicked from User: Conservative
- 8.5 Christianity's margin of victory over atheism
- 8.6 Spuriousness of atheism
- 8.7 Napoleon Bonaparte quote
- 8.8 Sun Tzu quote
- 8.9 Douglas MacArthur quote
- 8.10 George S. Patton quote
- 8.11 Dwight D. Eisenhower quote
- 9 Gentlemen, I hope you are deeply embarrassed by your kangaroo court. Shame, gentlemen! Shame!
- 10 The cherry atop of the glorious sundae of total victory over RationalWiki
- 11 Gentlemen, I laugh at your so-called permaban
- 12 Conservapedia attracts people with an extremely high interest in history/math. It does not attract weirdos and pansies!
- 13 User: Conservative shows his sensitive and delicate side
- 14 My final message to RationalWiki administrators and editors
- 15 2020 was a very bad year for atheism. VERY, VERY BAD. HORRIBLE.
- 16 Addendum: My reply to SamHB on the talk page of this essay
- 17 My reply to User: VargasMilan
- 18 See also
- 19 References
The cherry atop of the glorious sundae of total victory over RationalWiki
Gentlemen, I laugh at your so-called permaban
My sockpuppet account at RationalWiki (RW) still has not been found out despite being "permabanned"
As of 5-31-2020 12:23 AM GMT, my sockpuppet account at RationalWiki (RW) still has not been found out despite being "permabanned".
RW Administrator Spud wrote:
|“||...if you try to edit here again under a different account after you have been permabanned, your new account will also immediately get blocked for ban evasion. It's not as if you'll be difficult to spot. You won't even try to hide who you are. But even if you did try, your writing style would give you away immediately/ The only danger is somebody pretending to be you to take the piss out of you might get blocked as well, since the two are completely indistinguishable. Spud (talk) 05:03, 25 May 2020 (UTC)||”|
My RationalWiki sockpuppet account has not been immediately blocked for ban evasion.
I am difficult to spot.
Spud, you teach English as a profession and claim my writing style will give me away immediately. Yet, you cannot detect my sockpuppet account. I suggest you resign your position as a RW moderator/administrator and consider resign being a member of the RationalWiki Foundation Board of Trustees.
Egotistical authoritarians often overestimate their abilities. Once again, history repeats itself.
By the way, as far as sophisticated software that changes a writer's writing style, there was a free program developed in 2019 called Mutant-X and the developers plan on improving the program. Good luck trying to detect my sockpuppet account, you will need it!
One of the definitions of the word machismo is an "exhilarating sense of power or strength". Gentlemen, every day you fail to discover my sockpuppet account, I feel an exhilarating sense of power or strength! Olé! Olé! Olé!
Conservapedia proven right. RationalWiki Administrator Spud proven wrong, gentlemen
Gentlemen, I edited your RationalWiki using the account User: AndreyL.
RationalWiki administrator Spud said I would be be immediately blocked due to your wiki's so-called permaban. He claimed, as do many RationalWikians, that my internet posts are easily identifiable. Repeatedly, I announced that I was editing RationalWiki at this essay which was featured at the Freedom From Atheism Foundation's Facebook page. The Conservapedia essay been accessed 12,000 times as of 6-2-2020.
And yet over the course of 3 days, I made 10 posts at your wiki and 7 of them were in the religious/politics related sections of your wiki. And to make it even easier for you gentlemen to spot me, I only used the preview button once (Even though your administrator Grammar Commie complained about me not using the preview button enough). Yet, you still did not spot me, gentlemen. Despite me making a few edits to re-edit my posts. Once again, you utterly and completely failed gentlemen.
Despite my so-called permaban, I predicted in some posts at RationalWiki that Donald Trump would win the U.S. presidential election in 2020. I pointed out that in times of riots, Republicans having a law and order message have the advantage. I also cited the Reuters news article Biden losing economic argument to Trump as U.S. begins to re-open. And I purposely made my last few posts emphatic about Trump winning the election in 2020 just to make my posts stand out. And yet, although some RationalWiki editors responded to my posts including the RationalWiki administrator Grammar Commie (Dance gentlemen! Dance! How easily it is to make you dance!), not a single editor at RationalWiki spotted my sockpuppet despite some RationalWikians saying over the years that my posts are very easily to spot. Oh, how the mighty secular leftists have fallen!
I had to clearly and unmistakably tell RationalWikians that my account was a sock account of my supposedly permabanned account in order to for them to "detect" it. Sad!
I do realize that there isn't absolute certainty that Donald Trump will be elected, but he is a very strong candidate being an incumbent, law and order candidate with a strong record on the economy before the coronavirus pandemic virus hit. The odds of Trump winning the presidency are high. Very high! But it will be a brutal election with a lot of negative political advertisements. Hillary Clinton wasn't a great candidate, but at least she wasn't a hair sniffer and she could put some thoughts together with some regularity. And when Donald Trump is re-elected, don't say I didn't tell you so! Of course if you did, like the rest of most of the world I would not read it on your failing and uninteresting website whose website traffic continues to fall.
When pondering why you repeatedly failed to indentify my sockpuppet while vigorously maintaining you easily could identify my posts online, consider this: According to Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia founded by an atheist and agnostic, "In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability. It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from the inability of people to recognize their lack of ability. Without the self-awareness of metacognition, people cannot objectively evaluate their competence or incompetence."
And your wiki's failure to identify my multiple sockpuppet posts at your website is another brick in the high wall of evidence I have provided that more than one editor has edited using the User: Conservative account. And yet, many of the prideful, godless men at your website continue to double down on their pigheaded denialism about this matter.
I hope this clarifies the fact that Conservapedians are often proven right and RationalWikians are often proven wrong. That just the way the cookie crumbles gentlemen. Deny this and lose all credibility!
And don't think I haven't noticed that there is no "RationalWiki proven right" page because I have noticed! Just the other day Andy Schafly said to me, "Conservapedia has a Conservapedia proven right page. Have you noticed that RationalWiki doesn't have a RationalWiki proven right page?" (Psyche! Of course Mr. Schlafly never said this. A Harvard and Princeton man who was was raised by none other than Phyllis Schlafly never thinks about lowbrow and unsavory websites such as RationalWiki. And now that RationalWiki is rapidly losing web traffic, all your hopes and dreams that Andy Schlafly would finally acknowledge your existence have been dashed!).
By the way gentlemen, an administrator of the Freedom From Atheism Foundation indicated that information related to RW is no longer wanted due to the fact that so many people have never heard of RW. If only RW had the traffic of the top Christian websites!
Conservapedia attracts people with an extremely high interest in history/math. It does not attract weirdos and pansies!
User: Conservative shows his sensitive and delicate side
My final message to RationalWiki administrators and editors
RationalWiki breaks its own policy and cyberharasses me for years. Now it claims I am clamoring for attention. Isn't that rich?
The truth is that I gave your website more attention than your website deserved due to your cyber-harassment.
I just wanted to point out amidst your very steep web traffic loss how inept your website's administrators and editors are. And also point out that your website isn't even good at supposedly addressing authoritarianism given its capricious and authoritarian bent (which isn't good at imposing its authoritarianism as shown by my easy evasion of your so-called permaban. You couldn't even spot my sockpuppet even though I provided some clues and tried to stand out by being very emphatic in my latter posts. I do realize that there isn't absolute certainty that Donald Trump will be elected but he is a very strong candidate being an incumbent, law and order candidate with a strong record on the economy before the coronavirus pandemic virus hit.).
RationalWiki Administrator Ace McWicked has pointed out some of your website's recent authoritarianism. He is not alone.
Your website is filled with incompetents who couldn't argue or debate their way out of a wet paper bag. In recent times, a large amount of left of center governments in the West/world have been thrown out of office and replaced with right of center governments and this trend is continuing. And this has occurred amidst left of center leaders and activists engaging in censorship and bullying. You banned me because you couldn't debate effectively, not because you could. It's so easy to refute leftism/liberalism that it is child's play.
I have access to web traffic that has far more reach than your website currently receives. A few of your editors are aware of this matter. Try coming up with a better explanation for my recent posts about your wiki other than the lame explanation that I am clamoring for attention.
Sometimes you have to stand up to bullies. On the other hand, you don't want to overdo it and wrestle with pigs in the mud. And some of greatest generals in the world have written that to avoid conflict and/or to end it quickly is preferable to prolonged conflict. So I have decided to move on. Despite the coronavirus pandemic, I have some great opportunities before me and it makes sense to focus on these matters rather than a rapidly failing website with a poor future. One of the editors of your website who I have good relations with and who is also aware of the some of the opportunities I have open to me advised that I take advantage of these opportunities rather than confront childish bullies and of course he is right about this matter. Surrounding yourself with positive, productive people with excellent character is preferable to confronting bullies.
Looking back, I should have just run through the all the doors that are opening to me and not looked back at website that was in the midst of destroying itself - despite its continued cyber-harassment. The Apostle Paul wrote about forgetting what lies behind and moving forward with all one's might to a greater calling. Lot's wife looked back at cities undergoing destruction and the result was not good for her. So I have finally decided to move on. I should have done it earlier. After all, Jesus said to turn the other cheek and focus on loving God and your neighbors.
At heart, I am a peaceable person. Someone told me that is very hard to make me angry which is true. I have a very thick skin. With God, it is easy to turn the other cheek. But given our free will, it is easy not to turn the other check as well. Committing to do the right thing every day in the end is better for yourself and others. So this is what I am going to do.
Gallery of RationalWiki editors
See also: Gallery of RationalWiki editors
Gentlemen, it's now time for me to practice the first rule of Italian driving
2020 was a very bad year for atheism. VERY, VERY BAD. HORRIBLE.
Addendum: My reply to SamHB on the talk page of this essay
First of all, as I was researching the topic of atheism while producing a web resource for others, I was very content producing articles at Conservapedia. It was only because RationalWiki's administrator Ace McWicked repeatedly invited me to RationalWiki to debate him that I created a second account at RationalWiki after losing access to the first account I created there in the past and used briefly (I lost the password).
SamHB, my favorite two sentences of my recent essay: "And your wiki's failure to identify my multiple sockpuppet posts at your website is another brick in the high wall of evidence I have provided that more than one editor has edited using the User: Conservative account. And yet, many of the prideful, godless men at your website continue to double down on their pigheaded denialism about this matter."
The fact that a website was largely launched in response to the edits emanating from the User: Conservative account and has a web page on its website specifically and obsessively geared to commenting on this website and yet is unable to get the basic history of the website correct is rather humorous to me. Of course, no true skeptic maintains that one editor has edited using the User: Conservative account.
SamHB, I am just God's humble servant who puts his trousers on one leg at a time (A former U.S. Marine Corps manager told an employee at a company I worked for: Women wear pants. Men wear trousers! He made the mistake of offering an explanation on why he was not wearing the company provided trousers). And I currently share my Conservapedia account with another humble servant of God (who may be a man or woman).
SamHB, what you fail to realize is that most atheists are very prideful (see: Atheism and arrogance). My taunts are certainly not due to great pride, SamHB. They are just away of stripping away the multiple layers of pride that most atheists have. This is so easy for you to observe and readily comprehend that I am surprised that I even have to explain it to you.
The sad truth is that I should be applauded by secular leftists for having diversity within my account. And that I enjoy music from a wide varieties of cultures. But no! This is not the case! Is the User: Conservative account multiracial? Only Andy Schafly knows! SamHB, the User: Conservative account is a living testimony to the fact that secular leftists push their narratives despite the evidence and not because of it!
So many times I have pointed out the failings of atheists to achieve social justice (see: Atheism and social justice and Atheist hypocrisy). And this has helped push RationalWiki towards a frenzy of SJWism that finally imploded their wiki's web traffic and caused a deep rift within their website. SamHB, I am the puppet master and RationalWikians are the puppets! And it's not because I am some super genius that my string pulling has worked so well. I just wave my well-supported articles that Western atheists are not diverse and have failed to achieve social justice in their direction and they charge like angry bulls in a predictable direction (see: Atheism and diversity). Olé! Olé! Olé! You see if I say the sky is blue, atheists being the quarrelsome, socially challenged people they are, they will try to prove I am wrong! See: Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence
"If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu. See also: Atheism and anger
And of course, the icing on the cake is that they proclaim that they are focused on advancing SJWism, etc. etc. and have little interest in Conservapedia. And yet, the page that is on their website giving the most recent fake news (and some news) about Conservapedia remains and is regularly updated. Talk about denialism! Within prideful atheists/agnostics, is there any deception which is harder to detect than self-deception?
SamHB, you wrote about my sockpuppet at RationalWiki and their failure to detect it: "Maybe they don't care." First of all, this essay have over 13,000 page views! I am so thankful Mr. Schlafy decided to merely update this wiki to the version which has still page views so I could contest your point (Hopefully, Mr. Schafly's decision is not due to any satisfaction he may get when intolerant liberals/leftists look at the view counters and become enraged). Not a day goes by where I am not thankful for the retention of the view counters. By the way, did you know this website has been accessed over 500,000,000 times? And to think this project started off with Andy and his homeschooler students. So sorry I degressed for a few moments.
Getting back to your question, SamHB, like a moth to the flame, RationalWikians read my web content on atheism which tortures their souls because it frequently reminds them of the many failures of their godless ideology. Every year my atheism content at Conservapedia receives hundreds of thousands of views. You see many atheists desperately hope to find some chink or error in my atheism articles so they may attempt to rationalize away my web content. And yet, every atheism article that I or the other user of my account has created and/or contributed to has a talk page where mistakes can be pointed out. The collective of the editors of the User: Conservative welcome constructive feedback and have made a handful of corrections when mistakes were pointed out. You see, we are are not prideful like secular leftists!
As far as the websites that are among the 1.5 billion plus websites in the world that the editors of the User: Conservative have access to, I regret to tell you that that remains a mystery to many and only a select few Conservapedians know. You have to be in the innermost of innermost circles of Conservapedia to know this matter. Try as RationalWikians might to infiltrate Conservapedia's innermost workings over Conservapedia's history at various points, this particular confidential information has never been compromised - and never will be! Believe it or not, it is more shrouded in mystery than the book for middle schoolers that encourages them to question evolution (if such a thing were even possible!).
SamHB, you wrote: "If you really want to taunt those people, why don't you just go over there and taunt them directly?". SamHB, you are at an online encyclopedia with an article on one of the famous strategists and tactions ever produced by man and taught in U.S. military academies and military academies throughout the world. I am of course referring to Sun Tzu. "For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill." SamHB, I certainly don't need to spend a lot of time wrangling with atheists/agnostics at their failing wiki. I just have them come to Conservapedia where they have ready access to a multitude of interconnected articles on atheism. One stop shopping! So easy. So convenient for them. And did you know that atheists have one of the lowest retention rates in the world when it comes to worldviews (see: Atheism and its retention rate in individuals).
Next, Master Tzu wrote: "And therefore those skilled in war bring the enemy to the field of battle and are not brought there by him." And Master Tzu also wrote: "It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle." SamHB, given the intolerance and closed-mindedness of most atheists, I knew should I spend much time at RationalWiki, my material would be often erased/obscured and eventually a so-called "permaban" would be tried to be imposed (see: Atheism and intolerance and Atheism and dogmatism and Atheism and open-mindedness).
In short, posting at Conservapedia was far most efficient and didn't involve some censorious and ham-handed atheist like RationalWiki's administrator Grammar Commie erasing my web content because he cannot produce refuting arguments (see: Atheism debates). After all, Sun Tzu's strategies and tactics utilize the "Eastern tradition of strategy that emphasizes outwitting an opponent through speed, stealth, flexibility, and a minimum of effort." A minimal of effort. Not a maximum of effort, SamHB.
P.S. If you want to know another reason I chose not to spend too much time at RationalWiki, please read the essay section entitled "Message to Ace McWicked from User: Conservative". I do hope AceMicked heeds my advice and chooses not spend much time at RationalWiki. But perhaps given the oppositional and quarrelsome nature of atheists, perhaps I should say that I hope he does spend at lot of time at RationalWiki. Then he will do the exact opposite. Conservative (talk) 03:32, 3 June 2020 (EDT)
P.S.S. Perhaps the reason why RationalWiki has so few editors now is that there website invariably leads them to Conservapedia where their atheism drops like flies! Perhaps that is why RationalWikians became so enraged when I linked to Conservapedia at their website (see: Atheism and anger). It reminds me of vampire movies when the vampires are shown crosses. The ex-atheist C.S. Lewis: “A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading”. See: Rebuttals to atheist arguments and Evidence for Christianity
My reply to User: VargasMilan
Conservative, why must you provoke members of that wiki with descriptions of your own success-proving viewcounts? Their envy and anger have reduced them to charging about hither and yon in an unfocused rage where no one—man, woman, child or beast—is safe from their onslaughts! VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 06:10, 3 June 2020 (EDT)
- VargasMilan, one thing I have noticed about RationalWiki: They can dish out ridicule and mocking, but they cannot take it (see: Atheism and mockery and Mocking of atheism and Atheist hypocrisy). RationalWiki administrator Ace McWicked described RationalWikians perfectly. They are a "bunch of pearl clutching pansies" as Ace McWicked so aptly stated (see: Atheist whining).
- VargasMilan, Ace McWicked has a tendency to go on rants about Donald Trump. I believe he has Trump Derangement Syndrome.
- Personally, I try to remain calm, cool and objective about politicians. Perhaps, that is why my sockpuppet account went undetected at RationalWiki. I did say that Trump had some "authoritarian tendencies" at their wiki. Of course, when you have rioting in the streets from unruly anarchists and other malcontents (often anarchist are atheists given the rebelliousness of atheism, see: Atheism and anarchism), it's hard not to exercise authority in order to restore order.
Thin-skinned and hypocritical atheists
Both atheists and Muslims have developed a reputation of being thin-skinned (and for wanting to impose their ideology on others). It has been quipped that "Atheism is the easiest religion to troll". Internet trolls often actively pursue trolling atheists due to their penchant of being so proud and so easily angered.
In 2012, The Guardian published an article entitled Limmy's Show: Confessions of an internet troll which had the subtitle There's a witch-hunt going on against internet trolls right now. But, argues Scots funnyman Limmy, randomly goading atheists, jocks and non-existent techno geeks can be fun. And of course, being thin-skinned is symptomatic of having excessive pride.
Breitbart journalist Milo Yiannopoulos, a self-described provocateur, indicates "the reason I have a go at atheists is that it's fun. They are so thin-skinned. They are like libertarians, or...they are like liberal Democrats in the UK or..feminists in fact. They are so easy to wind up... They are so touchy."
Most people and cultures take a very dim view of proud people and some cultures are known for actively engaging humbling successful people and/or proud people (Several Anglosphere nations are known for having tall poppy syndrome and Filipinos are known for having a "crab culture". Crabs in a bucket of water will pull down crabs trying to escape from the bucket).
Atheist trolls and atheist bullying:
See also: Atheist trolls
- Atheism and social outcasts
- Atheism and social skills
- Atheist nerds
- Atheism and mental illness
- Atheism and cowardice
- Atheism and mental toughness
- Atheism and anxiety
- Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution
- 10 telltale signs you are an atheist nerd
- Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?
- NEWSWEEK Poll: 90% Believe in God, Newsweek 2007
- Roberts, Jessica, et al. (June 19, 2007). "Interview with an atheist". News21. Retrieved on July 30, 2014.
- [http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/12/genetically-inferior.html Genetically Inferior by Theodore Beale
- Administrator of RationalWiki admits its editors are a "bunch of pearl clutching pansies"
- Administrator of RationalWiki admits its editors are a "bunch of pearl clutching pansies"
- Administrator of RationalWiki admits its editors are a "bunch of pearl clutching pansies"
- Uproar Against Dawkins Is Sign of New Atheism Retrogression by Joshua Kelly
- Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God, The Daily Telegraph, May 14, 2011
- [Sun Tzu's 31 Best Pieces Of Leadership Advice], Forbes
- Is Christianity taking over the planet?
- Administrator Spud at RationalWiki, May 25, 2020
- A Girl Has No Name: Automated Authorship Obfuscation using Mutant-X by Asad Mahmood, Faizan Ahmad, Zubair Shafiq, Padmini Srinivasan, and Fareed Zaffar, Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies; 2019 (4):54–71
- Mutant X - Github
- Ammi, Ken (2011 or bef.) “Hitler’s Rabbi”. TrueFreethinker website. Retrieved on May 17, 2015.
- The Seven Military Classics of Ancient China, including The Art of War - Amazon
- Sun Tzu Compared to Clausewitz by Walter S. Zapotoczny
- President Donald J. Trump Stands Up For Religious Freedom In The United States, WhiteHouse.gov, May 3, 2018
- "Martin Wefail" on Twitter
- Atheism is the easiest religion to troll
- Limmy's Show: Confessions of an internet troll, The Guardian, Brian Limond The Guardian, Friday 9 November 2012 10.00 EST
- Milo Yiannopoulos vs Atheism
- Atheist trolls
- The distribution of atheist intelligence by Vox Day
- Christian Philosopher Explores Causes of Atheism