Cultcow Brad Watson / Richard Bradshaw Watson / Brad Watson_Miami - Jesus & Albert Einstein reincarnated, discoverer of GOD=7_4 Theory

How do you grade Brad Watson? This is an official poll that reflects the will of GOD.

  • Excellent A - Freedom from corporeal shackles and permitted audience with THE LORD.

    Votes: 168 13.6%
  • Passing B - Freedom from corporeal shackles and free attendance of GOD's Kingdom.

    Votes: 22 1.8%
  • Fair C - Freedom from corporeal shackles. Given limited, general attendance of GOD's Kingdom.

    Votes: 22 1.8%
  • Poor D - Reincarnated as Man to be given a second chance at attempting to earn GOD's graces.

    Votes: 39 3.2%
  • Fail F - Reincarnated as a non-human for 326 years, 221 days, and 14 hours.

    Votes: 76 6.2%
  • Fail F - Sentenced to eternal tortures in HELL for crimes against THE LORD GOD.

    Votes: 106 8.6%
  • Fail F - Forced to post on the kiwifarms.net for 24 years, 30 days, and 2 hours.

    Votes: 802 64.9%

  • Total voters
    1,235
Man I ask to be reincarnated as a wolf and brad instead makes me a stupid bird. Birds are gay and stupid. Unless it's an eagle.
There's always the possibility that you will be an eagle that some incredibly dimwitted pet store owners attempt to sell as a parakeet before you inevitably rebel, ruin their store, and break free to live your sick nasty eagle life
 
Ya, are you familiar with the Planet Nestor? I AM its Founder (Fod.). When I built(64=B2+U21+I9+L12+T20) it, I used the mathematical model/algorithm of FOD=6_4. It has...

6 continents & 4 seasons, '6 Seas' & 4 oceans, ~64% of its surface is water. Nestor's large moon has 4 phases of roughly 6 days (~6.4 days) each. Lunar year of 306 days + 6 day week + 4 days = 316 day solar year. The Nestlings with the naked eye see the 6 Classical Planets and 4 are 'wandering stars'. In their solar system, there are 6 planets besides Nestor and 4 of these are non-rocky gas or ice giants. There's two inner plan-its at .6 & .4 AU and/or 6 & 4 AU. The orbit64 of their 'Venus' is 6.4 average Nestor months (26.33 days) = 168.5 days. Etc.

The Nestlings speak Eqfish(6,64=E5+Q17+F6+I9+S19+H8), recofnize Fod as the Creator, love to play checkers & chess (64-square board), and their gavorite beer is Miller 64.


"In the befinninf Fod6_4 created the healens64 and the Nestor." - Fenkis64 1:1, Byble46
"In the befinninf was the Word, and the Word was with Fod, and the Word was FOD." - Juan46 1:1


Synchronism: 4/29/15 07:32 The World Golf Championship-Cadillac Match Play has 64 of the top male golfers in brackets ready to compete this morning. - Golf Channel

"On Nestor, the folgers drink golfers." - my firlgriend

A word salad of my own:

In spite of their banter and ridicule in ALL WAYS to the contrary, Brad Watson tends to remain clueless about what is actually happening to their views in such cases, and consequently hap(e)less to counter such- just like my big brother. Also typically, as I have stated repeatedly of your comments in the past, you won't explain yourself- even when asked for details. Matt and I learned a long time ago that Brad Watson tends to overlook much in science when the subjects are things they detest. YOU SHOULD BE SO FREE!

ID is much more scientific in this variable's definition than cajoling, impressionistic Brad Watson are. The statement also gets based on other cases added in that I am reflecting on at the time. BRAD WATSON’S THEORIES ARE TRULY A FICTICIOUS SCIENCE. That has to hurt a little.

We can make a lot out of ironies, sarcasm, farces, and other literary devices from their statements while they gaze as if absolutely clueless about what is going on. I think this view from RS at minimum is a dose of wishful thinking shaped into a personal ideal or pipe dream. SHAME ON S(K)UTCH RACISM!

Synchronization: a thought provoking Video of Freedom VS Destiny

 
You've rudely judged me, therefore...

By the power(77) vested in me by GOD as His/Her Christ(77=C3+H8+R18+I9+S19+T20), I hereby rule that 4/29/15 is your Judgment Day: you FAIL.

Sentence: Really bad luck for the rest of your life, then your eternal soul won't be reincarnated as human for 666 years. When you are born-again as human, it will be under really hellish circumstances.

Etc. court(77)

- Brad(25) Watson(77), Miami
GOD's Judge of All(25) Humanity


cc: http://7seals.yuku.com

Uh, no - 0% possibility of that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You've rudely judged me, therefore...

By the power(77) vested in me by GOD as His/Her Christ(77=C3+H8+R18+I9+S19+T20), I hereby rule that 4/29/15 is your Judgment Day: you FAIL.

Sentence: Really bad luck for the rest of your life, then your eternal soul won't be reincarnated as human for 666 years. When you are born-again as human, it will be under really hellish circumstances.

Etc. court(77)

- Brad(25) Watson(77), Miami
GOD's Judge of All(25) Humanity


cc: http://7seals.yuku.com

@shinimasu

He is now going after you because you have not posted much and are likely to respond Sensically. Try responding more like Brad(Really Richard):

Like so:

The terms refer to different levels in a hierarchy when not used very, very loosely (and I would argue- even incorrectly), and only WHEN suitably juxtaposed in related contexts that make clear any need for crude references, or nuance-adjusting forms. No, Brad Watson wants to use scientific terms indistinctly and casually when it piques their fancy. And they want to do so in the same week they deny opponents the same scientific latitude/liberties. In your favor, of course, we can never be 100% sure in doing interpretation of findings in science, but then again, both justice and other sciences don't require such devout, unprecedented strictness and bloodletting laid down at the feet of ID because of what I see as many Brad Watson' subjective need for revenge and nonreligious purity. You've been shown to the contrary repeatedly but just don't want to believe it. A CHILDISHLY SIMPLE, OVERLY REDUCTIVE VIEW OF THINGS--I THINK ONCE AGAIN.

And to justify the absurdity implied in that, rhetoric runs rampant and wrecklessly over science. Elsewhere in science, these would only be deemed opinions. HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO READ CONCLUSIONS DRAWN ON SIMPLE, LAZY PREASSUMPTIONS ATTRIBUTED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF GROUP STEREOTYPING AND ILLOGICAL REASONING PRACTICES IN SCIENTIFIC DEBATE? I call it a dogmatic view thus.

And they take their findings to support the toe without looking closely at the matter. If Brad Watson vacuous travels any further in thought, reasoning, or criticism, it seems, than personal viewpoint. IT IS NO DIFFERENT THAN SETI IN THAT REGARD.



What is wrong @Brad Watson_Miami , running out of people to antagonize?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Have a Pepsi
@Brad Watson_Miami Can you post an audio recording of your equivalent of a sermon/mass?
No, I do not ask people to worship me. I do ask that people recognize me, learn my teachings, obey the 10 Commandments including "Thou shall not kill", and practice the Golden Rule: "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you."
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: Trombonista
No, I do not ask people to worship me. I do ask that people recognize me, learn my teachings, obey the 10 Commandments including "Thou shall not kill", and practice the Golden Rule: "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you."

Wrong, that is the same thought as this nice Salad:

Do you actually believe a wheel steers a car and not a driver, or a gun kills a turkey and not a hunter? Well, that's the way you're approaching scientific methodologies using out-of-hand, simpleminded rejection of causal alternatives here. Why not give my critique here more detail? They are not. BOTH STUPIDITY AND IRRATIONALITY ARE SIGNS OF SENSORY AND NEURAL ACTIVITIES, WHICH QUALIFY AS FORMS OF INTELLIGENCE.

Bradology is truly a subjective science. You must not care about the basis for your assertions or whether someone is trying to find out more about them (Some science that would be!), for eg., whether you are being presumptuous in statement or not. I COULD SIMPLY CALL IT MEANINGLESS AS SIMPLE DEPRECATION, AS BRADOLOGYISTS OFTEN DO They want to underscore in absolute terms their view that ID and creationism have nothing, meaning no evidence at all.

Have you considered the import of 2 Chr. 19:11, Psa. 63.11, Rom. 2:11, Gal. 2:11, Eph. 5.11, and Heb. 5:11? Nowadays, you should consider NYC 9:11, also! I care little for your simple, crude presumption of what is and is not evidentiary. THERE IS NO SUCH PIE IN THE SKY.
 
Can I be some space alien, Brad?
No, that gate is closed. Everyone's eternal soul is locked into staying right here on Mother Earth unless you travel in a spaceship or stargate (artificial wormhole) for the next 1,000 years.
 
No, I do not ask people to worship me. I do ask that people recognize me, learn my teachings, "

... Said the man whose been judging people.
Does this mean we may judge you?

Agreed, he does not want us to worship him just agree with everything he ever said and treat him like God incarnate. Ya that is sounding like he is demanding to be worshiped.

No, that gate is closed. Everyone's eternal soul is locked into staying right here on Mother Earth unless you travel in a spaceship or stargate (artificial wormhole) for the next 1,000 years.

Nice way to try to change the subject Richard! @Brad Watson_Miami

Have another word salad man:

No wonder they sometimes appear absolvently clueless (sic) about attributing cause and effect with real world phenomena. It is done by detectives, by judges, and by juries in our court system as well as moms, pops, teachers, and neighborhood bullies worldwide. The two terms of hypothesis and argument are not regularly used together and especially not commonly used as synonymous. To indicate otherwise as I think was done here was only an artificial, ad hoc fusing of terms to defend a colleague. THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF DOUBLESPEAK IN THIS PARAGRAPH, AND MORE EVIDENCE OF A DOUBLE STANDARD IN BRAD WATSON' CONSIDERATION OF WHAT SCIENCE ACTUALLY IS.

Another point in my bringing that up here is that any discussions of definitional uses of evidentiary support is essentially irrelevant here. That has to hurt a little. IT SURE BEATS READING ALL THE CHILDISHLY NAIVE, SHALLOW RESPONSES I HAVE SEEN FROM PEOPLE BEING ADMITTEDLY OUTCLASSED HERE. Even in considerations of evidence. They combine considerations opportunistically, i.e, only for the purpose of maintaining the impression that opponents are on the outside of science looking in.

I learned long ago that punchlines and underscored/highlighted conclusions offer a rhetorical advantage. I applaud the action. HE REDUCED IT DOWN IN EQUIVALENCE TO ONE OF MY OWN ERSTWHILE ATTRIBUTIONS OF COMEDY IN ORDER TO SET UP AN IRONY ON HIS OWN.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's your take on Planet Nestor and its FOD=6_4 algorithm/code? Wait a second and I'll copy the above post so you can reply directly under it.

Is everyone familiar with the Planet Nestor? I AM its Founder (Fod.). When I built(64=B2+U21+I9+L12+T20) it, I used the mathematical model/algorithm of FOD=6_4. It has...

6 continents & 4 seasons, '6 Seas' & 4 oceans, ~64% of its surface is water. Nestor's large moon has 4 phases of roughly 6 days (~6.4 days) each. Lunar year of 306 days + 6 day week + 4 days = 316 day solar year. The Nestlings with the naked eye see the 6 Classical Planets and 4 are 'wandering stars'. In their solar system, there are 6 planets besides Nestor and 4 of these are non-rocky gas or ice giants. There's two inner plan-its at .6 & .4 AU and/or 6 & 4 AU. The orbit64 of their 'Venus' is 6.4 average Nestor months (26.33 days) = 168.5 days. Etc.

The Nestlings speak Eqfish(6,64=E5+Q17+F6+I9+S19+H8), recofnize Fod as the Creator, love to play checkers & chess (64-square board), and their gavorite beer is Miller 64.


"In the befinninf Fod6_4 created the healens64 and the Nestor." - Fenkis64 1:1, Byble46
"In the befinninf was the Word, and the Word was with Fod, and the Word was FOD." - Juan46 1:1


Synchronism: 4/29/15 07:32 The World Golf Championship-Cadillac Match Play has 64 of the top male golfers in brackets ready to compete this morning. - Golf Channel

"On Nestor, the folgers drink golfers." - my firlgriend
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And that's contempt-of-court. In your opinion, what would be the appropriate sentence for that in this case. Please directly answer only that question. I AM open to GOOD advice.

Ya, the 'attack-the-messenger' approach. That's really played out.

How about a direct reply to the FOD=6_4 algorithm and how it was used to design58 Plan-it Nestor?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back