Thursday, March 22, 2012

Who Lied? PZ Myers? Rebecca Watson? Buntzums?

Who Lied? PZ Myers? Rebecca Watson? Buntzums?

YouTube comment page for the above video

Myers, Myers, pants on fire? This may be longest rant I've ever made. And yeah, there is a bit of ElevatorGate in here too (from 6:30 to 10:30) along with the main topic. The main topic is the lie that's been spread about my "I See Nasty People" video.

The lie Buntzums claims she learned at Pharyngula, says I edited out something important. I did not do that.

Compare it and see for yourself, Full proof is in viewing and comparing the links below. Compare my handler story excerpt (the Nasty People vid), with the full talk it was taken from (the Skepticon 3 vid). You will see that my video contains the entire 'handler story' section of the full talk. If you still want to deny that, SHOW ME THE TIMESTAMP where I'm said to have edited something. It would be easy to prove if had I actually edited it. Seriously. The accusation that I edited out part of the handler story is easily proven to be false.

Compare the two:
1. "I See Nasty People" My video that Buntzums claims has something edited regarding Rebecca's handler story. The truth though, is that between some audio effects, which are at the very beginning and the very end for emphasis, my video contains the entire, unedited handler story.

2. "Rebecca Watson Skepticon 3 "How to Ruin Christmas"" The full talk, within which you can view the handler story that I excerpted. You can see for yourself whether or not the handler story segment matches the excerpt in my vid. Spoiler: It does.

YouTube channels of people I referred to in this video: (YouTube feminist) (Rebecca Watson) (PZ Myers) (another channel of PZs) (Amet)

Confabulate/confabulation means:
--to fill in gaps in memory by fabrication
--the replacement of a gap in a person's memory by a falsification that he or she believes to be true.

"PZ Myers" "Rebecca Watson" Buntzums liar "lying about editing" "practical joke fail" "I did not edit out parts of my video" "here's proof on a silver platter" "compare it yourself and see" "Watson, a liar or cruel?"

After recording the video embedded above, I continued to talk with Buntzums, my false accuser, via pm. I sent her this:

She then sent me the following. As you can see, even though she started things with a false accusation, she's now starting up the usual feminist twisting of things. She's setting the stage for HER being the victim. When I asked her to prove her accusations of me, and by giving her proof on a silver platter that her accusation was false, rather than face things, she's now acting as though I'm threatening her with some sort of punishment. Why is the truth punishment to her? I don't get it. But one thing I do know, is that she's still not retracting her false accusation that I edited the I See Nasty People video.

I can see where this is going. Any more asking her to be responsible for her false claims will be seen as picking on her. She sees blogging about this as something bad. Maybe it is, to someone who is shown to be both wrong and stubborn in refusing to retract her lie. The next step that feminists tend to take once the victim cry has started, is to call all further interactions 'stalking', so I let her know in a final pm that I will no longer contact her after this last one:

This is rich. Notice how I said "Next you'll be acting like I'm picking on you, even though it's really you who came to pick on ME with false editing accusations"? Well, can I call them, or is this sometimes just too easy? With almost pathetic reliability, this is what she sent back:

I think it's obvious at this point that she will never retract or defend the false accusation of editing she made about my video. I'd still like to know more about where she heard this though. She says it was at Pharyngula, but, even though PZ knows Buntzums is saying she got this lie from Pharyngula, I doubt he has enough integrity to either say A; I said yours was edited, but I was wrong, or B; I was only talking about another video and Buntzums must have assumed yours was edited too, or C; some other reasonable explanation, like maybe someone else in the comments at the blog told Buntzums that and got it wrong.

[EDIT: PZ now says that he didn't tell anyone that my video was edited. I have asked him to let Buntzums know, but have no idea if he will do so.]

Notice, in the video at the top of this article, before we pm'd, in the comments screencapped in the video, it shows that Buntzums attempted to do a Gish Gallop after accusing me? It continued into the pms as well. A Gish Gallop is when they say something and you respond, they ignore it and then say something different or about a side topic, you start to respond to that one, and they just gallop all over the place leaving new piles of horseshit. Once they are on a gallop, it's futile responding to any of the new things they bring up. They'll just respond with another partial or full subtopic change. They won't stand still long enough to actually discuss in a back and forth manner any of the things they say. It's a string of "shit 'n runs".

When I notice someone doing that, I repeatedly try to get them back on the original unresolved part of the topic. The very first one. In Buntzums case, it was her accusation that I did an edit changing the context, and that that caused her to change her initial opinion of the Nasty People video. That's quite the accusation. She refused though, to be responsible for it, and began to Gish Gallop away. Each time, I refused to follow her to her topic change. Each time, I asked her for proof of her accusation, and I showed her that I had proof of the accusation's falseness. And each time, she stubbornly refused to either retract or prove her accusation. She refused to even talk about it. Finally, as you see above, she put up her "help! she's picking on me" new accusation. It's an attempt to get out of answering to, or being responsible for, the accusation she made about my video.


  1. Very good article and video. Keep up the good work, SC. The moral cowardice and hypocrisy of the Baboons never fails to amaze

  2. Thanks C Tuvok. I'm also in constant amazement, especially when someone pulls a Gish Gallop AND a textbook case of "feminist who's-the-victim switcheroo". :)

  3. 'spose I should post here, no fair making you trawl through a ~4k comment thread for a response to your article!

    Seems this Buntzums character could have avoided the heat she received if she had asked "PZ or someone on pharyngula stated that this video is edited, what do you say to that?". Instead she takes the accusatory path, taking the accusation as her own, and as such she takes the responsibility of evidence upon herself. And failed.

    Perhaps all is not lost? Even if she is saving face, it was a lesson in taking FFTB "information" with a grain of salt. Hopefully she will exercise more caution in future.

  4. PZ showed up at the I See Nasty People YouTube thread, and even though he says he was unable to watch more than 30 seconds of my vids (even that one with Rebecca?), he stayed long enough to deny that he's told anyone my vid was edited. That part's good, but he passive/aggressively never does fuck all when he sees his commentors making extra shit up, like, in this case, deciding ALL vids made from that clip are edited. I've asked him to let Buntzums know that it's not edited, since she says she heard it was at Pharyngula. I don't know if he will though.

    Buntzums is overtly avoiding my proof that I did not edit, preferring instead to believe whoever told her it was no matter what. She might not even be bright enough to compare vids and is avoiding it for that too.

    I myself will not initiate any further conversations with Buntzums because, as you can see in her pms (above in the article) to me, she has started the transition into "fragile victim", and if you ask her to prove her nasty accusations, it means to her that you are picking on her. That's the type who's too cuckoo to even converse with.