Recent Comments

1. about 12 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   What spoiler? That the house was burglarized? Duh.

2. about 16 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   “he seems to be seen as a living animal by the wild animals in the woods as he appears as a living animal when walking in the woods with Calvin.”

   Your implied claim that Hobbes is shown as interacting with, affecting, or being sensed by animals is a flat out lie. All we EVER see is what Calvin imagines.

   “a Sunday strip from last year seemed to suggest that Hobbes had chased some animals away.”

   As usual, you omit facts in order to deceive. It was Calvin who assumed that Hobbes had done so. No animal was EVER shown being chased by Hobbes. Your citation of your “evidence” shows that your claim that you don’t try to prove Hobbes is real is false.

3. about 16 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   “If we accept that Hobbes can walk around on his own – as he is sometimes shown doing”

   Since you’ve admitted that Calvin can imagine this, there’s no reason to accept it as “evidence” of Hobbes being real.

   “there ARE two ways I can think of in which he COULD have scared off the thieves. Either the thieves heard him moving around or they saw that a “stuffed doll” had gone from one spot to another and concluded that there must be someone else in the house.”

   Hobbes is NEVER shown as being able to interact with, affect, or be sensed by anyone other than Calvin. EVER. There is no evidence whatsoever that Hobbes scared off anyone. Calvin’s mom found him under the bed covers, exactly where he was when the family left the house. If Hobbes HAD scared them off, they would NOT have stolen the TV and the other items. So he was NOT able to defend the house of his “best friend”. How interesting.

   As has been said, a claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

4. about 16 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   There is no evidence whatsoever that Hobbes scared off anyone. Calvin’s mom found him under the bed covers, exactly where he was when the family left the house. If Hobbes HAD scared them off, they would NOT have stolen the TV and the other items.

5. about 17 hours ago on The Born Loser

   Too bad that Brutus doesn’t behave according to the rest of Newton’s First Law: He won’t remain in motion after Rancid applies force.

6. about 18 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   “I keep pointing out that I am not “trying to prove that Hobbes is alive””.

   When I began this exchange with you, you kept citing “evidence” to support your flat out claim that Hobbes Is objectively real, a solid living animal.

   I’ve shown your “evidence” has no validity. That’s why you’ve backed off your claim and adopted your “I’m not trying to prove anything” stance.

   “I have outlined the two strips which show Hobbes as alive when Calvin is not with him and stated that this started me to question my assumption that Hobbes was meant to be part of Calvin’s imagination.”

   You’ve admitted that Calvin can imagine Hobbes alone, so it’s “evidence” of nothing.

   “it could be either Hobbes as a doll…It seems to be a deliberately ambiguous drawing of Hobbes by Watterson.”

   You’re forced to acknowledge that Watterson gave no proof of the reality of Hobbes.

   “I have also explained that I got the quote “I suspect he’s more real than any kid would make up” from The Encyclopaedia of Cartoon Animals which was published in 1991 and which I bought and read in April 1992. It does not give the context in which Watterson used it but gives it as Watterson’s view on Hobbes.”

   That doesn’t explain why you deliberately used the word could instead of would and continue to omit the complete context even after I corrected you and provided the source for the complete quote. You’re obviously still trying to deceive.

   “Calvin sees Hobbes one way. Everyone else sees Hobbes another way.”

   I’ll point out yet again that the washing machine strips destroy the “it’s all about subjective perception” claim. The machine perceives nothing. It’s an inanimate object. It can only hold what is objectively small enough to fit in it. Therefore, the true size of Hobbes MUST objectively be that of a doll. This has been pointed out to you many times. You’ve never been able to argue against it. You know this, yet you pretend otherwise.

7. about 19 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   “I read the 1989 quote by Watterson which I have sometimes misquoted.”

   You deliberately used the word could instead of would even after I corrected you and provided the source for the accurate quote. You’re quite shameless with your attempts at deception.

   “As you say, the real quote from Watterson is ‘I suspect he’s more real than any kid would make up’”.

   As usual, you attempt to deceive by omitting the entire quote, which is:

   WATTERSON: It would seem to me, though, that when you make up a friend for yourself, you would have somebody to agree with you, not to argue with you. So Hobbes is more real than I suspect any kid would dream up.

   WEST: Well, at the risk of getting into psychobabble, a lot of psychologists would say that children create imaginary friends to play out family dramas. So an argument can be just as much a part of an imaginary world as, you know, a sort of sentimental, gooey friendship can be.

   WATTERSON: Yeah, well, I would hope that the friendship between Calvin and Hobbes is so complex that it would transcend a normal fantasy.

   Richard West is pointing out that Watterson’s assumption that no one would make up a friend who would argue with him is psychologically invalid. Watterson also invalidated his own assumption by showing Calvin enjoying a fight with Hobbes, and Calvin obviously would do something he enjoys. Therefore, Watterson’s “suspicion” has no basis, leaving you nothing to be “convinced” by. Watterson admits the friendship is a fantasy. I’ve pointed this out repeatedly, but, much like Calvin, you pretend it doesn’t exist. Both of you prefer your delusions.

   “which explained…things shown in the strip such as Hobbes being alive when completely alone and Hobbes playing tricks on Calvin – who sometimes doesn’t know he’s been tricked.”

   You’ve admitted that Calvin can imagine Hobbes alone and pretend to be tricked, so your “explanation” isn’t needed. You pretend otherwise.

8. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   Oh brother. Yet another attempt at an argument from authority fallacy (“I’m right because I worked with scientists”). You present no actual evidence for the idea that animals are capable of conscious “friendship”. The best you can do is cite the Donner party, which was a case of people resorting to eating those who had died in order to survive. That’s not the same as the bear eating the guy trying to make “friends” with him AT ALL. It’s also not an argument to say “animals are capable of conscious friendship because humans sometimes commit murder”.

9. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

   I’m not surprised that feelings are all that matter to you.

10. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    We know that Watterson is a misanthrope. He thinks very little of his own species. He rarely has anything positive to say about people.