Standing For Truth has always been Stooping For Lies.

How to keep it straight:

"You're wrong because you're dumb" - ad hominem
"You're dumb because you're wrong" - NOT ad hominem.

You know, I am proud of my inner estrogen. It's this thing all vertebrates have, male and female. Fun times.

Mental note: never piss off Erika. She goes for the throat, brings receipts, and slathers the snark on your cold, dead corpse when she's done eviscerating you. Damn. I'm living for this!

“They’re Homophobic AND homoerotic , sometimes  both at the same time” is my favorite thing you’ve ever said 😂

Erika explaining penis anatomy to young earth creationist men is the greatest thing ever.

I truly do not understand how Erika only has 39k subscribers, her channel is one of the best science education channels on the YouTube, she should have more

“There are no transitional fossils”
“Here’s a fossil that’s really close, but different, to homo sapiens”
“That’s just a human”
“Here’s a fossil that’s really distant, but still has similarities, to homo sapiens”
“That’s just an ape”
“Here’s hundreds of fossils in between, each becoming more and more similar to homo sapiens as we approach our first appearance in the fossil record”
“I dunno man, I just see lots of apes and lots of humans.”

AronRa was correct when he said they should call themselves "Stooping For Lies"

RawMatt: "Humans are different from apes because we have beards"

In that same frame: shows a chimp with a beard

Erika, paying attention to SFT so nobody else has to. Not all heroes wear capes.

«Standing for truth» is another confirmation that a channel with the word «truth» in it's name is a channel that does everything to stay as far away from anything truthful as possible, and then, some more.

Knowing that this was likely pre-recorded for your honeymoon makes me appreciate it all the more.  Hope you're having an excellent time!

Nonstop dodgeball references are the absolute strangest quirk of them all, somehow.

He does look like someone said "used car salesman" three times in a mirror.

not all heroes wear capes. thanks gutsick!

SFT might not be worth our time, but I think Erika's video covering it is very much worth it.

So sft is basically matt powell by another name.

People who feel they need to point out how "respectful" and "sophisticated" they are, are more than likely neither of those things.

Just to provide my personal experience with this cartoon character

From late 2018 to early 2019, back when he still had the 'spongebob imagination meme as his avatar, Standing for Truth (SFT) and I were still conversing a lot. Obviously, we didn't agree on practically anything, but we still communicated. I ended up in a chat on google hangouts together with SFT and several other individuals. In that chat room, we went over several of SFT's talking points, trying really hard to explain simple things to him... but to no avail. Meanwhile,  I also wrote comments on the forum called 'League of Reason' (LOR) addressing some his talking points.

Very often, SFT would turn on his 'internet-debate-bro' mode and become very belligerent; simply dismissing any point made against him without providing an actual argument, often followed by a random challenge to a live youtube debate, and calling me a 'chicken' (i.e. coward) preemptively. I told him that I would not do a live debate, because I am convinced it would be unproductive. A live debate is an exercise in argumentative rhetoric mainly for public entertainment, and the winner is the one who can speak with the most confidence, rather than who has the evidence on their side. That's why filibustering and Gish-Galloping are very effective debate strategies. It's NOT an effective medium for an honest and rigorous discourse where the evidence cam be efficiently discussed. This is why scientists generally do not engage in live debates with one another.

In an attempt to regain a productive conversation, I proposed to have a written discussion on the LOR forum. SFT agreed on the condition that would I address another one of his claims. However, once I did, he said he didn't want to join the forum since he was too busy with youtube debates... so going back on his agreement. He also said he will continue reading my comments on the forum (he mistakenly referred to them as "blogs") and make response videos to them. So, he is too busy to join the forum, but not too busy to make video responses? After a while, I apparently convinced SFT that it would be much easier for both of us to discuss things on the LOR forum, where we can take our time to write our responses and address one point at a time. I would also let him decide on which point he would like to discuss first. He agreed to this.

However, it didn't turn out this way. A few hours later, SFT and 3 of his associates went on a 2 hour long live stream where they allegedly debunked Ration alMind and me. Does he seriously expect me to write a response to a 2 HOUR LONG hangout?? Not just that, he also said in that very hangout that this would be the last time he would give any attention to me, effectively ending our conversation before it could really start. Not without reason, I was really getting frustrated with SFT. I asked him what happened with our previous agreement to discuss this on the LOR forum. This is the responses I got. QUOTING VERBATIM:

"Would you like me to set up a debate between you, Jeremy and myself? You can bring Ration. If not then thats [sic] fine but Im [sic] not joining your blog [forum, not blog] Ive [sic] looked over it and the arguments are sad. I will continue making videos debunking anything you put in it. Thanks. This video plus your blog [forum, not blog] is up for everybody to look into and come to a valid conclusion. Quit bugging me about joining its [sic] not going to happen."

"I don't do this for you and the other BIASED atheists. I've chosen to do this to show FELLOW brothers in Christ that you evolutionary heavyweights of YouTube are not as smart as you think. I am enjoying this too much. Joining a forum is not something I am interested in. Debates are quick and easy and people can see both sides and come to a valid conclusion on whose side is better in light of the evidence. You have all fallen one by one, Jackson, RJ & the rest of the crew. You guys should retire because theres [sic] a new sherrif [sic] in town. This is Standing For Truths [sic] territory now. And Jeremy wiped the floor with you guys. You vs Jeremy on Haplogroups. Bring it. Chicken."

END QUOTES. This pretty much confirmed all of my suspicions. SFT is not interested in having an honest conversation and discuss the evidence in a productive manner whatsoever. Not even a tiny bit. He just wants to posture and show-off in front of his creationist associates and sycophants. That's not me being uncharitable. He admitted this right there. As if his self-given online name wasn't ironic enough. It's pretty obvious that SFT has realized a written discussion wouldn't go well for him, because this allows for his opponents the time to do the research that would easily disprove his claims. That is why he outright refuses do to a written discussion. On the other hand, he also can't just ignore me, because his debate-bro ego won't tolerate people getting the idea that he is running away from someone on the internet. That's why he tries to make the conversation as inconvenient as possible, by making replies in the form of videos that can be several hours long, expecting that nobody would bother responding to these avalanches of nonsense. Against our better judgement, Ration alMind and I continued to respond to SFTs live streams. One day, via the google hangouts chat, I notified SFT that I responded to two of his long videos. SFT replied... QUOTING THE FULL RESPONSE VERBATIM:

"No, the videos debunked your nonsense sufficiently. You can do what you have to do but we are onto other things now. Of course Ration says the arguments were "terrible" when in reality your guys arguments were "terrible". See ya"

...he promptly left the chat afterwards.

Hereafter, my eye caught the videos that Raw Matt made on SFTs youtube channel. These videos were often so hilariously wrong. It's almost impressive that someone could be so wrong without actually trying. For a period of time, I would watch every new video (luckily they were often short 10 minute videos) and point out one or a few of the most egregious errors in the comment section. I also downloaded every video that I responded to, such that I now possess a collection (about 10 videos) of marvelous stupidity. At one time, they took down a video I responded to and uploaded an 'updated' version of it. They did not say what they changed about it. Sure enough... the mistakes that I had pointed out before were gone. Just erased without an admission of error. They don't bother informing their audience about it, because they apparently don't care whether their audience ended up believing in the falsehoods they put out. If you are interested in the mistakes that they are too embarrassed about, I uploaded a video "Standing For Truth and Raw Matt - Sweeping their Mistakes under the Rug" where I compared the old and new version of their video.  

FIN

The concept of nested hierarchies was one of the big reasons I decided to accept evolution as scientific truth. If everything was individually specially created you should find every creature to be a different phyla... or at least a lot more diversity than we have, and there should be no way to neatly nest most of the living things we find. Also endogenous retroviruses were a big reason, and the actual existence of transitional fossils which I was lied to before and told didn't exist. When I realized there were transitionals between almost every major taxon I was pissed off at being lied to about that.