Um...Who's Toxic?

Typing “Um…”, which isn’t a natural part of written speech, but meant to posture as sincere questioning, and then following it up with a insincere rhetorical question that you’ve already implied an answer for before you asked it.

You stand to "Welcome" people here?

Insincere rhetorical question and scare-quotes.

OOOH.

Pure smug condescension, ironically feigning approval.

You the King of the non-God-non-smug universe?

An accusation in the form of an insincere rhetorical question.

Let them be smug, let them transubstantiate, let them babble in tongues; I have nothing to say

But you do, have something to say to their critics, you’ve just assumed that you personally have the arbitrary authority to decide on which group’s ideas and practices should be commented on which groups should remain silent.

the whole world is but a simple existential investigation.

This is an extraordinary claim, that everything that can be rightly be said about the world can be reduced to the subjective experiences of those experiencing it.

I personally have no conclusions that would qualify me to invite jack shit to an outhouse.

The only truthful statement made here.

You?

followed with another insincere question for which you’ve already implied the answer is that everyone else as unqualified as you are, and knows as little as you do.

Something about doubt being uncomfortable, certainty ridiculous; I am certain about nothing.

It is obvious that you are supremely comfortable with posturing as an extreme relativist. It’s also obvious that you are completely certain that this posture provides you a lofty perch of self-satisfied enlightenment from which you can smugly ridicule people who believe that there is a hierarchy of evidence for truth claims.

You?

Smug relativist confirmed.