lots of things bb4 nf6
How to refute the Bowdler?

It makes sense to add a diagram since a lot of people don't know the names of many openings.This might help you get better advice.

What's the Bowdler?
It doesn't exist. The OP can't spell, can't notate to save himself, and can't provide diagrams.
Where he says "1.e6", he means move 2, and by Black, "2...e6".
And he can't spell. It's Bowlder, NOT Bowdler
1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e6 - The line is crap. After 3.Nc3 Nc6!, White will wish he didn't waste time with the Bishop move as it would be better off being on b5 (1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bb5 e6 4.Bxc6) or that he never moved it in the first place and wishes he had played f4 instead (1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 - Grand Prix Attack), where the Bishop again should either be on b5, or else left at home for 4.Nf3 after 3...e6.
To answer his jibberish, 3...Nc6! Black has already equalized!

That's weird, the chess-dot-com Explorer also calls is the Bowdler Attack.
(edit: Even most of the articles on this ''attack'' call it the Bowdler Attack, so I guess it's actually not ''Bowlder''.)
(Double edit: It actually looks like there is some confusion about it's name)

That's weird, the chess-dot-com Explorer also calls is the Bowdler Attack.
(edit: Even most of the articles on this ''attack'' call it the Bowdler Attack, so I guess it's actually not ''Bowlder''.)
(Double edit: It actually looks like there is some confusion about it's name)
And yet here are the others:
https://gameknot.com/annotation.pl/bowlder-attack-dissection?gm=38478
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence (Under "Others")
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RehLCg6Z5xk'
Either way, the line is crap. Who cares? I don't play 1...c5 frequently, but when I do, you play 2.Bc4 against me, you'll get crushed!
By the way, over time, you will learn that you can barely trust chess.com's naming of openings with a grain of salt!
What's the Bowdler?
It doesn't exist. The OP can't spell, can't notate to save himself, and can't provide diagrams.
Where he says "1.e6", he means move 2, and by Black, "2...e6".
And he can't spell. It's Bowlder, NOT Bowdler
1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e6 - The line is crap. After 3.Nc3 Nc6!, White will wish he didn't waste time with the Bishop move as it would be better off being on b5 (1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bb5 e6 4.Bxc6) or that he never moved it in the first place and wishes he had played f4 instead (1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 - Grand Prix Attack), where the Bishop again should either be on b5, or else left at home for 4.Nf3 after 3...e6.
To answer his jibberish, 3...Nc6! Black has already equalized!
All I wanted was a straightforward answer on how to deal with it (since I deal with it in the local chess club frequently). Instead, I get an answer where you don't even bother to insert a diagram (despite ranting on about how I'm so stupid and can't insert them).

Opening:
Follow the Opening principles:
1. Control the center squares – d4-e4-d5-e5
2. Develop your minor pieces toward the center – piece activity is the key
Ø Complete your development before moving a piece twice or starting an attack.
Ø Move pieces not pawns.
3. Castle
4. Connect your rooks
Ø By move 12, you should have connected your Rooks, or be about to do so.

is it not an offshoot of tan sicillian i think an dutch gm Robin vankamplen plays it look at some of his games
THOMAS BOWDLER
Bowdler was born near Bath, England in 1754. He was a physician and a strong amateur chess player, but was most famous for publishing an expurgated edition of William Shakespeare's works that he considered to be more appropriate for women and children. His expurgation was the subject of criticism, and--through the eponym bowdlerize--his name is now associated with censorship of art and media.
He played François André Philidor eight times (in blindfold exhibitions and/or accepting odds), finishing +2 -2 =3. His game T Bowdler vs H Conway, 1788 is considered to be the first recorded example of a double rook sacrifice.
(source: chessgames.com)
Hopefully this will put the "Bowdler vs Bowlder" dispute to rest. Talk about bowdlerizing the Sicilian...

From what I've seen (I've been learning the Sicilian, and see the Bowdler a lot, and hence decided to study it), there is no refutation.
The Bowdler isn't terribly good, probably giving up the advantage on the second move, but it isn't a losing line, either. After either 2...e6 or 2...Nc6, white can choose either 3. Nc3 or 3. Nf3, maintaining equality and leading to a fairly balanced game. The position isn't very sharp, with lots of playable lines on both sides. White generally plays both Nc3 and Nf3, while black will play something like a Kan in many situations (i.e. with a6, c5, Nc6, and e6). Black intends to gain space and tempo with either b5 or d5 at some point. White will develop fairly normally, with Nc3, d4, and castling at some point.
The e6 pawn means that the bishop on c4 can be somewhat misplaced, often dropping back to d3 or e2. In general, play is similar to many lines in the Kan, though in most lines of the Kan the light bishop moves to either e2 or d3, not c4. The Bowdler has the advantage of more or less forcing this sort of play, avoiding some of the sharper lines in the Sicilian. However, there are other ways to pursue these sorts of positions that don't give up white's advantage. Here's a typical way the Bowdler might play out, constructed with engine analysis:
At most points in this, both sides have half a dozen decent move options, so it's unlikely that a game would progress this way.
I know it gains a tempo on the bishop after 2...e6 and preparing 3...d5, but what if White plays 3.Nc3 to try and restrict d5?