[chuck]Two years, four months, and today we get our second piece of hate mail, from an attorney named Grant. I guess we’re just mostly too darn loveable to generate much hate mail. This particular piece is from a concern troll who would like us to change our attitude because gosh darn it, we just might be harming the cause of atheism.
Grant doesn’t like us, but he’s mighty impressed by Lee Strobel, who apparently was so curious about Christianity in his hard-hitting investigative Quest for Truth that he only talked to conservative evangelicals. Grant’s bit about thermodynamics and evolution is also priceless, betraying a fundamental lack of knowledge about both. You can read it yourself after the jump. Not surprisingly, it originates from an aol.com email addie.
I would like you to know that I have perused some of the material on your site, as I am quite interested in the theist/atheist debate. For your information, at this point I am still somewhat on the fence concerning exactly what God might or might not be. I haven’t made up my mind yet.
Nevertheless, I have to tell you that I found your website to be overall a pretty poor defense of atheism in general. First of all, because of the incredibly bad attitudes displayed by both you and your “subscribers”. You probably think it is all a big joke or something, but frankly, as a fairly responsible adult I can tell you that to me you all come across as little more than a bunch of sarcastic, foul-mouthed misfits, with extremely rotten people and communication skills that in the end do as much to harm your so-called “position” on religion as defend it. For the most part you all come across to me as smug, snot-nosed adolescents that were never taught any manners by their elders (or how to respect anyone but themselves), and because of serious problems with personal ego and some degree of emotional arrest are, as a result, in serious rebellion against just about anything and everything, solely for the sake of rebellion and not for any rational reason.
Also, many of your arguments fall seriously flat in the logic, reason, and scientific categories (I am in the legal field, and I know something about logic and reason, being forced to rely on it often in the courtroom). You put forth a number of so-called “intellectual” positions that are viciously flung into the reader’s face as if they are “facts” (instead of just theories, opinions, and/or speculations), and then you adopt an extremely smug, condescending, “this is right just because I’m smarter than you” attitude toward anyone who might decide to disagree with you. (Some examples: the total bullshit about energy from the sun somehow completely negating the properties of thermodynamics and allowing evolution to take place; and the entirely far-too-early assumption that life is somehow being “miraculously” created from nothing more than inert chemicals by hydrothermal vents in the ocean. Neither of these ideas has been scientifically proven, but that doesn’t stop you and your “followers” from proudly and self-righteously parading them around on your site as if they have been.)
Lately I have been reading material by Lee Strobel, a former award-winning investigative reporter with the Chicago Tribune. I find his arguments for theism compelling and reasonable — and his rational investigation of the facts by seeking out the opinions of people recognized as being experts in their fields to base his own opinions on resonate with me. I also relate to the fact that at one time he was an avowed atheist himself, until he decided to research the question of God himself just as he would research any other investigation. His professionalism also resonates with me. I find little or no professionalism on your website. Again, all I find is a bunch of foul-mouthed, snot-nosed kids (I don’t know how old many of you are, but you come across mostly as either kids, or emotionally-stunted adults) shoving their self-absorbed opinions into other people’s faces simply for the sheer twisted joy of seeing the negative reaction that results. There is nothing serious or rational about such an immature approach to what is a very important question to most people.
My suggestion to you: if you want to be taken seriously by anyone who really matters in this world, then drop all the bad attitude and foul-mouthed bullshit on your site, and start applying some real legitimate investigative and research skills to what you do. That way, you might end up attracting some people to your site that are something other than just societal oddballs, rebels, and dedicated nonconformists.
Sincerely,
Grant
My advice: get off the fence and go believe in your precious mythologies. We don’t want you.
46 Responses to “Hate Mail #2”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- Kirk Hastings, Sock Puppet? – Irreligiosophy - [...] given the amount of questioning going on about the source of our Hate Mail #2 and similarities in tone,…
Its because you guys are the best kept secret in atheism.
The hidden enclave, if you will, to which the best and most prominent atheists return for refueling, and thus gird their loins for battle against the forces of mediocrity.
First off I don’t even think I understand what he’s saying about thermodynamics.
Second, he’s probably an irate fan of E4F and since you guys completely ass-raped them out of existence he’s just butt-hurt too.
Third, what is all this babble about being quiet, kind, professional and unexceptional in how we talk to people?
wow I actually read this and feel more mature already. My rebuttal?
Meat goes in, life comes out.
You can’t explain that.
Where to begin?
How is a hard-to-find podcast that you have to go out of your way to locate and then choose to listen to considered, “shoving [your] self-absorbed opinions into other people’s faces”?
I imagine if your podcasts were inserted into suppositories and shoved up your own asses that still would be considered too In-your-face for Grant.
As for Irreligiosophy being: ” little more than a bunch of sarcastic, foul-mouthed misfits, with extremely rotten people and communication skills” I have to say I’ve been exposed to more actual scholarly biblical content, history and criticism through this show than most anywhere else.
Actually I should be kind of pissed at you guys for that.
I particularly enjoyed his condemnation of “foul-mouthed bullshit.”
@Jack Pollack Thanks for introducing me to a new way to enjoy the podcast.
“you might end up attracting some people to your site that are something other than just societal oddballs, rebels, and dedicated nonconformists”
when that happens…i’m leaving….
He passes for reasonable at first, if a bit unnecessarily pissed off, and my impression of him was bolstered a bit by his writing style and occupation. But that reputation was short-lived. I laughed when he implied that he’s a creationist; his credibility flew out the window entirely at that point. Anyone who seems reasonable, but then reveals that they hold anti-scientific positions is a moron. The least this guy could do is take us seriously enough to go to his local library and take out a college biology text, turn to the section on evolution, and read it all the way through. Couldn’t be much harder than a few books of the Bible, could it? Anyone who says evolution isn’t real simply has never made the commitment to learn anything at all about it — except from religious sources, that is, since they’re bound to agree.
If you’re a lawyer, go do something you should already know how to do: research. Don’t just bathe in the rhetoric of the defense, but pay attention to the prosecutor’s position too. Learn some fucking science. Till you do that, you’re just a common idiot not worth anyone’s time.
Good pretend god. Tell me that at least one other person read this and immediately realized that Grant does not exist. This email was clearly written by Kirk Hastings. Compare the writing style to the email posted last week. Then compare the contents of this email with the major points from the E4F debate.
Kirk “Fundy” Hastings! J’ACCUSE!
@Gliblord. We shall call it “podkeestering” – when earbuds just aren’t private enough.
So how do we celebrate the good news (pun intended) of this hate-mail? There must be something we should be able to do, other than read it and point out Grant’s errors.
And as a skeptic, I have doubts as to whether this hate-mail is real. It came after there was a cry in the interview of David Silverman, that there is no hate-mail for Irreligiosophy.
To quote Richard Dawkins, “A mind like that, it seems to me, is… well… a disgrace to the human species.”
I think this just shows how people in the ‘legal field’ know absolutely jack shit except the specific, unnatural language of the law.
That’s not to say that lawyers, judges, etc., can’t educate themselves further like everyone else. But assuming ‘Grant’ is actually in the legal field and assuming generously that he is in fact qualified, he has proved he’s a complete moron otherwise with this 2nd law shit.
Closed system + outside source of energy = No longer closed system. You know, magic.
spectacular letter. My theory is that the owners of the emails ireligiosophy@gmail.com, irreligiosofy@gmail.com, irreligiosaphy@gmail.com, irreligosophy@gmail.com are getting a fuckload of angry emails.
Come on, this is really standard theist crybaby bullshit. Bring the arguments, you asshole!
These theists are always trying to create a false sense of guilt on everyone. One is always stupid, arrogant, ignorant, etc etc.
Your first piece of hate mail comes from someone named Grant? Man, this is a sad day for Grants everywhere…
@Admiral Annoy “I think this just shows how people in the ‘legal field’ know absolutely jack shit except the specific, unnatural language of the law. ” After three years of law school and the bar exam, I am not sure how Hell could be any worse to be honest…
But seriously, I find the legal field to be more agnostic than anything else, and that does make a lot sense. We train our selves to believe in any argument that suits/helps the client. Why cut off the possibility of God, if we do not need to. In my case, in college I was much closer to leaning towards atheism, but after law school and being in the field, I am leaning more towards, “I do not really know to be honest…”
Also the harshest critics of the Bible/Christianity/Judaism (before I met I landed on this site that is), have been from lawyers from that faith. Must lawyers do believe in justice, and even then ones that don’t can see the contradictions in the bible.
Really I have never heard how it could possibly be justfor God to send a she-bear to kill children for calling someone bald. How exactly do the faithful respond to that one..
This email was clearly written by Kirk Hastings.
Savemejeebus, you may be right. Let’s compare email addresses:
kirkhastings5@aol.com
grantgardner44@aol.com
Mein Gott! I spy a pattern!
@harayda http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycUqSQtbguo
Shit, if someone called ME bald and I had shebears at my disposal, you can be damn certain there would be 42 dead children in my wake.
Then again, I’m a baby-eating atheist and the foul-mouthed bad attitude of the podcast makes me want to hump my computer because it’s so damn amazing.
Lol I love that getting hate email has become an event
and another thing
“shoving their self-absorbed opinions into other people’s faces simply for the sheer twisted joy of seeing the negative reaction that results”
I do this in all aspects of my life not just with my atheism so take that Mr. Gardner, if that is your real name…
I love how these dopes always infer the core of Chuck and Leighton’s beings from their podcast personas. There’s no such thing as having more than one side to a person I guess.
Long, rambling e-mail in which the writer mainly just bitches about how mean you are and the bad words you use?? No way could that be Kirk…
If there’s another side to Chuck and Leighton than shoving their self-absorbed opinions into others’ faces, I don’t want to know about it. They’d have so much less sex appeal if that were the case.
@Arallyn One of them’s a married man. Seduce him first.
That’s a good idea. I’m pretty sure the other one’s gay.
I can be a man for him. I can be whatever he wants me to be.
I think people are giving Kirk Hastings too much credit. I mean, do you seriously think he’s has the cognitive capacity to create a fake email account to “spam” Irreligiosophy with hate mail?
You can check the ip address of who sent you e-mail. See if it matches the Kirk Hasting one.
If it wasn’t Kirk, then it was a publicist for Lee Strobel. Definitely a theist, whoever wrote it.
Lying for Jesus is the best when it’s during Easter because He had to die for something.
“you all come across as little more than a bunch of sarcastic, foul-mouthed misfits”
I thought that was the general idea. And Chuck, don’t say Leighton’s gay. All the women over at the SGU forum will be sooo disappointed. 🙂
Lets see who’s behind the REAL horrible hate mail haunt Scooby!…
Aaaaaaaaaaahaaaa – Its Kirk Hastings, the grumpy semi-illiterate owner of the E4F podcast.
“Yeah and I would have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for you damn avowed atheist kids!”
Scooby Scooby Dooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo….!
Zowie! Might we attract people like super duper “mattering” people like you, Kirk… er… Grant?
@Dr.Acula: lol, loved that!
Hate Mail FTW!
This guy obviously doesn’t know the definition of “irreligiosophy”.
Insofar as his claim of being in the “legal field”, the woman pushing the hotdog cart on the sidewalk outside the County Justice Center can just as easily make the same claim. I have a thousand times more respect for the hotdog woman, who provides a measurably valuable service, whereas the attorneys seem to do nothing more than pandering to societal oddballs, rebels, and dedicated nonconformists.
…he lost me at thermodynamics…
The letter writer plugged the meat (see also nuked the fridge
I loved that he dropped Lee Strobel in there. From one blow hard attorney to another blow hard attorney. He tried to dial in Denny Crane and ended up conjuring Hackey, Joake & Dunnit
I love the way he calls us “kids”. I’m probably one of the most foul mouthed people on the forum. I turned 49 last week.
Maybe I am emotionally stunted. Must be from my Catholic upbringing.
While I disagree with his conclusion, you can’t say he’s not observant. Case in point –
“I can tell you that to me you all come across as little more than a bunch of sarcastic, foul-mouthed misfits, with extremely rotten people and communication skills..”
betraying? do you mean portraying chuck? can you betray knowledge?
Yeah, he completely lost me at the sun/thermodynamics comparison, but I was a bit irritated by the lawyer=claim to authority. I work with lawyers pretty regularly, and I can’t think of one who would want to make that kind of claim. I’ve since heard it was a sock puppet message (and I’m not sure what this strange obsession says…), but I would have responded in a few ways. One, lawyers aren’t scientists; they have no special credibility when it comes to matters of science. Two, for all of the “logic” vaunted in this message, get three lawyers in the room and you’ll get three different opinions on just about any subject. =P Law is a trade and a skill, and you might be good at your particular trade, but you’re not an authority- not even necessarily on matters of law. That’s why there are rules about legal specializations.
Of course, all that is moot now, unless the e4f folk are attorneys.
I for one wouldn’t want this fuck wit representing me in court.
I dont know if he actually says hes an attorney, …’I am in the legal field… being forced to rely on it often in the courtroom.’ … he could just be a repeat offender.
Now I am from New Zealand, but from what I understand, you guys are pretty strongly for the freedom of speech over there in the US. For a lawyer protecting people’s rights, he sure seems to have problems with people expressing their own beliefs, unless of course you guys have starting spreading atheism by going door to door…..