[chuck]Granted, he didn’t have far to go, but I give you … The Question Irreligiosophy Project:
This purpose of this page is to call into question the extremely questionable tactics, arguments, actions, beliefs, and philosophies of atheist internet groups like Irreligiosophy, and Facebook pages like Question Creationism, Question The Question Evolution Project, etc. These pages were not created for the purpose of honest intellectual debate, or to advance a sincere search for reason, logic or truth — they are nothing less than hate groups, created to allow their bigoted atheist members the chance to express their irrational hatred for God, for Christians, for the Bible, and for religion in general. This page is a protest against such hate groups.
45 Responses to “I think we broke Kirk Hastings”
Chuck, how did you find this, did Kirk pridefully share it with you?
It would seem he’s bedfellows with Cowboy Bob, gross.
Yes, he mentioned it in a reply to my review of his book on Amazon:
Chuck, your “review” is just as ignorant and hate-filled as your website is. Guess I’ll be “helpful” again here and mention that there now happens to be a FB page that specifically questions Irreligiosophy’s intellectually dishonest tactics (like all the fake “reviews” you’ve had your mindless minions post here recently in order to artificially lower the ratings of my book). Incidentally, if you’re so smart, when are YOU going to write a book giving us YOUR “evidence” for atheism? (What there is of it.)
It’s really kind of sad that Kirk has nothing better to do with his time.
Tsk– I guess we just can’t have nice things around here.
Why, I was thinking Kirk was going to set you up with a nice APPRECIATION website cos’ of you helping make his book sell like hotcakes and all– and now (fan my brow), I’ve come to learn you’ve broken him!
Have you no mercy? No shame? I certainly hope not, because I am awaiting the moment you get over your scaredy-pants fear of Kirk’s book and continue your most excellent review. Grant… er… I mean KIRK is a never-ending font of giggle material! (I’m starting to wonder if there might be a god, after all.)
I’ve gone too long without an Irreligiosophy fix– and I need moar! (I am actually a biology teacher, and I it was very entertaining hearing evolution episode while driving to and from work. Thnx Much– and the new guy is a gem too!)
Oh for goodness’ sake. This persecution complex is starting to get worrisome.
“Hate group?” How dare he say such bkasohemous things against The One True Podcast?
I’m beginning to think Kirk gets his rocks off by having others mock and ridicule his stupidity. That’s why he spontaneously provokes the Irreligiosophy community. Once the ridicule dies down, and Kirk needs to get off again, he has to provoke us with retardation to elicit a response which will allow him to blow his load.
He’s in Looove!
1. He complains that we’re a page dedicated to hating on his stuff, which he thinks is intellectually dishonest, and his response is to… make a page dedicated to hating on our stuff. *sighs*
2. I don’t think he gets to complain about us having ‘artificially lowered’ it when the only positive reviews come from him, his ‘close friends’ and some guy who runs an anti-evolution website and calls himself “the liberal atheist’s and liberal Christian’s worst enemy”.
I guess I should know better than to expect rationality from him…
Now we can thank Kirk for all the publicity. It looks like he will really help this podcast download like hotcakes. I mean it looks like his whole family already likes kirk’s fb page.
Awww… Somebody needs a hug. And a job.
Kirk does have one good question. Chuck, when are you putting out a book?
I am really looking forward to the next episode after the creation of Kirk’s Irreligiosophy fan page today! Glad you haven’t recorded it yet!
The “debate” between chuck and kirk that is happening on amazon is pretty much the best thing ever. This little nugget of an argument from kirk takes the cake;
“If evolutionary theory can’t explain where everything originally came from, then what good is it?”… Yeah Chuck; if evolution cant explain something that has no relevance to the topic, then what is the meaning of life? Fail.
You see, now here’s the thing. I own a Kindle. I also read a shitload of Kindle books on my iPad. To get to the ‘good books’ ya gotta wade through some real crap. Anyone can write a book that in days gone by, would have hit the reject of every publishing house except ye olde ‘vanity press’. Any wank wad can write a book, e-book or otherwise. It’s very, very easy! Best of all it doesn’t have to be good! I remain skeptical about a lot of ‘reviews’ for Kindle books even those by reputable publishing houses. Sockpuppet anyone? Paid review companies anyone?
Chuck, you could write a book called ‘Confessions of a $5 Ass Slapper’ and it would sell more than Kirk’s crap.
I couldn’t help it, I had to go and look at his FB page. Got burned by the stupid. Captain McWhineypants has a cartoon strip. Perhaps that’s for the idiots that are too stupid to read without visual aids. Pathetic. There is no reasoning with these morons. As entertaining as it is to see them work themselves up into a righteous orgasm, I’ve had it with them. I really look forward to the next podcast though.
I don’t think they’ve ever truly gotten over being labeled as the evil ones with the goatees from Star Trek, the Original Series. You really know how to hit them where it hurts Chuck!
Oh boy. What a baby. He is NOT going to like our next episode, lol.
I visited Kirk’s FB profile, and it would seem he’s discovered an obscure invasion band from the sixties, I guess they are called the “Beatles”.
Also please upvote my Reddit link: http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/zy5rf/fundamentalist_gives_own_book_a_five_star_review/
Just went and read some of the fun on Amazon. Just for my own amusement, I looked up the publishing house responsible for this literary gem.
A vanity press.
What a surprise.
If you want a wheeze, go and read the ‘testimonials’ for Publish America. Any author who uses the phrase ‘I thought my writing sucked’ (because they got eight rejections for their book) but now know that they are vindicated because a print on demand publisher has printed them -well, I rest my case.
To be fair, many good books have had their fair share of rejections, but I really cannot see Little Kirk’s Book of Big Things being in the same league as Harry Potter. Well, except for the fact that they are both fiction. Blerg. It does my head in.
Kirk who?
I’m sorry. I just had to.
http://www.facebook.com/QuestionTheQuestionIrreligiosophyProject
Ash,
Dont blame us when kirk hastings starts to flame you, because we all know that he obsessively checks this feed. Ive now had two long term debates with vocal creationists, and both have ended with either contempt, or silence on their part; followed by an attempt to discredit me among peers… Beware the angry creationist, and embrace their loving… Um….. Hate?
Hey Derrick. I appreciate your words of warning. Perhaps I am getting into some hot water here. I guess I’ve sat on the sidelines long enough to know when I need to enter the ring. I can deal with their contempt. But as for Tery, he already has a hard time trying to figure out who he is. Reptile or bird.
Where does this Kirk Hastings guy live? I think one of us should check up on him and make sure he’s okay. He really sounds like he could be going off the deep end.
Ash, I laughed my ass off when I saw your counter page this morning.
I was banned when I posted about my Hindu Semen theory. 🙁
Little Kirky must have gotten his feelings hurt by my comments because they’ve been deleted and I’m banned. What a fucking prick.
Honestly, I am surprised it took him this long to start banning people.
I made a sock puppet then got banned again. The thing that got me banned was very telling. He said atheists believed life had no meaning and this was terrifying so I asked if that was so terrifying to him maybe his religion was simply a way to avoid a truth that scared him.
I’ll make another sock puppet tomorrow. I’ve had my fun today.
A statement from our friend Kirk Hastings:
Trolls don’t ask scientific questions; they ask biased propaganda disguised as “science.”
Are you fucking kidding me?
Project much, Kirk?
Especially since he went on to ask these questions:
************************************************************************************************
“THREE QUESTIONS ATHEISTS CANNOT RATIONALLY ANSWER
Below are Three Questions that all Darwinists/Atheists/Naturalists/Secularists need to answer adequately before they are in a position to ask any OTHER questions, or make any OTHER assertions, about what they may (or may not) believe:
1) If you believe that there are no absolutes in the universe, how can you then assert that anything you believe about Darwinism/Atheism/Naturalism/Secularism is in fact absolutely true? If everything in the universe is random and accidental and unguided (with no intelligent purpose or point behind it), then why should anyone in such an unintelligent universe concede that you (a mass of nothing more than a combination of biological meat and random chemical neurons) have “intelligent” answers to anything?
2) If you believe in Darwinism/Atheism/Naturalism/Secularism, then according to what you believe your brains are nothing more than a couple of pounds of biological meat that has somehow “evolved” from slime, chemicals, or whatever by various random mutations over time with no intelligent guidance whatsoever — and your thoughts are no more than electrical energy that is being randomly generated by your brains. (Note: “electricity” and “intelligence” are two totally different things — you have many electrical appliances in your home, but none of them can “think”.) If this is the case, then why should anyone accept anything you say as being reasonable, logical, truthful, or sensible, when you are, according to your beliefs, simply responding automatically to whatever your meat-based brain (and its random, unguided, “evolved” electrical impulses) tells you to do? … If you in fact insist that you DO have an “intelligent mind” that can know logic, reason, and truth, then describe how a series of random, unguided, unintelligent evolutionary changes managed to come UP with that mind (which is NON-physical), when only PHYSICAL things can “evolve”!
[The scientific law of “Like Begets Like” asserts that your capacity for intelligent, rational thought MUST have come from another intelligent agent. Why couldn’t that “Intelligent Agent” be the God of the Bible?]
3) Either you believe the Universe had a beginning, or you don’t. If you believe it DIDN’T have a beginning, then you are saying that the Universe itself is Eternal, and is an Uncaused Cause. But then why couldn’t GOD be Eternal, and an Uncaused Cause too? … If you believe the Universe DID have a beginning, then in order to justify your Darwinist/Atheist/Naturalistic/Secularistic beliefs you MUST come up with a scientific explanation for what CAUSED it, HOW it was caused, and WHERE it came from. If you cannot, then all your subsequent beliefs have NO truly rational basis, scientific or otherwise!
[And if the Universe DID have a beginning, then why couldn’t the Biblical Creator God be the Causal Agent?]
Conclusion: ALL of the above Darwinistic/Atheistic/Naturalistic/Secularistic assertions are TOTALLY self-contradictory — and anyone who believes them therefore has NO basis whatsoever for claiming to know anything about anything!
“There is a difficulty about disagreeing with God. He is the source from which all your reasoning power comes.” — C.S. Lewis
(Love) Kirk Hastings
************************************************************************************************
You don’t have a scientific explanation to the start of the universe, therefore how can any science be true?
Exactly discord. Exactly
Kirk Hastings, because I know you are reading this.
Darwinist, Atheist, Naturalist and Secularist are not synonyms. I was a secularist way before my first biology class, I still do not consider myself an atheist because what I do is refuse to worship gods whether they exist or not and I suppose I practice naturalism because so far I have only seen the whole body of science at least try to explain natural phenomena instead of saying “Goddidid” and leaving it at that while people died of tooth abscesses.
About the three questions. 1. As Einstein had said, “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong”. No single experiment has proven evolution wrong so far. Wishful thinking involving bananas does not count. 2. Take a look at a brain through a microscope. Yes, it is capable. And yes, you can find similar structure in brains of other animals, with the ones closer to us on the evolutionary tree being much closer. Also, “Like begets Like” does not equal “Same begets Same”. The reshuffling of genetic material that happens in sexual reproduction ensures that there is a chance that the offspring will be better than their parents at surviving and reproducing. Take that over the life span of the planet (which is certainly much longer than 6000 years old) and you have the biodiversity that we see today. The process I have just explained is evolution. 3. I do not believe the universe has a beginning. I *know* the universe had a beginning. Why? Because it has been proven. I would like to remind you (or inform you) that Fred Hoyle’s “Steady State” universe was backed by mathematics and was even in accordance with Hubble’s observations. But, we believe Alexander Friedman and Father Georges Lemaitre and Howard Percy Robertson and and Arthur Geoffrey Walker (who worked independently of each other on a universe with a definite beginning) not just because of the math that worked on paper, but the proof that was found with experiments. Incidentally, Father Lemaitre didn’t want the Pope to use his work as proof of a Creator.
As to where the universe came from: There is the theory of bubble universes and in general physicists are working on that question (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNnpfFaHNws). And everything self contradictory gets weeded out way before its gets to experiments. You wish religion was as thorough, after all, there are two different geneaologies for Jesus and they both end up on Joseph, who was, according to the New Testament, just the Son of God’s stepfather.
Also @ C.S.Lewis: I have worked in a paediatric hospital and I have seen children suffering in ways noone ever should, much less innocent children. I can argue with (and take to task) any supernatural entity that can do something about it and doesn’t as long I breathe.
Has anyone noticed Little Kirk has a thing for meat brains? I am certain he’s a zombie…
Ack and the helpful ‘differentiation’ between electricity and intelligence. Followed by the nonsensical arguments, so called…
Aaaarrrrrgggggghhhhhh.
Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Aaaaarrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Thank you Somewhere in Greece, Balm for the burning of the stupid.
@Annie M: no worries. I was not directly involved with the NICU and the Oncology departments, but enough so to be convinced that there is such a thing as a fate worse than death and that is watching your child suffer all the way to the grave. Any god who answers Tebow’s prayers over the ones of the parents I have met, any god who cares what consenting adults are doing to each other with their fun parts over alleviating the torment of tragically premature babies, any god who demands my “love” and “submission” while letting the blameless suffer, not only deserves, but invites my scorn and derision.
From what I see, this is exactly the sort of god Kirk Hastings believes in.
God can’t intervene, somewhere in greece. If he intervenes he will disrupt free will which is a slippery slope to God destroying the highest good. Those kids have cancer because:
1- Their parents were fuckups (see Old Testament)
2- God is waiting to show his pure awesomeness (see New Testament)
3- God didnt want the parents to hook up (see 2 Samuel 12:13-14)
Then this is not in interventionist god and therefore there is no point in asking for things. Also
1. Punish the parents, not the blameless
2. Well, he’s had plenty of chances to show awesomeness at the paediatric hospital where I’ve worked and didn’t.
3. There were plenty of chances to hit David with erectile dysfunction and there is no justice in punishing the blameless.
Wow, two out of three show god to be unjust at best, and emotional terrorist at worst. “Do as I say/you didn’t do as I said, so the kid gets it”? And this is an entity worthy of worship?
Now you’re just taking everything out of context you atheopath.
The context is even worse. All the Old Testament stories I learned in grade school were very much prettied up versions.
They went over OT stories with you in grade school? I mean more than the usual Adam & Eve, Noah, Jonah, and the David & Goliath story. They never really ventured into the OT with us, it was mainly the NT with a heavy emphasis on Paul’s bullshit (probably because they agreed with his stuff more than Jesus’ often incompatible message).
Yes, we had a book of OT stories when I was in 3rd grade. 4rth grade was NT and 5th and 6th grade were history of Christianity and catechism. What blew my mind as an adult was the fact that Absalom’s death was included and I found it very disturbing at the time. Of course, it was an extremely sanitized version, Absalom going against his father, failing and when he was chased down, his hair getting caught on a tree and getting killed by one of David’s soldiers, with David crying “Absalom, my child Absalom, why couldn’t I die instead of you?”. I shudder to think that kids might get their hands on an OT, and read the story in its entirety, with the rape of Tamar, David leaving behind his concubines who were raped by Absalom on a roof and who David isolated when he got power back because they were unclean. In Greece the OT and the NT were separate books and while my grandfather had a copy of the NT, we didn’t have an OT in the house until I was in my teen years and way too swamped with school to pick it up. That was for much later.
The level of dishonesty this guy is capable of showing just prooves why people should ask for evidence when people make extraordinary claims. It pains me to think for years I thought that spiritual leaders has insight on some larger truth, but the “truth” is that that are all full of shit.
” irrational hatred for God” LOL
He should question his his irrational love for mental gymnastic of a god.