My discussion with Gravity re: the RRS
Offline I got a myspace message a bit ago from All that Shimmers is not Gravity.
The subject was "A Simple Question". I was holding off on posting it because I don't copy paste private correspondence without asking.
I asked him and he said I could post it with his name attatched.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Date: Nov 24 2006 7:04 PM
Can I ask why you're a "proud member of the Rational Response Squad?"
-Thanks
~~~
From: Kat
Date: Nov 25 2006 12:43 PM
It's a forum I really like. Good people, intelligent conversation about how religion is really silly.
~Kat
~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Date: Nov 25 2006 12:54 PM
Is it finding things silly in general that you like, or is it specifically religion that you like to find silly? Out of the three main show runners, Mike, Rook, and Brian, who would you say is the most intelligent? Do you know of more intelligent people on their boards?
-Thanks, sorry if you find my questions to be a waste of time, I'm trying to get as much information as I can.
~~~
From: Kat
Date: Nov 25 2006 1:27 PM
What is this for, if you don't mind me asking? It's not that I "like to find something silly". I have always found religion silly, and when I found this forum, it was a breath of fresh air. Something that isn't generally addressed in society. Mike, Rook and Brian are all extremely intelligent, but their specialties are in different areas. *shrugs*
SilkyShrew is smart as a whip, Todangst is smart, Razorcade, LeftofLarry, there are LOTS of intelligent people on there.
It's just one of my forums I like going to. I don't get much of a chance to debate theology and stuff other than on there.
If you want more information, I'd suggest contacting Brian. He should be more informative.
~Kat
~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Date: Nov 25 2006 2:40 PM
I was just wondering if you also participated in any groups that found something like animal cruelty silly or if religion was your main focus of criticism.
Oh, and Brian knows who I am. (See "Gravity the Asshat" for whatever Brian hasn't deleted/edited). I am just surveying several RRS fans that I find all around the internet, trying to get a better angle at what draws people to become fans of the RRS.
It seems like a good theology debate is rare to find on the internet anymore, too many people believe they're right for the sake of being right (or is it for the sake of being them?), and perhaps the only subject that brings in a more emotional bias than a theology debate, is solely an abortion debate.
Well good luck,
-Thanks again
Gravity
~~~
From: Kat
Date: Nov 25 2006 3:33 PM
Well, I belong to quite a few forums, for music and video games I like, a couple of pet message boards for my cat and snails.... and a few animation boards. Funny you should bring it up, I get the SPCA newsletter sent to me as well as a local animal rights society newsletter. I join whatever interests me. If you're implying that "atheist activism" is my whole life or something and that it's the only board I'm on, well, that's not true. There are people on there that I don't neccessarily agree with on the RRS, as well as people I do.
I get the idea you don't really like it...... but I could be misinterpreting. Most debates online (heck, in life) get fairly intense, because everyone has their own opinion, and when it comes in direct conflict with another.... well, the poo hits the fan, I guess.
*smiles*
~Kat
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Date: Nov 25 2006 8:51 PM
You're right that I don't lke the RRS. I, like many others, am part of the anti-religious side that sees the RRS as quite hypocritical, in the sense that they act like a religion and flaunt many of the flaws of religion themselves. That doesn't mean that I don't like people when the only thing I know about them is that they listen to the RRS or post on their forums. And I also didn't mean to imply "atheist activism" is your whole life, just trying to see if listeners/active members of the club consider disputing religion to be central to their cause, or if they have several things they find to be of importance (like fighting animal abuse, or protesting war, or etc.).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Kat
Date: Nov 29 2006 4:35 PM
I don't really see how they act like a religion or share flaws with religion. I think the main flaw of religion is believing in an unprovable and likely nonexistent god.
If you're referring to trying to get people to hear and change their minds, that's not inherently a religious thing. If I like a band, I'll tell all my friends and try to get them to listen. It's not a "join a cult" thing. LOL
Discussion and questioning is okay on a forum like RRS. Questioning in religion? That's a no no.
Someone named skiminal started a thread on this topic, here. Check it out.
Sorry, I just woke up(worked nights) so my brain is fuzzy and my sentences are messed.
~Kat
~~~~~~~~~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Nov 29 2006 5:10 PM
I can only take so much of Brian's (nor Todangst's) complete idiocy in one sitting, so I probably won't be able to get through that thread.
The error of religion is not in believing silly things, lots of people believe in silly things, we are, after all, a silly little race of silly things, living on a silly planet. When you get deep into science, you start seeing silly things as well. I'm not saying science is necessarily silly, but you begin to ask yourself, "which one is silly, what I thought was true, or what science is telling me."
The error of religion cannot be simplified down to an error in facts, or in one fact, the error of religion is in the philosophy of that religion. And the RRS, as I and many others have noticed, employ some of these silly ideologies, like the ideology that everyone should be converted to one belief, or the ideology that other ideologies should be abolished entirely. The RRS espouses intolerance, at what cost? At what cause? They have no cause, it is completely unjustified, you cannot say somebody's opinion or belief should be abolished simply because there is no evidence for it. How bland a world would we live in if that were true? Alas, there in itself is another facet of the RRS that is similar to religion: the shameless rationalization that their silly behavior is not silly at all, but needed. Don't believe me? I've heard Sapient, himself, tell several atheists that they were "weeded out" from his idea, many people are completely turned off to the ideas the RRS spouts out, what does the RRS have to say about it? They're Christianized, or brainwashed to be tolerant of other's views... or even better, they're hypocrites because they're intolerant of our views!
Such is the way of religion, and I hate to say it, but this "atheist cult" might as well become a religion. The rational response squad is all but rational, rather irrational, and should be renamed the Rationalization Response Squad.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Date: Nov 29 2006 5:23 PM
By the way, that thread shows exactly why I disagree with the RRS. Perhaps you don't see it, but they got destroyed by elnathan. Perhaps that is another notion of religion I see in the RRS: groupthink. If everyone except the guy who disagrees with us, agrees that he is wrong, then he must be! I guarantee, if you have this discussion on a board with non-biased individuals, you will see it play out entirely differently. But the rationalizations come out, if elnathan doesn't agree with us, then surely he is a "believer" or accepts the Christian bastardizations of definitions that are so strong they convince agnostics that they aren't agnostics!
And where does all this come from? A simple one-claim argument: atheist means everything that isn't theist. Isn't this circular reasoning, since the conclusion that "agnostics can neither be theist or atheist" is included in the premises as a false premise?
~~~~~~~~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Nov 29 2006 5:33 PM
Sorry for the three messages, but this one I gotta give:
"MOD HAT: Increase the level of honesty in your posts, go back and address many of the issues that you've dodged, or your account will be blocked from posting on this site in accordance with the rules already posted to you in this thread that still appy."
This is the same person who banned me twice from their boards (the first time at random, they realized my being there actually decreased the number of participants in the RRS), the second time when I finally made clear who I was (at which point Sapient when wild, editted all my posts, and eventually deleted everything to try to cover it all up).
There is something wrong with a man who calls everyone a liar, and ironically concludes that people who call him a hypocrite are projecting... If you have a difference in opinion, you're a liar, and lying is not tolerable. It's bullshit, you're smart enough to notice this, I know I'm not the only one. Each time Sapient threatens to ban somebody for having a differing opinion should be a glaring hint that perhaps he is quite a closed-minded hypocrite after all.
~~~~~~~~~~
From: Kat
Date: Nov 29 2006 5:48 PM
I don't think one side got destroyed more than the other. Both sides skipped points and such. I still think that most people are biased. Not in a BAD way per se. But everyone does have biased notions one way or the other. And I know a lot of times the SAME question gets asked over and over and people get sick of answering it, so they get snotty. I don't neccessarily think all the people on the thread were being terribly rational.
Also, in regards to your "against war or animal cruelty" arguments.
Noone I know thinks animal cruelty is okay. Some people think it's neccessary, but still cruel.
Noone I know believes war is okay. Even pro-war people I know don't believe in killing innocent civilians.
However, religion is one of those things that not a lot of people question. Most people will react to religion in a way that is either accepting or angry and defensive. Even when it's damaging. It's a topic that I find difficult to bring up in other forums. I can't even say mild things like, "I find religion silly" in response to church/religion discussions. Mods WILL and DO jump in and reprimand me for insulting someones religion. Even other forumgoers say that being anti-religion is an "off limits" topic. However, when the religious folks tell me "i'm going to burn in hell and they'll be laughing" that's their religious beliefs, and no moderation required. I like the fact I can say my true feelings on the RRS, and sure some people might disagree with me, but I won't get banned/locked/yelled at for disagreeing. Just my $0.02.
~~~~~~~~~
From: All that Shimmers is not Gravity
Date: Nov 29 2006 6:45 PM
You can say your true feelings in most places. The RRS is not some haven, in fact, you cannot say your true feelings on the RRS unless they are in agreement with Sapient. Hence, why he is so ban-happy.
Yeah, I agree it sucks that you can't criticize religion without some idiot going "hey, that's not fair!" but fuck them, don't become like them.
"if you stare long enough into the Abyss, the Abyss stares also into you." - Nietzsche
- Login to post comments
I strongly disagree with his points about Sapient. I haven't responded to his last few messages yet... one of my responses was to the one post of the 3 in a row. When I started talking to him I was unaware he was "Gravity the asshat" of the topic of the same name.
Also wondering if anyone else has gotten messages from him.....
I gave him the link to this thread, but as he's apparently been banned, I doubt he's gonna post....
It all started out so nice.....
Wow.
This guy is really very passionate...about being moderate. Complaining that someone is biased in a debate is usually pointless. They're biased towards their own views; that's why they're debating them. I don't think he wants a "real" debate. To be honest...I don't know what the hell he wants.
And what's with his obsession over the word 'silly'? I think he said it about two hundred fucking times in the correspondence. It's really...well, it's silly, that's what it is. Yeah.
......
Thanks for sharing, Kat.
Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine
He sounds like a pathological sore loser to me. He just has a grudge and he wants to "win" somehow by talking to you about how "bad" Sapient is. His qualms could be said about any atheist, but the fact that he chooses Sapient as the root of all his problems leads me to think that this is a personal problem of his
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
Gravity is now in the video chatroom as Garyvit.
I really don't have the time to waste on one man that he has the time to waste on us (more specifically me), so I'll leave you with just a brief disection.
Gravity is one of the most dishonest people I know. Almost every portrayal of us and question he asks about us is dishonest. He needs so badly to not have his pantheism challenged as irrational that he'll fight tooth and nail and stoop to extreme levels of dishonesty to attempt to discredit us.
With that said, if I had the time, I would pick apart each and every lie he tells. I did it for a few minutes via audio in the video chatroom, but putting it all down in text takes much longer. However the easiest expose of Gravitys dishonest nature is to show you the following few lines from the video chatroom:
garyvit: I want him to prove his claim right.
garyvit: That I'm a liar.
A.N. Jake: You just asked to be proven wrong.
garyvit: Well, I do lie.
garyvit: I will admit to that.
And there ya have it.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
He begins with statements like:
garyvit: What is this place?
garyvit: Reason vs faith?
garyvit: Who says they are at odds?
Jumps into a few arguments, then darth_josh starts wondering if he is gravity. He is asked and gives responses like this:
garyvit: Are you calling me gravity?
garyvit: lol, are you dyslexic?
Then he gives these kind of responses:
garyvit: Oh, you mean this point? (links to myspace)
garyvit: That Sapient first editted away, and then deleted, IP banning this Gravity character, and covering it up?
garyvit: I suppose that was a "Rational Response?"
This proves he at least knows about grav, thing it kind of degrads from here with statements like:
garyvit: Prove what?
garyvit: Prove where I lied?
garyvit: I don't care if he can prove I lied once, or twice, on things I purposefully lied about.
garyvit: He can't handle the fact that a theist, me, is far more intelligent than him.
What's wrong with pantheism? Isn't it just an aesthetic additive to atheism? (Alliteration for the win).
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
It redefines god to bring it into existence. I could say that I believe God is the grocery store because it provides me all the nourishment I need to live. And because of this, I now believe in god. Now, this would (hopefully) sit as ridiculous and dishonest to you, and it should. And in the same vain I see pantheists as dishonest.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Other than essentially redefining "god" in naturalistic terms that are altogether meaningless and altogether superfluous, nothing.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Gravity was still on when I first joined. He is an asshat.
He's utterly desparate for attention. The best thing to do is ignore him. He's angry, bitter, and looking to lash out his hurt and anger onto others. He has some dim recognition of just how inept and ignorant he is, but he's unwilling to deal with except through projecting it out onto others....
We're going to start drawing others like him to the site.... the bigger you become, the bigger a target you become....
"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Oh, god... my side...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Oh, I'm laughing so hard I'm crying!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
(sigh)
I needed a good laugh.
What a tool.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
The question I always ask about people like gravity and others who so vehemently speak out against the RRS is why spend so much time doing so? I don't get it. If you don't subscribe to the ideologies of the RRS, because in effect you think it is not worth the time, and we should be live and let live atheists, why, then, spend so much time fighting the RRS? I say, live and let live. Don't worry about it. It seems as if at this point, there is some personal grudge perhaps. I don't know..but usually when I post on forums, and they get nowhere, I leave, never come back and place my energy elsewhere. it seems as if there is some kind of personal grudge for people to keep at it over and over and over and over....if you don't agree with the RRS, fine.....the RRS, last I checked, never held a gun to anyone's face....the RRS simply describes why the belief in a god is irrational, it is supported by many who think it is good to finally have criticism of religion. It is not irrational to try to persuade people from believing in fairy tales. It is not dogmatic to educate people in science and rational freethinking. Rather, I think it is the best thing that can be done to society. And anyway, Sapient truly believes that if people want to label the RRS or atheism as a religion, so long as it's for the betterment of mankind...then so be it. Define it as you will....who cares. The position stands, however, that the belief in a god, whether it's pagan, xtian, muslim jew, panentheist, pantheist, polytheist, monotheist, whatever....is irrational based on the fact that there is no empirical evidence...or historical for that matter.
From a sceintific point of view, I cannot accept anything without evidence. And if a concept is not testable..then that is all I need to make me a skeptic. If we start to move this debate on philosophical grounds, and philosophical grounds, strictly...we will never answer the questions. Philosophy is great, and I do believe it should be part of the discourse, however, I feel as if it's philosophy that stalls the intellectual progress when debating religion.
Ideologies are far and wide. To say the the RRS is hypocritical based on the fact that they are acting like a "religion", to me is pointless and irrelevant. Fact of the matter is, it's about time there are those of us who are tired of religion... how it's completely mixing with politics and how it's starting to entangle itself in our lives. Extremism begets extremism, the irony here is that hard atheism, radical atheism, whatever you want to call it is only radical because religion has manipulated societal sentiment on the issue. It has made criticizing religion taboo. So anyone taking a stand against relgion, is now, an extremist, a radical. This is one way it has been able to entangle itself in every aspect of society and government. It's much like the jewish lobby...criticize israel, and you're an anti-semite..bullshit.
It is time for poeple to stand up..and fight for what is right....I would argue on the basis of reality, that religion and blind faith are irrational. I would then argue that the need of a god in one's life can be a personal decision, but when it starts to turn into a societal and political power struggle...that's when it's time to say enough is enough. I think that most atheists would agree with that. I think we all start apathetic, live and let live atheists..but we have seen the reality of what religion is doing and we are fucking sick of it. So I say label us if you will....that's your opinion. But to use your perceived "hypocrisy" of the RRS, is a red herring argument.
To sit here, and argue semantics, definitions, whether the RRS is hypocritical or not, whether the RRS is acting like a religion or not, is pointless I think. Stop worrying about it. The reason why the RRS is not a religion..is simple...we have evidence to back our claims. The theists do not. Case closed. A chemist, is not religious because if he believes that Van der Waals forces exist..he can back that claim up with evidence. So the RRS, is not religios in the fact that we can back up our claims on reality. Plain and simple. It is reality that guides history.
And history has shown no evidence whatso ever of a god.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.
I told you Elnathan was a bad cat...now we find out he's working with Gravity.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)
We have another new 'tool' on the site as well....
"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'
WHo would this be?
Trout. Take a look at his irrational arguments in the agnostic thread.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/3358
"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'
anatman: It's asmoday that believes all this, gary.
mistamustard: The kind of "leaving the body" that comes with LSD and other psychedilics
garyvit: That you don't "Leave your body."
garyvit: Well fuck asmoday.
garyvit: He's an idiot.
darkina: we're TRYING to convince asmoday of that... LOL
mistamustard: Yeah
* ck2787 joined the room.
monard: i've never left my body on drugs... maybe i was doing it wrong.
garyvit: Well you're not going to convince the guy by calling him a fucking idiot.
garyvit: But you can laugh at him, sure enough.
double_b: mustard, so are you admitting to being an addict here, or what?
mistamustard: There's a HUGE difference between tripping on acid and, uh, astral projection?
Sapient: you just called him an idiot
darkina: i left my body on the bus and then i had to pay $2 to get it back
anatman: Yeah, I don't know why we are having this conversation. Trying to get asmoday to stop hallucinating.
garyvit: NO I didn't. Sapient.
mistamustard: Just like there's a huge difference between
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Wasn't it his dishonesty that got him banned from here?
I don't know the entire back story to this but from my initial observation of it, the kid seems needy and is a bit obsessed with the RRS. My response to the lad would be, 'get over it'.