Waaaah!

Sounds like it's time to do a little link-bouncing of our own.

That's an amusing redirect. Especially considering that we can see the URL of his site when we put the mouse over the link. Just type it in and you can get there.

I think this picture demonstrates the Good Reverend through out this whole very minor internet non issue..

Wow... for such a well-meaning, righteous, community-helping saint of a man (self described), this attempt at pure censorship and demand for reverence is downright deplorable.

You should be ashamed of yourself, Cockshaw.

You don't get it, and you never will. You don't like the negative response to your religious blather, then don't opt to publicize yourself and your beliefs on the internet, and CERTAINLY don't intentionally target atheists and the like by setting up metatags the way you did. What did you expect would happen you ignorant godbot?

Oh yea... And then he posted in your comments. It was hilarious.

I love these people. If you disagree and laugh at them, they simply want you gone.

PS: We didn't write to your registrant to ask them to destroy your website, did we?

In case anyone missed it the last time I posted it, this "Atheist Eve" cartoon is highly appropriate.

I still haven't figured out what Rev. Cockshaw's problem is, other than he wasn't controlling everything. Maybe we need to chip in and buy him a gift to make up for his inconvenience; say a crybaby doll.

Isn't this the exact thing that he was complaining about when we went to visit his website? Except we didn't try and get it shut down. I guess there goes that turning the other cheek thing.

Damn, getting traffic to his site, is he? The shock must be draining, what with some people actually thinking about what was on his site.

Retreat from thought, good Reverend, since it won't make god seem any more likely.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Especially considering that we can see the URL of his site when we put the mouse over the link. Just type it in and you can get there.

Or, even easier, right click on the link and "open in new window" works just as well.

As a recovering Anglican (Episcopalian, technically, but it's all the same), Cockshaw's hypocrisy just confirms me in my atheism (not that I needed more confirmation). Evangelism: you're doing it wrong.

@Emmet Caulfield, #6: Thank you; that sums it all up nicely, and I have to share that with some people.

I still don't see the poll that you guys were talking about anywhere on the page. Do you have to post a story to see it or something??

I have the same problem Shamar, and did last time the page was linked here!

Ah, the poor rev moron. Why doesn't he get his imaginary god to do his pathetic work for him? Have him come back here and this time we'll go for the kill.

@Shamar: He took down the poll because he didn't like the way it was turning out. The discussion among us and some debate with the Rev. Cockshaw takes place in the comments of the original post.

I still don't see the poll that you guys were talking about anywhere on the page. Do you have to post a story to see it or something??

he took it down after he discovered people were actually

SHOOOOOOOOOOOCKER

answering it.

I still don't see the poll that you guys were talking about anywhere on the page. Do you have to post a story to see it or something??

No, the poll is gone. Cockshaw removed the poll after an hour or so of Pharyngulation the other day, then came here to whine about it. See the thread PZ links to at the top.

My favourite thing about that episode is that he isn't just a vicar with a modem. The diocese hired him as their web outreach chap; this is as net-savvy as the CofE gets, apparently. And he put his little site with keywords "Dawkins, atheist, blah blah" and filled with piss-weak apologetics. Then he was and yet he was shocked - shocked! - at some poll-crashing and snark from godless websites.

I'm just amazed that anyone that couldn't see the fail in that plan is actually able to type.

Hi Pharyngulites:

I found a poll to crash that could actually make a difference. There is an office supply company in Texas that is offering a $25K "makeover" to whichever charitable organization wins the poll. Of course, one of the "charitable" organizations is a bogus "crisis pregnancy" center that has already put the word out to all the anti-choice websites and is currently leading in votes.

The sad thing about that is that there is an emergency homeless shelter on the list that could help actually born people. It's a Christian organization, granted, but you can't really knock the work they do. That's the one I would recommend pushing, but of course, there is also a local Habitat for Humanity, humane society, and a youth organization.

Anyway, this is the address of the office supply poll:

http://www.perryop.com/

You can vote from any area of the country, and the poll closes on November 23.

Thanks!

To be fair, the Rev did not seem all that concerned about us voting on the poll. He was bothered that people were voting many times on it. The point being that it's one thing to have an inaccurate sample unrepresentative of society, but it's another to have people screw the thing up from the get-go.

Second, the Rev was having to deal with people putting fake or otherwise filterable comments on his site. It was no more designed to be a platform for atheism than this site is for Christianity. And after all our talk about not having religion forced on us, isn't this forcing atheism on someone else? How isn't it hypocritical to mess with his website?

The worst thing out of all of this is that this Rev. Cockshaw has religion in what appears to be a knitting sort of habit. PZ said that's where he wants religion, and yet he's sent the hordes against a guy who has set up a harmless, even though pointless, website. The Rev even came on here and refrained from telling us we're going to hell, and did his best to negotiate. It looked to me like he didn't even have a condescending tone, let alone fling insults. As far as believers go, he's not bad.

At the least, you (PZ) should be telling commenters here to stop putting nonsense on the Rev's website when you mention it.

//[QUOTE]@Shamar: He took down the poll because he didn't like the way it was turning out. The discussion among us and some debate with the Rev. Cockshaw takes place in the comments of the original post.//[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I had the same problem when I went there from the original thread the other day. I guess I read the thread after he had already taken it down, oh well....

Kamikaze189

Second, the Rev was having to deal with people putting fake or otherwise filterable comments on his site. It was no more designed to be a platform for atheism than this site is for Christianity. And after all our talk about not having religion forced on us, isn't this forcing atheism on someone else? How isn't it hypocritical to mess with his website?

You tried to make the same point in the last thread... you were flat-out wrong then, and you are just as wrong now. Go back and read that thread if you need a refresher as to why...

And after all our talk about not having religion forced on us, isn't this forcing atheism on someone else? How isn't it hypocritical to mess with his website?

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

What was already posted on his website was total nonsense. I did not post nonsense, I posted what I believed to be the truth.

Chris P

Rev'd Evan is a fish not worth frying. I'm gonna leave the poor sap alone.

Man, this poll crashing stuff keeps getting funnier.

First, the God Poll guy comes in, calls us all terrorists, and asks Seed to remove PZ. Then he realizes what "crashing a poll" actually means. Ironically, then his poll "crashes" due to bad software that couldn't handle the increase traffic.

Now, Rev. Cocksure removes the poll after a while because

You'd managed to skew the results making them pointless.

As for his complaint about stupid story submissions, some of the stories he puts on the main page fit that category.

I remember that he kept asking that we just leave him and his website alone. But the internet is a public marketplace of ideas. Sure, you can encrypt and password protect website not intended for the public, but this was obviously not such a place. He wanted to get his message out to people. A message that I feel, quite frankly, should not be allowed to go out unchallenged. Does he have a right to proselytize on the internet? Of course. Does he have the right to complain when we belittle or combat his efforts? Nope.

Good reverend Cockshaw--It's the internet, bitch! Deal with it.

Remember, this is the christianity of the CofE/Anglicans/Episcopalians

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xcTNWehOn5I

Okay, question: What is this doing on that site?

Thank you Reverend Cockshaw for merely attempting to silence us when you could have called for a bloody jihad like that other religion. It's through actions like this that we see the true love that springs eternal from the Christian breast (unlike that other religion). I cannot express in words how grateful I am that Christians such as yourself allow me to exist on this earth (as long as I'm quiet about it) until that glorious day when I will be judged by God and sentenced to eternal hellfire for my heresy. Incidentally, I hope to see you there on that day, smiling and laughing as God metes out his torture to me and rewards you for the suffering you've endured on earth via the odious discomfort of sharing a planet with those who believe other than you do--again, unlike that other religion which encourages its followers to swiftly send unbelievers to their eternal punishment, leaving its adherents to focus only on the joys of knowing God in the afterlife and depriving them of the prurient happiness that can only come from watching God justly punish the wicked.)

You are the very model of Christianity for us all.

Not content with being a mere Liar for Jesus, he is also a Whiner for Jesus.

The Reverend Evan Cockshaw is not giving a good account of himself at all. First rule of screwups, "When you find yourself in a hole, quit digging."

1. Hasn't he ever heard of freedom of speech? The internet is a public commons, deal with it.

2. He just proved that the churches can dish out propaganda by the trainload but can't take a teaspoon of mostly hilarious counter-propaganda. They should grow a brain, a backbone, and a sense of humor.

3. He didn't seem dumb, a problem with many priests these days due to recruitment failures. OTOH, his inept floundering indicates some sort of mental straitjacket. Unfortunate, who knows how that happened?

Carol #20

"Anyway, this is the address of the office supply poll:

http://www.perryop.com/

You can vote from any area of the country, and the poll closes on November 23."

You can also vote from outside the USA - I just did.

(and how do you do block quoted, please?)

To be fair, the Rev did not seem all that concerned about us voting on the poll. He was bothered that people were voting many times on it.

Online polls are pointless and stupid. There no more scientific and accurate whether you vote once or 10 times. The message is "online straw polls are meaningless" not "we are a powerful online voting group". This was explained to Cockshaw several times.

Second, the Rev was having to deal with people putting fake or otherwise filterable comments on his site.

So a few people submitted some parodies to take the piss out of his online propaganda piece. Boo fucking hoo. Welcome to the Internet.

The Rev even came on here and refrained from telling us we're going to hell, and did his best to negotiate.

No, Cockshaw's first post had some pretty arrogant snipe about our "false belief". That irritated a few people. Negotiate my ass. He came here to whine. His hyperbole about letter-bombs from hateful atheists was offensive.

As far as believers go, he's not bad.

I agree. I'm sure he's a great guy who works very hard in the community. He's a harmless CoE vicar who tripped on a hornet's nest, got stung, then went back to the hornet's nest to complain to the hornets. He'll know better next time. He's not bad or stupid or nasty, just naïve.

The worst thing out of all of this is that this Rev. Cockshaw has religion in what appears to be a knitting sort of habit.

Wrong. He's an official representative of the official church of a major country. He's not some random harmless old grandma doing this privately as a hobby. This is his job. If he can't take any criticism of his organization, or of the dogma his organization espouses, then he needs to find another job.

Posted by: Jake | November 20, 2008 1:10 PM

Okay, question: What is this doing on that site?

YEAH?! I saw that flash by real fast too, so didn't get to read the whole thing, but just assumed it was a sarcastic message to atheists, but now I'm confused....

Second time I've done this recently: s/There/They're/
*cringe*

He's not bad or stupid or nasty, just naïve.

Well, he's also blatantly dishonest. And that was the source of our problem with him and his actions. When pressed for an answer as to whether or not he would have taken down the poll had the results been skewed in another direction, he would not answer... and when asked if he would review and accept honest anecdotes from people who politely gave their testimony as to why they did not believe, he was equally unwilling to answer...

As a result, I think the mocking and derision and satirical testimonies were more than appropriate to highlight the hypocrisy.

A new poll at MSNBC about whether "In God We Trust" should be eliminated from US Currency.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10103521/

We are losing.

Second, the Rev was having to deal with people putting fake or otherwise filterable comments on his site. It was no more designed to be a platform for atheism than this site is for Christianity.

Another problem with this analogy, Kamikaze189, is that in case you hadn't noticed, christians are given every opportunity on this site to express their views and thoughts... they are given that platform without filtering or censorship. Why? Because unlike them, we can handle it quite readily, and are not afraid to have our viewpoints publicly challenged.

Just be prepared for a ripping rebuttal if you do choose to express your religious ideals here.

Cockshaw's too cocksure.

Pity.

To be fair, the Rev did not seem all that concerned about us voting on the poll. He was bothered that people were voting many times on it. The point being that it's one thing to have an inaccurate sample unrepresentative of society, but it's another to have people screw the thing up from the get-go.

He admitted that it wasn't a meaningful poll, said that it was just for fun, but still removed it because the results were biased? I think it is fair to say that the opposing bias wouldn't have been met with the same response.

There is no rationale to suggest that any particular set of meaningless results is any more significant than any other set of equally meaningless results, except to promote an agenda. He didn't like our agenda, so chose to hide the result.

Still, it is his website, and he should feel free to do as he pleases with it, but it is a little rich to then attempt to justify blatent (but pretty minor) dishonesty by coming to this site to defend his actions.

I do agree that he was harshly treated, but he could have avoided that by not attempting to justify hmself or proselytize on this site. I also don't think that there was any good to served by submitting parodic testimonies, since those already to be found on the site do a much better job.

To be fair, the Rev did not seem all that concerned about us voting on the poll. He was bothered that people were voting many times on it.

No, he just "believed" people were doing that, based on no evidence that I saw.

All I wanted, after he came here to complain, was for the Rev. to answer his own question. Especially after he admitted that the answers submitted to his site so far were severely lacking, I thought for sure that he would give us some apologetics. But all we got was more whining and irrelevant diversion.

He folded his hand because he knew he had rags. Maybe he was using his site to mine new arguments, to avert a crisis of faith? He must be sorely disappointed.

windy (#44):

He doesn't need evidence — he has proof 'cause he believes.

:-/

@40: Are you sure that's a new poll, or is it just the same years-old one that keeps getting emailed around?

@windy @ #44
Well, he did cite the number of votes exceeding the number of individual voters that he could see on his site as evidence that people had voted multiple times, though it does not necessarily mean that the multiple voters had to be from the winning side. But, I find it awfully funny that he created a poll that allowed people to vote multiple times on it, and then took it down when he realized people are actually doing that. I mean, what did he expect?

It's a shame when you can't get people you have no control over to behave like you want them to.

Change the site to a free membership system with a logon and terms of use. Purge whatever content you don't like. Ban undesirable members. Limit people to view only without logon. Problem solved.

It's either a public forum or it isn't.

I'm good with crashing the poll- it did ask "Does God exist?", what would be the point of the poll if they only expected believers to partake in it? (Don't ask a question if you're not willing to accept the answer.)

However, the site is asking people to "contribute their real stories of God being involved and active in their lives" and posting stories intended to highlight the stupidity of the whole concept is violating the spirit of the open invitation to post just a little bit.

The Rev did mention that he accepted that there would be some sincere, but poor quality posts that would get marginalized as the better posts got ranked and bubbled up to the top. I wonder what would happen if a bunch of atheists collectively got together and instead of flaming his site with a bunch of BS posts, decided to rank the most obviously pathetic, Jesus freak, embarrassing to even the most evangelical Christians posts with top rankings such that the cream of delusion would float to the top? It justs asks for a user ranking, it doesn't ask you to rate how good a reason to believe in God it is. So since it doesn't give you a criteria to rank it on, I guess you can choose your own, such as most delusional story 5/5.

Rev. Cockshaw is a vicar in the post-industrial Black Country. He probably spends most of his time doing the job of a social work (while occasionally mention god). And is he wants his website as crowd sourced "reasons to believe" there is no reason he should have to open it up as public forum; Wikipedia "censors" material not helping the project as well; it's a perfectly reasonable practice.

But none of this is a reason to claim that the rev or his website should be immune from mockery. He's speaking in the public square and he was directly criticising someone else's campaign (and used keywords that attract people sympathetic to that campaign). On what ground can he reject to being criticised in turn. Trying to get linking articles taken down is the action of a complete dick.

You are not being fair PZ.

Some arguments in that page are quite persuasive; check this one:

"I believe in God because ...there is no other explanation for what has happenend in His world and in my life. I used to be an ahiest but when I went to church to begin with i though it was wack but for some strange reason i felt i had to be there to know for sure
and i then sarted 2 believe in god an i turned 2 chrisianity and im soon 2 be chrsitened wen i look bk in my life at all the things iv dun gud n bad i know now that he was always there tellin me that it was wrong n not 2 do i but i disobeyed him n ended up in prison n it wasn't till after i came ou ov prison wen i actually urned 2 chritianity he has helped me wih so much in very liltte time i have known him he has helped me turn away from drugs n im also turnin away from smoking he has helped me 2 learn 2 love my enimies as we are all the same born to this world by he hand ov god there is acually no posibiliy that this world could be made by a human being not 1 man could make a single plant from no thing not even from chemicals so there 4 the big bang thoery can't be true if they can't make a plant out ov chemicals then how can an explosion ov matter do it so there 4 i have come 2 the conclusion that god him self is real u may not believe this story but the only way u will know for sure is if u go 2 church and seek him out ur self"

@ #20
I voted in that poll, but I noticed that both the homeless shelter and Habitat for Humanity mentioned god in their description. The Humane Society did not, so I voted for them.

Poor Rev. Cockup. Played with fire, got burned.

Aseem @48> It actually didn't allow multiple votes when I attempted.. told me I had already voted in that poll that day. I'm sure with his lovely security all I needed to do was remove cookies and vote again, but I couldn't be buggered to do so.

I used to be an ahiest

Is that someone who never greets anyone else?

In the original Cocksure thread, the Rev said @ 419:

I believe in freedom of speech and the freedom for atheists to have poster campaigns saying there's no God. but as I agree with that, I hope you too can agree with our freedom to have websites which say "hey, we don't agree with that".

Gee, it's almost like the Reverend's professed belief in free speech was insincere.

Carlie for the win.

Another possibility:

Do you think he's avoiding bearing false witness through atrocious spelling?

I mean, if it's nonsense, it can't be a lie, right, god?

Dammit, Screechy Monkey, I had just copied that bit of hypocrisy from the last thread and was getting ready to make the same point... well done and a good find!

Honestly, is there a better point that can be made about Rev. Cockshaw than that? He's shown himself to be a dishonest, hypocritical liar trying to hide behind his "good deeds and community service". And the sad part of this is, there is a strong lesson for him to be learned through all of this regarding human behavior outside of his insular world... a lesson that is sure to escape him completely.

Did he or did he not try to have this blog taken down?
Isn't that an attack on free speech?
Every time i started to feel bad for him, feel that he was probably a decent fella in over his pay grade on these forums, he'd say something obviously underhanded or self riteous.
He could have left well enough alone, but chose to attack PZed's blog.
He couldn't beat us with words so he tried to have us shut up in other ways. I say that we see what he is really made of now.
Fuck him and his sleazy tactics.
He is intellectually AND morally deficient.

Is that someone who never greets anyone else?

It's someone who denies that greetings exist.

Heliobates
You can't disprove a greeting.

"Is that someone who never greets anyone else? "

No, I think it just means they use more proper forms of greeting, such as the full "Hello" or "Hallo", or perhaps "Good morrow to ye."

LOL at this section from an interview with the Rev:

Q. How was Jesus in touch with the natural world?

A. Hmmm. I view him as being more than just in touch with it. His very being was inextricably linked to it, and is into the future. Not in a gaia sense or other such new age weirdness, but in the fact he created it (John 1 etc), he commanded it (stormy waters and all that), he rebuked it (fig tree), and it will be redeemed in the future in connection with his second coming.

The stupid, it burneth.

Q: If you were a plant, what plant would you be? And why?

A: I would be a cactus. I think cacti are amazingly robust and efficient. I also happen to think they are quite beautiful in their own way to look at, but beautiful because of how God has made them to survive in such harsh environs.

He's a creationist too! Yippee!

Here's the rest of the interview with "Evan Cockshaw - Astrophysicist" (err, Evan, you really need a PhD in Astrophysics in order to call yourself an Astrophysicist. "Wannabe Astrophysicist" you might get away with).

"I believe in God because whenever some mean ol' atheist points out how stupid my beliefs are, the get censored."

From the interview linked above: "new age weirdness"

Geez, Rev, glass houses and all that.

Since when does a web site NOT want traffic? Oh yeah! When it's a cracker worshiping think skinned bible shaker!

Darn that "group of atheists" he referenced when he first changed his submit-you-story link.

Another point: So, when you don't like the results you just change the rules of the game!!

Lordy lordy lordy, these people just get more and more pathetic.

Since when does a web site NOT want traffic? Oh yeah! When it's a cracker worshiping think skinned bible shaker!

a doing-some-tedious-but-symbolic-ritual-with-a-cracker, thin skinned bible shaker. Seriously they burned people for these subtleties.

And interestingly, he's the guy behind a software company called FishFood Media.

Their main product is a crappy looking piece of software called Easy Worship, that is somewhere between a karaoke machine and Powerpoint, and which they sell for £250! If you believe in Jebus, you can get a 50% discount, though.

:)

I do agree that he was harshly treated.

Gimme a break. He was treated with kid-gloves. If he's going to engage in online evangelism for the CoE, he need to grow a pair of Internet cojones and not expect everyone to behave like they're drinking Earl Grey and eating cucumber sandwiches in the rectory after a cricket match on the village green.

@ggab: well played!

You can't disprove a greeting.

That's why I'm not an ahist. Or even an aghist.

I see people talking all the time. How did they start? Talking can't come from nothing.

Therefore greetings exist.

and not expect everyone to behave like they're drinking Earl Grey and eating cucumber sandwiches in the rectory after a cricket match on the village green.

I agree with your general point, but he lives in West Bromwich, not an episode of Miss Marple.

http://www.inspiremagazine.org.uk/news.aspx?action=view&id=734

So you can have an easier time imagining his face red with righteous indignation. Cheers.

A former student of physics and astrophysics has been appointed as a Church of England missionary to West Bromwich, and is promising to bring 'extreme Christianity' to the Black Country.
Extreme dude! Jesus is gnarly! Like skateboards! You kids are down with that, right? Now we are going to pass around the collection plate. To the MAX!

A former student of physics and astrophysics has been appointed as a Church of England missionary...

So, what, reality was too hard for him and he decided to just go with the "goddidit" answer? Hmm, guess it is easier to say "god's will" than trying to calculate energy states.

Thanks for the link, Diagoras.

The stupidity abounds in that interview with Cockshaw. Aside from the usual equivocations on the word "belief," you also get this nugget:

no experiment can ever be done on the universe to perfectly define how it was all created in the beginning. There are too many unanswerable questions.

Therefore, the god described in my book exists. Very compelling, Cockshaw.

It's no wonder he didn't try to argue his case in this forum. He'd be way out of his league.

I'm more of an anti-hiest. I actively oppose all forms of greetings.

Article about the Rev:

Church Leaders welcome Black Country Missioner

And [Archdeacon of Walsall] added: "Can the fuddy-duddy old Church of England really reach young adults out on the streets of West Bromwich? Well, actually the Church of England isn't only middle aged people like me; but here we have got a young clergyman who is streetwise and who knows the cultures and is in the cultures."

Streetwise? LOL, I think not.

Yeah - he starts with the assumption of a created universe. I'm sure the field of astrophysics is really, really, sad they lost such a brilliant contributor to their field. /snark

I'm trying to think of something funnier than an evangelical-minded Anglican vicar trying to be down wit the kids. So far I have "a high-church Anglican vicar trying to be down with the kids".

Don't scoff at his prowess at Streetwise, MH.
He put two points in it on his character sheet, and everything.

From here.

Evan Cockshaw, I am a curate in Horncastle, Lincolnshire. My first degree was in Physics with Astrophysics. When I trained for ordination I studied for an MA which I received with distinction. My thesis for that was "Arguments for the existence of God in the light of the new physics." In my final year I progressed onto post graduate research with a thesis title of "what might theology learn from the morphology of scientific models." this is the research I am now engaged in one day per week at the genreous permission of my parish. It is MPhil level. My thesis structure will primarily be a comparison of the work of Thomas Torrance and John Polkinghorne. I am currently majoring on Polkinghorne's work.

Oh, Evan. We'd LOVE to hear about the "arguments for the existence of God in the light of the new physics"! If you don't want to talk about it here, sign up at richarddawkins.net/forum. Think of it as missionary work.

Jimminy
I grew up in northern Kentucky, so I was raised a Howdyist.

What a funny fucker. You'd think that the way he acts that he's ungrateful for the publicity you gave him. You turned his silly little attempt to bring Christianity to the public into an ol' fashioned atheist beat-up-the-Christian party. We so often do that throughout history, it's so sad that we aristocratic atheists keep persecuting their religious belief by simply existing. It must be so hard for them to know that people think their most sacred of beliefs is an absurdity. And all they wanted to do was publicly evangelise without having anyone answer "no" on their stupid poll. The answer "no" was only there for showing purposes, not to be actually clicked...

A former student of physics and astrophysics

Ah so he lied about being an astrophysicist too. How surprising.

I took a few semesters of history in college and have been hiking around some native-american ruins.

By golly that must make me an archaeologist! Whoopeeeee!

*dons Indiana Jones fedora and bullwhip*

As I recall, his website wasn't just supposed to be an in-group praise and worship website; it was an apologetics site, a rebuttal to the atheist bus campaign which was designed for people to give their reasons for believing in God in order to convert visitors. For that to happen, they need non-christian visitors, I think. They claimed to want doubters and fence-sitters to have ALL the information they needed, so they could "make up their own minds" (Christians really like that phrase, as if the default is being forced to conclude things at gunpoint.)

That's debate. That's not a closed forum. You get involved in debate, you should expect -- and welcome -- disagreement from the other side. You should particularly expect it when you act as if your side is the underdog finally having their say -- when Christians have been aggressively proselytizing for hundreds of years with churches on every corner, and atheists just put up some signs on a bus, for crying out loud.

By the way I found a fascinating personal account of the Alpha course, from the point of view of an atheist. This is how they persuade nonchristians to become Christian. These are the arguments they give -- and they're mostly variations of what was on the Rev. C's site.

http://alphacoursereview.wordpress.com/page/2/

It's in reverse order, so you have to scroll down to start at the beginning, and then scroll down to the bottom of the page again for "next entries" when you're done -- but it's addictive. I think it only goes up to Week 10 so far. The minister in the account also seems like a nice sort of chap, and the believers are nice, too. But the theology does odd things to nice people.

What is it with West Bromwhich? Evan indicated it was some post apocalyptic depressed area of some sort.

We have those all over the USA too. Much of the midwest is emptying out and those so called small towns loved by christofascists are becoming all but ghost towns. Not even going to mention the rust belt places where houses can be bought for $1.00 and might not be worth that much. Or the coal mining areas of Apalachia after all the coal has been mined out.

Just visited the site in question and found some naughty boy or girl seems to have hacked it. The greeter (home) page puts up the following message as one of three, alongside the photo of some naked bloke touching the noodly appendage of the FSM (blessings be upon him), heavily disguised as an old git with a beard.

"The poster campaign by a group of atheists and part funded by the author Richard Dawkins has been really very succesful, in some ways at least. Raising 10 times more than the £11,000 originally hoped for they will now be placing posters all over the UK. We'd like to say 'Thanks'!!!"

Unless, of course, the reverend is becoming a bit too "cocksure".

@ Jimminy Christmas #84

Credit where credit is due, according to the link MH provided in #81, Rev. Cockshaw is degreed in these fields, but his post-grad or doctorate work in the field is not fully established, so far as I can tell...

Carol:

Done and done. As Ubi Dubium did, and for the same reasons, I voted for the Humane society.

It's sad to see how well the Pregnancy Centre's currently doing... That poll needs some good Pharyngulation.

http://www.perryop.com/

Anonymous @ #87

Actually, the good Rev did put that up there... it was his attempt at being snarky about the poster campaign. The original comment read "Thanks, Dicky", condescendingly. After being called out for that on this site (another hypocrisy, since he whined about people picking on his name), he altered the message to remove the "Dicky" part.

his website wasn't just supposed to be an in-group praise and worship website; it was an apologetics site, a rebuttal to the atheist bus campaign which was designed for people to give their reasons for believing in God in order to convert visitors. For that to happen, they need non-christian visitors, I think. They claimed to want doubters and fence-sitters to have ALL the information they needed, so they could "make up their own minds"

While that may be the ostensible purpose of the site, my guess is that its real reason for existence is to provide comfort to the wavering faithful. Its goal is to staunch the bleeding, like a mental tourniquet.

Celtic_Evolution @ #88

Fair enough. But, the implication of the article in the original thread seemed to be that he was currently an astrophysicist, or that he is (or was recently) actively doing research in that field. Although he may have some kind of degree in physics or astrophysics, it seems to me he was trying to play up his qualifications a bit in order to (not so) subtly make an argument from authority. That's what annoyed me.

Good Evans! How surprising! Another nice-sounding Christian who turns to attempted censorship when he isn't shown proper respect! Not so cocksure after all, eh Evan?

I saw something on that site, probably in Submit Your Story, about atheists having already worn the joke thin and how they still love us "as does God, whether you like it or not". I sent them a story of my own which wholeheartedly told them why I was an atheist and how I had no interest in making jokes, and also how it's impossible for anyone to love people that are most certainly doomed to hell (and people who they deny the chance to write back in what they considered a "debate").

Anyway, I can't find that dumbass section about God loving us whether we like it or not anymore. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough, or maybe some of you guys also sent their regards?

I agree with your general point, but he lives in West Bromwich, not an episode of Miss Marple.

As you no doubt surmised, my point was that he appears to expect genteel behaviour on the Internet, which is naïve. The Miss Marple extract was just to make the point. The only thing I know about West Brom is that the Baggies are shit ;o)

Hey, thanks to all who voted/are voting on the office supply giveaway thing. It just jerks my chain to see a fake charity like a crisis pregnancy center asking for money when it could just as easily go to an organization whose purpose is to actually help people.

Jimminy Christmas @ #92

No worries... and in general I agree with your point... just want to make sure the facts about the man are presented as accurately as possible. The last thing you ever want to do is give people like that ammunition for their persecution complexes.

From Evan's church website, and presumably penned by him:

Do all religions lead to God?
In this day and age it's politically correct to acknowledge all faiths as being equal and it's a common belief that as long you believe in God in some fashion then you'll be fine - at least when it comes to getting into heaven goes. Well - unfortunately that's a complete load of nonsense, designed to make people feel better about themselves and legitimising following totally false gods. In this article we'll look at why this 'politically correct' view is perhaps the most dangerous belief system in the world today.

Evan, all religion is about making people feel better about themselves. It is wishful thinking married to authoritarianism, nothing more.

The only thing I know about West Brom is that the Baggies are shit ;o)

teehee. They were actually tipped at the start of the season as the promoted team most likely to stay up

What a whiny little pissant the Rev. Cockshaw is - and how little faith he has in his own religion if he's afraid that atheists posting on his sight is going to turn people away from xinanity.

Has he not considered we might have been sent by his god to test the faith of his congregation? Is he not familiar with god's habit of doing this?

did anyone else notice that when u follow the link in the story above to the previous original poll post, the link "does god exist in the story??? when you roll over it, it says "Yes there probably is a god".

What's that about?

Lots about Rev Cockshaw here:

West Bromwich Network Church

Creepy.

The Rev lost my sympathy when he whinged that his wife was afraid of getting letter bombs from atheists.

[WBA] were actually tipped at the start of the season as the promoted team most likely to stay up.

I have to admit that I'm not a football fan. WBA were historically (well, in my memory) crap for so long that I made the joke before I realised that they got promoted.

What a douchebag. Trying to censor the web is like trying to nail jell-o to the wall. What a complete moron.

Jake @ 30--

See http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/blog_post.asp?id=65155. Be prepared to do some serious mental contortions to understand how the Methodists have taken the bus posters to actually support religion...

Be prepared to do some serious mental contortions to understand how the Methodists have taken the bus posters to actually support religion...

Would it be fair to say there's madness in their methodism?

Wait--PZ--"dun" means to demand the collection of a debt. We're not talking about the rev demanding $$$$ from Seed, are we???

I'm hoping someone more savvy about cookies will jump on the charity vote thing at www.perryop.com because I can't figure out which cookie to delete.

Go Waco Humane Society!!

JP @101:

That's just the title of Cockshaw's site.

@Penny #34

and how do you do block quoted, please?

<blockquote>Like this.</blockquote>

Chalk me up as another who lost respect for the Rev. due to his response to the situation. When someone has said something controversial, and received a wide variety of responses, I always like to pay attention to which types of responses get acknowledged.

Some people largely ignore the more knee-jerk, juvenile, or incredulous responses and focus their replies on the more serious, substantive ones. These people earn respect. Several of those have frequented this site (Scott Hatfield comes to mind).

The Rev., on the other hand, chose to engage with precisely zero substantive posts, while posting repeatedly about the snarky, juvenile ones. Sadly, this type of person seems more common than the former, both on this site, and in my general experience.

In short, the Reverend is much like the majority of the disappointing posts on his site, all style, no substance.

@ Brownian #31:

You are the very model of Christianity for us all.

He is the very model of the modern Christianity,
With information astrophysic and on teen inanity,
Pretensions of politeness (much abjuring of profanity)
And yet his lack of logic gives one cause to doubt his sanity.

He's hampered by the fact that his religion's parasitical,
Feigns being non-judgmental to correctly be political,
Equivocating on "respect" and anti-analytical,
His actions all betray that he's profoundly hypocritical.

astra @85 That's wonderful stuff. It looks like that Alpha course might produce several atheists :-)

SEF @113,
Brilliant! Utterly priceless!

The Rev. has a blog:
http://www.wbnc.org.uk/forum/index.php?autocom=blog&blogid=1&amp;

Here's part of his take on the global economic crisis:

Around the world whole banks are collapsing! More and more banks are being brought to the brink of death, and with it, the money stored inside them...As these things collapse I'm reminded of a God of love who told us not to get into debt but to trust in Him for provision and be 'good stewards' of the things He gives us.

And there's this "prayer from the 16th century of the famous mariner Sir Francis Drake:"

Disturb us, Lord, when We are too well pleased with ourselves,

See?! God really does answer prayers.

SEF deserves some kind of award for that.

SEF deserves a "Cuttlefish" for that...

As these things collapse I'm reminded of a God of love who told us not to get into debt

I'm surprised yon theologically and astrophysically adept reverend does not seem to be aware of the teachings of the "prosperity gospel". But then again, with him being an Anglican, I suppose I shouldn't fault him too much on that point. It's quite clear he has not had a large amount of experience dealing with the evil and angry American-Internet-Atheist™ species.

I have a question. Why does the christian god want us all to be poor and vulnerable? Wouldn't an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-benevolent god want us all to be equally rich and happy? If we were all equally happy, well-fed, well-adjusted and leisurely, wouldn't we have a lot more free time to think about how best to worship and praise our dear lord in heaven? I mean seriously...it's a lot easier to think about praising Jesus when you're sitting comfortably in your mansion than it is when you're starving to death in a cholera-laden shack. Why is the only way to heaven through abject poverty and suffering?

Oh but I know why. It's partially because poor and ignorant people are easy marks for opportunistic members of the clergy to take advantage of, but primarily because all the wondrous ancient holy texts they preach are bullshit.

So participating in a poll is "sabotinging" it if you don't vote how the poll's creator wants you too.

I meant "sabotaging". The preview button is our friend.

@ ndt

Didn't you know He was a benevolent creator, who only gave you free will to grumble when you actually exercised it? And He was perfectly right to banish you from His sight. (site?) Especially when you started taking His name in vain. (CockSHAW, thank you, kindly with tea and/or crumpets.) I mean how could you atheists (myself included) not recognize He was just trying to give you cuddles (univited prayer intercession from the brand of sky-fairy He trucks with)? I mean how could you not see His glorious martyrdom parallels that of his fave martyr eva!

So participating in a poll is "sabotaging" it if you don't vote how the poll's creator wants you too.

Well, it fits in with their belief in the concept of god-given 'free will' - in that you're free to do anything, apart from a long list of bizarre, often nonsensical restrictions.

THE GOD POLL IS TEMPORARILY DOWN

Due to an unusually high amount of traffic, and a flaw in the poll software, we've had to take The God Poll down temporarily. Hopefully, we can find a fix soon.

The God Poll

If you would like to see a snapshot of the voting as of November 9th (the day before the heavy influx which caused the files which store the poll results to become corrupted), please click here.

Apologies, and thank you.

He is the very model of the modern Christianity,

With information astrophysic and on teen inanity,
Pretensions of politeness (much abjuring of profanity)
And yet his lack of logic gives one cause to doubt his sanity.

He's hampered by the fact that his religion's parasitical,
Feigns being non-judgmental to correctly be political,
Equivocating on "respect" and anti-analytical,
His actions all betray that he's profoundly hypocritical.

For those of you unfamiliar with Gilbert and Sullivan - this is even better than you think. Here's the tune:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6dHk73jyho

(With thanks to Azdak for the blockquote info!)

The very name of his website 'thereprobablyis.com' displays uncertainty. There probably is? Oh he of little faith. I thought they were SURE he existed.

Patrick, context is important. The site was a reaction to the UK campaign for signs on buses reading "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

Because this is so threatening to faith :)

thx to MH #68 - I was wandering around the FishFood Media Comminity blogs and found "Claires Blog" "Film Faith Frustration" (? !!) so far so good but I think they need to review what sort of links are embedded on their pages - just a few gems :-

Free animal porn tube. from Free animal porn tube.
Free paris hilton video. from Paris hilton nude.
How does levitra work. from Levitra.
Propecia. from Propecia moins cher.
Real incest. from Stories of incest.

ooooooooooooops !

For a proper G&S parody I should probably have belittled Cuttlefish or something as they do HMS Pinafore. It could do with the verse which brings it back to the beginning though:

A raving bronze-age bigot with a new skin of urbanity,
Attributing to fantasy what's nat'ral to humanity,
So arrogant in ignorance and puffed-up in his vanity,
He is the very model of the modern Christianity.

Nice one SEF - again!
Now we just need someone with a video camera who can sing, and there's another You Tube parody all set!

SEF. Sweet, very sweet. I think even Cuttlefish would heartily approve and applaud.

I think awarding people a "Cuttlefish" for particularly good poetry is a splendid idea. I realise that it would mean that we couldn't award Cuttlefish a "Cuttlefish", but his poetry is so consistently spectacular that no award would ever be sufficient (except perhaps an award being named in his honour.

I reject such an award though - since my form pre-dates that of the Cuttlefish (even though most of you in this particular provincial blog are going to be ignorant of that fact).

Gimme a break. He was treated with kid-gloves. If he's going to engage in online evangelism for the CoE, he need to grow a pair of Internet cojones and not expect everyone to behave like they're drinking Earl Grey and eating cucumber sandwiches in the rectory after a cricket match on the village green.

I said harshly, not unfairly... He was certainly naive to think that everbody was going to act as model of restrained civility. Of course, he could have met with much worse treatment.

You do know how to win friends and influence people, don't you SEF!
[/sarcasm]

SEF,

I think that your comment #133 was intended as a parody of arrogance... but just in case, it's worth pointing out that though Cuttlefish is (as I'm sure everyone here would acknowledge) hardly the first person in the world to engage in witty poetic parodies, s/he is the standard by which such things are judged around here, and with great and glorious cause.

You don't seem to realise that that's the local equivalent of saying you'll pray for someone and expecting them to be impressed by it. :-D

Aww I think SEF's ego is bruised. Buck up.

Try being intellectually honest for a change and recognise that just because some subset (cult!) among the people here has some (new-fangled!) ritual sayings, customs, awards etc which they regard as being honours or whatever, that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone else has to agree with the validity of them.

SEF #139 -

Huh? Yes; we as a group have certain traditions that have grown out of long-time interaction and shared experience. And..? I don't get why it bothers you, or why you feel a need to haughtily dismiss it as the behavior of a "cult". If you don't like the game, feel free not to play. We won't care.

#133 was me pointing out that I felt free not to play. Whereas #136 (less so #135) and #138 (and even #140 to some extent) were cult members apparently caring that I didn't respect their cult beliefs the way they wanted me to do.

Notice how I never said other people couldn't play their own cultish games. Nor did I attempt to take any action to prevent them from doing so (as if that were even possible!). I merely pointed out that I rejected the system.

Physician heal thyself, or preacher remove the mote from thine own eye, or whatever ...

SEF,

What "cult"? There's no mote in my eye, I'm just raising an eyebrow and saying "WTF?"

And I'm just being amused at your (collective) lack of self-awareness. :-D

SEF,
Again, I ask "WTF?" What are you on about?

SEF - being terribly offended in the direction of people who admire a particular poet's verse styling and happen to think you have a knack for it too - on a thread titled "Waaaah!"

Irony: you're doing it right.

Wow! SEF is gettin all cosmopolitan on yur bumpkin asses.

Diagoras -

It didn't see to be so much like he was offended; more like someone pushed his "Pompous Arrogant Condescension" button and froze his sneer in place. It's just weird...

@ Diagoras #145:

Misrepresentation, you're doing that right.

Kendo -

Yeah, he sure showed us; he was making rhymes long before Cuttlefish, so any appreciation he is shown that dares to compare him to Cuttlefish is obviously STOOPID AND WRONG.

BTW, is it my turn to bring the burnt offerings to this week's meeting of the Holy Order of The Rhyming Mollusc, or is it Penny's? My C-meter is out of calibration so it's hard to keep track of my engrams, much less cult business...

It's the I-liked-that-band-before-it-was-cool syndrome. Only with poetry.
SEF apparently parsed together poems a long, long time ago.
Ones that rhymed, even.
Way before Cuttlefish did it.
Back before rhyming existed.
Back even before words that rhymed existed.
SEF had to invent that, you see.
So Cuttlefish was on the metaphorical lawn.
And SEF was on the metaphorical porch, shaking a cane and telling the damn kids to get off it.
And you.
Cheering Cuttlefish on.
Damn teenagers.
No respect these days.
For SEF - I mean - didn't you know that Dickinson, and Dylan, and Ginsberg.
Eliot, Cummings, Hughes, Hardy and Yeats -
All had to ask SEF before laying a verse down.

I reject such an award though - since my form pre-dates that of the Cuttlefish

...who has himself composed many, many stanzas to this tune. That's a well-acknowledged subgenre of blog poetry.

Diagoras -

I don't think you're being quite fair to SEF; after all, to make rhymes in his day he had to haul them uphill both ways through a blizzard!

any appreciation he is shown that dares to compare him to Cuttlefish is obviously STOOPID AND WRONG.

Cut it out, folks. The more you protest and put words like the above into his mouth, the more SEF's criticism seems a)appropriate, and b) like it's really bothering you, implying that you also worry that it might be appropriate.

I mean, do you really find it that surprising that there are those out there who find the whole Molly thing sort of clique-ish, and are turned off by that? It's not a matter of denigrating the contributions of a given OM. Anybody of open mind with appreciation for a blend of reasoned, informed debate and devastating snark will recognize that the commenter corps here is among the best on the toobz. But I will admit to sympathy with SEF's point on this score alone: there's something to be said for being the best, or nearly so, and taking quiet satisfaction in the fact. Running around proclaiming it to all and sundry gives the impression of insecurity, which would be unwarranted in this case.

Eric Saveau -

Well, I did account for the blizzard - but not the hill. I should send a fruit basket.

CJO -

Cut it out, folks. The more you protest and put words like the above into his mouth, the more SEF's criticism seems a)appropriate, and b) like it's really bothering you, implying that you also worry that it might be appropriate.

So, if SEF, or whoever, gets up on a high horse and starts proclaiming how "cultish" we are for a) offering words of appreciation of someone's work, and b) noticing that he's acting smug and derisive and conceited, it's inappropriate for us to point that out? It proves him right if we dare - DARE, I say! - if we have any sort of snarky reaction to his attitude, however mild?

for a) offering words of appreciation of someone's work

Another dishonest misrepresentation. I never took issue with the idea that some people were amused by my parody (as intended). I only ever took issue with the notion of the cult's award. So your false claim was shot down by the evidence within this thread long before you even made it.

If you genuinely care about the truth instead of merely liking to pretend to care about the truth, then go back and read the posts again - and this time do it properly and honestly for a change, with your critical thinking hat on (if you possess one at all).

SEF -

Your false claim of a "cult" indicates that you've got your head shoved firmly into your ass, clearly leaving no room for you to wear any critical thinking hat yourself. You're in no position to presume to lecture me about honesty.

SEF:

my form pre-dates that of the Cuttlefish

So you invented the Gilbert and Sullivan parody? Wow.

CJO:

I mean, do you really find it that surprising that there are those out there who find the whole Molly thing sort of clique-ish, and are turned off by that? It's not a matter of denigrating the contributions of a given OM.

Come to think of it, it was very rude of you people to award me your cultish "Molly" when my commenting history long predates that silly award! Hrm! Hmphf!

CJO -

Only picking on SEF because the "(collective) lack of self-awareness" jab.
Oh, and the "my form pre-dates that of the Cuttlefish" bit.
Just read as grandstandingly pompous and whiny.
On a thread labled "Waaaah!"
I forgot artists are a sensitive bunch.
Snark withdrawn.

So you invented the Gilbert and Sullivan parody?

More misrepresentation.* You cultists just can't manage to be honest when your rituals are challenged, can you. :-D

*Hint for the hard of thinking: "form" = form for posting impromptu poetry, not form as in a particular poetic structure.

Stop it! All of you just stop it!

Can't we all just get along???

United we stand... Divided we fall!!!

Won't somebody please think of the children???

He ain't heavy... he's my brother...

You heard it here first.
SEF invented everything.
Ever.
Especially poetry, though.
And that of the impromptu variety, doubly so.
And the word misrepresentation.
But look!
SEF inserted a smiley.
Is that the equivalent of a Palin wink?
The gambit of tossing out contempt, but in a folksy way.
How could we resist such an overture?

Can't we all just get along???

For what reason? I suppose you're being facetious but it does bear pointing out that valuing group cohesion above all is rather cult-like. Pharyngula comment threads would be a great deal less edifying (not to mention entertaining) if the only disagreements were between the regulars and the godbotherers.

(Discaimer: a given point of controversy might be silly and not warrant intra-necine squabbling; I caution only against valuing "getting along" over honest and rational discourse. Let the chips fall where they may, but pick your battles [and your cliches!].)

More misrepresentation.*

No, it was a jokey rhetorical question in the sense of "trying to figure out what SEF is going on about".

You cultists just can't manage to be honest when your rituals are challenged, can you. :-D

There is currently no ritual featuring a "Cuttlefish" award that I'm aware of? Maybe I'm not sufficiently initiated to the CULT?

*Hint for the hard of thinking: "form" = form for posting impromptu poetry, not form as in a particular poetic structure.

And that distinction was supposed to be obvious from your post?

PS. in the interest of correcting our ignorance, on what sites are you known for posting impromptu poetry?

@ CJO @ #163-

I was just trying to lighten what has become a seemingly unnecessarily contentious thread with a bit or pointless humor. Failing at it, obviously... you (collective, not specific) may return to sniping at each other.

Pharyngula is kid's play. There's this cult that has been giving out obscure internet awards for Gilbert&Sullivan pastiches (among other things) since 2002. At this point, it's probably too late to deprogram Wilkins.

Great, Thanks