1. He was always the red-headed stepchild of the real New Atheists -- a cut below D2H2 (Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, Hitchens). He did not have the charisma or charm, or smarts, or education of any of them. He is a 2nd tier professor at a mediocre midwestern University. He didn't measure up to the heavy hitters.Gerald McGrew wrote:Ironically, PZ was one of the "new atheists" (the aggressive, in your face folks who didn't care how rude and nasty they were to the religious). Now, PZ is part of the "answer to the new atheists", who demand to be treated respectfully and want nothing to do with rude people?
WTF? The lack of self-awareness is staggering.
2. None of them get the irony of being rude, obnoxious, and intentionally offensive to religious people, but descrying such conduct when directed at them. They don't think it's the same thing. Look at Carrier's unfortunate article -- he thinks that it is "appropriate" to berate and offend the religious, because, well, it's genuinely appropriate therefore a moral imperative. T-shirt's saying "i am not a Skepchick" are definitely inappropriate, and that anyone who does not see how that distinction makes sense, well, is disgusting and has no place in the movement.
That is what those folks really believe. It's so much fail, it's hard to wrap one's head around it...
Well done to the lovers and the haters, It has gone viral!
