Sunday, 26 September 2010
I know PZ gets inundated with crackpots on a daily basis that would make some of the god-walloping philosopher wannabes I get to deal with look like candidates for MENSA. But as Skepticon has gotten bigger, boy, have they been coming out of the woodwork more frequently. On the one hand, it's the sweet taste of growing influence, which is kind of cool. On the other hand, it's annoying as hell.
There are some people like Darrel Ray who wanted to speak at Skepticon that I've honestly hated to turn away since we became full up. But almost every other request I've received has been from some weird person in AOL-speak and/or too much access to a thesaurus. The guy who misspelled 'intelligence' in the same sentence he said he'd happily be the star debater for the god-side this year was a particular hoot.
Here is one I received today.
Subject: Message for J.T.: todd biesiada
I consider myself a hammer for truth. To the extreme of physics, theology, philosphy and most specifically to understand 'life' (what the hell are we).
I have a question that i often share to render the scope; If existence only operates ONE way, is the math the 'name' to know?
I believe existence can be described via science math to the extreme that all that we know that is real, can be grounded to reality via the universal language (math). Simply put, that there is a 'last word' to all arguments.
It means, we all live within this body of existence (god per se) and are alive describing itself.
weird but easy to sustain.
call me and lets talk it up and i would like to speak at your november event and be a contributer to the 'evolution of knowledge'.
What say you?
Holy crap, you mean we all live in this existence and are trying to describe it? That's like, so incredible that you've perceived that! And he can describe existence not with just boring, run-of-the-mill mathematics, but with science math. OMG!!!1!ONE!! He must feed his brain on a diet of, not ordinary food, but sustenance food!
So a semantic statement about the universe being 'god' preceded by a bunch of unsubstantiated claims from a guy who gives me no reason to consider him an expert at tiddlywinks, let alone physics or philosophy, and he wants me to put him on a stage with the likes of Richard Carrier, Victor Stenger, and PZ Myers? Hell, maybe I should nominate him for the Nobel Prize while I'm at it. He was nice enough to give me some parenthesis after the word 'life', just in case I didn't understand.
I googled this dude's name and there's nothing on him except for a few wonky comments on a couple web sites, including one about combining theology and science. Gag me. Religion is failed science at best. What is it with some people that they think they can just throw around a bunch of polysyllabic high-fallutin' words that have no real relevance to anything and people will automagically think they're a genius (*cough* Bryan Goodrich *cough*)?
Anyway, here was my reply:
I say, 'no.'
I prefer concise and to the point, since it makes communication easier. Don't waste my time, it annoys me.