Recently, we've been mocking the sad little website of the Rev. Cockshaw, which had the title "There probably is!" (referring, of course, to a deity). Now someone has done the obvious and grabbed the url for There Probably Isn't!. So go ahead, post your stories of deconversion there.
I'm feeling a bit sorry for Cockshaw. His efforts got steamrollered rather easily, and now they're being reversed. Good work!
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The Washington Post has a pretty good article on ID this morning, one that will no doubt bring howls of outrage from the Discovery Institute's Media Complaints Division (aka their blog). A couple interesting bits from it:
Some evolution opponents are trying to use Bush's No Child Left Behind law…
Colour? Science journalists care not for colour.
It's been more than a week since ScienceOnline 2010. Like many other people who went, I'm recovering from the disease that has become known as Scio10 plague, or sciflu, or Ed Yong plague (curse you, Skloooot!) and the depression of not being…
Religion has a real problem with incentives. As long as they're all in an invisible afterlife, it's hard to take them seriously.
The religion I grew up in was rather vague about the consequences — there was a Hell which was not discussed in polite company, and Heaven was a place brought up at…
Over at Nature Networks, Timo Hannay has posted a conference talk in which he questions the future of science blogging:
"Science blogging is growing" I confidently wrote in an essay a few months ago. Then, like any good scientist, I went in search of evidence to support my prejudice. But I couldn't…
If he is saying "there probably is", then you should refer to him not by the name Cockshaw, but Cocksure.
Cockblocked again.
Outstanding, and a spot-on reproduction. I especially like the FSM artwork.
The ironic part, and the part that will really get Rev. Cockshaw's panties in a bunch, is that I'd be willing to bet he could submit his own story and rebuttal, and it would likely be allowed... and then ripped to shreds of course, because that's what intelligent, rational people do. Instead of attempting to censor differing opinions and viewpoints, we prefer to have them expressed, then publicly disassembled where necessary. That way everybody learns from it.
Enjoy the site, Rev... that is if you can stomach the free and open expression of ideas that contradict your own... (doubtful).
What freaking genius is responsible for this.
Stand up and take a bow.
Awesome. You see Rev, when you start a fire and then try to put it out with gasoline, your actions tend to have the opposite effect of your intent. I look forward to reading lots of intelligent and coherent posts about why people are atheists...unlike the drivel on that other site.
Is it childish to link to this page with the phrases there probably is and Evan Cockshaw
Hello pharynguloid hordes! The website is my little baby - only 24 hours old so far...
It's a shame Rev. Cockshaw used an open source CMS and an easily obtainable template for the site - it makes it so much easier to reproduce and hopefully confuse the poor CoE bunnies.
All are welcome to partake in the godless joy that is "There Probably Isn't". Submit your tales of godless joy for the world to see!
Thanks to PZ for the publicity.
This is somewhat off-topic, but you might want to check this movie out... it's... special. He basically says that all atheists do is mockery.
I've no idea what it's good for, but I'm still charmed by that little word-orb gizmo. Shibby!
Isn't "shaw" eyedialect for "sure" in appropriate parts of the world? :sucks at languages:
A poll in the site is missing. Or, was it removed after it showed there are too many atheists out there?
Great site. I think one of the options to the question "Is there a god?" should be "Which one?"
@TheNaturalist: thanks for the idea
Added my story, thanks for posting it so fast Mark.
Take care,
Steve
Should Mr Cockshaw dare to visit the new tribute site I bet he'll notice one major factor - the astonishing difference between the intelligence of the atheist contributors on 'There probably is!' and the christian posters on his own effort. Sadly, I have no reason to think the glaring dichotomy will have the least effect on his own reasoning. Such is the nature of the devout faith-head.
Um...can't they be sued for copying that layout?
@Big City: IANAL but it prolly depends on where thereprobablyisnt has it's servers. I believe American law almost always treats parody as fair use. In England it's usually easier to sue on this stuff, but I expect it's OK; I've seen plenty of BBC website mock-ups go unchallenged.
I'm pretty sure the webpage layout was based off a template available free online... that anyone can use.
That was my impression anyway.
Matt Heath @ #6
I hope that they added those tags!
@Matt Heath: the CMS is open source (joomla) and the template is available for a modest fee from a template design company - it's all fair and above board design and layout-wise.
So far, despite only being up for 24 hours, TPI't! has almost equalled the amount of testimonials that TPI! has managed in a week!
Chuff me! He's (Mark) started a Facebook group. Methinks he's been slapped about the head with a happy haddock of the muse. Several times by the looks if it. :)
Very cool! I sent my story, for what it's worth.
Dear Rev Cockshaw,
Check-fucking-mate!
Dear Mark,
Well played!
@ # 20
Post the link to the FaceBook group pleeeeeease :-)
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35435332382
Too late, I already found it, lol
My "probably isn't":
http://thereprobablyisnt.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&…
I think I made a mistake taking the poll,"Is there a god" seriously, because I read all the possible answers and eliminated them one-by-one on grounds of non-agreement - until I was left with "other". Yup, that's me, the lonely 0.2% at the bottom of the list
"Yes" was out of the frame through lack of any piece of real evidence. "No" likewise cannot be acceptable because, as we all know, there *probably* isn't. "Which one" and "Erm..." don't answer the question and "Chuck Norris" is a man who makes money peddling a notion that dealing with recidivists and other recalcitrant individuals is best done by killing them. I'm absolutely sure of all of this so I could not consider "Unsure" as an answer.
I'm disappointed that the poll won't let me vote more than once a day without some additional effort. What kind of freaky internet poll is that? Bummer. Kids and their new-fangled gadgets these days. Well, off to call in the cookie monster...
I bet this really has Mrs. Cockshaw trembling in fear curled up in the fetal position on the very thought of the Atheist horde sending the goons to her house.
This website is just proof of what dangerous assholes we all are.
O'oh
We have a problem:
thereprobablyis.com and thereprobablyisnt.com are most likely made by the same person:
If you go to thereprobablyis.com you will find that the third video slide is giving thanks, in exactly the same manner, to the atheist bus campaign. The easiest way to explain this is that since the video part of the sites use the same code, the person who uploads the videos accidentally uploaded 1 video onto the wrong site!
Sorry Pharyngualiets, but you have been had!
Yasic:
Whois says that the two sites are associated with different people - our friend Mark (thereprobablyisnt) and the inane Cockshaw (the other one). In addition, decompiling flash and reusing bits and pieces might not particularly complicated.
tpIsn't slide: "The poster campaign by the BHA and part funded by the author Richard Dawkins has been really very successful. Raising over 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'!!!"
tbIs slide: "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'!!!"
Wording is a bit different, I could believe it was just put on tpIsn't to parody the one on tpIs, similar to the FSM slide.
The question is why is it on tpIs in the first place?
The comments from Jason of Arkansas were interesting. I used to think creationism is an incurable disease, but apparently Jason recovered from it. His comments are strong evidence for the idea there is no such thing as a scientifically literate creationist. If a creationist makes an honest effort to study and understand evolution, he or she could not possibly continue being a creationist.
After getting in a few arguments with 'evolutionists' online, I decided to research the subject from *their* side, so I would already know their arguments and how to respond. What surprised me when I started looking at it from their side instead of the creationist propaganda wasn't that they had some evidence, I always assumed they had some, they were just interpreting it wrong. What surprised me was HOW MUCH evidence they had, and how airtight it was.
Jason then explained how his new critical thinking skills helped him to eventually throw out the god invention. Probably most creationists could never accomplish what Jason accomplished, because they are cowards and because they are just plain stupid.
Anonymous (#27) wrote:
Would you say there "probably" isn't a pink elephant orbiting Pluto? The magic fairy Christians and other religious retards believe in is equally impossible.
"NO" is the only correct answer to the poll that asked "Is there a God?".
BobC - That's me :)
It gives me hope when talking to creationists now, I did it, they can do it too. It's not about convincing them that they're wrong, it's about convincing them that the Discovery Institute and Answers in Genesis aren't giving them the whole story. If they make an honest effort to find out about the things DI and AiG aren't telling them, hopefully they'll figure it out.
My approach now is when creationists come with an argument that they've been told evolution 'has no answer for', I just show them 'yeah, we can answer that. Here's how. Maybe you should research what we have answers for before you come in asserting we don't.'
Usually followed by a link to TalkOrigins
Mark @ # 17: Submit your tales of godless joy for the world to see!
Thanks to PZ for the publicity.
Mark may have a really good site, but Cuttlefish retains the poetry prize...
Oops, that there 2nd line in # 37, being Mark's, should be italicized too...
Cockshaw, sounds like a really phony name to me, sure this is not a spoof?
The site needs more women's stories - come on Pharyngulistas!
@Mark
This bit:
comes over a bit condescending. I'm not sure whether you meant it to imply this, but it seems to be saying that believers are stupid. If you genuinely want believers to consider what people are saying on the site, it's probably not a good idea to insult them.
Otherwise, great job.
@Sailor #39,
Cockshaw is legitimate: view a photo of Evan Cockshaw here.
Foolfodder @ 41
It's based on the good reverend's own opening to his site:
@Sili: The 'word orb' is a rotating list of search terms whose size relates to the popularity of the term searched for. Click on any of the terms, they highlight when you hover over them, and you go to a search page.
@Brachychiton #43
Good point, I didn't realise that. However, I'd say that there might be visitors who aren't aware of the other site. Or who are and haven't paid attention. :)
Also, if the quote on the site had said, "Read the stories of normal everyday people who aren't stupid, and haven't been brainwashed into not believing in supernatural beings." then it would match the original better.
Well folks, in a little over 24 hours, we have succeeded in getting almost twice the amount of testimonials that Rev Cockshaw has on his site.
I've not had any hate mail yet, but if I do, I'm thinking of putting it into a separate "Love Thy Neighbour" section...
#9: "I've no idea what it's good for, but I'm still charmed by that little word-orb gizmo. Shibby!"
You can find that gizmo here:
http://www.roytanck.com/2008/03/06/wordpress-plugin-wp-cumulus-flash-ba…
Love the idea for the "Love thy Neighbour" section, Mark!
#9 - I am also charmed by the word orb search engine! Thanks for the link scelesor!
I think "Turn the other cheek" would be a better name for the hate mail section.
I love it Chuck is beating yes in the poll
Anonymous says: "Chuck Norris" is a man who makes money peddling a notion that dealing with recidivists and other recalcitrant individuals is best done by killing them."
Sounds an awful lot like that Yahweh chap, except I'm fairly sure that Chuck Norris actually exists.
Score board (for entertainment purposes only)
thereprobablyis: 6 pages of belief stories (given a good head start)
thereprobablyisnt: 17 pages of non-belief
woo hoo, we're kickin the believers asses!!!!
I've got to speak up for Reverend Cockshaw here. I may disagree with his theist point of view and I know he didn't do much to engage with any of the arguments when he responded to the earlier blog entries, but do you really have to drag his wife into it? I've been in touch with him directly by email to try and show him that not all atheists want to fill his inbox with hate mail, as he's had a heck of a lot off the back of this and, whatever you think of his website and his views, do you really think he and his wife deserve that? By all means make your arguments on here, but this couple don't deserve to be made to feel frightened as a result of his details being displayed for all to see on what is a very powerful blog. Don't forget, he didn't ask for this - his online poll was pharygulated and he's since been the subject of two more blog entries. If that was it then I wouldn't bother posting this, but the abuse they're getting directly is definitely out of order.
You may think they've over-reacted and that may well be the case, but what's the point in behaving as badly as the most misguided fundy just because someone posted a poll on a website which isn't going to do anything other than make theists feel better about themselves? I don't see any evidence of the reverend being a nutjob creationist squealing about what gets taught in the science class, of him making death threats to PZ because of a cracker or of threats of hell and damnation for homosexuals and unbelievers. Granted, he made a side-swipe at Richard Dawkins but it was pretty tame by any standards.
There are more deserving targets for Pharyngula's bile. I don't have a problem with criticising the guy's website and his religious views which can obviously be construed from it. Heck, I don't have a problem with people being rude about particular elements of a faith-based world view - I wouldn't be reading Pharyngula regularly otherwise. But the personal abuse isn't warranted and makes those of us who want to discuss the issues with some of the more thoughtful theists look bad by association.
You can see the domain registration for the two websites via whois at the following links.
http://www.whois.net/whois_new.cgi?d=thereprobablyis&tld=com
and
http://www.whois.net/whois_new.cgi?d=thereprobablyisnt&tld=com