Know your atheists – The Exterminator

When I first started delving into the realms of online atheism, I found a link to an oddly-titled site called No More Hornets. Being naturally inquisitive, I navigated over there, and found one of the more… unique parts of the atheosphere. I remember thinking, “Wow – this guy is angry!” closely followed by, “… but bloody funny!” The Exterminator’s rants and puzzles quickly became the most visited site on my favourites list, and when I started my own blogroll, his was the first name on there. In true drooling fanboy style, then, here’s the exclusive interview with the man most atheists call “Ex”, and most theists refer to as “look, just shut the hell up, will you?”…

I just wanna complain here at the outset that your cheque bounced. The Americans from Main Street who work at my bank told me that they didn’t know what a “cheh-kyou” was. I told them it was probably something Russian, but, to be sure, they should ask Sarah Palin.

Would you rather be known as an angry person who’s funny, or a funny person who’s angry?

I don’t think you can separate angry from funny because most funny people are angry about something. Not all angry people are funny, though – which explains why Attila the Hun’s late night chat show was cancelled so quickly. If I had to characterize myself in one word, I guess I’d say that I’m “fungry.”

You’ve recently been expressing a degree of annoyance/disappointment with the current content of the Atheosphere. What’s bugging you, and what would you like to see instead?

Well, now you’re gonna hear my rant. You asked for it. Bear in mind that I’m referring here only to those bloggers who are trying to impress an audience, not to those who are merely typing for therapy or speed-practice. Also, what I have to say is not directed at those chimps who keep keying random letters an infinite number of times, hoping to wind up with the complete works of Shakespeare or a new episode of “Lost.”

I’m tired of the deluded naivete of the Atheosphere. Too many atheist bloggers think they’re on a mission to “enlighten” the world. They parrot the same ideas that have been said by every other atheist, again and again and again. They’re either oh-so-serious, or snidely humorous about the silliness of religion, but they show little creativity and almost no originality. Just think about how many times we see the very same article or video linked on dozens of freethinkers’ blogs. Here’s news: most of us already know about evolution; we don’t need to be told that creationism is dumb. We already know that religion makes no sense; we don’t need someone to deconstruct it – usually ineffectively – for us.

Also, I’m tired of the insincerity and the hypocrisy, the hiding behind a misleading BlogWorld persona. I get the sense that many – not all – atheist bloggers are pretending to be someone they aren’t: the guy who keeps screaming about the need for an atheist community when he hasn’t even “come out” in real life; the ranter who attacks religious propaganda but doesn’t challenge her own political prejudices; the “deep thinker” who never has an insight that hasn’t been stated more succinctly, clearly, poetically, frighteningly, or humorously by someone else.

And I hate dull, pointless blather. When I read an article, or look at an image, or listen to music, particularly in the instant universe of the Internet, I want to be entertained, or offered something new to think about, or prompted to look at my old ideas in a different way. And, goddammit, I want the writing to be personal and engaging – and to show at least a basic familiarity with the mechanics of English. Why should I trust any pseudo-”profundities” that come from a person who cares so little about communicating that he can’t even fucking spell?

Not to give you a swelled head or anything, but your grammar, punctuation, and spelling are commendable.

Why thank you. Unlike many of the atheists doing the rounds, you’ve been a non-believer for, as far as I can gather, ever. Do you think this has affected your approach to religion, and how do you feel it impacts on your ability to argue with theists? Is there any part of you that wishes you had the same sorts of war-stories to draw on as the deconverted among us?

I’ve never had any patience for theistic arguments. They didn’t make any sense to me when I was six years old, and they still make no sense to me today. I don’t tend to argue seriously with religionists for the same reason that I don’t tend to argue seriously with cats: their brains are extremely limited when it comes to intellectual discourse, even though they’re great at sneaking up on their prey. However, cats cover up all their shit, whereas theists want to spread theirs around.

For the edification of the British among us, what the hell are French-cut canned stringbeans? What’s French about them? Does your hatred stem from the cutting, the canning or the bean itself?

Canned stringbeans (usually written “string beans,” as if they were related in some way to decent beans) are the same obnoxious food that you folks refer to as “French beans in a tin.” The “French-cut” descriptor was an advertiser’s attempt to make them sound more gourmet-ish, when actually they’re just julienned (voilà, that’s French), which is a hifalutin’ way to say “mushy.” I suppose that if some company chose to hack away at its canned string beans without worrying about how they looked or whether the slashing did any damage, they could have been marketed as “American-cut canned stringbeans.” I still wouldn’t like them, and worse, they wouldn’t be as funny. “French” stuff is automatically hilarious.

Whilst we’re on the subject of vegetables, in America a courgette is called a zucchini, an aubergine is known as an eggplant and spring onions are re-monikered as scallions. Can you shed any light on the reasoning behind this trans-Atlantic vegetable-identification anomaly?

Yes. We think British food sucks. So we’ve carefully renamed our dishes to make them sound more palatable. For example: What you guys call “steak and kidney pie” is known here as “piss-flavored beef cobbler.” And, of course, what you call “bangers and mash,” we refer to as “pornographic magazines.”

Sum up your position on religious belief in the form of a haiku.

The “priests” gain power
by telling ev’ryone else
how to eat and fuck.

Which book is currently taking time out from your groaning bookshelves to accompany your evening cocoa?

I never drink cocoa; it’s a waste of good chocolate. But to go with my effete Starbucks coffees, I’ve been rereading Le Carre’s Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, which definitely ranks among the best espionage thrillers ever written. I’m happy to report that I’ve long since forgotten who the mole was, so I find myself turning the pages just as ferociously as I did more than 30 years ago. I’ve also been dipping into The World’s Great Speeches, just to aggravate myself about how poorly our current crop of political candidates express themselves. I’m thinking about voting for Churchill.

You’re very fond of setting puzzles of either a literary or logical nature. How do you dream up these things?

I go to sleep on a full stomach. Then, either I spend the night thinking that I’m giving a speech in my underwear, or I imagine myself and Charlize Theron (not in her underwear, alas) fleeing from giant man-eating French-cut canned stringbeans. Since “dare we run” is an anagram for “underwear,” I often wake up having thought of a new word puzzle.

You’re also a keen birdwatcher. Some twitchers I know will hire a private charter jet to check out rumours of a rare species – how seriously do you take your birding?

Not seriously enough to refer to myself as a “twitcher” – although I have been known to twitch, particularly when listening to Republicans mangle the language. I take my birding moderately seriously, and have the mosquito bites to show for it. But I’m not a lister; I don’t see myself as engaging in a sport in which every new species sighted earns me a point. So I would never travel long distances just to get to check off another box. Most of the time, in fact, I just spy on the birds that fly into my yard. (See my novel Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Twitcher.) Fortunately for me, they include many colorful and tuneful species, as well as raptors to create suspense. I never get tired of watching those guys live the birdy life, and, since my wife is also fairly knowledgeable, we get to have some great arguments about what exactly we saw and heard. Over the years, I’ve invested many dollars in binoculars, field guides, and ear-training CDs, not to mention “squirrel-proof” (ha!) feeders and birdseed. But, then, I’ve also spent a ton of money on Good ‘n’ Plenty candies, and they can’t even fly.

Atheists are often regarded as violent, amoral types, with no ethical compass to guide their actions. With that in mind, which would you rather kick to death: a penguin, an otter or a marmoset?

My amorality doesn’t manifest itself through kicking animals. But I’d be willing to yell “fuck you” at them if you like.

As a gentleman and a scholar, I’m sure you have at least a basic grasp of the lingua franca of the Catholic Church. Can you perhaps sign off with an amusing bon mot in Latin?

You realize, I hope, that in your sentence as written, “a gentleman and a scholar” refers to “I,” which is you, not me. Thanks for the non-compliment. But, FYI, my favorite Latin expression is Klaatu barada nikto, which, roughly translated means “Stop destroying the Earth and, instead, go kick a marmoset.” In the Catholic mass, it’s addressed directly to Jesus.

So much for my “commendable” grammar…

Thanks to The Exterminator for his participation and grammatical correction (also for correcting my original spelling of zucchini… honestly, it’s been like interviewing my old English teacher.) I’ll be sending him a lifetime’s supply of French-cut canned string-beans as a display of gratitude. Should anyone else care to win such a reward by baring their non-existent soul to the internet hordes, feel free to drop me a line and I’ll be happy to interrogate you.

Know your atheists – (((Billy)))

Continuing the series on other atheist bloggers, here’s my interview with (((Billy))) The Atheist, whose musings on life, faith and politics can be found at the top of more than one blogroll (it’s the parentheses (alphabetisation can be useful!)).

You’re a bit of a cat person, as are most of the other atheists with whom I communicate. Do you think there’s anything inherently godless about cats?

No more godless than the rest of reality. I like cats because they do not worship, they just live. Dogs tend to worship humans (think of the story of Rowsby Woof and the Fairy Wodog from “Watership Down”(chapter 41)) in much the same way that religions expect humans to worship god. Cats are realists, dogs are fantasists.

Which figure in history do you most admire?

I’ve always admired Botticelli’s maidens, so . . . . Oh. Wait. You mean as in a person, not the person’s figure. Okay. Thomas Jefferson for his stance on religious freedom in pre-revolutionary Virginia. He also did a damn good job with some of his other writing, but . . .

You’re noted for your regular disappearances from the blogosphere to tackle fires and disasters. Can you tell us a little more about what drew you into that line of work, and a bit about what it’s like to be a fire-fighter?

What drew me into the fire world? Money (156 hours of OT on this lastone) and being away from my office for two weeks while still getting paid. I first got into fire work back in 2000 when the Washington Office sent out a memo saying, basically, we don’t care if you have to cancel tours or close the Visitor Center, send everyone who is qualified. I went, and discovered I enjoyed the experience and really liked the paycheck.

What is it like? I come in to each fire with a consciously open mind. I know that each fire is so completely different (size, complexity, geography, weather, fuels) that if I expect something, I will be wrong. Each incident (fire, hurricane, terrorist attack) requires different skillsets. When I go, I have two different jobs for which I am qualified. I go out as a Security Specialist Level 2 (which means I don’t carry a gun) and either patrol the fire camp and control access, or sit for 12 or so hours a day at a roadblock to keep civilians out of the fire area. I’m also qualified as an SECM — Security Manager. The pay is exactly the same, but I supervise up to 25 SEC2s and SEC1s (the gun-toters). I usually sleep in a tent. Food is provided by a caterer (don’t get excited — it is a kitchen in a tractor-trailer with a tent for use as a mess hall). Showers are in a trailer. I work up to 17 hours per day (I get paid for 16 because we have to show two half-hour breaks).

You live in a pretty theotastic part of the world, where Jesusism is heavily ingrained in the community. Have you had to make any concessions to religion in your daily life, or conceal your atheism in conversation with your neighbours?

No concessions, but I certainly don’t advertise my views. We are private people, and tend to keep to ourselves anyway. When someone (say a store clerk) says ‘God bless you’ as a way of saying goodbye,(((Wife))) and I appreciate the gesture — the person is trying to be nice and ‘protect’ me. I just smile and say, “And you have a good day,” or something similar.

How do you relax?

I play guitar. I cook. I read. I put together plastic models (warplanes and tanks). I play Scrabble. I enjoy (((Wife))).

What’s the highest score you’ve ever made in Scrabble (parentheses not included)?

I have scored 116 points on one play (and did not even bingo (it included a ‘Q’ on a quadruple letter score which was then doubled). My high score in conventional Scrabble (for a game) is 610 points. My high score for Super Scrabble is 1010.

Given that you spend a lot of time close to nature (albeit nature that’s on fire), perhaps you can offer a response to the age-old question: How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck would chuck wood?

No opposable thumbs, therefore they cannot chuck wood. However, (((Wife))) and I have seen a woodchuck (groundhog) fall out of a tree…

Just goes to show that names can be deceptive… What are you reading at the moment?

I just finished “Watership Down” (reading it for the umpteenth time) and “Dawn of the Dinosaurs: Life in the Triassic (Life of the Past)” by Nicholas Fraser, James O. Farlow, and Douglas Henderson. I am currently reading “Che Guevera A Revolutionary Life”, by Jon Lee Anderson, which is the first biography of Che I have run across which is neither a hagiography nor a demonagraphy. I’m also rereading Pohl’s “Gateway.” And “The Affair, The Case of Alfred Dryfuss” by Jean-Denis Bredin.

Do you think there’s a likelihood of atheists ever organising to the same sort of degree as the religious, or is atheism too nebulous a banner for mass activism?

No. Religion has a distinct advantage when it comes to organization– they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, and without recourse to facts, that they, and only they, have the one and only answer. Atheists are wedded to reality, and reality is a little more real and amorphous compared to faith. I (as, I suspect, are most atheists) am willing to adjust my view of reality to incorporate new information.None of us will have the same set of information and we all concentrate on different aspects of reality, so banding together with the same intensity as theists, with their inherent monomania, just won’t happen for us free-thinkers.

Speaking of free-thinkers and religious organisations, you were a member of the Unitarian church in your youth. Given that Unitarians are generally very tolerant of atheists (when they aren’t atheists themselves), do you ever feel like going back to church for a sense of spirituality or community?

Though I grew up as a putative Unitarian, I rarely went to services. My parents are quite active with a Unitarian Church where they retired, and I enjoy the occasional service while visiting. Our kids would summer at Camp Granny Grandad and also enjoyed the Unitarian services. I have tried our local UU church, but they are a little too weird for me (which is saying a lot!).

What advice would you give the newbie atheist who’s just starting to come to terms with his or her unbelief?

My biggest problem, as I drifted from universal theist to agnostic to atheist, was the question ‘why?’ Why was I drifting away from theism? Why was I questioning the theistic paradigm? When I discovered atheist blogs (less than a year ago) that question crystalized. Why have I become an atheist? For me, the answer is naturalism. If a phenomena can be explained naturally, why push god into it? Evolution, physics, geology, palaeontology, anthropology, archaeology, astronomy, astro-physics, genetics, biology, biochemistry, and every other natural science presents us with processes which explain the natural world through natural means. Once I realized (through the help of the Spanish Inquisitor, the Exterminator, Vjack (at Atheist Revolution), the Lifeguard, Chappie, the Ordinary Girl, and many of the science blogs) WHY I was questioning, WHY I found the ‘answers’ of religion so unsatisfying, I realized that, based on naturalism, I am an atheist. My advice to a newbie atheist (and, keep in mind, I am fairly new myself — I realized I was an atheist at the age of 43 (which was less than a year ago)) is first figure out why you consider yourself an atheist. Are you a natural atheist? Philosophical? Logical?Historical? Anti-religion? Specifically, what was the keystone in the arch of YOUR bridge from theism to atheism? What is the center of your non-belief?

If you can answer that question, welcome to reality.

An insight into the life of a paranthetical atheist, there. Many thanks to (((Billy))) for his participation, and of course if anyone else would like their name in lights, please feel free to contact me – stuart.e.turner@hotmail.co.uk.

Know your atheists – Eshu

Amidst the anonymity of the internet, sometimes it’s nice to know a little more about those who cohabit the atheosphere with us. With that in mind, here, in the first of a new series on Right To Think, is an exclusive interview with Eshu, the man behind Bridging Schisms. I first discovered him through a link from Daylight Atheism, and now his weekly investigations into everything from ectoplasmic orbs to people who touch animals are one of my favourite parts of the internet.

Let’s kick off with the obvious and most vital question that anyone can ask an atheist blogger. Given the preponderance of religion in modern society, and the rise of the American Religious Right, and taking into account the work of Richard Dawkins and the other New Atheists; what’s your favourite dessert?

Apple Crumble.

Good choice. With custard, or clotted cream?

Custard, or anything vanilla flavoured.

Returning to the world of online atheism, I understand you’re a fan of Daylight Atheism, which is one of the more heavily frequented and well-known atheist blogs. To what extent would you say Ebonmuse’s arguments have affected the way you approach atheism? Are there any other bloggers whose work has been particulary significant to you?

A few years ago, I was a casual uninformed atheist who’d be wary of getting into a religious debate. My main gripe with Christianity was the injustice of divine judgement. Getting into a long-winded religious debate with a Christian friend motivated me to do some homework on the subject and, being a qualified geek, I naturally turned to the Internet.

After reading the essays on Ebon Musings I feel I can approach religious arguments from a number of angles and I’m fairly confident I won’t hear anything especially new in conversation with believers – although I’d be happy to be surprised. Another blogger I have huge respect for is Greta Christina, mostly because of her good attitude and exceptionally readable style. That said, I’ve found useful insights from bloggers and commenters all over the web, not just those with the time and dedication to post regularly.

Where do you see the modern atheist movement headed? Do you think there is even any such thing as a movement?

I’m sorry, the only answer to this question I could think of took a decidedly scatological turn…

Nice. I’m going to have to rephrase that question the next time I do one of these interviews. Does your attitude to religious belief ever cause frictions with friends, family or co-workers?

No, for the most part I’m fortunate in that respect. Any friction with co-workers is arguably something I bring on myself by asking awkward questions rather than shrugging and saying, “Well each to their own”. I don’t usually like confrontation, especially in person, but I’m willing to risk a little friction sometimes if it makes people think.

Freddy Mercury once asked: “Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?” What do you think, and does it matter either way?

I think this is the real life, at least it’s best to assume that until we discover otherwise. If this was a fantasy, I think I would’ve come up with a wittier and more insightful answer to this question. ;-)

You’re pretty much an empiricist, then?

Yes, although I admit I had to look it up to check.

So have you always thought that way, or have you ever believed otherwise? Any weird superstitions – now or in the past?

At one point I was really into palmistry – reading people’s futures and personalities from the features of their hands. I was also a Christian at the time and I remember my friends giving me a half-joking finger wagging “Tut-tut” when palmistry was listed by our Church youth group as one of those “bad” practices.

If such things as genies existed, what would your three wishes be?

World peace, to be able to make people laugh and of course be immortal.

Since its inception, Bridging Schisms has had an investigative and diplomatic approach to the religion/atheism divide (when compared to, say, Why I Hate Jesus or You Made Me Say It). It’s commendably even-handed, but what made you decide to take this approach to blogging rather than a more hardline angle?

Thanks. I wanted to change minds. Either my own – if it turns out that I’m wrong in my assumptions about other people’s beliefs – or those of the believers. In my opinion, taking a confrontational approach to debating with believers (as many online atheists do), is often an impediment to the debate. If you make people angry, they won’t listen to you – emotion can get in the way of clear thinking as the chaplain pointed out. I think your suggestion of the Socratic method is an excellent guideline that I’m trying to keep in mind during my online and offline discussions with believers.

Moreover, I’d like to understand people’s reasons for believing different things, even if they turn out to be rather poor reasons. For me that’s the biggest mystery of religion. I guess it’s actually a mystery of psychology.

Having said all that, I also recognise that I’m fortunate enough to live in a fairly secular part of the world, where being an atheist isn’t such a taboo. The majority of believers I meet aren’t fundamentalist misanthropes set on bending society to their religion’s archaic will. So I appreciate that for many atheists civil, even-handed discussion with believers is hard if not impossible.

We definitely are lucky to live in the UK, although secularism still has a long way to go here. Do you think we will ever see a truly non-religious society in Britain? Or are we too heavily influenced by the voice of history and our neighbours across the Atlantic?

I’m fairly optimistic that common sense will prevail. If we (very unscientifically) drew a graph of secular attitudes in this country for the last hundred years or so, I think the trend would be positive – I’m just guessing, though.

What makes you smile?

My wife, the great outdoors, poetic justice and juvenile yet intellectual comedy. As an example of the latter, a friend studied coprolites and titled her thesis, “On the origin of faeces”.

When you were a kid, what job did you want to do when you grew up?

I wanted to be a vet, now I’m (mostly) grown up I dream of being a stand-up comic.

When you aren’t entertaining Jehovah’s Witnesses or researching the profundities of Buddhism, how do you occupy your spare time?

My day job is as a safety-critical software engineer, but my interests are mostly sporting – more doing them than watching. I race two-person dinghies with my wife, although with limited success so far – I’ve still got a lot to learn there. We’re also into cycling in a big way, taking a bike trip across Europe for our honeymoon. I’m currently training as a badminton coach having played since I was a youngster and I’d like to help others appreciate the world’s fastest racket sport. I enjoy rock climbing too, but as I’m scared of heights I’m not much good when I get up high and my hands start sweating and my legs shaking!

I must admit however, that I’m a hopelessly bad footballer. Two left feet, always picked last, you know the type!

In the evenings I play online team computer games and try to remain magnanimous as my friends and I are trounced by 14 year olds from Korea and Denmark.

I occasionally bash on an acoustic guitar and pretend I can sing – people threw me a few coins when busking back in my student days, but that may have been in the hope I’d go away.

What’s your favourite freethinker quote?

“It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.” Thomas Paine

Where would a paparazzi photographer have to hang out to catch you doing something embarrassing, foolhardy or downright illegal?

I’m generally quite law-abiding and a pretty careful driver, but I’m a bit more gung ho when cycling. I’ve been known to shake my fist and yell at inconsiderate drivers and foolishly forget how obvious this is when you’re riding a bike.

Complete the joke: “An empiricist, an existentialist and a rabbi walk into a bar…” Failing that, tell us a joke of your own.

I know the word on the street – it’s SLOW.

Many thanks to Eshu for taking the time to effectively write my post for me today… if anyone else would like to bare their souls to the internet, please drop me a line at stuart.e.turner@hotmail.co.uk.