Richard Carrier’s Insane Responses

Richard Carrier’s Insane Responses


By Joseph Atwill


Even though my troll, Richard Carrier, once made the claim that my theory was the result of mental illness, I took no pleasure in the irony of his responses to my recent article ‘Richard Carrier, A Troll Supreme’. It made me sad to see someone who felt the need for such blatant lying.


Carrier’s responses contradict reality to such an extent that they can only be called insane. They could have come from a street person on a meth binge.


As I documented in my article, the email exchange between Tsakaris and Carrier clearly showed that a debate was proposed between Carrier and myself, which he agreed to.


Nevertheless, Carrier wrote:


“Yeah. That wasn't a refusal to debate Atwill. It was a refusal to work with Tsakaris. You'll notice there's no mention of a debate with Atwill.”


Since Carrier knows – one hopes – that anyone actually reading his email exchange with Tsakaris will know this statement is untrue, he attempts to distract the reader with a red herring; the ‘fair format’ that he claims I turned down in the first effort to create a debate. Notice that he repeats the claim three times - an obvious tell that he is lying - and then attempts to mind control the reader by insisting his claim is a fact, another tell of a liar.


“I have always been willing to debate Atwill in a fair format.”


“He has never proposed one. He always uses people who don't do fair debates,”


“or backs out when a fair debate is proposed.”


“That's the fact.”


Of course, it is not a fact. As I documented in the article that spun Carrier’s mind, I never backed out and the ‘fair proposal’ he refers to is one he himself orchestrated to avoid having to defend his indefensible blog post.


Having posted his first bizarre response, Carrier realized it was unconvincing and immediately produced a second response; another tell of a liar. Repeating his red herring for the fourth time. He wrote:


“I should mention I have the whole email thread. It shows it was Atwill who backed out when a fair proposal was made. So Atwill is again leaving out information in order to deceive the public.”


Carrier’s statement ‘leaves out’ the information that in the article I produced the actual email wherein the hosts admitted they were the ones who cancelled the debate and that I did not back out of anything.


Carrier’s attempt to improve on his first response collapses with his next statement. It is both untrue, as I never asked Tsakaris to arrange a debate with Carrier, but, moreover, contradicts his claim above that Tsakaris was not arranging a debate between Carrier and myself.


“His attempt to recruit Tsakaris was just another attempt to avoid the same format.”


Carrier then produces another truly insane claim:


“But I never made any agreement to do anything with Tsakaris.”


Carrier not only “made an agreement” with Tsakaris but note that in doing so he constructed it with his normal advantage of speaking last, as he had tried to do with his “fair proposal”.



RICHARD CARRIER on FEBRUARY 11, 2014, 6:08 PM
wrote:


“REGARDING A DEBATE, YES, I’LL DO A REBUTTAL INTERVIEW ON A SUBSEQUENT EPISODE,”


Carrier then produces a non sequitur, another sign that he knows he is lying. Though his grammar fails him, his purpose is clear. He is trying to mesmerize the reader into believing he had not entered into an agreement to debate because he had not entered into it “even from the start.”


“Even from the start. So there was nothing to back out of.”


He concludes with an attempt at bluster but notice that he bolsters his courage by presenting his red herring – the ‘fair format’ for the fifth time.


“If Atwill wants a fair format, he knows how to get one. He turned down that opportunity.”


Since my troll reads everything I write, I will address him directly. Richard, your trolling me is stupid. I know you are struggling to find financial stability in the low resource environment of NT scholarship and that it irks you to see the success my book and documentary have had. But lying and hurling insults like I am a liar, crazy, a crank or that my theory is offal will not stop CM at this point as it is simply too well established. So, if you wish to have an effect on the popularity of Caesar’s Messiah may I suggest that you shift gears and do some actual scholarship? Start by reading my book and then posting your comments here on Postflaviana.


I will be only too happy to respond.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Since my troll reads everything I write, I will address him directly.
Actually, I'm not sure whether Carrier is following the discussion here at PF, or not. I've been posting selected items at Carrier's Patreon site, which he does follow. I relayed this message back to him at Patreon, as follows:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/killing-crankery-21854928

Hello Richard, Joe has replied to this latest claim that he is "leaving out information in order to deceive the public", here at Postflaviana:

https://bit.ly/2ObcMss

He addressed the following comments directly to you:

"Richard, your trolling me is stupid. I know you are struggling to find financial stability in the low resource environment of NT scholarship and that it irks you to see the success my book and documentary have had. But lying and hurling insults like I am a liar, crazy, a crank or that my theory is offal will not stop CM at this point as it is simply too well established. So, if you wish to have an effect on the popularity of Caesar’s Messiah may I suggest that you shift gears and do some actual scholarship? Start by reading my book and then posting your comments here on Postflaviana. I will be only too happy to respond."

Personally I don't insist that you read Joe's book, because there are so many others, some from highly credible publishers, that support the Roman Origins hypothesis. And I don't care if the debate happens at postflaviana.org, or at some other venue, written or spoken.

But I am curious if you & your mysterious patron funding source are satisfied that the debate is over? Because Joe's words look like a debate challenge to me, and Joe obviously considers that your complaint about a "fair format" is a red herring, and a dodge.
I expect that Richard will post some sort of reply at the Patreon site.

 
Top