June 7th is stop following Joe Cienkowski day

One of the many tirades the twitter liar for Jesus Joe Cienkowski (@JoeCienkowski) is always going off on, surrounds a video clip of Richard Dawkins being set-up by a creationist propaganda film-crew, in which he explains that if any sort of ‘Intelligent Design’ had any chance of credibility, it would be Directed Panspermia.

Joe took this to mean that Dawkins had been unmasked as a secret creationist. I know.

At first it was just another one of the many odd things Peach Boy comes out with and people basically ignored it—but then he began spamming it as every other tweet and wouldn’t let go of it despite several attempts by several people to point him towards a clip of Dawkins explaining he was set-up and that he’s doesn’t give any credence to Directed Panspermia or Intelligent Design of any kind.

So by way of an update as to what form my review of Joe’s book will take, once it eventually arrives, I made the video below, today, in the hope Joe would take the opportunity to admit he had made a mistake. His response was as follows:

dont need to see anything other than end of Expelled. Dawkins freely offered what on his mind In context.Clear & concise
http://twitter.com/JoeCienkowski/statuses/15377108898

June 7th is stop following Joe Cienkowski day. That is three days from now. The only reason he has (as I write) 256 twitter followers is because half of them are waiting to see what nonsense will come out of his mouth next and the other half so they can see his replies to their other followers (since twitter doesn’t let you see @replies unless you’re following both people).

If we can half his followers in three days, we can zero his followers in a week—or at least put them back to the 20 or 30 level he was at when he first started trying to sell his book and push his idiotic pseudo-Christian shite on people who told him time and again why he is wrong.

Anyway, enjoy the video and please don’t forget: June 7th is stop following Joe Cienkowski day. Cheers!

EDIT: Just to re-cap, we’re not “picking on” Joe any more than he deserves it. He is a puke charlatan liar who only wants to self-promote and cheat honest people out of money for his “science” book.

18 comments on “June 7th is stop following Joe Cienkowski day

  1. But I can still keep him on my Twitter list ‘Godbothering-dudes-who-will-probably-burn-in-hell-if-God-exists’, right?

  2. Aw, I’m not following hin anyhow………drat, I’ll shut his search column down, symbolic and satisfying. We should all stop contact with him and explain to other Atheist who may be drawn in.

  3. I don’t follow him (nor any of the crazy nut bags on Twitter), but would gladly stop if I was.

  4. I’ll be joining in. Dear Joe’s rather a dull fellow. I keep expecting to hear of a mass shooting in Granite City.

    Hmmm Granite. That’s what Joe’s heads made of isn’t it?

  5. First you bought his book, now you’re dedicating a day to him?

    If all these people are following him to mock him, shouldn’t you encourage MORE people to follow him rather than less? Since mocking him is currently the ‘done thing’ on this blog? x

  6. He was given a fair chance to be honest when the evidence he had made a mistake was presented to him and he refused to watch it. If he’d been given no chance to respond at all, Michael would be the first one to point out the hypocrisy of championing free speech, so long as it doesn’t contradict the opinion of the hive mind. So I don’t know what Michael wants; religious nutters to be hung by their own petard or ignored altogether, but I wish he’d make his mind up from one comment threat to another.

  7. This is not my issue but since you mention it, watch Expelled. Dawkins DID offer directed panspermia as a potential answer for abiogenesis. Clearly he does not subscribe to it but he DID bring it up in that interview. Despite what he says now he was NOT forced to do so. Trying to claim he was indulging them and trying to give intelligent design ‘it’s best shot’ is a case of rewind-is-he-really-trying-to-sell-that disengenuousness. Think about it, either Dawkins was tricked into talking with people he didn’t know where advocating I.D, or he was trying to indulge them and give them their ‘best shot’, he cannot have it both ways.

    The thing that is so dull about this whole charade is that nobody actually gives a crap if Dawkins does or doesn’t think d.p is a viable explanation for the origin of life. Even if Dawkins turned around tomorrow, through his hands up and started praising God, what difference would it make? Seriously, is this ‘conflict’ about arguments or about personalities?

    In reality this whole non-topic is just a transparant little game, where the religious zealot want’s to sell books to atheists, realises that Dawkins is basically the patron-saint of atheism, and so uses him to troll a bunch of you. The real kicker is that it bloody works! For all of your supposed reason and mock indignation and ‘oh I bought the book but please now some of you guys give some cash to unicef to balance out the karma’ (Karma BTW?) haven’t you stopped for one solitary second to ponder the fact that if what you say is true, if Joe is a total nut ‘lying for Jesus’ just to make spme bank, then isn’t this relentlessly self righteous and O.T.T response giving him EXACTLY what he wants?

    If you think my comments are contradictory you are wrong. There is no conflict between pointing out the obvious flaw in trying to expose someone you know to be ‘preaching for profit’ by giving it to them, and then again showing you the flaw in dedicating a everyone unfollow ‘Joe Cienkowski Day’..further publicising a charlatan. Seriously at this point you are promoting this guy every bit as effectively as he is himself.

    If you think I am critcising you too much, it’s because you used to attack issues, but now this blog has become a base to chase around hack after shill after idiot until now it’s finally reached the point where I can’t remember the last time I came here and actually learned something important.

    And what happened to you’re eye it looks bruised.

  8. FYI, Dawkins apparently offered to Stein the directed panspermia hypothesis as an olive branch, having heard Dembski make the same hypothesis in support of intelligent design. He also went on to say that was the only way intelligent design could work, and that those aliens in turn would have to have been either intelligently designed or evolved — and since the regression is not infinite, abiogenesis and evolution would have to have kicked in at some point. I don’t see this as at all unreasonable, and I don’t know why people think this somehow proves anything untoward about Dawkins.

    As for that other dude with the book… well… who needs another Ken Ham anyway?

  9. Oh to feed the trolls or not to feed the trolls, that is the question isn’t it?

    Are you concerned ignoring him might cause people to fall for his schtick.. and perhaps buy his books?

    Do you think you could ever ‘deconvert’ him? Did you ‘deconvert’ Todd, or ZDenny, or Juanita?

    Didn’t you used to say ‘you cannot reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into’?

    Do you think flaming will work where reason has failed?

  10. Michael I have a lot of time for you because you take the time to think about your answers, but we’re going to have to agree to disagree here. The questions is, do I stand by and watch these liars get away with it or do I let them know there are people out there who detest what they stand for? It seems to me, and you are welcome to disagree, that failing to challenge these people makes you as complicit as if you support them. Too many people have been given too long to say whatever dangerous nonsense they want unchallenged. If I can do anything in whatever small way to help steer just one person away from them, who they might have ordinarily been suckered in, then it is all worth it. You don’t have to approve or condone it if you don’t want to, but I think that’s what your own blog is for. But thanks for your opinion all the same.

  11. I’ve given up 24 hours before I intended to. I just can’t deal with his sort of blinkered, philistine pig ignorance any longer. I did make it to the 7th on the Australian clock, at least.

  12. When the book comes in: please disclose the dedication, and any loop hole that he may have left for himself to sneak out of.

    If Joe is going to claim that he is a fundalmentalist, may I remind him that IF he has retained anything from even a remote chance of a casual bible study, he would understand and believe that he knows nothing compared to his god. Therefore; who is he to make claims in God’s name? Witnessing Christians are not to talk about or promote beyond the base form of their personal testimony -THERE IS NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY. I’m looking at a cardboard cutout!

    Am I one of these overly strict fundalmentalists who refuse to buy overt sexual verbation as a segway to “Buy My Book!” Con men like Joe Cienkowski are easier to spot these days because they just follow a certain stereotype. That’s how my pattern seeking brain sees it.
    Two faced
    Split Tounged
    Talkin’ Through His Hat

    I wouldn’t be surprised that he comes out with a “Tammy Fae & Jim Baker” repent. That should be good for a late August tent revival meeting.

  13. Pingback: Cosmodaddy » Blog Archive » Creationists are Just Plain Stupid

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s