{"id":3993,"date":"2016-10-02T17:22:08","date_gmt":"2016-10-02T22:22:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/?p=3993"},"modified":"2016-10-02T19:33:14","modified_gmt":"2016-10-03T00:33:14","slug":"analysis-richard-carrier-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/2016\/10\/02\/analysis-richard-carrier-lawsuit\/","title":{"rendered":"Analysis of the Richard Carrier Lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"

As you may have heard, atheist activist and independent scholar Richard Carrier is suing<\/a> loads of his erstwhile allies for defamation, among other things.<\/p>\n

[Just to get my own biases out of the way: I have nothing personally against Richard Carrier. He has done yeoman’s work in bringing the question of Jesus’ historicity into question, among various other things<\/a>. About the only thing he did spectacularly wrong (from an atheist movement perspective) was turning Atheism Plus into an “us vs. them” festival of denunciation and excommunication, but that was arguably bound to happen. Possibly he should be credited with speeding up the inevitable collapse.]<\/p>\n

I was going to write up why this defamation suit is a Sisyphean\u00a0uphill\u00a0battle, but regrettably I have been overtaken by events and expertise. Instead, I give\u00a0you the definitive podcast which ends all rational debate<\/a> on this lawsuit:<\/p>\n

\n

AS280: Richard Carrier\u2019s Lawsuit, with Andrew\u00a0Torrez https:\/\/t.co\/C2QPvLRDvm<\/a><\/p>\n

— Thomas Smith (@seriouspod) September 29, 2016<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n