Back • Home • Next

Fan Mail

What I find interesting is that most of the people who complain can't spell correctly.
Fortunately the world is not only filled with complainers. And some even change their minds.

 
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

From: A. M.
Sent: Sun 06/02/2005
To: Mario Di Maggio
Subject: racist fuckin git

Mate, visisted your website for some bizarre reason, why Africa was better in colonial times? Leaving Islam? Why tolerance is racism? Is that what they teach you in the third reich of South Africa? And you actually assume you're intelligent. Come to Canada my friend, to gain some insight in how to live with differences, obviously South Africa was a bad example.
 

FOLLOW-UP 3 YEARS LATER:

From: A. M.
To: Mario Di Maggio
Subject: Hello
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008

Dear Mr Di Maggio,

I have known for quite some time that the rather impulsive email I had sent you several years ago has been featured on your website, and although it is a source of personal embarrassment (considering the fact that upon sober reflection, I actually agree with you on several of the stated issues), I didn't give the matter much thought.

The reason I am writing you, is that it has come to my attention that employers have begun to engage in the particularly unsettling practice of running "google checks" on people whom they are considering for employment, and I am now quite frankly a little concerned that the email featured on your website may seriously jeopardise any chances I have for future employment.

I sincerely apologise for having caused you any offence, but I can only hope that my statements have not offended you to the extent that you would want them to pose a serious obstacle in providing me with a means of sustaining myself and my family.

I thank you for your time Mr Di Maggio, and hope that you can find it within your heart to remove the said email from your website.

Regards,

A. M.
Mario wrote:
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007
From: Mario
Subject: Re: Re http://www.dimaggio.org/index.htm
To: L. L.

Hello Lu

"Lekker man"... good to receive your message! ;-)

You seem to be a really cool person. Will you ever visit the UK? If you do, please let me know, as my girlfriend and I would love to meet you in person. We apper to have much in common!

Saluti

Mario


L. L. wrote:
Hi Mario

Just to say hello from the USA - a fellow ex-South African.

I stumbled on your site:

http://xxxxxx.stumbleupon.com/

and enjoyed it tremendously.

Lu
 
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:07:22 -0800
From: "S.M..>
To: Mario
Subject: JW creation book

Mario,

Thank you for your web site regarding the JW's creation book. I have
a meeting with a Brother to discuss the book and your information will
be valuable.

Thanks!

S.M.
Anchorage, Alaska
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:02:01 +0100 (BST)
From: a m s
Subject: Thankyou....
To: Mario

....for you website

You have no idea :D

Anna x Psychology and science graduate currently
trying to use bible study with the JW's to at least
save 2 of them from a fate worse that religion!
 
> Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:18:36 -0500
> To: Mario
> Subject: Re: A terrific website analyzing the
> "Creation" book
>
> Hi Mario
>
> I hate to admit it, but I didn't see your name there
> on the bottom of
> the EvoWiki page until you called my attention to
> it. If there's
> anything I've learned from reading about Francis
> Hitching it's this:
> know something about your sources!
>
> Thanks again for the great website. I actually
> laughed aloud at The
> Watchtower Society's response to your letter about
> the koala bear's
> diet and range. It's interesting how JW's are told
> in the LHDIGHBEOBC
> book that the fossil record is not a smooth
> gradient, and is therefore
> full of holes. At the same time (as you note in your
> letter about the
> extent of the flood) there's not a single shred of
> evidence that
> endemic species, like the koala, was ever in the
> vicinity of Mount
> Ararat; there are no 4,300-year-old mummified
> marsupials to bolster
> the flood/ark/animal distribution tale, but that's
> not a problem.
> "Evolutionists" must provide seamless physical
> evidence to prove
> evolution, but zero evidence is required to back-up
> a fantastic story
> of animal collection, storage and eventual
> redistribution.
>
> I found a sentence in the 1/15/1962 Watchtower
> Questions from Readers
> particularly interesting: "Other oceanographic
> studies have turned up
> evidence that once there existed a huge South
> Pacific continent that
> took in Australia and many of the South Sea isles."
> It's interesting
> to me that the Society doesn't appear to have a
> problem with plate
> tectonics, even though, according to Genesis Chapter
> 1, Jehovah
> creates the earth and sea just as he creates living
> creatures. If
> Jehovah can allow his divinely created landmasses to
> shift around in
> his divinely created sea, why can't he also allow
> his animal creation
> to shift and evolve? I'm surprised the WTS doesn't
> battle plate
> tectonics as vociferously as they battle speciation.
>
> Take care,
>
> R

Mario wrote:
> Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:27:17 +0100 (BST)
> Subject: Re: A terrific website analyzing the
> "Creation" book
> To: R M
>
> Hi R
>
> Good to receive your email, and thanks for that
> reference. I wasn't aware of the EvoWiki site about
> the Creation book. I'm glad to see that my analysis
> of
> the book is one of the two primary references! :-)
>
> I'll certainly add the link to my website.
>
> Ciao for now
>
> Mario
>
>
> --- R M wrote:
>
> > Hi Mario Di Maggio:
> >
> > I have a suggestion for your Other Great Web Sites
> > section on dimaggio.org:
> >
> http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Life--How_Did_It_Get_Here%3F
> >
> > EvoWiki discusses all manner of topics related to
> > biology and
> > evolution, and the link above brings you to an
> > in-depth examination of
> > the book Life - How Did it Get Here? By Evolution
> or
> > By Creation?
> > There's quite a bit of crossover between your
> > analysis of this book
> > and EvoWiki's. Plus, the EvoWiki entry has a
> > point-by-point breakdown
> > of each erroneous claim posited by the LHDIGHBEOBC
> > book, followed by
> > scientific responses/refutations.
> >
> > Great website! Keep up the good work...
> >
> > R
> > Minneapolis, MN USA
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 18:17:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Liked Your Site
To: Mario

Mario,
Thanks for the reply. After looking at more of your site I thought that
would be what you ment. It really is a great site & I'm very happy I found
it.
So much of the internet is filled with....for lack of a better word crap
these days. I remember when I first got online & would do a search all the
first replys to the search were usually relevant. Nowdays it seems like
half of what's returned is links for someone trying to sell you something,
most of which has nothing to do with the search you performed in the first
place!
Your museum looks really cool. If I ever make it over again I'm going to
make it high on my must see list!
Thank-you for making such an interesting site.
T---

--- Mario wrote:
> Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:38:29 +0100 (BST)
> Subject: Re: Liked Your Site
>
> Hi T
>
> Thanks for your message. Indeed, although I haven't
> read Bryson's book, I'm well aware that our present
> scientific knowledge is minimal - I mean, 96% of the
> composition of the Universe is a mystery for a
> start!
> (23% dark matter, 73% dark energy :-)
>
> I guess what I meant by that "I now understand
> almost
> everything" comment, was more 'I now understand what
> life and existence is all about' ie. there is no
> "higher purpose" to humanity. We're the end result
> of
> extremely lucky circumstances, and we're still
> driven
> mostly by primitive instincts. We're just
> sophisticated
> monkeys, that's all.
>
> Yet, we are self-aware. And there's the rub. A great
> privilege is ours, but also a great responsibility
> towards the Cosmos.
>
> Mario
>
>
> ---  wrote:>
> > Hello,
> > Just thought I'd drop you a note & tell you that
> I
> > liked your site. I forget how I found it but I
> > think it had to do with an astronomy search. I
> > haven't gotten to a lot of it but what I have
> looked
> > at was good. I also wanted to let you know about
> a
> > book I just read because of a response to one of
> the
> > letters in your Hate Mail sections. You responded
> > "and thanks to science we now understand how
> almost
> > everything around us works." I used to think this
> > way also. But after finishing "A Short History of
> > Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson I came to
> realize
> > that we know very little about almost everything.
> > If you get a chance check it out. I think you'll
> > enjoy it.
> > T L
---On 22 March 2007
--- Cmto4u@ wrote:
>
> I was searching randomly on the Internet when I
> came upon your site, I found
> it very interesting,and even though I believe
> different than you I have
> intention on argueing,or "preaching" to you. I'm
> sure you've gotten a lot of
> "preaching's" any ways.
> I just want to ask some questions out of curiosity.
> What exactly made you
> turn from being a Jehovah's Witness to an
> athiest.(Sorry if I missed it on your
> site,just wondering.)
> I also wanted to know if/why you seem so angry. You
> seem to be holding a lot
> of anger...or at elast that's the perspective I got
> from your site. Usually
> people name call when they are either A. Immature
> or B. Frustrated or angry.
> I'm pretty positive you are a very mature as well
> as intelligent person,and
> the only conclusion that I could think of to explain
> this hostility and name
> calling would have to be some issue that gave birth
> to wrath. Maybe you met
> some hypocritical Christians?? I know I have,ones
> that do the "church act," If
> this is why I can assure you there are true
> Christians out there,ones that
> don't shun others for believing different. I don't.
> I think it's dumb to mock
> or shun a person for thinking or believing
> different,and unfortunately a lot
> of people tend to do that. I can't literally flat
> out prove to you that there
> is a God no more than you can flat out prove there
> isn't a God. I believe
> based on my personal experience,as well as a few
> other things.As you can
> probably tell I'm not a big debate person,it's just
> not my thing and I don't really
> like arguing in the first place.It doesn't seem to
> do any good really. I
> just want to know why/if (because I don't
> perosnally know you and am only
> guessing by your site) you seem so mad.
> -Brooke


On 23 March 2007 I replied:

If I come across as angry it's because I know first-hand what an impoverished version of life religion (in all its forms) offers humanity. To live one's life in a fantasy world of non-existent delusions is the most demeaning thing a human being can possibly experience.

There was a time when religion had survival value. That time is over. Thanks to medical science we now live long, relatively happy lives; and thanks to science we now understand how almost everything around us works. There is very little room or need for an imaginary 'God' anymore.

The liberation I felt when I left religion and delusion behind, was the most exhilarating experience of my life - and it continues to grow every day.

I now know I am a product of this wondrous Universe; I know exactly who my ancestors were; and I know very accurately what is going to happen to our planet in a thousand million years time.

I'm LIVING Brooke. I'm REALLY living.

And as much as I'd love for every other human being to experience the same - I see every day around me how miserable, snivelling religious leaders, bigots, and other 'well-meaning' deluded and desperate humans mislead and brainwash generation after generation of impressionable children.

It's a sad state of affairs. And as a religious person, you are partly responsible.

Grow up Brooke. Snap out of it. Like I did. There's no-one there. When you pray you're talking to yourself.

If you need help, buy and read this book:

"The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins (2006)

Join the people who are living in the beautiful, REAL world. This life is ALL you get. A mere crack of light between two eternities of darkness. Don't blow it like all the other sad and weak people around us.

Mario
Email exchange with sometime in September 2006.
Clearly this guy can't read.
Make sure you start reading from the first message at the bottom:

Brother,
Thanks for responding. You are by far the fairest (and hence wisest) atheist I've run across.
If you re-read my email, you will not find me stating anything about my beliefs. I neither state nor infer that I believe in an imaginary alpha male in the sky (and I love that phrasing). Your attack and name calling was unwarranted.
I had one pint too many last night when I wrote. My point was: Your website suggests that because some humans are born with tails (20 known cases in 10B births), we evolved from ape-like beings.
I find that logic flawed.
Birth defects present problems for both atheists and theists. As recently as last week, a child was born in Indonesia with two functioning heads. Did she evolve from ape-like beings with two heads? No, that's illogical. Just like saying that when a human is born with a tail, they evolved from ape-like beings.
That was it. I'm not attacking you. Just pointing out your argument is weak. That also doesn't make me a creationist. Kudos for putting your beliefs out there.
Live long and prosper.
RF


Mario wrote:
R
Unfortunately it's you who are choosing to live in cloud-cuckoo land my friend.
If you look into the genetics of it all (and I assume you did read the bit about genetic throwbacks?), you will see that EXTRA thumbs / heads / legs, like ZERO thumbs / heads / legs, are simply MULTIPLICATION errors ie. genetic mistakes in the NUMBER of normal characteristics produced.
Human beings occasionally having TAILS is something completely different. Tails are NOT normal characteristics for modern humans. They occur today due to ancient genes being erroneously 're-activated'.
According to your logic, human beings should also occasionally be born with ELEPHANT TRUNKS, long GIRAFFE NECKS and CROCODILE SNOUTS.
I don't think any such births have been reported....yet.
I say "yet", because in science we cannot be certain of anything. Your rainbow-chasing scenario of life on Earth being attributed to an imaginary alpha male in the sky may one day actually be substantiated by evidence.
But somehow I don't think that will ever happen.
And until then, people like me will choose to live fearlessly in the real world, not in the comforting delusion of the masses (who, by the way, are the ones with the laughable intellect).
Mario


RF wrote:
Mario,
I ran across your website while looking for a picture of human tails.
Your headline, ".....humans evolved from ape-like ancestors..." and, "...whether you 'accept' it or not...." is laughable. You can't be serious.
The fact that birth defects exist (in countless forms) does not mean we evolved from apes. When a two headed child is born, what is your deduction? Siamese twins? No arms? No legs? Covered in hair? Cleft pallet?
It is flawed logic that to make such a deduction that because one of the countless birth defects looks like a tail, we evolved from apes. Dogs have tails. So do cats, lions, birds, possums, the list is endless. Why not deduce we evolved from them?
You are probably a smart person, but the world is laughing at your superior intellect. [catch the Star Trek 2 quote.......?]
Thanks for the pics of the birth defects.
R
 
From: "Matthew Walker"
To: mario@dimaggio.org
Subject: Hi mario
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 23:02:55 +0000

I read with interest your letters to the JW headquarters. To be completely honest, although you do make valid points, it seems to me that you wouldn't
have accepted any answer from anyone, as the tone of your letters reflect that your decisions had already been made. Whether the flood happened over
all the earth or not, is not your real issue here. I personally couldn't care less about the flood and I do like the fact that you do. This shows that you have the capacity to engage in a strong faith and is something I wished I could feel. But your criticisms are based on a few letters and you not recieving the replies which you wanted. I'm sorry to point this out my friend but you are a little harsh and I wanted you to know a view from a reader.

Nothing personal and take good care

Matt
 
From: Jacobi Knight
Sent: Tue 18/05/2004 12:51
To: Mario Di Maggio
Subject: tails

Your reasoning is actually incorrect, the fact humans have tails doesnt anymore mean we are related to monkeys anymore than we are related to elphants, pigs, worms, or anything with a tail. Similarities do not necessarily = we came from it anymore than a baseball evolved from a basketball and lost its orangeness over time.

Furthermore the loss of a tail doesn't prove evolution, it shows we are losing genetic information, and losing genetic information IS NOT a contributer to evolution, it makes it less likely as there is less to work with. Humans are losing information more and more with each generation because of cumulative radiation damage and HARMFUL mutations, not beneficial.

If you are going to preach, make sure you know what you are talkig about. Reading a few books and being enchanted by men in suits and ties with smug and arrogant looks don't = they are right.

Fascinating, how when you do give someone visual proof that there is a god, they use it to deny his existance and power.

Daniel

http://athiesm.tk
 
From: Carmen Lambert
Sent: Sat 16/04/2005 05:42
To: Mario Di Maggio
Subject: religion and science

Hi

Visited your site mostly because I was thinking of starting my own heretic web log.

Some thoughts:

Rejecting Christianity because you were a Jehova's Witness is like rejecting science because your parents "discovered" cold fusion.

If God is love, and science can't measure love, then how can science prove or disprove the existence of God?

There is a part of the brain, when stimulated with electricity or drugs will create religious experiences. I believe this part of the brain is also triggered by physical or mental trauma. I think this is why religion exists and why it thrives.

Science can't prove everything. If you were born blind, then how could anyone prove to you scientifically that colours exist? Sure, millions of people would tell you they exist, but millions tell you that God exists too, so that doesn't count.

After reading all the wild stuff that quantum physics says, how could any scientist not believe that anything is possible?

I think people would be happier if they didn't have a religion because it doesn't matter what they do, there are no consequences for their actions (provided they get away with it). On a purely scientific basis, murder isn't wrong, for instance. The death of one individual is nothing measured against the death of a
star.

You might think I'm a religious nut, but I'm not. I've almost given up on religion because it isn't even consistent within it's own belief structure. (Example
1: "Every word of the Bible is true." In Gen 6:3 God said no one would live past 120. This was in Noah's time. All but one of the rest of the characters
mentioned in Genesis lived way more than that. Example 2 :"Jesus was the perfect sacrifice." But, He was killed in the wrong way at the wrong time in the
wrong place by the wrong people to be the perfect sacrificial lamb.)

I think religion is a social issue. It makes people behave so that society can function. Christianity especially was created for people living on the margins of society (the outcasts) so that they could be reintegrated into society. I believe churches perform these functions well. (Anyone can become a Jehova's Witness and work themselves up the ranks.Same with Salvation Army, same with a lot of religions. (Of course if you're a woman forget it- you'll have to
resort to new age religions if you want to get anywhere).

So religion is important and if people want to believe in God they should be free to, without being ridiculed. Right?

Carmen