Richard Dawkins reads some hate mail

Quacking Christopher Maloney has tried to say my paper that was largely about him was hate mail, but I feel he does the term a disservice. I don’t have a personal grudge against the guy and since hate mail is all about the personal (not to mention the, uh, whole mail thing), it was not hate mail he received. As I’ve told him before: Chris, I don’t hate you. I hate woo.

I mention the infamous quack because, though tiresome as he is, he helps to illuminate a point I wish to make. Hate mail is something significant. In order to get it, someone has to really get under someone else’s skin. There has to be a true, seething, crashing vitriol behind it if we’re to honestly call it hate mail. Provided there isn’t a bag-o-crazy behind the veil, I’m forced to view hate mail as a badge of honor. Sadly, I’ve never received any. I’ve been left to wallow in the intellectually and morally and legally bankrupt threats of libel lawsuits (and a surprising number of times, really), occasionally peppered with whining from Andreas Moritz supporters/cancer promoters. Perhaps I need to come out in favor of seal clubbing; something drastic is needed. Until then, I watch with envy this clip of Dawkins: