Welcome home; have some religious pareidolia

I’m back home for the holidays – home being Northwest Indiana, which is effectively part of Chicago. This area is way more liberal than West Lafayette, so it’s always a bit of a relief…but that doesn’t mean it’s completely void of religious wackiness. For example, here are two short articles in our local newspaper, both titled “Christmas miracles?”:

JUDY FIDKOWSKI | THE TIMES Jason Amaya, 19, of Lake Station, holds a Cheeto that, to him, resembles Our Lady of Guadalupe, a celebrated Catholic image of the Virgin Mary.

JEFF BURTON | THE TIMES Last month, Renee Sperka noticed a unique spot on the wood paneling in the basement of her Hammond home. She and many of her friends believe it resembles the image of Jesus Christ.

Come on, wood paneling and a cheeto? Those have totally already been done before. You think the lord would be able to come up with more creative ways to reveal himself.

Christmas miracles? …I think the answer to that is “No.”

Google’s religious censorship: the double standard

Anyone who has used Google before knows that when you start typing a phrase, Google will start suggesting searches for you based on common searches of other people. This can be useful, and it can also lead to some pretty wacky stuff popping up sometimes. But what happens when you combine religion and Google’s search suggestions? Let’s take a look at some major world religions:Wow, a lot of negative and critical stuff being searched, huh? Because I’m an equal opportunity offender, let’s throw in atheism too, even though it’s technically not a religion (though apparently most searchers don’t understand that).
But wait, what about Islam? Did I just forget about them? Nope – there’s just nothing to show.
Yep. Google censors the search “Islam is,” presumably so negative phrases don’t pop up. Apparently it’s okay to criticize other religions – but Islam? Oh ho ho, nooooo, we’re not opening that can of worms.

But maybe no one is searching for “Islam is,” and that’s why we don’t see it. Let’s take a look at the number of search results per term:

“Christianity is” – 2,600,000
“Judaism is” – 486,000
“Hinduism is” – 270,000
“Buddhism is” – 550,000
“Atheism is” – 548,000
“Islam is” – 14,400,000

Yes, even though “Islam is” has the most search results, it offers no search suggestion.

Maybe this is an isolated case. What happens if we look at a similar type of search term?
Huh, looking pretty empty around here. I guess this goes with the old “Respect the person, not the idea” mantra that I support. As long as Google does that for all of the groups…
Well…okay, I guess none of those things are really bad things…
Aaanndd never mind. Guess it’s still okay to pick on the ickle atheists, but not anyone else.

Let’s look at the search results:

“Christians are” – 2,600,000
“Jews are” – 7,880,000
“Muslims are” – 1,890,000
“Hindus are” – 268,000
“Buddhists are” – 95,300
“Atheists are” – 390,000

Again, an odd little correlation. Two of the terms with the lowest amount of search results are the ones that actually show search suggestions. It’s obvious Google is covering its ass and trying not to offend religious users – and you know what, as a company they have that right. And as long as they’re not censoring the actual results (which seems true, looking at the number of search results), that’s okay with me. But I think this really illustrates the attitude that surrounds criticizing religion.

We’ve gotten to the point where it’s okay to criticize everything but Islam – which is a better than not being able to criticize religion at all – but we shouldn’t be putting Islam on a special pedestal. We can’t be bullied into silence through threats and incidents like the Muhammad cartoons, because that only gives them even more power. Even something as simple as Google being afraid to highlight the searches of others (not their own personal views) shows how strongly people can fear criticizing Muslims.

And as for the search terms about individuals? I personally don’t think Google should censor anything, as it leaves silly loop holes like this. It shows which groups scare them the most – the ones with the most power – rather than any sort of logical, uniform censoring system. I don’t think Google hates atheists, but rather that they realize we won’t flip our shit at a couple of nasty search terms. It just all seems a bit ridiculous, really.

(Hat tip to Reddit for finding this)

Purdue senior tries to return parking ticket, gets arrested for terroristic mischief

What happens when you need to pay off a parking ticket and return a wheel lock, but Parking Services isn’t open yet? Maybe you can just leave it in a box outside of their door – seems simple enough, right? Nope, obviously everyone needs to freak out, because a box automatically equals a bomb.

According to a press release, around 7:50 a.m. Thursday, three college-aged men left a suspicious box in a hallway at the center, located at 504 Northwestern Ave. Police evacuated the building and used a portable X-ray machine to examine the box’s contents. Inside of the box there was a wheel lock, a Purdue parking ticket and $20. Police re-opened the center at 9 a.m.

So they closed down the building for an hour…no major harm done, right?

Police arrested 21-year-old Roy C. Sun of Andover, Mass., on preliminary charges of Class C felony terroristic mischief and possession of stolen property, a Class C felony. …

Terroristic mischief is when a person knowingly or intentionally places a device with the intent to cause a reasonable person to believe it is weapon of mass destruction, according to the press release.

Norberg said it is not a good use of police time when they have to respond to this kind of activity.

“It was a very serious matter to do something that mimics a terrorist activity – it uses numerous resources,” she said. “When they’re doing that they’re not out doing other things that might be needed.”

A Class C felony is punishable by a maximum of eight years in prison and a fine up to $10,000, and a Class D felony is punishable by a maximum of three years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine.

…Are you fucking kidding me?

First of all, it’s fairly obvious that the guy wasn’t knowingly or intentionally trying to make the box seem like a weapon of mass destruction (really? WMD?). He was trying to return a parking ticket and didn’t think that police would irrationally freak the fuck out about it. Maybe if this isn’t a good use of police time, police shouldn’t be so trigger happy to think there’s a freaking WMD in a tiny building on their relatively insignificant college campus in the middle of a corn field. Left outside the White House, I can understand – but outside of Parking Services at Purdue? What did they think, someone got so disgruntled with getting ticketed that it was time to do everyone in?

He hasn’t been officially charged yet, so hopefully the prosecutor’s office will realize how ridiculous this is. There is a facebook group and they’ve already held a protest. On top of that, this story is becoming popular on reddit… Lovely that Purdue will yet again be in the news for something stupid. We’re really building up our image this year.

Darwin Fashion Show

British fashion designer Alexander McQueen unveiled his new collection inspired by Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species:

“Models with their hair teased into devil-like horns, strutted the catwalk in minidresses decorated with all manner of colourful, elaborate skins. Ruffled hemlines were frilled to resemble feathers, and vibrant fabrics were printed to resemble amphibian-like breastplates.”

Actually I have no idea what any of these costumes have to do with evolution, but I felt compelled to post them since they combined my biology love with my horrible fascination with America’s Next Top Model. Aka, I like sparkly weird costumes. I guess this was a better idea than having all of the models wearing giant beards, or having each outfit gradually change over time. That would be a long, not so interesting fashion show.

Fundraising fail

I just passed a table where a sorority is trying to collect money for their charity event. They’re having a formal dance called “A Night to Remember.” The charity?

Alzheimer’s research.

I know their intentions are good, but I wonder if they realize the dark, twisted humor they’ve inadvertently created.

Anti-Porn event – emotional appeals and dangerous misinformation

*I apologize for this post being so long. If you want to read the most humorous parts, scroll down until you get to the quotes from the former porn actress, Shelly. They’re the “highlight” of the show.

As many of you know, last night I attended Porn and Popcorn, a Christian anti-pornography event hosted by the Stewart Cooperative, the Purdue Student Union Board, and other various Christian organizations and local businesses (Chick-Fil-A was one, nothing too surprising there). Oddly enough, about 25 other members of the non-theists joined me. At least I had an excuse of “this will make a good blog post,” but I think they’re all just a bit masochistic. Or in it for the free pop and popcorn, which we received without bursting into flames or being struck with lightening.

Proof I wasted my time going to this thing

We settled down on Slayter Hill, a big open air amphitheater on campus where you just sit on the grass to watch the stage. There were about 600 – 1000 people there (wide range, I know, I’m not good at guestimating crowds). The band was already playing (not well, but playing), and I was amazed that they weren’t playing Christian rock. Actually, the fact that they were singing songs I enjoy unnerved me a bit, because I suddenly heard the lyrics from a different perspective (Wait, this is about God and not his girlfriend?!). They even had about 10 female groupies in front of the stage jumping around with their hands in the air. Eventually they had 20 people holding hands and skipping around in a circle, at which point the giggling began.

As we were waiting for the real show to start, they had PowerPoint slides cycling through with what would be the only “scientific” facts of the entire show:

  1. “90% of kids age 8 – 16 have seen porn.” What a wide age range. I’d love to see the distribution of that, because I’m sure the vast majority of those numbers come from the older kids. When you have a skew like that, you can’t just keep including a lower age for shock tactics.
  2. “True or False: 18-24 year olds are the highest porn users – False. 12-17 use porn the most.” Wow, shocking. Maybe that’s because 18-24 year olds are actually having sex and are less curious about human sexuality because they’ve already learned about it? Oh wait, no, we’re supposed to be in shock that middle and high schoolers are looking at sexual things. Sorry.
  3. “Women are more likely to act out their sexual urges, like casual sex, multiple partners, or affairs.” Um, no. Buss 2006 summarizes the many studies that show men desire casual sex more than women, and both sides would engage in the same amount since they need to be doing it with someone, assuming heterosexual sex. Men and women would on average have the same number of partners, but men desire more. Laumann et al 1994 found that 25% of married men and 15% of married women had an extramarital affair at some point in their marriage. Nice try with the lies to slander women.

The show opened with a nicely produced video set to some hip hop music (dude, they get us) about how horrible sex and porn is. They had some skeevy looking guy taking of advantage of what I have to think was a thirteen year old girl, especially since they had toys and children’s drawings everywhere. Afterward the pastor* comes out and tells us this is a reality (*Side note: I just want to make it clear that these are the “good” Christians who say Jesus loves everyone, only God judges, love the sinner hate the sin, yadda yadda). Yeah, sexual abuse of children is a reality, but it has nothing to do with pornography and should not be used as an emotional tool. But that’s the only tool they have. The entire two hour presentation contained nothing but emotional arguments and personal stories – those “facts” I listed above were as close as you get to “science.” To illustrate my point, here are some of the scare tactics they used at the beginning (bold is their arguments):

  • Senior citizens are the highest porn users. Doesn’t that make you want to throw up? Wow, way to marginalize an entire group of people for being sexual. Oh wait, that’s the whole point of this presentation.
  • A mother called us saying her 8 year old son stumbled upon a porn site. Yeah, he “accidentally” found it. Rigggghttt.
  • Porn destroys the economy because you’re wasting your money on it. This said right after they tell us how porn is a multi-billion dollar institution. Doesn’t that mean it would be stimulating the economy? (EDIT: Apparently even Gingrich agrees with me)
  • When this anti-porn Christian group went to a porn convention, everyone their loved and accepted them. Therefor they’re doing the right thing. Could you imagine a Christian convention accepting a porn group? Or maybe people at porn conventions are more liberal and open minded, and accepting of people who are different than them?
  • Men feel terrified and guilty that they have to hide porn from their wife. Maybe you shouldn’t marry someone who’s so uptight and anti-sex that she’s not cool with you watching porn. Some great communication you have in your marriage there.
  • Porn is a gateway drug to child porn. What. No.

They then brought out a former porn producer to talk about how he saw the light, quit the porn industry, and became a Good Christian. Every story he told didn’t shed any light on the evils of porn – it just showed that he was a giant douche bag. He cheated on his wife multiple times before even getting started in porn. He secretly was a porn producer for 3 years without his wife’s knowledge, and then when she found out, she left him. It’s not porn that ruined your marriage – it’s that you’re a lying dick who was duping your wife. He then went on and on about how he ruined all of these women’s lives and tricked them into porn, how in between shoots they would curl up in the fetal position and suck their thumb, how they needed surgery to correct the sexual things he made them do. I’m going to call Bull Shit on all of this, but even if it was true, that just further reflects on the guy’s character, not porn – he’s a giant insensitive ass.

Pastor: What did you think of our group when you first saw it?
Porn Producer: I thought you were a porn site making fun of Christians, and I thought it was a great idea!
Us: *laugh* …*realize we’re the only people laughing, go quiet*

He then went on to tell the story of all his inner turmoil because of porn (no, because you’re a jerk) and how he used to be a troll at Christian forums. But they were all so nice and even though they banned him they kept telling him over and over again that they would pray for him. And eventually he prayed that God would give him sign.

Pastor: At some point you need to give up.
Us: …

His car broke down and while the mechanic told him it was something wrong with the spark plug, he knew it was God. And that’s when he stopped being an atheist and accepted Jesus. …Yeah, buddy, if you’re asking God for signs and you’re willing to believe events with rational explanations are signs, I’m inclined to believe you weren’t an atheist. Stop trying to make us look bad. He then went on to say how he was at peace, which including crying and puking… uh, okay, sounds real peaceful to me.

Porn Producer: There are bad Christians, but not a bad God.
Josh: Because there’s no God
Me: *high five*

These sort of emotional, personal stories went on all night: they never presented any scientific studies or even included possible credentials they have (anyone have a degree in Psychology? no?). It even included a video of Pornmobile Confessions where people talk about their porn problems while riding in the backseat of a Mini Cooper at night. Their main argument is that they get people writing them all the time about how porn has ruined their lives. Um, have you heard of sampling bias? You only see the people who have been negatively affected by porn because those are the only people who are contacting you. The vast majority of people have had a neutral or positive experience, but you don’t see them because you’re not seeking them out. I’m sure some people really have had negative experiences with porn, but they’re blowing it way out of proportion.

And with the people who did have bad experiences with porn, those were all caused BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGION. People feel guilty/scared and hide porn from loved ones, and it ruins their marriage because of bad communication. People feel guilty for being sexual beings or need to turn to porn for their sexual curiosity. You know where this guilt comes from? RELIGION. If conservative Christians didn’t beat over your head that sex was so evil to begin with, people wouldn’t be having these problems. We’d have comprehensive sex education and open dialog about human sexuality so little kids wouldn’t have to turn to the internet for information. We wouldn’t feel guilty for engaging in normal sexual activity. We’d be able to talk about sex with our loved ones before marrying them and finding out they have incompatible viewpoints.

It’s like Christians have fabricated the problem of sex so they can come down and fix it. And that’s the only solution or “reasoning” they give: Jesus. All they repeated is that you need to follow God’s plan and be a pure person. “Jesus died and can help you,” but they don’t say how. They never give a single other reason other than God. What about people who aren’t Christians? What’s their incentive to stop watching porn? I guess they either forget us non-Christians even exist, they figure we’re a lost cause, or they see this as a good method to get us to convert to Christianity. The Religiosity Level was through the roof at this point as they told people to give themselves up to Jesus, and I really expected them to ask people to come up on the spot, but they didn’t.

And as an important side note, this whole beginning piece came off as very demeaning towards women. All women were painted as fragile children who couldn’t make their own decisions and were duped into porn. I never heard the pastor or the porn producer refer to females as women or ladies – they always called them “girls.” Whether you were a helper in their movement, a porn actress, or the producer’s wife – you were “Girl.” Way to show some respect to adult women.

Then the night took drove right past Religiousville and took a right into Bizarroland. They brought out Shelly, a former porn actress who talked so nonsensically that the whole audience (not just us) was murmuring in confusion and convinced that she was either high or that her brain was permanently warped from years of drug abuse (which she later admitted to). Her talk was not only rambling, but incredibly sexist and racist, which was even more ironic coming from a black female. It was so rambling that I can’t form coherent paragraphs about what she was saying, so here, have some lovely statements:

  • “Women were created as helpers.“ Isn’t it lovely how Christianity can brainwash you into subordination? Why do women take this shit?
  • “Chosen virginity” Apparently those times you lose your virginity when you were a confused heathen don’t count. You get to start over when you’re Christian again!
  • “Once you start having sex, God’s plan doesn’t want you to stop.” Or maybe you don’t want to stop because you realize how nice sex is. What does that have to do with God’s plan? If he doesn’t want you to have premarital sex, why would he keep you going unless his plan is flawed?
  • “If he can’t pay for the movie, he can’t pay for the rent! You don’t want him!” What the fuck? So that’s all women want in a man – support? I rarely have had guys pay for dinner because we usually split, but if he does, I’ll usually pay for dinner sometimes to. I can’t imagine the idea of a boyfriend paying my rent. My parents raised me to be able to take care of myself without a man, thank you very much.
  • She was introduced to masturbation by her African Studies Professor, who said it was the best way to have an orgasm. She also supposed he was sleeping with half of the students. First of all, what is the purpose of pointing out he was an African Studies Professor? Second of all, since when is it okay to make wild libelous claims that you give absolutely no proof of?
  • “Think of a clean glass of water. Now imagine greasy finger prints all over it, like I was just eating fried chicken. That’s what masturbation is.” …I don’t know what’s more disturbing here, the fried chicken comment, or the fact that masturbation is considered dirty.
  • Many women like masturbation more than sex, and that ruins their sex life. Therefore masturbation is bad. Or maybe their lack of communication ruins their sex life because they’re too ashamed to tell their partner what they enjoy.
  • “Women were created to receive.” …Feminist rage in 3…2…
  • God created sex so you could be one with your partner. Every time you have sex, you’re creating oneness with that n

    ew person, so you’re fracturing your soul into pieces. OMG SEX CREATES HORCRUXES. That’s really how Voldemort was doing it, but Rowling had to keep the book rated PG-13. Man, so does that mean when I reach 7 sex partners I’ll become all powerful? Sign me up!

  • Do any of you watch soap operas? *looks at audience* A DUDE watches soap operas? Man, we’re going to need to have a talk. Yes, because you’re not conforming to your gender stereotypes! Oh, she then went on to say soap operas were evil, which I guess I’ll agree with to an extent.
  • “Non-married sex is fake, it’s counterfeit. The devil came up with it.” …Yeah, around this point she started invoking the devil. I have to admit this made me really uncomfortable. I mean, I’ve heard a lot of ridiculous religious things before, but just something about someone going on about the devil’s influences and truly believing he exists unnerves me. It’s such a convenient excuse for all the bad things you do that it absolutely absolves you of personal responsibility or control.
  • I had four abortions because my friend told me they were an option. Yes, blame your friend for your irresponsibility. Four, really? I mean, I’m pro-choice, but at a certain point you have to learn to be responsible. Maybe if she had proper sex education she would have known how to properly use contraception.
  • I had such bad self esteem that I would sleep with any guy who complimented me to thank him. Yeah, how is this porn’s fault and not some serious issues you have? Go see a Psychologist, not Jesus.
  • I was sleeping with this gangsta guy who was had seven girlfriends at once. Again, what does this have to do with porn? This just shows that you made really poor life choices and have bad self control when it comes to sex.
  • I was a wedding planner for my best friend, and I slept with the groom. Okay, what are all of these stories illustrating other than you’re uneducated about sex, out of control, have severe psychological problems, and are a horrible friend? Oh, that’s right, they’re setting you up to be incredibly hypocritical:
  • To connect with an unbeliever is to connect with the devil. and “If he can’t be a faithful to God, he can’t be faithful to you.” Yep, can’t go a whole Christian event without bashing the atheists. This quote made me fume. I just listened to a bunch of Christians go on about how they cheated, had promiscuous sex, kept giant secrets from their spouses, got STDs, did drugs, had abortions, etc etc – but that’s all okay because they found Jesus. But those atheists? They have no morals, so they’re all going to cheat on you. What a bunch of fucking shit. Our whole group was sitting their in awe of how morally bankrupt these people were, because we’re actually good, honest people, and then they go and say we’re the cheaters. Or as my agnostic friend said, “My current girlfriend (atheist) is the first one to not cheat on me, compared to all the Christians I dated.” PSUB is going to get quite a few unhappy emails about how they’re sponsoring events that slander non-believers with unfounded lies. I yet again had the wonderful feeling of being an outcast; that if I introduced myself to random people at Purdue and they found out I was an atheist, the vast majority would instantly not like me. But if you can believe it, that wasn’t the quote that upset me the most that night:
  • “Protective sex is a joke.” Wow. I can’t think of a more horrible thing to be telling a crowd of 18-25 year olds. This is just plain irresponsible and dangerous. Again, I can’t believe PSUB would sponsor an event that could have a severe detrimental affect on the health of students at Purdue. I…I’m really left without words.

After they basically had to kick Shelly off the stage because she ran over her time and refused to stop talking, they went right back into the Christian rock band. That’s right, no time for questions. But you know what, it doesn’t really surprise me. This type of religion isn’t about asking questions or thinking for yourself. The event was to give you a biased view (no one pro-porn there) and to tell you what to do and how to think or else God will be very disappointed in you. I guess I was naive to assume they would encourage any intellectual discussion.

We then left and went to Qdoba to eat food and rant, and I’m sure some of the arguments we came up there were far more intelligent than the things I have just said. But I’m getting to the point where thinking about this depresses me, so I’m going to leave the rest of the insightful comments to you guys, and give you some funny highlights from the event:

Pastor: What better truth than the Bible?!
Non-Theists: *giggle*

Pastor: God wants to come inside you!
Friend: Woah, kinky

Shelly: *first comment* Sex outside of God’s intention is desicration.
Me: … *feeling insane at this point, lays down, covers face with notebook, and has a stifled tear-producing giggle fit, which in turn makes all the other members giggle inappropriately*
Friend: Jen’s down! Jen’s down! Monya [Treasurer], you’re our first in command now!

Shelly: How many of you are virgins?
Audience: *some people put hands up*
Shelly: I mean a real virgin. Oral sex and anal sex and masturbation count.
Audience: *everyone puts hands down*

Shelly: What’s that one guy’s name with the long flowing hair?
Me: (from all the way in the back) FABIO!
Shelly: Yeah, Fabio! He’s used as a sex symbol –
Non-theist females: Ewwwww Fabio

Shelly: Any of you ever want to admit to having a roach in your apartment?
Me: *only person in audience who raises hand*
Shelly: Yeah, you live it up, girl!
Me: …Wait…IS SHE TALKING ABOUT MARIJUANA? I MEAN THE INSECT! *horrified, lays down in grass dying laughing along with all the other Non-Theists*
Minutes later
Friend: Jen! Now she’s talking about bugs! Either she was always talking about cockroaches or she just got confused mid metaphor.
Me: Knowing her, it’s the latter.

Shelly: How many of you girls have asked a guy what his life goals are before dating him?
Non-Theist girls: *raise hands*
Shelly: Only you four? You go girls! (Yeah, those evil, corrupt atheists…)

Shelly: How many of you have had one of those crazy drama girlfriends?
Some Non-Theist girls: *raise hands*
Angry Christian nearby: Faggots

Yeah, that last one wasn’t funny – just wanted to illustrate what we’re dealing with at Purdue.

Awww, I missed the cut for Ken Ham's disdain!

Remember when I said I was told the Creation Museum was taking photos of cars that had liberal bumper stickers? Well, it turns out that was true. Ken Ham, still cranky that a bunch of atheists invaded his museum, posted a bunch of the horrible bumper stickers that our group had. I mean, look at these awful things!
Doing good is your religion? Marriage is love?! Ethics?!? OBAMA?!?! *swoon*

Though I admit, I’m severely disappointed that none of my bumper stickers made the cut. I guess my Darwin Fish and Obama sticker were too common, and I have a feeling he didn’t get my “Republicans for Voldemort” one. Pretty sure they’re the kind of people who don’t read Harry Potter.

(Via Pharyngula)

Awww, I missed the cut for Ken Ham’s disdain!

Remember when I said I was told the Creation Museum was taking photos of cars that had liberal bumper stickers? Well, it turns out that was true. Ken Ham, still cranky that a bunch of atheists invaded his museum, posted a bunch of the horrible bumper stickers that our group had. I mean, look at these awful things!
Doing good is your religion? Marriage is love?! Ethics?!? OBAMA?!?! *swoon*

Though I admit, I’m severely disappointed that none of my bumper stickers made the cut. I guess my Darwin Fish and Obama sticker were too common, and I have a feeling he didn’t get my “Republicans for Voldemort” one. Pretty sure they’re the kind of people who don’t read Harry Potter.

(Via Pharyngula)

Creation Museum Part 9

I found Hemant again, who was just outside the room, and we decided that we wanted to try to go see the “Ultimate Proof of Creation” presentation that was supposed to start in about fifteen minutes. Because of that I didn’t really pay much attention to the last bit of the exhibit, since we were trying to hurry. A guard with a dog popped around the corner (trying to sniff out the brown people, we said). My friends (who had abandoned me at the antibiotics display) pulled me aside to point out one last bit of hilarity, which I got on video. Mark is Jewish (well, and an atheist, you know how that works) and had a bone to pick about some of the museum’s Hebrew:

Apparently it’s a little more complicated than that, and Mark has a more in depth explanation at the end of his post about the Creation Museum. There are also people at Pharyngula saying all of the other languages are messed up, too. Good quality control, Ken Ham!

You pop out into the gift store (how strategic) but I didn’t look around much because we wanted to get in line – a giant freaking line. Hemant and I knew we probably weren’t going to get in, but we felt obligated as bloggers to try, especially since PZ was even farther behind us. We snaked around the museum and saw some random nice exhibits about different gem stones and rocks and fossils, and I just enjoyed them without reading the signs telling me they were only thousands of years old. Then the entrance to the theater was in sight, but they closed the doors with only about 25 people in front of us…so no Ultimate Proof of Creation for us. I’m sure I would have converted if only I had seen it.

Having failed, my group of friends went to eat in Noah’s Cafe. I brought a bagged lunch because I couldn’t bare to spend a penny more on the place. The napkin holders here had this delightful advertisement for some sort of toy/game/thing:Apologetics for kids. Barf. I almost lost my lunch.

After lunch I wanted to go check out the petting zoo with some people in the group. On the way out, we happened to walk by right when the only incident of the trip happened. PZ has the full story at his blog – the part I saw was Derek getting a stern talking to by a Creation Museum staff member. I agree that Derek was being peaceful and really just trying to defend himself from this guy accusing him of doing bad things. There was another guy who was shooting film for a documentary the entire trip, and he tried to film their discussion. When they asked him to stop and he didn’t, they asked him to leave and he peacefully did. That’s all. I was going to stick around, but then I saw Pastor Tom again (still lurking around the entrance!) so we decided to leave and go to the petting zoo.

The petting zoo was alright. It made me sad because I knew the whole point they had one was yet another reason to attract kids. What little kids don’t like a petting zoo? Hell, I was flailing gleefully about going there. It was pretty typical except for two animals. One, they had a camel:And two, they had a Zorse:Wtf is a Zorse, you ask? Apparently it’s a cross between a Zebra and a Horse – and yes, this isn’t just another lie from the Creation Museum, they have a Wikipedia article that confirms their existence. Why the hell did they have a Zorse, you ask? Well, it’s supposed to be proof of their “Kinds” idea I talked about earlier. They claimed that Horses and Zebras aren’t really different species because they can breed, which is utter bull crap for multiple reasons. Now what defines a species is a complicated topic in biology, but they violate even the most basic of definitions, so let’s just go with that right now.

“A common definition [for a species] is that of a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, and separated from other such groups with which interbreeding does not (normally) happen.”

I instantly guessed that Zorses were sterile, but the keeper was busy talking to someone else, so I didn’t ask. But yep, they are. When two species mate and produce a sterile hybrid, that’s means that they’re two different species. Also, Zorses do not occur naturally in the wild, which is a major part of the definition. They only occur when humans forcibly breed a Horse and a Zebra – this is an example of interbreeding not normally happening. Often times the barrier between reproduction isn’t so much incompatible sperm and eggs, but incompatible behavior. Honestly, the whole species concept thing is so much more complicated than that, but it’s annoying how the Creation Museum just lies about it (again).

At this point Mark called me to tell me to come join him and Hemant again (they were busy in the gift shop instead of the petting zoo). When we got back they were following a crowd of atheists including PZ, and not wanting to miss any potential excitement, I followed. It was during this time where three older atheists in the group informed me that they had been watching the parking lot, and that security guards were going around photographing the license plates of all the cars with liberal bumper stickers. That almost certainly included mine since I have a Darwin Fish, an Obama sticker, and a Republicans for Voldemort sticker (though they may not have understood that last one). I didn’t see it myself, but I don’t see why they’d lie about it. Not quite sure if anything will come out of that, who knows.

We went outside the gates, and that’s where PZ underwent a debaptism by Edwin Kagin (legal director for American Atheists) and was then made a Kentucky Colonel! Good thing I tagged along!After that, a lot of people started to go home. I could have gone back and poked around the gift shop and probably found tons more to laugh and cry about, but by that point I had had enough. In the parking lot I formally introduced myself to PZ (“the crazy person who drew that cartoon”) and got a photo before heading home:
All of the Creation Museum staff and guards were very nice (even with the tasers and glocks and dogs…). I was oddly surprised that they never really talked about Jesus, but I guess they were focused on Creation, not really modern Christianity. Honestly, typing this up and thinking about everything with a clear mind was more horrible than walking through the museum. When I was there I treated it like Disneyland – all fantasy, nothing true, just something to giggle about. But now that I can take a step back and think about it, it depresses and horrifies me. These people are blatantly anti-science and anti-reason, and their sole purpose is to brainwash children (well, and to make money). The Creation Museum was literally mind numbingly stupid: it took nearly two hours of philosophical and scientific discussion in the car ride to Columbus until I could form grammatically correct sentences again.

Hopefully my recount of the trip was detailed enough that you guys won’t feel the need to go there and suffer through it. However, I am glad I went. People were criticizing our decision, but I think hearing about this craziness is just what people need. This isn’t just some private belief system. These people are out to convert, to warp the minds of children, to slander scientists and spread lies about the world, to instill archaic morals into the minds of many. These religious extremists may be a minority, but they are a vocal minority. We need to step up, be activist atheists, and keep working hard to make sure this rubbish doesn’t get spread around anymore.

And that was an incredibly depressing ending. Here, have a photo of us before we went in, back before we had died a little inside:

(Thanks to Vanessa and Josh for extra photos)

Part1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9

Creation Museum Part 8

*takes a deep breath*

I’ve been dreading to write about this part of the Creation Museum trip because I know it will put me into a frothing rage all over again. But being a biologist, this is the part I should talk about the most. I’ll try to keep Caps lock and exclamation points to a minimum.

When I saw this sign, I went straight into the room:The whole theme of this part of the museum is that they accept natural selection and microevolution, but not macroevolution. Which makes no sense whatsoever, since microevolution over time leads to macroevolution. Actually, I hate those stupid terms anyway. Evolution is evolution, whether it’s a change in a trait or a change of a species – it’s just the change of genetic material from one generation to another. Since their stance makes absolutely no sense, they deal with it by repeating over and over again that things “are not evolution” even when they just perfectly described evolution happening.

They also never really talk about species, either. Instead there are just “Kinds.”
Their basic idea is that Noah took a certain “Kind” on the Ark, and then that differentiated after the flood. Horrifyingly enough, they have a made up word for creationists who waste their time studying “Kinds”: Baraminologists. Just because you can stick “ologist” at the end of a word doesn’t make it scientific. Here’s an example of “Kinds”:Noah took a small proto-horse, and that eventually evolved – sorry, gradually changed through time (wtf?) into modern horses, zebras, mules, etc. All the proto-animals Noah took were smaller than their modern day counter parts because that’s how they could fit on the boat (wtf?!). Their main argument is that all living equines aren’t really different species, because that would imply evolution. I don’t know why they even bother with all the microevolution stuff, because it just complicates their argument. Why not say Noah took two horses and two mules and two zebras on and they didn’t evolve at all? Why start redefining species and messing with all this “Kind” stuff?

The other thing they beat over your head is that God put so much genetic diversity into the animals Noah took onto the Ark, that once the flood was over, they were able to differentiate. Any geneticist can tell you this is pretty much impossible. Noah forced every single living creature into an extreme bottleneck of two individuals that would eliminate virtually all genetic variation present. Think of it this way: at a single gene locus, if both individuals were heterozygous, the maximum number of alleles you could have in the population would initially be 4. That is not a lot of diversity, and certainly not enough diversity to produce different “species” or whatever the hell they call them. And most likely, not every animal would be heterozygous, or they’d both share alleles that were common in the population. Have the people at the Creation Museum never heard of the Founder effect? It would take insane rates of mutation to make up for this, but they don’t claim that happened – they just say God filled the creatures with variation, which shows that they have absolutely no understanding of genetics.

Oh, but they did provide an answer to one of my favorite questions about the flood! How did the animals redisperse across the world once the flood was over and the Ark landed? It’s simple!
Yes, they really do claim that uprooted trees floated in all the oceans, and animals walked across these trees to get to the other side.

Let that sink in for a moment.

…

I really don’t understand how these people can NOT see how ridiculous this sounds. Have they ever tried to walk across floating logs before? How would a fucking mastodon walk on logs across an ocean? How many days would that take to get across, where the animals wouldn’t have food or would have to sleep on makeshift rafts without drowning. Keep in mind there are only TWO of each animal at this point. Better hope both of them make it! That must have been what happened to the unicorns.

On that note, how the hell did any of the plants survive? I’m pretty sure the vast majority of plants couldn’t survive being under salt water for months, dealing with whole continents moving and mountains being formed, all the soil be moved around so they’re ripped out, or having miles of soil being deposited on top of their seeds (if they even have them). Hell, most plants die if you water them too much! Even if only a couple plants died, it would cause huge complications since ecosystems are so interconnected. Or what about plants that needs specific animals or pollinators to survive? How do they know if that animal is going to end up in the same place since the animals now have to move all over the world? What if a plant that likes growing in a valley ends up on top of a mountain? IT DOESN’T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL!

*heavy breathing*

Ok, back to the Creation Museum raping genetics:
The whole point of this case was to say that all mutations are negative (mice with mutations are blind, sick, blah blah blah). They claimed no mutations are ever neutral or positive or produce anything new, which is an outright lie that has been debunked over and over again. It’s one thing to fabricate stories, but it’s another to try and use science and utterly fail. It just drives me mad that this stops being about religious beliefs and starts being about demonizing science. No where in the Bible does it say “all mutations are negative.” They can’t go around asserting that this is their opinion (not that opinions are sacred, but you know what I mean). They are just making shit up to discredit scientists and to promote their own cause. Another example:
I probably stood in front of this case for 15 minutes. First, I had no idea what it was trying to say. Second, the museum was making me feel so confused and stupid that I actually had a hard time reading full sentences to understand it. Third, once I understood what it was saying, I was so flabbergasted that I just stared at it with my jaw hanging open. The whole diorama isn’t there, so let me summarize for you:

1. Wild type bacteria + antibiotic = dead bacteria

Hmmm, that seems okay.

2. Mutant bacteria + antibiotic = living bacteria

Alright, still with you there.

3. Wild type and mutant bacteria WITHOUT antibiotic = living wild type, but dead mutant bacteria

…Wait, what?

The whole premise is that since there are ONLY negative mutations (aka, something destroying a receptor that an antibiotic targets), that without antibiotics present, mutant bacteria are less fit. This again is a downright lie. Proof? How about all the people who are infected with mutant, antibiotic resistant bacteria BEFORE they take any antibiotics? Those resistant bacteria seem to be doing just fine! There, in two seconds I debunked their entire display.

I still couldn’t stop staring at it though, because it angered me so much. Hemant finally appeared and gave me a hug, and after talking to him a bit I still stayed and stared at the stupid thing. Then PZ came through the entrance with Ashley (healthyaddict) who was videotaping this exchange, so I hope it goes up (with more accurate quotes):

PZ: *sees me staring forlornly at the thing* Hmm, so what’s this?
Me: *explains what I just said above*
PZ: …What.
Me: Yep.
PZ: That doesn’t make any sense.
Me: Have you seen the rest of this room?
PZ: …No.
Me: Have fun.

At that point I had to pry myself away or I was going to start crying.

(Thanks to Vanessa and Josh and robsterFDCD3 for extra photos)

Part1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9