‘Tis a good day to #creozerg

I’m in Springfield, Missouri, and today at noon I’ll be joining a mob of skeptics and atheists at the Gillioz Theater to prepare to hit the Creation Ministries of the Ozarks. We shall descend upon them as a horde and sweep through their “museum”, documenting the foolishness and mocking the silly. You’re all welcome to join, but if you do show up, there are a few rules to follow:

  • Be polite and nondisruptive. This is their property and you are a visitor.

  • Remember: the Christians running this show, and the Christian attendees, are the delusional victims here. Feel some pity for them.

  • Do not, however, forget that this is an institution dedicated to promoting lies and ignorance. Do not pull a Michael Ruse and start admiring what they’ve accomplished.

  • Do not loudly insult the gift shop, if they have one. They hate that — that was the one thing that made the goons at our last #creozerg snap.

  • Do not have gay sex on the exhibits.

  • Document. Take notes and photographs. Your goal is to come away from this with a better understanding of what the promulgators of ignorance are teaching, and to spread the word about their folly afterwards.

  • Converse. One of the cool things about these trips is that you’re in a large group of critical thinkers, many of whom may have expertise on the subjects being mangled by the exhibits. Ask questions. Learn stuff.

  • Just to be on the safe side, you probably shouldn’t have heterosexual sex on the exhibits, either.

  • Be in the right frame of mind: you are not a gang of hooligans planning to vandalize the place, you are skeptical anthropologists there to observe the peculiar and pathological folkways of a backwards, intellectually impoverished people.

  • Have fun.

I’ll try to throw a few comments on twitter, hashtag #creozerg, as we pass through the halls of unlearning. Don’t expect a lot, though; this is a small, rinky-tink local creation “museum”, unlike that monument to idiocy built by the notorious leech, Ken Ham. We’ll probably race through it fairly fast, just because there won’t be a heck of a lot to see.

(Also on FtB)

Someone wanna explain the Streisand Effect to the Pope?

The Vatican wants to sue a clothing company over an ad.

“It is a serious lack of respect for the Pope, an affront to the feelings of the faithful and an evident demonstration of how, in the field of advertising, the most elemental rules of respect for others can be broken in order to attract attention by provocation,” Holy See spokesman Federico Lombardi said in a statement about the ad.

“The Secretariat of State is examining the steps that may be taken with the competent authorities in order to guarantee adequate protection for the figure of the Holy Father,” Lombardi said, referring to the Vatican’s secretary of state.

Odd…I wouldn’t have even noticed the ad, and certainly wouldn’t have thought to put up a blog post about it, except for the fact that the Vatican is popping blood vessels all over the place over it. So here you go, free advertising for Benetton!

‘Tis a good day to #creozerg

I’m in Springfield, Missouri, and today at noon I’ll be joining a mob of skeptics and atheists at the Gillioz Theater to prepare to hit the Creation Ministries of the Ozarks. We shall descend upon them as a horde and sweep through their “museum”, documenting the foolishness and mocking the silly. You’re all welcome to join, but if you do show up, there are a few rules to follow:

  • Be polite and nondisruptive. This is their property and you are a visitor.

  • Remember: the Christians running this show, and the Christian attendees, are the delusional victims here. Feel some pity for them.

  • Do not, however, forget that this is an institution dedicated to promoting lies and ignorance. Do not pull a Michael Ruse and start admiring what they’ve accomplished.

  • Do not loudly insult the gift shop, if they have one. They hate that — that was the one thing that made the goons at our last #creozerg snap.

  • Do not have gay sex on the exhibits.

  • Document. Take notes and photographs. Your goal is to come away from this with a better understanding of what the promulgators of ignorance are teaching, and to spread the word about their folly afterwards.

  • Converse. One of the cool things about these trips is that you’re in a large group of critical thinkers, many of whom may have expertise on the subjects being mangled by the exhibits. Ask questions. Learn stuff.

  • Just to be on the safe side, you probably shouldn’t have heterosexual sex on the exhibits, either.

  • Be in the right frame of mind: you are not a gang of hooligans planning to vandalize the place, you are skeptical anthropologists there to observe the peculiar and pathological folkways of a backwards, intellectually impoverished people.

  • Have fun.

I’ll try to throw a few comments on twitter, hashtag #creozerg, as we pass through the halls of unlearning. Don’t expect a lot, though; this is a small, rinky-tink local creation “museum”, unlike that monument to idiocy built by the notorious leech, Ken Ham. We’ll probably race through it fairly fast, just because there won’t be a heck of a lot to see.

(Also on Sb)

Why I am an atheist – Blattafrax

God and religion were not a part of my upbringing, my parents are agnostic/disinterested. School Christmas plays and religious instruction at a young age passed over my head – I never questioned the story of the Noachian flood, but recall being worried about the amount of mud there’d be afterwards. It was only at the age of about 16 that I realised there were religious people out there and they had an impact on my life. My AD&D group fell apart under pressure; I actually listened to the occasional sermon I had to attend; friends’ parents imposing biblical rules on their children.

So having realised there was something to worry about, I did. The Gideons gave me a bible (thank you) and I read it – didn’t do much. At about the same time, my brother was ‘born again’ and I spoke with his friends. They told me how wonderful it was, if only you made the leap of faith (and held on to it). I tried in my head – nothing.

Then university and a girlfriend who tried her hardest to help me understand. I loved her. I wanted to share her experience. We went to church together. We talked about Christ and how important he was to her. I could see how happy it made her. Still nothing clicked inside.

An attack of utter exhaustion alone on a mountainside made me pray seriously for the only time in my life. Give me strength, I need to be able to move. Please. Nothing. Gradually with the rest, I regained enough energy to walk the last few kilometres to the mountain hut. No vision or burning bush led me there – only me.

Sex, drugs, rock & roll, education, politics, friends, enemies, enthusiasm, laziness, joy, hurt, desire, love all had an impact on me then and still do to this day. Influences were and are everywhere. They all have a memory, an effect, a cause. God on the other hand – nothing.

That was over 20 years ago now. There’s never going to be a sign is there?

Since then Richard Dawkins & Pharyngula showed how agnosticism has no basis and led me to understand why that is important. Steven Pinker, Jared Diamond and a scientific education taught me some of the things that can be explained rationally. Talk.origins revealed the opposing forces of imbecility. Intellectually, I am an atheist because there is no god necessary to explain anything. Emotionally, I am an atheist because there was no god to give me the revelation I looked for as a young adult. I am an atheist because there is no god.

Blattafrax
Switzerland

#NudePhotoRevolutionary

Aliaa Magda Elmahdy, and Egyptian secularist, has done something striking: to protest against repressive Islamic culture, she has taken her clothes off, and posted photographs of herself on her blog

The 20-year-old wrote on her blog that the photos, which show her naked apart from stockings, are her “screams against a society of violence, racism, sexism, sexual harassment and hypocrisy”. Her blog has received 1.5 million hits since her photos were posted earlier this week.

This has had an expected result — the conservative and religious elements (but I am redundand) are outraged — and another, subtler, annoying aspect: even the liberals are whining. The comments on her blog, those few that are in English that I can read, are revealing. Among the comments praising her bravery, there are a few craven, well-meaning people urging cowardice, like this one.

With all respect to you – what good will it do the world if men and women in the Middle East take their clothes off?

It would be more accurate to say that it is a freedom, and we should be willing to fight to keep. Personal freedom? what this concept means in Egyptian society?

Personal freedom had limits and this kind of personal freedom – nude male and female art – is unknown in our society.You misunderstand the concept!

I have no problem with nudity.If you wish for people to be more understanding about nude photography you need to understand and deal with negative comments.

Yes,Nude does NOT equal sexual and nudity is artistic expression,but that doesn’t mean that it is acceptable in the society where we live in. As much as I want to believe being open minded about nudity,It would be great if we could get to a place where nudity was just a person with no clothes on. I think that will take a very long time though!

I hope this clears things up for you.

It doesn’t. What a muddle. So yes, you should be free to take your clothes off, but that isn’t “acceptable in the society where we live in,” and maybe you shouldn’t do it. You’re free, but you’re only free to do the things that the puritans in charge will allow you to do.

I think the problem is that this person is using the word “freedom”, but he doesn’t know what it actually means. That’s OK, we Americans act like we invented the word, but most of us seem perfectly willing to throw it away for a little imaginary security, or for the privilege of feeling sanctimoniously superior to our neighbors, or just to conform.

I’ll just say…bravo, Ms Elmahdy. I hope the reactionary haters in your country don’t do you harm, and I hope the tepid semi-liberals don’t applaud while they try.

(via Maryam Namazie.)

Why I am an atheist – Gary Hill

Last night I had a dream. In this dream I had reason to believe that a room in my house was inhabited by a poltergeist. I couldn’t actually see the entity but I had good reason to believe it was there because inanimate objects were constantly being moved from where I had left them. Of course I also could have been mistaken as to where I had put them. So I conducted an experiment. I left a pair of shoes in the middle of the floor and out loud, informed the poltergeist that “I have left a pair of shoes in the middle of the room and I am now going to leave the room, close the door, and return in 10 minutes. If you want me to believe in your existence I want you to move the shoes to somewhere else in the room”. Then I left. On returning, sure enough, the shoes were neatly placed on the table. In my dream I repeated the procedure several times and each time the shoes ended up on the table.

I imagine I have dreams like this because as a young teen I discovered science fiction and avidly read the entire contents of my high school library. Stalwarts such as John Wyndham, Lester Del Rey and later, the ‘new wave’ of science fiction authors such as Bradbury, Ballard and Ellison became my sustenance. From there it was an easy step into the decidely dodgy world of ESP, ley lines, the mathematical profundity of the pyramids, Erich von Daniken and Lobsang Rampa. You name it, I’ve probably read it.

Looking back on this period, now armed with a PhD in cognitive psychology, I wonder whether reading these books acted as a type of partial wish fulfillment. We all wish the world were different to how it actually is. In my case this was characterised by such thoughts as wouldn’t it be great if telepathy were real? Imagine being able to privately communicate with someone at a great distance without having to worry about dialing codes or whether the battery has enough charge. Excellent! Talking to dead relatives and close friends? Cool! Visitors from outer space in saucer shaped craft? Fantastic! Being able to move objects at a distance? Wow! Curing any emotional ill simply by talking through your feelings, guided by a simple, universal template of human psychological structure? Awesome!

An omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent entity that created the universe (and us, to look just like him!) and responds to all your needs…….

But let’s be honest here. There is no such thing as ESP, telekinesis, reliably effective Freudian analysis, flying saucers etc. How do we know this? Well we’ve observed and experimented, and crunched the numbers. And observed and experimented and crunched the numbers again. And again. And not only formally, in laboratories, but informally, in the field, in our everday observations and thoughts. And as for that omnsicient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent being, or even an omniscient entity of any sort, well again, the numbers, whether from philosphical or empirical investigation, simply don’t add up.

So, in the best tradition of personality psychology in categorising human beings, I observe a psychological continuum between those who perceive the world in terms of wish-fulfillment (believers) and those who perceive the world in terms of evidence (rationalists). Or, in other words, a continuum based on an individual’s existential honesty.

Using my dream as analogy, whether the shoes had moved or not, the rationalist would simply accept the state of things as found and the scientific world-view would be amended accordingly in that the poltergeist hypothesis would gain some support. If the shoes had not moved, however, the poltergeist believer would have their world-view threatened and likely be trying to convince us that the shoes really had moved. Substitute god for poltergeist, and the shoes would have moved in the spiritual dimension, or actually would have moved, if god was willing, or their remains the possibility that the shoes will move, if only we had more faith….

That is why I am an atheist. I simply aspire to perceive the universe in as true a way as possible; which entails being honest about my psychological makeup, i.e., my own wants and wishes, no matter what the data is telling me. It’s not that I don’t believe in god. I simply have yet to see any convincing data (or philosophical argument, for that matter) that the hypothesis is true. Belief just doesn’t come into it.

Gary Hill
United Kingdom

The Kensington Forgery

The infamous Kensington Runestone is kept in a museum just a few miles up the road from me. It’s a carved rock that was dug up on a farm in the 19th century by a Swedish farmer, and purports to tell the tale in runes of a doomed Viking expedition that had come down from Hudson’s Bay to meet a tragic end at the hands of the Minnesota natives. More likely, it’s a cunning artifact produced by the farmer, Olof Öhman. It’s an unlikely bit of pseudo-history, and I’d love to see an unassailable disproof of its source.

Martin Rundkvist is reporting that Öhman’s signature has been found on the stone. Unfortunately, I find the evidence for that even more weirdly unlikely than that Vikings carved it. There are various numbers scattered around in the account written on the stone — the number of Vikings, the days spent traveling, that sort of thing — and the guy who claims to have detected the signature uses these numbers in a bizarrely oblique way.

The inscription has twelve lines. Larsson counts the words from the left on odd-numbered lines and from the right on even-numbered lines…

Uh, why? What if you counted from the left on even lines and from the right on odd lines? What if you counted characters up from the bottom, or whatever other random number-juggling you could do. This reeks of post-hoc fitting of an interpretation to the data set, and I don’t believe a word of it.

Rats. We’re going to have to keep on rolling our eyes at the silliness in that little museum to the north, I guess.

(Also on FtB)