Archive for November, 2006

Much Ado…

Today's pathetically misinformed offended person story comes from Pagosa Springs in Colorado, where a homeowners' association tried to force a local resident to take down a Christmas wreath shaped like a peace symbol (link).

The owner of the wreath was told that it was "divisive" and that "3 or 4" residents had complained that the wreath was an anti-Iraq war protest or a symbol of Satan. The association stated it would impose a $25 fine every day until the wreath was taken down.

Forgetting the outrageously ridiculous premise that anyone should be able to tell you whether or not you can hang a wreath on your door... "symbol of Satan"???

Dear clueless religious wingnut in Colorado: the peace symbol was developed in Britian in 1958 as a symbol of nuclear disarmament and was adopted by peace movements everywhere. It has nothing to do with devil worship. The design of the symbol comes from the semaphore code -- a system of communication involving one person holding two flags in different positions to signify different letters and numbers. Before radio, it was often used by the military to communicate visually over long distances. The diagonal lines in the peace symbol match the semaphore for N, and the vertical line matches the semaphore for D. ND = Nuclear Disarmament.

The owner of the wreath says that it is a "spiritual thing" and not a war protest. That's not so hard to believe. For religious folks Christmas is a celebration of the birth of Christ who is sometimes referred to as "The Prince of..." Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? "The Prince of Peace".

Even if it was an anti-war statement, what difference does that make? People who want to live in a place where they will never have to see something that offends them should encase themselves in concrete and shoot themselves into space, for the benefit of us all. So someone is against the war, get over it.

You know what's really offensive? Homeowners' Associations.

At least in this case there is a happy ending. The association in question has changed its mind (link). One of those rare stories where reason prevails.


The “What if you’re wrong” phase

I’ll admit it, I went through a “what if I’m wrong” phase. It’s that time when you logically know that the Christian god doesn’t exist, yet you’re still a little scared of Hell. Once I realized that it was Hell I was worried about, the phase was pretty easy to get through. Although I still fall back in to that occasionally.

But how about this? I’ve known for a while the psychology of Christianity preying upon human doubts and needs. But to put it this blatantly.

whatiftrue-779632.jpg

This church is hoping that you’ve never heard of Pascal’s Wager. Basically it goes like this. If a Christian is wrong and there isn’t a god then they’re dead and they’ve lived a good life. If an atheist is wrong and there is a god then they are going to Hell. With that argument, doesn’t it make sense to play it safe and believe in God?

And I found myself using that argument on myself during my stay in Christianity. Problem is that it’s absurd. It’s questioning “what if there is a god” under the assumption that there’s only one. What if Islam is true and you’ve been praying to Yahweh?

The Cosmic Connection

Panda's Thumb has a post with links to YouTube videos of a lecture given by Neil deGrasse Tyson (an astrophysicist of some reknown).  It's worth watching.

It was interesting to see and hear Mr. Tyson speak with passion about discovery and the "spiritual" feeling that comes from looking out into the universe and coming to the realization how we are all connected to it and part of it.  Given how every atom in our bodies which is heavier that hydrogen was forged in the cores of stars, he notes "We're not just in the universe, the universe is in us."

Perhaps most wonderful to me, was to hear confirmation of my crackpot ideas about what "spiritual feelings" are and why atheists can have them coming from Mr. Tyson.

The speech is about 16 or so minutes long, but it is worth seeing.  I found Mr. Tyson's conviction and depth of feeling about our connection to the cosmos touching.  I think in some small way I know how he feels.  When I finally get home in the evening from work I can't resist looking up at the stars for at least a moment or two before I walk into the house.  And whenever I do I feel a kinship to those distant stars.

It's nice to know someone else does too...


There’s No Science Like No Science…

I'm not going to take the bait. You're asking me to play a game: "Provide as much detail in terms of possible causal mechanisms for your [Intelligent Design] position as I do for my Darwinian position." [Intelligent Design] is not a mechanistic theory, and it's not [Intelligent Design]'s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. If [Intelligent Design] is correct and an intelligence is responsible and indispensable for certain structures, then it makes no sense to try to ape your method of connecting the dots. True, there may be dots to be connected. But there may also be fundamental discontinuities, and with [Irreducibly Complex] systems that is what [Intelligent Design] is discovering.
-- William Dembski

The Protocol Of Men

I was driving home with my girlfriend and happened to come across a dude in a smart car. As one does. And when one encounters a smart car one normally ignores it and tries to drive it off the road. That is the protocol. My girlfriend disagrees with this protocol. I disagree with my girlfriend. I asked a mutual friend for his opinion. He sided with my girlfriend. That’s not on. I kinda felt let down. A man is supposed to back his fellow man up. Especially when it comes down to smart cars and green hippies. My friend just violated the protocol of men. I was asked what the protocol of men were...

 

THE PROTOCOL OF MEN

1. It is ok for a man to cry only under the following circumstances:
 a. When a heroic dog dies to save its master. (Poodles and Chihuahuas excepted)
 b. After wrecking the bosses car (Unless its a smart car, in which case there will be much rejoicing)
 c. When the wife brings home 'light' beer
 d. after brushing off a supermodels advances in favour of ones girlfriend.

 2. Any Man who brings a camera to a stag night may be legally killed and eaten by his mates.

 3. Unless he murdered someone in your family, you must bail a friend out of jail within 12 hours.

 4. If you've known a bloke for more than 24 hours, his sister is off limits forever, unless you actually marry her.

 5. Moaning about the brand of free beer in a mate's fridge is forbidden. Complain at will if the temperature is unsuitable.

 6. No man shall ever be required to buy a birthday present for another man.  In fact, even remembering your mate's birthday is strictly optional.

 7. On a road trip, the strongest bladder determines pit stops, not the weakest.

 8. When stumbling upon other blokes watching a sporting event, you may ask the score of the game in progress, but you may never ask who's playing.

 9. It is permissible to quaff a fruity alcopop drink only when you're sunning on a tropical beach... and it's delivered by a bikini clad supermodel...and it's free.

 10. Unless you're in prison, never fight naked.

 11. Friends don't let friends wear Speedos. Ever. Issue closed.

 12. If a man's fly is down, that's his problem, you didn't see anything.

 13. Women who claim they "love formula 1" must be treated as spies until they demonstrate knowledge of the sport and the ability to drink as much as the other formula 1 watchers.

 14. Never hesitate to reach for the last beer or the last slice of pizza, but not both - that's just mean.

 15. If you compliment a bloke on his six-pack, you'd better be talking about his choice of beer.

 16. Never talk to a man in a public toilet ever - even if he is your brother.

 17. It is acceptable for you to drive her car. Unless her car is a smart car, in which case, dump her. It is not acceptable for her to drive yours.

 18. Thou shalt not buy a car in the colours of brown, pink, lime green, orange or sky blue.

 19. The girl who replies to the question "What do you want for Christmas?" with "If you loved me, you'd know what I want!" gets a XBOX 360. End of story.

 20.  Under no circumstances may two men share an umbrella

 21. You shall drive a smart car off the road. Dudes in smart cars will be humiliated, tarred and feathered. Dudes with pony tails driving smart cars... well you are in big trouble.

 22. No man shall disagree with his brethren in front of their girlfriends. That’s just not on.

 23. No man shall ever hum the tune to the Titanic theme song. Or any Celine Dion song to that matter.

 24. South park rules! Not open for discussion. Ever. Traitors will be kicked in the nuts.

 25. A man shall have at least 1 power tool. Its usefulness is not important. The bigger the better. Men with power tools that sap the national grid are to be idolised.

 26. A man shall not recognize global warming. Its just a conspiracy to make you buy a smart car.

 Heed all ye men to these rules, for they shall bring order and enlightment to your otherwise meandering lives.

Hijacking Science

Proponents of Intelligent Design speak compellingly in ways that sound convincing to young people, or people who want affirmation for their faith, and they often hijack science by misusing scientific findings to support their crackpot conjectures. The saving grace for scientists and other freethinkers is that the ID-nuts don't know what the heck they are talking about...

Celestial Teapots


I still haven’t finished The God Delusion (I’ll post a review of some sort when I’m finished), but this little clip is a pretty good summary of Dawkins’ claims.

It’s from his unfortunately titled documentary, The Root of All Evil?, which is floating around Google Video.

Genesis 2 - “Adam and Eve show up”

Quick wrap of of Genesis 2 - God is satisfied with what He’s created so he takes a little break and then makes some rivers and Adam and Eve.

1 - Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2 - And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

3 - And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

4 - These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

5 - And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

6 - But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

I do not understand, and I didn’t understand it when I was Christian, why God needed to rest. Sure, if he created the entire universe in a week He probably deserved a rest. But if He’s supposed to be perfect then why couldn’t He just keep going?

The commentary on BibleGateway that I linked to above mentions that God did not rest as one that was weary, but as one that was pleased. Wouldn’t that fall under pride? He took a break because he was pleased of His work. Pride is one of the “big 7″ sins, and yet God seems to be able to have the sin of pride without issue.

Every time I’ve heard Jesus’s perfection mentioned it is in line with the fact that He was without sin. Two problems here. One, Jesus and God are supposed to be one according to the theory of the Trinity. So if God sinned the sin of pride then so did Jesus. And if God sinned ruining the definition of perfection then Jesus cannot be perfect, also under the theory of the Trinity.

And I’ve seen what happens to my grass without rain. How did the plants grow before rain?

7 - And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This is the second time that God has created Man, the first being Gen 1:27. The first time Man was created in God’s image, the second Man was created of dust of the ground (I’ve also heard clay). Which is it? Are we in God’s image or are we mud?

Maybe He didn’t like the first draft of Man and Woman. Maybe He created two different tribes. It’s possible that having separate tribes is what allowed Adam and Eve’s children to find wives when there was no mention of other families. Or maybe it’s two separate myths, which is the explanation that seems most sensible to me.

8 - And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

9 - And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

10 - And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.

11 - The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;

12 - And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

13 - And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.

14 - And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

15 - And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

16 - And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 - But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

If you look at the country of Ethiopia today, and especially during the 80s, it is certainly not a land blessed of God. Famine, disease, and death are all very prevalent.

It is also very convenient that all of the areas mentioned in this verse are in the same part of the world that civilization began. Yes, from a Christian point of view I could see that it would make sense because God put civilization there and it would fit in with that world view. But it also fits, and this is what I believe, that civilization began and God was formed to explain how it came to be.  It’s a chicken and egg type problem that could be argued without end.
I have a real problem with verse 17. God created the world and then put Adam in it to be a caretaker. But he also set Man up for failure by putting the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. It is the eating of the fruit that caused sin. God could have easily avoided the whole problem of sin by leaving the tree out, but allowed it anyway. For now I’ll stop there, but I’m sure I’ll have more issues when I get to the chapter where they eat from the tree.

18 - And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 - And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 - And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

The animals were also created in Gen 1. This leads me back to my thoughts of two separate creation myths merging in to 1 from the previous post.

21 - And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 - And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

23 - And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

24 - Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

25 - And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

And Woman is created for the second time, this time from Adam’s rib. I’ve had high school aged children who honestly believed that men had one less rib than women because of this story. Check the x-rays, men don’t. But that says something about how literally some people take the Bible.

Whats all this about?

When the talk turns to my blogs do you find yourself saying "eh wha?"? You need feel embarrassed no longer, for I feel the same when I am writing this goobledegook. So whats all this about? Believe it or not (mostly not) this blog and all this typing has a purpose.
 
Here on MSN Spaces, in simple words and fantastically complicated prose and pictures, is the fearlessly outspoken exposé that rips the lid off pressing problems of our times, Viz.:
 
1) Who is stronger, Captain Lostmi Marbles or SuperDuperMan?
2) What shocking new evidence lies behind the charge that blogs are the real cause of adult delinquency.
3) Religion.
4) What is Nikhil's Vital message to the teeming million minions?
 
Answer to these and other important questions can be found here, on this blog. More precious than diamonds, more stimulating than 'Red Bull', this blog has a RSS feed that you will want to read and treasure. You can even print it and use the printouts for wrapping fish!! Tastes better than fish wrapped in newspapers.