Friday, December 30, 2005

Looney Toons on Larry King...Again

And limited skeptic presence...again. Your Rockstar started calling LKL at 8:59 CST to try and get his brand of wit and skepticism on, but I imagine the amount of Creduloids trying to get one of these frauds to give them a "reading" was enormous.

The show, which aired 12/28/05 at 9:00 CST, was just what I expected from the man who asked "but if evolution happened, why are there still apes?". 3 of the world's biggest frauds:
Big Fat Idiot, Chuckles Van Praagh and some chick named Char Margolis were in studio. Dr. Bryan Farha, represented the sole true skeptic in my opinion. The other guy was a Rabbi who just argued that the psychics' view of the "spirit world" and religion was wrong.

Chuckles started the lunacy with this statement (you can read the transcript
right here) :

To a certain degree and it has been tested there are certain percentages of ["the sprit world"]
that have been proven to a certain degree in percentage certainly but there are certain scientific methods which also have not been invented yet or come up with a method that they can actually measure something like this.

Damn! I have certainly never seen that many certain uses of the word "certain" in an
appeal to gibbersh at any certain time. And get this - there are no scientific methods that can measure the spirit world. I agree - the only thing that exists that we can't measure or observe is NOTHING.

Oh boy does the bullshit fly after that. Larry King wonders what good it does when Syl tells someone their dead brother's name was "Herbie". Syl decides that's a good thing - the sitter sucker knows "Herbie" is with them spiritually...or that Syl knows how to read obituaries, whichever you prefer. Then we get this exchange when Char jumps in:

MARGOLIS: It's really interesting you say that because that was my father's name and out of all the names in the world why would you bring that up? See to me...

KING: Because one of my best friends is named Herbie.

MARGOLIS: OK but he...

KING: It had nothing to do -- I didn't get a feeling.

MARGOLIS: But to me -- but to me that's a sign.

BROWNE: It's called synchronicity, yes.
No, it's called two completely different people have the same fairly common name. Big deal.

For what it's worth, the Rabbi does point out that no psychic has ever "predicted" anything worthwhile. Where's Osama Bin Laden? Who cares if you know my brother's name is Herbie? Dr. Farha tries to jump in to rebut the buttheads, but gets shushed. Imagine that...

Char then claims responsibility for finding Dean Martin's son
Dean Paul after "Dino" crashed his National Guard fighter jet in the mountains of California. I'm trying to find information to verify this, but a google search comes up empty. The few sites that do cover Dino's death mention nothing about Char or her magic powers. I'll provide any findings in an update. Until then, we'll assume she's making it up.

At this point, Chuckles busts out the old fourth dimension bullshit and LK actually points out that he can't prove it. But Chuckles knows we all have magic powers:

Two- thirds of Americans have had experiences where, telepathic experiences where they thought about someone. Five minutes later the phone rings and it's that person. This is a sense that every single person has experienced.

Ok, well I would point out how many times I've thought about someone and they didn't call me 5 minutes later. Chuckles is taking advantage of our ignorance of
the law of large numbers and confirmation bias - basically the fact that we receive hundreds of thousands of phone calls in our lives, and are bound to be thinking of the caller at least once. However, we forget the 99,999 times it didn't happen and pay close attention to the one time it did happen. This is typically how I descibe psychic bullshit to fence sitters. They simply don't consider those two facts.

Chuckles continues:

Just because things cannot be proven scientifically in the scientific method or the way you choose it to be in your paradigm, your way of thinking, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Wouldn't you know it - I checked
Skeptico today (hey, rockstars are busy and take a couple of days to write articles, sheesh) and he comments on this! Says he:

[cut]...which the obvious rejoinder would have been: just because I can’t prove to everyone that you’re a fraud doesn’t mean you aren’t one.

(I'll skip over the whole discussion of mysticism, since religion and psi have same amount of evidence.)

Dr. Farha then proves his open-mindedness when questioned whether he was open to the possibility of another dimension:

I am open to that dimension. I'm open to the possibility. I'm not open to the idea that these people have proven it.

Exactly. No one has. Dr. Farha then asks Sylvia why she has not taken the
JREF Million Dollar Challenge, and shows her documentation that the money exists (which she slanderoulsy said did not on an earlier LKL). Sylvia provides the usual reasons the frauds back out of the test - Lloyd Auerbach says you can't win, Randi changes the rules, he'll run away from the challenge when it appears they'll win, etc.

It's at this point my blood began to boil. I'm serious, I think I could've passed the Challenge myself my body temperature raised to such a degree. Chuckles has the gall to say:

Let me just say something. The skeptics (INAUDIBLE) use this thing about taking a test and proving it, the emphasis should be on them to prove it to us this is not real and I would say they always raise the bar.

What. The. Fuck. If you make a claim that is extraordinary, why should I help defend you? It's called
burden of proof. Were I to say give me $1,000 and you'll marry Natalie Portman, is it up to you to prove me wrong? Or would you ignore me till you had some proof?

I believe Dr. Farha made a serious mistake by not explaining the scientific method right here. I was twitching to get on the air. First he could explain burden of proof. Then, when the psychics say that psi can't be proven by science, ask them this:

Does psi produce effects that we can observe or measure?

If yes, then it can be tested scientifically through DBTs. If no, then I have to say there is only one thing in the known universe we all agree produces no observable effects.



The Big Sylvia Browne Thread

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Roosevelt converts to Hinduism!

Well, that's what Civilization 4 told me last night. I got the game for Decemberween, since it was the natural progression: the last two PC games I bought were Civ 2 and Civ 3. My laptop isn't up to specs, but the game still manages to work, though it's a bit choppy, and sometimes my horses, cows, and so forth turn invisible, except for their shadows, apparently possessing custom hoof-oriented knock-offs of the One Ring.

I'm thinking about getting a new desktop that'll meet and beat the specs so that it'll play smoothly. I'm nearly oblivious to the nuances of PC gaming and appropriate hardware, so if you have advice as to how to build and/or buy such a unit (preferably for cheap), please speak to me as if I had the IQ of a YEC... Well, maybe not that low. My idea of compatibility checking is looking for a Playstation logo.

But enough about my pansy PC. I thought I'd bring up Civ 4 because it features more detailed mechanics than usual on religion. For those who haven't played the Civ games, religious and political ideologies are in the big category of "technology" alongside more concrete things like chemistry, lasers, and robotics. Religious "technologies" often work as prerequisites for other technologies. To some extent, I think that's understandable. For example, with all the efforts humans have put into building bigger and better temples to the deities, we've probably learned a few good engineering lessons. I recall some shows that demonstrated some clever mechanics to produce "miracles" in Greek temples.

One (possibly flawed) analogy comes to mind: The space program. In the early days, scientists had to push the limits of engineering to put Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and all their buddies on the moon. The Egyptians had to do the same to build the pyramids. The difference: Religion hasn't displayed any evidence of a moon for it to land on. The end result might be the same, though: In the effort to achieve the end goal, many lessons are learned, and new, useful technologies are developed.

Counter-analogy: Religion can be a lot like war when it comes to technology. War has brought about many advances. There was even a show about it. The problem is that those advances have a cost in terms of homes and lives destroyed that I would prefer to avoid. Religion is similar in that it incurs often unacceptable costs: It can cause a reduction in critical thinking abilities. (Exception I'd make to the sweeping generality: The religious people who readily adjust their beliefs when new facts come in. You're okay in my book.) At its worst, it triggers witch hunts, wars, and other atrocities.

Though modern science has correctly shed its ancient dependency on religion and the supernatural, I'm curious how our distant ancestors would have progressed without religion. I imagine they probably would have progressed faster, not being held back by the phrase "Things Man Was Not Meant to Know." Then again, I can imagine the threat of a plague of vicious beasts if you don't build a perfectly hemispherical dome on the temple could encourage someone to accurately calculate pi.

For now, though, I'm going to continue researching Meditation, so that I can get Philosophy down the line, followed by Liberalism, so I can get the Free Religion civic. I'm not sure I qualify as a liberal, but I'll take it anyway.

P.S.: I typed "First Amendment" in's search engine for the "Free Religion" hotlink, and I got this bit of unintentional humor. I didn't intend to get political, but I couldn't really resist this.

EDIT: Tried the search engine again, and some results showed up. I guess it was a temporary glitch. It's still funny, though.

Monday, December 26, 2005

"Customer Service"


Has anyone ever noticed how completely unhelpful customer service lines really are? Well, maybe it's just me. Every time I call a customer service hotline, no one can seem to help me. They try, I'll give them that. But it never seems to fix the problem. Aren't they there to answer any and every question you can think of? I understand that it's difficult to comprehend some questions that people ask (i.e. "what's this thingy that just popped up on the screen?"), but they're trained for that, right?

Another issue I have with customer service lines is that a fee is generally involved. When my computer broke and I tried to call HP for some support, they first acquired my name, email address, and phone number. They then informed me that because my warranty is no longer good, I would have to pay approximately $100 for them to help me over the phone. For one freaking question. And this $100 only gets me one year of service. But wait, it gets better. If I simply wanted to suscribe to the 2-week service, it would only cost me half of that. But, I could also go online and get support for free. Because I had a functioning computer and all.

Honestly, how mental are these people? I don't know if I speak for the general public or not, but we do not break things frequently enough to give the producer $100 to help us fix it. Or not fix it, in most cases. It's ridiculous that these "support lines" charge outrageous fees to answer simple questions. The more reasonable/logical option is to have people call a non-toll-free line and pay only for the time that they actually use. But I guess it's a part of the American way to fuck people for money, eh?

/end rant

Note: I do not mean to offend anyone who works in customer service. Nor do I mean to diss our nation's economic strategies. I love America. I just hate Americans that try to fuck up my life with bullshit. :D

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Hey! Read the Skeptic's Circle and Don't Use Apostrophe's Unless' Needed's!

The Christy Eve miracle of the 24th Skeptic's Circle is up at Immunoblogging. Merry Jeesus.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

America? Fuck Yeah!

USA, not CSA!Now that it's unconstitutional to teach Intelijunt Desine as an alternative to evolution, it's made me wonder:

How can we as a country get some things right and others so wrong?

The Dover decision is for every assbag that ever said "If you don't want GOD in the Pledge of Allegiance/national motto/US currency, then LEAVE to a GODLESS country!"

I can't wait to tell them to LEAVE and go to a SCIENCELESS country. But these cocksnacks exist and will continue to exist, saying that Judge Jones is oppressing and censoring them. Face it Chet - you lost. You tried to mask Creationism as science by dressing it up with a fancy name. BANG! Shot down by scientists and biology professors who saw through the bullshit. You tried to get your religion into public schools by electing close-minded hillbillies. Score currently stands tied 1-1. You then tried to go through the courts to have Creationism taught to children as a viable explanation for the origin of species. BANG! Shot down. Kansas, you're next...

Speaking of BANG, I wish I had a bazooka for every dumbass who still thinks that I'm out to destroy Christmas. No, really, check out what
this lying piece of shit has to say (via 2% Company):

"It's a sad day in America when you have to retain an attorney to say 'Merry Christmas,' " said Mike Johnson, an Alliance Defense Fund attorney in Louisiana who will push the Christmas cause."
Whaaa??? If there is someone in the world who is holding you back from saying "Christy Christmas and a very Christy New Christ" to every mouth-breathing motherfucker who walks down the street, please tell them I have a bazooka saved for them too. Problem is, there is no one stopping you from doing so. Not person number one. Scream it from the top of your lungs. Wear the stupid sweaters, making sure to piss your dog off by making them wear one too. Have them match for shit's sake - I don't care.

But stop playing victim! I'm sick of these assholes making things up to raise money for the Jerry Falwell retirement fund. Show me evidence!

While we're on evidence, I have a new pet peeve. It's all the creduloids that drop by and spout their bullshit but don't back it up. It's fine if you disagree with me; even Your Rockstar can't be right about everything. But when I ask you fuckers for evidence, here are the responses I've been getting:

1. "Do the research yourself!"
2. "You're stupid!"
3. "Pastor Hank on says it's true!"
4. A shitty poem on an even shittier blog
5. The claimant disappears completely to uplink with the mother-ship.

Oh well. At least we've held religion out of public schools for the time being

Thursday, December 15, 2005

The Bronze Dawg is in the Hizzy. Or Whatever You Kids are Saying These Days.

Since not all of you hang out at the JREF forums, much less the humor section thereof, I suppose I should introduce myself. I'm a geek and general skeptic. Although I've got a BA in art, I've got a good science background, and got that degree faster by CLEPing out 8 hours of chemistry.

I'd like to take a moment to thank Mrs. Isbell for that.

I think critically, and I'm fully aware that even I can slip up. If I do, don't hesitate to bring in the rolled-up newspapers and pummel me on the nose.

My pet peeves:

Bad grammar (especially those morons who don't know what an apostrophe is, but still use it)
Interesting Ian
Religious intrusion on government
Governmental intrusion on religion (which includes the government telling people who they can and can't marry)
Deities who act like mob bosses, exchanging "protection" for "respect" (See also: Pat Robertson's god.)
Marketing buzz phrases like, "Extreme," "edgy," and anything that unnecessarily starts with an X.

Things that really get me angry:

Propaganda techniques (especially straw men and stereotypes)

Some of my turn-ons:

Raw data
Non-submissive women. Skepchicks in particular.
Geometric forms
Good anime

As for my future at Rockstar Ramblings: I'll probably be posting some fairly generic stuff, like Skeptico has been doing, such as explaining common fallacies performed by the newage crowd, the nature of skepticism, as I see it, and so forth. As a regular poster at the JREF forums, I might spend a little time dissecting some of the truly stupid things the resident non-skeptics post.

-Bronze Dog

Friday, December 09, 2005

Alert the Scientists - We Now Have a Theory of Everything

Being an enemy of stupidity and a crusader against the credulous, we've come upon a lot of silly crap. Not just Fun Size Snickers Bar piles. Mountains of steaming horse crap. That being said, I now call your attention to The Final Theory. Yes, this guy has the "Theory of Everything". Wow. So instead of publishing this in numerous scientific journals for peer review, he writes this book. Probably because those evil scientists would ignore him - how else would they keep their jobs? All the science are belong to him!

Part I or "Are You Freaking Serious?"

On his
website author Mark McCutcheon frequently requests science base itself on common sense, yet refuses to do so himself. Case in point:

Q: Light slows as it passes through water or glass, causing it to bend, but how can it return to light-speed on its own once it exits?

A: This is impossible in today's science. No object in nature can speed up of its own accord after being slowed. A bullet doesn't spontaneously speed up after it is slowed by passing through a wooden block, so how does a photon of light mysteriously return to its original speed once it exits a glassblock?

Part II or "The Game"

For those who don't get the
False Analogy, here's some pretty pictures for you:

Rockstar Excuse me, Mr. Creduloid?

Dumbass WhAT?

Rockstar Let's play a game of "One of These Things is Not Like the Other".

Dumbass oTAY!

Here we go!

Ok, which one?

Dumbass i KnOW, i KnOW! dA LITE!

Rockstar Good! Why?

Dumbass BECOZ! i CAn'T EAT da LITE!

Rockstar Ok, not really the answer I was going for...

Mr. McCutcheon, try this - drop a dead body from a plane. Have it hit or break through something at about 5000 feet. I predict that it speeds up to terminal velocity before hitting the ground. That's what science does and your woo-woo drivel doesn't.
If the entire book is filled with this shit, I see about as much need to buy it as I do paying money to have Sylvia Browne ask if I'm related to an "R".

Part III or "This is What it's Like When Woos Collide"

Now dig this. A
Fundie wack-a-doo used this book as proof science can be disproven. No, really. Click the link. Back? Fascinating isn't it? This guy unintentionally (or maybe intentionally?) gave religious wackos ammunition in the "debate" over science. Except that using that ammo would be akin to throwing marshmallows at a velociraptor...

Using The Final Theory to show how science can be disproven is like saying I'll have Bugs Bunny kick your ass because you don't believe in the LORD (Praise the LORD!)

Here's what the author did not grasp: science doesn't care how something happens, be it against your common sense or not. We make observations and test our theories to make predictions. We try anything we can to make our theories not fit the data; it's falsifiable. "The Theory of Everything" ranks right up there with ID as far as being science.

The beauty of science is that it works whether you believe in it or not.

Thursday, December 08, 2005

Why am I Anti-American for Being a Rational Being?

I don't believe in the supernatural. I don't believe in the paranormal. I am open-minded though; I'm willing to admit my beliefs are wrong. However, based on the fact there is absolutely zero evidence for the existence of a god/gods, demons, angels, psychic powers, dowsing, astrology, homeopathy, or any kind of magic in general, and in some cases evidence against their existence, I won't change my mind until they are proven.

Somehow, according to the Fundamentalist in
Lya's most recent post at God is for Suckers, because I don't believe these things exist I am Anti-America. My question to the Theists: Why?

To quote the billboard in the picture:

Attention: Lunatic Atheists & their Lawyers

Anti-God is Anti-American

There is a glaring error in that statement; an atheist can't be Anti-God because there is no God to be Anti about (not to mention the fact that I'd associate "Lunatic" with the Bleevers more than atheism). But apparently this fool thinks that since I don't believe there is a god/gods, I'm Anti-God and therefore Anti-American. Again - why?

Is God an American citizen? No, he'd have to have been born here or go through everything necessary to get citizenship. Hell, I don't even think he has a green card...
Is it because the country's legal framework is based in religion? No, it can't be that. A quick look at the Constitution of the U.S. would show
no mention of "God". So atheism isn't against the law...

So I ask all of you religious types: why am I Anti-America for not believing in God? What makes you hold this belief? Surely there is a reason or you'd not think atheism = Anti-American. Ask yourself. I'm willing to bet it is because someone told you to think this way. And that makes you a credulous fool.

I don't believe in God. And I love living in a country I can fucking say that!

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Virgin Mary Crying Blood?

From CBS News:

Outside Sacramento, at the small Vietnamese Catholic Martyrs church, a statue of the Virgin Mary appears to be crying, reports The Early Show national correspondent Hattie Kauffman.

"Just the fact that it's coming from the eyes, and it's a red color like blood, I would say that there's a miracle either way," said Dave Leatherby, who visited the statue. "Even if there's a natural explanation, it's a sign."

Ok. Of course there's a natural explanation for this. Obviously there must be holes near the eye sockets for this to happen. Unless water is just appearing out of nowhere. Which is possible (condensation.) Either way, let's say there are holes present. These holes may have been cut or eroded away by water that is trapped within the head of the statue. The water begins to leak out and reflects a red color. If you look at the picture, it already appears that the statue has a pinkish tint to it. So the first thing people say is, "IT HAS TO BE BLOOD!" Yes. Because all statues bleed. Honestly, is that the first (il)logical conclusion that people can think of? If you saw some sort of substance that appeared to have a tint of red in it coming from a shoe, would you think this was blood? I'm sure at work here is some sort of logical fallacy (fallacy of exclusion?).

"So maybe this is happening for a reason. I just think she's crying for all the sins of the world and everything."

Then she should have started crying a long time ago.

"We came here Thanksgiving night," Vivian Valles said. "The blood was on her chest. We came back the next day and it had run all the way down her dress."

Yes, liquids do tend to travel at relatively quick speeds, especially in a downward motion. This is due to gravity, obviously an unknown concept to Christians.

But father James Murphy of the Sacramento diocese shies away from calling this a miracle.
"These kinds of phenomena are fairly common," he said. "But the number that turn out to be miraculous are very, very rare."

Oh my Flying Spaghetti Monster. This guy can't be real. One from the church claiming it may not be a miracle?!? Well, it seems that some who practice religion have some logic. Yet he still believes in miracles. Maybe he'll come around...

However, it does bring more people to the church.

Exactly. This is simply a ploy to get more to come to church. By exploiting "miracles," those who have been lacking faith will surely come back to the church and pray for forgiveness. These sinners see it as a sign, possibly that the world is ending. Way to go church. Everytime people start to think a little more logically, you keep making them into wackos. PRAISE THE LORD!

Church officials say they will investigate if the phenomenon continues. But for believers, or those seeking guidance, healing or inspiration, there is no need for proof.


Monday, November 28, 2005

Dowsing for Oil in Rockstar's Backyard

A recent Lincoln Journal Star article has me concerned for small credulous oil companies here in Nebraska. Now that oil is up to $754,789 a barrell (or somewhere near there, right?), there is a renewed interest in drilling for oil in a state not necessarily known as a powerhouse in the industry. So the small companies need a cheaper method of prospecting for oil. Their solution?


Here's the problem. Gather round close now all...ready?


Got it? It doesn't work. Hogwash. Flim-flam. You'd be better served to wipe your ass with all those dollar bills you gave to the dowser; at least then you'd get some use out of them.

The article did a horrible job of presenting dowsing as anything but paranormal nonsense. The "evidence"? According to Bill Sydow, the Nebraska Oil and Gas Conservation Commissioner, "I've seen it work."

Very compelling evidence Bill. The article continues:

A self-described “new Earth creationist,” Sydow says the business of prospecting should be waged with imagination and intuition. He even believes it’s possible some oil is derived from a chemistry not directly linked to plants and animals that decayed at the bottom of ancient seas and lagoons, the known source of oil.

The Commissioner...of the Nebraska Oil...and Gas a Young-Earth Creationist. Please help me. This man believes all oil and natural gas is less than 10,000 years old and was put in its current place wholly by God. And it's possible that some oil is derived from an unknown chemistry. True, but it's also possible small gnomes live in our asses. Possible, not likely, and since there's no evidence to prove it, I call bullshit.

“Oil and gas,” he added, “is found in the minds of men.” (Aha! So it's not in the ground anymore? That's why I can't find any and retire Jed Clampett style!!)

That's like having Pat Robertson as Commisioner of Evolutionary Processes. It is a known fact that oil comes from ancient plants and animals that when combined with mud and under pressure for eons. Doesn't one have to have a working knowledge, nay, a basic understanding, of how oil is made to head up this commission? Not in Nebraska. Praise the LORD!

The only bit of skepticism I found was this little blurb:

Mainstream scientists have long disputed the idea that people can pinpoint minerals hundreds — even thousands — of feet below the surface by holding a branch or brass or any other so-called dowsing rod.

Complete missed opportunity to wipe the shit off the proverbial boot this article was. From Richard Romine, famed Nebraska dowser and self-deluded fool, we get this little anecdote:

“There’s oil on this property, I just know it,” Romine remembers his granddad saying as they walked to the mailbox. Romine jumped in with both feet, building up some oil-prospecting contacts, bringing more dowsers into the area. Four of the five, he said, detected oil. They used more than rod work to help detect oil, including radiometric mapping. Prospectors use it to help find subsurface high spots by measuring variations in the natural radiation of an area. The measurements showed a likelihood oil was there, Romine said. The company brought its rig to the prairie dog town in mid-October and drilled down to the shale. Surface casings were set for the pipe to protect groundwater, concrete poured around it. When the round-the-clock drilling started, Romine stayed — all night, sleeping in his Tahoe.

Over four days, the drill bore down.

Finally, at 4,672 feet, Romine learned a lesson: “When a hole comes up dry, your heart goes right down to your toes.”

It didn't work. He admits it doesn't work. But rather than question him, the journalist lets him explain it away. They just picked the wrong spot...Or maybe quit drilling too soon...Or maybe dowsing doesn't work.

One thing is for sure Nebraska Oil Companies - if you trust a dowser to prospect for you, you'll never pack-on-up and move to Bev-er-lee.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

22nd Skeptic's Circle

The 22nd Skeptic's Circle is now up at Mile Zero. You gotta feel for the yeti these days, what with all the rampant skepticism of their existence...

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Activist stresses logic, not religion, in anti-abortion debate

**Edit: I realize now that in this post I was basically ranting. I also realize that I kind of made my own logical fallacy: ad hominem. I didn't conclude this very well because I didn't show that I proved him wrong. So I'm sorry. I don't think he can be proven wrong, but I was trying to make the argument (which I did very poorly) that if he was thinking logically and not religiously, he would see that it's nothing more than some cells trying to make the right connections to become a human being. Thinking religiously, one would say that this thing has a soul from the beginning of conception and is, therefore, a human being from conception. Do I make more sense? I'll try to keep on topic and do better on my next. I also realize that the abortion topic is one that is very sensitive for most, so I'm sorry if I've offended anyone.**

The article highlights points made by Scott Klusendorf, president of the Life Training Institute and anti-abortionist, on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln campus. The man is attempting to use logic in his debate regarding abortion, though conclusions point towards the use of religious values. Let's see just how logical Mr. Klusendorf is.

Klusendorf spent more than an hour defending his position using logical principles instead of religion.

We shall see.

He said the basis of the argument comes down to defining the unborn.


If someone can prove fetuses are not actually human beings, Klusendorf said he could find no reason to oppose abortion and embryonic stem cell research.

Edit: Logical fallacy - shifting burden of proof.

Klusendorf said from the point of conception, embryos are whole human beings.

Wait just one second here. How do you know this? Is there any proof that a human being is what is present after a sperm and ovum collide? Three to five days after conception, the "human being" is simply a mass of cells that have yet to differentiate (form into different types of cells), yet continue to proliferate. Do you consider this mass of cells a human being? If you want logical standards to determine if something is a human being, follow the Personhood Theory. It claims, "The criteria a person must have in personhood theory are one or more of the following:

  1. Consciousness.
  2. The ability to steer one's attention and action purposively.
  3. Self awareness, self bonded to objectivities.
  4. Self as longitudinal thematic identity, one's biographic identity."
These criteria make sense. If a being is to be considered human, it must act in a way that differentiates it from other species. A mass of cells that is proliferating is simply acting like a cancerous mass. When the cells begin to differentiate and appendages and organs are formed, it could be a member of any mammalian species, though it would be an odd-looking pig. (Note: Although these cells contain human DNA and the potential to develop into a human being, this does not necessarily indicate that they will develop into a human being. For example, in the case of spontaneous abortions, these cells have human DNA but were not able to develop into a human being.) It all comes down to the following: certain neural connections (involved with the ability to speak and reason logically, etc.) have made and continue to make human beings different from other species. That's it.

He also discussed public policy issues and said he would initially support any bill that would prohibit abortion, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother. However, he said: "Hardship doesn't justify homicide."

Well, it's about time you showed your religious personality: a blood-thirsty fuckhead (refer to the episode of "Trading Spouses" where one mother goes insane because her children were subjected to a mother that was not Christian.) "Hardship doesn't justify homicide." Is he serious? Does he not understand what a mother-to-be endures during a pregnancy? Normal mothers must deal with extra weight that limits them physically, but also endure some sort of mild depression during the pregnancy. For a mother-to-be who has been a victim of rape, incest, etc., the emotional stress is increased ten-fold. It's unnecessary, considering that most victims are younger and not prepared for such instability. I've no thoughts on prohibiting abortions to prevent danger to the life of the mother, but it should be allowed. And once again, it's not homicide if the thing isn't a human being.

Partway through his presentation, Klusendorf showed a short video on abortion. The audience of about 45 students and Lincolnites sat in silence as they watched pictures of bloody aborted fetuses and miniature body parts.

Logical fallacy: appeal to pity. Obviously showing this type of tape will appeal to anyone who has a heart, but those who think logically will realize that it is simply a necessary product of some action. You can not justify something because it makes others weak at the knees. Plus, I'm sure that movie was gross. :D

After his presentation, Klusendorf said he hoped attendees would be more confident they could rationally defend their anti-abortion position without involving religion. He also said his goal was to encourage the audience to put their thoughts into action.

Yes, because all thoughts presented involved logical rationalizations and were not in any way, shape, or form influenced by any religious ideals. Throw me a friggin' bone. He showed no proof of any of his claims, nor did he prove that he was even attempting to think logically. This is simply my interpretation, but it seems that if he didn't believe this thing had a soul, he would be able to see it as just that: some kind of thing. A mass of cells is not a human being, but if this mass already has a soul, it's human. I don't know how they think, but these people are crazy.

"I think we need to re-invent ourselves," he said. "I think we need people who are both passionate and informed."

No more of these people, please! We all hate seeing them protesting everywhere!

Monday, November 21, 2005

New Logical Fallacy

Logical Fallacy:

Religious Thinking


(1) There's grass on the ground because...(insert choice higher being)didit.
(2) I believe in (insert choice higher being) because I do.
(3) (Insert things that are invisible) do exist; I (alone) saw them!

Astrology is Bullshit...Again

*A Rockstar Ryan Classic. Enjoy!*

I've been wanting to do this for quite some time - take a whole week of horoscopes and compare them to what really happened the next day. The amazing Astrologer/Psychic/Author/Bullshit Artist
Rochelle Gordon has kindly taken some time out of her busy day and obliged me. I put in my exact birthdate, hit "send", and later I received a whole week of predictions designed just for me! What a great opportunity to show not only how useless astrology is, but what an idiot she is! You can read my horoscope here. I'm not even going to concern myself with proving it doesn't work. We know it doesn't. For pity's sake we'll go to the Land of Make-Believe where Rochelle lives with the fairies, leprechauns and Jesus. We'll pretend astrology works. My goal: to prove that even if the planets controlled my destiny, whatever these nutbars tell us is absolutely useless.

So I decided to keep a running diary comparing what Rochelle said me and the other 300,000 people who share my birthday and date would experience this week, and what happened in the real world. We'll skip all the horsecrap at the beginning about the moon of Virgo entering Uranus (huh-huh) and sup on the meat of stupidity. Here goes:

June 13, 2005

Today you may find yourself more concerned than usual with issues concerning health and wellbeing. You should try to remember that being robust and strong is often a question of mind over matter.

But I was ill last week! If I'd have had this amazing foresight in time, I could've gone to the doctor, told him a magic lady said I'd be sick, and gotten a prescription! Oh, wait, she doesn't say I'd be sick. She said I may find myself more concerned about issues concerning health and wellbeing. So what, I need to prepare for a lot of concerning? Thanks for the tip.

Your daily responsibilities are likely to increase now, but they won't be without their rewards. Observers will admire the efficient way in which you approach your duties.

Strike two!! My boss told me just the opposite regarding my efficiency. Probably because I'm always writing in my crappy blog...

You may feel torn between doing your own work and helping a friend. Put your chores aside for the moment in favor of assisting your pal. That way, you may be able to get a boost when you need it most.

There's that "may" crap again. I "may" be concerned about stuff. I "may" feel torn between work and a friend. I might do a lot of things. But I did not need to put any chores aside to help a friend. I guess Rochelle was right, since I may or may not have done it, correct? Astrology is not a very precise pseudo-science...

I suppose I'm not doing a good job in the Land of Make-Believe and shoehorning these predictions into what happened to me yesterday. I guess my mind doesn't work that way. Probably because I'm not a mopey, fat 40 year old divorced woman holding a power crystal hoping to find Mr. Right. (Feel free to e-mail me though, baby, I'm Mr. RIGHT NOW)

Social events may surround such activities as health care, diet and exercise routines or lectures or gatherings involving personal well- being. Your sense of responsibility includes a good sense of humor.

I "may" be involved with my personal well-being? (Wait, it's well-being now and not wellbeing? I suppose I concern over one and involve the other) No, I will be involved with my personal well-being. Otherwise I'd be like these idiots. The only social event I participated in was a rock show, opening for Dark New Day. She is right about one thing though - I feel responsible for showing the rest of the world what a scamming/defrauding/only-uses-a-hyphen-50%-of-the-time kind of person she is, and will do so with a good sense of humor.

Having been disappointed with Monday's reading, I e-mailed Rochelle:


What the hell does any of this magic fore knowledge do for me? I "may" be more concerned about health and wellbeing? I "may" feel torn between helping a friend and doing work?

I "may" feel like licking a dog's butt. This doesn't necessarily make it fucking so."

I can't wait for the response.

June 14, 2005

You may be hungry for delicacies today, my friend. Indulging in finer foods can make you very happy. The appearance of your food may be as important as the taste, so pay attention to presentation.

Step 1. Find one thing useful in that paragraph. Step 2. Remember people pay astrologers to tell them these things. Step 3. Laugh. What delicacies was I supposed to maybe hungry for? Thai? Indian? Klingon? The $.99 party pizza did just fine.

Try not to get too wrapped up in the details of a complicated project, my dear. The emphasis should be on getting things finished, rather than making everything perfect.

I'm not working on any "projects" right now. Seriously, I wonder if there was some moron out there that read this and now his Lego castle looks like shit.

When under pressure or stress, are your nerves affected? This is a time for finding ways to relax and release tension. Putting your domestic and daily responsibilities in order will help you greatly.

sigh...No jackass, my nerves aren't affected when I'm under pressure or stress. When stressed, I feel like giving everyone a big hug, starting with you. But then you have to be bodyslammed.

June 15, 2005

You may find yourself scrutinizing the world around you to make sure that you can find beauty in every corner. Today can be a good day to clean and spruce up your home. Buy flowers and scented candles, too.

It wouldn't be a horoscope unless it started the day off with something I "may" do. These readings are starting to sound like the textbook they read from in the classes for the "special" kids. So far this week I'm supposed to:

1. Take care of myself.

2. Feed myself.

3. Clean.

Help Rochelle! What do I do next? And does she remember she's talking to a bunch of 25 year old kids? Half of which are men? How many Rockstars have flowers and smelly candles in their pads? And just what are the said candles supposed to smell like? Probably bullshit. Even in the Land of Make-Believe I'm starting to think my birthdate had nothing to do with my readings...

Breaking a bad habit can be made easier now; this is the time to do something about it. Your willpower is strong, so set your mind to it. You can be over the habit in a few days.

Why is breaking a bad habit easier now? She doesn't even pay me the common courtesy of letting me know that Mars is entering Virgo from the rear, or something like that. I'd say that she's just making all this up, but remember, we're still in the Land of Make-Believe. Here comes the trolley now...

Take extra care of your health and that of your family and loved ones today, my friend. Don't be in too much of a hurry on any count. Take your time and plan your actions carefully, both at work and at home.

I just don't know what to say anymore. Take care of yourself and think before you act. Guess what? I didn't use any "extra" care, and I'm fine. Again, people pay money to be told this...and you're not my fucking friend...

My letter to Rochelle for the day:


My forecast for yesterday said to clean my house, buy flowers and smelly candles, and take care of myself. Do you think I stink or something? The day before you reminded me to eat. Are your forecasts for retarded people? I think you should know I'm not a retarded person. Can you please just tell me how to win the lottery or something?"

June 16, 2005

I finally got a response from Rochelle! I couldn't wait to read it. Surely she fixed my horoscope, as it obviously got mixed up with a mentally handicapped old woman's reading.

Ok, the "exclusive free offer" thing at the top seemed weird, but she tells me it's important - she had a sense of psychic urgency when doing my reading (why'd she wait till Thursday to tell me?) that I had a burning question nagging me!

In your forecast, I am committed to giving you daily guidance that reflects my sense of how the stars and planets will affect you. And right now, the stars will be aligned in your favor for the next few precious months.
So this is your opportunity to increase your chances to win lots of money, to get what you need and want from someone you love, to find out the answer to a question that refuses to go away...

Yes! Yes! Yes! How!?

The phenomenon I am talking about is the amazing... POWER OF THE PENDULUM

Huh? The POWER OF THE PENDULUM? If the stars are aligned in my favor...

*Rockstar has had enough, and projects from the ethereal plane of the Land of Make-Believe back to the real world*

No. I just can't take this shit anymore. This woman is actually offering to sell me A FUCKING PENDULUM THAT TELLS THE FUTURE. I don't even think I need to debunk this thing, but she says:

Because the pendulum is so easy to use, it only takes moments to master it! With the help of a pendulum, you can get detailed answers to questions like...
What numbers should I play in the lottery this week?
When is the best time to move out of my house?
Does the person I love feel the same way about me?
Will these arguments with a close loved one end?
Where should I look for employment?
What can I do to stop these headaches?

See anywhere in this mighty communique she explains how it works? Of course not. Letter to Rochelle for the week:


Apparently you have not received my prior e-mails. Here are recaps of my letters you can read on my weblog,

(Here I insert THE POWER OF THE PENDULUM letter and recap my prior letters.)

Your "predictions" are bad enough, but the attached comminique is what really upsets me. The fact you are making a living as a professional fraud is bad enough, but selling THE POWER OF THE PENDULUM to sap magnets should be downright illegal.
If your magic pendulums and psychic powers really work, please sign up for the JREF Million Dollar Challenge at If you can pass the test, I will retract my harsh remarks.
Until then - in my opinion you are just a fucking fraud. Take me off your list, I'm through making fun of you.
Rockstar Ryan

Unfortunately, this article is making me ill to my stomach. I can't go on. Right now, there are people basing their lives on what these assholes tell them. They are making choices involving their jobs, their lives, and their children's lives based on a FUCKING PENDULUM. This is why it's not OK to believe in Woo-Woo.

What if your physician made a diagnosis based on your zodiac sign? What if you were on trial for a crime you did not commit and the judge decided your guilt or innocence on a FUCKING PENDULUM? Think twice about the woo people, before you hurt yourself...or more importantly ME!

*You can read the response here.

Tuesday, November 15, 2005


We haven't had any problems yet, but since it's going around...

Our comment policy:

We can delete your comments for any freaking reason we see fit. Maybe we don't like you. Maybe your post was vaccuous. Maybe you're off topic.


Which Path Will Produce the Next Economic Superpower?

Ken Jarboe of the Athena Alliance has it right. He says:

While US schools argue about "Intelligent Design," Chinese schools are studying "Technology and Design".

Which of these paths do you think will produce the economic superpower...

I think the answer to that question is clear.

Friday, November 11, 2005

Finding Said to Boost Proof of Goliath

No, it doesn't.

Archaeologists have recently found a shard of
pottery with the name "Goliath" inscribed on it.

The shard dates back to around 950 B.C., within 70 years of when biblical chronology asserts David squared off against Goliath, making it the oldest Philistine inscription ever found, the archaeologists said.

So does that lend any significance to the historical account in the Bible? Let me get my
shoehorn out here. Urrrgghh, that data is hard to force in there!

No. While the finding is incredible, it proves exactly dick when it comes to Biblical chronology.

While the discovery is not definitive evidence of Goliath's existence, it does support the Bible's depiction of life at the time the battle was supposed to have occurred, said Dr. Aren Maeir, a professor at Bar-Ilan University and director of the excavation.

No. It proves that the name "Goliath" goes back to 950 B.C. That's all. Reading anything else into the finding is shoehorning it in to what you want to believe. It's just not intellectually honest.

Thursday, November 10, 2005

The 21st Circle of Skeptics

Doth mine ears deceive me? Lo, thine angst displayed; a fortnight 'tis been since thy yonder globe of skepticism hath been displayed. Hark! A Pooflinger cometh! Let us bask in the merriment thus!

Friday, November 04, 2005

The Don't Knock it Till You've Tried it Fallacy

This one pops up quite frequently in "debates" with the Bleevers. It takes this form -

You've never tried/used/seen 'X'. Therefore, you can't have an opinion on 'X'.

I'm quite against drug use*, and the other musicians frequently throw that one on me. Woo-Woos bask in the glory of the DKTYTF.

Related to the
anecdote, this claim attempts to show that my argument is invalid since my opinion is uninformed. However, anecdotes are not always fallacious; they are simply unreliable. The Don't Knock it Till You've Tried it argument is a common logical flaw. Why?

How do you know I've not tried your bullshit? And there's plenty of ways to review and learn about 'X' other than having hands on experience. I've never smoked crack cocaine because I've learned about
the dangers of doing so (I've also watched WAY too much "COPS"). I will not try the White Mountain voice programmed remedy maker. Not only is there no evidence it works, there is evidence showing it does not work.

Likewise, what benefit would I get from wasting my time with
Phiten® Titanium? And since we know prayer is still useless, I see no reason to try it.

My smart-ass come back to any creduloid who pulls out the DKTYTF?

You've never been rogered in the ass by a 300 pound man before. Therefore, you can't know you wouldn't like it.

That always shuts 'em up...


*Before I get any slams for this, lemme sum up - I support the legalization and decriminalization of drugs for consenting, non-vehicle manipulating adults. I'd hope that just because they are legal, one would still stray from their usage.

Thursday, October 27, 2005

Don't Want to Work? Bleeve in Invisible Friends!!

From About Atheism via The Uncredible Hallq, we find this article:

Rape victim: 'Morning after' pill denied

Although it is safe, effective and legal, emergency contraception - the "morning after" pill - can be hard to find in Tucson.

After a sexual assault one recent weekend, a young Tucson woman spent three frantic days trying to obtain the drug to prevent a pregnancy, knowing that each passing day lowered the chance the drug would work.

While calling dozens of Tucson pharmacies trying to fill a prescription for emergency contraception, she found that most did not stock the drug.

When she finally did find a pharmacy with it, she said she was told the pharmacist on duty would not dispense it because of religious and moral objections.

"I was so shocked," said the 20-year-old woman, who, as a victim of sexual assault, is not being named by the Star. "I just did not understand how they could legally refuse to do this."


...less than half [of AZ pharmacies] keep emergency contraception drugs in stock, with most saying there is too little demand, but some cite moral reasons, according to the Arizona Family Planning Council. Yet, family-planning agencies say they've seen a 60 percent increase in demand for the drug in recent years. The statistics are creating what advocates say is a frightening situation for some women. But others are glad pharmacists have a choice.

Women who report sexual assaults to police receive treatment, examination and the immediate offer of emergency contraception at a local emergency room, according to the policy of most Tucson hospitals.

But, like many sexual assault victims, the 20-year-old woman did not report the assault because she felt traumatized and guilty she had put herself in a situation that left her vulnerable. She was mistakenly locked outside a gathering at a friend's house and accepted the offer of a neighbor to stay at his place.

"This (sex) was with someone I did not even know and did not want to have intercourse with, and I am in no place now to have children," she said. "I just don't think this should be the pharmacist's decision."

The manager of the Fry's pharmacy at 3920 E. Grant Road, where the refusal occurred, offered to find another location where the prescription could be filled, according to a Fry's spokeswoman. But the young woman said she was offered no other options.

Although emergency contraception drugs have been around in one form or another for more than two decades, they remain highly controversial, with anti-abortionists and religious conservatives saying they can abort a fertilized egg.
More widespread use of emergency contraception could prevent as many as 800,000 surgical abortions a year, according to family-planning groups such as Planned Parenthood.

Controversy over emergency contraception is roiling now at the national level, with FDA scientists resigning over the agency's refusal to allow emergency contraception to be sold over the counter, without a prescription.

The issue surfaced in Arizona last winter, when Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have permitted pharmacists to refuse to dispense it on moral or religious grounds.

..."He (the manager [of Fry's Pharmacy]) said he would fill it himself if we could get there before his shift ended, within 10 minutes," said Sabrina Fladness, a University of Arizona student and owner of a computer service business.

"But we were more than 10 minutes away, so that was impossible. So he said we would have to come back the next morning" - after the shift of the refusing pharmacist ended.

"We have all kinds of compassion for a rape victim - in that case, Plan B is OK, the church has no problem with it," said Ron Johnson, with the Arizona Catholic Conference, which supports the right of any health-care worker to refuse to dispense emergency contraception and lobbied hard for passage of the Arizona law to allow it.
But the biggest roadblock to obtaining emergency contraception was that most pharmacies simply do not stock it, Fladness said. She said she called nearly 50, before finding two that had it and agreed to dispense it.

[I inserted bold]

So since gawd/Jeebus/Mohammed/Krishna/Thor et. al told this phucking pharmacist emergency contaception in the case of rape is bad, he doesn't have to work!

Folks, rape is messed up shit. A close friend of mine experienced this several years ago and is still suffering mental effects. Should she have been required to go through 9 months of pain, suffering, and constant reminder of the tragic event because you interpreted your silly ancient book to read "'bortions r bad"?? Seriously, that' s like asking someone who lost a family member in the 9/11 terrorist attacks to keep a picture of the planes flying into the World Trade Center on their mantle for 9 months!

Thanks gawd for all you do. I know these women thank you daily...

Friday, October 21, 2005

Less Boring Bigfoot Journalism

Seriously, why is this news? A Bigfoot convention that draws 400 people in Texas is about as exciting to me as a polyp found on Bill Manitopolis from Houston's ass. Where's the star of the show? Have you ever heard of a Star Trek convention where none of the actors from the series show up? Hell even Lincoln's ST convention had "Drugged Military Officer #2 himself, Chuck Hicks! So in a Rockstar exclusive, I was able to get a few moments with Mr. Bigfoot. Things get a little intense when he attempts to validate his existence.

Rockstar Good afternoon Mr. Bigfoot. Thank you for joining us. Why thank you Rockstar. Just "Bigfoot" will be fine.

Rockstar Very well, Bigfoot. Let's get first things first. What do you think of all those people gathering to discuss the latest sightings and tracking techniques at the Texas Bigfoot Conference? It's quite an honor, Rockstar. We are slowly starting to earn support from the scientific community.

Rockstar Scientific community? Mmmm yes. People have been believing in me for years, but this conference brought forth the newest scientific evidence of my existence.

Rockstar Such as? The thousands of footprints, sightings, and photographs.


Rockstar You don't think those prints are highly suspect? I mean, why have we found "footprints" but no hair, bodies or scat? I, um, don't poop or shed.

Rockstar As far as the sightings, isn't there a more rational explanation? According to Christopher L. Murphy's 2004 book "Meet the Sasquatch", I've been seen by 2,550 credible people, like this man: Notice the stunned look on his face? He's a big fan in Utah. Daryl Coyler, my lead investigator, even said "It's not a matter of believing, like faith, when you believe in something you can't see". How true!

Rockstar Couldn't those folks have experienced
pareidolia? Ya know, like, saw something they thought was you but was something else? Like seeing Jesus on a tortilla for example. There are many clear photos of me taken by credible scientists.

Rockstar Most of them look like guys in suits. Then how do you explain THIS!? (Bigfoot, according to the Texas Bigfoot Research Center)

Rockstar ZZZZZZZ... ......

Rockstar ZZZZZZZ... Rockstar?

Rockstar ZZZZZZ... Rockstar? Um, do you explain that?

Rockstar That doesn't look like anything paranormal, Bigfoot. It's just a shadow. In fact, are you...

(*shuffle* *rip*)

Rockstar BWAHAHAHAHAHA!! ......

At this point in the interview, Craig Woolheater, co-founder of the Texas Bigfoot Research Center ran out from behind the puppet. I chased him as far as I could, but I made my point. It's amazing how fast he can run with those big fake feet.

Having a convention about a bunch of invisible apes running around that no one has any evidence of...sheesh...

Wonder if it was held on a Sunday??

*Bigfoot photos credit: © Nimba Creations UK 2005. Bigfoot sculpture, mould making, casting, painting and hair punching. ~ they are awesome!*

Thursday, October 20, 2005

ID + Behe X Astrology = Bullshit

During the ongoing Dover religion Intelligent Design trial, Michael "Goddidit" Behe has recently stated that under his definition of a scientific theory, "astrology would fit as neatly as intelligent design".


Ok, according to Behe (and every rational thinking person on this planet) ID has as much merit in the world of science as astrology, which we all know is
complete and utter bullshit. So why teach ID in schools?

Behe states ID is another "theory" of "how complex biological structures arose." Let's examine this theory. The bible of ID, "Of Pandas and People" defines ID thusly:

"Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency with their distinctive features already intact, fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks and wings, etc."

That's it. That's their theory. Complex biological structures began abruptly through an intelligent agency. Or in other words, God did it.

I can't wait for that college final:

Good Job, Bob!

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

The Bibble - Inerrant, DAMMIT!

At least according to Xian blogger David Heddle . Says Heddle:

I find it very interesting, this insistence of atheist evolutionists that an inerrant bible is incompatible with science.

He follows up with a great quote from science blogger
PZ Myers:

A religion that declares the bible inerrant is not compatible with science, because its followers would have to be idiots.

Apparently David and his Christer buddies have a problem with this. But in true apologist form, they do not take on Professor Myers' statement. No, they simply whine about "atheist bigots" calling them idiots. David, following the Xian apologist textbook, takes this opportunity to express the controversy!

...see religion has nothing to fear from science—these scientists and devout Christians see no conflict whatsoever.

However, it is a strategy they just can’t make themselves follow. Why? I can only assume that it is because their hatred for Christianity far outweighs the possible political advantage. Someone like Myers could never say: “What are you worried about? Professor X believes in the compatibility of an inerrant bible and science. Science is not your enemy.” No, to someone like Myers religion must be the enemy. It just has to be. No alliances permitted. He loves being an enemy of religion.

So, according to Heddle, the only reason we atheists feel the bibble contradicts science is because of our hatred for Christianity.

Stop right there David! I'm not a fan of apologetics. I like evidence and science. Here's just a few examples where the bibble and fact collide like a fat kid and a cupcake:

1. Which
genealogy of Jebus should we believe - Mark or Luke?

2. What were the true
last words of Jebus?

3. Since when do animals in the family leporidae chew their cud? (Lev. 11:5-6)

4. Pi must be
3, according to the good book. (I Kings 7:23)

Need I produce more? That's why we feel any religion that calls the bibble "inerrant" would require idiots to follow it.

Friday, October 14, 2005

All Things are NOT Through Him

A pirate walks into a bar. He has a large galleon steering wheel coming out of his trousers. The bartender says "Hey buddy - you know you gotta big wheel sticking outta yer drawers???"

"Aye, and it's drivin' me nuts!"

I thought that may illustrate the point I'm about to make. Why do people give credit for their abilities to a magical man in the sky? For instance, many Grammy winners begin their acceptance speech with "First off I'd like to thank God; through him all things are possible."

If your Rockstar ever wins a Grammy, I might start my speech like this:

"First off, I'd like to thank God for sitting in my basement every night for five hours learning to play guitar for me. I'd also like to thank Him for writing
Labeled's songs (Rockstar's band). Through Him all things are possible."

What about Me?

Why do people give their invisible friend credit for all their accomplishments?