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.

Agreed.

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!

New Logical Fallacy

Logical Fallacy:

Religious Thinking

Examples:

(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:

"Question:

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:

"Rochelle,

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:

Rochelle,

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

(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 http://www.randi.org/. 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.
Regards,
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.

Comments

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.

Whatever.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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...

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.

Good afternoon Mr. Bigfoot. Thank you for joining us.

Why thank you Rockstar. Just "Bigfoot" will be fine.

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.

Scientific community?

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

Such as?

The thousands of footprints, sightings, and photographs.

.......

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.

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!

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.

Most of them look like guys in suits.

Then how do you explain THIS!?

(Bigfoot, according to the Texas Bigfoot Research Center)

ZZZZZZZ...

......

ZZZZZZZ...

Rockstar?

ZZZZZZ...

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

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

(*shuffle* *rip*)

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. www.nimbacreatons.com ~ they are awesome!*

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".

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

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:

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.

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."



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

19th Skeptic's Circle

An alcoholic has taken over Nurse Kelly's blog! Shit, Rockstars know all about that! Here is the link to the new SC. En-friggin-joy!

Belief in Flying Spaghetti Monster Now Required to Sit on Supreme Court

*Spontaneous Entry Alert*

This just in from the "You Gotta be Fucking Kidding Me" files. It now appears that belief in magic is a requirement to be nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court. Quoth the Bush:

"People ask me why I picked Harriet Miers. They want to know Harriet Miers' background. They want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. And part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion."

You chose her because of her religion. That irritates me so bad, it's hard to comment. Says Scott McClellan:

"Faith is very important to Harriet Miers. But she recognizes that faith and that her religion and that her personal views don't have a role to play when it comes to making decisions."

Oh really? Well, since they never discuss what or whose magic Miers believes in, what if she has to make a decision against her faith? We'll assume she's a Xian since the Prez likes her.

What about school prayer? What about a woman's right to choose? The death sentence?

I guarantee she and all the other religious Justices base part if not all of their decisions on their book of magic written a thousand years ago.

Now, to all the fundies who read this and would like to bitch at how stupid I am, think of this:

What if, in the future, the President of the United States nominates a Supreme Court Justice based on their Muslim beliefs? What if they're Hindu? Now you know how I feel. Anyway,

=

A Script for "Debating" ID/Creationists

Debating an ID/Creationist (I use that term lightly; it's hard to debate someone with no facts) is like listening to Jeff Foxworthy's "You Might be a Redneck" jokes. At first it's interesting, but gets old when you hear the same tired old thing all the time. The same goes for ID/Creationists. Some of them are just honest uneducated people. Others are lying propogandists. Here's a script I've used in probably every "debate" with an IDiot/Cretinist. Keep in mind, they usually come out with all of these at once. Stick to your guns and hit them one at a time.

Part I or "They ALWAYS start with this one"

1. Evolution never happened. Why do you think they call it a theory?

Big mistake. It happened, it's still happening.

*First point out the to the ID/Creationist they are apparently ignorant of what evolution is. In layman's terms, evolution is the change in the gene pool of a population over time. This is readily observable. I typically provide antibiotic resistant bacteria and DDT resistant insects as obvious choices. Direct them to the talk origins FAQ on observed instances of speciation for proof. This is a good time to point out the difference between what "theory" means to scientists and what it means in everyday conversation.

The comeback:

Oh, you mean "micro-evolution" (changes within species). I mean "macro-evolution" (at or above the level of species). A frog that changes into another frog is still a frog.

The end of argument 1:

*Don't let the ID/Creationist get away with being dishonest! Do not address anymore of their points until they answer this question: "Why did you say evolution never happened before, but now you say it did?" Continue to quote their point until they give an honest answer, basically making them admit they believe evolution has occured. In my experience, they will usually tuck tail and run, or say something like "sorry for not being clear." It is now apparent that the only thing being argued is "macro-evolution". Soooooo...

Throw 'em for a loop! We've both agreed micro-evolution is a fact. Now why is there a "controversy" here? Oh, maaaaaacro-evolution. Which brings me to my next ID/Creationist argument:

Part II or "The Most Ignorant Argument ID/Creationists Use"

Trust me, if you use this, do so only with people who are utterly ignorant of science lest you sound like a complete and total moron.

2. When I see a frog give birth to a cat, then I'll believe in macro-evolution!

Well, when I see a frog give birth to a cat, I'll renounce atheism and lead my life for Christ; that would be excellent evidence for Creationism, not evolution.

*BWAHAHAHAHA! Silly ID/Creationist! Not only are you serving to debunk your own claims, you are playing my game now! If generational changes occured that quickly, it would refute evolutionary theory! Evolution happens over millions of years, not overnight.

The comeback:

Fine, but animals stay in their own kind; frogs are still frogs, dogs are still dogs!

The end of argument 2:

*Does "kind" mean different species? If so, they're wrong; you've already agreed speciation occurs. Typically, though, ID/Creationists move the meaning of the word up to higher taxonomic levels, be it genus or even family. By this way of thinking, they might lump these together:


Hey, same genus, right?

Some ID/Creationists say "kind" can't be defined biologically. OK fine. How does one define it? If "kind" has no definition, why use the term?

Part III or "I'll Huff, and I'll Puff and I'll Blow that Strawman Down!"

3. If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys? I believe God/gods/Gorlock the Mighty gave me a soul, so there's no way we could be related to monkeys.

This point may be the easiest to refute.

*We didn't evolve from monkeys. We evolved from a common ancestor. Evolution works like this:



Not this:


Note the common ancestor.

Here's where it gets real interesting. Show them Eohippus and Miohippus only. Are they the same "kind"? I'll wager $50 bucks they say yes. Then show them Miohippus and Merychippus. Are they the same "kind"? Repeat ad finitum until you get to the modern horse. Notice how the tree branches off to other species. So note how eohippus was not only the common ancestor to modern horses, but also species such as Paleotherium.

Human evolution was much the same, with a common ancestor extending through many branches.

The comeback:

You have to give it to them they stick to their guns. They'll always revert to the "kind" argument.

The end of argument 3:

Ok so this:



and this:



Are the same "kind"? Looks like pretty good evidence for "macro-evolution" to me.

Stay tuned for part II...some jackass just spammed a critical thinking blog with an ad for pseudo-science. What better way to pay him back than to debunk the hell outta his product?

*update 10/12/05*
I know I used some of the older names for a few of the extinct species (ie Eohippus). They're extinct, I don't think they'll care...

Up is Circle Skeptic's 18th the

Here out it check. Tom's Wolverine at up is Circle Skeptic's 18th the.

Anecdotes - Good or Bad?

As every critical thinker knows, anecdotes are the main ammunition for pseudo-science. Since they have no hard evidence to back up their claims, one is usually presented with the old argument "I've tried it; it works". But is all anecdotal evidence fallacious?

Your Rockstar says no. Anecdotal evidence is typically unreliable, but not guaranteed to be false.

Part I or "Einstein > Moron"

Prior to modern medicine, many cures were determined solely on anecdotal evidence. For instance, James Lind observed that the 18th century British Royal Navy had fewer cases of scurvy when the sailors ate fresh citrus fruits. One of the common methods of preventing scurvy was sucking on limes - which is supposedly where the American slang term for Brits, "limey", came about. So it became anecdotal evidence in the form of "we're not sure why, but sucking on limes prevents scurvy".

Why was this an example of good anecdotal evidence? Due to the tales, Lind decided to make observations based on his knowledge of science and nutrition. Lind figured there was a plausible explanation. He made predictions, and was able to test his hypothesis, making the cure for scurvy in the 1700's akin to Einstein's idea of a "cosmic force" (one recently shown to be plausible due to the fact the universe is not only expanding faster than expected, but gaining speed. I'd probably need the Bad Astronomer to confirm that). Unfortunately, like Einstein, the theory could not be proven until later in time when Albert Szent-Gyorgyi discovered the properties of Vitamin C.

Part II or "Dealing with Fools"

Bad anecdotal evidence is that which deals with the paranormal, supernatural, magic, or that which has already been proven false. For instance, not only is there no evidence for astrology, but it's been proven that astrology doesn't work at all. The same can be said for the anti-vaccination nutbars. Yet there are still assholes out there using anecdotal evidence to try and "prove" this silliness to the rest of the world.

Take Phiten® Titanium products. Via Skeptico we learn magic necklace salesman Scott McDonald states:

Everybody has electricity running through their bodies… This product stabilizes that flow of electricity if you're stressed or tired. Pitchers are seeing that they aren't as sore. Injured players are seeing that they recover faster from workouts. People are always skeptical, but when they try it, they become believers.

Translation: Our necklace is just a piece of metal. So we'll come up with some scientific words and anecdotes to correlate our magic necklace to stress relief!

Skeptico further reports:

Phiten® Titanium products promote pain relief and performance enhancement. Titanium emits energy that is effective in controlling the flow of bioelectric current. When this current is stabilized, the muscles relax and blood circulation increases, allowing for easier movement and pain relief. All Phiten® products help relieve pain in muscles and joints by improving the alignment of ions, especially at the body's crucial motor points. Our product is also effective in the temporary relief of pain from bursitis, sciatica, tendonitis, certain types of arthritis and numberous other conditions.

Riiiiiggghht. Titanium emits "energy"? What energy? (Ad Hominem alert) "Numberous"? Very respecatabel...

They go on to provide gleaming testimonials from baseball players and the like, soundly endorsing the product.

Part III or "But Rockstar, why is this bad anecdotal evidence and Lind's limes aren't?"

Lind heard the anecdotes - "Scurvy-grass cures and prevents scurvy!" Using his knowledge of nutrition, it sounded plausible. He made observations, created a hypothesis, and construed and tested a valid theory. This theory was later proven to be scientific fact.

Metallurgy tells us there is absolutely no reason to believe Titanium emits "energy". There is no reason to believe the "stabilizing the bioelectric current" would assist in curing dick. The only people to observe the effects of the magic necklace were those using the product. The easiest person to deceive is one's self.

Anecdotal evidence can be useful in the realm of science. The main difference between good and bad:

Good anecdotes lead to scientific discovery.

Bad anecdotes are used to prove something against all observation and logic.

One Nation Indivisible

As it stands, mandatory recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is completely unconstitutional. It is religion forced on a nation that is supposed to separate church and state.

The new argument I heard on my favorite talk radio show today is something like this:

The majority wants "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. This is a Democracy, and the majority rules. Therefore, the phrase stays.

Assinine.

Democracy is an important system of government; not only to the majority, but to protect the minority as well. Recall folks, several hundred years ago, the majority of human beings in the USA thought it was ok to enslave other human beings.

Keep that in mind next time - Democracy means you can have all the silly ideas you want. But when your rights (even the majority's) infringe upon the rights of others, it is inherently wrong.

Now, if you still believe "The majority wants "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. This is a Democracy, and the majority rules. Therefore, the phrase stays", I politely ask you to suck on my athiest nuts.

Thank you.

My Chat with Almighty God

God is for Suckers is fast becoming a favorite blog.

I found a way to talk with God on their site. Here's our conversation:

Me:
What’s up Dude?
God:
I am chatting with others like you.
Me:
Why are you on the internet and not doing good, like cleaning up your Katrina mess?
God:
Myself programmed me for it.
Me:
You programmed you for internet or cleaning up your Katrina mess
God:
That’s good information: said I programmed you for internet or cleaning up your Katrina mess.
Me:
Why is God confused?
God:
Why do I exist?
Me:
You dont.
God:
Thanks for the information: said I dont.
Me:
Talking to you is just like talking to Christians
God:
What do they say?
Me:
Thanks for the information: read the Bible
God:
It was nothing.
Me:
Indeed
God:
Indeed it is so.

Almost frightening how accurate the chat bot is. Post your conversations in the comments section. Mbains, I especially await your talks with the Almighty.

Creation Science Textbook

Chapter I: All Things Through Him

Q: Insert any who, what, why, when, or how question relating to science.

A: Goddidit.

*If an evil Satanic Nazi Darwinistic skeptical atheist asks how you know this, point them to the proper verse in the Holy Bible.

*If the evil Satanic Nazi Darwinistic skeptical atheist attempts to point out historical/scientific inaccuracies:

-Laugh, then inform them they are not interpreting the verse/chapter correctly.
-Tell them you will pray for them.

You Were All Wrong!

Inside envelope: Coffee cup

Written on the outside of the envelope: YOU GUESSED WRONG

No new apprentice this year!

(For extra credit, what movie is that from?)

16th Skeptic's Circle

Check out the 16th Skeptic's Circle over a Pat Hayes' excellent blog Red State Rabble. Even though your Rockstar is a conservative at heart, he's been leaning to the Red quite a bit as far as science is concerned!!

*By the way - voting for Bush over Kerry was like voting for a douchesicle over a turd sandwich.

The Psychic Challenge, Part I

Calling all psychics/remote viewers/clairvoyants/etc:

Here is my challenge to you. I have an envelope on top of my T.V. set. Very simply - what's inside? For bonus points, what is written on the envelope?

1. The envelope is 4 1/8" X 9 1/2" or standard letter size.

2. The envelope is not sealed.

3. For my remote viewing friends - let me narrow your search. I'm in Lincoln, NE 68512. I live in a third floor apartment.

4. If you need to know what I look like for some reason, check here.

5. I will be e-mailing the answer to 3 people - Skeptico, The 2% Company, and my webmaster. The time stamp on my e-mail will show that I did not change my answer after the fact.

6. For those who believe my negativity will have an adverse effect on your ability to "see" the object, please be assured I think it highly possible someone will guess correctly.

7. I hereby give everyone w/ paranormal superpowers full access to my thoughts/mind/soul.

8. You can e-mail me at rockstarryan AT rock.com or leave a comment with the answer. Just make sure I have a way of getting back to you if you are right. Anyone who wishes to remain anonymous will, just let me know.

9. If there is anything unfair about this challenge, please e-mail me. All reasonable requests for change due to unfairness will be taken care of.

*UPDATED 9/1/05
10. Some people have expressed concern that there is a "trick" item in the envelope. No, the answer is not "nothing" or an intangible noun like "honor" or "hope". The envelope contents would be a standard noun/nouns.

*UPDATED 9/2/05
11. This is by no means a replacement for the very serious JREF Million Dollar Challenge. This is not a joke, I just hope the Amazing One is not offended. On a cool note, he did e-mail me back! (I'll never wash my computer again...)

Why should you do this? Well for one, if you can pass my challenge, you have a pretty good shot at passing Randi's challenge for one million dollars. Fair enough?

*UPDATED 9/12/05
Here is the answer!

Jesus Fish = Bad Driver

I was reading Orac's post today about knowing someone is a shitty driver without even seeing them in the process. This may be a first for my blog, but I have absolutely no evidence to back up the following statement:

People with a Jesus fish on their car can not drive.

My buddy Mike pointed this out to me several years ago.

When we were in college, we made weekly trips to the Super K-Mart for the essential supplies: Beer, cigs, chips and a few personal hygiene items. Mike is the stingiest person I know, and would compare the "price per ounce" to see what box size of Lucky Charms was cheaper. I always asked him why he didn't just get the size he needed. I'll never get Mike, ever...

Anywhoo, one day we pulled up to a stoplight.

Mike: Oh shit dude, a Jesus Fish.

Ryan: Yeah, so what?

Mike: Ryan (imagine someone saying your name, but meaning "Asshole". That's how Mike always says my name) everyone knows that people with Jesus Fish on the back of their cars can't drive. Watch this guy. He's going to do something stupid before the next stoplight.

Sure as Pat Roberts and apologetics, the JF guy swerved between 3 lanes, prompting Mike to scream "GET A LANE, BUTT-BRAIN!" I'll never get Mike, ever...

It was maybe a year later when I tested this hypothesis with some of my friends. Through my own observation, I noticed a correllation between Jesus Fish and bad driving.

Ryan: Uh-oh. Jesus Fish.

Ryan's Friends: So what?

Ryan: This chick is going to do something stupid before the next stoplight.

Sure as Sylvia Browne is a big fat idiot the moron cut directly in front of me, swerved back to the other lane, cut back in front of me, and swerved into that little limbo area in between lanes, where she stayed for the next block or two.

Now, I realize that correllation does not equal causation, but I'd like to know if anyone else has experienced the Jesus Fish effect?

I Think I've Had It

Today Skeptico posted an article about the White Mountain Voice Programmed Remedy Maker. To which he took it to task for being a bunch of bullshit.

Tell you what. I've had it.

We keep writing in our blogs in the hope that, somehow, reason will come to the people of the world and crap like this will disappear. Yet these con-artists continue to separate the clueless from their money, thereby staying in business. It defys all logic. Aren't we (the Skeptical Blogosphere) the good guys? Not anymore friends. Your Rockstar is going to get us the cut we deserve!!

Here's how: We're going to create our own Woo-machine, make a ton of outrageous claims about it, use real big scientific-sounding words, charge a shitload of money for it, and scoff when the so-called skeptics say it doesn't work. We'll marvel the masses with our appeals to popularity! We'll astonish them with our amazing testimonials!

I suggest we call it the Intelligently Designed Astrological Quantum Homeopathizing Titanium Prayer Wheel. It will create homeopathic remedies, Kabbalah water, and increase your athletic ability. Our Woo Machine will make your sex life better, and cleans the air in your home. It will grant you eternal life and money.

Gather round fellow skeptical bloggers!! Leave your ideas here so we can get to work on the project.

I've decided the company be named Woo Enterprises, Inc. But I'm up for suggestions. Being modeled after the White Mountain organization, Woo Enterprises Inc. still needs the following positions:

*Vice President in Charge of Apologetics

*Vice President of Biased Study

*Chief Appelate to Popularity

*Director of Big Scientific Sounding Words

Let me know what we're forgetting...

What Would Jesus Do? Probably Not This...

Apparently Pat Robertson has forgotten that old rule: "Thou Shalt Not Kill".

In a surprisingly un-Christ-like move, Pat has decided that we now need to assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. According to the AP:

"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said recently on his T.V show. "We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator," he continued. "It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."

Now Pat gets real fanatical:

"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson said. "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

He thinks we're trying to assassinate him. So we should. Very Christian of you Pat.

*UPDATE 8/24/05

Apparently now this is just a big misunderstanding. According to Pat on the 700 Club:

"I said our special forces could take him out. Take him out could be a number of things including kidnapping," Robertson said on his "The 700 Club" television program. "There are a number of ways of taking out a dictator from power besides killing him. I was misinterpreted."

So when you said "if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it", you must've forgotten what 'assassinate' means. Let me remind you:

IT MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO FUCKING MURDER SOMEONE!

Any more questions regarding the English language?

*UPDATE 2 - 8/24/05

DIDN'T YOU JUST SAY YOU DIDN'T SUGGEST WE ASSASSINATE CHAVEZ?? Pat, caught in lie #2 is now trying to weasel his way out of trouble. He says:

"Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him."

I guess that makes it all OK now, right? He was speaking in frustration.

I think he was speaking out of his ass. Anyone else?

15th Skeptic's Circle

The 15th Skeptic's Circle is up at About Atheism. Go, my Padawans, and waste your day at work reading the best skeptical blogging on the net!

What We Are Up Against

Today I came upon a comment on the Bad Astronomy blog that basically sums up the silly notions the proponents of Creationism hold to this day. You can read this moron's comment in all it's stupidity here. David, an IDiot, had been arguing ID with Samara, a normal intelligent person. Here we go!

Part I, or "David Should Worship the Sun!"

Samara, your (sic) afraid of people being indoctrinated in ID???!!! Hmmmmmm……………..Lets see again. ID has been the predominant public belief of our beginings for 6,000+ years. Nothing has lasted that long.

David: first, you and the rest of your clan only recently decided to call Creationism Intelligent Design. A coy plan to mask your religion in science. Second, are you fucking kidding me??? Creationism has been the public belief for 6,000 years and that proves it's right??

People in the past have worshipped the Sun and believed that blood-letting was a viable cure for disease. Sound silly? It is.

Do me a great favor David. Ask yourself why these ideas are silly. When you have your answer, you will know why we think Intelligent Design is a very Neanderthal system of beliefs.

Part II, or "David Gets all Political and Stuff"

It is now against the law to teach ID in school.

No, it's not. It's rightfully suggested that ID not be taught in science class. Teaching ID in science class would be like Kenneth Lay teaching business ethics.

Evolution is taught to our children in school all throughout thier formidable years and into higher education. But polls show something like 70% of the population believe ID over evolution.

Please show your work. I'd like to see how the questions were asked, and what the sample was. A proper survey would include random sampling, not designated by region. It would have to give at least 3 choices: ID/Creationism, Theistic evolution, or evolution by itself. Most of the people taking the survey probably support theistic evolution, but like my father, don't comprehend the difference between Creationism and Theistic evolution.

Part III or "The Science of ID is that Evolution is Wrong"

There is no evidence of evolution.

I beg to differ shithead.

If you have evidence and want to make a quick $250,000 then go to drdino.com. Dr Kent Hovind will pay anyone with irrefutable evidence of evolution $250k. For over 10 years noone has taken the challenge.

Not correct. Hovind is a moron, and will not accept the evidence at talk.origins. He wants to see a frog give birth to a dog. Read his incredibly dense website, you'll never see a greater collection of apologetics.

Part IV, or "WTF are You Talking About??"

The big bang theory and evolution defy most of the laws of physics, thermodynamics and statistical probablities. But we force our children to learn it and nothing else anyway.

BWAHAHAHAHA! These nonsensical ideas are still around?? First, what the fuck does the big bang theory have to do with biological evolution? Second, I'm sorry my friend, even your cretinous companions have debunked the thermodynamics arguments. See here for proof. Third, the statistical probability thing is yesterday's news too. Use your wee noodle: Because we're here, we should doubt it? If I dealt you a bridge hand, the odds of getting that exact hand would be something like 13 billion to one. Should you not believe you are holding that particular hand due to it's unlikelyhood??

Part V or "Dude, You are Making This Entirely too Easy"

Contrary to all this, I can turn on the television anytime I want and see something about how we ‘evolved’ from apes. Whether it be a passing comment or a 2 hour long documentary. But it is very rare, few and far between that I see anything on ID.

You're making this easy. We didn't 'evolve from apes' you uneducated ass. Seriously, if you're gonna debunk evolution, at least know what you're talking about. We evolved from a common link. And you can turn on one of the religion channels and get all the ID goodness you like. I like the one with the fat ass nun who has big ass jowls. She makes me laugh. However, you'll not see anything on ID on a science channel, because it's not science you twit.

ID people dont try and silence evolutionists, they just want equal time. But evolutionists do everything they can to silence IDer’s. From outlawing them to google bombing them. Why? Because thier afraid of indoctrinating people in ID???!!! LOLOLOL Please.

No. You can think anything you want. If you prefer to go about your merry way thinking that Giant Lizards, Aliens, Invisible Pink Unicorns, or a magical man in the sky created everything one by one and continues to do so, then fine. Keep your faith to yourself. Scientists (that is, people who do science for my ID believing readers) do not want ID taught in science until these questions can be answered before it can be taught as an alternative to evolution:

*Who is this designer? Is it God? Is it aliens? Invisible Pink Bunny Rabbits? (For fun, do as Orac suggests and ask ID proponents if the desinger is God. Normally they will not give an answer, or say that there are no limits. Then ask if it is Pink Invisible Bunny Rabbits or Giant Lizards. L. Ron Hubbard I love Orac sometimes...)

*How do you propose to prove who/what this designer is?

*How did the designer operate?

*What process was used? It is fact evolution occured, but there are many theories as to how.

*You will need to provide new evidence proving speciation and mutation occur independentlyfrom natural selection. We have proof, show our evidence is flawed.

*Why did the designer create flaws in our design?

Part VI or "The End"

Okey dokey Creationheads. Lemme know why I'm wrong now. And please, show your work.

Class dismissed.

"Faith means believing in something you know ain't so." - Mark Twain

What a Quote!

From the "Make You Think" file and the hand of Glintir comes this quote from Stephen Roberts on how to get the monotheists thinking:

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Truer words have yet to be spoken...aside from "Dude, Natalie Portman is fuckin' hot".

More Proof our "Designer" is Stupid

Intelligent Design has been the popular topic on blogs lately, and I guess I'll keep up with the flow.

I've just found through Yahoo News a new study performed by Valerie Clark of Cornell University showing evidence of convergent evolution in Poison Frogs. The study basically shows two separate ecosystems developing the same traits over time on two different continents, South America and Madagascar.

The Boring Part, or "Here Comes the Science":

The frogs can not produce their own poison, so they feed on alkaloid rich ants to secrete the poison from their skin. Clark explains the evolutionary process involved:

First, species of ants high in alkaloids had to evolve on two separate continents. "The ants had to be there with alkaloids for the frogs to evolve to get alkaloids in their skin," Clark told LiveScience. Then the frogs had to develop a resistance to the alkaloids--instead of spitting out the ants or passing the alkaloids through their systems, the frogs became able to keep their ant dinners down. Then they evolved to make use of the alkaloids themselves. Also, both the frogs in South America and Madagascar evolved to have "don't-eat-me" skin colorings, the final step in a remarkable tale of multi-step convergent evolution.

Remarkable, no?

The Fun Part, or "Making Fun of IDiots Again"

Nice design. It doesn't make sense to me why our "designer" decided to make such a simple process so long and drawn out. Why not just make the damn frogs poisonous in the first place? I suppose that God just works in mysterious ways...oh, wait, the IDiots don't call it God anymore.

Any Intelligent Design proponent out there care to answer my question? Why did God, I mean, ID, use such a long process to provide our little Kermits with don't eat me skin? Wouldn't proper design be more like this:

FROG -----> POISONOUS SKIN

And not this:

FROG (----->ABILITY TO CONSUME ALKALOIDS) -----> ANTS (-----> ALKALOID RICH SKIN) ----->TURN ALKALOIDS INTO POISONOUS SECRETIONS IN SKIN

?

I'm going to help ID supporters right now. Yes, your Rockstar who hates the very notion of Intelligent Design is going to help them. You, ID man, can prove me wrong. Simply explain why ID went through this long drawn out process that simulates everything we know about evolution. Where are the benefits in this design? How did ID do it this way? See, science is easy and fun!! I'm talking to YOU Kent Hovind! For being a "religion masked in science", evolution sure fits pretty well here.

If you are a holder of the faith, please leave a comment. I'd love to see how you explain this one.

Wait, I'm going to use my psychic powers...there we go...

Your argument will consist of no scientific merit, only "ID works in mysterious ways".

Randi, write a fucking check right now!!

JK JR, I love you man!

I Wanna Play Too!

Here's what I think of Intelligent Design. There's a movement out there I found out about through God is for Suckers to Google Bomb ID and link to the National Center for Science Education's piece on ID. It will make that page the number one link on a search for Intelligent Design.

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design

Take that, morons!

Time For a Change

I like this format a little better.

I feel like I jumped into this thing unprepared, and my writing has suffered. Maybe blogging about my motives a la Respectful Insolence will do me some good.

I got into this thing several months ago, as a forum to express myself in all issues skeptical. Influenced by gentlemen such as James Randi, Skeptico, and Bob Carroll of the wonderful Skeptics Dictionary website, I wanted to join in.

Chapter I, or "Mom's Imaginary Friend"

A lifetime skeptic, I recall being just a little boy when my Mom told me that I should love God more than anything, even my family. As this was an insane statement, even to a child of four, I asked Mom if that meant she loved God more than me. Now, my mother is an amazingly intelligent woman (just ask her), but I remember the anguish in her face as her "beliefs" were questioned by a toddler. She knew the answer she was supposed to give, but could not bring herself to tell her little boy that she loved some invisible man living in the sky more than he. Although she has yet to say it, I do not believe my mother has any religious inklings anymore.

I also developed an interest in paranormal activity, such as ghosts, UFO's, the Bermuda Triangle, Atlantis, etc. This fueled my interest in real science, such as archaeology, the Saragasso, history, and music. I read every book I could on the subjects, but unfortunately there was not a lot of material skeptical of the paranormal. At least none readily accessible to me at the time. Still, it was interesting, though I didn't believe everything.

Growing older, I was forced to attend church. I hated church. It was boring, and everyone there had this attitude of "well, it's Sunday, so we have to be here". I recall not understanding, even thinking it foolish. Was church just some sort of social event, or did these people really believe that a mystical prophet who died 2000 years ago is going to come back to Earth and save us all from...whatever? I was a prick in Sunday school, too. Bible inaccuracies were abound, and I loved to point it out.

Little Ryan: "How did Jesus turn the fish and bread into enough food for 5,000 people?"

Sunday School Lady: "He just did. Jesus performed miracles."

This is how all my questions were answered. Anyway, I was baptized because "that's what you were supposed to do". I do remember a strange "tingling" feeling afterward, which I attributed to religion (ie, God had just washed my sins away). In fact, this feeling was the basis for continuing to believe for many years, though I now attribute it to the excitement of having "grown up". The baptized kids got to sit at the adult tables, join adult Sunday school, take communion, etc. It's like I just got promoted to grownupdom.

Chapter II, or "Pastor Bob: OWNED!"

Eventually, we lost all of our "normal" pastors in favor of a Young Earth Creationist. Boy did we hit it off well. This man had a Phd from the University of Nebraska Lincoln, yet could not properly debate an 8 year old child. Maybe he saw me as a project, because I distinctly remember this conversation:

Little Ryan: So if you accept Jesus, you get to go to heaven no matter what?

Pastor Bob: That's right. He died so your sins are forgiven.

LR: What about murderers?

PB: The Lord will forgive them.

LR: What about Hitler?

PB: (a little slower this time, and I'll put accents to show how strangely this man spoke) If Hiittler renounced eeeevil and accepted Christ into his heart before he died, then yes, the Lord will forgive him.

LR: What about Buddhists? What if they never commit a sin, but don't believe in Jesus? Do they go to Heaven?

PB: That's up to the Lord. (I swear he said this) Maybe the Lord will take all the love and devotion they showed to Buddha and accept them into heaven.

LR: Doesn't God love everyone? Why do good people go to Hell because they never found out about Jesus?

PB: (I know he was quaking here, he started to backtrack) The Lord has a plan. Good people follow the teachings of Jesus, so they will go to heaven.

LR: What about the Buddhists then? (PWNED!!11!!1)

PB: Everyone will have a chance to be introduced to Christ. If they don't take him into their heart, then they are not good people.

LR: What about people who live in deepest darkest Africa?

He went on about how the Lord sends missionaries to them, so they had their chance! He also told me that he does not believe in evolution because there are no "half-cats", and that the world is less that 10,000 years old because Noah's flood made major changes in the face of the earth, and anyway, God made the universe to look old.

I will never forget. This is when I started to question Christianity. I guess in a strange Bizzaro world sort of way, I owe Pastor Bob. Thanks, I guess...

Chapter III, or "The Amazing One"

I stopped attending church (except Easter, Mother's Day, Father's Day, and Christmas) at about the age of 10 to the extreme displeasure of my parents. Yes, I would rather stay home and watch WWF All-American Wrestling. Once in a while I was forced to go outside of the holidays because it was "good for me". L. Ron Hubbard, I'm never doing this to my kids...

High school came and went, with me attending church rarely. My interest in paranormal continued, but I started to hear and understand the other side. Then I saw him.

The Amazing Randi.

This guy was awesome! Uri Geller - BAM BITCH! Evangelist healers - BAM BITCHES!

Having been innundated with psychics and their bullshit, he was a breath of fresh air.

John Edward came on. I have to admit, Young Adult Ryan was still suceptible to these people. Being just a kid, even the smartest amongst us can be duped. (Shit, Pastor Bob had a doctoral degree!) But after a while, it seemed like he was just yelling out initials...and not really getting things crystal clear...

During college, the Crazies came out in force. There was this one family of "missionaries" who preached every year at the same place. It was more than ridiculous, it was scary. Their children did not go to the doctor, they received the healing power of prayer, which we know doesn't work. They told us that the girls were prostitutes and the boys were heathens, though by that time we were waaay too smart to buy into their bullshit.

However, even amongst my years at the U, I still held true to the belief of a "blind watchmaker". I considered myself a deist up until a few years ago. Deism basically states that there is an omnipotent force that created the universe, but then it backed away and does not interfere. Fortunately, by reading the sites and bloggers I mentioned above, I learned about Carl Sagan and Occam's Razor. I learned to eliminate some of the steps. For instance, here is deist thought:

1. The universe is here. 2. The universe could not come from nothing. 3. There must be a blind watchmaker that created it.

Now I think like more this:

1. The universe is here. 2. There is no such thing as "nothing", since before time, time did not exist. 3. The universe has always been.

Chapter IV, or Why the Hell do I do This?

After reading that, I hope everyone can understand why I passionately hate all this shit, and my blog is a way to put it all out there. Here's what I'd like to accomplish:

*My goal is to have no more superstition taken as fact. Keep your religion and your paranormal to yourselves until you can prove it.

*Science is not a religion. I do not have "faith" in the laws of physics/nature/mathematics. They have been observed and proven to be true. I only believe things that are proven true by this method.

*I want the USA to jump back into the 21st century and be a leader in science and philosophy, not believing in caveman ritualistic nonsense. Seriously, it is 2005 and people still think an invisible man is responsible for everything we do or say.

*I also want to point out all the absurdities that these silly beliefs set forth. For instance prayer. If God has a grand plan, doesn't it already know what's going to happen? Why should we be so vain as to take the creator of the universe's time to insinuate it should change that plan?

Thanks everyone. I feel better now. I'll be changing the writing style I use a little bit, if nothing more than to show my compatriots I'm not just a smart ass junior skeptic...Ok, I'll always be a junior skeptic, but just because I love that title!

14th Skeptic's Circle is Up

And it is cool!

I Normally Defend the Prez, But This Time...

OK, this is getting ridiculous. The President recently stated that he believes the religious story of creationism/intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution in public schools.

Unbelievable.

I do realize that he has no say in what is actually taught in schools, but it does make the leader of the free world look like a complete dumbass. One more time: Religion can not be taught in schools as fact!! It is OK to learn about them, but not through them.

ID needs to answer these questions before it can be taught as an alternative to evolution:

*Who is this designer? Is it God? Is it aliens? Invisible Pink Bunny Rabbits? For fun, do as Orac suggests and ask ID proponents if the desinger is God. Normally they will not give an answer, or say that there are no limits. Then ask if it is Pink Invisible Bunny Rabbits or Giant Lizards. L. Ron Hubbard I love Orac sometimes...

*How do you propose to prove who/what this designer is?

*How did the designer operate?

*What process was used? It is fact evolution occured, but there are many theories as to how.

*You will need to provide new evidence proving speciation and mutation occur independently
from natural selection. We have proof, show our evidence is flawed.

*Why did the designer create flaws in our design?

Start with these, Mr. President. Please provide testable ways to prove your claims as well. Please keep in mind that I stood by your decision to go to war on terror. I support fully your Medicare reform (I'm also going to make a lot of money on it!) and social security privatization. But keep your beliefs in the paranormal and supernatural to yourself, lest we seem like a country of cavemen.

More Deception From ID Proponents

This makes me want to vomit. I'm going to be very brief, and quite blunt.

According to Discovery Institute Senior Fellow Dr. Paul Nelson, "There are serious scientific criticisms of evolutionary theory, and people want to know why students aren't learning about them."

This statement is ridiculous. Students are learning to think critically about evolution. That evolution occured is a fact. There are absolutely no scientific "criticsms" that hold water disputing the fact evolution occured, only theological propaganda. However, I do recall learning the different models as to how evolution occured in my freshman biology class at the University of Nebraska. So Doctor Paul's statement is an assinine rejection of the fact evolution occured (not a more than reasonable request to criticize the mechanics of how) and a complete ignorance of even introductory biology texts.

"Those who dare question modern evolutionary theory are often portrayed as creationist simpletons with only tired, religious criticisms to offer," says Lewis Young, conference organizer.

Sounds about right. Bring the science and I'll change my mind. We've been waiting for scientific evidence that shows your "theory". Saying "ID did it" is the same as saying "Goddidit", which proves nothing. Didn't your magical friend create you in His Almighty image? Don't you want to know how goddidit??

"We're going to bury those old stereotypes by showcasing prominent scientists and scholars who find Darwinian evolution unconvincing."

Not bloody likely. But think about this: if I was able to convince a "prominent scientist", by any means necessary be it a bribe or a brain-washing religion, to say that Invisible Pink Unicorns live in my butt, would you believe it? Probably not. Frankly speaking, even if James Randi, Emperor of all Skeptics came out and said that Hobbits live among us, we'd all ask for proof right? WHY DOES THIS NOT APPLY TO ID??? Where do you draw the line as to where unprovable nonsense and ID lie? In this case, I don't care if you have 76 PhDs and a Sword of Smite-All + 16, unless you have the evidence, you can never destroy me!!

Biochemist Dr. Michael Behe will take attendees into the molecular realm and explain how the "irreducible complexity" of many cellular systems poses an obstacle for the power of natural selection to create such systems, Darwin's other major claim.

Two things wrong with the above statement. One, Behe's theroy is not based in science, only philosophy. It has been debunked so many times that only a great fool would take this as proof of a designer. Two, I'm tired of being called a "Darwinist" for not buying into religious nonsense. Don't you assholes think there has been advances in the field in the past 150 years?? Probably not, as the only advance Cretinism and ID have made is taking the word "God" out and replacing it with "designer". (Actually, I'm being unfair. They have also mightily advanced their perceived foolishness with their convoluted nonsense.) Calling a non-ignoramus a "Darwinist" for validating evolution is like calling a NASA rocket scientist a "Goddardist", a physicist an "Archimedian", or Doc Orac a "Hippocratian".

And finally, Dr. John Angus Campbell, a noted rhetorician of science, will explain how Darwinian evolution should be taught in contemporary, pluralistic American society.

I can only imagine how this will go, but I think P.Z Meyers at Pharyngula has an idea.

What drives me nuts folks is that these "prominent scientists" have less a grasp on scientific method than a lowly, uneducated Rockstar. Bring on the science!