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!