Mythbuster cartoon...

This is hi-larious. It's so true.

HJ

A truly delightful physics blog post...

I just can't get enough of this awesome post, "How Fast is the Beacon of Gondor?" which is the apotheosis of nerdom. This follow up comment is a corker as well:

"You have unbalanced parenthesis in one of your equations. For every unpaired bracket, god kills a kitten..."

I love it.

HJ

Kicking around the office...

I'm a selfless giver. I'm in the office, waiting for students who will, mark my words, probably not show up. Damn it. When the day of reckoning comes, however, nobody will say I did not do my best with what I was given.

This afternoon the Atlanta skeptics are going to the Fox Theater, which may be fun. I'm hoping to snag a few people for dinner afterward, and we'll see what happens. There's a little fork-and-bucket place right down the street and as well as some tragically hip places down the road in the other direction.

And now the students are late.

Every minute that I am here is a minute I could be doing anything else.

I might as well work on my book.

So, here all day. Ho-diddly-hum.

HJ

More machine than I will ever need.

I got a Vox AC30 Custom Classic. Behold:

And God saw that it was good. And large. The two things God saw were that it was good and large and loud and that it could frighten a dog at 30 yards.

We'll come in again.

Seriously, it is really a hell of a machine. This is the one I wanted. It's so awesome, I think it just makes me generally a more awesome person as I walk down the street. In fact, I was talking to a checker at the store today, and I said to her, "Ask me how awesome I am."

"How awe...?"

"Pretty awesome."

I've decided that this checker will be my chum at the store. She's so less irritating than the woman who loudly calls me "the cereal killer" because I buy little single-serving bowls of cereal every day.

My amp is even louder than the cereal killer lady. Muahahaha!

Seriously, it's so awesomely large I had a hard time getting it up the stairs! It's so big, my cats entered its orbit!

Enthuse, enthuse, enthuse.

Aw yeaaah!

HJ

"Occupation?" "Stand-up philosopher!"

Ah, Slavoj Zizek talks about poop, love and quantum physics:







HJ

Skeptic Star Party

FYI, I am going to be at the the Atlanta Skeptics' Star Party on Sept 2. And we have an awesome logo. I mean, there should totally be a t-shirt:

George Hrab's announcement is ball-bouncingly funny, by the way. George will be there, as will Pamela Gay, a real live astronomer, and Fraser Cain, a real live Canadian!

I will be there, hopefully in a helping-out and working capacity, if anyone is interested. I'll also be haunting the skeptic track at the *Con (pun totally intended), so try and find me! Maybe I'll have a Bing badge on or something.

HJ

Meryl Dorey and the AVN

The Australian Vaccination Network, an anti-vax outfit on the decline, has refused to recognize the HCCC's ruling that they are an anti-vaccine outfit and that they release misleading information. Meryl Dorey was supposed to publish this information on their website in a disclaimer, but she was unable to conjure even the moral or intellectual authority to state that you should speak to physician before making medical decisions. Mega-fail.

I would like to apologize to all of Australia for inflicting the Thing From New York upon you, but to be fair, you sent us Ken Ham.

Rachael Dunlop has been keeping dutiful watch on all the bad press the AVN has heaped upon themselves lately.

Update--found on AVN's website:

I've been meaning to get me one of them organic babies.

The synthetic ones make my eyes itch.

HJ

I'm in line at the grocery store...

I'm having thoughts. Deep ones, man, like, "How can I get all of my students arrested?"

So the guy checking me out asks, "How are you doing?"

"I'm...scheming."

"Scheming on who?"

(You kids with your hep lingo, I think.) "Not on anyone. I'm coming up with an evil plan."

"Oh, yeah?"

"I'm trying to figure out a way to get all of my students arrested." He stops in mid-swipe and looks at me with an appropriate level of confusion. "I mean, I'm a teacher. An English teacher. And I was thinking about teaching a class on rock 'n' roll, and I thought it would be fun if, as a final project, we had a concert on the roof of a building, like the Beatles did."

He looked unconvinced.

"They'd have to be arrested, though. It wouldn't count if they weren't arrested."

"Why not?"

"Because the Beatles were escorted off of the roof by the police. They were stopping traffic."

He resumed swiping. I figured that I had crossed some sort of line, though I'm not sure which one was the one that lost him. "Also, I can't think of a way to make a concert on the roof pedagogically useful. That and my chair might take a dim view of me getting my class arrested."

"Well, if that happens, you let me know. If you don't tell anyone else, you tell me."

"Sure thing."

I walked into the parking lot and reflected further on the implications of getting my students arrested. One could make a reasonable case that I would never work at my school again. If any of them were under 17, which is a possibility, I might be contributing to the delinquency of an assload of minors, if that law means what I think it does. Also, what if a student has a warrant or is on probation or something and they get arrested for a grade and then they get shipped off to Gitmo or whatever? What if I had international students whose visa required that they not get arrested?

What else could I do if I taught the rock 'n' roll course? I thought as I waited for a break in the traffic so I could cross the street.

Well, it has to be musical somehow. A concert would be great, but there is the inconvenient fact that a fair number of my students would not play an instrument. What if we hosted a jam session open to the entire student body and faculty? That could kick ass. It would be loud and unexpected. But would it be rock 'n' roll?

Any ideas?

HJ

A post so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel

I like Tony Robinson. He played Baldrick in the series Blackadder. We'll he's back, and now he's talking to ghosts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7-ewwT9Dww

If you are one of my readers interested in skepticism, I think that you will find it worth watching all 5 parts of this one, because it raises some frustrating problems.

All the main points, all of the original substantive claims about the Glastonbury-automatic-writing-ghost-friend story are debunked (Hey! Check out the English major helping!), in some cases, completely fucking smashed (the look on the archaeologist's face when she tries to tactfully break the news to the priest is...priceless and I'd marry her right now). Not only are all the individual elements debunked, but the show demonstrates that conclusively that even experientially convincing experiences are unreliable. And how do they end it? Stressing what Robinson finds to be experientially convincing as if he didn't transparently retrofit his expectations. It's like they deliberately failed to learn anything.

They may flush you into the Themes with all the other turds, Tony, but for Christ's sake, don't jump in.

HJ

American asshole CEO replaces British asshole CEO

Wait Wait! last week had a great line about BP. It's a great supervillain: it's a global company led by an effete British monster who would destroy the world and then go to a yacht race. All he needed was a cat to stroke while he said, "No, shrimping fleet, I expect you to die!"

The odious vomit crust known as Tony Hayward has lost his job. He should be used as a paper towel to sop up oil, as far as I'm concerned. Then he would have some utility.

I would like to add that this does nothing to improve anything. They are merely changing horses mid-apocalypse.

HJ

Anonymous Geometry...

Way back in the day, Jason Lisle wrote a pitiably ironic tome about logical fallacies. Because of a certain internet troll who will remain Canadian (as well as a bunch of spam comments like: "This is a much interesting topic of very intelligent and I will visit back. Also, have you a need for teenage japanese girl porn?"...), I have been manually approving comments on posts than, say, 15 days or so.

The following reply recently appeared after the post, "Jason Lisle's Mind is Immensely Damaged":

Anonymous said...
While I don't agree with Jason's interpretation of Genesis 1, I do believe that the Bible is true.

But for the moment, try to ignore that (so that you can follow the argument I will make).

You assert that circular reasoning is a logical fallacy. But this is not the case. All arguments that come from authority are ultimately circular.

How do we know anything about geometry? We know things about geometry, because many people have done all kinds of proofs to demonstrate that particular geometrical theorems are true. But those theorems are based on other geometrical theorems. How do we know that they are true? Because they are based on other geomtrical theorems. But how do we know they are true? Well, at the bottom of this, we have postulates. And how do we know that a postulate is true? There is no way to prove a postulate. So, if challenged about the veracity of a postulate, you can't point to anything outside of that postulate to prove the postulate. If you could, then the postulate wouldn't be a postulate. Somehow, the very nature of the postulate convinces us that the postulate is true.

God's truth can't be proven by anything or anyone outside of God. Sure, we can see ordered complexity in nature and consider that such ordered-complexity makes it seem like nature was designed by an Intelligent Creator. But the bottom line is that we can't know anything about God for sure unless God Himself makes His truth plain to us. This doesn't mean that God is unknowable. For by His very nature, aspects of His truth are made plain to us. By the very nature of the postulates of geometry, the truth of the postulates is made plain to us.

[Note: I am referring to Euclid's first four postulates. Let's not go into Euclid's fifth postulate for now.]

Now, is your head hurting from all the wrong?

2,500 years of rhetorical practice confirms that yes, circular reasoning is a logical fallacy, and you will have to deal with this. It's like one of the big damned fallacies likely to get you laughed out of a philosophy department, should philosophers ever learn to laugh. By circular reasoning, I refer to building your conclusion into your premises. a^2+b^2=c^2 is not built into, say, the definition of a point, or of a line, or of an angle, but you can get to Pythagoras using these elements, none of which is the conclusion itself.

Also, what the complete sam hell are you talking about? As best I can tell, your argument is the Chewbacca Defense:

Your geometry, as best I can tell, is bad, and then you say that there is some sort of relationship between the deeply flawed example and....whatever the hell you are saying. Please remember I read amateur writing for a living, so if there was sense in there, by now I should be able to guess at what you meant to say, and I have no idea.

HJ

A day without Ken Ham is like a day without kitten smashing...

...Very nice indeed.

Anyway, the person Australia apparently traded the US for Meryl Dorey, Ken Ham, founder and cult-leader of Answers in Genesis, made milk shoot out of my nose when he started clucking indignantly about the Smithsonian's new origins exhibit.

It's called: Smithsonian Exhibition--Deception and Atheism. And it fails as memorably as it does predictably.

The National Museum of Natural History, funded by donations and tax money, recently opened its new exhibition on human origins. The NMNH in Washington D.C. is one of the famed Smithsonian Museums.

Let us remember that it is also staffed by many highly qualified scientists at the top of their field, that they offer incomparable expertise and experience in public education, and that they have all the cool toys to show off. Go on.

To build this exhibition, called the Hall of Human Origins, the Smithsonian spent almost as much money as we did to build the entire 70,000 square-foot, high-tech Creation Museum near Cincinnati!

Dude, your museum is shit. It has nothing. It has posters. It has a kind of old, but not all that old, Torah that made it through the Holocaust and which you don't own. It has your stamp collection. It has your dad's Bible, for some reason. Most of the items that you "have", in the museum sense of the word, are on loan. Oh, did I mention the posters? You have dioramas and posters. And a clientèle who clearly has never been to a good museum. You don't have objects that illustrate your point. Oh, and it is staffed by family members, volunteers and unpublishable scientist-impersonators.

The purpose of this exhibit on the origin of man is not only to indoctrinate children and adults in evolution, but also atheism!

HAHAH! Sorry. You somehow peered into their hearts. Stop that. And you don't get to use the word indoctrinate without getting laughed at. Your wacky creation wonderland was in every way the embodiment of cult indoctrination: the same message repeated over and over and over and over and over and over, sensory overload and the dulling of thought. It's the hallmark of indoctrination.

In a CNSNews report, with a headline that included the words Devoid of References to God, we read the following about the new exhibit:

Why are you reporting on the headline of a conservative media outlet? That's clearly hearsay based on an admittedly biased source.

The stages of human development also are highlighted, but visitors will not find any references to God, creationism, or pre-natal existence. The exhibit’s Web site says fossils “provide evidence that modern humans evolved from earlier humans.”

It's not an abortion exhibit, fuckwipe. And check this shit out. They actually illustrate their points with SHIT THEY OWN, like a real museum does.

The report continues:

. . . Richard Potts, curator and director of the Smithsonian’s Human Origins Program, said the Smithsonian Institution has a “deep commitment to the study of evolution” and that the new permanent exhibit will answer “profound questions” about human origins.

When asked by CNSNews.com why the exhibit does not include any reference to God or address the debate—even in scientific circles—about Darwinian evolution, Potts replied that the Natural History Museum ‘is a science museum, and all the objects that a museum can possibly display about the origins of humans have been uncovered in the context of doing the science of evolution.’

Oh, god, here it comes. 1) There really is no debate, only debate among non-practicing non-specialists. To suggest otherwise would be dishonest. 2) God was repeated invited to contribute an exhibit, but he didn't respond. :)

Note two very telling admissions here:

Regarding his quote “. . . all the objects that a museum can possibly display about the origins of humans have been uncovered . . .” well, that is simply not true. “All” that can be “possibly displayed”? What about the Bible’s account of human origins? The Bible is a document that claims to be the Word of the Creator concerning how humans came to be on this planet.

Why won’t Potts and his researchers include that? Well, they have arbitrarily defined science (which means “knowledge”) as having nothing to do with God. They will only allow explanations according to their view of naturalism, the religion of atheism.

Oh, shut up, retard. His statement takes care of the "possibly displayed" question if you realize that the Bible cannot possibly account for the origins of the world. You dill-weed. And it's not an arbitrary derived definition of science. It's the same definition that put a man on the moon, gave us internet porn and all of the other great benefits of modern society.

Lastly, don't try to use a fairly archaic definition of the word to change the topic, you soft-shelled turd taco supreme.

It becomes even clearer in the second admission:

. . . in the context of doing the science of evolution.

Evolution, in the Darwinian sense (using naturalism and no supernaturalism), is their bottom-line presupposition. It’s used to interpret the evidence of the fossils they display as they attempt to reconstruct the unobservable past.

And of course, it is not that simple. Unobservable as it happened? Yes. Un-know-about-able? Hell, no. The "supernatural" is not science.

In an interview with the Washington Post, Potts was asked whether creationism would be found in the Hall of Human Origins. He replied: “There’s no Adam and Eve here.” He continued: “If you believe that the world—and man—was created in seven days, and that it’s only thousands of years old, you might have a little problem with an exhibition that talks about a process of 6 million to 8 million years.”

And was he wrong about this, oh Exhibit A?

Later in the Post article, when asked what he hopes visitors will take away from the exhibition, Potts replied: “A sense of the sacred.” That almost sounds as if he wants the hall to be a kind of a temple, where visitors can be worshipful of the fossils of their apelike ancestors!

You need not a deity to have a sense of the numinous, of the profound implications of evolutionary science or of a more informed perspective about our origins and place in the universe.

The American public has largely been duped into thinking that by not mentioning God or the Bible, something like the Smithsonian is being “neutral.” But there is no neutral position; one is either for Christ or against (Luke 11:23). This museum is imposing a religion on generations of Americans: the religion of atheism. It’s the same worldview that is being thrust at generations of children in the public schools.

You are a conspiracy theorist, positing global agendas and deception because you are marginalized. Classic conspiracist thought.

And don't say thrust!

One of the methods used to impose an atheistic religion on children is deception. For instance, in the educator guide for grades 5–12 that was designed to help reinforce the evolutionary teachings of the Smithsonian’s human origins exhibit, there is a list of so-called “Misconceptions About Evolution.” Under one of them, it states: “humans were definitely not the last organism to evolve. Numerous other species have evolved since the onset of human evolution.”

The word evolution is not defined. In the first instance, evolution is being used in the molecules-to-man sense, with eventually ape-like creatures evolving into humans.

No difference exists. The mechanism is the same.

Now, when the museum states: “Numerous other species have evolved since the onset of human evolution,” the word evolution is being used in the sense of change that relates to speciation. Indeed, certain new “species” have formed in recent times (e.g., various species of fish), but speciation occurring within a “family” or “kind” is very different than one kind of creature evolving into a totally different one.

Oh, I see the problem. The word "kind" is not scientific term.

Unsuspecting students and adults don’t know the difference, and so they are led to believe by the museum that speciation (change within a kind) is evolution, and thus molecules-to-man is true!

You don't make sense. You are making up imaginary categories that don't do anything to advance your cause, you failure of a man.

On our website, we have many articles that reveal how speciation and natural selection are actually observed. But when understood at the genetic level, this is solid evidence against molecules-to-man evolution!

So, here we have tens of millions of dollars (including your tax money) that have been spent on deception and ultimately to promote the religion of atheism! We pray that with God’s blessing, our Creation Museum and other outreaches will continue to help undo the terrible damage done to the hearts and minds (with eternal consequences) of countless children and adults.

It's true, the whole natural world screams at you to go to hell, Ken.

HJ

This week in conspiracy (7/25)

My wife, an escapee from a convent in Quebec, where she was exposed to all sorts of filthy satanic rituals (although, admittedly, her mother says she never was quite the same after she pencil stuck in her own head), has reminded me that it is time to review the week that was weak.

• Turns out that the Rose Cheramie existed. You know, the one who pops up at the beginning of Oliver Stone's incoherent JFK and then disappears? Whether or not she had any knowledge of the assassination is a completely other matter.
• Duff Gordon--or Gordon Duff--does it really matter: Still crazy after all of these years. A little 9/11 denialism + Mossad agents steering remote control planes into the towers. The man should be in an asylum.
• Just a little slice of turd pie, please. I'm all full: Mel Gibson's wife meets with half-wit Mark Lane. She really surrounds herself with stellar men, doesn't she? Oh, he represented the People's Temple and survived the massacre, apparently. And he's Lindsay Lohan's lawyer. WTF, Mark?
• UFOs in China.
• Utter Nutjob-in-Chief Hugo Chavez digs up remains of Simon Bolivar and has him tested for poison. It was a hell of a week for exhumations, actually, as Romania pulled Nicolae Ceausescu and wife out of the ground to show everyone, that yes, it's really them and they are still there. (I thought they staked him a few years back, so he should still be there! Animala recommends that they cut his head off and burn him, just to be safe.)
• News Alert: Conspiracy theories are everywhere. I only include this because I like the frowny faces on the sign.
• Alex Jones says his youtube account hacked. Yay!
• What is with the Dancing Israelis conspiracy over at Veterans Today? Are they like the Jumping Jews of Jerusalem?
• Elvis is still dead, and you can now bid on the autopsy equipment used on him...including the gloves!
• WorldNetDaily, there's nothing good about it. But I did find one conspiracy theory that they did not bite down hard on....fluoridation.
• See if you can recognize the ad populum in this moon hoax article.
• Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura: Two dim things that go dimmer together!
• I don't have an opinion of the "Journolist conspiracy" yet. It's sad, but I can't find any good, detached discussion of the thing. I'll wait for next week's On the Media to discuss it.
• I liked this conservative's article on whether or not "his type" can ride bikes. Heehee. Karl Rove should totally get his pudgy ass on a bike.
• YOU CAN MEET THE HOTTEST GIRLS--WITH LIVE WEB CAMS!!! Also, something about the North American Union being tied to the oil spill or some such shit. But the girls are the most important thing. Also, did I mention the picture of the boob at the top?
• And now for something completely different:"The UFO people seem to be focusing more on 'living right' than material acquisition." There's nothing goofier than new age UFO assertions. We make up deities to tell us what we want to hear.
• Militia groups, the ever-growing crazy.

Quote of the week:

So...who are the extraterrestrials?

The short answer is that the extraterrestrials are not alien or non-terrestrial...essentially, they are evolved and/or hybrid humans from the future.

Conspiracy Theory of the Week

• Cleopatra and the Virgin Mary are both fictionalized versions of Julius Caesar's daughter Julia. It's a little bit country, a little bit rock 'n' roll, and a whole lot of batshit. Oh, and I think it's Canadian.

HJ

Buckyballs...in...Space!!!!!

Pretty neat.

HJ

Not all opinions are created equal...

I was looking through the sitemeter record of which pages people are visiting, and one about squid-licking monkey boy Reed Heustis came up. I followed the link, and it took me to an old blog post that I had written way back in January 2008. At the end of this there was a strange little disclaimer link that I included because even though Reed was a lawyer he was already unpleasant by disposition.

I followed the link in the disclaimer and it took me to...the Taj Mahal of modern ignorance. The Mouth Rushmore of knuckle-dragging. The Very Big and Impressive Thing of something less grand. It was EtherZone: The Intelligent Alternative. (Clearly a typo. It was clearly meant to read: "the alternative to intelligence.") This article is by a guy named Phil Brennan, with whom his family should seriously consider breaking off ties. The article was called:

THE PASSION OF MEL GIBSON
SURE, HE'S A SINNER

By: Phil Brennan

Sure, he's a sinner, against his fellow man, common decency and sobriety.

I don’t know Mel Gibson. A colleague who does tells me that Gibson admired my columns, notably the one I wrote about his last motion picture, The Passion of the Christ, for NewsMax.Com. And in my conceit I like to think that my book “Sindone: on the Shroud Turin and what it tells us about Christ’s passion and death was among his research materials.

You hunger for the praise of the racist? Wow. How low can you go? (Pretty low, it will turn out.)

I have however, paid keen attention to his work, as well as his comings and goings as chronicled in the media, which does not share my admiration for the man and his accomplishments, especially his depiction of the final hours of Jesus Christ in this world.

He did not reach superstardom by staying out of the media's good graces.

We are now witnessing the passion of Mel Gibson, played out in the sordid tale of his troubled relationship with his former mistress, much of it revealed in a series of tape recordings which are alleged to have been doctored and thus unreliable.

Oh, that's how it works. Well, I allege that your article has been doctored and is thus unreliable.

This is not the first time Mr. Gibson has been pilloried in the media for past examples of his public misbehavior, much of which appears to have been motivated by the consumption of an unacceptable amount of booze, which was certainly the case in the rampage that got him busted.

Booze does not put racism in your head, simp. It lowers the capacity to self-censor and allows what was already there out. Or, what everyone knew from watching his passionate snuff film.

I don’t know if prior to his tape recorded phone tirades with the woman who appears to be motivated by greed, one of the seven dearly sins about which we are warned, but it seems likely that Mr. Gibson had taken more than a few large sips of demon rum or whatever hootch that strikes his fancy.

HE THREATENED TO KILL HER! SHE'S ENTITLED TO IT ALL, as far as I'm concerned. Leave him without a fucking nickel. Hell, maybe some time in prison would straighten him out.

It also appears that the thuggish Gibson heard on the tapes is not the Mel Gibson his friends and colleagues, and his regrettably soon-to-be ex-wife know … and love.

Regrettably? I'm sorry, perhaps I did not type that last bit in large enough font: HE THREATENED TO KILL HER, YOU NUTJOB! RESTRAINING ORDERS ALL AROUND! He loves her like OJ loved Nicole, you bent-as-a- pretzel consumer of lavender scented baby powders.

So one is left with the impression that the new Mr. Gibson was probably born within the contents of a bottle of booze, as well as a seething resentment that he now believes the lady of his recent choice – the mother of his eighth child, ain’t no lady.

You're right. That was her threatening her own life. If she were a real lady, she would just take the drunkard's abuse.

That Mel Gibson is bad news for himself and those around him. That Mel Gibson is the Mel Gibson, fanatically faithful to the Roman Catholic Church, if not its hierarchy, and a victim of his confusion with what he views as the tinkering with doctrine and practice that in his view has resulted from Vatican II and imposed on the faithful by radical elements within Holy Mother Church.

Wha...? What? Is...What?

Taking that stance, along with the father he loves and admires, has set him at odds with the Vatican, and no doubt with himself and what we have seen recently is, in my humble opinion, a direct result of the inner conflict between faithful Catholic and his rebellious nature.

Hold on, my head is going to explode. The logic here is of a non-earth type.

Like many traditionalist Catholics, he has been deprived of certitude and set adrift, and that’s a prescription for an inner chaos that often slips it moors and explodes amidst those around him.

As an altar boy from the age of seven until I was fourteen,

"...and, boy, is my ass sore!" (That was too easy. Sorry.)

...and a faithful Catholic since I found the disruption since Vatican II to be at the very least unsettling, but unlike Mel Gibson I was reassured by the certain knowledge that the Church is always and everywhere guided by the Holy Spirit, and I’m not about to argue with the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, even when it appears to my mortal mind that He has goofed, or that his servants in Rome don’t know what the hell they are doing.

"Of course, by 'certain knowledge,' I mean completely unfounded opinion. Also, I'm really good at cognitive dissonance."

Sooner or later things get back on track and in the meantime the more confused among us simply have to sit back and wait for the abuses that followed Vatican II get straighten out.

Wait, VATICAN II threatened Gibson's wife?

Getting back to Mel Gibson,

Meanwhile, in the first essay...

it is instructive to listen to his wife, now in the process of divorcing, leap to his defense. In the midst of the traditional male mid-life crisis, he’s damn lucky to have such a wife, even one he has publicly dumped such as Robyn Gibson. Most women publicly betrayed by the father of her seven children would be more likely to have taken the opportunity to take a cudgel and beat his brains out with it.

Or "put him in the garden," I believe is how he put it. I have no idea what you are saying anymore.

Anyway, I’m not about to join the lynch mob [that is] now gathering around Mel Gibson.

BARABUS! GIVE US BARABUS!

He remains in my mind, a good and decent man to whom the world is indebted for giving us the magnificent “Passion of the Christ”.

There's something for you in this video, Phil:

Sure, he’s a sinner, but then so am I, and so are you. We’re just not in the public eye where even our most venial sins are grist for the media mill.

What part of threatening to murder someone, and apparently punching a woman holding a child is "venial". You are damaged. Fucking damaged.

He is in my prayers and should be in yours.

I pray every day that he falls down stairs and gets all Christopher Reeve, and every moment he is not falling down stairs is an affront to the universe.

"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Bill Donohue disease confirmed.

HJ

How do you explain this one to St. Peter?

91-Year-Old Man Dies After Being Run Over by Amish Horse-Drawn Cart

What a way to go!

HJ

Mike Adams is the biggest, lamest, most perfect idiot ever to survive into adulthood.

I mean, holy crap, people. You watch Mike Adams, Health Ranger (haha), do his thing, and you wonder what type of enfeebled fuckwit of a mother let such a thing live!

Anyway, Mike has soared to new heights of lunacy. (Strength to strength, as they say.) I can't believe anyone takes this asshat seriously. It arrived in my mailbox and was called:

The nutrition secret behind The Secret

How to multiply your success with "The Secret" and achieve new clarity using the Law of Attraction

I almost had a stroke I laughed so hard.

Dear readers,

What a fuckhea... oh wait he hasn't said anything. That was just a reflex. Sorry.

With the popularity of "The Secret" rapidly growing in the United States and around the world, there's growing interest in finding ways to maximize results while using the power of intention and Law of Attraction.

You know, if only we could read the Law of Attraction out loud to all those poor people who want to be poor. You know, like all of sub-Saharan Africa. And cancer patients, who clearly weren't positive enough or at least didn't not want cancer badly enough.

Few people really know one of the most important secrets to making "The Secret" work: Establishing the right nutrition and dietary habits that clear your nervous system and allow intention to flow.

Oh, that's why sub-Saharan Africa is in such a state. They need food first. Well, then, they're screwed. Also, intention flows?

In this article, I'll share some of the best nutritional secrets about The Secret, covering:
1) Foods and substances that interfere with the power of your intention.
2) Foods and substances that enhance the power of your intention.

3) Opportunistic echoing popular but silly fads in ways that make me money while allowing me to prey on the sick.

4) Purchasing opportunities that enhance Mike Adams' wallet.

Mike Adams--paid shill for Big Retard.

Once you learn this information, you'll instantly discover ways to greatly enhance the effects you get when you apply your intention (or invoke the Law of Attraction). You'll also come to recognize why the great spiritual leaders throughout the world all gravitate towards similar diets that are free of certain substances (such as red meat).

God, I hate vegans. Or at least evangelical vegans. Seriously, you extremely regular sons-of-bitches piss me off...I'm sorry. That was the red meat talking.

Let's begin by examining those foods and substances that interfere with the power of intention and the Law of Attraction.

Foods and substances that block the power of intention

The power of intention (i.e. the Law of Attraction) only works when you have a clear, healthy nervous system that's free from distortion.

What the fuck does that even mean? I mean. You have words but, like, without the accompanying ideas. Is there a condition called nervous system distortion?

Invoking the power of intention is a lot like broadcasting a message from a radio tower, and your nervous system (brain, spinal cord, nerves, etc.) are the transmission tissues.

Your spine is a transmission tower? You transmit a lot of stupid shit then, boy-o.

A radio tower only works well when it has sufficient electricity, clarity and symmetry. It also can't be gunked up with interfering signals or overriding disturbances. Your own nervous system is the same: For it to function well, it must be free of distortion and operating at peak performance.

So, you are saying that if your brain is to function well, it should function well? You are my own personal Zeno. I'm sorry, I mean Xenu.

The following items greatly interfere with healthy nervous system function and therefore inhibit your power of intention:

Meat products: All animal-derived foods impair the clarity of intention, and this is especially so if those foods are derived from cruelly-treated animals (like feedlot cattle). This is why so many spiritual leaders around the world refrain from eating meat. It's also why vegetarians are generally more peaceful, spiritually balanced people than heavy meat eaters.

Fuck you, self-righteous vegetarians! Hitler? Vegetarian. (Not that this makes a difference or means anything. But some vegetarians actually find this a threatening argument. Take, for instance, the clearly calorie-deprived ramblings of Rynn Berry made this argument in a MONOGRAPH-LENGTH WORK CALLED Why Hitler Was Not a Vegetarian, in which he said, "Hitler was in no way an ethical vegetarian." He wasn't an ethical anything, as it turns out. But you seem to be committing a No True Scottsman while actually sort of being a little scared of the ad Naziam. Very sad.)

Alcohol and drugs: All recreational drugs (including alcohol) impair healthy nervous system function. Clarity cannot be achieved while under the influence of nicotine, alcohol, meth or street drugs.

You still haven't described what clarity is, how to measure it, or anything of use. I we have a beer-summit smoker boy in the White House. Of course, he was placed there by the Illuminati, so I guess The Secret does not apply to him. And if you are making some sort of argument that meth or street drugs (heheh) somehow interferes with someone success, you are just breaking new ground right and left, aren't you, Sparky?

While there are medicinal uses for some natural drugs (such as medical marijuana), their use still inevitably interferes with clarity and clouds the Law of Attraction, so use them sparingly if at all. On the other hand, there are also natural plant-based medicines that actually enhance clarity when used as part of sacred spiritual journeys. Western society has declared such substances to be illegal drugs, but they are deliberately and consciously used with great care in healing journey experiences in many other parts of the world.

[I could not come up with a good joke here. I challenge my readers to fill in the blank, preferably with something that uses the word "pigfucker."]

Caffeine: Even caffeine interferes with healthy nervous system function. The onslaught of daily stimulants leaves the body depleted of energy, unable to reach the level of vibration necessary to effectively broadcast intention to the universe.

Vibratory vegetables it is then. Animala, fetch me a zucchini and some petroleum jelly! What the hell do your words even mean? It's like a linguistic train wreck. If you really feel like there is meaning behind those words, you're mentally ill, Mike.

Television: Watching television fills your mind with false messages, clouding your mind with ideas that distort reality and impair your ability to connect with the universe. Have you ever noticed that the people who watch the most television seem to be unable to attract those things into their lives that they want? It's because television acts like an intention blocking device, draining away your intention energy and filling your head with ideas and beliefs that only serve the interests of corporations and governments.

HAHAHAHAAH!! HAHAHAHA! The tinfoil hat takes care of that, Mike. You git. Wow, Mr. Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Mr. Kettle. I think you'll find you have a lot in common.

Processed foods: Processed foods not only lack the nutrition necessary for healthy nervous system function, they're also typically loaded with excitotoxins like MSG, aspartame and yeast extract. These substances damage the functioning of the nervous system, making any practice of the Law of Attraction virtually impossible.

So, unleavened bread with hummus, then.

Fragrance products: All fragrance products based on artificial chemicals impair the healthy functioning of the nervous system by dulling the senses and limiting sensory acquity. Achieving success with the power of intention requires eliminating ALL fragrance products from your life. These include most shampoos, laundry detergents, dryer sheets, soaps, perfumes, cosmetics, deodorants, skin creams and other similar products. In each of these categories, there are many alternatives available: Natural products that are either fragrance-free or made from essential oil fragrances only. If you wish to find success in applying the Law of Attraction, it's crucial to get these artificial fragrance chemicals out of your life (and away from your nervous system).

Remove my nose. Check.

Once you're free of the substances interfering with your power of intention, you can move on to enhancing your nervous system health with proper supportive substances. Here are the most important items to consider:

Raw foods: Raw foods really cleanse your nervous system and restore healthy brain function.

Clearly not, Mike, if you are any measure.

I'm done. There is a lot more, if you want to look it up. But the stupid hurts, and I am a delicate flower of a man.

HJ

Westboro vs. ComicCon Fans Update

I attended a Westboro counter-protest a few months ago, right before Skepticamp Atlanta, and I can tell you that the more people the WBC protest in front of, the more ridiculous they look. Every public protest is a fail, and I think that the crowning glory of their ridiculousness is their misguided trip to ComicCon in San Diego. ComicCon is legendary, I heard on the show PSYCH, and I think that it is only appropriate that the Phelps'(-es?) met a gaggle of people who were just as ridiculous as they are but vastly, vastly more clever. Unbelievable.

The Phelps(es's) are the biblical equivalent to fanboys dressing up like superheroes and cartoon characters, which is what makes this protest so...staggeringly asinine and appropriate. Fight stupid with even more cleverer stupid, that's my motto.

I really hope they come back to Atlanta for Dragon*Con.

HJ

Phil Plait's Bad Universe!

Check it out! It looks like Mythbusters meets Armageddon!

Sweet! Way to go, Phil!

HJ

Sign seen at recent Westboro Baptist Counter-protest

ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!

HJ

Nature: You are one cruel bitch.

Lawsamercy! Did I ever see a grasshopper having the worst day in a long time. I saw a strangely large bug outside my office building and when it landed on a branch at eye-level, I took a minute to look it over. It was a wasp, a dark little bugger with a grasshopper between its legs. It was actually carrying the damned thing as it flew, the prey every bit as large as the wasp, and it looked to me as if the grasshopper was not yet completely dead or paralyzed or whatever. The wasp could only fly a few feet before stopping, so I got a good look at the macabre scene. The wasp had the grasshopper at the neck, it looked like. I kind of thought it might bite the head off the grasshopper, but it didn't. It has other plans...

My best guess is that it was a Prionyx atratus, which I presume means "bad motherfucker" in wasp. It was an impressive feat. If I am reading the websites right, there is a very good chance that the grasshopper was going to end up with an egg on it. And then be devoured by the larva. The websites call the grasshopper a "host" so that suggests to me that it is just paralyzed and is probably sweating it out right now.

HJ

Dear Ken Ham, The Answer is "Yes." Break a hip, Bing

HJ

I'm having an evilgasm...

Seriously. I would love for a certain fellow visiting a certain city to have the sales of his home-school crap completely thrown off. I would love for him to never return to that certain city ever again because it is not profitable.

Oh...the wonderfulness. Hopefully my evil plans can come to fruition. Meanwhile, I'm just dreaming.

Cryptically yours,

HJ

WTF is wrong with HuffPo?

You can't have that many quacks on one site by accident. I think that idiots seek them out to publish because the quality of the editorials is so completely shitty.

Take for instance today's...mega....epic...fail...of the century. Holy shit, it is...awful and bad and rotten and retarded. It's a cosmetic dentist who is scared of fluoridation. Seriously, you fuckwit? Really? And you are allowed to touch people professionally? Jeezis.

I liked Animala's quip when she saw it:

"It's interesting that he's a cosmetic dentist. Isn't that like taking a cosmetic surgeon's advice for treating breast cancer?"

Why, yes it is, Animala. Yes, it is.

Let's talk about water fluoridation this week. And, being that I'm a dentist, you'll probably be a little surprised by my stance on it. At least in terms of it being included in water.

To be fair, he never claimed that he was a good dentist.

As you likely know, fluoride is a chemical that is commonly found in most toothpaste brands. People use fluoridated toothpaste as a means to strengthen teeth (i.e. prevent cavities) and normally don't think much further about it. Which is fine -- that's pretty much how it's marketed.

And it does, even in minuscule doses.

Since the late 1990s, the United States Food and Drug Administration has made it mandatory for toothpastes to carry a warning in regards to fluoride usage. But why would the FDA post a warning on a toothpaste ingredient?

So mouth breathers like yourself don't go scarfing the gallons that you would need in order to hurt yourselves?

Doing research on what fluoride is reveals that the chemical is now considered a potential toxic drug, and ingesting enough of the ingredient could be harmful.

ANYTHING is potentially harmful in the right doses! And yes, if you take "enough" of something to harm you, it could harm you.

Now, I don't want to scare you

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!

-- brushing your teeth with fluoride toothpaste isn't harmful. Nor is a dentist using a gel-type fluoride treatment when you get your checkup. Uses like that are topical usages -- you don't ingest it. And even if you do ingest some toothpaste (etc), the levels of fluoride aren't going to pose any threat. And it does prevent cavities.

But in terms of it being added to water, I'm not so sure that's a good thing. Adding fluoride has been a standard in many countries for years. However, several countries (mainly Europe) have taken an active stance on banning fluoride from their drinking water. And I'm with them -- I do not see the good in fluoridating our drinking water. I definitely see the reasoning why countries would add it -- it helps prevent cavities. But as a dentist, I think cavity prevention can be done just as effectively without putting fluoride in our water.

Would that entail going to more cosmetic dentists? I merely ask.

To me, the "bad" it can (potentially) do outweighs the good.

So what is the bad?

Fluoridation positively correlates with Huffington Post fuckwittery.

Sigh. Long day.

HJ

Internet multiple personality disorder, and the joys thereof...

I have a pair of facebook accounts. One for me, one for Bing. Except for occasional cleaning purposes, I never check Bing's account. Today was one of those rare days, and last month, someone calling themselves "Maxine Wilson" sent me an email:

Maxine Wilson

Hey Bing!

Sounds like you share a commonality with your spokesperson. You both forage for grub, you both drink incessently, and you both have a relentless urge for sex. Why should your life be any less valuable than the one who disparages it? Furthermore, it appears you both are equally unemployable.

Bing, do you blog on Facebook? Your mouthpiece does. Is this a worthy feat? I would say not any worthier a feat than your zoning out on your lily pad. Bing, pay no attention to this asshole, much less the asshole who dreams of cheetos-shitting cats when he falls into his drunken stuper. OMG, do I sound like an ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVIST? I am. Is Lindy my spokesperson? You bet! Sounds like you two assholes think you have dominion over Bing because you walk upright. And yet one of you is so sloshed he can't even crawl, most likely confined to his pad. i

And it just cuts off there. Apparently her head exploded. Heehee. Lindy...animal rights activist..hm. Sounds familiar... Oh, that odious raccoon-fucking clown with a neck that looks like Yoda's ass, Lindy Green? I remember her! What's that old granola-snorting goat been up to? Decline, obviously.

Her message is almost incoherent, as you can see. (Hey, DM! I think I found a possible fuck buddy for you!) I enjoyed it very much. What have you been up to? Clearly not watching as many kitten-crushing fetish videos as I have. This totally made my day. Thanks, Lindy! As always, every time an animal rights nutter contacts me, I name a steak and have it for dinner. Yum! Tonight I shall eat Little Tina.

Bing's last known photo. Very Silence of the Lambs.

HJ

Home at last, home at last, thank god almighty I'm home at last...

Seriously, you don't expect to not get home until 10:30 when you step out of the door at 6:30. Well, not if you're me, and I am.

And as things go, it was not a very exciting day. I mean, I showed up to my office, had a bagel, and got to work on designing documents for today's class (drawing up worksheets and suchlike). Then I decided to make myself scarce for a bit. I needed some "me" time. Snicked off to the library to surf the webbies, handle some email, and then just sort of drooled over some guitar pedals for a while.

Soon, class came, and it was time to put on what I call "The Bing Show." Today, we were teaching students how to do a very brief presentation with main points distilled from other work that they had done in preparation for poster presentations. One class was swell, the other, not so much.

Between classes, my colleague mentioned that a couple of people from the department were meeting up. I had forgotten about this, and I got all tense and nervous. I'm very set in my ways, you see, and variation from my routine is disturbing. I need a few minutes to get used to the idea that my day (as I imagined it, at least) was over and that I was going to end up doing things I had not anticipated. I hate changing mental gears like that; they always grind.

Anyway, I went out to a new bar and had a lovely time, honestly. I came across a new word "mouthfeel," which is a made up word if I ever encountered one. It's like some jackass trying to find some aspect of beer tasting that nobody had yet discovered. I bet when he (you know it was a guy) came up with "mouthfeel," beer snobs all over the world celebrated the pushing the boundaries of...evaluating things in their mouths. Yeah, guys, you can have a big mouthful of "weenielick."

So, I got curious about this travesty of a word and went to the OED to see if it was there. I'll be damned. There is is:

The way an item of food or drink feels in the mouth, esp. a sensation of consistency, richness, etc., produced during tasting.

Seriously, if something is in your mouth, aren't you by necessity tasting it? Just saying. The examples they give are just as foppish:

1973 N.Y. Times 26 Aug. III. 12/2 The key to no-drip ice cream..is a new ‘stabilizer’ that ‘does not affect quality, texture, taste or mouth feel’. 1995 Fine Cooking Feb. 22/1 Fat..moistens sandwiches.., gives a tender richness to meats,..and it adds richness, texture, and great ‘mouth-feel’ to desserts. 2000 Wine May 29 A superb wine, with integrated oak and a vivid mouthfeel following an elegant opening.

A few things. In 1973, when "mouth feel" was pulled out of someone's butt, it seems to have been an advertising word. At least, that is how I am reading the quotation marks. So, yes, vapid non-word conveying almost a sense of a thing. In 1995, when you would have thought we'd have grown out of this mouth feel phase, they still had to put it in "this is not really a word" quotes. The 2000 entry conveys no information. It's superb. So what. What does integrated oak taste like? And a vivid mouthfeel following an elegant opening. NO content there. You have said, almost, "I liked it," only pretentiously.

Anyway, while I was at the bar, I got quizzed over my atheism, and the nice people decided that I was really an agnostic. Sure. I'd get into right now, but the whole mouthfeel thing has left a taste in my mouth.

HJ

Oops...

Also, who cares?

Indonesian Muslims praying to Africa, not Mecca.

And what's the point?

"But it has been decided that actually the mosques are facing Somalia or Kenya, so we are now suggesting people shift the direction slightly to the north-west," the head of the MUI, Cholil Ridwan, told Reuters. "There's no need to knock down mosques,

just shift your direction slightly during prayer."

Ridwan said Muslims need not fear that their prayers have been wasted because they were facing the wrong way.

"Their prayers will still be heard by Allah," he said.

I mean, if it doesn't matter...why does it matter? God, religion is goofy. HOLY FUCK! THEY HAVE BEEN PRAYING TO PIRATES!

HJ

Better now...

Once, when I was in college, I slept through the final exam. It was an essay exam for a lit class I needed for my major. And when I realized that I had totally and completely fucked myself, I met it with a rather detached sense of amazement that someone could do such a thing. That it was me did not enter into it. I had already completely and totally accepted...whatever fate wanted to do to me. I think that is about where I am with my article. I'll work on it a little tomorrow, but I've decided that I will not give much more time to it. One final revision, and then I change course. It has to be that way.

I am currently reading Mistakes Were Made by Tavris and Aronson. It's a charming little book about cognitive dissonance; Tim Farley (who runs What's the Harm?) recommended it to me after my talk the other day. Of course, I am now second guessing every memory I have ever had, thank you very much. I tell you, it's strange but I am applying what I have been reading there over the last few days to my reaction to the sinking realization that my article may not be as awesome as I thought. I've even been looking to blame the people who have been reviewing it, a big self-deluding no-no. It's a damned hard thing to keep focused on the reality of the situation, but worth the effort, I keep telling myself. (See that? Turning a failure into a positive! Let's hear it for reducing dissonance! Yay! Sigh!)

HJ

Now for a bit of a fret...

Holy shit, I can't look at this article anymore. I've written and rewritten it for over a year, it's still not published and holy ever-loving fuck I can't believe the evisceration that I am finding on it after passing it on to my roommate. It's like all she said was, "This doesn't fit" or "This makes no sense." I'm experienced at this sort of thing--I've been critiqued as a writer since...always. But I find it very hard to believe that I could write something so bad and not see the badness. It's agonizing because I want to publish it. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. I need someone else to read it. If it comes back with the same "WTF?" throughout, then I'll toss it down the well, and I'll have to swallow it. FUCK.

Also, DOUBLE FUCK!

FUCK!

FUCK!

I wish I could step back and deal with this article in a dispassionate problem-solver, but Jesus, it's been mercilessly hacked and rejiggered for a year, and I don't think it makes more sense now than it did before. When the original reviewers got it, one liked it as it was and said it was "potentially seminal" in the field. The editor agreed in her cover letter. This was a HUGE high. But the more I've reworked it, the more tepid the response has been.

Fuck.

HJ

This week and last week in conspiracy (18 July)

The infection of nanorobots injected into my prefrontal cortex by the CIA demand that I write about the week that was weak. And, boy, was it weak.

STOP THE PRESSES! MEGA CONSPIRACY OF THE (PREVIOUS) WEEK!

This just came through, and so it's fair game. Sen. Vitter (R-LA) endorses thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory. I WANT TO SEE VITTER'S FUCKING BIRTH CERTIFICATE!!!!!1112@@1!EMPHASIS!!! This is bad news. Really bad.

• From Dr. Theo, in one of the Dakotas (does it really matter which?): "NASA a launching pad for Islam." The strategic collaboration that would get the Middle East excited about science instead of superstition and secularize it (maybe) seems to evade him. Dude, Muslims can't go to space. How do you pray at Mecca from orbit?
• Cupcakes and assassinations at the new Sixth-Floor Museum. That's wrong; murder shouldn't have a gift shop.
• Right Side News: All the News That Isn't!
• From the BIN, "Soldiers moving families away from the Gulf! SEE!?! SEE!?!"
• CNN, WTF? I can't believe you hired this goat-fucking child molester.
• GLENN MILLER TORTURED BY NAZIS IN BROTHEL! No shit? Dude, that's totally how I want to go.
• Can you actually say that people like conspiracy theories?
• There is a "black mamba" snake in our government. Oh, redneck racist! You and your witty quips!
• A minor point in this story that depresses me, Roy Blunt of Missouri, in whose Capitol Hill office I once sat (one of the few reps I actually saw), did not laugh outright at the brither conspiracy. Jesus.
• Artificial fog may have brought down Polish president's plane, in much the same way I fart confetti.
• Man, retards should not be in charge of curricula. Glenn Beck grotesquely overestimates own intelligence, value as human being.
• Wow. Chuck Colson thinks he can speak English.
• Canada: Be polite and not fascist.
• This one reminds me of the old Onion headline (see the lead story).
• Here's one from Jolly Old England that I had not heard.
• This conspiracy theory is not anything new--NWO, Obama, BP, Constitution, Rothschilds, Federal Reserve, blahblahblah--but it has a great picture of Obama that really should be painted on velvet. There may be a unicorn behind him.
• In Dealey Plaza, vendor-murder-leech-creatures evicted. Asshat sues.
• The Lateline report on the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission ruling that smashed the nuts of the Australian Vaccination Network. My upside-down friends must be doing little Australian jigs on their hands right now.
• Michael Moriority is a racist. An asshole and a racist. But at least he's unbalanced and unprincipled.
• Hey, how about that neo-Nazi wackjobby keeping America safe from brown people?
• Alex Jones headline bespeaks not at all thoroughly deranged thought processes: America Stands on the Precipice of Total Collapse

Conspiracy of the Week:

I do so love this one.

• Queen Elizabeth so ashamed by the BP oil spill that she plans to abdicate this month.

That's it for now. I should mention that I have been posting this to the "conspiracy theory" page of reddit on a weekly basis, but now the service no longer recognizes me or lets me post. Conspiracy?

Also, I have a recent talk that I gave about conspiracy theories coming out in a few days, so watch for that.

HJ

Chicks who like to be boned...

XXX-rays...

HJ

Brannon Howse dropped an exquisite one the other day...

It was a great episode of Weirdview Weekend. I mean, holy crap. I can't wait to do a review of this episode on my podcast. Sorry. Just had to emote for a second.

You'll hear about this one. It's pretty fab.

HJ

Still working, but never too busy to bust a conspiracy theory...

This one has to do with the BP oil well cap that was placed and seems to have stopped the flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, an ongoing disaster since April. It's hard to believe that we could finally be at the end of this beginning of this disaster.

While I think that BP seems to have had an inordinate and improper influence on media coverage of the event, how skeptical should we be? A lot of people with a lot more immediately at stake than I have in the well's closing refuse to believe that the well is capped. Their doubt is understandable, but is it justified?

Well, we have BP's word, which is basically worthless. They have been weasels throughout, and I have no intention of taking what they have to say at face value. But we have other evidence, visual evidence of the cap. For what the conspiracy-minded to be true, those pictures would have to be faked or altered. (There are versions of the story where weak pressure at the point of the cap would signify that there was damage elsewhere in the line, but there are no pictures one way or the other to speak to that.)

Here's one shot. It shows only the slightest alteration, probably to bring out the colors of the rig in the murky water. And another shows similar slight, slight alteration.

While I have every reason to have no faith in BP's emergency management technology, I'm not seeing any reason to doubt that the cap is on and working right now.

HJ

Bing has a shitty day....

This is so wrong, I'm not even going to post it here. Only link to it.

Does anyone have any Chapstick?

HJ

Time out...

I need to apologize for my lack of posts. This happens occasionally. But I'll have you know that I am working on something that I intend to share with you in the near future, so know that, as ever, I am slaving away for you, the little people! Heheh.

So here is a spoon bending video from A Bit of Fry and Laurie:

Hugh Laurie's song about America:

And, Stephen Fry, what an instrument!

HJ

We should have an "Everybody Draw Mohammed Fucking a Pig" Day

I mean, seriously.

HJ

Hilarious humor of hilarity.

Via Contrarian:

HJ

I see an oily slick coming from Uranus...

Do you want to see the least insightful thing ever? I was looking up the exact coordinates of the Deepwater Horizon for a presentation that I am putting together.

HJ

His Royal Madness...

The artist currently known as Prince is a loon. Once known for his progressive use of gyrating hotties, now he is railing against the Intertubbies:

"All these computers and digital gadgets are no good. They just fill your head with numbers and that can't be good for you."

*blink blink*

HJ

An odd day...

For reasons I am not at liberty to divulge, I was at a junior high school today with a group of my students. It's a highly innovative school in what I understand to be a socioeconomically depressed area. Black kids. Entirely, I think. 85 of them.

Throughout the school there are pictures of African-Americans who have made their mark on society. Inspirational. Seriously, I was impressed. These faces were plastered on t-shirts worn by the teachers. But there was one guy who was wearing a Nat Turner t-shirt. Turner is looking, uh, better than he does in contemporary depictions of him (but those were clearly drawn to exaggerate the "African" features of the 1830s Osama bin Laden--he was that hated and detested--broad nose, large lips, etc). Because there is no reliable image of him, the image on this shirt was necessarily an idealization, and he was drawn as a freaking superhero. A strapping guy who was ripped enough to make even the most butch hetero male feel all giggly. And Turner has an axe.

I'm sorry, but we know that I'm a complete prick.

"So, Nat Turner?" I said to the guy.

"Yep!"

"I taught about him last semester."

"Oh, yeah?"

"You know how that turned out, right?"

"With them hanging him. Yeah."

"But you know, before, during the insurrection."

"Yeah."

"He killed children."

What I wanted to say was that he had, to my eye, all the markings of a cult leader exploiting a vulnerable population. (The only qualification that I would have is that he was not, to my knowledge, brutalizing the slaves, even if he did lead them on to their deaths.) But I did not want to get into that. I had this in mind:

On which, armed with a hatchet, and accompanied by Will, I entered my master's chamber, it being dark, I could not give a death blow, the hatchet glanced from his head, he sprang from the bed and called his wife, it was his last word, Will laid him dead, with a blow of his axe, and Mrs. Travis shared the same fate, as she lay in bed. The murder of this family, five in number, was the work of a moment , not one of them awoke; there was a little infant sleeping in a cradle, that was forgotten, until we had left the house and gone some distance, when Henry and Will returned and killed it [...].

Killed the slave owners. I think that there is a self-defense argument that could be made there. Went back to kill an infant in bed. How can you justify that? In my mind a line was crossed, and not an ambiguous one. You don't kill people because they might do something bad to you one day. Also, he massacred all but one of the children in a school, the only difference between the victims and the kids playing around us today was that the kids in Virginia were born of slave holding parents.

He was well aware of this, he led me to understand. "But a role model?" I explained that I taught about Turner as a person who occupies an ambiguous place in history.

What followed was a short discussion with a man who put Turner in the same category as Martin Luther King, Jr., who is traditionally depicted wielding a machete and a pistol. Oh wait, hang on...

Anyway, he was a genuinely nice guy, and when he started mentioning people displayed on the murals in the building, I shifted my conversation to the important stuff that they were doing. I did like the guy. I heaped genuine praise on the school and their program.

So what do you think? Nat Turner a hero? Ambiguous? Villain who had a shitty life?

HJ

Speaking of evil scientists...

Was someone speaking of evil scientists?

I hear this is how Stephen Hawking got started.

HJ

BP game from the 1970s?

It's, like, totally realistic. An oil spill might cost you 1 million dollars.

HJ

Scienceblogs unravels...

Now that PepsiCo can have a nutrition blog at Scienceblogs, a lot good bloggers are leaving. Carl Zimmer, who as best I can tell has not slept in years, has the most thorough coverage, including the highest number of high-profile respondents in the comment section.

Now, if PZ would like to come and post at HJHOP, I'd be happy to have him and would pay him well over $25 (that's twenty-five AMERICAN dollars) a year. Think about it, PZ.

HJ

COLD FUSION! OR MAYBE, WELL, PROBABLY NOT!!!

OK, do any physicists see any reason to take this guy seriously? Honestly, last night I read a chapter about the cold fusion debacle of the late '90s. A few problems stuck out then: 1) they would have died had they been successful, 2) the ones who made the most questionable and potentially revolutionary claims were far outside their field (chemists playing in physicist land). This guy 1) still alive, and 2) a web developer.

He seems to have released a full-on media assault and he produces no evidence, or even discuss anything of interest as far as I can tell. My bullshit detector is going crazy, so someone let me know if it needs to be readjusted.

HJ

This is for people who read Answers in Genesis

Recently, Ken Ham's public writing has slipped over the line from marginal to something else. Something a lot more sinister, and people who take him seriously need to be aware of what he is doing and the type of monster he is capable of being. I use that word deliberately. He makes monsters for people to fear, and I'll prove it.

I would very much like to direct Ken Ham's readers to his commentary about the recent atheist conference in Copenhagen, which generated a "statement of principles." Atheists...we're not organized, so this is actually rather a big deal, but I don't feel in any way bound to honor anything that came out of the conference. Because that's what a freethinker does, thinks freely.

Ham goes through the statement of principles point by point and inserts his own commentary. Scary commentary. He does himself a disservice by allowing atheists to speak in between his comments. I would very much like to give you, without atheistic interference, Ken Ham's unaltered opinion of the Copenhagen Declaration. The only thing I have altered at all is a single punctuation mark, and I have indicated it.

Recently, atheists met at a conference in Copenhagen and released what they call their “Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life,” which really means they released their statement of faith and their declaration against Christianity. Their declaration is reprinted below and indented, which is interspersed with my translation (not indented) on what they actually mean. These atheists think they can indoctrinate the public by their statements, but many are awake (and hopefully this blog post will help even more people to awaken) to their agenda to indoctrinate the public in their anti-God religion[.]

We recognize the unlimited right (even though we have no objective basis for “rights” in our system) to freedom of conscience, religion, and belief—except for Christians—and that freedom to practice one’s religion should be limited only by the need to respect the rights of others (this is the golden rule: “do unto others . . . ” for which we have no logical basis in our way of thinking)—except for Christians, as we reject Christianity totally and must try to eliminate it.

This is our dogma: we submit that public policy should be informed by evidence—except we discount the Bible as evidence—and reason—as long as it is autonomous human reason, as we arbitrarily reject the biblical God totally—not by dogma (except for our dogma of course)—as we reject the claim of the absolute authority of the Christian God.

We assert the need for a society based on democracy (even though this has no logical basis in our evolutionary worldview)—as long as the absolutes of Christianity are not allowed—human rights (for which we have no basis), and the rule of law (which protects the weak from the strong—despite the fact that we believe in evolution, which is about the strong dominating the weak). History has shown that the most successful (“successful” by our arbitrary dogma) societies are the most secular—just like the countries led by Mao, Pol Pott, Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin, and many more (killing off millions of human animals for their cause).

We assert (that is, we take the non-neutral position) that the only equitable system (even though we have no logical basis for what is fair) of government in a democratic society is based on secularism—the religion of naturalism and atheism—and thus relative morality, rejecting any absolutes (except we absolutely reject Christianity and the Bible)—state neutrality in matters of religion (by which we mean the state must enforce our view)—that is why we are absolutely against any absolute morality based on the Christian God—favoring none—except the religion of naturalism/atheism which is the only favored religious system—and discriminating against none—except Christians, as it is okay to discriminate against them because by our own arbitrary definitions we have eliminated Christianity, belief in a Creator God, and the claims of the Bible as God’s revelation—thus it is okay to discriminate against Christians.

We assert that private conduct—except for Christians—which respects the rights of others—even though we have no basis for determining what “respect” means, nor any logical basis for why people (who are chance conglomerations of chemicals) ought to have “rights”—should not be the subject of legal sanction or government concern—unless it involves Christians, as we have determined they should not be allowed freedom for their religion because they believe in absolutes and have a system of absolute morality.

We affirm the right of believers and non-believers alike to participate in pubic life—as long as Christians do not use their position to act or even vote in accord with their Christian morality etc., as in pubic life they must act and vote in accord with what we call neutrality, which is really our religion of atheism and naturalism—because that is what we demand be imposed on our culture—and their right to equality of treatment in the democratic process, as long as they agree with our atheistic religion—otherwise, they are not allowed equality and must be marginalized and eliminated.

We affirm the right to freedom of expression for all—except for Christians, who cannot express their beliefs in public and certainly not in public schools, though it is okay for Muslims and atheists to indoctrinate kids in the public school system, but Christians can’t even mention the Bible or their Christianity or they will be fired—subject to limitations only as prescribed in international law (which we will determine, as we reject the Bible)—laws which all governments should respect and enforce—even though we have no basis for any laws except our opinion, if we can impose that. We reject all blasphemy laws (except for those which protect our religious belief in atheism and evolution, which must not be criticized) as we have determined that it is okay to blaspheme the Christian God (though we try to avoid speaking against the Muslim god or others) because we have, by our arbitrary definitions, determined there is no God anyway—and restrictions on the right to criticize religion or nonreligious life stances—as long as no one criticizes atheism, because we have determined that this is fact and therefore any other position is outlawed if we can get away with that, as we are totally intolerant of others who don’t have our position.

We assert the principle of one law for all—which is our law, which is arbitrary because we have no basis for it except that we want to impose it—with no special treatment for minority communities (except ours)—even though we have no ultimate basis for such a belief—and no jurisdiction for religious courts for the settlement of civil matters or family disputes—which means no Christians can be involved in such courts because we reject Christianity—therefore, only courts based on our atheism and relative morality can inconsistently rule on such matters imposing their atheistic opinions on others.

We reject all discrimination in employment (other than for religious leaders)—as no one has a right to impose any morality on their organization except our system of morality (which is arbitrary, of course) and is against Christians—and of course we want to have atheists as leaders in atheist organizations so we need that freedom for our leaders—though in the organization itself we allow freedom, except for Bible-believing Christians of course, as they have (by our arbitrary definition) been eliminated anyway—and the provision of social services on the grounds of race, religion or belief, gender, class, caste or sexual orientation—as we are tolerant of all, except we are intolerant of those dogmatic Christians who claim they have an absolute morality based on the Bible, which of course we reject as we want our own absolutes, which deny Christian absolutes, imposed on the culture.

We reject any special consideration for religion in politics and public life—except for the religion of atheism, as we want to control politics and public life and impose our arbitrary relative morality and intolerant system on the culture—and oppose charitable, tax-free status and state grants for the promotion of any religion—except the religion of atheism, as we want all the grants and the tax-free status—as inimical to the interests of non-believers and those of other faiths. We oppose state funding for faith schools—except for the atheist faith, as that is the only faith allowed in schools to be funded, which is why it is now really the official religion of the public schools in the USA, where Christianity by and large has been thrown out and replaced with the religion of naturalism/atheism—which is what we want to happen to all schools. That way, we can control the coming generations and indoctrinate them in atheism and against Christianity—which we are doing quite successfully at the present time.

We support the right to secular education—which means atheist-based education, as we totally reject Christian education because we are atheists out to impose our religion of atheism on the culture—and assert the need for education in critical thinking—except for naturalism/evolution—evolution is not allowed to be critically analyzed, because we need to indoctrinate kids totally in evolution so they will more easily accept our religion of atheism—and the distinction between faith and reason as a guide to knowledge (except for our faith in atheism which we simply redefine as “reason”)—as we reject knowledge claimed to be from God and only allow knowledge to be determined based on our arbitrary definitions of science being naturalism—and in the diversity of religious beliefs as long as Christianity is not allowed, because we are tolerant of all religions except Christianity. We support the spirit of free inquiry—except no one is free to base their beliefs on the Bible—and the teaching of science free from religious interference—except for the religion of atheism, as by our definition, science can only explain things based on natural causes, because we have by definition eliminated the supernatural from any part of science—and are opposed to indoctrination, religious or otherwise—except for the indoctrination in atheism/naturalism, which is what we are determined to do—and as long as we don’t allow people to even consider the Bible or Christianity because atheism is the religion we demand be imposed on everyone—as we totally reject the God of the Bible.

Wow. These atheists must be monsters! Did they come up with Mein Kampf II: Kampf Harder? All that persecution specifically directed at Christians! My God, how could I see that oppression and hatred and continue to call myself an atheist or to want to associate myself with anyone at all like them? Ever? I can stand by no longer as Christians are singled out and oppressed!

I've reviewed a lot of hateful stuff on this website, but surely this Copenhagen declaration must be so rank and abominable as to put all of those other writings to shame! I warn the reader, this might be intense, so, you know, be ready to look away, but we have to know what these evil people are doing!

• We recognize the unlimited right to freedom of conscience, religion and belief, and that freedom to practice one's religion should be limited only by the need to respect the rights of others.
• We submit that public policy should be informed by evidence and reason, not by dogma.
• We assert the need for a society based on democracy, human rights and the rule of law. History has shown that the most successful societies are the most secular.
• We assert that the only equitable system of government in a democratic society is based on secularism: state neutrality in matters of religion or belief, favoring none and discriminating against none.
• We assert that private conduct, which respects the rights of others should not be the subject of legal sanction or government concern.
• We affirm the right of believers and non-believers alike to participate in public life and their right to equality of treatment in the democratic process.
• We affirm the right to freedom of expression for all, subject to limitations only as prescribed in international law - laws which all governments should respect and enforce. We reject all blasphemy laws and restrictions on the right to criticize religion or nonreligious life stances.
• We assert the principle of one law for all, with no special treatment for minority communities, and no jurisdiction for religious courts for the settlement of civil matters or family disputes.
• We reject all discrimination in employment (other than for religious leaders) and the provision of social services on the grounds of race, religion or belief, gender, class, caste or sexual orientation.
• We reject any special consideration for religion in politics and public life, and oppose charitable, tax-free status and state grants for the promotion of any religion as inimical to the interests of non-believers and those of other faiths. We oppose state funding for faith schools.
• We support the right to secular education, and assert the need for education in critical thinking and the distinction between faith and reason as a guide to knowledge, and in the diversity of religious beliefs. We support the spirit of free inquiry and the teaching of science free from religious interference, and are opposed to indoctrination, religious or otherwise.

Hold on... Where is the Christian-crushing? It's entirely absent. All of those specters raised by Ham figments of his imagination. Why? Because he gets donations when people are scared. Ken, how dare you claim to be a righteous emissary of all that is good and then misrepresent people like that? HOW DARE YOU? Indeed, all of your religious beliefs are protected in that document. (I've put those in bold, Ken, just in case you missed them.)

And this is where Ham starts to arrive at cult leader status. He sees the world in black and white, demonizes a specific enemy, encourages his audience to see the world as a place that is conspiring against then, and then claims to offer the only refuge. He also latches onto an "official document" positing a "unified global agenda." Basically, Copenhagen is Ham's Communist Manifesto.

Note well, those of you who have sent him money, that he is not beneath lying to the faithful's faces to secure that influence. No religion secure enough to be called "true" would need to have to rely so heavily on fear, fabrication and deceit.

UPDATE: This video, from the bacon-eating atheist Jewish person named "baconeater" at the Atheist Jew, seems appropriate, as it illustrates the type of place Ham (heheh) is literally trying to convince people they live in!

HJ