Fox News Radio: Fair and Balanced about Creationism? I don't think so!

http://radio.foxnews.com/2011/03/22/atheist-wants-creationist-teacher-fired/

They allow comments here.  I'm waiting to see if the site admins approve.

EVERYONE should want a creationist biology teacher fired!  If I were a Christian and had kids in that school, I'd be livid that this creep is usurping the parental and church role for religious education.  Not to mention, I'd want my kids to learn real science.  Even 30 seconds devoted to fairy tales would detract from real learning.

Calling all Amputees!

You don't have to be a religious nutter to be a "faith" healer (though it helps).  You do have to be a "faith" heal-ee, though.

http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-braco-braco-to-bring-silent-gaze-healing-to-indy-20110329,0,989823.story

This wacky gazing fellow is coming to town.  Notice that the list of things he can "cure" doesn't include amputees?  So, if you know any amputees I can borrow to take to see this guy please send them my way!

I mean, if you can be healed by being stared at, shouldn't all burn victims be healed?  (come to think of it, send them my way too!)  Not to mention, there would be no breast cancer if staring worked!

How does this crap get a foothold?  I thought everyone was supposed to have sufficient health care to get, well... HEALTH CARE now!

YAY! For Indiana!

Incredible as it may seem, fundies in Indiana have failed to insert their skydaddy into the Biology curriculum for public schools:

http://ncse.com/news/2011/03/voice-evolution-from-indiana-006564

The pdf linked there states:

"...content taught in the area of science must be consistent with the nature of science... as science itself is the connection between theory and experiment."

Sadly, they waffle later:  "This does not mean that belief systems based upon sacred texts or tradition are to be discounted, for they are not lesser or greater than a "scientific" viewpoint.  Understanding the difference and the nature of science itself is the key, and it is something of which students should be made aware."

...and then they say it's okay to add myth to the curriculum (not the science curriculum) as long as it doesn't favor one religion.

I'm proud of Indiana educators for standing up to the bullies of the religious right, but I'm ashamed for them that they feel they have to have these disclaimers about religion.

Beware: The Elevens

Seen on Facebook:

Sept 11( NY) Jan 11( Haiti) march 11(Japan).. Luke21:10-11, Then Jesus said to his disiples; Nations will rise against nation & Kingdom against kingdom. There will be great earthquakes,famines & pestilinces in various places and great signs from Beacon.'Jesus says behold I come quikly'.(So ask yourself are you ready for his return)? So sad to many wont post!!!

I didn't post a reply.  There's just no room on FB to post all the reasons why this is wrong, conceited, self-centered, hard-hearted, stupid, a-historical and inapppropriate.

Not enough room here, either.  And anyway, I found a picture that says it all.

Okay, let's try anyway.

First, in order to find this "pattern" you have to ignore all sorts of horrible events that didn't happen on the 11th of their respective months.  The Indonesian tsunami happened on December 26.  Christchurch, NZ suffered a terrible earthquake on February 22.  Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana on August 29.  And of course God attempted to destroy the city of Nashville with a horrendous flood beginning May 1, 2010.  Apparently The Grand Ole Opry offended God.

If you put all those events into a list you see no pattern at all.

Second, if God was sending a message by making earthquakes, how does 9/11 figure into this?  It wasn't an earthquake, famine, or pestilence.  The terrorists weren't a nation or even citizens of the country they were living in, so you can't count that as "nation against nation," either. 

Third, all these things have been happening for all of history.  If you want to be a shyster prognosticator, it's a safe bet that there will be wars, earthquakes, famine and pestilence somewhere in the world most of the time.  It's like dousers finding aquifers (which are under virtually all land).

Fourth, as if we need more reasons to argue against this tripe, why would all this horrible stuff presage Jesus' return?  What kind of god does that?  Wouldn't a loving god say "In order to give you a last chance to repent, I'll give you a two-minute warning (remember, God isn't very good with time, so that would be like 20 years).  I'll send rainbows and cure everyone from their cancers and stop all the locusts from destroying any crops."

Fifth *sigh*  The "endtimes" have come and gone many many many times, most recently in 2007.

I don't de-friend people who post this stuff.  They're nice people and I see them as victims rather than morons.   Still...  I wish they would think a little harder and develop some critical skills.  It's rude of me to argue in a FB thread, and it has to be massively offensive for me to break the unwritten FB etiquette rules.  This one didn't rise to that level but it merited a post and a facepalm.

Godspam, and the Goddamngodspammers who Spam it

I think we've all (atheists and theists alike) received insipid life lesson godspam in our e-mail at one time or another. Some of my friends are so god-soaked (hat-tip to Human Ape for the adjective) that they hardly realize that the feel-good stories they send are religious. After all, a pithy religious note at the end of a long series of cute puppy photos doesn't make an e-mail religious, does it? *facepalm*

Recently, one of my atheist friends at work (yes, I found another one here in Indiana!!!) received the NASA spam claiming to validate two Biblical miracles. It claims that astrophysicists have proved a "lost day" during which the Sun "stood still" in the sky (Joshua 10:12-13) for 23 hours and 40 minutes, and another fable about Hezekiah demanding the Sun go backwards as proof that Isaiah was visiting him as a ghost, filling in the remaining 20 minutes.  *groan*  This is such utter nonsense it ought to make baby Jebus cry.

How can you tell it's nonsense if you're not an astronomer (which I'm not)? Here are some tips:

It's an e-mail that purports there is scientific proof supporting a Biblical miracle. Miracles by definition defy science so this would be big news indeed. And yet the only people who know are the lucky few who happen to be in the spammer's contacts list. Wouldn't this be common knowledge if it were really true?  Here are some clues:

The person sending it is a Christian. There. I said it. Christians are gullible. They are so eager to be right that they will believe anything, from Creationism to the Virgin Mary appearing in an office building window.

NASA scientists are supposedly wasting the taxpayers' money proving a religious myth. That would be unconstitutional, besides also being a waste of time. And anyway, why would NASA worry about something like that when they have bigger problems to solve?

The noble Christian character, who figures out The Truth thanks to his prior indoctrination as a Christian, is a classic trope.  He's the Christian Mulder. Doesn't every conspiracy theory have one? Crackpot loners always have the right answer against common sense and the scientific method. *rolls eyes*  Their colleagues suppress The Truth (tm) and he can only get the message out through spam.

Complete lack of detail, such as dates, references to written articles, etc. That's pretty much a trait of all urban legend type spam too.

...and then as I was getting ready to finish this post and publish it, I find this piece of shit in my e-mail account (sent as an e-mail).  WTF?  How did they get my e-mail address?  That's the most pathetic spam I've ever seen!  Although I have to admit, I am intrigued by the thought that the book teaches the fools how to spot logical fallacies!

WTF?????

I'm sorry, I couldn't think of a better title for this post.

I mean, how do you describe bullshit, complete and utter bullshit, being posted to the blog of a periodical that the general public trusts?

"Extraordinary" claims do not require extraordinary evidence, according to this writer on the Psychology Today blog.

In order to take him seriously you have to completely misunderstand what Sagan meant in the first place.

Extraordinary claims:  i.e., outside the realm of the normal or natural, i.e. supernatural

Extraordinary evidence:  pretty much the same thing

Apparently there's a brouhaha in the psychology field since the publication of an article claiming to prove precognition.  And this idiot is arguing against demanding "extraordinary" evidence in this manner:

The problem with the dictum is that there are no absolute criteria for what counts as “extraordinary claims.”  In particular, what counts as extraordinary depends entirely on what you know and believe.

Well, there's the natural world and the non-natural world.  If you want to claim that the supernatural is natural you do indeed need some damn good proof because you're not just filling in the gap in some huge field of knowledge; you'd be turning all knowledge about the world upside-down.

And apparently "science" is so trendy your a dinosaur if you don't go along with the latest gibberish:

Worse, what counts as extraordinary depends also on the scientific fads and fashion of the time.   The claims of race and sex differences in intelligence were not at all extraordinary a hundred years ago.  They are considered to be extremely extraordinary today, requiring extraordinary evidence.

 Bingo.  Just like religionists, pseudoscientists perform linguistic sleight-of-hand when it suits them:

The claims of race and sex differences in intelligence were not at all extraordinary a hundred years ago.  They are considered to be extremely extraordinary today, requiring extraordinary evidence.

So now we're speaking of "extraordinary" in the sense of unusual, not supernatural.    In Science, knowledge changes based on evidence, testing, and retesting.  That's not faddish, it's the way science is supposed to work.  It's entirely possible for an unusual phenomenon to change the way experts think.  That doesn't mean that supernatural claims shouldn't be held to a higher standard.

Further, this is a false equivalence.  There's nothing about bias in intelligence testing that's the equivalent to claiming precognition because intelligence had previously been established.  Precognition has not been established, unless this supposed study is indeed valid.  Presumably the author of the original study will accept Randi's million-dollar challenge, win, and have plenty of money to validate the earlier "evidence."

Meanwhile, only believers in precognition will believe this stuff.

The offending article is here if you have the stomach for it:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201103/do-extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence

Poe's Law? Or perhaps the corollary?

Someone named TamTamPamela posted a video that she now says was a hoax.  In it, she says that god is "good" and the Japanese earthquake and tsunami were his way of telling the atheists that he's "there."  Is it real or is it someone from 4chan?



The question that people aren't asking is the true important question: Why is it so hard to tell a troll from the real thing?  Why have crazy Christian crackers gone so far off the rails that what should have been obvious as a troll (if it really was) could pass for the real thing?  Shouldn't crazy hatespeech be questioned as an attempt to smear Christians?  Why are we so conditioned to expect this crap?

Because Christianity has a long history of blaming natural disasters on God's wrath.  The notable exception would be tornadoes ripping up "Tornado Alley," which happens to coincide with the "red" stripe of right-wing fundamentalist Christianity that runs up the middle of the U.S. map.  Tornadoes are just tonadoes, but earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes and droughts (except the 1930s "Dust Bowl" in the midwest!) are God's way of punishment when he's too impatient to wait for everyone to die and then throw them into Hell.

And because the Old Testament God comes around whenever it's handy for them to summon him, but if someone (ohhh atheists, for example) cites the genocide and atrocities of the OT "God" suddenly they believe in the New Testament.

Anywho, this whole thing introduced me to the Trollnews channel, which is some fun watching/listening.

Angie the Anti-Theist Reads "Purpose-Driven Life"

She reads Rick Warren so you don't have to! Way to take one for the team!

God Hates Uppity Teenagers

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/16/teen-creator-of-note-to-god-app-in-coma/

This is very very sad for his family but it seems to prove the pointlessness of believing in a god.  His idiot relatives believe it's a "miracle" that someone found him on a road after being hit by a car... but he was supposed to be meeting someone on that road so it was virtually certain someone would find him either by accident or by searching for him.  A real miracle would be having a car hit him, kill him, and then he gets up like nothing happened.  Or maybe the car goes right through him.  It would be even better if the car were a police cruiser with a dashboard camera to catch the whole thing.  That would convince me of the supernatural (not of God, though).

Check out the demo of the app he created.  The examples of the notes people send to god are just so pathetic, but I feel sympathy for them, even if they are deluded.  Rape victims, worried girlfriends waiting for MRI results, grieving parents, they all feel some kind of psychological pain that they don't have any method of coping with except this app on their iphone.  *sniff*  Actually using the phone as a phone and calling a friend to talk it over doesn't occur to people anymore apparently. 

Pray for Japan... even though they're atheists

...in the sense that they don't believe in a supreme being, anyway.  Shintoism and Buddhism are prevalent "religions" but belief in a supreme single deity is not required.

I keep seeing and hearing of people saying they're "praying for" Japan but not saying what they're praying for exactly.  It's really a kind of meaningless expression of concern.  Deep down they know their prayers won't affect the outcome other than to make them feel a bit better about being helpless. This is the kind of insipid vague crapola that bugs me when it's directed toward me.  If you actually question the good-hearted souls who offer to pray for others they will quickly become embarrassed at how shallow and useless their gesture is.

Here are some questions to ask in case you run into this inanity:

1. Why would a Christian god care about non-Christians?
2. Why didn't God prevent the earthquake and tsunami?
3. What are you asking God to do, exactly?
4. Why didn't you pray for Japan (or Haiti, or Thailand) before this happened?
5. What about all the other people in the world who need help?  Why not pray for them?
6. Why are you only praying for the living?  Why not ask god to forgive the deceased for being Shintoists and Buddhists?
7. Why aren't you praying for God to halt the aftershocks?  (they likely aren't)
8. Why should God listen to you?
9. If you pray for the Japanese and another earthquake kills more people there, does that mean God doesn't answer prayers?
10. Why doesn't God perform a miracle and bring all the victims back to life?

Why Atheists are Angry: Ten Things that Believers are Doing that are Ruining the World

We're not angry at God.  You can't be angry at a fairy tale.  So if you are a Christian and this is what you've been told, erase it from your brain NOW!  But we do have a few gripes. 

Believers have been working hard at ruining the world of late.  We live here too and we don't like the way Christians have been doing things.  Other religionists are often just as bad.  So if you sense anger from some of us, it's because you've been behaving badly.  If you don't want us to be angry, try not being dicks.  You can start with these ten things:

These are 10 things that piss us off:

1.  Killing people.  Jihadists, abortion doctor murderers, presidents who believe they're on a mission from God... they all suck and they're all evil, and they all believe they're going to be rewarded for the horrible things they're doing.  So right off:  STOP KILLING PEOPLE.  Sure, some atheists kill people too but not for atheism.  For other reasons (which also suck).  But you won't see atheists flying planes into buildings or shooting people at church, and you won't see groups of atheists celebrating some horrible misdeed by a fellow atheist.  We want some of you to fuck off and die, but we're not running around offing you ourselves.

2.  Trying to make everyone else believe in fairy tales.  Stop sending out missionaries.  You believe in your fairy tales because some ruler eons ago decided those were the ones to believe and your peasant ancestors had to go along with it.  You may believe in some split-off version of it but that's basically it.  Scientologists, you too, even though you have different tactics.  And Falun gung - stop xeroxing pamphlets and handing them out on the streets of DC.  Secretaries and janitors can't help your cause and making them late for their coffee break at Starbucks just ticks them off.  Muslims: get out of the prisons.  Jehovah's witnesses: get off my front porch.  Mormons: stop dressing like 1950s ice cream parlor nerds and riding around on bicycles.  Get real jobs and make a contribution to society.  Sure, the First Amendment guarantees you have the right to do this, but you can't complain that we get pissed off at it.  We have our rights, too.  If you don't stop, we'll start knocking on your doors!

3.  Semi-universalist "tolerance."  Incredibly, people who believe in a god will respect people who believe in a different god more than they'll respect someone who rejects them all.  WTF?  That makes no sense at all.   Those other people disbelieve 99% of gods, just as you do, but one they accept is one that you reject and vice versa.  You disagree with them more than you disagree with atheists!  At least we agree with you about those other peoples' gods.

4.  Creationism/Intelligent Design.  If you really believe that evolution is "just a theory" and should be ignored, then please put your money where your mouth is and stop believing in the germ theory of disease transmission.  Stop getting vaccinated, taking antibiotics, washing your hands, and drinking treated water.   Let's see how soon you change your mind about what "theory" means!

5.  Claiming the rights to "family values."  Your families are no better than anybody else's and you know it.  You get mental illnesses and addictions at the same rate.  You divorce at a higher rate.  If you're predisposed to a hot temper you believe in "spare the rod, spoil the child" and if you're a softie you don't believe in hitting your kids.  It has nothing to do with religion!   You pick and choose what "family values" are in your religion based on the ones that you happen to like.  And too often your idea of "love" includes telling your children that an invisible magic despot is reading their minds and wants to send them to hell for having the wrong thoughts.  Then you perform a ritual that symbolizes (or actually is, depending on your theology) cannibalism.  Giving them Christmas presents makes up for this abuse for awhile but wouldn't it be better if you didn't make them afraid eternal punishment before they can even tell time?

6.  Bigotry.  The KKK and other hate groups claim that God is on their side.  'nuff said.

7.  Claiming your religion is valid because of the beautiful art it inspired. Hey, everyone's religion inspired beautiful art.  That proves nothing.  Bach composed non-religious music.  Michelangelo created Hellenistic artwork.  The art of Hindus is truly gorgeous.  None of that art validates religion as a whole or any particular religion.  So stop trying to claim all the world's greatest artists as your own.  If they got paid more to create art for their religion it's because their religion was a rapacious money-grubbing greedy abusive power within that particular culture.  Artists may have claimed to be sincere about their art, but wouldn't it be foolish of them to express an iota of cynicism toward their sugar daddies?  And even if they were sincere, that doesn't mean they wouldn't have been great artists if they'd been atheists.  They would have been just as talented and taken on different subjects.

8.  Telling atheists what we believe.  We've read your books, but have you read ours?  Here's some news: we don't have a catechism.  We don't have a list of questions we have to answer to be atheists and we don't have to answer your questions, either.  If you insist on asking me where I'll go when I die then I'll have no recourse but to ask you why the Gospels trace Jesus' genealogy through Joseph when he was supposed to have been conceived by God, or why it was okay for Lot to have sex with his daughters but not okay for his wife to look over her shoulder at her former home as it burned.  Religion only answers the questions it poses, and the questions beg the answers.  Not believing in a god doesn't mean we believe in "nothing."  Not believing in the Ten Commandments doesn't mean we have no morality. 

9.  Accusing us of being arrogant.  Okay, so many of us are smarter than you, but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know bullshit when you smell it.  It's not arrogant to say "I see no evidence for religion so I don't believe in it."  It's not even arrogant to say that gods don't exist.  At least not more arrogant than saying that other peoples' gods don't exist.  In fact I think that believers are the arrogant ones.  Not only do you believe in something for which there is no validated proof, but you think that you're smart enough to have chosen the correct belief system, and the correct splinter group as well.  Okay, sure your ancestors picked it for you, soaked your culture in it, indoctrinated your parents, and they in turn perpetuated the indoctrination to the point where you have no sense of perspective whatever, but you picked the correct parents!  Well done!

10.  Going to Bob Evans after church.  I'm just waking up and I need a bottomless cup of coffee and a place to do some quiet reading.  Besides driving behemoth vehicles I can't park near, you take up all the good tables and the wait staff pay more attention to you.  Also, stop dressing up if you insist on doing this.  You make the rest of us look bad.  Sunday mornings should be mandatory casual dress day.  All my good stuff is in the laundry hamper on Sunday morning.  You don't want me stinking up your Bob Evans with my skanky weekday work clothes do you?  I'm getting paid to dress nice at work, and I sure as heck wouldn't dress nice for Bob Evans.  Their slogan is "down on the farm" get it?  Dress like a farmer!  (only cleaner).   And tell your brats to stop kicking my seat!

There are probably many many more things you do to tick us off but that's a quick list.

Note:  This post was inspired by The Human Ape at Darwin Killed God, though the anger is my own.

The Local Town Idiot Speaks

Thanks to The Human Ape at Darwin Killed God for bringing this local piece of Creationist inanity to my attention.  In case it disappears from radar before my loyal fans readers have a chance to click:

Defending God
Atheists are constantly demanding scientific proof that God exists. The claim is that belief in a Creator is no more than a fabrication from an age of weakmindedness before science, logic and enlightenment became our litmus test.


I would propose that, if science is what you need, look no further than your own DNA. While agreeing that random patterns occur naturally by chance, DNA consists of code, which requires a designer. In intelligent design, we find a specified complexity. There is no Shakespearean sonnet without Shakespeare. Our very existence proves the existence of a Creator God.

However, God does not need to be defended for God's sake, but for our sake. God is eternal, above and beyond all that is temporal, and will continue to exist regardless of what we do here in our world limited to time and space and science as we presently understand it.

In our increasingly agnostic and atheistic world, God has been judged and sentenced to irrelevance, mocked instead of revered. The decisions we each make about God will determine our eternal futures, but it is a personal path. Do not limit your study to the rantings of the secular. Do not waste your arguments on those who will not listen. Discuss and debate within yourself to find the answers to your existence. In the end, it is between you and God.

I'm heartened to see local atheists replying.  There are probably some auslanders replying too, but it's for a good cause.  In a city with a university that offers *gasp*  SCIENCE degrees it's embarrassing to see this kind of crap posted in letters to the newspaper.  It's not like Christians don't have enough outlets to spew their stupidity.

The Billboards are Coming! Oh Noes!!!

Coming to a big city near MEEEE!!!!! Indianapolis!!!!!

The press says they picked Indy because there are freethinkers here, but I think the truth is, Indiana is the most backward state north of the Mason-Dixon.  I don't really care why I'm just glad it's coming.  It's an in-your-face answer to all the ridiculous crap lining the highways of this backward state, including Rapture billboards.  Yes, we have rapture billboards.  I kid you not.

The message will get through despite ticking people off.  I love this message, in fact.  It's not anti-Christian, at least not as much as it could be!  And it shows lovely white people displaying family values - nuclear family, child loving and respecting his mother, doting daddy... what could be better?

I still crack up remembering the comment at work about a local atheist leader being "one of the happiest people I've met" as if it was the freakiest thing to find that atheists could be happy.  The conversation didn't get very far, though, because I said "I'm an atheist too, and I'm pretty happy."

One happy atheist =  freaky oddity.  Two happy atheists = what the fuck?  A whole community of happy atheists coming out of the closet = did my pastor lie to me?

Yes, Virginia, your pastor lied to you.  We don't go around raping, murdering, robbing, and doing drugs.  Well, not more than theists do.  Possibly less.

If you have empathy for your fellow human beings you are much much less likely to hurt them, and more likely to respect yourself.  A religion that is all about YOU and YOUR future deployment to Heaven or Hell doesn't create empathetic people.

Some of Jesus' supposed words seem to encourage empathy but plenty of other stuff in the Bible drowns that stuff out for the average believer.  Even the "missions" to "help people" are mostly about being good in Jesus' eyes, or bringing Christianity to heathens, or earning brownie points with fellow Christians.

If people are empathetic it is because it's an evolutionary advantage for the species for individuals to look out for each other.  We are the decendents of apes that helped each other out.   Not everyone needs to be a certain way for the species to carry on a beneficial gene (a fact theists just can't get sometimes), but enough of us will be empathetic for the species to survive.  It has to be nurtured but not necessarily by a church.  Loving parents are all you really need.  Loving teachers, neighbors, and extended family help a lot too.

I would even say we're the "real thing" when it comes to morality and empathy because when an atheist behaves ethically or compassionately it's other-centered and sincere.  We offer aid and comfort freely, with no strings attached.  We do it because we're happy and we want others to be happy. What better reason could there be?

Are Christians Different from Scientologists?

Awareness of cults such as Scientology was part of the deconversion process for me.  In them I saw the process that early Christianity may have undergone:  charismatic leader, incoherent yet appealing myth, and devoted followers convinced that to leave the cult would mean death.

This article from the New Yorker made me think of Scientology again.  ...and why learning about Scientology put a few more nails in the coffin on any credibility Christianity had for me.

First, there's the whole issue of personality.  L. Ron Hubbard & Jesus both claimed to know the big Truths of Life and how to avoid pain and spiritual death. That's true of all cult leaders as far as I know.  They have to offer some insight that their victims adherents can't find elsewhere.

The point where Paul Haggis knew his religion's leaders were full of crap was when he saw one lie about whether they had a policy called "disconnection."  "Disconnection" is when the Scientologist has to sever ties to relatives who are anti-Scientology.  Sound familiar?  Perhaps it's because you are familiar with Christianity:  "If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple."  (Luke 14:26)

Reading through the article I find more parallels.  Scientology bragged on itself in its publications:  "participation in Scientology brings to many a broader social consciousness, manifested through meaningful contribution to charitable and social reform activities."  I hear this kind of thing from Christians.  They justify their belief system by its effects rather than proving their deity exists.  They have a lineage of creativity backing them up, too.  From Michelangelo to Bach our society has been enriched by their belief system.   ... as if Michelangelo and Bach were incapable of coming up with ideas for secular art.  The Brandenburg Concertos are probably Bach's most famous works, and they're not at all sacred.

Scientology got its foothold by cultivating celebrities:  "In 1955, a year after the church’s founding, an affiliated publication urged Scientologists to cultivate celebrities: “It is obvious what would happen to Scientology if prime communicators benefitting from it would mention it.”

Christianity benefitted from Constantine and later rulers adopting it as their official religion.  Back then, there were no movie stars, so they had to settle for kings and emperors. 

The following could easily be said of almost any believer in any faith:

“I had such a lack of curiosity when I was inside,” Haggis said. “It’s stunning to me, because I’m such a curious person.” He said that he had been “somewhere between uninterested in looking and afraid of looking.” His life was comfortable, he liked his circle of friends, and he didn’t want to upset the balance. It was also easy to dismiss people who quit the church. As he put it, “There’s always disgruntled folks who say all sorts of things.”

Once you've been sucked into (or born into) a religion, what keeps you there has nothing to do with theology, historicity, or any "proof" of the supernatural.  It's the comfort of belonging to a community, probably the most human need we have.  It's evolutionary: we are social creatures that depend on community for the survival of individuals, and our communities depend on the loyalty of the individuals for the survival of the community.

Yet Christians will point out how great their communities are as if other religions can't make the same claim.  (Americans will also brag on how great Americans are in a disaster, as if people in other countries won't rescue their neighbors during a natural disaster)

Some aspects of Scientology baffled him. He hadn’t been able to get through “Dianetics”: “I read about thirty pages. I thought it was impenetrable.” But much of the coursework gave him a feeling of accomplishment

Boy does this sound like the typical Christian.  Most have not read the Bible, or if they have they did it through coursework, being led to pay attention only to the convenient portions.  Bible study is one of those things I can respect because at least they're not just nodding their heads once a week on Sunday, but now that I'm an outsider, I realize there is no study of alternate viewpoints.  Of course any religion seems valid as long as you intentionally ignore all other viewpoints.

Haggis says: "I think I did, in some ways, become a better person. I did develop more empathy for others." 

This is also true of other religions.  The leaders and community can provide valid psychological insight and help adherents to develop empathy.  Again, no proof at all of the validity of claims of the supernatural.  Just a benefit of belonging to a community.  In the case of Scientology they suck you in with a promise of psychological help, and perhaps they really do help.  But do they help more than other types of therapy?  Or even confession? 

And how do they deal with doubt?  About the same way that Christians do:

Haggis expected that, as an O.T. VII, he would feel a sense of accomplishment, but he remained confused and unsatisfied. He thought that Hubbard was “brilliant in so many ways,” and that the failing must be his. At one point, he confided to a minister in the church that he didn’t think he should be a Scientologist. She told him, “There are all sorts of Scientologists,” just as there are all sorts of Jews and Christians, with varying levels of faith. The implication, Haggis said, was that he could “pick and choose” which tenets of Scientology to believe.

You might make the case that Scientology charges its victims adherents for religious instruction, but Christ told his victims followers to give all their money to their communal pot.  He also advocated a life of poverty, which rich people conveniently forgot.

No, the main difference is that the delusional ramblings of L. Ron Hubbard are of more recent vintage, so more easily dismissed.  Ancient beliefs seem to hold more sway.  If a text was written by long-dead writers who can argue with them?  Lao Tsu and Moses didn't leave paper trails, unlike Hubbard, whose military career and writings are available for investigation. 

But even though Scientology's claims have been proved false, its victims adherents cling to their false beliefs because belonging to a "religion" is more important than knowing whether its claims have any validty.  That's the main thing Scientology has in common with Christianity.

Now *this* is "militant atheism"

Oh noes someone didn't want to pray!

Good for him for raising a ruckus and getting arrested! Going to court is just too damn expensive and time-consuming.  Let the fuckers know to their faces that what they're doing is unconstitutional and that not everyone in their community is a fucking Christian!

 I hope he doesn't have to pay court fees or get a felony charge.  If the meeting hadn't officially started, then what was he disrupting?  It's not against the law to disrupt prayer.  Ask Fred Phelps!

God lets down Christians.... again

God hates evangelists

The Adams' website chronicles their worldwide voyage, which included trips to New Zealand, China, Cambodia and Panama.


One aspect of their travels, according to the site, "is friendship evangelism -- that is, finding homes for thousands of Bibles, which have been donated through grants and gifts, as we travel from place to place." They also say their mission is to "allow the power of the Word to transform lives."

Despite their own prayers and the prayers of people that God really listens to (i.e. pastors, as in the video linked on the news page), these people were killed by the Somali pirates who overtook their boat. 

I don't experience any schadenfreude from this, but it does make me wonder what the people who went public with their prayers are going to say now.   If you were to make a statistical study of people in danger who were prayed for by others, compared to people in danger who were not prayed for (or maybe those prayed for by the wrong religionists!)... you would probably find that the outcome was no different.

You can't make a study of people who prayed for themselves because you would get the worst kind of confirmation bias: only people who survived a life-threatening event would answer your survey.

Do Christians ever think about why they only hear about people who prayed and were delivered from a life-threatening event or disease?  Don't they realize that the people who prayed and died anyway aren't talking to them?

If they do acknowledge that their prayers weren't answered (as opposed to conveniently forgetting that they prayed), they have a real problem on their hands, as their imaginary Sky Daddy was supposed to make everything all right.  Here are some website explanations for why prayer doesn't work:

You're not a good enough person.

Your prayers aren't good enough

You don't want the right things

You didn't tell God how great he is first

God did answer the prayer by doing what's best for you, not what you want


This last one is the default for a lot of the Christians I've met.  God knows what's best.  His ways are mysterious.  One door closes, another door opens...   blah blah blah 

All these excuses have one thing in common:  blaming the person doing the praying.  God is all-powerful but apparently you have the power to change his mind if you do everything just so.  If God doesn't answer a prayer it's because there's something wrong with you, not with the Somali pirates.

Someone at work the other day said she met the leader of a local atheist group and "she was one of the happiest people I've ever met."  I tried to explain how liberating atheism is, but I don't think her brain got past "you too?"

Liberating, yes.  Sure, being powerless in distressing or dangerous situations is frustrating, uncomfortable, and scary.  But we don't carry any shame for the situation or the outcome.  We don't allow ourselves to be belittled by fairy tale Sky Daddies and their spokespeople who will do everything to put the blame on the believer.  Those of us who were brought up to believe this nonsense are free to put the blame where it belongs: on the person committing the evil act, the cancer ravaging a body, or plate tectonics causing an earthquake.

It doesn't say anything about you that the pirates killed their captives, or that people died in the New Zealand earthquake, or that a four year old dies from cancer.  In the long run, we atheists are in a much better position to recover from horrible events than Christians because we don't hold false hopes of a fairy tale ending or blame ourselves when things don't come out the way we think they should.

We also don't have to spill a lot of ink wondering why things came out the way they did.

Here's a tip, Christians:  if it has taken theologians thousands of years to come up with an explanation, that's a sure sign that the underlying concept is bogus.  The answer to the question of why prayers aren't answered is that prayer is a mindgame and has no influence on the outcome of events.  If it makes you feel good, that's about all you're going to get from it.

"symptoms of being pregnant by a supernatural entity"

I was looking through the search terms that led people to this blog and found this gem:  "symptoms of being pregnant by a supernatural entity."  I have no idea how that phrase led google to this blog, but starting today it will make sense, because it inspired this post.

This is something the Bible should have dwelt on just a bit.  If they want us to believe that Mary didn't just make up a story about getting knocked up by a deity, she should have had some supernatural symptoms.

It also made me think of Rosemary's Baby, the book and the movie about a woman who is impregnated by Satan when he wants to propagate himself.  I read the novel as a teen and I remember that it terrified me so much I didn't want to see the movie.

Then there was the immaculate conception episode of Star Trek, which was rather amusing.  The womb that got appropriated was that of Counselor Troi, and the "supernatural" being was a ball lightning kind of being that wanted to see what it was like to have a body.  The pregnancy lasted just a few days and after the birth Troi's body was completely healed, as if she'd never had a baby.

It's disappointing that the Bible didn't dwell on the pregnancy and birth.  It would have made the whole immaculate conception thing more believable to me.  ... but not to the people of the times.  Virgin birth and gods inseminating human women were well-worn tropes for them.  They would expect anyone claiming to be part god to have this kind of story.  In fact, if it weren't part of the family lore, it would have been added by the prosletyzers to lend credibility to their claims.

...and with so many gods about, not to mention Satan and all the angels, how would we know that the pregnancy was really caused by the god, and not SATAN?????  It's not like there's a DNA test for it.

It comes down again to wanting to believe what your authority figures believe.  Your parents, pastor, teachers, and the writers of the Bible know what they're talking about, right?

10 Reasons why the Christian God isn't worth Worshiping

If I were to believe in an ancient fairy tale of supernatural entities reading minds, interfering with fate, and setting down rules, I don't think I'd worship *the* God of my culture.  Why?  There are many many many things wrong with this "god" but I have a top 10 list for starters:

10.  Weak ego.  He needs to be worshiped to the point of expecting people to behave themselves in order to do what? Spend eternity worshipping him in Heaven.  What a loser.

9.   He's perfect, and he created us in his own image... really?  He has a tailbone and weak lower back?  He is allergic to the plants and animals that he himself created?  Does he forget where he put his car keys?  Well, maybe he likes puppies.  That would be a point in his favor.  But seriously, how can a superior being create inferior beings and then say they're in "his image?"

8.  Supposed to be unchangeable but keeps changing his mind.  If you trace his approach to punishment from the "Fall" through the End-Times, you would never know what theory of justice he subscribes to.  He has wiped out the whole "world," countries, cities, and punished the children of sinners to the seventh generation.  Then he decides, nah, sacrifice an animal to the priests at the temple and I'll let you off.  Then he decides to spare the animals and sacrifices Jesus.  ... but then he threatens everyone with Hell.  Which is it?

7.  Stopped talking to us.  He used to talk to prophets.  Now he only talks to schizophrenics.  What gives?  Doesn't he love us anymore?

6.  Can't get his people to agree on anything.  There are three religions that supposedly believe in him.  Each of them has numerous large and small branches.  Is this the big ego at play again?  Being so obtuse that billions of people argue about what he's like?  Is that how he gets his attention?  Why not spell it out?  He's GOD for Pete's sake.  He could engrave the whole *CORRECT* bible on the walls of the Grand Canyon!  Why hasn't he?

5.  Poor communicator.  See #6 above.  He could speak plainly if he wanted to.  He supposedly made Ronald Reagan and Dubya Bush, who were plain-speaking idiots who knew how to reach "the folk."  If he could make people who could communicate like that why can't he speak like that himself?

4.  Bad parenting skills.  Right from the get-go he's a jerk as a parent.  "Don't touch that apple!!!  Oh darn you touched the apple!  Now I have to condemn you and all your children and their children for eternity.  Bad kids, bad."  WTF?  He made the apple!  Why put temptation within reach?

3.  Poor designer.  "Intelligent" design my arse, literally.  When I fell on my arse I broke my tailbone.  WTF?  Why do I have a tailbone and why is it so easy to break it?  And then after I broke it I was told that nothing could be done for it that wouldn't make it hurt worse.  It hurt for TEN YEARS.  What kind of "intelligent" designer would give us tails that you can't even see and then make them hurt like crap?  Despite designing perfect people they sometimes come out with real tails.  Sometimes their spines are outside their bodies.  Sometimes they have no legs or hands or feet.  WTF?  That's pretty stupid design.  Would you let him design your car?  or your 747?  I wouldn't let him design a dishcloth.

2.  Supernatural.  He created a natural world then expected us to believe in magic.  But the only thing understandable to us is the natural.  We can't figure out his magic... except when we can of course.  There are too many weaknesses in the supernatural claims for anyone who has paid attention to the natural world to believe.  God needs to do something demonstrably supernatural to smart people, not just spring happy coincidences on his dunces once in awhile.

1.  Too much like the other gods of other religions.  They're all waaaay too much like insecure human despotic rulers and not enough like actual magical beings.  They're all vague.  They all made an imperfect world.  They all allowed their believers to splinter.  They all resemble the leaders of their own cultures way too much to be above those cultures.

Happy Valentine's Day

I saw this on Facebook this morning:

Happy Valentine's Day everyone. Just remember, Married, Single, or Dating, Jesus will always be your Valentine :-D He loves you regardless :)

This kind of crap drives me nuts, but it goes a long way toward explaining the appeal of "fundamentalist" religion.

Apparently we don't pay attention to John 3:16 anymore.  God doesn't love us, then make himself human and kill himself and then undead himself and wander around as a zombie for a few days then disappear after promising to be right back.
Religion isn't about being a good person, or saying the right words at the right time, or participating in ritual cannibalistic ceremonies.

Noooo it's about being loved by a bronze age rabbi.  If he ever did return would he be greeted by swooning screaming women and tweens?  *sigh*