Imagine for a moment that you have the ability to do an amazing thing. You have the ability to travel literally billions of light years to a planet orbiting some distant star. You can do this nearly instantaneously through the power of your astounding space ship. When you got there, what would you do? Close your eyes a moment and think about the answer to that question. Was the answer “Probe the rectums of hillbillies”? I didn’t think so. I would imagine that I might be interested in understanding the physiology of the life forms on the planet, as they would almost without a doubt be completely different to my own physiology. But if I had the technology to instantaneously travel through space and time like that, I’d probably be coming from a race so advanced that our means of evaluating the physiology would be much more advanced than shoving things up someone’s southern pucker.

Now, imagine that you have the ability to send a message to another continuum. What’s a continuum? Well, the one we’re most familliar with would be the space-time continuum. But in a post over at the JREF site, Harriet Hall (who is Not Impressed) describes an interaction with someone who assures her that the TV series Lost is accurate because of a message transmitted by someone from another continuum. Seriously, read the thing, it’s worthy of a giggle.

Continue reading →

The nice thing about writing a nerdy skeptic blog is that you can be sarcastic, and most of the time people won’t come down on you too hard for it. They’ll kill you on grammar and spelling, but being a dick is perfectly acceptable. Which brings us to today’s little commentary, in which the writer expresses this sarcasm as follows:

I’ve read a lot lately about denialists. Whether it’s about things like the holocaust or evolution or the link between HIV and AIDS, it seems like someone out there is denializing everything. Because we live in a society that mistakenly believes that the opinion of¬†one and all is equally meritorious (even when they are loons), this is considered not just acceptable, but often necessary to the public debate. You can’t watch the news and see a report on climate change without someone from the alternative viewpoint (probably someone who works in oil and gas) being presented in the name of balance to take the denialist’s stance.

I have a solution. But first, let’s make sure we know what we’re talking about. Wikipedia, that bastion of truth, states that denialism is “choosing to deny reality as a way to avoid an uncomfortable truth”. In other words, it’s not about disagreement with the norm. It’s about denying reality. And now my solution. Today, I officially have become a denialism denialist.

There is, in this new insight of mine, no such thing as a denialist. Take a moment and let that sink in. That’s right, I just ended the problem. The definition of denialist denialism shall henceforth be “choosing to deny reality as a way to avoid boring news reports full of misinformation and jerk-ass lies”. So how does it work?

Let’s take that a look at a news broadcast in my new world order. They start with a shot of some evolutionary biologist who explains some new piece of our fossil record, and how that relates to the way life has developed on the earth. We snap back to the reporter. Normally, he would say something about how some people disagree, and go to a lunatic priest of the Young Earth Creationist school in the name of balance. But also in the name of balance, they would need to go to me and have me explain that this man simply does not exist. Since the man clearly cannot exist (in the name of balance), then why bother cutting to him for his opinion in the first place? If he doesn’t exist, that just sounds like dead air.

It’s a brilliant scheme. And trust me, you’ll thank me for it.

Jim

I am a jerk. It’s worth getting that right out in the open before I start in on this little tirade. And it’s not a real tirade. I don’t believe a word I’m about to say. I’m just being a jerk.¬†I believe that our capacity to help our neighbors is a fine example of global society, that thing which in my opinion is humanity’s most beneficial adaptation. When the earthquake in Haiti happened, I was happy to see a lot of people rushing to their aid with everything from doctors to supplies to magic. Okay, I wasn’t so pleased with the magic, but the Scientologists can presumably do what they like

However, now I simply must comment. We’re all well aware of the ever-present question, “Why would a just God allow something like this to happen?” and it is in no way my intention to answer that question. I don’t believe in any God, just or otherwise, and certainly find the concept of a loving and all-powerful creator who would cause such suffering simply impossible to put together. However, this isn’t a comment on me, it’s a comment on the religious.

Pat Robertson went so far as to say that God hates Haiti because Haiti made a pact with the devil (and the Devil clearly took offence), but the usual answer I hear is that we simply cannot understand the mind of God. His brain, being infinite, is a lot bigger than our much more finite brains, which weigh on average less than a pound. You can easily see that infinite is much bigger than less than a pound, whatever that converts to in Euros.

Well, clearly we can know the mind of God in one way; he clearly wanted to mess up Haiti. If this is an act of God then obviously he wanted to do it, as God is infallible. You hear me on this one, religious folk? God, for reasons we cannot fathom, wanted to beat the crap out of Haiti. And you, his servants, are now sending money and aid to the survivors? You dare to help them rebuild their country, mend their injured, and care for them? Aren’t you directly going against what God (in whatever form you imagine him, from the divine to the bovine) wants?

Clearly, the faith-based initiative in situations like this should be to simply take no initiative. Your God, in his love, wants to punish the wicked, so maybe you should stay home with your Bibles and your Korans and your E-Meters and leave the¬†rest to those of us who want to help rather than convert. I can’t imagine how embarrassing it would be to get to the pearly gates (or whatever wonderful judgement analogy you subscribe to) and find out that you lived a wonderful, pious, loving life, but you really pissed off your creator when you went and undid his great work.

Jim (who is being bitchy today)