"Evolutionism is a fairy tale."
Evolution is called "evolution".
What you call a fairy tale is the strongest fact of science.
I'm not surprised this place is infested with know-nothing science deniers. Religions can't exist without throwing out basic facts of science.
Here in the 21st century where normal people live we have something called "looking things up". If science deniers were not so lazy and not so afraid of educating themselves they could google "wikipedia, evidence for evolution" and they would get this and study it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
Just that one link would take a lifetime to study. But the science deniers have zero curiosity. They don't want to know anything.
Science hard, hurts brain.
God easy, no think.
Saturday, March 31, 2018
What somebody else wrote about the bullshit in the disgusting bible. It was well done.
I have to laugh when I see folks below posting quotes from the Bible as if they are evidence of anything. What would these posters think of "proofs" from the Quran or the Book of Mormon?
The Bible is riddled with errors and inconsistencies, yet believers seem blissfully unaware of these facts.
Here's challenge for believers (one that I've never seen answered):
Read the resurrection stories in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Then answer:
1) Did "they" go to the tomb before or after sunrise?
2) Who were "they"?
3) Was the stone in place or rolled away?
4) How many angels were present?
5) Was(were) the angel(s) in or out of the tomb?
6) Where was the risen Jesus first met?
7) Who first met the risen Jesus?
8) How many days elapsed before Jesus "went to Heaven"
9) On what day was Jesus crucified?
There are more inconsistencies, but these will suffice for now.
The Bible is riddled with errors and inconsistencies, yet believers seem blissfully unaware of these facts.
Here's challenge for believers (one that I've never seen answered):
Read the resurrection stories in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Then answer:
1) Did "they" go to the tomb before or after sunrise?
2) Who were "they"?
3) Was the stone in place or rolled away?
4) How many angels were present?
5) Was(were) the angel(s) in or out of the tomb?
6) Where was the risen Jesus first met?
7) Who first met the risen Jesus?
8) How many days elapsed before Jesus "went to Heaven"
9) On what day was Jesus crucified?
There are more inconsistencies, but these will suffice for now.
Christian morons think the Earth is a big fucking deal. They are wrong.
I looked this stuff up. Google is my friend.
Hubble reveals an estimated 100 billion galaxies in the universe or so, but this number is likely to increase to about 200 billion as telescope technology in space improves. Every galaxy has billions of stars.
Why would a magical master of the entire universe, aka God, Zeus, Allah, give this tiny insignificant planet in the middle of nowhere so much special treatment?
One of my favorite quotes:
"So altogether I can’t believe the special stories that’ve been made up about our relationship to the universe at large because they seem to be too simple, too connected, too local, too provincial. The 'earth,' He came to 'the earth', one of the aspects of God came to 'the earth!' mind you, and look at what’s out there. It isn’t in proportion!"
-- Richard Feynman
Hubble reveals an estimated 100 billion galaxies in the universe or so, but this number is likely to increase to about 200 billion as telescope technology in space improves. Every galaxy has billions of stars.
Why would a magical master of the entire universe, aka God, Zeus, Allah, give this tiny insignificant planet in the middle of nowhere so much special treatment?
One of my favorite quotes:
"So altogether I can’t believe the special stories that’ve been made up about our relationship to the universe at large because they seem to be too simple, too connected, too local, too provincial. The 'earth,' He came to 'the earth', one of the aspects of God came to 'the earth!' mind you, and look at what’s out there. It isn’t in proportion!"
-- Richard Feynman
What I wrote at the Wall Street Journal about reality.
Every miracle, including the Muslim belief in a moon that split in half, and the Christian belief in a decomposing preacher who rose from the dead, is a belief in supernatural magic.
Is supernatural magic real? Can a god with unlimited magical powers throw out reality and make impossible things happen?
I'm convinced supernatural magic including magic god fairies are just childish fantasies. I can't imagine how reality can be thrown out. Reality is not going anywhere.
Everything we see in the universe can be explained or eventually will be explained by science. Scientific progress will continue forever. Meanwhile primitive religions are permanently stuck in the Dark Ages.
One of my favorite quotes:
"There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works."
-- Stephen Hawking
Is supernatural magic real? Can a god with unlimited magical powers throw out reality and make impossible things happen?
I'm convinced supernatural magic including magic god fairies are just childish fantasies. I can't imagine how reality can be thrown out. Reality is not going anywhere.
Everything we see in the universe can be explained or eventually will be explained by science. Scientific progress will continue forever. Meanwhile primitive religions are permanently stuck in the Dark Ages.
One of my favorite quotes:
"There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works."
-- Stephen Hawking
What I wrote at the god-soaked Wall Street Journal about the moronic Christian death cult.
A few years ago I wondered how Christians could justify the resurrection of a decomposing corpse because after 3 days nothing is going to work.
So I looked it up and found something from the Catholic Church. Their idea was the corpse never decomposed at all.
In other words to justify a magical resurrection they invented more magic. How convenient that is. Just keep making stuff up.
Christianity completely depends on a magical resurrection being true even though it's impossible. The problem is reality can't be thrown out. Reality doesn't care if people don't like it.
The logical thing to do is just give up and admit Christianity is the most ridiculous cult ever invented. Then throw it in the garbage where it belongs.
Reality is a wonderful thing because it's interesting and because it's real.
Religious fantasies are boring not to mention disgusting. They are not real.
Science hard, hurts brain.
God easy, no think.
So I looked it up and found something from the Catholic Church. Their idea was the corpse never decomposed at all.
In other words to justify a magical resurrection they invented more magic. How convenient that is. Just keep making stuff up.
Christianity completely depends on a magical resurrection being true even though it's impossible. The problem is reality can't be thrown out. Reality doesn't care if people don't like it.
The logical thing to do is just give up and admit Christianity is the most ridiculous cult ever invented. Then throw it in the garbage where it belongs.
Reality is a wonderful thing because it's interesting and because it's real.
Religious fantasies are boring not to mention disgusting. They are not real.
Science hard, hurts brain.
God easy, no think.
The pope is a stupid fucking asshole.
Pope faces indigenous Canadians' anger over refusal to apologize for past abuse
Canada bishops’ group said Francis would not offer personal apology for residential school system that abused generations of children.
Leyland Cecco in Toronto Friday 30 March 2018
Survivors of Canada’s residential schools have expressed dismay after Pope Francis refused to apologize on behalf of the Catholic church for a system that abused thousands of indigenous children for generations.
The schools, many of which were run by missionaries, were used to convert indigenous children to Christianity through a governmental policy of “aggressive assimilation”. More than 150,000 children passed through around 80 schools across the country until the last one closed in 1996.
The Canadian government formally apologized for the program 10 years ago. In 2014, Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommended a papal apology, which the prime minister, Justin Trudeau, personally lobbied for when he visited the Vatican last year.
While he has apologized for the “grave sins” of colonialism in South America, in a letter released Tuesday by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the president of the organization said Pope Francis would not issue a personal apology.
Stephen Kakfwi, the former premier of the Northwest Territories, attended a number of residential schools in the Canadian Arctic. He argued that survivors of the schools were not calling for a personal apology from the pontiff, but an institutional response from the Catholic church.
“We asked as for an apology from the pope, the head of the Catholic faith, for the millions of people who are Catholics around the world,” said Kakfwi, who helped arrange visits by Pope John Paul II to the Arctic.
“He would, as a spiritual leader, say that this should have never happened if the clergy followed the true teachings of Jesus. He would be saying: ‘I’m sorry for the failings of the church as an institution.’”
Kakfwi said he suspected that part of the reason for Francis’s refusal was a difference of opinions amongst bishops in Canada, who remain divided on the issue.
Other survivors said the pope’s decision marked a perpetuation of the colonial mindset that gave rise to the system in the first place.
“It’s the continuation of a policy that we are always hoping would be discontinued by the church: the implication that indigenous people are less closer to God than the average non-indigenous person,” said Edmund Metatawabin, a former chief of the Fort Albany First Nation in Ontario.
Much of church doctrine taught to the students was aimed at separating them from their indigenous identity. Metatawabin’s father, himself the product of a residential school, had become “brainwashed” to believe traditional ceremonies and beliefs were bad.
As a youth, Metatawabin was only able to learn of his community’s tradition from his great grandmother and grandfather, who discreetly passed on the knowledge under the promise of secrecy.
Metatawabin attended the notorious St Anne’s Indian residential school for eight years, where he witnessed and experienced rampant sexual and physical abuse. Once, after vomiting into his porridge, he was forced to eat that same bowl of food.
The school even had a homemade electric chair, used for both punishment and the amusement of the staff.
“The pope is saying that white people have more to give the world than any indigenous person,” he said.
Canada bishops’ group said Francis would not offer personal apology for residential school system that abused generations of children.
Leyland Cecco in Toronto Friday 30 March 2018
Survivors of Canada’s residential schools have expressed dismay after Pope Francis refused to apologize on behalf of the Catholic church for a system that abused thousands of indigenous children for generations.
The schools, many of which were run by missionaries, were used to convert indigenous children to Christianity through a governmental policy of “aggressive assimilation”. More than 150,000 children passed through around 80 schools across the country until the last one closed in 1996.
The Canadian government formally apologized for the program 10 years ago. In 2014, Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommended a papal apology, which the prime minister, Justin Trudeau, personally lobbied for when he visited the Vatican last year.
While he has apologized for the “grave sins” of colonialism in South America, in a letter released Tuesday by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the president of the organization said Pope Francis would not issue a personal apology.
Stephen Kakfwi, the former premier of the Northwest Territories, attended a number of residential schools in the Canadian Arctic. He argued that survivors of the schools were not calling for a personal apology from the pontiff, but an institutional response from the Catholic church.
“We asked as for an apology from the pope, the head of the Catholic faith, for the millions of people who are Catholics around the world,” said Kakfwi, who helped arrange visits by Pope John Paul II to the Arctic.
“He would, as a spiritual leader, say that this should have never happened if the clergy followed the true teachings of Jesus. He would be saying: ‘I’m sorry for the failings of the church as an institution.’”
Kakfwi said he suspected that part of the reason for Francis’s refusal was a difference of opinions amongst bishops in Canada, who remain divided on the issue.
Other survivors said the pope’s decision marked a perpetuation of the colonial mindset that gave rise to the system in the first place.
“It’s the continuation of a policy that we are always hoping would be discontinued by the church: the implication that indigenous people are less closer to God than the average non-indigenous person,” said Edmund Metatawabin, a former chief of the Fort Albany First Nation in Ontario.
Much of church doctrine taught to the students was aimed at separating them from their indigenous identity. Metatawabin’s father, himself the product of a residential school, had become “brainwashed” to believe traditional ceremonies and beliefs were bad.
As a youth, Metatawabin was only able to learn of his community’s tradition from his great grandmother and grandfather, who discreetly passed on the knowledge under the promise of secrecy.
Metatawabin attended the notorious St Anne’s Indian residential school for eight years, where he witnessed and experienced rampant sexual and physical abuse. Once, after vomiting into his porridge, he was forced to eat that same bowl of food.
The school even had a homemade electric chair, used for both punishment and the amusement of the staff.
“The pope is saying that white people have more to give the world than any indigenous person,” he said.
March 31, 2018. A Wall Street Journal article about the magical resurrection of the Magic Jeebus Man. I wrote a comment to explain why the magical resurrection of a decomposing corpse is impossible. The numerous other comments: Lots of extreme stupid.
Today's March 31, 2018 Wall Street Journal, also known as the Christian Journal because it has so much Christian bullshit in it, has an article about the magical resurrection of the Magic Jeebus Man. I usually avoid writing comments at the WSJ because the place is infested with stupid fucking assholes, aka Christian scum, but this time I had to write something about it. Here it is:
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
This article, I never saw so much gibberish. Never once did Mr. Weigel provide any evidence for the resurrection fantasy.
Ancient paintings are not evidence for anything. Bible stories are not evidence for anything. 500 dead witnesses, even if they weren't invented, is not evidence for anything. Wishful thinking is not evidence for anything.
The magical resurrection of a decomposing corpse never happened because it's impossible. This is a basic fact of reality. Reality doesn't care about a god fairy's magical powers. Reality doesn't care about what makes cowards feel good. Reality isn't going anywhere.
Less than one third of the human race believes in this ridiculous disgusting resurrection. A thousand years from now nobody will believe it. The stupidity can't last forever.
Christian crybabies will cry. Nobody cares. These crybabies brainwash their children and everyone else's children if they can get away with it. This is child abuse. The child abusers have my contempt.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
A typical comment. The stupid, it burns. "He is risen indeed--factually, historically, literally. There is no hope for the world outside of the resurrection of Christ."
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Here is the entire ridiculous article:
The Easter Effect and How It Changed the World
The first Christians were baffled by what they called ‘the Resurrection.’ Their struggle to understand it brought about astonishing success for their faith.
By George Weigel March 30, 2018
Mr. Weigel is distinguished senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.
In the year 312, just before his victory at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge won him the undisputed leadership of the Roman Empire, Constantine the Great had a heavenly vision of Christian symbols. That augury led him, a year later, to end all legal sanctions on the public profession of Christianity.
Or so a pious tradition has it.
But there’s a more mundane explanation for Constantine’s decision: He was a politician who had shrewdly decided to join the winning side. By the early 4th century, Christians likely counted for between a quarter and a half of the population of the Roman Empire, and their exponential growth seemed likely to continue.
How did this happen? How did a ragtag band of nobodies from the far edges of the Mediterranean world become such a dominant force in just two and a half centuries? The historical sociology of this extraordinary phenomenon has been explored by Rodney Stark of Baylor University, who argues that Christianity modeled a nobler way of life than what was on offer elsewhere in the rather brutal society of the day. In Christianity, women were respected as they weren’t in classical culture and played a critical role in bringing men to the faith and attracting converts. In an age of plagues, the readiness of Christians to care for all the sick, not just their own, was a factor, as was the impressive witness to faith of countless martyrs. Christianity also grew from within because Christians had larger families, a byproduct of their faith’s prohibition of contraception, abortion and infanticide.
For theologians who like to think that arguments won the day for the Christian faith, this sort of historical reconstruction is not particularly gratifying, but it makes a lot of human sense. Prof. Stark’s analysis still leaves us with a question, though: How did all that modeling of a compelling, alternative way of life get started? And that, in turn, brings us back to that gaggle of nobodies in the early first century A.D. and what happened to them.
What happened to them was the Easter Effect.
There is no accounting for the rise of Christianity without weighing the revolutionary effect on those nobodies of what they called “the Resurrection”: their encounter with the one whom they embraced as the Risen Lord, whom they first knew as the itinerant Jewish rabbi, Jesus of Nazareth, and who died an agonizing and shameful death on a Roman cross outside Jerusalem. As N.T. Wright, one of the Anglosphere’s pre-eminent biblical scholars, makes clear, that first generation answered the question of why they were Christians with a straightforward answer: because Jesus was raised from the dead.
Now that, as some disgruntled listeners once complained about Jesus’ preaching, is “a hard saying.” It was no less challenging two millennia ago than it is today. And one of the most striking things about the New Testament accounts of Easter, and what followed in the days immediately after Easter, is that the Gospel writers and editors carefully preserved the memory of the first Christians’ bafflement, skepticism and even fright about what had happened to their former teacher and what was happening to them.
In Mark’s gospel, Mary Magdalene and other women in Jesus’ entourage find his tomb empty and a young man sitting nearby telling them that “Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified…has risen; he is not here.” But they had no idea what that was all about, “and went out and fled from the tomb…[and] said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.”
Two disciples walking to Emmaus from Jerusalem on Easter afternoon haven’t a clue as to who’s talking with them along their way, interpreting the scriptures and explaining Jesus’ suffering as part of his messianic mission. They don’t even recognize who it is that sits down to supper with them until he breaks bread and asks a blessing: “…and their eyes were opened and they recognized him.” They high-tail it back to Jerusalem to tell the other friends of Jesus, who report that Peter has had a similarly strange experience, but when “Jesus himself stood among them…they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a ghost.”
Some time later, Peter, John and others in Jesus’ core group are fishing on the Sea of Tiberias. “Jesus stood on the beach,” we are told, “yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus.” At the very end of these post-Easter accounts, those whom we might expect to have been the first to grasp what was afoot are still skeptical. When that core group of Jesus’ followers goes back to Galilee, they see him, “but some doubted.”
This remarkable and deliberate recording of the first Christians’ incomprehension of what they insisted was the irreducible bottom line of their faith teaches us two things. First, it tells us that the early Christians were confident enough about what they called the Resurrection that (to borrow from Prof. Wright) they were prepared to say something like, “I know this sounds ridiculous, but it’s what happened.” And the second thing it tells us is that it took time for the first Christians to figure out what the events of Easter meant—not only for Jesus but for themselves. As they worked that out, their thinking about a lot of things changed profoundly, as Prof. Wright and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI help us to understand in their biblical commentaries.
The way they thought about time and history changed. During Jesus’ public ministry, many of his followers shared in the Jewish messianic expectations of the time: God would soon work something grand for his people in Israel, liberating them from their oppressors and bringing about a new age in which (as Isaiah had prophesied) the nations would stream to the mountain of the Lord and history would end. The early Christians came to understand that the cataclysmic, world-redeeming act that God had promised had taken place at Easter. God’s Kingdom had come not at the end of time but within time—and that had changed the texture of both time and history. History continued, but those shaped by the Easter Effect became the people who knew how history was going to turn out. Because of that, they could live differently. The Easter Effect impelled them to bring a new standard of equality into the world and to embrace death as martyrs if necessary—because they knew, now, that death did not have the final word in the human story.
The way they thought about “resurrection” changed. Pious Jews taught by the reforming Pharisees of Jesus’ time believed in the resurrection of the dead. Easter taught the first Christians, who were all pious Jews, that this resurrection was not the resuscitation of a corpse, nor did it involve the decomposition of a corpse. Jesus’ tomb was empty, but the Risen Lord appeared to his disciples in a transformed body. Those who first experienced the Easter Effect would not have put it in these terms, but as their understanding of what had happened to Jesus and to themselves grew, they grasped that (as Benedict XVI put it in “Jesus of Nazareth–Holy Week”) there had been an “evolutionary leap” in the human condition. A new way of being had been encountered in the manifestly human but utterly different life of the one they met as the Risen Lord. That insight radically changed all those who embraced it.
Which brings us to the next manifestation of the Easter Effect among the first Christians: The way they thought about their responsibilities changed. What had happened to Jesus, they slowly began to grasp, was not just about their former teacher and friend; it was about all of them. His destiny was their destiny. So not only could they face opposition, scorn and even death with confidence; they could offer to others the truth and the fellowship they had been given. Indeed, they had to do so, to be faithful to what they had experienced. Christian mission is inconceivable without Easter. And that mission would eventually lead these sons and daughters of Abraham to the conviction that the promise that God had made to the People of Israel had been extended to those who were not sons and daughters of Abraham. Because of Easter, the gentiles, too, could be embraced in a relationship—a covenant—with the one God, which was embodied in righteous living.
The way they thought about worship and its temporal rhythms changed. For the Jews who were the first members of the Jesus movement, nothing was more sacrosanct than the Sabbath, the seventh day of rest and worship. The Sabbath was enshrined in creation, for God himself had rested on the seventh day. The Sabbath’s importance as a key behavioral marker of the People of God had been reaffirmed in the Ten Commandments. Yet these first Christians, all Jews, quickly fixed Sunday as the “Lord’s Day,” because Easter had been a Sunday. Benedict XVI draws out the crucial point here:
“Only an event that marked souls indelibly could bring about such a profound realignment of the religious culture of the week. Mere theological speculations could not have achieved this... [The] celebration of the Lord’s day, which was characteristic of the Christian community from the outset, is one of the most convincing proofs that something extraordinary happened [at Easter]—the discovery of the empty tomb and the encounter with the Risen Lord.”
Without the Easter Effect, there is really no explaining why there was a winning side—the Christian side—for Constantine the Great to choose. That effect, as Prof. Wright puts it, begins with, and is incomprehensible without, the first Christians’ conviction that “Jesus of Nazareth was raised bodily to a new sort of life, three days after his execution.” Recognizing that does not, of course, convince everyone. Nor does it end the mystery of Easter. The first Christians, like Christians today, cannot fully comprehend resurrected life: the life depicted in the Gospels of a transphysical body that can eat, drink and be touched but that also appears and disappears, unbothered by obstacles like doors and distance.
Nor does Easter mean that everything is always going to turn out just fine, for there is still work to be done in history. As Benedict XVI put it in his 2010 Easter message: “Easter does not work magic. Just as the Israelites found the desert awaiting them on the far side of the Red Sea, so the Church, after the Resurrection, always finds history filled with joy and hope, grief and anguish. And yet this history is changed…it is truly open to the future.”
Which perhaps offers one final insight into the question with which we began: How did the Jesus movement, beginning on the margins of civilization and led by people of seeming inconsequence, end up being what Constantine regarded as the winning side? However important the role of sociological factors in explaining why Christianity carried the day, there also was that curious and inexplicable joy that marked the early Christians, even as they were being marched off to execution. Was that joy simply delusion? Denial?
Perhaps it was the Easter Effect: the joy of people who had become convinced that they were witnesses to something inexplicable but nonetheless true. Something that gave a superabundance of meaning to life and that erased the fear of death. Something that had to be shared. Something with which to change the world.
Appeared in the March 31, 2018, print edition as 'The Easter Effect.'
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
This article, I never saw so much gibberish. Never once did Mr. Weigel provide any evidence for the resurrection fantasy.
Ancient paintings are not evidence for anything. Bible stories are not evidence for anything. 500 dead witnesses, even if they weren't invented, is not evidence for anything. Wishful thinking is not evidence for anything.
The magical resurrection of a decomposing corpse never happened because it's impossible. This is a basic fact of reality. Reality doesn't care about a god fairy's magical powers. Reality doesn't care about what makes cowards feel good. Reality isn't going anywhere.
Less than one third of the human race believes in this ridiculous disgusting resurrection. A thousand years from now nobody will believe it. The stupidity can't last forever.
Christian crybabies will cry. Nobody cares. These crybabies brainwash their children and everyone else's children if they can get away with it. This is child abuse. The child abusers have my contempt.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
A typical comment. The stupid, it burns. "He is risen indeed--factually, historically, literally. There is no hope for the world outside of the resurrection of Christ."
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Here is the entire ridiculous article:
The Easter Effect and How It Changed the World
The first Christians were baffled by what they called ‘the Resurrection.’ Their struggle to understand it brought about astonishing success for their faith.
By George Weigel March 30, 2018
Mr. Weigel is distinguished senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.
In the year 312, just before his victory at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge won him the undisputed leadership of the Roman Empire, Constantine the Great had a heavenly vision of Christian symbols. That augury led him, a year later, to end all legal sanctions on the public profession of Christianity.
Or so a pious tradition has it.
But there’s a more mundane explanation for Constantine’s decision: He was a politician who had shrewdly decided to join the winning side. By the early 4th century, Christians likely counted for between a quarter and a half of the population of the Roman Empire, and their exponential growth seemed likely to continue.
How did this happen? How did a ragtag band of nobodies from the far edges of the Mediterranean world become such a dominant force in just two and a half centuries? The historical sociology of this extraordinary phenomenon has been explored by Rodney Stark of Baylor University, who argues that Christianity modeled a nobler way of life than what was on offer elsewhere in the rather brutal society of the day. In Christianity, women were respected as they weren’t in classical culture and played a critical role in bringing men to the faith and attracting converts. In an age of plagues, the readiness of Christians to care for all the sick, not just their own, was a factor, as was the impressive witness to faith of countless martyrs. Christianity also grew from within because Christians had larger families, a byproduct of their faith’s prohibition of contraception, abortion and infanticide.
For theologians who like to think that arguments won the day for the Christian faith, this sort of historical reconstruction is not particularly gratifying, but it makes a lot of human sense. Prof. Stark’s analysis still leaves us with a question, though: How did all that modeling of a compelling, alternative way of life get started? And that, in turn, brings us back to that gaggle of nobodies in the early first century A.D. and what happened to them.
What happened to them was the Easter Effect.
There is no accounting for the rise of Christianity without weighing the revolutionary effect on those nobodies of what they called “the Resurrection”: their encounter with the one whom they embraced as the Risen Lord, whom they first knew as the itinerant Jewish rabbi, Jesus of Nazareth, and who died an agonizing and shameful death on a Roman cross outside Jerusalem. As N.T. Wright, one of the Anglosphere’s pre-eminent biblical scholars, makes clear, that first generation answered the question of why they were Christians with a straightforward answer: because Jesus was raised from the dead.
Now that, as some disgruntled listeners once complained about Jesus’ preaching, is “a hard saying.” It was no less challenging two millennia ago than it is today. And one of the most striking things about the New Testament accounts of Easter, and what followed in the days immediately after Easter, is that the Gospel writers and editors carefully preserved the memory of the first Christians’ bafflement, skepticism and even fright about what had happened to their former teacher and what was happening to them.
In Mark’s gospel, Mary Magdalene and other women in Jesus’ entourage find his tomb empty and a young man sitting nearby telling them that “Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified…has risen; he is not here.” But they had no idea what that was all about, “and went out and fled from the tomb…[and] said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.”
Two disciples walking to Emmaus from Jerusalem on Easter afternoon haven’t a clue as to who’s talking with them along their way, interpreting the scriptures and explaining Jesus’ suffering as part of his messianic mission. They don’t even recognize who it is that sits down to supper with them until he breaks bread and asks a blessing: “…and their eyes were opened and they recognized him.” They high-tail it back to Jerusalem to tell the other friends of Jesus, who report that Peter has had a similarly strange experience, but when “Jesus himself stood among them…they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a ghost.”
Some time later, Peter, John and others in Jesus’ core group are fishing on the Sea of Tiberias. “Jesus stood on the beach,” we are told, “yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus.” At the very end of these post-Easter accounts, those whom we might expect to have been the first to grasp what was afoot are still skeptical. When that core group of Jesus’ followers goes back to Galilee, they see him, “but some doubted.”
This remarkable and deliberate recording of the first Christians’ incomprehension of what they insisted was the irreducible bottom line of their faith teaches us two things. First, it tells us that the early Christians were confident enough about what they called the Resurrection that (to borrow from Prof. Wright) they were prepared to say something like, “I know this sounds ridiculous, but it’s what happened.” And the second thing it tells us is that it took time for the first Christians to figure out what the events of Easter meant—not only for Jesus but for themselves. As they worked that out, their thinking about a lot of things changed profoundly, as Prof. Wright and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI help us to understand in their biblical commentaries.
The way they thought about time and history changed. During Jesus’ public ministry, many of his followers shared in the Jewish messianic expectations of the time: God would soon work something grand for his people in Israel, liberating them from their oppressors and bringing about a new age in which (as Isaiah had prophesied) the nations would stream to the mountain of the Lord and history would end. The early Christians came to understand that the cataclysmic, world-redeeming act that God had promised had taken place at Easter. God’s Kingdom had come not at the end of time but within time—and that had changed the texture of both time and history. History continued, but those shaped by the Easter Effect became the people who knew how history was going to turn out. Because of that, they could live differently. The Easter Effect impelled them to bring a new standard of equality into the world and to embrace death as martyrs if necessary—because they knew, now, that death did not have the final word in the human story.
The way they thought about “resurrection” changed. Pious Jews taught by the reforming Pharisees of Jesus’ time believed in the resurrection of the dead. Easter taught the first Christians, who were all pious Jews, that this resurrection was not the resuscitation of a corpse, nor did it involve the decomposition of a corpse. Jesus’ tomb was empty, but the Risen Lord appeared to his disciples in a transformed body. Those who first experienced the Easter Effect would not have put it in these terms, but as their understanding of what had happened to Jesus and to themselves grew, they grasped that (as Benedict XVI put it in “Jesus of Nazareth–Holy Week”) there had been an “evolutionary leap” in the human condition. A new way of being had been encountered in the manifestly human but utterly different life of the one they met as the Risen Lord. That insight radically changed all those who embraced it.
Which brings us to the next manifestation of the Easter Effect among the first Christians: The way they thought about their responsibilities changed. What had happened to Jesus, they slowly began to grasp, was not just about their former teacher and friend; it was about all of them. His destiny was their destiny. So not only could they face opposition, scorn and even death with confidence; they could offer to others the truth and the fellowship they had been given. Indeed, they had to do so, to be faithful to what they had experienced. Christian mission is inconceivable without Easter. And that mission would eventually lead these sons and daughters of Abraham to the conviction that the promise that God had made to the People of Israel had been extended to those who were not sons and daughters of Abraham. Because of Easter, the gentiles, too, could be embraced in a relationship—a covenant—with the one God, which was embodied in righteous living.
The way they thought about worship and its temporal rhythms changed. For the Jews who were the first members of the Jesus movement, nothing was more sacrosanct than the Sabbath, the seventh day of rest and worship. The Sabbath was enshrined in creation, for God himself had rested on the seventh day. The Sabbath’s importance as a key behavioral marker of the People of God had been reaffirmed in the Ten Commandments. Yet these first Christians, all Jews, quickly fixed Sunday as the “Lord’s Day,” because Easter had been a Sunday. Benedict XVI draws out the crucial point here:
“Only an event that marked souls indelibly could bring about such a profound realignment of the religious culture of the week. Mere theological speculations could not have achieved this... [The] celebration of the Lord’s day, which was characteristic of the Christian community from the outset, is one of the most convincing proofs that something extraordinary happened [at Easter]—the discovery of the empty tomb and the encounter with the Risen Lord.”
Without the Easter Effect, there is really no explaining why there was a winning side—the Christian side—for Constantine the Great to choose. That effect, as Prof. Wright puts it, begins with, and is incomprehensible without, the first Christians’ conviction that “Jesus of Nazareth was raised bodily to a new sort of life, three days after his execution.” Recognizing that does not, of course, convince everyone. Nor does it end the mystery of Easter. The first Christians, like Christians today, cannot fully comprehend resurrected life: the life depicted in the Gospels of a transphysical body that can eat, drink and be touched but that also appears and disappears, unbothered by obstacles like doors and distance.
Nor does Easter mean that everything is always going to turn out just fine, for there is still work to be done in history. As Benedict XVI put it in his 2010 Easter message: “Easter does not work magic. Just as the Israelites found the desert awaiting them on the far side of the Red Sea, so the Church, after the Resurrection, always finds history filled with joy and hope, grief and anguish. And yet this history is changed…it is truly open to the future.”
Which perhaps offers one final insight into the question with which we began: How did the Jesus movement, beginning on the margins of civilization and led by people of seeming inconsequence, end up being what Constantine regarded as the winning side? However important the role of sociological factors in explaining why Christianity carried the day, there also was that curious and inexplicable joy that marked the early Christians, even as they were being marched off to execution. Was that joy simply delusion? Denial?
Perhaps it was the Easter Effect: the joy of people who had become convinced that they were witnesses to something inexplicable but nonetheless true. Something that gave a superabundance of meaning to life and that erased the fear of death. Something that had to be shared. Something with which to change the world.
Appeared in the March 31, 2018, print edition as 'The Easter Effect.'
 |
| ‘Resurrection of Christ’ by Sodoma (Giovanni Antonio Bazzi). |
 |
| ‘The Incredulity of St. Thomas’ by Caravaggio. |
Wall Street Journal article about President Fucktard Trump and his idiotic war against successful businesses including Amazon (which I love) and AT&T which is where I get most of my dividend income. Drop dead Trump.
Wall Street Journal - President Fucktard Trump Target's Amazon. The President’s tweets make any regulatory action seem political.
By The Editorial Board - March 29, 2018 449 COMMENTS
Donald Trump slammed Amazon on Twitter Thursday, and its stock price went up. Maybe investors are figuring out that deploying federal power against the online retailing behemoth isn’t as easy as pressing “Tweet”—for which Americans should be grateful no matter what they think of Amazon.
On Wednesday the Axios website reported what was hardly a secret—that Mr. Trump doesn’t like Amazon and its CEO Jeff Bezos, who also owns the relentlessly anti-Trump Washington Post. Amazon shares fell about 4.4% on the day, amid the general investor angst over political anger aimed at Facebook and the big tech companies.
Then on Thursday Mr. Trump, perhaps boiling over after a calm week, tweeted: “I have stated my concerns with Amazon long before the election. Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!”
Amazon wisely declined to respond, and the President is wrong to target a private company. That’s what Democrats do—as Barack Obama did against Staples for executive compensation (2015), Anthem for raising insurance premiums (2010), and the Koch brothers for opposing renewable fuels (2015), among others. But Amazon shares popped back 1.1% Thursday in a rising market.
The reality is that Mr. Trump and the executive branch can’t do much to hurt Amazon—at least not legally, or without an effort to build a far better case than his tweets offer.
Mr. Trump complains about Amazon’s state and local tax payments, but Amazon has collected billions of dollars in sales tax in the states that require it. It's true that cities and states competing for Amazon’s second headquarters have offered an embarrassment of taxpayer subsidies. But however regrettable, such corporate dowries aren’t the concern of the federal government.
Mr. Trump could try to unleash the Internal Revenue Service, though that would be a scandal that could be an impeachable offense. The press and prosecutors would not give the Trump IRS the pass they gave Lois Lerner during the Obama years for targeting conservative nonprofits with extra scrutiny.
Alternatively, Mr. Trump could try to gin up antitrust regulators at the Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department. But the federal government would struggle to prove consumer harm, the most basic criterion for an antitrust case. Amazon has disrupted the retailing business by delivering online consumer goods conveniently and often at lower prices.
One place Amazon likely does enjoy an unfair competitive advantage is due to federal intervention. The Obama Justice Department brought an antitrust case against Apple for trying to compete with Amazon’s e-books dominance. These columns called the case “quarter-baked,” but liberal judges approved.
Amazon has been the main beneficiary, and today it accounts for around 75% of all e-book sales. Mr. Trump’s appointees at the Justice Department should review that case, though the President’s social-media outbursts will make any such intervention now seem politically motivated. Mr. Trump’s tweets have already cast a political pall on Justice’s legally dubious antitrust case against the AT&T -Time Warner merger.
Mr. Trump’s other big gripe is that taxpayers are on the losing end of Amazon’s deal with the U.S. Postal Service. But that story is also more complicated. The Post Office has often operated at a net loss, but package volumes grew in fiscal 2017 by more than 11%, making it a rare growth market. Many of the additional 589 million boxes delivered last year came from Amazon.
Though imperfect, the deal is mutually beneficial. The Post Office arguably needs Amazon more than Amazon needs the Post Office. The Post Office could drop Amazon as a delivery partner, but it would likely have to raise prices elsewhere or endure higher losses. Would Mr. Trump take credit for that?
Mr. Trump can rail against anyone he wants, but America is still a nation of laws, as Mr. Obama also discovered. This is a lesson Mr. Trump’s critics forgot as they cried wolf over a fascist takeover. The political reality is that the more Mr. Trump publicly assails Amazon, the harder it will be to take regulatory action, deserved or not.
Appeared in the March 30, 2018, print edition.
By The Editorial Board - March 29, 2018 449 COMMENTS
Donald Trump slammed Amazon on Twitter Thursday, and its stock price went up. Maybe investors are figuring out that deploying federal power against the online retailing behemoth isn’t as easy as pressing “Tweet”—for which Americans should be grateful no matter what they think of Amazon.
On Wednesday the Axios website reported what was hardly a secret—that Mr. Trump doesn’t like Amazon and its CEO Jeff Bezos, who also owns the relentlessly anti-Trump Washington Post. Amazon shares fell about 4.4% on the day, amid the general investor angst over political anger aimed at Facebook and the big tech companies.
Then on Thursday Mr. Trump, perhaps boiling over after a calm week, tweeted: “I have stated my concerns with Amazon long before the election. Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!”
Amazon wisely declined to respond, and the President is wrong to target a private company. That’s what Democrats do—as Barack Obama did against Staples for executive compensation (2015), Anthem for raising insurance premiums (2010), and the Koch brothers for opposing renewable fuels (2015), among others. But Amazon shares popped back 1.1% Thursday in a rising market.
The reality is that Mr. Trump and the executive branch can’t do much to hurt Amazon—at least not legally, or without an effort to build a far better case than his tweets offer.
Mr. Trump complains about Amazon’s state and local tax payments, but Amazon has collected billions of dollars in sales tax in the states that require it. It's true that cities and states competing for Amazon’s second headquarters have offered an embarrassment of taxpayer subsidies. But however regrettable, such corporate dowries aren’t the concern of the federal government.
Mr. Trump could try to unleash the Internal Revenue Service, though that would be a scandal that could be an impeachable offense. The press and prosecutors would not give the Trump IRS the pass they gave Lois Lerner during the Obama years for targeting conservative nonprofits with extra scrutiny.
Alternatively, Mr. Trump could try to gin up antitrust regulators at the Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department. But the federal government would struggle to prove consumer harm, the most basic criterion for an antitrust case. Amazon has disrupted the retailing business by delivering online consumer goods conveniently and often at lower prices.
One place Amazon likely does enjoy an unfair competitive advantage is due to federal intervention. The Obama Justice Department brought an antitrust case against Apple for trying to compete with Amazon’s e-books dominance. These columns called the case “quarter-baked,” but liberal judges approved.
Amazon has been the main beneficiary, and today it accounts for around 75% of all e-book sales. Mr. Trump’s appointees at the Justice Department should review that case, though the President’s social-media outbursts will make any such intervention now seem politically motivated. Mr. Trump’s tweets have already cast a political pall on Justice’s legally dubious antitrust case against the AT&T -Time Warner merger.
Mr. Trump’s other big gripe is that taxpayers are on the losing end of Amazon’s deal with the U.S. Postal Service. But that story is also more complicated. The Post Office has often operated at a net loss, but package volumes grew in fiscal 2017 by more than 11%, making it a rare growth market. Many of the additional 589 million boxes delivered last year came from Amazon.
Though imperfect, the deal is mutually beneficial. The Post Office arguably needs Amazon more than Amazon needs the Post Office. The Post Office could drop Amazon as a delivery partner, but it would likely have to raise prices elsewhere or endure higher losses. Would Mr. Trump take credit for that?
Mr. Trump can rail against anyone he wants, but America is still a nation of laws, as Mr. Obama also discovered. This is a lesson Mr. Trump’s critics forgot as they cried wolf over a fascist takeover. The political reality is that the more Mr. Trump publicly assails Amazon, the harder it will be to take regulatory action, deserved or not.
Appeared in the March 30, 2018, print edition.
Friday, March 30, 2018
Muslim scum need to be wiped off this planet.
BBC News - video - Malala: 'I'm so happy to be home'
According to Malala there are 130 million girls who cannot go to school in Pakistan.
She was almost killed because she defended the right of girls to go to school. Cowardly Muslim assholes would like to shoot her in the head again. "Moderate Muslims" think it's wrong for women to be educated. Muslim morons are afraid of women.
According to Malala there are 130 million girls who cannot go to school in Pakistan.
She was almost killed because she defended the right of girls to go to school. Cowardly Muslim assholes would like to shoot her in the head again. "Moderate Muslims" think it's wrong for women to be educated. Muslim morons are afraid of women.
The time for being nice is over with. The only way to stop poaching which is wiping out entire species is kill the poachers. Don't warn them. Don't let them surrender. Just kill them.
 |
| Despite rising demand for illegal rhino horn, and plummeting numbers throughout Africa and South-East Asia, rhinos in Kaziranga are flourishing |
In Kaziranga, a national park in north-eastern India, rangers shoot people to protect rhinos. The park’s aggressive policing is, of course, controversial, but the results are clear: despite rising demand for illegal rhino horn, and plummeting numbers throughout Africa and southeast Asia, rhinos in Kaziranga are flourishing.
The BBC feature shows park rangers who have been given the licence to “shoot-on-sight,” a power they have used with deadly effect. In 2015 more than 20 poachers were killed—more than the number of rhinos poached that year.
American yellow warbler
Wikipedia - American yellow warbler
To humans, these birds are quite beneficial. For one thing, in particular the young devour many pest insects during the breeding season. For another, the plumage and song of the breeding males have been described[3] as "lovely" and "musical", and they can help to generate revenue from ecotourism. No significant negative effects of American yellow and mangrove warblers on humans have been recorded.[3]
You can hear these birds sing at Yellow Warbler Sounds.
A problem that will probably never be fixed. The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope.
Another quote for my list of favorite quotes. I wrote this one.
Every god-soaked idiot is a feeble-minded coward. These morons for Jeebus or Allah can't exist without their childish magical-2nd-life fantasy. Reality makes them cry.
This blog has 281 posts with my favorite quotes at My favorite quotes.
This blog has 281 posts with my favorite quotes at My favorite quotes.
What somebody else wrote about religious brainwashing, aka child abuse.
"The only way primitive religion exists today is through the child abuse of forcing it into very, very young children but thanks to better education and growing intellects so many teens are able to discover the truth, throw off the indoctrination and step into the real world."
"Atheism is not a conscious decision or a belief but a realization, those that cannot escape remain prisoners of their conditioning."
"Atheism is not a conscious decision or a belief but a realization, those that cannot escape remain prisoners of their conditioning."
Religious violence and religious stupidity. This stuff would never happen if everyone was normal, aka atheist.
What was billed as a peaceful protest along Gaza's border with Israel turned bloody. The Israeli military killed at least 8 Palestinians, Gaza officials say.
Friday, March 30, 2018 11:29 AM EST
What was billed as a six-week campaign of peaceful protests in Gaza, culminating in a mass march toward Israel, descended almost immediately into chaos and bloodshed on Friday, with at least eight Palestinians reported killed by Israeli soldiers in confrontations along the border fence.
Friday, March 30, 2018 11:29 AM EST
What was billed as a six-week campaign of peaceful protests in Gaza, culminating in a mass march toward Israel, descended almost immediately into chaos and bloodshed on Friday, with at least eight Palestinians reported killed by Israeli soldiers in confrontations along the border fence.
I play chess at Lichess.org. My opponents are from virtually every country in the world. When I look at their profiles I thank goodness for Google Translate.
Алексей Мищенко
Люблю решать задачи, читать шахматную литературу в cbh,изучать классическое наследие!
Санкт-Петербург, Russia
Alexey Mishchenko
I like solving problems, reading chess literature in cbh, studying the classical heritage!
Saint Petersburg, Russia
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Classical heritage would be chess games from the 18th and 19th centuries.
I just lost a game against Saint Petersburg, Russia. I was winning but he found a way to change everything. Russians are the best chess players in the world.
Люблю решать задачи, читать шахматную литературу в cbh,изучать классическое наследие!
Санкт-Петербург, Russia
Alexey Mishchenko
I like solving problems, reading chess literature in cbh, studying the classical heritage!
Saint Petersburg, Russia
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Classical heritage would be chess games from the 18th and 19th centuries.
I just lost a game against Saint Petersburg, Russia. I was winning but he found a way to change everything. Russians are the best chess players in the world.
More than two thousand years of religious violence.
Where does evil come from?
Religion. Millions murdered because they believed in the wrong magic god fairy. These atrocities continue today. It will never end until the last theistic moron drops dead.
Religion. Millions murdered because they believed in the wrong magic god fairy. These atrocities continue today. It will never end until the last theistic moron drops dead.
Thursday, March 29, 2018
A Christian fucktard wrote "Jesus saves souls".
The Magic Jeebus Man saves souls.
Some problems with this moronic fantasy: Jeebus is dead. Magical souls are not real. A magical 2nd life is impossible.
The stupidity in Idiot America is overwhelming.
Some problems with this moronic fantasy: Jeebus is dead. Magical souls are not real. A magical 2nd life is impossible.
The stupidity in Idiot America is overwhelming.
This frog lives in Panama. I don't know what species it is. The frog is yellow with black dots.
Wikipedia: Covering around 40% of its land area, Panama's jungles are home to an abundance of tropical plants and animals – some of them found nowhere else on the planet.[11]
UPDATE:
Google is my friend. A google search for "panama yellow frog with black dots" worked. This beautiful creature is called the Panamanian golden frog but actually it's a toad. As usual in the 21st century this toad is threatened with extinction thanks to human assholes.
Wikipedia: Despite its common name, the Panamanian golden frog is a true toad, a member of the family Bufonidae. It was first described as a subspecies of Atelopus varius, but is now classified as a separate species.[3][7][8]
The Panamanian golden frog is a national symbol and is considered to be one of the most beautiful frogs in Panama.[9] The skin colour ranges from light yellow-green to bright gold, with some individuals exhibiting black spots on their backs and legs. Females are generally larger than males; females typically range from 45 to 63 mm (1.8 to 2.5 in) in length and 4 to 15 g (0.14 to 0.53 oz) in weight, with males between 35 and 48 millimetres (1.4 and 1.9 in) in length and 3 and 12 grams (0.11 and 0.42 oz) in weight.[10]
I recommend click this link: Wikipedia - Panamanian golden frog
It has information about why this priceless toad is going extinct and what's being done to save it.
I answered a dumb question.
"Why do atheists insist that there is no evidence for God?"
The thing has never shown itself. The thing has never tried to communicate with us. The thing has never provided any evidence for its existence.
There never could be any evidence for a magic god fairy because the thing is impossible. There is no magic in the universe. This is a basic fact of reality.
The thing has never shown itself. The thing has never tried to communicate with us. The thing has never provided any evidence for its existence.
There never could be any evidence for a magic god fairy because the thing is impossible. There is no magic in the universe. This is a basic fact of reality.
I answered a good question.
"What makes you happy being an atheist?"
The freedom is nice.
Knowing I'm not infected with the god disease is nice.
Not being able to solve scientific problems with the ridiculous god-did-it fantasy is nice. Reality is much more interesting than the childish fantasies of religions.
The best thing is I know I will be nothing but worm food when I drop dead. No eternal boredom in a magical heaven is a good thing.
The freedom is nice.
Knowing I'm not infected with the god disease is nice.
Not being able to solve scientific problems with the ridiculous god-did-it fantasy is nice. Reality is much more interesting than the childish fantasies of religions.
The best thing is I know I will be nothing but worm food when I drop dead. No eternal boredom in a magical heaven is a good thing.
Idiot America has something called the "Discovery Institute" which is a Christian creationist organization. Their goal is to destroy science education in America. Evolution makes these morons cry. Virtually everyone who works at this anti-science organization is in the Encyclopedia of American Loons including this stupid asshole, Richard Weikart.
Encyclopedia of American Loons - Richard Weikart
Richard Weikart is a professor of history at California State University, Stanislaus, and a senior fellow for the Center for Science and Culture of the Discovery Institute. He is also at the editorial board of the Access Research Network's Origins & Design Journal, where his work focuses on the impact of evolution on social thought, ethics and morality. Needless to say, his conclusions are not shared by most fellow historians.
His most famous book is “From Darwin to Hitler”, which has been pretty much univocally dismissed by actual experts because it is historically wildly inaccurate and stupid, but it is nevertheless widely touted by creationists (despite the fact that confusing the veracity of a belief with the consequences of holding it is a rather obvious fallacy). Strange that. The sequel, “Hitler's Ethic”, argues that Hitler's “ideology revolved around evolutionary ethics – the idea that whatever promoted evolutionary progress is good and whatever hinders it is bad.” (He is, obviously, less focused on the fact that Hitler’s views have nothing to do with the biological theory of evolution, a theory Hitler – a staunch creationist in fact rejected). Weikart’s central claim is that Darwinism promotes racism whereas “Christian theology taught the universal brotherhood of all races, who descended from common ancestors – Adam and Eve.” Most historians are unconvinced that this claim is accurate either. Of course, Weikart uses his purported connection to issue fair warnings to today’s Darwinists about where their beliefs may take them (as an aside: Dembski gleefully shares this sentiment).
For a note to Weikart’s article “Was Darwin or Spencer the father of laissez-faire social Darwinism?”, this one is fairly interesting.
The late D James Kennedy was a fan (more on that here and here) and Weikart played a prominent role in the insanely dishonest film “Darwin’s Deadly Legacy”.
You can find a good resource concerning creationism and genocide arguments here.
Diagnosis: Apparently the embodiment of the Discovery Institute’s research philosophy, Weikart is enormously influential, and work of his kind continues to swamp the market despite its dishonesty, fact-distortions, ignorance and bias, and covert or overt references pops up again and again, regardless of how often they are refuted.
Richard Weikart is a professor of history at California State University, Stanislaus, and a senior fellow for the Center for Science and Culture of the Discovery Institute. He is also at the editorial board of the Access Research Network's Origins & Design Journal, where his work focuses on the impact of evolution on social thought, ethics and morality. Needless to say, his conclusions are not shared by most fellow historians.
His most famous book is “From Darwin to Hitler”, which has been pretty much univocally dismissed by actual experts because it is historically wildly inaccurate and stupid, but it is nevertheless widely touted by creationists (despite the fact that confusing the veracity of a belief with the consequences of holding it is a rather obvious fallacy). Strange that. The sequel, “Hitler's Ethic”, argues that Hitler's “ideology revolved around evolutionary ethics – the idea that whatever promoted evolutionary progress is good and whatever hinders it is bad.” (He is, obviously, less focused on the fact that Hitler’s views have nothing to do with the biological theory of evolution, a theory Hitler – a staunch creationist in fact rejected). Weikart’s central claim is that Darwinism promotes racism whereas “Christian theology taught the universal brotherhood of all races, who descended from common ancestors – Adam and Eve.” Most historians are unconvinced that this claim is accurate either. Of course, Weikart uses his purported connection to issue fair warnings to today’s Darwinists about where their beliefs may take them (as an aside: Dembski gleefully shares this sentiment).
For a note to Weikart’s article “Was Darwin or Spencer the father of laissez-faire social Darwinism?”, this one is fairly interesting.
The late D James Kennedy was a fan (more on that here and here) and Weikart played a prominent role in the insanely dishonest film “Darwin’s Deadly Legacy”.
You can find a good resource concerning creationism and genocide arguments here.
Diagnosis: Apparently the embodiment of the Discovery Institute’s research philosophy, Weikart is enormously influential, and work of his kind continues to swamp the market despite its dishonesty, fact-distortions, ignorance and bias, and covert or overt references pops up again and again, regardless of how often they are refuted.
Charles Darwin called this artificial selection.
In animal breeding, techniques such as inbreeding, linebreeding, and outcrossing are utilized. In plant breeding, similar methods are used. Charles Darwin discussed how selective breeding had been successful in producing change over time in his 1859 book, On the Origin of Species. Its first chapter discusses selective breeding and domestication of such animals as pigeons, cats, cattle, and dogs. Darwin used artificial selection as a springboard to introduce and support the theory of natural selection.[1]
A successful business, loved by its customers, makes President Donald Trump cry.
President Fucktard Trump is threatening Amazon.com. Virtually everything I buy I get at Amazon. Drop dead Trump, you stupid fucking asshole.
Wall Street Journal - President Donald Trump slammed Amazon.com Inc. over the company’s business practices and its impact on the economy, adding to investors’ growing concerns about potential new regulations for the technology giant.
Wall Street Journal - President Donald Trump slammed Amazon.com Inc. over the company’s business practices and its impact on the economy, adding to investors’ growing concerns about potential new regulations for the technology giant.
Here in Idiot America we have something called "The Wall Street Journal". It's about business and numerous other things. Most of the subscribers are Republicans. Most Republicans are god-soaked assholes. So I was not surprised to see a full page ad in today's newspaper about god bullshit.
The full page ad had photos of two brainwashed children. A quote from one of the victims who learned how to be stupid:
"A miracle is when god surprises us. He saved my life twice!"
Apparently doctors had nothing to do with it because the Magic Man did it.
Some more childish bullshit in the ad:
"Children believe in miracles. What if we all did?"
What if everyone thought magical miracles are real? In other words what if everyone was totally deranged?
It gets worse:
"Children see the true wonder of Easter. Imagine if we all saw the world like that."
"A miracle is when god surprises us. He saved my life twice!"
Apparently doctors had nothing to do with it because the Magic Man did it.
Some more childish bullshit in the ad:
"Children believe in miracles. What if we all did?"
What if everyone thought magical miracles are real? In other words what if everyone was totally deranged?
It gets worse:
"Children see the true wonder of Easter. Imagine if we all saw the world like that."
Imagine the breathtaking stupidity required to believe a worthless decomposing preacher man magically became a zombie.
"The people at The United Methodist Church believe in growing the kind of deep spiritual relationships that span a lifetime. Together, through god's love, we can all experience the miracle and wonder of Easter."
The magic god fairy is real and the thing loves us. Zero evidence provided for this ridiculous bullshit. Cowards buy the bullshit because it makes them feel good.
"The people at The United Methodist Church believe in growing the kind of deep spiritual relationships that span a lifetime. Together, through god's love, we can all experience the miracle and wonder of Easter."
The magic god fairy is real and the thing loves us. Zero evidence provided for this ridiculous bullshit. Cowards buy the bullshit because it makes them feel good.
"Visit rethinkchurch.org and see what the kids have to say about miracles."
I clicked the link. There was a one minute YouTube video (no comments allowed of course). Several brainwashed children explained why magical miracles are real. This is child abuse. The brain damage is incurable. Christians are stupid fucking assholes.
Like every other Christian death cult, the Methodist Church is a business. That's why tons of money was spent on this ridiculous ad. To make money from morons it's necessary to spend money to advertise the bullshit.
When is Easter (also known as the Magical Resurrection of the Magic Jeebus Man)? I looked it up. It's this Sunday, April 1, 2018, also known as April Fools Day.
The stupid, it burns out of control in Idiot America.
Like every other Christian death cult, the Methodist Church is a business. That's why tons of money was spent on this ridiculous ad. To make money from morons it's necessary to spend money to advertise the bullshit.
When is Easter (also known as the Magical Resurrection of the Magic Jeebus Man)? I looked it up. It's this Sunday, April 1, 2018, also known as April Fools Day.
The stupid, it burns out of control in Idiot America.
Malala was shot in the head because she was for letting girls get an education. Thanks to UK doctors she survived despite the odds. She is going on a 4 day trip to Pakistan "under tight security" because the Religion of Peace wants to try to kill her again. Muslims are stupid fucking assholes.
ABC News - The 72 Hours That Saved Malala: Doctors Reveal for the First Time How Close She Came to Death By NICK SCHIFRIN Oct. 7, 2013
BBC News - Malala Yousafzai returns to Pakistan for first time since shooting. March 28, 2018.
Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai has returned to Pakistan for the first time since being shot by Taliban militants.
Ms Yousafzai, now aged 20 and a vocal human rights activist, was shot in the head by a gunman for campaigning for female education in 2012.
She is expected to hold meetings with Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi.
Details of the trip have been kept secret "in view of the sensitivity", an official told AFP news agency.
Pakistani television broadcast video that appeared to show her with her parents at Islamabad's Benazir Bhutto International Airport under tight security.
The trip is expected to last four days and she arrived with officials from her Malala Fund group, local media report.
Is Pakistan still dangerous?
Despite security efforts in recent years, the Pakistani Taliban has remained active.
They have been blamed for a number of deadly attacks on schools and colleges that have killed hundreds.
Ms Yousafzai repeatedly expressed her wishes to return to Pakistan, describing her hometown of Swat as "paradise on earth" in an interview earlier this month.
BBC News - Malala Yousafzai returns to Pakistan for first time since shooting. March 28, 2018.
Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai has returned to Pakistan for the first time since being shot by Taliban militants.
Ms Yousafzai, now aged 20 and a vocal human rights activist, was shot in the head by a gunman for campaigning for female education in 2012.
She is expected to hold meetings with Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi.
Details of the trip have been kept secret "in view of the sensitivity", an official told AFP news agency.
Pakistani television broadcast video that appeared to show her with her parents at Islamabad's Benazir Bhutto International Airport under tight security.
The trip is expected to last four days and she arrived with officials from her Malala Fund group, local media report.
Is Pakistan still dangerous?
Despite security efforts in recent years, the Pakistani Taliban has remained active.
They have been blamed for a number of deadly attacks on schools and colleges that have killed hundreds.
Ms Yousafzai repeatedly expressed her wishes to return to Pakistan, describing her hometown of Swat as "paradise on earth" in an interview earlier this month.
 |
| Ms Yousafzai, now studying at Oxford University, was targeted on her way to school at 15 |
 |
| Swat Valley - Pakistan |
Wednesday, March 28, 2018
In 2016 Mrs. Clinton lost to a celebrity clown. That's quite a feat. From Wikipedia some interesting facts about President Fucktard Trump.
Wikipedia - Donald Fucktard Trump
According to March 2018 figures by Forbes, he is the world's 766th richest person, with an estimated net worth of $3.1 billion.
Trump entered the 2016 presidential race as a Republican and defeated sixteen opponents in the primaries. Commentators described his political positions as populist, protectionist, and nationalist. His campaign received extensive free media coverage; many of his public statements were controversial or false. Trump was elected president against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton; his victory upset the expectations of polls and analysts. He became the oldest and wealthiest person ever to assume the presidency, the first without prior military or government service, and the fifth to have won the election despite losing the popular vote. His election and policies sparked numerous protests.
According to March 2018 figures by Forbes, he is the world's 766th richest person, with an estimated net worth of $3.1 billion.
Trump entered the 2016 presidential race as a Republican and defeated sixteen opponents in the primaries. Commentators described his political positions as populist, protectionist, and nationalist. His campaign received extensive free media coverage; many of his public statements were controversial or false. Trump was elected president against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton; his victory upset the expectations of polls and analysts. He became the oldest and wealthiest person ever to assume the presidency, the first without prior military or government service, and the fifth to have won the election despite losing the popular vote. His election and policies sparked numerous protests.
An American has won a tournament to determine who will challenge the World Chess Champion in November 2018 in London. It's possible the next World Chess Champion will be an American, the 1st time since Bobby Fischer won the title in 1972, 46 years ago.
Wikipedia: "The World Chess Championship 2018 is an upcoming chess match between the reigning world champion since 2013, Magnus Carlsen, and challenger Fabiano Caruana to determine the World Chess Champion. The 12-game match, organized by FIDE and its commercial partner Agon, will be played in London between 9 and 28 November 2018."
World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen lives in Norway. Fabiano Caruana is the American. I'm a big fan of Carlsen but I hope America wins because that's where I live. If Caruana does become the World Champion then chess will become very popular here again.
I predict very hard fought games. These are the two best players in the world.
"They will compete for a combined prize fund of €1m ($1.19m), organizers said."
By the way I play chess every day at https://lichess.org. My opponents are from virtually every country in the world. My living room is an international chess club. I love the 21st century.
World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen lives in Norway. Fabiano Caruana is the American. I'm a big fan of Carlsen but I hope America wins because that's where I live. If Caruana does become the World Champion then chess will become very popular here again.
I predict very hard fought games. These are the two best players in the world.
"They will compete for a combined prize fund of €1m ($1.19m), organizers said."
By the way I play chess every day at https://lichess.org. My opponents are from virtually every country in the world. My living room is an international chess club. I love the 21st century.
The New York Times has decided to be part of the religious insanity problem.
I WROTE THIS COMMENT:
"Listen: I do not know if an actual person named Jesus rose from the dead. I hope that this is true, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there."
Why is this childish nonsense in the New York Times?
I know the decomposing Jeebus didn't magically rise from the dead because it's impossible. And I certainly would not hope magic is real.
Religions are good for nothing but brainwashing (child abuse), stupidity, and never ending violence. The New York Times has decided to be part of the problem.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
WHAT SOMEONE ELSE WROTE:
"Listen: I do not know if an actual person named Jesus rose from the dead. I hope that this is true, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there."
Oh, Jennifer....there's simply no reason to lose your sense of reason just because life is beautiful, nature is breathtaking and humans are the absolute worst suckers for storytelling.
Humanity is finally starting to ease out of the medieval religious darkness that has been concussed into human brains for eons and there you go getting all mentally weak-kneed as you have a mini-relapse during one of Christianity's 'holy weeks'.
Reason has come a long way over the centuries, but there is much more work to be done and 'thoughts and prayers' are about as useful good men doing nothing in the face of evil.
Sure the buildings and the music are nice, but the logic fails...badly.
Snap out it, get a hold of yourself, think things through, and come to your senses.
Use your head.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
THIS IS THE RIDICULOUS NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE:
The Agony of Faith
Jennifer Finney Boylan MARCH 28, 2018
We were back at the shore, after almost 50 years, and I was telling the story of the talking donkey.
The five of us — Link, John, Mark, Kenny and me — had met in seventh grade, in 1970, and over the ensuing years we had gathered many times at this vacation house in Ventnor, N.J. Now, as we face our 60th birthdays, we had come together again, to celebrate our long friendships, and to look back.
The first night, the conversation unexpectedly turned to faith. I noted that it had been the story in Numbers 22 that had first shattered my nascent Christianity. This is the story in which Balaam beats his donkey, and the donkey, exasperated, turns to him and says, “What did I ever do to you?” And Balaam replies, “You’ve made a fool of me!”
“That’s not what anyone would say in that situation!” I complained.
“No? What would you have said?” asked Link.
“I’d have said, ‘Whoa! I have a talking donkey! I’m going to be rich!’”
This was the same objection I had raised to this story — and to the larger question of the reliability of Scripture — with my mother, decades before. When we were children, she dutifully dragged my sister and me to the Lutheran church in Broomall, Pa., where we sat in scratchy clothes, listening to stories of talking donkeys, parting seas, multitudes being fed with a single loaf of bread. A portrait of Christ in Gethsemane, — “Agony in the Garden,” hung on one wall.
My sister and I would have none of it. Eventually, a day came when we refused to go, and my mother realized there was no point in forcing us. Later, as my friends were confirmed in their faiths — John joined the Presbyterians, Kenny was bar mitzvahed — my mother felt that she had failed us. “I should have had you confirmed,” she lamented. “You could always have been atheists afterward.”
Back then, I thought that doubt (also known as “common sense”) was my roadblock to a spiritual life. Now, these many years later, I have come to believe that doubt is, in fact, the drive wheel of faith, not its obstacle. BULLSHIT.
One Sunday morning a few years ago, I wandered out of my apartment in New York without having a clear sense of where I was going. The next thing I knew I had pulled into a nearby church, where I looked around suspiciously, and thought, “Please, God, don’t make me do it.” I sat in a pew.
The sermon that day was not about talking donkeys. It was about feeding the hungry. It was about working for equality. It was about justice for minorities, and gay and lesbian and bisexual and trans people. It was about giving refuge to people — including immigrants and refugees — who do not have a home.
It was, in the end, about only one thing: the necessity of loving one another.
Well, Jesus, I thought. I could get behind that.
Later, on the way out of church, I saw that same old painting of Christ in the garden, hanging in a small chapel. And I suddenly realized what I had been looking at, even while I was a child in the Lutheran church.
It was a portrait of a man thinking, “Please God, don’t make me do it.” And yet he did it anyway, in spite of his doubt.
We have had hard lives, my old friends and I, in some ways. Since we first met in 1970, there have been all kinds of misfortunes. There have been car accidents and job losses, divorces and heartbreaks, newborn babies whose lives were endangered. One of us is in a wheelchair now.
But here we all are, on the threshold of 60, and still deeply connected to one another. That day in New Jersey, as I sat there with these precious souls at the shore — can I call them anything but old men now? — it occurred to me that I have seen things a lot more improbable than talking donkeys turn out to be true. What greater miracle could there be than friendships that last a lifetime?
The next morning, my friend Kenny and I were up early enough to see the sun rise over the Atlantic, standing on the same beach where we had stood, nearly half a century before, as teenage boys. Thirty years ago, before I came out as trans, he’d been my best man.
He is still my best man.
Listen: I do not know if an actual person named Jesus rose from the dead. I hope that this is true, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there.
I know this though: On Sunday morning I stood on a beach with the friend of my youth, our arms around each other’s shoulders. The rising sun burst over the ocean, and the light shone on our faces.
"Listen: I do not know if an actual person named Jesus rose from the dead. I hope that this is true, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there."
Why is this childish nonsense in the New York Times?
I know the decomposing Jeebus didn't magically rise from the dead because it's impossible. And I certainly would not hope magic is real.
Religions are good for nothing but brainwashing (child abuse), stupidity, and never ending violence. The New York Times has decided to be part of the problem.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
WHAT SOMEONE ELSE WROTE:
"Listen: I do not know if an actual person named Jesus rose from the dead. I hope that this is true, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there."
Oh, Jennifer....there's simply no reason to lose your sense of reason just because life is beautiful, nature is breathtaking and humans are the absolute worst suckers for storytelling.
Humanity is finally starting to ease out of the medieval religious darkness that has been concussed into human brains for eons and there you go getting all mentally weak-kneed as you have a mini-relapse during one of Christianity's 'holy weeks'.
Reason has come a long way over the centuries, but there is much more work to be done and 'thoughts and prayers' are about as useful good men doing nothing in the face of evil.
Sure the buildings and the music are nice, but the logic fails...badly.
Snap out it, get a hold of yourself, think things through, and come to your senses.
Use your head.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
THIS IS THE RIDICULOUS NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE:
The Agony of Faith
Jennifer Finney Boylan MARCH 28, 2018
We were back at the shore, after almost 50 years, and I was telling the story of the talking donkey.
The five of us — Link, John, Mark, Kenny and me — had met in seventh grade, in 1970, and over the ensuing years we had gathered many times at this vacation house in Ventnor, N.J. Now, as we face our 60th birthdays, we had come together again, to celebrate our long friendships, and to look back.
The first night, the conversation unexpectedly turned to faith. I noted that it had been the story in Numbers 22 that had first shattered my nascent Christianity. This is the story in which Balaam beats his donkey, and the donkey, exasperated, turns to him and says, “What did I ever do to you?” And Balaam replies, “You’ve made a fool of me!”
“That’s not what anyone would say in that situation!” I complained.
“No? What would you have said?” asked Link.
“I’d have said, ‘Whoa! I have a talking donkey! I’m going to be rich!’”
This was the same objection I had raised to this story — and to the larger question of the reliability of Scripture — with my mother, decades before. When we were children, she dutifully dragged my sister and me to the Lutheran church in Broomall, Pa., where we sat in scratchy clothes, listening to stories of talking donkeys, parting seas, multitudes being fed with a single loaf of bread. A portrait of Christ in Gethsemane, — “Agony in the Garden,” hung on one wall.
My sister and I would have none of it. Eventually, a day came when we refused to go, and my mother realized there was no point in forcing us. Later, as my friends were confirmed in their faiths — John joined the Presbyterians, Kenny was bar mitzvahed — my mother felt that she had failed us. “I should have had you confirmed,” she lamented. “You could always have been atheists afterward.”
Back then, I thought that doubt (also known as “common sense”) was my roadblock to a spiritual life. Now, these many years later, I have come to believe that doubt is, in fact, the drive wheel of faith, not its obstacle. BULLSHIT.
One Sunday morning a few years ago, I wandered out of my apartment in New York without having a clear sense of where I was going. The next thing I knew I had pulled into a nearby church, where I looked around suspiciously, and thought, “Please, God, don’t make me do it.” I sat in a pew.
The sermon that day was not about talking donkeys. It was about feeding the hungry. It was about working for equality. It was about justice for minorities, and gay and lesbian and bisexual and trans people. It was about giving refuge to people — including immigrants and refugees — who do not have a home.
It was, in the end, about only one thing: the necessity of loving one another.
Well, Jesus, I thought. I could get behind that.
Later, on the way out of church, I saw that same old painting of Christ in the garden, hanging in a small chapel. And I suddenly realized what I had been looking at, even while I was a child in the Lutheran church.
It was a portrait of a man thinking, “Please God, don’t make me do it.” And yet he did it anyway, in spite of his doubt.
We have had hard lives, my old friends and I, in some ways. Since we first met in 1970, there have been all kinds of misfortunes. There have been car accidents and job losses, divorces and heartbreaks, newborn babies whose lives were endangered. One of us is in a wheelchair now.
But here we all are, on the threshold of 60, and still deeply connected to one another. That day in New Jersey, as I sat there with these precious souls at the shore — can I call them anything but old men now? — it occurred to me that I have seen things a lot more improbable than talking donkeys turn out to be true. What greater miracle could there be than friendships that last a lifetime?
The next morning, my friend Kenny and I were up early enough to see the sun rise over the Atlantic, standing on the same beach where we had stood, nearly half a century before, as teenage boys. Thirty years ago, before I came out as trans, he’d been my best man.
He is still my best man.
Listen: I do not know if an actual person named Jesus rose from the dead. I hope that this is true, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there.
I know this though: On Sunday morning I stood on a beach with the friend of my youth, our arms around each other’s shoulders. The rising sun burst over the ocean, and the light shone on our faces.
 |
| “Agony in the Garden,” a 15th-century painting by Pietro Perugino. |
The UK has a good idea to keep plastic out of our oceans.
BBC News - People in England will soon have to pay a deposit when they buy drinks bottles and cans in a bid to boost recycling and cut waste.
"UK consumers use around 13 billion plastic drinks bottles a year but more than three billion are not recycled."
It's probably a worse problem in Idiot America. If the world was not infested with idiots all plastic would get recycled instead of being thrown into the ocean.
"Mr Gove said the 5p levy put on plastic bags proves how effectively the UK can respond as consumption of single-use carrier bags is down 83%."
"He said it was vital to act, pointing to two reports last week."
"One said plastic pollution in the sea would treble in a decade unless marine litter is curbed."
"The other warned that the Great Pacific Garbage Patch - an artificial island of plastic material twice the size of France - is thought to contain 79,000 tonnes of floating waste - that is up to 16 times more plastic and microplastic particles than previously estimated."
"UK consumers use around 13 billion plastic drinks bottles a year but more than three billion are not recycled."
It's probably a worse problem in Idiot America. If the world was not infested with idiots all plastic would get recycled instead of being thrown into the ocean.
"Mr Gove said the 5p levy put on plastic bags proves how effectively the UK can respond as consumption of single-use carrier bags is down 83%."
"He said it was vital to act, pointing to two reports last week."
"One said plastic pollution in the sea would treble in a decade unless marine litter is curbed."
"The other warned that the Great Pacific Garbage Patch - an artificial island of plastic material twice the size of France - is thought to contain 79,000 tonnes of floating waste - that is up to 16 times more plastic and microplastic particles than previously estimated."
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
We do idiots believe in gods? It's a brainwashing problem.
Why do we believe in gods? Religious belief 'not linked to intuition or rational thinking'. The study challenges a growing trend that has attempted to show that believing in the supernatural is something that comes to us 'naturally' or intuitively.
Religious beliefs are not linked to intuition or rational thinking, according to new research by the universities of Coventry and Oxford.
Previous studies have suggested people who hold strong religious beliefs are more intuitive and less analytical, and when they think more analytically their religious beliefs decrease.
But new research, by academics from Coventry University's Centre for Advances in Behavioural Science and neuroscientists and philosophers at Oxford University, suggests that is not the case, and that people are not 'born believers'.
The study -- which included tests on pilgrims taking part in the famous Camino de Santiago and a brain stimulation experiment -- found no link between intuitive/analytical thinking, or cognitive inhibition (an ability to suppress unwanted thoughts and actions), and supernatural beliefs.
Instead, the academics conclude that other factors, such as upbringing and socio-cultural processes, are more likely to play a greater role in religious beliefs.
The study -- published in Scientific Reports -- was the first to challenge a growing trend among cognitive psychologists over the past 20 years that has attempted to show that believing in the supernatural is something that comes to us 'naturally' or intuitively.
The team started by carrying out an investigation on one of the largest pilgrimage routes in the world -- the Camino de Santiago de Compostela, in northern Spain.
They asked pilgrims about the strength of their beliefs and the length of time spent on the pilgrimage and assessed their levels of intuitive thinking with a probability task, where participants had to decide between a logical and a 'gut feeling' choice.
The results suggested no link between strength of supernatural belief and intuition.
In a second study, where they used mathematical puzzles to increase intuition, they also found no link between levels of intuitive thinking and supernatural belief.
In the last part of their research they used brain stimulation to increase levels of cognitive inhibition, which is thought to regulate analytical thinking.
This involved running a painless electrical current between two electrodes placed on the participant's scalp, to activate the right inferior frontal gyrus, a part of the brain that controls inhibitory control.
A previous brain-imaging study had shown that atheists used this area of the brain more when they wanted to suppress supernatural ideas.
The results showed that while this brain stimulation increased levels of cognitive inhibition, it did not change levels of supernatural belief, suggesting there is no direct link between cognitive inhibition and supernatural belief.
The academics say that it is "premature" to explain belief in gods as intuitive or natural.
Instead, they say their research supports a theory that religion is a nurture-based process and develops because of socio-cultural processes, including upbringing and education.
Leading author Miguel Farias said:
"What drives our belief in gods -- intuition or reason; heart or head? There has been a long debate on this matter but our studies have challenged the theory that being a religious believer is determined by how much individuals rely on intuitive or analytical thinking.
"We don't think people are 'born believers' in the same way we inevitably learn a language at an early age. The available sociological and historical data show that what we believe in is mainly based on social and educational factors, and not on cognitive styles, such as intuitive/analytical thinking.
"Religious belief is most likely rooted in culture rather than in some primitive gut intuition."
Religious beliefs are not linked to intuition or rational thinking, according to new research by the universities of Coventry and Oxford.
Previous studies have suggested people who hold strong religious beliefs are more intuitive and less analytical, and when they think more analytically their religious beliefs decrease.
But new research, by academics from Coventry University's Centre for Advances in Behavioural Science and neuroscientists and philosophers at Oxford University, suggests that is not the case, and that people are not 'born believers'.
The study -- which included tests on pilgrims taking part in the famous Camino de Santiago and a brain stimulation experiment -- found no link between intuitive/analytical thinking, or cognitive inhibition (an ability to suppress unwanted thoughts and actions), and supernatural beliefs.
Instead, the academics conclude that other factors, such as upbringing and socio-cultural processes, are more likely to play a greater role in religious beliefs.
The study -- published in Scientific Reports -- was the first to challenge a growing trend among cognitive psychologists over the past 20 years that has attempted to show that believing in the supernatural is something that comes to us 'naturally' or intuitively.
The team started by carrying out an investigation on one of the largest pilgrimage routes in the world -- the Camino de Santiago de Compostela, in northern Spain.
They asked pilgrims about the strength of their beliefs and the length of time spent on the pilgrimage and assessed their levels of intuitive thinking with a probability task, where participants had to decide between a logical and a 'gut feeling' choice.
The results suggested no link between strength of supernatural belief and intuition.
In a second study, where they used mathematical puzzles to increase intuition, they also found no link between levels of intuitive thinking and supernatural belief.
In the last part of their research they used brain stimulation to increase levels of cognitive inhibition, which is thought to regulate analytical thinking.
This involved running a painless electrical current between two electrodes placed on the participant's scalp, to activate the right inferior frontal gyrus, a part of the brain that controls inhibitory control.
A previous brain-imaging study had shown that atheists used this area of the brain more when they wanted to suppress supernatural ideas.
The results showed that while this brain stimulation increased levels of cognitive inhibition, it did not change levels of supernatural belief, suggesting there is no direct link between cognitive inhibition and supernatural belief.
The academics say that it is "premature" to explain belief in gods as intuitive or natural.
Instead, they say their research supports a theory that religion is a nurture-based process and develops because of socio-cultural processes, including upbringing and education.
Leading author Miguel Farias said:
"What drives our belief in gods -- intuition or reason; heart or head? There has been a long debate on this matter but our studies have challenged the theory that being a religious believer is determined by how much individuals rely on intuitive or analytical thinking.
"We don't think people are 'born believers' in the same way we inevitably learn a language at an early age. The available sociological and historical data show that what we believe in is mainly based on social and educational factors, and not on cognitive styles, such as intuitive/analytical thinking.
"Religious belief is most likely rooted in culture rather than in some primitive gut intuition."
The James Webb Space Telescope will be launched in 2020. It's going to be fantastic. "It will search for the very first stars to shine in the Universe."
The successor to the Hubble Space Telescope has been delayed yet again and will not now launch until "approximately May 2020".
JWST is a joint venture between the American space agency and its European and Canadian counterparts.
When it eventually goes into space, it will search for the very first stars to shine in the Universe.
To achieve this ambition, it will deploy a 6.5m-wide mirror, giving the observatory roughly seven times the light-collecting area of Hubble.
Allied to instruments that are sensitive in the infrared, Webb will be tuned to detect the faint, "stretched" glow of objects that originally shone more than 13.5 billion years ago.
"Rational Wiki" is a good thing.
"Several thousand years ago, a small tribe of ignorant near-savages wrote various collections of myths, wild tales, lies, and gibberish. Over the centuries, the stories were embroidered, garbled, mutilated, and torn into small pieces that were then repeatedly shuffled. Finally, this material was badly translated into several languages successively. The resultant text, creationists feel, is the best guide to this complex and technical subject."
Rational Wiki has everything you always wanted to know about the moronic fantasy called "magical creationism" at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Creationism.
Also, Rational Wiki has everything you always wanted to know about the bullshit in the Bible at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Bible.
"The Bible includes a staggering number of myths that readers may interpret either literally or allegorically, largely depending on their level of education."
Rational Wiki has everything you always wanted to know about the moronic fantasy called "magical creationism" at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Creationism.
Also, Rational Wiki has everything you always wanted to know about the bullshit in the Bible at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Bible.
"The Bible includes a staggering number of myths that readers may interpret either literally or allegorically, largely depending on their level of education."
I found this at a Louisiana news website. Incompetent biology teachers are allowed to teach magical creationism instead of evolution in Louisiana's biology classrooms. I don't understand why people haven't taken legal action against the anti-science Jeebus assholes.
The stupid, it burns in Idiot America.
"Morrell’s bill was recommended by the nonpartisan Louisiana State Law Institute, which studies complex legal issues for the Legislature."
"Sen. Rick Ward, chairman of the Senate Judiciary A Committee, noted that the institute recently developed a list of Louisiana state laws deemed unconstitutional but still on the books. Ward said that list was 77 pages. For example, lawmakers have repeatedly refused to repeal an unconstitutional law that required teaching creationism in science classes."
The wimps who suck up to Muslim scum are part of the religious violence problem. The wimpy morons have my contempt.
 |
| London police outside Parsons Green Underground station, following the Ahmed Hassan's terrorist bombing there on September 15, 2017. |
by Douglas Murray March 27, 2018
At Brooklands College in July 2017, Ahmed Hassan was awarded a prize as "student of the year". He used the £20 Amazon voucher he received to purchase the first of the ingredients he needed to build his bomb.
Mr Justice Haddon-Cave seems almost to suggest that "violating" the law of the Quran and Islam is an offense in itself -- one worth noting alongside the crime of putting a bomb on a packed commuter train.
That the judge's pronouncement was superfluous is obvious. That it is incorrect is at least equally so. But worst is that it will further erode the belief of the citizenry in their lawmakers.
Last week, Ahmed Hassan was sentenced to a minimum term of 34 years in prison. The previous September, he had stepped onto the District line of the London Underground and left a homemade bomb on the train. At Parson's Green tube station, the device detonated. Fortunately for the commuters, which included many children on their way to school, only the detonator of the bomb went off. On its own, it created a fireball which ran along the roof of the carriage, singeing the hair of many passengers and causing an immediate stampede away from the blast and a number of injuries. The main explosive material the of bomb, however, which was packed with shrapnel, including bolts, nails and knives, failed to detonate. Had it done so, the United Kingdom would have seen -- for the fourth time in a few months -- dozens more dead victims, including school children, carried out in body bags.
All this happened because of a young man of Iraqi origin, who should never have been in the UK in the first place. Hassan moved into Europe among the migrant flows of 2015. He ended up at the "Jungle" migrant camp in Calais -- a place to which celebrities in the UK consistently go in order to implore the British people to take in the people who are living there. A particular cry of these celebrities (figures such as the actress Juliet Stevenson) is that the "child migrants" in particular should be taken in by the UK. The call is flawed, not least, in that it suggests that anybody who breaks the existing asylum procedures of the European Union and simply pushes their way to the front of the queue is somebody who will be rewarded for this act.
At the Calais camp, Hassan did not bother to wait for the British government to invite him. Most likely aided by the anti-borders NGOs who work in the camp, Hassan found out how to get around the system. In 2015, smuggled in the back of a lorry, Hassan arrived in the UK. If he had been a genuine asylum seeker, he could have -- and should have (under the terms of the Dublin Treaty) -- applied for asylum in the first European country where he set foot. Certainly, if there had been any legitimate reason for him to gain asylum, there was no reason why he should not have applied for asylum in France.
Once he arrived in the UK, it took some time for the British authorities to catch up with him. When they eventually did, and he was questioned by Home Office officials, he told them he had been a member of ISIS and had been trained by the group to kill.
He claimed to be 16 years old, although the authorities believed he was probably older. The open-borders NGOs are able to advise people in Calais and elsewhere that claiming to be a "child migrant" increases the likelihood of being able to stay.
A week later, housed at a Barnado's children's home, he was seen by a member of the staff looking up ISIS videos on his phone, and later, to be listening to extremist songs (nasheed).
Nevertheless, the British authorities helped him find a school. At Brooklands College, a teacher observed him reading a WhatsApp message which said "IS has accepted your donation." He told a teacher that it was his "duty to hate Britain". The state also placed him with a foster family, whom they failed to inform about his ISIS past.
Every effort continued to be made for this young man who had broken into the country. At Brooklands College in July 2017, he was even awarded a prize as "student of the year". Hassan used the £20 Amazon voucher he received to purchase the first of the ingredients he needed to build his bomb.
At every stage, the British state helped Hassan in every way it could. It took in a person who had no right to be in the country -- who indeed had entered the country illegally. It housed him, fed him, educated him and encouraged him. He repaid this by building a bomb at the home of his foster parents and trying to bring carnage to the rush-hour commuters on the London Underground.
Now that Hassan has been tried, convicted and sentenced for his crime, the British people may be surprised at the priorities of the authorities who are meant to keep them safe. But at the final stage of that process, the state produced one final insult against the people of the country.
This is how The Honourable Mr Justice Haddon-Cave concluded his sentencingon March 23:
Finally, Ahmed Hassan, let me say this to you. You will have plenty of time to study the Qur'an in prison in the years to come. You should understand that the Qur'an is a book of peace; Islam is a religion of peace. The Qur'an and Islam forbid anything extreme, including extremism in religion. Islam forbids breaking the "law of the land" where one is living or is a guest. Islam forbids terrorism (hiraba). The Qur'an and the Sunna provide that the crime of perpetrating terror to "cause corruption in the land" is one of the most severe crimes in Islam. So it is in the law of the United Kingdom. You have, therefore, received the most severe of sentences under the law of this land. You have violated the Qur'an and Islam by your actions, as well as the law of all civilized people. It is to be hoped that you will come to realise this one day. Please go with the officers.
First, what business is it of a judge to make such a statement? Why should Mr Justice Haddon-Cave think that being a judge in a British court also permits him to expound on Islamic theology? And what if he is wrong in his theological pronouncements? What if it is not the case that Islam "forbids anything extreme"? What if a lot of British subjects who are not Muslims discover that this judge is telling an untruth? What if he is wrong, and that the cure for a jihadist like Ahmed Hassan is not in fact confinement with the Quran and Sunna?
Mr Justice Haddon-Cave seems almost to suggest that "violating" the law of the Quran and Islam is an offense in itself -- one worth noting alongside the crime of putting a bomb on a packed commuter train. That his pronouncement was superfluous is obvious. That it is incorrect is at least equally so. But worst is that it will further erode the belief of the citizenry in their lawmakers.
In his sorry and violent life, Ahmed Hassan had already proven the incompetency of Britain's border-police and the ignorance or naivety of its Home Office officials. His final gift to the state that allowed him in was to bring about the over-reach -- and presumption and lack of awareness -- of its judiciary.
Douglas Murray, British author, commentator and public affairs analyst, is based in London, England. His latest book, an international best-seller, is "The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam."
Follow Douglas Murray on Twitter
© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
A god-soaked moron wrote about his favorite hiding places for the magic god fairy of the gaps.
"How can an atheist say God didn't create the universe? Do you have any clue just how fine times both the universe itself and our planet are to even allow life to be possible? A trillion different things have to be JUST PERFECT. That's not luck, that's Creation."
You don't know what you're talking about. A trillion different things? You just made that up.
Everything is the result of natural processes whether or not scientists completely understand everything about those natural processes.
The only alternative is supernatural magic, an idea too ridiculous and too childish to take seriously.
You religious nutjobs are constantly looking for hiding places for your magical god of the gaps. Why can't you realize every time you do this, science solves the problem without magic.
Religious bullshit works like this:
"I don't understand how this happened, therefore nobody else understands, and all future scientists who haven't been born yet will not understand, therefore the Magic Man did it."
That's being childish not to mention stupid and lazy.
You don't know what you're talking about. A trillion different things? You just made that up.
Everything is the result of natural processes whether or not scientists completely understand everything about those natural processes.
The only alternative is supernatural magic, an idea too ridiculous and too childish to take seriously.
You religious nutjobs are constantly looking for hiding places for your magical god of the gaps. Why can't you realize every time you do this, science solves the problem without magic.
Religious bullshit works like this:
"I don't understand how this happened, therefore nobody else understands, and all future scientists who haven't been born yet will not understand, therefore the Magic Man did it."
That's being childish not to mention stupid and lazy.
Monday, March 26, 2018
Reality is a wonderful thing because it's interesting and because it's real.
Atheism is an acceptance of reality.
Theism is a denial of reality.
Take your pick.
Theism is a denial of reality.
Take your pick.
This is how a celebrity clown became President of the United States.
"Do you think that President Trump is a Godly man who lives his life according to the teachings of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ?"
Trump was not interested in religious bullshit until he became a candidate for president. To get votes from American morons he pretended to be religious. The morons bought his bullshit and Trump got the job.
Trump was not interested in religious bullshit until he became a candidate for president. To get votes from American morons he pretended to be religious. The morons bought his bullshit and Trump got the job.
Religious violence has a very long history and it's getting worse.
Millions of people have been murdered by Christian assholes because they belonged to the wrong religion.
Muslim scum are trying to catch up with the Christian atrocities.
Religions are good for nothing except brainwashing, a war against teaching evolution, breathtaking stupidity, and genocide.
Muslim scum are trying to catch up with the Christian atrocities.
Religions are good for nothing except brainwashing, a war against teaching evolution, breathtaking stupidity, and genocide.
I thought a full-of-crap asshole was in the Encyclopedia of American Loons and I was right. The fucktard is David Berlinski. He works for the anti-science Christian Creationist Discovery Institute which has numerous other morons who are also in the Encyclopedia of American Loons.
American Loons - David Fucktard Berlinski
Berlinski is one of the movers and shakers of the contemporary creationist movement, associated with the Discovery Institute and one of their most frequent and famous debaters. A delusional, pompous narcissist with an ego to fit a medieval pope. Also a name-dropper (most of his talks concern important people he has talked to). A comment on one of his lunatic self-aggrandizing rants can be found here (sums up this guy pretty well):
He is apparently really angry at evolution (it is unclear why), and famous for his purely enumerative “cows cannot evolve into whales” argument.
Berlinski was once a moderately respected author of popular-science books on mathematics. He can still add numbers together, but has forgotten the GIGO rule (“garbage in, garbage out") of applied mathematics. Some of his rantings are discussed here.
Likes to play ‘the skeptic’ (which means denialism in this case, and that is not the same thing).
Diagnosis: Boneheaded, pompous and arrogant nitwit; has a lot of influence, and a frequent participator in debates, since apparently the Discovery Institute thinks that’s the way scientific disputes are settled.
(for a nice description of the difference between skepticism and paranoid denialism, I recommend these three articles: here, here, and here.)
Berlinski is one of the movers and shakers of the contemporary creationist movement, associated with the Discovery Institute and one of their most frequent and famous debaters. A delusional, pompous narcissist with an ego to fit a medieval pope. Also a name-dropper (most of his talks concern important people he has talked to). A comment on one of his lunatic self-aggrandizing rants can be found here (sums up this guy pretty well):
He is apparently really angry at evolution (it is unclear why), and famous for his purely enumerative “cows cannot evolve into whales” argument.
Berlinski was once a moderately respected author of popular-science books on mathematics. He can still add numbers together, but has forgotten the GIGO rule (“garbage in, garbage out") of applied mathematics. Some of his rantings are discussed here.
Likes to play ‘the skeptic’ (which means denialism in this case, and that is not the same thing).
Diagnosis: Boneheaded, pompous and arrogant nitwit; has a lot of influence, and a frequent participator in debates, since apparently the Discovery Institute thinks that’s the way scientific disputes are settled.
(for a nice description of the difference between skepticism and paranoid denialism, I recommend these three articles: here, here, and here.)
Robert Green Ingersoll lived in the 19th century. I found this Ingersoll quote in Jerry Coyne's "Faith Versus Fact, Why Science and Religion Are Incompatible".
These blessings did not fall from the skies. These benefits did not drop from the outstretched hands of priests. They were not found in cathedrals or behind altars -- neither were they searched for with holy candles. They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer, nor did they come in answer to superstitious supplication. They are the children of freedom, the gifts of reason, observation and experience -- and for them all, man is indebted to man.”
― Robert G. Ingersoll, August 11, 1833 – July 21, 1899
For more Ingersoll quotes see http://darwinkilledgod.blogspot.com - Robert Green Ingersoll