“Hello, My name is Herb Grossman”

It’s hard to find something dumber than Kent Hovind, but here you go: the website of Herb Grossman, trashevolution. It’s what Hovind could have produced if he’d been an alcoholic gay man in denial. He has a rambling, mostly incoherent set of pages that he claims disprove evolution, but if you read just one, it should be his page on homosexuality. It doesn’t really exist, you know, although he has been feeling supernatural homosexual urges for years.

No one has to be a homosexual, because—

—Homosexuality is a Cruel Deception,

and you should not worry about possibly being a homosexual, because there is no such thing–homosexuality is an evil supernatural trick! The key is to fight it, and the sooner the better. I still sometimes get supernatural “urges” towards perversions or homosexuality, but by immediately rejecting “it” (both physically and mentally), “it” goes away.

What I write or say concerning belief in evolution being a major encouragement towards homosexuality is not meant to win some popularity contest. Some of you will laugh and think I am stupid for writing this, but the shoes I have walked in–the years of aggravation while fighting off the cause of homosexuality–have given me a certain amount of sympathy for the homosexual and a hatred for the way evolution is such a big factor in keeping many of them trapped in their unfortunate perversion. It would be a crime for me to know what I know and not do something, because I thoroughly believe that many people will benefit from knowing of the troubles I’ve been through and will be inspired to avoid or get out of the homosexual trap

He never does get around to explaining how evolutionary biology contributes to homosexuality, and after reading about his miserable life with two angry divorces, 35 years of alcoholism and gambling addiction, I’m thinking he’s about the last person I’d want advising me on how to live a good life. Instead of actually addressing anything about evolution or homosexuality, though, what Mr Grossman does next is recite a litany of “supernatural” events that occurred to him and which prove there is a god. Here’s my favorite of his examples:

I had several situations where I would be sitting and think of something good I could do, and a big foam-rubber-like hand would then pat me on a shoulder as if approving of my thoughts. Was an invisible person standing beside me? Some supernatural person was–and I was inclined to think “God,” but I now suspect it was really someone conditioning me towards accepting supernatural deceptions.

Did I mention that he was a long-term alcoholic? Yes, I did. This is what most of his supernatural events are: imaginary incidents, bleary fantasies of seeing things that weren’t there. And then, finally, he ties this all back to his ideas about homosexuality (but not evolution):

It wasn’t long before I fell into about three months of doing perverse, homosexual acts with invisible, supernatural people/beings* Strong thoughts and sensations would get things started, but I was not the cause–no pornography used. Somebody had control of me! (I did meet up with some visible demonic types, but those encounters, although weird, were not of a homosexual nature).

*I have never acted in any perverted/homosexual manner with any man or boy, nor felt any attraction/sensation towards the same. However, I am not claiming total innocence on my part, as I must admit to some perverse actions (sometimes with use of pornography) in my past that I am ashamed of (I wish I knew then what I know now). Looking back, I suspect those past actions likely made me an attractive target to the supernatural “persons’ that drive the homosexual deception system. To be fair, though, I realize there are many social forces and situations that might condition a person to accept the homosexual deception. and I do not doubt that some people have fallen into the homosexuality trap without having prior perverse activities:

What a sad, repressed, confused little man. He never felt any attraction towards other men…he just fantasized about homosexual acts with invisible people. And has so little ability to distinguish the imaginary from the actual that he thinks those dreaming encounters were real, but at the same time not real enough to count as gay impulses.

The other sad thing about his series of articles is that he’s addressing them to “Mr. or Miss Teenager of America.” He’s trying to reach out to youth and convince them that he has all the answers, but I can guess what young people will think: “Ewww. Creepy old loser.”

Massimo Pigliucci is so very rude

Massimo Pigliucci has written a book, Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll), that actually sounds very interesting — it takes a strong skeptic’s approach to truth claims. What really makes it sound worth reading, though, is a review by Carlin Romano that pans it, Pigliucci, and a whole great legion of scientists irritated with the public endorsement of nonsense: Romano complains that we’re on “ego trips.” Why? Because Pigliucci expresses such strong certainty about the conclusions of science.

Here’s the heart of the review. It’s a lot of aggravating piss-pottery about tone.

Pigliucci offers more hero sandwiches spiced with derision and certainty. Media coverage of science is “characterized by allegedly serious journalists who behave like comedians.” Commenting on the highly publicized Dover, Pa., court case in which U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent-design theory is not science, Pigliucci labels the need for that judgment a “bizarre” consequence of the local school board’s “inane” resolution. Noting the complaint of intelligent-design advocate William Buckingham that an approved science textbook didn’t give creationism a fair shake, Pigliucci writes, “This is like complaining that a textbook in astronomy is too focused on the Copernican theory of the structure of the solar system and unfairly neglects the possibility that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is really pulling each planet’s strings, unseen by the deluded scientists.”

Is it really? Or is it possible that the alternate view unfairly neglected could be more like that of Harvard scientist Owen Gingerich, who contends in God’s Universe (Harvard University Press, 2006) that it is partly statistical arguments–the extraordinary unlikelihood eons ago of the physical conditions necessary for self-conscious life–that support his belief in a universe “congenially designed for the existence of intelligent, self-reflective life”? Even if we agree that capital “I” and “D” intelligent-design of the scriptural sort–what Gingerich himself calls “primitive scriptural literalism”–is not scientifically credible, does that make Gingerich’s assertion, “I believe in intelligent design, lowercase i and lowercase d,” equivalent to Flying-Spaghetti-Monsterism?

Tone matters. And sarcasm is not science.

Romano is oblivious to the actual facts of the Dover case. William Buckingham was not some thoughtful theist who wanted a philosophical discussion in the science classroom; he wasn’t even an ID proponent. He was a born-again jesus freak befuddled on hillbilly heroin who was more of a young earth creationist. He wanted to get the Christian Bible into the public school classrooms, was willing to lie on the witness stand to do it, and saw intelligent design only as a tool to smuggle Jesus into the science classes.

Yes, really.

“Inane” is also how Judge Jones described the school board’s actions: to be precise, he called it “breathtaking inanity”. The view they were trying to push on children, that the there is a magic man in the sky who poofed us all into existence, is actually entirely as silly as the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Pigliucci was right. Romano is wrong.

But what if Buckingham had been a genteel, considerate, ruminative Owen-Gingerich-style Pennsylvania populist? Would that make any difference? No. Gingerich is a religious cosmologist who believes that “a common-sense and satisfying interpretation of our world suggests the designing hand of a superintelligence.” There is absolutely no evidence for this, despite his claims that that bogus ‘fine-tuning’ argument supports the notion. It’s a fabulous fantasy of a grand cosmic super-brain hovering about at the beginning of the Big Bang that is just as ludicrously unfounded as the claim that Jesus did it, or that the Flying Spaghetti Monster flapped a few noodly appendages to conjure a home for pirates into existence. Leaving the word “Jesus” out of your explanation does not turn it into science.

The only thing I agreed with in Romano’s cranky review was the second to the last sentence above: “Tone matters.” It certainly does, but not in the way he imagines. Romano has written a kvetching review in which he reserves all of his bile for the fellow promoting an evidence-based view of reality, and provides nothing but gentle strokes for people who favor fantasies over hard truths…and his complaint is that scientists are insufficiently conciliatory to those deceitful purveyors of faith and fables. Tone does matter when you use that brand of argument to beg special treatment for liars, and to justify chastising those who deliver a blunt truth — it means one is pandering to faith-based folly.

Tone matters, because too many have been insufficiently fierce in their criticism of pious excuses for sloppy thinking. Tone matters because we haven’t been rude enough in the face of special claims of privilege for religious inanity. We need to flip that tone argument around 180°—the problem isn’t that our tone is so harsh, it’s that yours is so inappropriately soft towards people who lie to children, who want to gut our educational system, and who want to taint science with a bias for magic.

I get email

I was cleaning out my filtered junk mail folder, and what do I discover? Mail after mail after mail from a long-banned kook, the infamously idiotic John A. Davison. Davison’s is notoriously incompetent: this is the fellow who has created multiple blogs, each with one entry, which he closes when it gathers enough comments…most of which are from Davison himself. He also tends to get in long running battles in blog comments, all over his dismissal of evolution, which he regards as the most important battle in the history of mankind!!!. He has also reported me to my university provost.

He has banned here for a long time. He’s banned just about everywhere, which he complains bitterly about, but it’s entirely because he’s obsessive and insane and repetitive — even the ID/creationist blogs can’t stand him.

So he’s been dunning me with email, apparently. He’s usually yelling at me to pay attention to him, and spamming links to one of his blogs…usually to some specific comment at his blog, because, as is par for the course, his blogs have almost no actual entries, just long mumbling rants by himself in the comment threads.

But he’s been so persistent that I’ll give him a moment’s attention, just to taunt him. Because he’s such an ass, though, I’m going to torment him by deleting all the links he sent me. Trust me, they all say the same thing: “I love it so,” and various permutations of his claim that evolution is finished, and that he has proven it wrong. He hasn’t.

These are just the most recent of his missives. There are many more, but I’ve deleted them.

22 March:

Dear PeeZee,

I invite you to savor my several recent essays which can be found on the link –

  url redacted  

Perhaps you would be willing to introduce them to your flock so they can enjoy them as well.

It doesn’t get any better thn this.

22 March:

Dear Pee Zee

Enjoy my recent essays –

  url redacted  

Let me know how you feel about them.

30 March:

  url redacted  

#712

Enjoy!

15 April:

Check out my latest challenge –

  url redacted  

and acknowledge it. I will look for it!

22 April:

Hey PeeZee,

Why don’t you call the attention of your drooling retards to the emails you get from me? I’ll look for it!

27 April:

PeeZee,

  url redacted  

#267

Enjoy!

28 April:

Dear PeeZee,

A collection of my unpublished Evolution papers is now available

  url to self-published book redacted  

The definitve cover and possible endoresements are not yet in place.

29 April:

Dear PeeZee

  url redacted  

#404

I expect to see an acknowledgement that I exist on Pharyngula.

30 April:

PeeZee

Why don’t you rate my book? I’m sure your fans would love to see you destroy it. I will look for it!

30 April:

Pee Zee

I see you, like Dawkins and Elsberry, go right on petending I don’t exist. That won’t work any longer. You clowns are finished. Now get cracking and recognize that you have been mortally wounded. The longer you ignore me and my sources the worse it wll be for you. I will see to it. Trust me.

1 May:

Dear PeeZee

How does it feel to realize that everything you believe is about to be exposed as meaningless drivel? It must be awful for you. Check out my Why Banishment? thread from time to time. There you will discover that [email protected] refuses to accept my emails, a response in itself. Lynn Margulis has resorted to the same desperate device. If you Darwinian mystics think you can continue your time honored tradition of ignoring your real adversaries, you are all very sadly mistaken. It is crunch time PeeZee. Gird your loins. The longer you insist on silence the worse it will be for you. I will see to it and will enjoy every moment of it! Trust me.

Cheers

John

He’s just getting crazier and crazier, and now he’s beginning to sound like that other banned kook, Dennis Markuze.

Texans shall demonstrate

On 16 May, there will be a demonstration protesting the foolish curriculum the Texas Board of Education is imposing on the state. If you’re near the capitol, join in! Here’s their rationale:

A religious-right faction dominating the Texas Board of Education is trying to distort the content of public school textbooks. This revisionist history includes downplaying or eliminating mention of Enlightenment thinkers including Thomas Jefferson, more emphasis on religious themes and figures (theocrats like John Calvin!), and even attacks on Darwinian evolution. These religious extremists wish to turn our public schools into pulpits for sectarian preaching and an authoritarian social and cultural agenda.
Read the Proposed Revisions here

Their actions could affect the content of school texts in nearly two-dozen other states as well!

We urge you to join us for a peaceful assembly on the steps of the Texas State Capitol in Austin to protest this outrage, and to express support of teaching solid science, balanced history and facts over sectarian religious dogmatism. Stop the Texas Textbook Massacre!

Go and send me photos.

Latest Ark finding is a fake

This is completely unsurprising. An account from Randall Price has emerged; Price is a notorious Ark-hunter, young earth creationist, and professor at Liberty University, so he has good kook credentials and is the kind of guy who desperately wants the recent claims of the discovery of Noah’s Ark to be true, making this an admission contrary to his biases…of course, it turns out he also has a money motive to begrudge the Chinese evangelicals their ‘discovery’. But this is also a familiar story.

I was the archaeologist with the Chinese expedition in the summer of 2008 and was given photos of what they now are reporting to be the inside of the Ark. I and my partners invested $100,000 in this expedition (described below) which they have retained, despite their promise and our requests to return it, since it was not used for the expedition. The information given below is my opinion based on what I have seen and heard (from others who claim to have been eyewitnesses or know the exact details).

To make a long story short: this is all reported to be a fake. The photos were reputed to have been taken off site near the Black Sea, but the film footage the Chinese now have was shot on location on Mt. Ararat. In the late summer of 2008 ten Kurdish workers hired by Parasut, the guide used by the Chinese, are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. In the winter of 2008 a Chinese climber taken by Parasut’s men to the site saw the wood, but couldn’t get inside because of the severe weather conditions. During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film. As I said, I have the photos of the inside of the so-called Ark (that show cobwebs in the corners of rafters – something just not possible in these conditions) and our Kurdish partner in Dogubabyazit (the village at the foot of Mt. Ararat) has all of the facts about the location, the men who planted the wood, and even the truck that transported it.

A similar phenomenon took place in Paluxy River, Texas. Some creationists find fossil footprints that look vaguely (to the biased eye) human, pretty soon a flood of evangelical Christians are searching the area for confirmation, and very quickly, the locals, being no dummies and seeing a tourism goldmine, start carving up even better footprints.

You can hardly blame the Turks around Ararat. There’s a lot of money being poured into the local economy from these numerous creationist expeditions. It only makes sense to salt a few sites with chunks of wood.

If Fox News and Wing Nut Daily say it’s true, it must be so

Ho hum. I’m getting lots of mail about this ridiculous story on WND and Fox claiming that Noah’s Ark has been discovered atop Mt Ararat. No, it hasn’t. This is yet another mob of incompetent evangelicals hiking all over a big hill in Turkey and credulously interpreting every rock formation and every chunk of wood as proof that they’ve found a big boat. It’s the same BS Ron Wyatt was peddling for years. It’s always the same stuff: distant photos of a rock formation that is vaguely boat-shaped, but nothing close-up to suggest that it is anything but a rock formation. Or sometimes it’s a photo of a glacial ridge, with the claim that the Ark is buried under that.

Then there are the occasional close-ups of something — this latest account has lots of those — that look more like recent construction: a cabin, a mine shaft, the reinforced walls of a well. Again, nothing competently photographed to show context or extent or overall structure, nothing that even looks like a boat. In particular, though, it looks nothing like a 5,000 year old boat left exposed on a mountaintop or churned up by a glacier.

They do have one other novel claim this time around.

The group claims that carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old, meaning they date to around the same time the ark was said to be afloat. Mt. Ararat has long been suspected as the final resting place of the craft by evangelicals and literalists hoping to validate biblical stories.

Oh, yeah. Now the creationists are willing to say carbon-dating is valid.

Bye-bye McLeroy, Hello Dunbar

Arch-creationist dentist Don McLeroy is limping and quacking his way off the Texas Board of Education, but there’s still plenty of crazy left behind. Cynthia Dunbar recently appeared on a far right-wing radio show to preach her revisionist history, her dislike of atheists and Christians who aren’t part of her sect, and plead for more god in the schools. Texas Freedom Network provides a synopsis; listen to the actual show at the peril of your sanity.

Speaking last week on a far-right talk show, The American View, (read more about the show here) Dunbar — a Richmond Republican representing a state board district that stretches from west of Houston to Austin — attacked public education and even the religious faith of people who don’t agree with her. She also repeated her infamous attack on President Obama as a terrorist sympathizer. And as the state board prepares to take a final vote next month on social studies curriculum standards for public schools, Dunbar suggested that supporters of separation of church and state don’t understand the Constitution and that the drafters of the First Amendment had no concerns “whatsoever” for the nonreligious.

I caught a bit of the beginning, when the announcer/interview is shouting out his vision of THE American View — there is only one — and was amused at one thing. He’s harping on the usual quasi-religious veneration of the Founding Fathers, when he makes it clear that he’s not talking about those Founding Fathers, the ones tainted by that Enlightenment nonsense, but the original founders, the ones who settled on this continent in the 17th century, and who put God, God, God, God, and God in everything. Merely being 230 years behind the times is insufficient for these guys — they want to roll the calendar back at least 400 years.