Obama is not an atheist

Please, fellow godless folk, stop trying to claim Obama as one of us. He isn’t. He goes to church sometimes, he has a religious history, he’s happy to use Christian metaphors, he hasn’t claimed to be so much as an agnostic. He’s a liberal Christian who is not obsessed with religion. Take his words at face value; I find it annoying when people look for signs that he’s a hidden member of our little clan. It is so conspiracy-theory.

Maybe it’s a science thing: use Occam’s Razor and make minimal assumptions, and use the simplest explanation to see if it is sufficient to explain a phenomenon. And I’m sorry for those who want him in our club, but the simplest explanation is that he is what he says he is, and nothing in his observed behavior contradicts that.

But don’t worry, atheists aren’t guiltiest of playing that game. We have to look to the wingnuts to see batty pseudo-psychoanalysis carried to a radical extreme. Read Dinesh D’Souza’s recent contribution to Forbes Magazine, which is like a telegraph from Mars it’s so freaking weird.

D’Souza does everything short of accusing Obama of being a spear-chuckin’, bone-in-the-nose savage — he paints a picture of Obama as being some kind of angry African tribesman using ritual magic at his father’s grave to gain revenge against the colonial oppressors of the imperial West.

But instead of readying us for the challenge, our President is trapped in his father’s time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation’s agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father’s dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.

Demented. Insane. Delusional. And D’Souza is writing a whole book about this nutty analysis he’s made. (One has to wonder why sober, respectable, conservative Forbes Magazine is giving any space at all to this lunatic.)

Look, it’s so much simpler. Obama is not a socialist or a communist or a Luo tribesman. He is a centrist politician from Chicago who believes in improving peoples lives incrementally by working step by step through political compromise. He pisses off the liberal, progressive wing of the Democratic party because we want him to be bold and aggressive, and he’s not, and because he’s also comfortable with the military-industrial status quo. He really annoys the wingnut right because he wants to move the country away from their dreams of a Reaganesque/Randian capitalist paradise, and he is…slowly and tentatively.

That’s really all you need to know to comprehend what Obama is doing and how he works. It’s sufficient to explain everything. We don’t have to postulate that he’s a reincarnated Mau Mau chieftain or that he’s a secret communist plant. He’s just a traditional middle-of-the-road politician from the Midwest.

And good grief, not even daffy D’Souza speculates that he could be a closet atheist. The possibility is almost too horrific to contemplate, don’t you know.

i-991c592e787c9608607ef575f28f7185-glox_news.jpeg

Kiss-in at the UM!

The University of Minnesota Twin Cities is to be blessed with a visit from Brother Jed on 16 September…and the Campus Atheists, Skeptics, and Humanists plan to be waiting for him with a special event:

As a counter protest to the preacher Brother Jed, we want to get as many people as we can to share a kiss with their significant other. Our goal is to get many same-sex couples, but all couples are encouraged to partake in the event. We want to show Brother Jed and the rest of the campus that we don’t support the hatred we portrays and that all people deserve to be with the ones they love.

Meet on the Northrup Mall around noon (it will go on all day) and spread the love.

Who says Christianity doesn’t have the power to inspire?

I think I’ll skip this one

i-efdbf4a359a75ddfef9aec5cc0ae6a26-geocentrism.jpeg

Teach the controversy! Who would have thought geocentrists would still be around? They’re having a conference even: Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right, the first annual Catholic conference on geocentrism. They’re also arguing that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. No word yet if any flat-earthers will be in attendance.

I think it’s cute that they call it a “Catholic conference” and make a point of it being held near Notre Dame, even if it is extraordinarily unlikely that they have any official Catholic status.

(via Unreasonable Faith)

Now we’re leading an onslaught!

It has become quite amusing to watch the Defenders of the Faith reach for increasingly more hysterical phrasing to describe what the Gnu Atheists are doing. I thought we were writing and talking, but according to William Oddie, we’re carrying out a distressing onslaught.

The atheists’ utter loathing, all the same, is at times a little frightening in its sheer vicious irrationality. These people are in the grip of a barely restrained hysteria. Take the current issue of the New Humanist, subtitle: “Ideas for godless people”; this issue gives a good idea of what it must be like being godless, and at least it makes you grateful not to be godless yourself. “If you were invited to address Benedict XVI during his UK visit,” the New Humanist introduces its special issue, “what would you say to him? Richard Dawkins, Philip Pullman, Claire Rayner, Ben Goldacre and many more take part in our Pope quiz.”

Ah, yes, the fellow who believes in angels and miracles and magic crackers finds it irrational that people look at his beliefs and point out how silly they are, and even worse, looks at the faith-based bloody-minded malfunctioning policies promulgated by the Pope and criticize them as nonsensical and counter-productive and damaging to humanity. He’s upset now because the New Humanist was insufficiently reverent and loving towards the Pope; in the Catholic World Order, after all, we must ignore the real effects of his ideas and instead adore him and kiss his ring.

This is all horrible for anyone who regards Pope Benedict with the admiration and love most Catholics feel for him; and I find myself almost wishing that the decision had been taken to beatify Cardinal Newman in St Peter’s Square and not a muddy field, and for the Pope to be spared this dreadful business of a state visit.

Someday, they’ll explain to us what there is to admire and love about an old conservative dogmatist who clawed his way up the rigid hierarchy of an ancient institution like the church. I get the impression we’re supposed to love the guy simply for the fact that he is a pope.

And oh, yes, that dreadful business — he’s getting millions thrown away on the pomp of his visit, will be treated like a king, and only simpering lackeys will be allowed anywhere near him, while his critics are held off…and for that, his critics are deranged monsters because they don’t love the narrow-minded old man enough.

I get email

It’s an unfortunate fact of google life that links to my criticisms of Kent Hovind pop up quite high in google listings, so I’m always getting these letters from pissed-off creationists who are shocked, shocked, shocked that there they are, innocently searching for information on their hero, when Pharyngula rises up and dares to criticize the great bible-thumping convicted tax cheat.

In addition to the usual incoherence and refusal to offer any scientific support for their position, these letters are usually marked by a rather sniffy attitude of offended sensibilities and surprise that web pages criticizing creationism actually exist. It must be scary to step outside the church.

Here’s the latest. I’ve put my impressions in red.

To whom this may concern; [this was sent to my personal email account; does he think a committee lives here?]

I had a look at your web site today and frankly can’t figure out [count me unsurprised] just what all

the uproar is concerning “scientists” such as yourself feeling that you have to
spend so much effort [it’s easy, I assure you] trying [trying?] to discredit Kent Hovind [he’s a convicted felon and phony with an unaccredited degree] and/or others in his field
the way that you do! If indeed he is the ignorant individual [yep] that you attempt to

[don’t ask me why he inserted these odd random line breaks]

portray him as, “writing like a fourth grader” [excuse me, that would be “second grader“] as you say, then why should you
waste such valuable research time slandering him? [it takes very little time to dismantle Hovind; why are you wasting your valuable time writing to me?]

My guess is, as I have watched this whole rairoading [he was convicted, and his own testimony and behavior indicted him] of him and his
organization

[mystery line breaks!]

come about, that individuals and groups for that matter with your particular
mind-set are either scared to death [he’s a worm, not a snake] of the debate [there is no debate] between creationism [bullshit] and
Darwinian evolution [science. We win!], or that you simply do not have the intellectual cahonas [??? Do you mean “cojones”?] to
engage creationists such as Mr. Hovind in any real truth [he has none to share]– revealing discourse
concerning the subject.

What are you afraid of? [ebola, senility, and bad clams]

I find it quite revealing indeed that when the “non-believers” in the world
bash Christians as a bunch of prudish [QFT], bible thumping [QFT], homophobic [QFT], hate
mongering [QFT] flat earthers [QFT] that nobody really seems to care [it’s the banality of a pedestrian truth]; in fact it has become
something of a national pass-time [???] it would seem. But!!!!! [are you wearing your underpants on your head?], suggest for a moment
that the so-called [what other scientific community is there?] scientific community has at the very least bought into a
theory that has been highly questionable at best since it’s inception [nope—enthusiastically embraced by the scientifically literate at its inception, and become more and more strungly supported since], and the
mobs are ready to light torches and take up their pitchforks! [personally, I prefer a cyber-pistol]

With all due respect [dishonest again], I find your tactic of attacking Mr. Hovind [I think it’s entirely appropriate to criticize tax cheats and creationists—why should he be exempt?], and on such
ridiculous grounds as his doctoral dissertation no less [it’s true, his dissertation was rather ridiculous], quite an immature
stretch to say the least [given that “Dr” Dino calls himself a degreed scientist on the basis of that thesis, examining its quality is entirely reasonable]. This is exactly the kind of thing [what? that we examine scholarly claims?] that tells me that
not all scientists are anywhere near to being the “rational thinkers” [I question the ability of Hovind fans to recognize such] that we’re

[another line break interlude]

always being reminded of in this God hating society [I wish] that we are living in.

Get some backbone about yourself sir and take a look at ALL the evidence [curious fact: these cranks are always telling me I missed some key evidence, but they never quite get to the point of telling me what it is], not
just the convenient parts as you and yours are so quick to accuse creationists
of doing. [instead of whining, you could have actually cited some evidence…but I think these jokers know I’ll joyfully tear their ‘facts’ apart]

Sincerely, W.C. Revere [email says “William McKinney”, but signs it “W.C. Revere”. Don’t play games, please.]

I get these fairly regularly. There’s some odd combination of oblivious hero-worship and total cluelessness about the internet in Kent Hovind fans that sparks a need to rage at me. I don’t reply, but I do feel like sending them links to Fark or /b/ just to wake them up a little more to the medium they’re using.

I think Wayne Laugesen believes he’s my nemesis — but his only superpower is bad polls

I hate to break the news to him, but he’s just so Johnny Snow. I’ve grated against ol’ Wayne a few times before to mock his awful polls, and now I think he has finally snapped, babbling out incoherent mush about how atheists are just like believers, only worse…and he really doesn’t like me. I don’t think. Hard to tell with mixed messages like this one.

Just as James Dobson and other evangelists cultivate audiences in order to spread their beliefs, so do atheist evangelizers. The bigs are Britons Christopher Hitchens, who is battling cancer, and Richard Dawkins, who turns 70 in March. Myers, who grabbed attention by vandalizing sacred religious property, is a young and energetic American evangelist on track to become the James Dobson of atheism.

Excellent whiplash there — my eyebrows were pressing up against my hairline with that “young and energetic” remark, but then I had to do a major eyeroll at the comparison to Dobson. He’s giving my face quite a workout.

Anyway, yeah, he’s got another terrible little online poll, and it’s already going the wrong way for him. I think he’s got a reputation as the noisy little freak of Colorado Springs, so people all over already gawk at his train-wreck editorials. Here is this week’s, which really out to be answered with data, not opinion polling:

Per capita, do athiests provide as much charity as members of traditional religions?

Yes, atheists are at least as charitable as members of traditional religions
68%
No, atheists are less charitable than members of traditional religions
16%
I don’t know
5%
I don’t care
10%

According to the statistics, religious people do donate more time and money to charity, but it’s also complicated: atheists aren’t organized and even when they are, typically aren’t associating as community service organizations. It’s like asking who gives more, TV repairmen or members of Habitat for Humanity? It’s biasing the sample of TV repairmen (or atheists) by selecting from a more diverse pool, while Habitat for Humanity (or many religions) are preselected to contain more volunteers. Then of course there’s also the confusion of needing only one godless Bill Gates to skew the data.

I like to skew it another way, and say that giving for religious purposes shouldn’t really count, any more than flushing money down a toilet should count as charitable outreach. Instead, let’s only consider productive charities, like hospitals.

Rarely have I been so thoroughly misconstrued

A while back, Larry Arnhart wrote an article claiming that evolution supported libertarianism. I was invited to write a reaction essay, which I did, and I argued that evolution supported diversity, and that it was silly and inappropriate to claim it for a single narrow human political movement.

I’d suggest that my criticisms must have stung, because Arnhart has now written a rebuttal to my rebuttal, except that he seems to comprehend neither what I said nor the basics of evolution, so I think everything I wrote sailed right past him on a cloud of confusion. Especially since his response was to accuse me of being a creationist.

Stop laughing. He’s serious. He repeats this bizarre claim several times.

But I was surprised when I saw his argument that evolutionary science cannot explain morality and politics at all. He conceded that Charles Darwin himself was a classical liberal. But he insisted that this had nothing at all to do with his evolutionary science, because science cannot explain the moral life of human beings, which is completely unconstrained by natural evolution.

When, of course, my essay said nothing of the kind. I said that Darwin’s personal political preferences did not privilege his favored views as somehow having the blessing of four billion years of evolution, because there have been many contributors to evolutionary theory — and I named Kropotkin, Dobzhansky, Lewontin, and Crick — with different views. Nowhere do I claim that biology makes no contribution to morality and politics, or that our moral history has been unconstrained by evolution. There’s a difference between saying, “your political philosophy is not the ultimate goal of evolution” and “your political philosophy is independent of history, experience, and biology”. I said the former, not the latter.

It gets crazier. Apparently, now I’m in the pocket of the Pope.

Pope John Paul II agreed with Wallace in his claim (in a 1996 statement) that evolution could account for the human body but not for the human soul as expresed in morality, politics, and religion. To explain that, John Paul insisted, we needed an “ontological leap”–some kind of miraculous transformation that could not be explained by science.

Oddly enough, it seems, Myers agrees with Wallace and Pope John Paul about this “ontological leap,” because Myers seems to believe that human beings have moral and intellectual powers that are expressed in political life that are completely unconstrained by evolutionary nature. As he says: “To suggest that the science of evolution supports a specific view of the narrowly human domain of politics is meaningless. Evolutionary theory supports the existence of ants and eagles, lichens and redwood trees, and finding an evolutionary basis for any human activity is trivial.”

No, there was no magic leap. Our natures are not independent of our biological properties. I’m saying that libertarianism is as much a necessary outcome of evolution as petticoats. That does not imply that petticoats are independent of biology.

Ah, libertarians. They’re the crazy, deaf, bellowing uncle of the great family of political perspectives.

Got throat cancer? You must not have been breathing right

Here’s a swami with his magic breathing advice for coping with throat cancer. How these guys can dispense bogus medical advice and not get lynched by angry cancer patients is a mystery.

At least he looks really goofy when he curls his tongue and breathes. Now if only there were some yogic enchantment that could do something about his creepy squink eye…

That didn’t take long

Already, deranged Discovery Institute shill David Klinghoffer is blaming the hostage-taking nut James Lee’s actions on Darwinism.

Witness the recent examples of Holocaust Memorial Museum shooter James von Brunn, Columbine High School shooter Eric Harris, Jokela High School shooter Pekka Eric Auvinen. Historical figures who drew inspiration, if indirectly, from Darwinian theory include Charles Manson, Mao Tse-tung, Joseph Stalin, Josef Mengele, and of course Adolf Hitler. I’ve written about this many times before and received much abuse for it, not least when I took up the theme on the Huffington Post. (An editor advised me they will not let me do that again.)

Yes, Lee was apparently an atheist, and he attributed the need for his actions to a badly mangled version of Darwinism (although, really, a strict Darwinian fanatic probably wouldn’t rush to commit a violent act that could only end with him dead or incarcerated, and also wouldn’t be ranting about ending reproduction for his own species. I’d expect a truly fervent Darwinian to be avoiding risks and expending a great deal of effort in courtship, or at least frantically making lots of donations to the local sperm or ovum bank.) Yes, we can make lists of atheists or people who have fulminated superficially about Darwin who have done evil crimes. So? We can also make lists of Christians who have committed evil.

But let us be clear about a few things about godless Darwinians:

  • They don’t make claims that believing in Darwin will make you a good person.

  • They don’t make claims that taking courses in Darwinism will clear up your mental health issues.

  • Certified Darwinian counselors do not have free parking privileges so they can rush to the sick and dying to soothe them with a little doctrine in population genetics.

  • There is no Darwinist creed that justifies and encourages slaughtering creationists.

  • There are no Darwinist elites laying down fatwas against Discovery Channel executives, not even for Ghost Lab or Bear Grylls.

  • They do not seek salvation in the mixed bag of pop sci programming on a cable television station. Jamie and Adam are not our prophets, even if Mythbusters is pretty good, mostly.

  • There is no grassroots collection of Darwinist supporters lurking in the remote urban wilderness who would have sheltered James Lee while he was on the lam.

  • There was no supportive mob of god-hatin’ Darwin lovers converging on the Discovery Building to chant in support of James Lee.

  • There will be no surly academic Darwinists who will grumble “no comment” at reporters while gathering with the faithful to praise their heroic martyr, James Lee, in the privacy of their communes and revival meetings.

  • They all pretty much think James Lee was a mentally ill doofus who got everything wrong — at best a subject of pity.

  • There will be no conspiracy theories that James Lee was a good man set up by the Christian majority.

  • They will not be telling each other that James Lee will receive his reward for his righteous actions in Darwinist Paradise.

  • If he’d lived, James Lee would not have been given free legal help by the Society for the Study of Evolution, nor would they have hidden his crimes and helped him relocate to another regional chapter, which would not have been told about his violent proclivities.

  • There will be no secretive James Lee Society set up to work for reduced fertility and angrier television documentaries in his name.

  • No one will be writing generous op-eds in which James Lee is praised as a misguided figure with his heart in the right place, in the bosom of scientific thinking.

  • James von Brunn, Eric Harris, Pekka Eric Auvinen, and not even Manson, Mao, Stalin, Mengele, or Hitler are praised in any biology textbooks. James Lee will not, either.

  • An occasional lone nut spouting idiosyncratic visions of Darwinism does not change the fact that we have the scientific evidence on our side.

  • James Lee does not have a constituency, nor does he have any representatives working for his goals in congress.

  • James Lee did not increase his inclusive fitness.

I’m sorry, Mr Krazypants Klinghoffer, but there’s basically no way anyone can argue that James Lee was representative of any significant subgroup of evolutionary biologists, fans of Darwin, or freethinkers; he’s a sad, lonely outlier whose weird collection of confused ideas were a product of his isolation and mental illness, not any substantial strand of evolutionary theory.

Oh, and Hitler did not derive his ideas from Darwin: his primary intellectual antecedent would have been Houston Stewart Chamberlain, who detested anything to do with that Darwin fellow’s theory. You’ve had this explained to you often enough, that Hitler was if anything nominally Catholic, bizarrely pagan, and his ideas had nothing to do with science or with atheism, but you don’t care, I know. Is it any surprise that you’re considered too obtuse even for the Huffington Post?

Discovery Channel besieged

A gunman with an explosive device is holding hostages at the Discovery Channel building until they give him what he wants. What does he want? Well, he’s nuts, and his
page of demands is loading very slowly, so here’s what I was able to extract:

The Discovery Channel MUST broadcast to the world their commitment to save the planet and to do the following IMMEDIATELY:

1. The Discovery Channel and it’s affiliate channels MUST have daily television programs at prime time slots based on Daniel Quinn’s “My Ishmael” pages 207-212 where solutions to save the planet would be done in the same way as the Industrial Revolution was done, by people building on each other’s inventive ideas. Focus must be given on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution. A game show format contest would be in order. Perhaps also forums of leading scientists who understand and agree with the Malthus-Darwin science and the problem of human overpopulation. Do both. Do all until something WORKS and the natural world starts improving and human civilization building STOPS and is reversed! MAKE IT INTERESTING SO PEOPLE WATCH AND APPLY SOLUTIONS!!!!

2. All programs on Discovery Health-TLC must stop encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human infants and the false heroics behind those actions. In those programs’ places, programs encouraging human sterilization and infertility must be pushed. All former pro-birth programs must now push in the direction of stopping human birth, not encouraging it.

3. All programs promoting War and the technology behind those must cease. There is no sense in advertising weapons of mass-destruction anymore. Instead, talk about ways to disassemble civilization and concentrate the message in finding SOLUTIONS to solving global military mechanized conflict. Again, solutions solutions instead of just repeating the same old wars with newer weapons. Also, keep out the fraudulent peace movements. They are liars and fakes and had no real intention of ending the wars. ALL OF THEM ARE FAKE! On one hand, they claim they want the wars to end, on the other, they are demanding the human population increase. World War II had 2 Billion humans and after that war, the people decided that tripling the population would assure peace. WTF??? STUPIDITY! MORE HUMANS EQUALS MORE WAR!

4. Civilization must be exposed for the filth it is. That, and all its disgusting religious-cultural roots and greed. Broadcast this message until the pollution in the planet is reversed and the human population goes down! This is your obligation. If you think it isn’t, then get hell off the planet! Breathe Oil! It is the moral obligation of everyone living otherwise what good are they??

5. Immigration: Programs must be developed to find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution and the anchor baby filth that follows that. Find solutions to stopping it. Call for people in the world to develop solutions to stop it completely and permanently. Find solutions FOR these countries so they stop sending their breeding populations to the US and the world to seek jobs and therefore breed more unwanted pollution babies. FIND SOLUTIONS FOR THEM TO STOP THEIR HUMAN GROWTH AND THE EXPORTATION OF THAT DISGUSTING FILTH! (The first world is feeding the population growth of the Third World and those human families are going to where the food is! They must stop procreating new humans looking for nonexistant jobs!)

6. Find solutions for Global Warming, Automotive pollution, International Trade, factory pollution, and the whole blasted human economy. Find ways so that people don’t build more housing pollution which destroys the environment to make way for more human filth! Find solutions so that people stop breeding as well as stopping using Oil in order to REVERSE Global warming and the destruction of the planet!

7. Develop shows that mention the Malthusian sciences about how food production leads to the overpopulation of the Human race. Talk about Evolution. Talk about Malthus and Darwin until it sinks into the stupid people’s brains until they get it!!

8. Saving the Planet means saving what’s left of the non-human Wildlife by decreasing the Human population. That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies! You’re the media, you can reach enough people. It’s your resposibility because you reach so many minds!!!

9. Develop shows that will correct and dismantle the dangerous US world economy. Find solutions for their disasterous Ponzi-Casino economy before they take the world to another nuclear war.

10. Stop all shows glorifying human birthing on all your channels and on TLC. Stop Future Weapons shows or replace the dialogue condemning the people behind these developments so that the shows become exposes rather than advertisements of Arms sales and development!

11. You’re also going to find solutions for unemployment and housing. All these unemployed people makes me think the US is headed toward more war.

Humans are the most destructive, filthy, pollutive creatures around and are wrecking what’s left of the planet with their false morals and breeding culture.

For every human born, ACRES of wildlife forests must be turned into farmland in order to feed that new addition over the course of 60 to 100 YEARS of that new human’s lifespan! THIS IS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE FOREST CREATURES!!!! All human procreation and farming must cease!

It is the responsiblity of everyone to preserve the planet they live on by not breeding any more children who will continue their filthy practices. Children represent FUTURE catastrophic pollution whereas their parents are current pollution. NO MORE BABIES! Population growth is a real crisis. Even one child born in the US will use 30 to a thousand times more resources than a Third World child. It’s like a couple are having 30 babies even though it’s just one! If the US goes in this direction maybe other countries will too!

Also, war must be halted. Not because it’s morally wrong, but because of the catastrophic environmental damage modern weapons cause to other creatures. FIND SOLUTIONS JUST LIKE THE BOOK SAYS! Humans are supposed to be inventive. INVENT, DAMN YOU!!

The world needs TV shows that DEVELOP solutions to the problems that humans are causing, not stupify the people into destroying the world. Not encouraging them to breed more environmentally harmful humans.

Saving the environment and the remaning species diversity of the planet is now your mindset. Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.

The humans? The planet does not need humans.

You MUST KNOW the human population is behind all the pollution and problems in the world, and YET you encourage the exact opposite instead of discouraging human growth and procreation. Surely you MUST ALREADY KNOW this!

I want Discovery Communications to broadcast on their channels to the world their new program lineup and I want proof they are doing so. I want the new shows started by asking the public for inventive solution ideas to save the planet and the remaining wildlife on it.

These are the demands and sayings of Lee.

So, basically, he wants the Discovery Channel to yell loudly at people to fix human civilization until they correct all of the world’s environmental problems, and he wants everyone to stop having babies and eating food from farms.

I don’t think that threatening television personnel with death and asking them to scream as crazily as he does is going to help. Let’s just hope that this can be resolved without anyone getting hurt…and by “resolved”, I mean get James Lee into a mental hospital.

Just the fact that he thinks the channel of “American Loggers,” “Deadliest Catch,” “Dirty Jobs,” “Ghost Lab,” “Swamp Loggers,” “Pitchmen” and “Shark Week” will be his allies in his crusade to end the blight of humanity suggests there is something wrong in his head.