I get email

Would you believe I still get email about cracker abuse? At least this one is novel in its tone.

LESSON NUMBER ONE: IMPORTANCE OF CHRISTIANITY STRAIN
So-Called Atheists a.k.a RUBES a.k.a. LAMESTREAM ACADEMIA PABLUM asks: “Why is so-called defunct ”Christianity Strain” the prime target of Satan lead OPERATION LAST DREAM/PAGAN-ATHEIST OPERATION PROJECT?”.

LESSON NUMBER ONE: IMPORTANCE OF CHRISTIANITY STRAIN

THE GREAT ANTI-SPIRITUAL INSURGENCY (a.k.a ‘atheism’ a.k.a ‘secular humanism’ a.k.a ‘paganism’ amongst so-called atheists/RUBES) is only the BEGINNING of the FINAL PHASE of SATAN’s PROJECT OPERATION LAST DREAM PROJECT. Operation Last Dream project begins in A.E with the completion of al-Qur’ān the first scripture in the late-line Anti-Spiritual strain and will only end when SATAN is vanquished or all PURE CHRISTIANITY WORSHIP STRAINS are extinct or converted into pseudo-PAGANIST strains.

FACT: Standard dogma of purestrain WRPG is

1.1.Destruction of IMMORAL PAGAN PRINCIPLE A.K.A HEDONISM IE ”Sodom” and ”Gomorrah”
2.VALIDATION of existing worship structure IE ”JESUS RESURRECTION”

FACT: Purestrain CHRISTIANITY ‘Catholicism’ has been CORRUPTED by Satan LAST DREAM OPERATION INFILTRATION TEAMS who create and flood ‘Catholicism’ and ‘Ecclesiology’ with so-called ‘saints’ that carry ANTI-SPIRITUAL PAGANIST CONTAGION VIRUS.

FACT: ATHEISM dictates dictates replacement of divinity with pagan principles IE ”lifestream” IE ”Persona-Worship” IE ”HEDONISM”

FACT: DR.PAUL ZACHARY ‘MYERS’ a.k.a DR.PAUL ZACHARY MENGELE a.k.a DR.PZ MENGELE is responsible for Killing GOD-PROXY a.k.a Sacrament a.k.a communion wafer, committed contemporaneously with the writing of HARRY POTTER (a.k.a the ORIGIN of PAGANISM contagion-strain!) PAGANISM contagion project is Athei-nihilist culture jamming… Athei-nihilist endgame is to destroy GOD through REPEATED RITUALISTIC EFFIGY ASSASSINATION!!!

Lesson Number One

Singularitarianism?

Ray Kurzweil is a genius. One of the greatest hucksters of the age. That’s the only way I can explain how his nonsense gets so much press and has such a following. Now he has the cover of Time magazine, and an article called 2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal. It certainly couldn’t be taken seriously anywhere else; once again, Kurzweil wiggles his fingers and mumbles a few catchphrases and upchucks a remarkable prediction, that in 35 years (a number dredged out of his compendium of biased estimates), Man (one, a few, many? How? He doesn’t know) will finally achieve immortality (seems to me you’d need to wait a few years beyond that goal to know if it was true). Now we’ve even got a name for the Kurzweil delusion: Singularitarianism.

There’s room inside Singularitarianism for considerable diversity of opinion about what the Singularity means and when and how it will or won’t happen. But Singularitarians share a worldview. They think in terms of deep time, they believe in the power of technology to shape history, they have little interest in the conventional wisdom about anything, and they cannot believe you’re walking around living your life and watching TV as if the artificial-intelligence revolution were not about to erupt and change absolutely everything. They have no fear of sounding ridiculous; your ordinary citizen’s distaste for apparently absurd ideas is just an example of irrational bias, and Singularitarians have no truck with irrationality. When you enter their mind-space you pass through an extreme gradient in worldview, a hard ontological shear that separates Singularitarians from the common run of humanity. Expect turbulence.

Wow. Sounds just like the Raelians, or Hercolubians, or Scientologists, or any of the modern New Age pseudosciences that appropriate a bit of jargon and blow it up into a huge mythology. Nice hyperbole there, though. Too bad the whole movement is empty of evidence.

One of the things I do really despise about the Kurzweil approach is their dishonest management of critics, and Kurzweil is the master. He loves to tell everyone what’s wrong with his critics, but he doesn’t actually address the criticisms.

Take the question of whether computers can replicate the biochemical complexity of an organic brain. Kurzweil yields no ground there whatsoever. He does not see any fundamental difference between flesh and silicon that would prevent the latter from thinking. He defies biologists to come up with a neurological mechanism that could not be modeled or at least matched in power and flexibility by software running on a computer. He refuses to fall on his knees before the mystery of the human brain. “Generally speaking,” he says, “the core of a disagreement I’ll have with a critic is, they’ll say, Oh, Kurzweil is underestimating the complexity of reverse-engineering of the human brain or the complexity of biology. But I don’t believe I’m underestimating the challenge. I think they’re underestimating the power of exponential growth.”

This is wrong. For instance, I think reverse-engineering the general principles of a human brain might well be doable in a few or several decades, and I do suspect that we’ll be able to do things in ten years, 20 years, a century that I can’t even imagine. I don’t find Kurzweil silly because I’m blind to the power of exponential growth, but because:

  • Kurzweil hasn’t demonstrated that there is exponential growth at play here. I’ve read his absurd book, and his “data” is phony and fudged to fit his conclusion. He cheerfully makes stuff up or drops data that goes against his desires to invent these ridiculous charts.

  • I’m not claiming he underestimates the complexity of the brain, I’m saying he doesn’t understand biology, period. Handwaving is not enough — if he’s going to make fairly specific claims of “immortality in 35 years”, there had better be some understanding of the path that will be taken.

  • There is a vast difference between grasping a principle and implementing the specifics. If we understand how the brain works, if we can create a computer simulation that replicates and improves upon the function of our brain, that does not in any way imply that my identity and experiences can be translated into the digital realm. Again, Kurzweil doesn’t have even a hint of a path that can be taken to do that, so he has no basis for making the prediction.

  • Smooth curves that climb upward into infinity can exist in mathematics (although Kurzweil’s predictions don’t live in state of rigor that would justify calling them “mathematical”), but they don’t work in the real world. There are limits. We’ve been building better and more powerful power plants for aircraft for a century, but they haven’t gotten to a size and efficiency to allow me to fly off with a personal jetpack. I have no reason to expect that they will, either.

  • While I don’t doubt that science will advance rapidly, I also expect that the directions it takes will be unpredictable. Kurzweil confuses engineering, where you build something to fit a predetermined set of specifications, with science, in which you follow the evidence wherever it leads. Look at the so-called war on cancer: it isn’t won, no one expects that it will be, but what it has accomplished is to provide limited success in improving health and quality of life, extending survival times, and developing new tools for earlier diagnosis — that’s reality, and understanding reality is achieved incrementally, not by sudden surges in technology independent of human effort. It also generates unexpected spinoffs in deeper knowledge about cell cycles, signaling, gene regulation, etc. The problems get more interesting and diverse, and it’s awfully silly of one non-biologist in 2011 to try to predict what surprises will pop out.

  • Kurzweil is a typical technocrat with limited breadth of knowledge. Imagine what happens IF we actually converge on some kind of immortality. Who gets it? If it’s restricted, what makes Kurzweil think he, and not Senator Dumbbum who controls federal spending on health, or Tycoon Greedo the trillionaire, gets it? How would the world react if such a capability were available, and they (or their dying mother, or their sick child) don’t have access? What if it’s cheap and easy, and everyone gets it? Kurzweil is talking about a technology that would almost certainly destroy every human society on the planet, and he treats it as blithely as the prospect of getting new options for his cell phone. In case he hadn’t noticed, human sociology and politics shows no sign of being on an exponential trend towards greater wisdom. Yeah, “expect turbulence.”

  • He’s guilty of a very weird form of reductionism that considers a human life can be reduced to patterns in a computer. I have no stock in spiritualism or dualism, but we are very much a product of our crude and messy biology — we percieve the world through imprecise chemical reactions, our brains send signals by shuffling ions in salt water, our attitudes and reactions are shaped by chemicals secreted by glands in our guts. Replicating the lightning while ignoring the clouds and rain and pressure changes will not give you a copy of the storm. It will give you something different, which would be interesting still, but it’s not the same.

  • Kurzweil shows other signs of kookery. Two hundred pills a day? Weekly intravenous transfusions? Drinking alkalized water because he’s afraid of acidosis? The man is an intelligent engineer, but he’s also an obsessive crackpot.

Oh, well. I’ll make my own predictions. Magazines will continue to praise Kurzweil’s techno-religion in sporadic bursts, and followers will continue to gullibly accept what he says because it is what they wish would happen. Kurzweil will die while brain-uploading and immortality are still vague dreams; he will be frozen in liquid nitrogen, which will so thoroughly disrupt his cells that even if we discover how to cure whatever kills him, there will be no hope of recovering the mind and personality of Kurzweil from the scrambled chaos of his dead brain. 2045 will come, and those of us who are alive to see it, will look back and realize it is very, very different from what life was like in 2011, and also very different from what we expected life to be like. At some point, I expect artificial intelligences to be part of our culture, if we persist; they’ll work in radically different ways than human brains, and they will revolutionize society, but I have no way of guessing how. Ray Kurzweil will be forgotten, mostly, but records of the existence of a strange shaman of the circuitry from the late 20th and early 21st century will be tucked away in whatever the future databases are like, and people and machines will sometimes stumble across them and laugh or zotigrate and say, “How quaint and amusing!”, or whatever the equivalent in the frangitwidian language of the trans-entity circumsolar ansible network might be.

And that’ll be kinda cool. I wish I could live to see it.

Hercolubus or Red Planet

Hi, Ben!

Ben is my neighbor, and I think he’s on his way to being a good skeptic. He found this book at the library book sale and had to share it with me — although he had a hard time holding back the laughter as he tried to describe it, and now that I’ve read it, he’s right…it’s hilarious.

We are doomed, according to V.M. Rabolú. There is a giant planet called Hercolubus, or the Red Planet, which is going to collide with Earth and destroy the human race entirely. Rabolú is warning us, not that there’s much we can do about it.

How does he know this? He’s an astral traveler. You can trust him because he provides verifiable evidence to show that he actually has visited other planets. For instance, he’s been to Venus.

The Venusians have perfect bodies: a wide or broad forehead, blue eyes, straight nose, blond hair, and an astonishing intelligence. They are more or less between 1.3 and 1.4 meters (4’3″-4’6″ feet) tall. Nobody is taller or shorter. There are no potbellies and you do not see deformed people. Everybody has an angelic figure: there is perfection in men and women because it is a planet with an ascendant, superior Humanity. There are no monsters like those you can see here.

They wear a wide belt full of red, blue, and yellow buttons all around, which flash like a lighthouse. When in danger, they press a main button, which you can imagine is like a buckle we have on our belt. Just by pressing it, a circle of fire is formed which can destroy a bullet and everything that it catches around it.

How can they be perfect? They’re little runts with poor fashion sense.

Rabolú has also been to Mars.

Life on Mars is exactly the same as on Venus. There is freedom in everything. The Martians can move to any place on the planet, without needing papers or passports or anything like that, and without needing anyone’s permission. Wherever they may go, there is a place to sleep, eat, clothing to change themselves, in whatever place on Mars. Wherever they may be, they find everything they need, because there are no borders but complete freedom. It is exactly the same way on the other planets of our solar system.

Martians have stronger bodies than Venusians, visibly more vigorous, for they belong to the Ray of Force.

On Mars everybody wears a soldier’s univorm: shield, helmet and a suit of armor. All these war clothes are made out of a material similar to bronze. They stand out because they are warriors to the core, but not warriors in the sense that we would call it here. There are no wars among them or with the other planets. Their war is directed against evil, to defeat evil, not against one another.

There are apparently some small number of people who take this very seriously. Why, they even have a website! With a video explaining it all!

Now you may be wondering…it’s all well and good that this wise interplanetary traveller is sharing his knowledge with us, but we’re about to be destroyed! At the end, he gives us his Formulas to disintegrate the Self and go out into the cosmos, just like him, and escape our destruction. Here’s all you have to do: lie down, recite these formulas 3 or 5 times verbally, and many more times mentally, and you will be translated:

Mantra LA RA S: this mantra is pronounced so that the sound of each syllable is prolonged:

Lllllaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaa (rolling the r).
Ssssssssssssssss (like a hiss).

Another mantra for unfolding within the astral body is: FARAON

FaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaRrrrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaa
Oooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn. (rolling the r)

If you have problems with this, the website has recordings of how to say the formulas properly. They also have a form so you can order your very own copy of the book. Get to work! You don’t have much time!

I am wondering exactly how many people are able to swallow this nonsense. There may not be many, but those few have got money — they’re mailing this silly book out for free, after all, which has got to add up. I’m not believing any of it, and I doubt that Ben is, either — at least, I haven’t heard any strange chanting from next door lately. Although, apparently, someone in Morris, Minnesota ordered this thing and gave it to our library, so there may be Hercolubians among us.

I get email

I don’t know what it is, but the kooks who write to me either don’t know what paragraphs are, so that I get a dense knot of disconnected sentences, or they use a peculiar pattern of quirky line breaks that makes sense to them, I suppose, but not to anyone else. Arvin is one of the latter. He likes his white space.

Hello Dr. PZ Myers my name is Arvin Sookiassian

I had two questions for you Dr. PZ Myers.

1. How do you justify objective morals without a moral source (GOD)?

2. Why are short human beings deserving of life?

• Taller human beings are smarter then shorter human beings (they make more money and are better respected by their colleagues).

• Tall men are much more wanted by females then short men are (for mating/financial security).

Thus by an evolutionary reasoning we can see that taller

Men/people are much better suited for survival in life.

So if there is no god why shouldn’t I go around and kill people and rape women?

If evolution is true then why shouldn’t I kill short men? I mean what are they good for?

I am taller then them and thus smarter and much better fit to mate with females. (I can provide them with a better life, thanks to evolution (my height).

So if evolution is a fact and God is not real then why shouldn’t I kill short men?

Thank you for your time

I really wish Arvin had bothered to tell me how tall he is; I think that is an essential datum here. If he’s less than 5’11” or 180 cm, I should hunt him down and kill him because he is too short, while if he is taller than I am, I should hunt him down and kill him in self-defense.

It’s a strange world Arvin thinks we should be living in — one where, if they aren’t controlled by a magic slave-owner in the sky, we’d wander about killing and raping. I wonder about people like Arvin. Why don’t they ever imagine that, if we abandoned biblical authority, we might wander the earth drinking beer occasionally, watching TV, and working hard at our jobs so we can afford that vacation to Disneyworld? You know, the kind of stuff most people do right now.

The short answer to Arvin’s goofy but all-too-common question is this: morality is not obedience. Morality derives from empathy and a sense of communal obligation with our fellow human beings, not with an arbitrary and whimsical supernatural authority. Destroy god, and people still live…so nothing would change for me.

Arvin, on the other hand, would be going on a rampage with a yardstick, losing sight of the fact that other people are something more than meat of a certain height and sex, raping and killing. Arvin really ought to see a psychiatrist. He’s an emotionally and intellectually stunted individual.

P.S. Tall people aren’t smarter than short people, nor do women entirely judge prospective mates by their height.

Bring it on, Al

Albert Mohler, that deluded Baptist zealot, has written an analysis of the New Atheism that puts evolution front and center. I actually sort of agree with him — these New/Gnu Atheists are predominantly scientific atheists who consider scientific explanations to be far better and more satisfying and most importantly, more true than religious explanations. Mohler lards his summary with gloppy accusations of “worldview” and “dogma” and other such buzzwords that religious apologists use as insults when applied to atheists but virtues when applied to theologians, but otherwise, it’s a fair cop.

The Dogma of Darwinism is among the first principles of the worldview offered by the New Atheists. Darwin replaces the Bible as the great explainer of the existence of life in all of its forms. The New Atheists are not merely dependent upon science for their worldview; their worldview amounts to scientism — the belief that modern naturalistic science is the great unifying answer to the most basic questions of human life.

As Richard Dawkins has recently argued, they believe that disbelief in evolution should be considered as intellectually disrespectable and reprehensible as denial of the Holocaust. Thus, their strategy is to use the theory of evolution as a central weapon in today’s context of intellectual combat.

The New Atheists would have no coherent worldview without the Dogma of Darwinism. With it, they intend to malign belief in God and to marginalize Christians and Christian arguments. Thus, we can draw a straight line from the emergence of evolutionary theory to the resurgence of atheism in our times. Never underestimate the power of a bad idea.

Mohler just lets it lie there — isn’t it enough to just point at the Other and shriek, “DARWINIST!”? — but I can see where he’s going with it, and it’s the same place creationists go. All they have to do to prove atheism wrong and Christianity true, they think, is to prove that evolution is false. I welcome this tactic. I love watching creationists butt heads against the evidence. They’re so cute when they’re reeling about, blood streaming down their faces, brains getting increasingly addled, as they try to deny reality. I guess it’s a kind of historical tradition in Christianity, this business of tying a blindfold on and throwing themselves to the lions. It used to be you needed a legionnaire or two poking them with a spear to get them to enter the arena, but nowadays they just do it voluntarily.

And I guarantee you, we atheists do not underestimate the power of bad ideas. We witness them in action every Sunday, and every time a public official whines that they need to say a magic chant to their sky-fairy before they get to work.

Cyclone Yasi

Queensland, Australia is currently threatened by a major cyclone, and everyone is bracing for the impact. There isn’t much we can do right now but watch and wait, and be prepared to help however we can. But there are things that are pointless to do.

I thought this was the silliest, most useless web source I’d find for this problem: it’s a set of specific instructions on how to pray during a natural disaster. Yeah, everybody in Cairns right now — all you need to do is get on the internet, read a few hundred words telling you what to pray for, and then get on your knees and start begging God based on an 8-point checklist.

But wait! There’s an even more stupid way to waste your time! You could do like Catch the Fire Ministries (Aussies are not surprised that that organization comes up when the word “stupid” is mentioned) and even before the cyclone makes landfall, you can start pointing fingers and blaming the atheist prime minister and the gay Green party leader who have caused the catastrophe. Prime Minister Gillard has failed to pray for God to turn the cyclone away.

Maybe someone should send those prayer instructions to the PM. Or better yet, send them to Daniel Nalliah! He seems to have a special in with god … maybe he should be using his persuasive powers to get his god to send his cyclone away. If he doesn’t, I think we should blame Nalliah for the cyclone, since he’s not using his prayerful powers to help the people of Australia.

I get strange books in my mailbox

I must be a magnet for madness. The latest treasure to manifest itself in my mail is a book by Stefano Polidori called The Chaos Riders. It may be a rare artifact; it’s not listed on Amazon, but it’s expensively bound with an inset photograph of Da Vinci’s The Last Supper on the cover, with thick glossy pages and profuse color illustrations throughout, but no publisher is listed anywhere. It’s hot off the vanity press.

I have tried to read bits and pieces of it. I was a bit put off by the translator’s remarks that claim the author is a scientist, but the first words in the preface are Polidori proudly telling us that he doesn’t read anyone else’s work, and the last book he read was Jonathan Livingston Seagull, and by the way, he dropped out of university because he “refused to accept others telling me how my brain should work.”

I was not able to figure out why the book is called The Chaos Riders or even what it is about. I did learn that Stefano Polidori possesses the reincarnated soul of John William Polidori, and that he vibrates at the same frequency of the prior Polidori, which attracts UFOs to hover over him. He carries a mutation which equipped his brain with an electromagnetic transmitter, which allows telepathy. He’s also obsessed with a friend named Henrik Dreyer, who knows a lot about past lives and gets his information by talking with plants. He does nicely spill the beans on the current identities of the reincarnated Lord Byron and Percy Shelley, in case you’re looking to commission some poetry.

But there’s something else that’s notable about this book, that simply blew my mind when I opened it and leafed through the pages.

The entire book, every word, is typeset in Comic Sans.

You doubt me. No one could be that mad, you think. But I tell you, it is so! And you can trust me, after all, since I am the reincarnated Hypatia of Alexandria, and you know she’d never tell a lie. Like a true skeptic, though, even that isn’t good enough, so I am currently broadcasting images of this book via my mutant electromagnetic transmitter brain, images that will be displayed on the undersurfaces of passing UFOs like advertising on the Goodyear Blimp, so just look up.

What, you still doubt me? You must have only limited, mundane senses. Therefore, to aid the handicapped, here is a scan of page 97. Behold!

[Read more…]

Alister McGrath loves him some Deep Rifts

After a brief career as one of Richard Dawkins’ fleas, author of some book or another complaining about atheism, Alister McGrath faded away into irrelevance again. Not that he was missed; he always reminded me of the Impressive Clergyman played by Peter Cook in The Princess Bride, that affected pontificator with nothing really to say. I guess he’s trying for a comeback now, but his only tactic is to try and ride the coattails of the New Atheists again, this time by triumphantly pointing out that there is dissent in the ranks, that the New Atheists are all loud and enthusiastic while other atheists are critical of the aggressive approach.

So he has now published a longish opinion piece crowing over what I consider healthy disagreement.

It’s easy to see why the “old school” of atheism is worried. The slick and breezy slogans of the New Atheism simply conceal its obvious evidential and rational deficit. Sooner or later, someone’s going to notice that these simplistic slogans just don’t match up with the reality. And they’re right to be apprehensive.

The conversation has now moved past the sloganeering stage. The froth has disappeared, leaving us free to look critically at arguments and evidence.

It’s classic McGrath. The essay goes on and on for many paragraphs while McGrath struggles to toothlessly mumble over the scenery (I’m sorry, but he doesn’t even have the dramatic flair to be able to chew it)…but he never quite gets around to the “arguments and evidence.” It offers the same hilarity as a cavalcade of clowns tumbling out of a clown car — it’s not so much the individual bits, but that they keep on coming.

And just when you reach those final paragraphs and think he’s finally done, his big announcement is that he’s going to do a whole series of posts just like this one. More clown cars are rolling into the center ring!

Besides, Deep Rifts are so 2009. Atheists disagree with one another? That’s always going to be true.

Hey, Alister, the joke can only last so long, you know. The incongruity of a fervent Christian denouncing atheism for a lack of evidence helps a little bit, but you’re really going to have to come up with something more entertaining to hold anyone’s interest.

I guess I’ll cancel my plans to go to prison, then

There’s another reason not to go to prison: they’ll confiscate your Dungeons & Dragons rulebooks! The courts have ruled that fantasy role playing games are a threat to security because…

Well, in a 2009 case, a prison gang leader “established and enforced rules.” You know, just like in D&D. And hell, there’s even a risk of “D&D players looking to Dungeon Masters, rather than to the prison’s own carefully constructed hierarchy of authority, for guidance and dispute resolution.”

Man, this is too easy. I can think of another fantasy game that is encouraged and rewarded in prisons, and has exactly the same properties they attribute to D&D. Quick, someone confiscate Chuck Colson’s bibles! Or better yet, someone take away his Templeton Prize.

Speaking of “WTF” moments, heeeeeere’s Sarah!

What a stupid, ignorant woman. She’s baffled by the phrase “Sputnik moment”; she reads it over and over; it makes her vaguely uncomfortable, with that Russian sound to it; and rather than asking someone or looking it up, she decides to invent her own totally wrong definition built on false premises (the Soviet Union was bankrupted by a satellite launch in 1957? Ha ha, screw you, Ronald Reagan!), and declare it on national television? It must be bad, that commie Obama said it.

Man, if I thought the American electorate cared at all about intelligence in its presidential candidates, I’d announce that Palin is toast and we can just scrape the burnt crumbly bits into the sink, try to salvage her with some butter, take a bite, decide she’s ruined, and throw her in the kitchen recycling bin for deposit in the compost heap once the snow melts.

Yeah, that metaphor ran away with me, but then I just watched the video, so I have an excuse for a little temporary brain damage.