Bringing back bad memories

Thunderf00t has come out with some execrable video in which he makes a number of horrible, awful, stupid claims: that there is a gray line between rape and bad sex, that it’s pointless to tell men not to rape, that telling women that it’s not their fault that they were raped is depriving them of agency — yeah, it’s one long parade of victim blaming non sequiturs (in which he repeatedly says he’s not victim blaming, while saying women often have the body language of victims). It’s horrifyingly ignorant, condescending, and oblivious to his own arrogant attitude.

Typical blunderthud, then. So don’t watch it.

Instead, read SomeGreyBloke, who has thoroughly deconstructed the video at length, in a 7 part series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7. It’s good. It reveals Thunderf00t, and all the other clueless men (Joe Rogan, I’m looking at you) who think that they should not be held accountable if they have sex with someone whose ability to consent has been compromised, as total moral idiots.

One killer insight is that Thudordud simultaneously tries to claim that there is a gray line between bad sex and rape, while arguing that educating rapists won’t work because they’re like Ted Bundy. I don’t think Fubberf00t is anything like Bundy, nor are most rapists, but they do have one trait in common: an inability to use a mirror.

When people like Zerlina Maxwell advocate teaching kids not to rape, they’re not talking about trying to get through to serial killers like Ted Bundy. Of course it’s "bloody obvious" that sociopaths are not about to listen. 

But most rapes aren’t committed by sociopaths. Most rapes are committed by men who are simply too selfish to think beyond their immediate gratification.

It is interesting that this subject bothers Thunderf00t so very very much.

Jebus. To think that we briefly had Dundert00t on this network at all…it’s embarrassing how bad he is.

Uh, bacon?

Ray Comfort, king of non sequiturs and nonsensical arguments, is at it again. Apparently our menus are dictated by God.

Ray Comfort: There was a big fuss recently in Sweden about lasagna and burgers containing horse meat. Sweden is atheist heaven, and so there shouldn't be any hard and fast table manners—other than "if it tastes good, eat it." So why aren't cats and horses on restaurant menus in most countries? It's because Judeo/Christian nations base what is right and wrong to eat on the rules God gave to the Jews. But if atheism has its way, we can expect restaurants to expand their menus to include eagle-wings, double-double whale burgers, fresh cat casseroles, and tasty little kitten fingers. When any nation forsakes God, it defaults to mob rule (what society dictates) and that can go anywhere it wants.

Ray Comfort: There was a big fuss recently in Sweden about lasagna and burgers containing horse meat. Sweden is atheist heaven, and so there shouldn’t be any hard and fast table manners—other than “if it tastes good, eat it.” So why aren’t cats and horses on restaurant menus in most countries? It’s because Judeo/Christian nations base what is right and wrong to eat on the rules God gave to the Jews. But if atheism has its way, we can expect restaurants to expand their menus to include eagle-wings, double-double whale burgers, fresh cat casseroles, and tasty little kitten fingers. When any nation forsakes God, it defaults to mob rule (what society dictates) and that can go anywhere it wants.

If America bases what is right and wrong to eat on God’s rules, what are we to say about bacon, mussels, crab, pork chops, catfish, calamari, baby back ribs, steamed butter clams, ham, lobster, pork loin, and oysters? And you know that the avoidance of eating horse meats is primarily a habit in English speaking countries, and that many other European countries have no problem with it (although it may be regarded as a low quality meat, since horses aren’t typically raised for slaughter — they have too many other uses)?

Rabbits and squirrels are also not kosher, but we don’t have any other proscriptions against eating them.

We don’t eat cats and dogs, not because the Bible says we can’t, but because we’re uncomfortable with eating pets. I mean, come on, unless you’re orthodox Jewish or a member of a few other sects that takes Old Testament dietary laws very seriously, food preferences are determined by a broader cultural tradition and we simply ignore antique religious demands entirely. When you get rid of phony god rules, you get to make eating decisions based on flavor, availability, and ethics, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

Besides, everyone knows that when we fully forsake the gods, we default to veganism.

Own goal!

I just wanted to share some fun tweets I got today. I was waiting in the airport, and some loon took offense at my criticisms of Pat Condell, and just had to vent…and managed to flame himself beautifully.

@J77Crazy
@patcondell @pzmyers the clown isn’t worth a response. #PZMyers is an embarrassment to white men everywhere. He is a faux feminist. #dhimmi

To “white men”? He’s a bit concerned with preserving the dignity of the White Race.

@J77Crazy
@pzmyers @patcondell You are disgusting. You represent every self loathing white in the world. You’re disgusting excuse for a white man

Gosh. Was that racist? I think it was.

@J77Crazy
@reggiereggie66 @pzmyers @patcondell anyone who sides with leftist theory, PZMyers BS or any other antiwhite parties are sick in the head.

For not being a racist, Pat Condell sure seems to attract some wild racists.

But — get ready for it — I agreed completely with this!

@J77Crazy
@pzmyers @patcondell calling Pat Condell a racist is like You saying you’re a feminist. #Fail

Yes, #Fail. Booyah!

A few other people commented on his meltdown, prompting, unsurprisingly, the sexist side of Mr @J77Crazy.

@J77Crazy
@DrJaneChi no one cares what you think. That’s why feminists and beta males hate everything. Go get some dick, you look like ya need it

See? Fun!


I should probably just block this guy because he’s evil and stupid, but he keeps coming back with jewels like this:

@J77Crazy
@thedxman @SpokesGay @pzmyers @patcondell no one here mentioned race, just a religion. You ppl are hopeless. Fuck all Whites like all of You

Now they want to poison knowledge

We all know that the creationists have been busily trying to redefine science so that they can call Bible-based faith that the earth is 6000 years old “science”, while empirical research and validated theories are relabeled “dogma”. But now they’re going to reach deeper into the educational process and redefine “knowledge”.

While most of us think that it is ignorance that needs to be stamped out, advocates of Kentucky’s new unapproved and forcibly implemented science standards are targeting … knowledge.

Just take a gander at the responses to my opinion piece in the Louisville Courier-Journal which were published on Monday. According to Brad Matthews, former director of curriculum and assessment for the Jefferson County Public Schools, one reason we need these unapproved and forcibly implement standards is to extirpate that bane of all modern permissivist educators: memorization.

"Science education has moved away from the memorization of many facts," says Matthews, "and toward understanding how the laws and principles of science are applied."

That’s right: students have memorized too many facts. Their heads are bursting with scientific facts. There is not enough room in their tiny little brains for an understanding of how these facts should be applied because all the room us currently taken up by scientific facts which these students have memorized. There is simply no space in those fact-crowded little heads for scientific concepts.

The solution is obvious to people like Matthews: clear all that knowledge out of there so they will be able to apply the knowledge they will no longer have under these standards.

Knowledge is now the rote memorization of “facts”, and educators who try to get students to understand concepts are now enemies of knowledge. I’m sure the taskmasters who run madrassas are now nodding their heads in complete agreement.

Brad Matthews’ statement is entirely reasonable, and does not warrant one iota of the hyperbole Cothran applies to it. The worst classes in the world are the ones where we sit students down and force them to memorize strings of data and then regurgitate them onto an exam. That does not imply that kids shouldn’t have to master some basic rote skills; sorry, gang, knowing your times tables is still important as a basic life skill.

But you still have to understand how to apply that knowledge. For instance, in cell biology, I expect my students to memorize the structure of a peptide bond (that’s not hard) and the basic properties of the classes of amino acids (only slightly harder), and we talk about some basic chemical reactions, like hydrolysis. They should be able to figure out how you break a peptide bond, without memorizing all the pairwise combinations of amino acids and how they’re split chemically. Once you know the general principle you can apply it everywhere!

Also, if you’re learning science, you have to learn how to fit new facts into an existing body of knowledge, and memorization won’t cut it.

What these guys are really afraid of is that deep ideas like evolution are natural inferences from all the data and facts floating around in science — if you learn how to think, you’ll inevitably figure out that creationism is bullshit, evolution actually works and makes sense, and that all those religious cranks have been lying to us. So in defense they want to truncate education: memorize what we already know (and even that they will tightly circumscribe), but don’t you dare teach kids how to think.

How can you call him a racist? He says he isn’t!

For some strange reason, this tirade by a guy laying out his criteria for a girlfriend reminds me of Pat Condell and his friends.

I am NOT racist. Just because I don’t like the appearnce of black people does not make me racist. Just because I don’t like a particular painting, does not mean I dislike the medium of Art as a whole!

But I will say this, Blacks do make up the majority of the inmates in the prisons in the country.

And I think it’s White people that make up the majority of white collar executive types of positions in America. Probably more Whites are 1 percenters than there are blacks.

When I think of all of the classical composers like Mozart etc that were pure genius, I don’t recall many of them being Black.

This is the 1st black president we’ve had so far and look what a horrible job he has done.

So in the grand scheme of things, it appears the scales are tilted in favor of Whites being the superior race, after all we weren’t the ones that were enslaved workinf cotton fields for 40o years..

Just pointing out that history seems to show whites as always rising to the top and dominating all other countries and cultures and taking what they want and doing as they please, being the dominant, most powerful, most intelligent race….

I’m not saying I personally believe whites are superior to blacks, I am not a scientist, and I have not studied it to any great depth…

Just pointing out some observations.

But, again, for the millionth time, I may be a jerk, but I’m not a racist, there’s a big difference.

My best friends are black and I have no hatred for them.

If you follow the link, you’ll also discover that he is not a sexist pig, nosir, not him.

It’s going to be a fun day!

Good morning! Expect a few rounds of fuming racist comments today — I have been discovered by Pat Condell, and he’s sending his pals over to set us all straight.

Pat Condell @patcondell
Many thanks to @pzmyers and everyone at the North Korea of free thought for a most amusing start to the day. https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2013/09/23/feminism-is-not-an-excuse-for-your-racism-pat-condell/

Ha ha, yes, because a blog network is just like a totalitarian state. I was just telling my kids they need to grow a beard and put on some weight if they ever expect to succeed me.

Pat Condell @patcondell
Ha ha. Honoured to be slandered as racist by @pzmyers and his fellow carpet-chewing PC fanatics at the ludicrously named Freethought Blogs.

“PC” is one of those dogwhistles blown by racists, Republicans, and small-minded thugs who don’t want to recognize the rights of all people…only their own privileged subset. It’s a pretty good marker for regressive idiots.

This is FreethoughtBlogs, which means we don’t kowtow to self-appointed leaders of the freethought movement. To the Condells of the world, it’s only freethought if it properly abases itself before the Loud White Men On Pedestals.

But here come the Condell followers…

The Equaliser P.A.I @Abloorable
@patcondell what an idiot @pzmyers is missing the point feminists are against the ‘list’ of crimes Pat states=acceptance of ISLAM fucks it

We begin with a proper bit of incoherence, which puts us in the right frame of mind for the flood that follows. These people make no sense at all. I don’t know what this guy is trying to say; feminists accept Islam? What?

ShorehamBoys1889 @ShorehamBoy1889
@pzmyers Pat has never been racist he just says what the majority are thinking and isn’t scared to upset the pc lefty liberal scum.

“He’s not just racist, he just says things that get anti-racists upset!” Great defense, guy. Also, what did I say about “pc”?

Veelkantie @Veelkantie
@patcondell Thank god we didn’t have much @pzmyers 70 years ago blaming the ‘small groep of nazi fundamentalist’ for al wrongs at the time.

Godwin!

Yisroel Shalom @YisroelShalom
@patcondell @pzmyers good on you you racist, lol, I wish all racists were like you!! #respect to you Sir!

Yisroel, you’re not helping to make the case against Condell being a racist.

demoivre @dugfuser
@patcondell @pzmyers If an ultra-liberal PC feminist shithead like Myers calls you a racist you know you’re doing something right.

“PC,” check. Liberal and feminist used as a pejorative, check. Embracing “racist” as a compliment, check. I think we’re done here.

1Pat @1Braque
@pzmyers Facts “feminists” remain silent while +100Sharia courts in UK subjugate women’s rights, no convictions of 1000sFGM etc @patcondell

You know, if you get on Google and search for this topic, the top results are all from far right-wing sites raging against both feminism and Sharia law; they never offer any support for their claim that feminists are in bed with Islamists. Instead they just repetitively insist that they’re the same thing, and both must be opposed. It’s a really easy lie: express outrage over some abuse of Islam against women, then say that Gloria Steinem and Naomi Wolf haven’t condemned it. And it’s true! Every feminist does not stand by their fax machine, watching CNN and waiting for every atrocity so they can send out a disavowal. Instead, they fight for broader principles and the liberation of women everywhere, and condemn Islamic policies as a whole.

I was amused to stumble across this story: Iranian women are translating feminist works to undermine Sharia law, an interview with Azar Nafisi.

WOWOWOW: Who would you describe as role models for Iranian women?

AZAR NAFISI: The writers of the feminist movement — Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan and Mary Wollstonecraft — are active voices in the Iranian movement today. Their works have been translated. Women very courageously translated all of them. Those women were at the forefront of the movement.

There is something deeply wrong with you if you believe that feminism and Islam are friendly allies. It requires a deeply twisted perspective; it seems to be a story that the right wing press has been pushing hard, though, so if you only read the Daily Mail and Stormfront and Sarah Palin fan sites and the Blaze and Tea Party organs, you’ll get nothing but this breathless assertion that feminists don’t protest against Islam vehemently enough. But note one commonality: these kinds of sites hate both feminism and Islam.

You’d think they’d notice that abortion is outlawed under Sharia, and feminists tend to be pro-choice, just to name one issue. Yet somehow they think they’re allies? Bizarre.

Michael Stephenson @mcsadapted
@patcondell @pzmyers Those folks are fully indoctrinated… to deny that feminists ignore Muslim depredations is absurdly dishonest.

I know these guys ignore what I write, for sure. I rattled off a list of feminists I read —
Taslima, Maryam, Ophelia, Sikivu, Heina — to claim that any of them ignore Islamist oppression of women is simply willfully ridiculous and ignorant.

Alex Rose @SRevision
@pzmyers @patcondell What is wrong with this pz clown?Richard Dawkins, Pat Condell, Michael Shermer..He really thinks he is above them all?

I get this a lot, and it’s hilarious. Do these people really think their heroes are above all criticism? Because that’s the issue here, not that I think I’m “above” all these people, but that I think I can disagree with them on many points.

What is wrong with you that you dare not differ from your heroes, and get offended when anyone points out their human failings?

Oh, I forgot one.

Not Rose Tinted @gpolitica
shut your gob .@pzmyers

Simple, clear, lucid. There’s someone who plainly says what he thinks.

Feminism is not an excuse for your racism, Pat Condell

I confess, I liked his early anti-religious rants, but as he became steadily more irate about the brown hordes invading Britain, I tuned him out…until now, when I happened to run across his latest video. Holy crap, what a racist cretin.

He’s chewing out those

…”progressive” feminists who confidently challenge everyday sexism but who are struck deaf and dumb by Islamic misogyny…they turn a blind eye to religiously endorsed wife-beating, forced marriage, honour killing, genital mutilation, organised rape gangs, sharia courts that treat women as less than fully human, and little girls forced to dress like nuns.

Turn a blind eye to Islamic misogyny, or you’ll be a racist, you racist.

Way to go, Pat! Teach those strawfeminists a thing or two!

I really don’t know of any feminists who think anything on that list is at all acceptable. Who are these mysterious feminists who have no problem with honor killing or rape gangs?

I’m looking around at my circle of progressive feminists — is it Taslima? Maryam? Ophelia? Sikivu? Heina? He seems to be flinging about wild accusations with no basis in fact here; it’s hard to even imagine a woman not deeply indoctrinated into Islam who would excuse murdering other women for infidelity, for instance.

I don’t see anyone turning a blind eye to Islamic misogyny. I do see plenty of conservative racist dorks turning a blind eye to the fact that the majority of the victims of Islamic misogyny are Muslim women, and using the abhorrent tactics of Islamic fundamentalists as an excuse to blame all Muslims for their pain.

Really. Pointing out that many Islamic cultures formally endorse hateful policies is not racism; looking at every immigrant and assuming they’re there to rape ‘your’ women is.

This kind of backward, ugly attitude towards women prevails throughout much of the Islamic world and it’s being deliberately imported wholesale into western society unchallenged and uncorrected thanks to the insane “progressive” view that all cultures are equal, except, of course, for western culture, which is inferior, and this is making life more dangerous for women.

You know that backward, ugly attitude? Islam didn’t invent it. We’ve got plenty of it to go around in the western world as well. To assume that it’s being imported by brown people into a white civilization that is innocent of sexism and misogyny is, well, racist.

It’s also a reflection of an attitude Pat seems to miss. Saying that Western culture is not necessarily superior to other cultures is not implying that we’re inferior. The attitude I see among progressive feminists is that fundamentalist Islam is well and thoroughly fucked up, as is fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Judaism, and maybe we should reject all of that garbage.

The progressive part, of course, is that we also recognize that Muslims are human beings and they deserve equal rights. That’s the equality I endorse. Maybe Condell is confused because he thinks they don’t deserve that?

And now this is flaming racism.

Norway and Sweden used to be among the safest for women. Now they’re best known for their high levels of Islamic immigrant rape that nobody in power wants to acknowledge or do anything about that because that would be racist.

Consequently, Norwegian and Swedish women are no longer safe in their own countries, for cultural reasons. Indeed, Sweden has been so “enriched” by Islamic immigration that its women statistically have a 25% chance of being raped in their lifetime.

Oh, god. That is so dishonest; this is the kind of lies fed to a racist public by right wing tabloids. Sweden does have a remarkably high rate of reported rapes. But that’s because, as a progressive culture, they’ve taken great care to document all cases of sexual abuse. Nothing gets swept under the rug.

But that is a misconception, according to Klara Selin, a sociologist at the National Council for Crime Prevention in Stockholm. She says you cannot compare countries’ records, because police procedures and legal definitions vary widely.

"In Sweden there has been this ambition explicitly to record every case of sexual violence separately, to make it visible in the statistics," she says.

"So, for instance, when a woman comes to the police and she says my husband or my fiance raped me almost every day during the last year, the police have to record each of these events, which might be more than 300 events. In many other countries it would just be one record – one victim, one type of crime, one record."

Condell is holding the conscientious record keeping of Swedes against them. This misleading statistic has been widely reported, so there’s no excuse for this lie…unless he gets all of his news from the Daily Mail.

And to imply that this surge of Swedish rapes is a consequence of raping hordes of Muslim immigrants is simply unconscionable. Given that between one in five and one in six women in America (and one in three if you’re Indian!) will be raped in their lifetime, with the more stringent requirements for counting an act as rape here, a figure of one in four for Sweden does not sound remarkable in comparison. Remarkable that it’s so damn high, but not remarkable in that it’s so high everywhere, even in the US, where we can’t blame it on an invasion of Muslim rapists.

Wait, you do need a cherry on top of all this racism, don’t you?

So forgive me for being blunt about this, girls, but there are more important things to get angry about than offensive language on twitter or sexist comments about your appearance.

Fuck you, too, Pat. We can be angry about genital mutilation and honor killings at the same time we’re angry about cranky old racists who are still fussed about every new wave of immigration since the Normans, and about sexist dudes who think they should be given a free pass on calling women “bitches” and “cunts” because they can find someone else who did something worse. We’re also quite capable of evaluating the relative harm of each of those without you falsely telling us that some of them do zero harm and must be ignored. You don’t get to tell me what I’m allowed to be enraged over, and let me assure you, I’ve got enough anger at all of these cultural toxins to go around. My fury encompasses whole worlds, and you’re right there in the list with mullahs and popes and KKK members and Republicans and assholes on youtube and members of UKIP and the English Defence League.

Boy.


Rebecca Watson seems to be somewhat sarcastic, but wow there are some similarities here.

Why are all your speakers older white men?

We asked several women and people of color to participate but unfortunately none were able to make it. We’re not sure why, but it’s a shame because we were planning a workshop with Richard Dawkins titled, “Things Marginalized People Should and Should Not Be Angry About: Everyday Bigotry (No) and Religion (Yes).”

I’m not the troll, but I think they caught one in their sample

I got a strange email the other day.

Dear Troller

Dear Dr Myers, I note that you are trolling our work Please find attached a copy of our SPIE paper which we gave in San Diego. I would welcome the opportunity to give a talk at you Institution so that you, with all your infinite wisdom, could shoot me down in flames and make a fool of me. However, I doubt that you have the balls ! Professor Milton Wainwright

“Trolling” their work? And who the heck is Milton Wainwright? And then I looked at the paper and realized…

Earlier this week, someone had told me that there was another loony “organisms from space” paper touted as proof that British scientists had discovered alien life published in that joke journal, the Journal of Cosmology by this guy Wainwright, and I admit it, I took a quick look at his goofy blog. But that’s it! All I did was read it! I didn’t comment or write about it here!

For a moment I had this terrible thought that maybe the crackpots have finally figured out how to read our minds.

But then I realized that these guys get so little attention paid to them that they probably carefully scrutinize their tiny little referer logs, and they noticed that someone from Morris, Minnesota stopped by, and obviously, since I’m the sole inhabitant of this eerily empty ghost town on the prairie, it must have been me.

So now merely reading their work is trolling.

Well, now I guess I’m obligated to follow through. I had read their paper and decided it was more of the same ol’, same ol’ and hadn’t said anything then, but I’m willing to summarize it.

It’s crap.

The data collection is fine. They’re lofting balloons into the stratosphere, and at a designated altitude, are opening a trap that allows dust, debris, small organisms, and so forth to settle and adhere to EM stubs. Then the trap is closed, the balloon descends, and they put the stubs on the electron microscope and see what is floating around in the atmosphere.

So far, so good. The problem lies in the interpretation. They’re then sorting the material observed into known vs. unknown, where “known” is clearly material from earth, and “unknown” is immediately categorized as Possible Signs of Extraterrestrial Life. The logic doesn’t work. It makes no sense. You’re looking at low density airborne particles in the atmosphere of a planet; it’s not as if we’ve come even close to categorizing all the particles of terrestrial origin, so you can’t play this game of assigning subsets to some other source outside our world.

The authors also have a bad case of apophenia. Almost every bit of unrecognizable garbage they spot is called “life”. Here is one of their examples.

A, Sheet-like inorganic material recovered from the stratosphere which is clearly not biological; and B, a  clump of stratospheric cosmic dust which includes coccoid and rod shaped particles which may, or may not, be  bacteria.

A, Sheet-like inorganic material recovered from the stratosphere which is clearly not biological; and B, a clump of stratospheric cosmic dust which includes coccoid and rod shaped particles which may, or may not, be bacteria.

So the sheet-like stuff to the left is not biological (how they know that, I don’t know and they don’t tell us — I think it’s “it doesn’t look like it to my untrained eye”), while the amorphous blob to the right may or may not be biological. In other words, the information content in this image is precisely zero. (By the way, that mess on the right doesn’t look at all bacterial to me.)

In other cases they flat out claim that the blob they see is biological.

An unknown biological entity isolated from the stratosphere

An unknown biological entity isolated from the stratosphere

Unequivocally biological, no less. How they know, I again don’t know. It seems to be that when they stare at it and do a little subjective pattern matching, they call something a “neck” and something else a “body” — that is, they slap labels on things that conform to their beliefs about the morphology of organisms.

The structure shown in Fig.3 however is unequivocally biological. Here we see a complex organism which has a segmented neck attached to a flask-shaped body which is ridged and has collapsed under the vacuum of the stratosphere or produced during E/M analysis. The top of the neck is fringed with what could be cilia or a fringe which formed the point of attachment of the neck to another biological entity. The complexity of this particle excludes the possibility that is of non-biological in origin.

Complexity does not exclude a non-biological source. Also, just saying that things have names similar to the names we’d give a life form does not support the claim that it is anything other than a subjective interpretation of some debris.

They have another example that demonstrates my point.

A collapsed balloon-like biological entity sampled from the stratosphere. Note the “proboscis” to the left,  with nose-like openings and the “sphincter” present at the top of the organism

A collapsed balloon-like biological entity sampled from the stratosphere. Note the “proboscis” to the left, with nose-like openings and the “sphincter” present at the top of the organism

The structure shown in Fig.4 is also clearly biological in nature; here we see a somewhat phallic balloon-like structure which has presumably collapsed under low pressure. A “proboscis” is seen emerging from the left of the main cell which has two, nostril-like openings. At the top of the collapsed “balloon” is a sphincter-like opening. Again, this entity is clearly biological in nature, and is not an inorganic artefact. Although it is clearly not a bacterium it could well be an alga or a protozoan of some kind. The organisms shown in Figs. 3 and 4 are presumably clear enough for experts in the relevant branches of taxonomy to provide some kind of identification.

Why would an alga or a protist have a proboscis with nostrils? Do they have multiple samples that exhibit a similar shape? Isn’t it more likely to be a random scrap of material, rather than the patterned shape of an organism?

gnomish

Oh, wait. They missed something: look at that wrinkle at the bottom right of the object. It looks like…a pointy ear. And then there’s the nose, alright, and a robust jaw beneath it. By golly, it’s the tiny decapitated head of a gnome that was less than a tenth of a millimeter tall in life! And its forehead has been bashed in, no doubt in a great battle between microcosmic fairy tribes waged by thrip-mounted cavalry in the skies!

I think that’s a more plausible explanation than the authors’ similarly evidence-free guess that unidentified particles are signs of extraplanetary life.

Also, I thought Journal of Cosmology was defunct — it was up for sale, complete with crude slymepit-style parting shots at me. I guess it’s still dribbling on, providing a forum for the worst and dumbest kinds of pseudoscience.


By the way, Rawn Joseph, former(?) owner of the JoC, appears to have had a rather nasty falling out with Chandra Wickramasinghe, who he accuses of theft and plagiarism.