TurboFool (Neither, really)

I just watched a great video by potholer54 on the “controversial” (among people who don’t know wtf they’re talking about) subject of carbon dating and just had to post it here:

It leads me to question these unfortunately common tactics of creationists to explain their ideological viewpoints. In this case the never-failing-to-amuse Kent Hovind manages to quote-mine papers, skew findings to achieve his desired explanation, ignore already well-known limitations of the technology within the scientific community to show what’s already been found and worked around, and ignore direct warnings from scientists over the fact that the results he’d get were KNOWN to not be of what he was trying to find. And yet he goes right ahead anyway and does all of this to “prove” that carbon dating doesn’t work when it’s clearly only HE that isn’t working properly.

Now most assume this guy is just plain dishonest. And given his history of and imprisonment over tax evasion, it’s a fair assumption. But it’s not definitely the case. It’s also entirely possible that this guy is a complete idiot. Yes, yes, he’s a “doctor,” and he speaks in a way that suggests some level of intelligence, but those aren’t proof either. And then there’s the old cognitive dissonance issue where he believes his viewpoint so strongly that he’ll do anything to back it up, justifying the dishonesty to the point where he doesn’t even realize he’s being dishonest. I think it’s likely the first problem or the last, the first placing the blame entirely on Hovind, the last putting more of the blame on the overall concept that’s poisoned his mind so deeply against reality.

At the end of the day, believe what you will, but don’t fucking lie about it to me or impressionable people. Stick to facts, stick to proof, stick to reliable evidence, stick to reality, or STFU. You’re not helping yourself or anyone else by spreading arguments that are provably wrong, and especially arguments that were already proven wrong to you BEFORE you used them. Adjust, learn, adapt, and evolve your arguments as you learn. I know it runs contradictory to your view that the world is nothing but cold stone facts written in an ancient book, but the truth is our survival depends on adaptation, and you know it. Why else would you have renamed “creation” to “intelligent design?” You know your tactics have to change if they’re going to have any shot at success, and this tactic of continuing to use arguments that were disproven is one of them. Move on. And if you run out of such arguments, maybe it’s time to reconsider your position. You know, the way rational people do.

So today I made the mistake of using the #atheism hashtag on Twitter. It wasn’t really a mistake, I did it purposefully, and was aware that it brands me exactly as I’m comfortable being branded. What I didn’t expect was the troll I got in response.

He doesn’t fit the classic description of a troll or flamebaiter per se, or at least not MY definition. He’s a calm enough guy who’s simply making the same old tired, illogical, badly-presented arguments. In particular he’s claiming that atheism is, in fact, a religion, and that he has proof of this, a list of 5 gods that atheists believe in, and that we need to stop saying we don’t have belief or that we lack belief.

Where it gets interesting, though, is that he mainly avoids making the arguments themselves, only referencing the fact that he has them. Why? Because he has a convenient eBook available for sale on his website that has all those answers! And it retails for only $4.99, which is actually quite reasonable. $4.99 is almost inexpensive enough to be worth me buying just to read his arguments which I’ll likely immediately recognize from decades of others making the exact same tired arguments, along with nonsensical ramblings full of logical fallacies. Then I’d have the ammunition with which to refute his claims directly and show him how flawed they are, assuming he’s capable of following an intelligent argument.

And right there is where I realized this guy’s hidden brilliance. Regardless of whether he believes his claims (I have no reason to doubt that he does), and regardless of whether I and many more knowledgeable folks can rip said claims to shreds, is irrelevant. Why? Because the moment he’s successfully baited us into wanting to read his evidence to dispute his inanity he’s made $4.99 off us (minus fees, of course). At that point we could prove he’s one of the worst authors on the planet and has no skills whatsoever in philosophy or theology, and he’ll still have proven that what he lacks in those fields he makes up for in marketing strategy. Much like Brian Dunning once pointed out, sure you can make a better hamburger than McDonald’s, but you can’t make a better business. It’s not about the product, it’s about the selling of said product. And this guy deserves some credit for that. I can make a better argument than he can, but at the end of the day, which of us has made $4.99 off the other?

I’ve purposefully avoided linking to the person in question, but if you’re interested in checking out what he has to say, look to my Twitter feed. While I personally don’t wish to financially support his flawed arguments or deceptive practices, I won’t prevent you from doing so. He is pretty clever, and perhaps some may feel he deserves a few bucks for that. So be it. Now, should he wish to send me a FREE copy of the eBook and prove this wasn’t his strategy and he really does want open and honest discussion of the subject, I’d be happy to review it here. But I’m not paying for the privilege of arguing with him. I’m not that big of a masochist.

EDIT 5/18/10: I realize I’m doing nobody justice by not providing some link to this guy’s chatter, especially since he’s apparently still at it, even if he left me alone when it was clear I wasn’t buying (his book or his BS). So check out his Twitter feed to see what he’s up to.

This song is full of profanity, and it’s likely to piss off a lot of people, potentially including people I know and love dearly. I apologize to them in advance, but I do not, can not, and will not apologize for the content or meaning of the song which I, instead, support with every inch of my being. It’s full of profanity (hence my title), and so is my follow-up. Easily offended? Leave now.

Tim Minchin’s one of my favorite musicians and comedians. He’s funny and honest (which tend to go hand in hand) and has no problem calling an idiot an idiot, and we need more of that. In this case he doesn’t hold back one bit, and I thank him for that.

I don’t respect this authority figure just because a bunch of other supposed authority figures got together and voted that he was the guy who should be the leader of their church. I know as a non-Catholic I can’t possibly understand what it’s like, and how important he is, and how infallible he’s supposed to be. He’s a motherfucker who covered up for and protected child-fuckers. Children were RAPED by men who they and their parents TRUSTED, who they were supposed to trust more than anyone else by the very design of the motherfucking organization, and this trust was violated. And then, when the motherfuckers who violated their trust and bodies were called out on it, even bigger motherfuckers like the current Pope (then a a Cardinal) protected them from prosecution and hid their motherfucking crimes.

So no, I don’t understand your church, and I don’t understand why you feel the need to protect this man when you’d be crying for blood if a cop or a judge or the mayor either fucked your kid or covered up for someone who did. I’m sorry I don’t understand it and I’m sorry I never, ever fucking will. There is no damn bloody excuse for this no matter who this man thinks he is, has been told he is, or has been divinely inspired to be that allows for this.

And in the off chance that I’m fucking wrong, and he is divine, and this is all part of the plan, well you know what? Fuck the motherfucking plan, too. Yes, I’m an atheist, and contrary to what people who can’t comprehend atheism believe, no that doesn’t mean I hate your god, or that I’m angry at him. It means I simply do not believe he exists. None of your evidence has managed to convince me so far. But just for a moment suppose you managed to do the trick. You managed to find the evidence, display the miracles, push the boundaries and prove to me that, holy shit, it’s all true. If the religion you reveal to me to be reality happens to be one in which motherfuckers like this are RIGHT and JUST in their actions, and your god condones this evil prick’s actions, you’ll only have managed to convince me of your first opinion. Because that’s a god I could hate, loathe, revile, detest, and vow my life against. That’s a sick, twisted deity, and one that doesn’t fit your descriptions of a loving, just god. At that point I’d be more interested in taking my chances with the devil.

All right, new episode of Mr. Deity is up, and I’m in it again! Woohoo, go me, living the dream, etc. Check it out (and stick around for the begging segment at the end):

Another good episode, and I loved the PZ references. Definitely some good, subtle stuff in there, and as usual plenty of ad-libbing (the Dagon reference was something I was especially proud of).

Anyway, the season’s nearly wrapped up, then there’ll be a small hiatus and for the first time ever, a Mr. Deity DVD release of the entire third season! Hopefully there’ll be a bunch of bonus content like outtakes (we have, on some very, very rare occasions, botched a line, or done something else mildly unplanned) and extended scenes to make it extra worth it, but just having it without the GoDaddy ads is enough for me. That and maybe no begging, although I find the begging bits nearly as funny (and, admittedly, occasionally funnier) than the episodes themselves, so hopefully they’ll be on the DVDs in one form or another.

Btw, if you were at all confused by the beginning, you may want to check out this Super Bowl commercial after the break to clear things up a bit:

More »

That’s right, folks, Timmy’s back! And check out what a headache he’s got on his hands…

This one was a doozy to film, because the dialog was so tight and the timing had to be so perfect that we had a lot to focus on. Plus I had worked late the night before, and Jimbo and Brian had spent the day filming another episode first, so none of us was as well-prepared as we would have liked. But that never stops a Mr. Deity, and better yet, some of the funniest things that come out of our mouths are born from sheer delirium.

As well, I was deeply honored to learn (and confirm upon reflection) that I am officially the first recurring character in Mr. Deity history (obviously not counting the four principle players). It means so very much to me to have been so openly and warmly accepted into this group and brought on-board such an amazing project. To go from a rabid fan (thankfully the doctors got that taken care of) to a recurring role as the head of R&D for the entire universe is a literal dream come true. I couldn’t be happier to be involved in something so clever, witty, original, and meaningful.

Well, enough blubbering. The next episode is one I managed to operate cameras and sound for, and it’s damn funny, despite me not appearing in it. Look forward to it in a couple of weeks. And word is I may appear in at least one more episode this season. Stay Tubed…

I don’t believe in God. That’s no secret. If you’ve read my blog or had a conversation with me on the topic, you’re aware of this. I work hard to be respectful of the people I know and love and their right to believe what they wish, and I avoid arguments with them simply because I like to maintain the relationships I have with them. But that doesn’t keep me quiet everywhere, and that doesn’t stop me from caring.

But why DO I care? After all, if I don’t believe, then what does it matter? Why do I as an atheist, or all atheists, seem to spend so much time talking about something we don’t believe in? Religious people seem to find this concept silly, and on the surface I can see why. I don’t put a title on my lack of belief in fairies, nor do I write blog posts about it, have heated discussions online, join activist groups, attend conferences, or read books about it. And since I respect each individual’s right to those beliefs, what does it matter?

I’ve wanted to answer this question for quite some time, honestly, and get into the nitty-gritty of it. But today, my Twitter friend @natheist favorited a new (well, maybe just new to me, I didn’t check the date) video by the AWESOME @gogreen18 (who is awesome, to clarify, for being brilliant and well-spoken, all while happening to prove the stereotype that gorgeous women can’t be either is complete bull) that just so happens to say everything I wanted to say better, more compactly, and with prettier eyes. Take a look:

That’s it, in a nutshell. That’s why I care, why it all matters. Historically, and currently, religion tends to impact my life and those of the people I love more than most other forces, and it’s my opinion, and that of a consistently growing number of people, that it does so negatively. Now perhaps you’re one of those who believes in a god or spirituality in some more generalized or personal sense, and one who doesn’t buy into this organized religion thing. Then perhaps you’re one of the people who doesn’t directly harm me. But when you believe your holy text overrides my rights as someone who hasn’t bought into it, you impact my life. And that’s when I have to start doing something about it.

More »

All right, finally getting around to posting this on my own blog since it went up yesterday. The latest episode of Mr. Deity is up, and it features yours truly. Check it out:

As the head of R&D for the entire universe, I think you can understand why I’ve been too busy to blog much.

Anyway, hope you enjoyed it, and look forward to more coming soon. We’re filming another one later this week!

Religious folk have it easy (minus that whole eternity of nightmarish torment for kissing the wrong person thing). See, they get to live in a world of black and white, good and evil, right and wrong, yes and no, heaven and hell, The Beatles and Celine Dion. They get to state absolute certainties regardless of their inability to back them up because they have “faith.” And it’s really quite an enviable position, as it doesn’t require much in the way of intellectual leg work*. Debates can pretty much start and end with “this is just how it is,” and anything they add as to why or how is icing on the cake and optional (not to mention easily changed on the fly if the person they’re arguing against calls them on it). They know what they know, and usually can’t be swayed, which makes them look pretty darn strong to an unbiased and inexperienced onlooker.

This difference puts those of us who invest in science, reason, and honest self-examination at a bit of a disadvantage. When we’re explaining our position on a subject to a third party, assuming we play by our own rules, we must readily and honestly admit when we DON’T know something or can’t be 100% certain. While there’s much we’re clear on, there are many topics that aren’t cut and dry, or that we can’t prove/disprove beyond all shadow of a doubt. But those who subscribe to religious beliefs can claim with absolute certainty anything they feel, and when someone’s looking for an answer, especially in a moment of weakness, self-doubt, grief, loss, fear, pain, etc., certainty sure is nice to have.

This comes up quite heavily on the issue of God (we’ll simply go with the Judeo-Christian one for simplicity here, but this applies equally to all other deities and spiritual forces and such), and especially the matter of his existence or lack thereof. See, while religious folk are quite happy to stick with a firm, hard, unwavering “yes, He definitely exists,” those of us with a more scientific angle can only stick to much more wishy-washy answers such as, “we have no evidence he exists,” “his existence is highly improbable,” “while I can’t rule out the possibility entirely, I’m not convinced,” etc. As I remember hearing someone point out recently (wish I remember who so I could credit them), a true scientist if asked whether the sun would rise again tomorrow would say, after pointing out the inaccuracy of the phrase, that all he or she can state is that all observable evidence suggests so. We simply cannot guarantee that a cosmic disaster won’t take place before that moment, or that some reality-altering shift in the universe won’t change all that we know. We’re pretty frickin’ damn sure it’s going to “rise” again tomorrow, as it has every day throughout recorded history, and well before that as we can extrapolate from the preponderance of evidence, and we see no sign of impending doom in any of the vast fields of research in which such an event could be foreseen, but committing 100% is foolish when looking at something scientifically. The unknown must always be accounted for. So the same has to apply to this question of God’s existence, no matter how sure we are he doesn’t exist.

What I’ve noticed from this is that it often affects how a person portrays their philosophy on the subject, leading some to describe themselves as agnostic simply due to accepting this minute possibility that they’re wrong. Now this seems to me a very slim minority of those who are agnostic, with most somewhere between simply not caring and lacking the knowledge to make an informed decision. But some actively decide that it’s impossible to know for a fact or dishonest to state it as such, therefore they’re unwilling to come down on either side of the fence. And while I find this quality admirable, and befitting the attitude of the true rationalist, it just doesn’t work for me on a personal level.

See, I too accept the possibility that I could be wrong, simply because the claims are NOT falsifiable. If it can’t be disproven 100%, I can’t say I’m 100% sure it’s not true. So much like Richard Dawkins, I have to place myself as a 9 on the scale of hardcore believer to hardcore unbeliever, as stating definitively that there is no God is just as dishonest as stating there most definitely is. I can’t say it’s impossible, as the rules under which he fits are just wide enough that I’d be lying if I said I know I’m right. So then why am I an atheist and not an agnostic? Simple: are you an atackliotist, or are you agnostic to Tackliots? What? You don’t know what Tackliots are? You’ve never heard of them before? That’s because I just made them up, but shhh, don’t tell anyone. Let me fill you in on the background of the amazing being known as the Tackliot:

The Tackliot came into existence before the dawn of time. Now I know what you’re thinking: How can something come BEFORE time? The answer, of course, is shut up. Now the Tackliot was simultaneously everything and nothing. That Tackliot was not only the entire universe, despite the fact that it didn’t yet exist (buh- buh… that’s better), but it also wasn’t the universe. Not even slightly. I’m blowing your mind, right? No? Read it again and then answer that. Not even a little? Try again, but squint this time. Now? Tiny headaches count as a sort of blown mind… Okay, sweet. Anyway, the Tackliot got bored with complete lack of time and a universe, and decided to make one. Since the Tackliot was everything and nothing, it was a simple task to instantly create every possible combination of designs for the universe at once, and then pick its favorites to keep. The Tackliot then absorbed the rest back into itself, and left the remaining universes intact. This meant the Tackliot was no longer everything as some universes now existed outside of itself. Thankfully it couldn’t cease to be nothing, so was able to enjoy this small cold comfort. However the Tackliot soon found that the universes it had created were full of small flaws and holes, and its work was cut out for it patching and fixing all of these various issues, tweaking something here, mending something there, until it had managed to give all that remained of itself to the various universes it had created, once again managing to become everything, and also nothing (see how I tied all that together so masterfully? Yeah, I’m totally down for drinks…). Our universe is but one of the myriad of universes that make up the Tackliot, and we should remember every day the beauty and history of this being that put us here in the lives that we lead. Also, next time you masturbate, remember that the Tackliot is watching you from the air, the walls, the ceiling, the floor, that sock, and is also your hand and junk. Have fun!

Now I know what you’re thinking right now after reading that wacky paragraph: that is AWESOME! Right? No? Try reading it again, but put on 3D glasses this time. Mind-blowing headache, right? Anyway, point is, there’s a being who may or may not exist. Its legacy makes as little or as much sense as most other religious stories about the origin of the universe, and we can’t disprove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it doesn’t exist. Now before you read this, you had to have been an atackliotist because you had no belief that the Tackliot existed. Now that you know the possibility exists, it would arguably be dishonest to say it’s 100% impossible as the story really didn’t provide any falsifiable details.

Of course one thing the story of the Tackliot lacks that the religious stories have is a vast backlog of books, stories, hymns, etc., all backing up the story. It also lacks the thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, or billions of fellow believers in the story. It lacks preachers, evangelists, and missionaries spreading the word of the Tackliot. So my story is at a pretty serious disadvantage, leaving it still pretty logical to be an atackliotist and not agnostic to his beauty, despite the inability to disprove the story. But what if Christianity didn’t have all of that? What if it lacked the books, the believers, the evangelists, etc.? Would it be any more convincing than my story? Well, without all of that vast wealth behind it, it really is just another story. No better, no worse than the rest. And just as unconvincing. But thankfully for it, it does have all that backing, right?

The thing is, though, for some of us Christianity DOES lack all of that. Because when I examine all of the materials used to prove the subject, I’m left thoroughly unconvinced, not to mention underwhelmed. I find the holy texts lacking all evidence, backing, logic, reasoning, structure, consistency, or believability. They seem to scream to me that they were written by primitive men who needed to explain the world around them based on the limited knowledge they had, while infusing it with stories and rules that backed up what was already important to them while condemning what their enemies held dear. So that, for me, cancels out the books, stories, hymns, etc. They might as well not exist for me.

But then what of the preachers, evangelists, missionaries, and believers? Surely I can’t discount all of them? But I can, because they exist only because of that now-forgotten evidence that left me so very, very unimpressed. They bought the stories that I didn’t. They believed the tales I saw as no different than the average fable. They accepted the stories of other believers who fell for the same poorly-written evidence that left me feeling unimpressed. And for this reason, they no longer exist in this equation. And what does that leave us with? Just another story. Just another story that had I not heard it before, just like you hadn’t heard the story of the Tackliot 10 minutes ago, I would never have even considered as an option in the way the universe works. I’d lack belief in it simply by virtue of the thought never having entered my head. And once I examine the evidence, discount it, and discount all of the surrounding noise that came from it, I have no remaining reason to treat it as anything more than just another story that in another universe I may never have even heard.

It’s for this reason that I, a rational-minded, free-thinking, skeptical, scientific person who must readily admit what he can’t know for certain, and who listens to evidence and changes his position when it becomes clear that it’s time to do so, still chooses to label himself as an atheist and not an agnostic. I was born an atheist, as is every other human being on this planet, and until I’m given something more than noise to consider, I’m going to remain one. Prove me wrong. Please. It’ll blow my mind (more than just giving me a headache), and open up this already incredible universe we live in even further. And contrary to popular belief, there are few things scientists love more than finding out what they believed was wrong and they have a whole new field to explore, complete with vast amounts of research grant dollars. As a mere science spectator (to borrow a term from Penn Jillette), I won’t benefit from the grant dollars, but I’ll be cheering on from the sidelines as we expand the world’s awareness that much further. Yeehaw!

*I need to clarify here that I very much am generalizing for the sake of dramatic effect. I know many religious people who would fit my description of being some of the most intelligent, thoughtful, insightful people I’ve ever known, and I’m lucky to have them and their brilliance in my life. But they’re the minority of what I see from those making religious arguments, especially on the Internet, and so I go after the low-hanging fruit. If you don’t fall into the traps I describe in this post, consider yourself not someone I’m describing.