October 1st 2004
Natasha's Nonsense
October 3rd 2004
Hellfire, Logic and Hocus-Pocus
October 5th 2004
Missiles of Spin
October 7th 2004 The
Devil's Virus
October 9th 2004
Reagan On Bush
October 11th 2004
Pope
Stacks Deck
October 14th 2004
Of
Missiles and Road Maps
October 17th 2004
Bothering
God
October 25th 2004
Uncivil War
October 28th 2004
Clone
Clash
October 29th 2004
Ancient
Dwarves
October 31st 2004
Finding Faith
Through Fear
November 3rd 2004
Bleak
Outlook
November 5th 2004 Biblical Bilge
November 7th 2004
The Men Who
Stare At Goats
November 9th 2004
Vacuous Values
Voters
November 11th 2004
Exit the
Crisco Kid
November 13th 2004
Breast Cancer
Lies
November 16th 2004
Sunken Dreams
November 19th 2004 The
Epistle of Brown Nose Bob
November 23rd 2004 Sacred
Snippets
November 25th 2004
No
Miracle
December 1st 2004 Holy
Spam
December 3rd 2004
Unholy Smoke
December 7th 2004
Vardy's
Vacuity
December 9th 2004
Shoot to Thrill?
December 10th 2004
Bullshit
December 12th 2004 Implausible
Stories
December 14th 2004
Hush My Mouth?
December 16th 2004
Second Front
December 18th 2004
No Still,
Small Voice
December 20th 2004
Sanctified Tat
December 22nd 2004 The
Unexamined Life
December 23rd 2004
Thou
Shalt Not
December 24th 2004
Sikh Censorship
December 25th 2004
Herod the Great
December 27th 2004
Integrated Hogwash
December 28th 2004
Asking Why
December 30th 2004
Antiquities Antics
October 1st 2004
Natasha's Nonsense
- just for a moment imagine that you have a
gift, a paranormal power, and you are confident enough in its genuineness
to charge people money for the information you obtain using this power.
Now along comes a benefactor who says let's devise a test for these
powers, the rules and protocols of which we can both agree to beforehand,
and, if you pass this test, you will be given a $1 million. What would you
do? If you are Natasha Demkina, a 17 year-old Russian girl, like many
before you, you ignore the offer. This girl is currently in the UK on a
publicity tour, sponsored by the Discovery Channel. She first came to 80's
notice back in February of this year when the tabloid end of the British
press became excited at her supposed ability to diagnose medical
conditions using some kind of X-ray sight. It was at this time that James
Randi
offered, via a Granada TV researcher, to
test Natasha for the aforementioned
$1 million. He never received an answer. Now Natasha has been
tested for a TV show,
reports the Guardian, by representatives
of CSICOP,
the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the
Paranormal, and, according to the testers, she has failed. Natasha, who
surely agreed to the test rules beforehand, has now fallen back on one of
the standard psychic's excuses for non-performance under scrutiny. She
says that she was unhappy with the way the test was carried out "The
atmosphere of the testing was unfriendly. The conditions I was looking for
were in some cases dubious. Why is that if I get five out of seven I pass,
but if I get four, I'm a total failure?" What, one wonders, does
she mean by unfriendly? Were the testers actually hostile or does she mean
they were not impressed with her performance? Or was it quite proper
scientific detachment? One of the test devisers,
Professor Richard Wiseman, a psychologist
at the University of Hertfordshire, was also unhappy with one aspect of
the test. Apparently Natasha was sending and receiving text messages
during the procedure, something which had been expressly forbidden. This
casts doubts on even the "successes" that she had. While no one there is
suggesting she cheated, it is a definite possibility. Apart from the
dubious text messaging Wiseman also noted that subjects she "diagnosed"
tended to react in the way that many folk do to readings by mediums - by
remembering the successes and tending to forget the much larger number of
failures. Wiseman told the Guardian "When I saw her
do her usual readings, I couldn't believe the discrepancy between what I
was hearing and how impressed the individuals were. I thought they were
going to walk away saying it was embarrassing, but time and again, they
said it was amazing. Before each reading, I asked the people what was the
main medical problem and Natasha never got one of those right."
Wiseman crops up elsewhere this week
talking about seances to BBC News -
oddly, although the strategies of psychics are discussed, the term
cold-reading is not used. This is a widespread and
comparatively easily learned technique of eliciting information from the
bereaved in order to fine tune the reading given. Those desperate or
grieving are often unaware that this is being done and again, as with
Natasha's diagnoses, they tend to remember the hits and disregard the
misses. Wiseman, in both articles, is careful to be polite and accuses no
one of deception or fraud. 80, on the other hand, thinks that most
mediums, and particularly the TV species, are ghouls making a living from
the bereaved and deserve little more than contempt. As for Natasha, she is
going to have to do a lot better if she is going to convince anyone of her
abilities. Taking a test, failing, then whining that the atmosphere was
unfriendly does nothing to convince this observer. For more on the
techniques employed by mediums see
Psychic Sophistry by Tony Youens. For a believer's description
of how Natasha's powers work this message from the
Graham Hancock message board is hard to
beat "It's just one more "siddhi"--psychic ability.
The human body is not solid--no matter is. Some people are born with these
abilities, others pick them up through growth obtained by meditation. She
is seeing with her eye-center chakra--or more accurately, when one is "at"
the eye-center, one can often see through solid matter, because one is
conscious in a higher reality-an etheric or even astral reality. But like
I said, nothing is solid anyway." Certainly nothing between the
writer's ears.......
Popetown Shutdown
- the BBC has been
cowed - not this time by the bullying
tactics of an unelected official, but by pressure and incessant whining
from the Roman Catholic church. It is common ploy these days for various
Christian groups that when something is not to their liking they start
whingeing
about being persecuted and oppressed. The subject of the RC's ire is an
animated comedy show called
Popetown, which,
according to the Daily Telegraph,
features "...back-stabbing cardinals and an
infantile Pope who bounced around the Vatican on a pogo stick..."
(In 80's view, apart from the pogo stick, it sounds like a documentary.)
The show was commissioned for the digital BBC 3 channel, with the voice of
Ruby Wax as the Pope and that of Jerry Hall as a nun, but has been pulled
under pressure from the RC church. The Bishop of Portsmouth told the BBC "It
was obviously going to be a controversial programme which would have
caused offence, not least among the Catholic community who hold the person
of the Holy Father in the highest regard and affection." Unlike
many outside the Catholic community who consider him a reactionary bigot.
BBC 3's controller, Stuart Murphy, is quoted as saying the comic impact of
Popetown did "not outweigh the potential offence it
will cause". It would have been nice to have viewed a couple of
episodes to see if his assessment was correct. He also said "There
is a fine judgement line in comedy between the scurrilously funny and the
offensive." Here he is dead wrong - to be scurrilously funny means
that you are going to have to offend someone. 80's dictionary
defines scurrilous as meaning "Expressing offensive
reproach". (It is also worth noting that Mark Thompson, the BBC's
director-general is a practising Roman Catholic.) The boss of Channel X,
the independent production company that made the show, Alan Marke, made a
most telling comment on the BBC's craven behavior when he said "But
I understand the world has changed since the series was originally
commissioned and sympathise with the difficult decision the BBC has had to
make." The key phrase here is "the world has
changed". Since the show was commissioned 3 years ago the BBC has
been given an
unwarranted kicking over the Hutton
Report into its reporting of the intelligence that led to the invasion of
Iraq. This has made them overly sensitive to the RC church's whining -
which has
not been confined solely to Popetown.
Also, everyone is frightened of being accused of "religious
hatred", especially in light of Home Secretary Blunkett's
proposed legislation. This is confirmed by a BBC spokesman "The
climate in which it was commissioned is different from what it is now.
There are heightened sensitivities about the depiction of religion."
At a time when the absurdities, cruelties and prejudices inherent in
religion are more obvious than ever, a little ridicule and scurrilous fun
would have helped redress the balance.
October 3rd 2004
Hellfire, Logic and Hocus-Pocus
- there are a couple of items in
the Observer/Guardian that, in 80's view, are well worth a moment of your
time. The first is a
comment piece by David Aaronovitch
entitled "Flaws of faith - As religion insinuates
its way into public life, secularists must unite to fight hellfire with
logic" Taking the BBC Popetown climbdown as his starting point (see
Popetown Shutdown)
Aaronovitch looks at the assault by religionists, ie "people of faith", on
secular society, taking in on the way, the hackneyed calumny that atheists
lack morals and the subordinate role of women imposed by many religions.
The title of the piece shows the difficulty of the task in combatting
faith-based bigotry - how can you "fight hellfire with logic"? Those who
believe in the retribution of a vengeful creator God are unlikely to be
amenable to logic - Aaronovitch is right that the creeping religiosity in
education and government needs fighting, the problem is finding the right
strategy. Britain in particular reflects a weird, and infuriating
imbalance, whereby an increasingly secular society is still told what to
do by unelected religionists in the fields of education, entertainment and
government. If you need examples just look at the Popetown fiasco,
sectarian
"faith" schools, and the Blair
government's infatuation with consulting unrepresentative
"faith groups" on matters far outside
their limited provenance. The second item is Cristina Odone's Diary
piece called "Hocus
Pocus has never enjoyed such high status with the middle classes"
citing the popularity of the nonsensical crap (80's words not Odone's)
that is astrology, the attention given to mediums plying their ghoulish
trade of conning the bereaved, clown Prince Charles' patronage of a palm
reader, and other assorted, irrational, claptrap. Does Odone thinks this
should be fought, as Aaronovitch feels about religion, which is, after
all, merely established and officially sanctioned claptrap? It seems that
although she disapproves, she thinks, probably correctly, that the battle
is not winnable, for she concludes "The mumbo jumbo
will continue unabated, raking in millions for its perpetrators and
delivering a thrill to its believers. After all these years, we truly live
in the age of Aquarius." This may seem somewhat of a defeatist
attitude, but is, in fact, merely realistic. Even if there is no ultimate
victory possible the struggle to hold the line is well worth the effort.
80 took a gloomy look at a world dominated by irrational beliefs (If
This Goes On) - it would not be a place worth living in.
Darfur - Denial or Collusion?
- the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, has said the Sudanese
government are in denial over the
horrendous conditions that over 1 million
displaced people are suffering in Darfur, after a week-long visit to the
area. Referring to the widespread incidence of rape and attacks by
militiamen on the refugees she said "I think the
government as a whole is in denial about the scale and the severity of the
problem." Arbour has called for strengthening both the
international presence in the area and increasing the number of African
Union monitors. She summed up the situation in grave terms "Displaced
people cannot envisage returning home because they do not trust the
government of Sudan to protect them. At best they feel the authorities
respond inadequately to their concerns, and at worst that they are in
collusion with their abusers, including armed groups and militias
generally described as Janjaweed." In 80's view it is collusion not
denial that is delaying a resolution to this crisis. It is obvious that
the government in Khartoum has little interest in improving the lot of
those suffering in Darfur. The immediate application of sanctions, backed
up with the threat of military action, is the only thing they will
understand.
Crown Imperial ?
- whatever the result of the forthcoming US
election, the present incumbent's wife is busy remodelling the famous
Lincoln Bedroom at the White House. It is interesting to read this
description, from the Washington Post, of
the centerpiece of the new decorative scheme, "The
pièce de résistance, both decoratively and symbolically, will be a carved
bed canopy in the shape of a crown. It too has been sent for gilding. When
affixed to the ceiling, the crown will support yards of regal purple satin
over white lace, both trailing to the floor." It is said much can
be revealed by one's taste in furniture and fashions. A crown and regal
purple satin speaks volumes........
October 5th 2004
Missiles of Spin - the US has started deployment of its missile
defense system - not because it has been tested and proved to be
effective, but apparently so that President Bush can claim to have
fulfilled one of his 2000 election pledges. SecDef Rumsfeld has tried to
justify the deployment with his usual bluster, as
quoted in the Washington Post (WP) "Did
we have perfection with our first airplane, our first rifle, our first
ship? I mean, they'd still be testing at Kitty Hawk, for God's sake, if
you wanted perfection." No, perfection was not achieved, but the
comparison is misleading - all these examples had a history of development
well before deployment - no one tried to make the Wright Flyer into a
warplane. Another quote from the WP is rather nearer the mark, from
ex-head of the US Strategic Command, Gen. Eugene Habiger, "A
system is being deployed that doesn't have any credible capability, I
cannot recall any military system being deployed in such a manner."
The WP article goes into detail on the many shortcomings of the system,
and notes that it has cost so far $31 billion but is liable to top out at
over $100 billion - in so far as anyone can tell for "...the
traditional reviews and assessments have been bypassed." 80 is
reminded of an observation by the late, great Richard Feynman, which
describes the current situation very well indeed "For
a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."
Thou Shalt Not Kill
- unless of course your victim is gay."I'm
trying to find the correct name for it ... this utter absolute, asinine,
idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. ... I've never seen a man in my
life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever
looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died." So
said Jimmy Swaggart, evangelist and bigot, in a
sermon shown on a Canadian TV show (video
here). There are several observations to make here, beyond
noting Swaggart's rampant homophobia (methinks he doth protest too much).
If he sincerely believes in the deity he is always banging on about, does
he also believe it is OK to try and deceive that deity? Yes. Is he so
stupid to think that he could lie to a being that is supposed to be
omnipresent? Yes. All of this merely confirms that Swaggart, who in the
past has demonstrated a close personal interest in
fallen women, has to be one of the most
hypocritical and offensive of a group notable for these two attributes,
the TV evangelists. He is thoroughly contemptible, but no more so than his
congregation, who met his outrageous remarks with applause. If you can
stomach it, this page from BBC news has a video of Swaggart's nauseating
and tearful
public confession of his "consorting
with a prostitute" in 1988. (Thanks to
morons.org)
Costly Blind Faith
- a short while ago 80 asked the question "Are
those accustomed to putting blind faith in a deity more likely to fall for
the wiles of religious con men?" (see
Faithful Forfeit) The answer at the time
was yes - and it still is - and the con man doesn't even have to be
overtly religious. Another slightly different instance of blind faith
leading to penury has surfaced in the
New York Times (reg rqd). Saint Mary's
College, a small liberal arts school in San Francisco's Bay Area, has been
taken in by a con man who offered the school a donation, initially of $25
million, but subsequently raised to a head-spinning $112 million - an
unheard of amount for such a small establishment. The Christian Brothers
who run the school are apparently so unworldly that they, on the basis of
the promised donation went ahead and built "a $25
million, three-story science center and began plans for several other
buildings and major renovations on campus." Now according to Contra
Costa County district attorney's office the Brothers "unwittingly
became entangled in what appears to have been a real estate fraud that
involved more than 120 investors and about $9 million that has
disappeared." The big question must be, why did they spend money
that they had yet to receive? Another equally large question is how the
hell are they going to find the money now to pay for the science center?
Answering the first question is easy, here is what Dr Giles Miller, a now
retired trustee's board member, had to say "It was
accepted on the basis of faith. Faith is a big thing in religion."
No shit. So, obviously, is gullibility. The college president, Brother
Craig J. Franz, announcing that he would step down in January, made the
understatement of the year "I did make some mistake
at some point along the line". According to the NYT he is now
apparently "waiting for the college's internal
investigation to determine precisely what went wrong." What, he
still doesn't know? Hey Craig, you spent $25 million you didn't have on
the promise of a complete stranger. Is that clear enough for you? As
regards the second question, Nicholas G. Moore, the chairman of the board
of trustees, says the college "has never been in
better shape" financially. 80 presumes that this is a faith-based
observation and does not necessarily bear any relation to reality.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, the donor, a Conrad Colbrandt, claims
that he in turn was conned by "John Banker, an
83-year-old former real estate broker whose license was revoked in 1980
after he pleaded guilty to grand theft and forgery in a real estate case
and was sentenced to five years in prison." Banker has now skipped
to Mexico, along with the proceeds of the real estate fraud. You can bet
he is lighting a candle to St. Duplicitous, patron saint of con artists,
right now.
Sound as a Pound
- as noted in the intro of this page "the
only consistent criterion for inclusion is whether a site catches 80's
somewhat fickle attention..." Which is a cunning ploy that leaves
80 free to feature sites that do not fit the usual categories mentioned
here. 80 wrote a little while back about coincidence, but here is a case
of coincidence's near relative, serendipity. This is defined as "pure
luck in discovering things you were not looking for" - the word
itself derives from an old name for Sri Lanka, Serendib. But enough
preamble. At a party recently 80 serendipitously ran into an old friend,
Jack Pound, described on Jack's own
website
by John Rice (more about
John here) as a "musician,
cabaret entrepreneur, jobbing builder, local man about town, and on
occasion, though hard to credit, a lifeguard..... A highly skilled
guitarist and songwriter, his bluesy, often quirky style is particularly
appreciated by discerning literary audiences.....whilst the rest of us
just enjoy the music". The man and his music are well worth
following up, so check out his
site for
CDs, upcoming gigs and other info. By the way, Jack has, for the second
time, contributed a track to a benefit CD in aid of the Demelza Children's
Hospice which is "the only children's hospice caring
for children living in Kent, South East London and East Sussex." If
you can help Demelza House in any way
click here
to visit their site.
October 7th 2004
The
Devil's Virus
- the founder of the Salvation Army, William Booth,
famously said of the turgid nature of
much church music "Why should the devil have all the
best tunes?" He then most effectively employed profane music for
his own religious purposes. It now seems the Roman Catholic church is
taking the same tack in its
reaction to the Spanish government's
intention to legalise same sex marriage. A church spokesman, Juan Antonio
Martinez Camino, hasn't borrowed a tune from the devil, but from someone
who, in the eyes of most religionists, is practically indistinguishable
from that horned figure - Professor Richard Dawkins. Dawkins, a man with
an excellent turn of phrase, has referred to religion (accurately, in 80's
view) as a "virus
of the mind". Camino knows a good metaphor when he hears one,
even when coined by an atheist, and has referred to Spain's proposed
legislation thus, "It would impose on society a
virus, something false, which will have negative consequences for social
life." This BBC news item talks of the Socialist government's
laudable intention of creating a secular state, which has shaken the Roman
Catholic church, and in a telling paragraph identifies the kind of state
where the church can flourish. "The changes have
distressed and outraged the Church, whose influence on Spaniards has
declined precipitously since the death in 1975 of the dictator General
Francisco Franco. His regime was closely linked to the Church."
Fascism and Roman Catholicism have often been
comfortable bedfellows. Also see
here
Update
- to the above. The Spanish government has
approved a draft law which will legalise
homosexual marriages and gives gay couples the same rights as
heterosexual couples, including the right to adopt children. The Spanish
Bishop's Conference has issued a statement saying "A
married couple, producing and educating their children, contributes in an
irreplaceable way to the growth and stability of society," adding
that a homosexual couple "could never have such
characteristics". Question - who would you rather leave a young
child with, a loving couple, gay or not, or a Roman Catholic
priest? Prime Minister Jose Luis
Rodriguez Zapatero said "I deeply respect the
opinions of the Catholic Church even if they are very critical of the
government. I ask them to show the same respect." He won't get it.
Religionists always whinge on about deserving respect but they fail to
reciprocate. Zapatero is being too reasonable - the church deserves
toleration but not respect - not until it shows some respect of its own
for other's opinions. The bishops have the built-in arrogance of those who
claim to know all the answers. Superstition and dogma, no matter how
longstanding or widespread, have no place in a democratic society.
Quote
- "Society bends over backward to be accommodating to
religious sensibilities but not to other kinds of sensibilities. If I say
something offensive to religious people, I'll be universally censured,
including by many atheists. But if I say something insulting about
Democrats or Republicans or the Green Party, one is allowed to get away
with that. Hiding behind the smoke screen of untouchability is something
religions have been allowed to get away with for too long." Richard
Dawkins. (Thanks to
Positive Atheism)
The
Prince of Peace
- would be so proud to see his minions beating the
crap out of each other. The Guardian headline sums up this undignified
episode "Punch-up
at tomb of Jesus". Greek Orthodox and Franciscan clerics
started belting each other after an imagined slight involving an open
door. Things turned nasty, "There was lots of
hitting going on. Police were hit, monks were hit ... there were people
with bloodied faces." according to one witness. A Franciscan cleric
observed "We are all Christians, and there is
nothing to fight about." He obviously does not know his Christian
history - almost from the start the nascent religion was rent by schisms
and things have continued in that vein ever since. Only within a couple of
decades of Christ's supposed lifetime, Paul is being hauled over the coals
by the "pillars of the church" in Jerusalem, and warning in his epistles
against those who preach "a different Christ". Lest Muslims feel smug
about all this, remember that the Prophet Mohammed was barely cold when
the Sunni/Shiite schism occurred and is still the cause of bloodshed
today. Let's face it, revealed religion
is divisive and its claims to absolute truth have ever been a recipe for
strife.
October 9th 2004
Reagan On Bush, Second Helping
- following on from his
scathing attack on George W Bush in
Esquire magazine, Ron Reagan is back on the offensive in an
interview in the Sunday Herald, in particular accusing the Bush
administration of hijacking his father's reputation for its own agenda. In
80's view, Ron Jr doesn't really have all that much to be proud of in his
father's record, but it is entertaining to read his venomous references to
George Bush, some of which are wonderfully catty. Referring to Bush's
attempts to appear as a Texas rancher, rather than the privileged scion of
an East Coast dynasty, Reagan finds it "amusing,
when you see pictures of him on his ranch with his little chainsaw as if
he actually does any work there". He also returns to the subject of
the President's opposition to stem-cell research, with its promise of
treatments for the Alzheimer's disease that afflicted Reagan's father, and
other distressing illnesses. This seems to be at the heart of Reagan's
anger and dislike of the current administration, as it is so close to home
for him and his mother. Referring to those in favor of banning therapeutic
cloning, who seem to equate the use of embryonic stem-cells with abortion,
he had this to say "I wonder how they would feel if
a child or a loved one developed diabetes or Parkinson’s, and then see
where they lie on the debate. Most people have no difficulty in choosing
between a petri dish and a human being." On the war in Iraq, and
the reasons behind it, he has a question for President Bush "I
would ask him whether he felt that the innocent Iraqis and Afghans who
died under our bombs were going to heaven as he imagines it. I think the
answer to that would be very telling about Mr Bush’s character and his
outlook on the world." Asked if he wanted to be a politician,
Reagan declined, citing the constraints on what he could say - "My
mother probably gets a little nervous if I’m too rough on George Bush – I
mean, she has to speak to these people every once in a while."
Perhaps no longer - since Nancy Reagan's views on stem-cell research have
become public her contacts with the Bush
camp are likely to be even less than "once in a while".
From a Cat's Eyes
- here is
a piece by Yusuf Islam in the Guardian
describing his recent abortive attempt to enter the USA. He makes a
spirited defence against what he considers "religious
profiling" and loudly proclaims his peaceful intentions "I
am a man of peace and denounce all forms of terrorism and injustice; it is
outrageous for the US authorities to suggest otherwise." He
professes himself puzzled as to why the US chose to refuse him admission -
and unless those same authorities are more forthcoming this will likely
remain a mystery. In 80's view one thing needs further clarification from
Yusuf Islam, and that is how he defines the injustice that he denounces -
does this include the Iranian death threats against Salman Rushdie? For
more on this, see
Big In Iran.
October 11th 2004
Pope Stacks Deck
- Karol Wojtyla, otherwise known as the Pope, has
been busy adding to the ranks of the blessed, nominating 5 more dead Roman
Catholics for this posthumous honor, which is the precursor of full-blown
sainthood. Among these worthies is the last Austro-Hungarian Emperor,
called Karl I in this BBC
news item. The thought occurs that if he
was the last emperor, how come he has a number after his name? Just plain
Karl should suffice. Also how blessed is someone who restricted, but did
not stop, the
use of poison gas by his military? A
miracle attributed to him leaves a lot to be desired as well. According to
the Vatican he cured a Brazilian nun of varicose veins. (You just cannot
make this stuff up!) An even more controversial choice for beatification
is the torture-obsessed, anti-semitic, 19th century German nun, Anne
Catherine Emmerich. This strange old girl was the source for the nuttier
touches, not attested to in the canonical gospels, that Mel Gibson put
into his 2 hour snuff movie, The Passion of the Christ. (see
Twisted Sister).
Obviously Wojtyla was not awarding the beatification for her S and M Jesus
fantasies involving scourges and flails and buckets of blood, or for her
grotesque caricatures of Jews, but for her "pious
character and concern for the poor." So that's alright, then. By
the way, Wojtyla is a veritable saint factory, for according to Reuters,
he has beatified "some 1,340 people, more than all
his predecessors combined." Perhaps the old boy is stacking the
deck in his favor for when he gets to heaven, much like he has stacked the
deck of cardinals that will choose his successor. (For more on the deluded
old bat Emmerich, her stigmata and childhood conversations with Jesus, see
this
article. Her book of
visions/hallucinations is available
online. Also see 80's
Saints - Who Needs Them?)
Why
Beatify?
- a further thought on this business of beatification and
sainthood. The whole rigmarole whereby an individual's life is examined
for piety and miracles by mere mortals is surely redundant. If God is
omniscient (and we are
told he is) surely he knows immediately
when someone has qualified to be a saint, he hardly needs the Roman
Catholic church to tell him. It should be the other way round - when a
person qualifies for sainthood God can just tell us - straight from the
deity's mouth as it were. This would avoid the preliminary
pantomime of beatification,
devil's advocates and the rest of the
drawn-out qualification process.
Face Value
- 80 was intrigued by the huge amount of
media comment
on George W Bush's
facial expressions during his recent televised debate
with John Kerry. So unflattering was the impression given, that the
Democrats rushed out a web video which can be viewed
here. 80 does not find the features of
the President easy viewing at the best of times, but obviously the
excerpts featured by the Democrats have been chosen to show Bush in an
unflattering light. The DNC chairman, Terry McAuliffe, claims that the
video clip, entitled "Faces of Frustration",
demonstrated "George Bush had a record of failure to
defend, and he failed to defend it. He refused to take responsibility for
his go it alone rush to war, and tt (sic) times, he was defensive,
annoyed, arrogant, even angry, and showed it." How can we tell
these expressions really revealed Bush's emotions? Paul Ekman, emeritus
professor of psychology at the University of California, San Francisco
offers an instructional CD on his
website which, for $49.95, claims to
train you to analyze facial expressions, even the most fleeting ones, "MicroExpression
Training Tools (METT) and Subtle Expression Training Tools (SETT) provide
self instructional training to improve your ability to recognize facial
expressions of emotion. In under an hour, METT will train you to see very
brief (1/25th of a second) microexpressions of concealed emotion. SETT
teaches you to recognize the subtlest signs of when an emotion is first
beginning in another person." Perhaps a swift course of Ekman's CD
will reveal that the general impression given by Bush's demeanor is
accurate - or not. It would also be interesting to submit Kerry's features
during the debate to the same analysis. For what it's worth, and 80 cannot
claim to be an unbiased observer, Bush looked like an irritated brat being
chewed out by a superior, and suffering the admonishment with a singular
lack of grace. It is likely that the expressions displayed are more than familiar to
Bush Snr - they doubtless preceded Junior's suggestion to settle things
"mano a mano" with his old man when he was bawled out for taking his
underage brother Marvin drinking and driving back in 1972. These days the whole planet
suffers the consequences of his reckless behavior.
Country Blues
- highlights from the Ig Nobel awards in
this article from New Scientist, which
also has the best headline "Invisible gorilla steals
Ig Nobel prize", include the study that found "suicide
rates for whites in US metropolitan areas is higher in cities where more
country music is played on the radio..." Accepting the award, one
of the researchers revealed to the audience that "if
you play country records backwards, your dog and estranged spouse come
home and you get your job back." There was also the study that
showed that herring may communicate by farting (you can listen
here). Larry Dill of Simon Fraser
University observed "It's a kind of bonding thing.
Pre-adolescent boys have been doing this for millennia." The
Coca-Cola Company of Great Britain also featured in the awards in
recognition of the Dasani fiasco, as reported by 80 in
Liquid Asset.
October
14th 2004
Of
Missiles and Road Maps - it is interesting to note all the fuss
about Iran's ex-president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's
declaration that his nation now has
missiles with a range of 2,000 kilometres (1,240 miles). The fact that
this theocracy is also moving to develop nuclear weapons makes for some
very worrying scenarios. This is not helped when missiles, paraded
Soviet-style through Teheran, are draped with banners bearing phrases such
as "crush America" and "wipe
Israel off the map". In response to suggestions that such showing
off could lead to a pre-emptive strike against his country, Rafsanjani
resorted to bluster, "The United States and the
Zionist regime are our enemies, but given their past experience, the
United States knows that they should not engage themselves in a dangerous
conflict with us." To compare, say, a long distance stealth bombing
mission, to the events that surrounded the Iranian hostage-taking at the
end of Jimmy Carter's presidency, and in particular the abortive US rescue
attempt is, not to put too fine a point on it, unremittingly stupid. Now,
as has been made abundantly obvious elsewhere on this site, 80 is no
admirer of the government of Iran and, consequently, it is difficult to
make the mental leap that is required to see their point of view, but one
item is missing from the reports 80 has seen on the new Iranian Shahab-3
missiles. Israel already possesses
rockets of 4000 km range and has had
nuclear weapons for years. It helps to
remember that any kind of arms race requires at least two participants. On
the subject of Israel it is
now official that Sharon's government has
torn up the road map for a two state solution for Israel and Palestine.
Here is a close aide to Sharon, Dov Weisglass, (wonderfully ironic first
name) on the matter of the withdrawal from Gaza "The
significance of our disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace
process. It supplies the formaldehyde necessary so there is no political
process with Palestinians. When you freeze the process, you prevent the
establishment of a Palestinian state. Effectively, this whole package
called a Palestinian state, with all it entails, has been removed
indefinitely from our agenda." Despite this, Colin Powell, the man
whose reputation for probity went down the tubes after his
Iraq WMD speech at the UN in 2003 , still
"does not doubt Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's
commitment to the road map." The truth is whatever Israel wants,
the current US administration is happy to go along. Is it really any
wonder that Rafsanjani is busy doing a bit of scimitar-rattling? (for more
on the Bush administration and Israel see
Solomon, Arthur and Dubya and for an overview of the whole sorry mess read
It's The Occupation, Stupid by Am Johal.
80 also recommends
Israeli/Palestinian ProCon.org for an
even-handed response to the question, "What are the
just resolutions of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict?")
Star Wars Stars - Joyce Jillson, famous astrologer, has just died,
and this
obituary notice in The Globe and Mail
(reg rqd) reveals the extent of her influence. Her daily astrology column
was syndicated in 200 newspapers, but she had other big clients. It seems
she was "official astrologer for 20th Century Fox
Studios" and was actually consulted on the best days to release
movies. The obit informs us that she "picked the
opening date for 1977's Star Wars — the second-highest grossing movie of
all time." This is a classic "post
hoc propter hoc" fallacious statement, the implication being
that the date she selected had something to do with the film's financial
success, which is nonsense. It is also more than a little insulting to the
director and others who worked on the movie, as though their efforts could
have all been for nought but for Jillson's choice of a propitious release
date. A list of her clients includes the Ford Motor Co., the Los Angeles
Dodgers and the Reagan White House, where it was said Nancy Reagan often
made use of astrologers. Jillson's ex-husband, Joseph Gallagher, had a
couple of interesting things to say. It seems that although Jillson's
birth sign was Capricorn, she regarded herself as a Libra. Does this mean
that for her personal preference overruled astrology? It seems a rather
offhand way to treat the field from which she seems to have made a good
living. Gallagher reveals just what was behind this attitude "She
had a complex and very intellectual approach to astrology." Any
truly intellectual approach to astrology reveals in fairly short order
what irrational hogwash it is - which explains just why Jillson was happy
to disregard her birth sign - it was as meaningless as the rest of this
sadly lucrative pseudoscience.
October 17th 2004
Bothering God - if there is a caring supreme being that sees even
the fall of a sparrow, how come religionists think he can be cajoled into
action by intercessory prayers? If a god is truly concerned with the
health and well-being of his human creations, why would he need to be
prompted into action to save, say, a terminally ill person? Surely, with
an omniscient being this should hardly be necessary. Leaving these issues
aside, there are many people that believe prayer can alter the outcome of
illness. This
article in the New York Times (reg rqd)
revisits the intercessory prayer debate, a debate that continues despite
no convincing evidence whatsoever for the success of this god-bothering.
The writer of the NYT piece, Benedict Carey, starts by referring to a
recent prayer study that has become a
scandal and therefore useless as
evidence, although Carey does not seem fully aware of how discredited it
now is. (see
Without a Prayer). A greater scandal is
that the federal government has spent $2.3 million on prayer research over
the last four years. If something does not work, or works no better than
chance, which is effectively the same thing, throwing money at it will
achieve nothing except the transfer of taxpayer's money into the pockets
of those conducting the research. An interesting quote comes from the Rev.
Raymond J. Lawrence Jr., director of pastoral care at New
York-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center. He says "There's
no way to put God to the test, and that's exactly what you're doing when
you design a study to see if God answers your prayers. This whole exercise
cheapens religion, and promotes an infantile theology that God is out
there ready to miraculously defy the laws of nature in answer to a prayer."
When religionists make claims about the real world, as opposed to some
spiritual one, then those claims definitely fall under the scrutiny of
science and can, should, be tested, but not necessarily with public money,
and not repeatedly in the face of null results. When Lawrence refers in
disparaging terms to an "infantile theology that God
is out there ready to miraculously defy the laws of nature in answer to a
prayer." he is describing exactly what many, perhaps most, ordinary
Christians believe. The title of the NYT article is partly a question and
partly a statement - Can Prayers Heal? Critics Say
Studies Go Past Science's Reach. The answer to the first part is,
on current evidence, no. As for the second, as is made clear above, any
claims that faith, or psi or whatever has an effect in the physical world
are testable - but further intercessory prayer studies are, in 80's view,
would be a poor use of time and money. (for more see
this from the North Texas Skeptics and
this
piece by Victor Stenger)
Baffle of the Bulge - Elton John is in the news right now
lambasting "mystical" pop singer Madonna
for cheating on stage, by miming. He accused her of the crime of
lip-synching when singing her songs, but at least it can be said that she
was miming to her own voice and using her own material. Such a misdemeanor
is hardly worth bothering about as the pop world is full of deceptions,
and no one is surprised. It would be very different if what was happening
on the stage affected the lives of people worldwide, and those listening
believed, wrongly, that what was being said was a genuine reflection of
the speaker's thoughts and convictions. Which brings us to the first
presidential debate between George W Bush and John Kerry. It has been
reported that in video footage of that event the President appears to have
a bulge (shown
here) under his jacket - or as this
Guardian article (provided by Salon.com)
puts it "The image shows a large solid object
between Bush's shoulder blades as he leans over the lectern and faces
moderator Jim Lehrer.". There is much speculation about what this
object may be, but prime suspect is a wireless radio link to help Bush
make his "spontaneous" rejoinders to Kerry's points. Dave Lindorff, writer
of the piece, at first suspected some digital manipulation of the image,
but was convinced of the bulge's reality after viewing
footage of the debate. So what was going
on here? A spyware and surveillance expert says that "given
its shape, the bulge could be the inductor portion of a two-way
push-to-talk system." This could be used with a tiny, indetectable,
wireless earphone. There is some evidence that this technology may have
been used by Bush before, at the D-Day ceremony in France "when
a CNN broadcast appeared to pick up - and broadcast to surprised viewers -
the sound of another voice seemingly reading Bush his lines, after which
Bush repeated them." If this form of subterfuge is being employed
it raises at least a couple of issues. Those listening to the debate were
deceived into thinking they were hearing the President voice his own
thoughts instead of "channeling Karl Rove",
as Lindorff eloquently puts it. Such electronic ventriloquism (80 can't
help thinking of
Charlie McCarthy) would surely be a
betrayal of trust and grossly unfair, pitting a lone Kerry against Bush
aided by an invisible team. Puzzlingly, if this was really a wireless
receiver giving Bush covert assistance in the debate with Kerry, how come
the President came out of it so
badly? (If you want to know more about this intriguing story an
enterprising soul has set up the bluntly named
IsBushWired.com site. The matter is also investigated here at
Mediachannel.org, and also at the
Cannonfire blog.) By the way, as is the fashion in the press
for any political scandal to attract a snappy name ending with "gate", in
tribute to the late Richard Nixon, this is already being called
Promptergate.
October 25th 2004
Uncivil
War - a war that should belong to the past is still very much in existence - this war is no war on terror, but a civil war within western democracies. In this depressing piece from the Guardian by Jonathan Freedland, it is characterized as the struggle between
of Faith
against Reason. In the US presidential election religion has become another weapon, with George W Bush holding a strong hand. If he is re-elected, Freedland reckons, and in 80's view correctly, that the USA will be on the way to a theocracy. To claim God is on your side is a wonderful ploy, for then any who doubt you are
actually doubting the divinity. This can be a surefire way to stifle the questioning and debate that
are such basic components of a healthy democracy. A President who admits no mistakes and cannot be questioned without impugning his faith, is a dangerous figure indeed. American citizens may well see, if Bush stays in the White House, the dismantling of the barrier between Church and State. Those people of faiths other than Christian, and those of none, will find themselves increasingly isolated and the idea of an inclusive US little more than a dream. Meanwhile, the European Parliament is riven by the appointment of
Rocco
Buttiglione, right-wing Catholic politician and confidante of the Pope. This bigot is on record as saying that AIDS is a divine punishment and homosexuality is a sin. If these were merely private opinions they would be Buttiglione's own affair, but when expressed by the European Justice, Freedom and Security Commisioner it is deeply worrying. In keeping with his beliefs Buttiglione also would like to relegate women to a subordinate role
"The family exists in order to allow women to have children and to have the protection of a male to take care of
them." This vision of women as subservient baby producers is
repulsive. The Vatican must be enthralled to have such a devotee in a position of power, but the secularists are fighting back at the appointment of this religious throwback.
Naturally the Catholic church, using a common Christian stratagem, has described
this understandable reaction as persecution. Buttiglione himself has tried to
defuse matters. This BBC page quotes him as saying
"The state has no right to stick its nose into these things and nobody can be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation... this stands in the Charter of Human Rights, this stands in the Constitution and I have pledged to defend this
constitution." This seems at odds with his stated views elsewhere, but one essential point has to be borne in mind when dealing with some kinds of particularly devout religionists - they have a higher allegiance, they know that they are doing their God's will. Normally lying is considered a sin, and this goes for right-wing Catholics and right-wing born-again presidents, but if that lying is considered to be furthering God's work on earth then it is acceptable. On matters of church/state separation 80 believes that you trust the Buttiglione's and Bush's of this world about as far as you could comfortably spit a large rat. (For
the truth about Buttiglione, his beliefs and his membership of a
fundamentalist Catholic sect, see this
(pdf) from Catholics for Choice)
So Sioux Me - Here's a strange one. The native American Oglala Sioux tribe has decided to
complain about a world famous Parisian nightclub that features striptease. It is not the nudity that bothers Harvey White Woman, but the use of his ancestor's name, Crazy Horse, for the establishment and the acts which
"featured pseudo-Indian feathered headdresses - on mostly naked
dancers." The big question is what took so long for the Oglala Sioux to be offended? The club has been in existence
since 1951 - and no one has complained before. Purely in the interest of harmony, 80 suggests that the club drops the name Crazy Horse and chooses one that keeps the Old West theme and is more relevant to the acts on display. 80 feels that the name White Woman fits the bill nicely.
Electile
Dysfunction - President Bush has made it clear that if open and fair democratic Iraqi elections mean that there would be an Islamic government, he would
accept that
decision. This would seem to represent a change of heart on his earlier position - something that if done by others he would no doubt label a "flip-flop". AP quote him as saying
"I will be disappointed. But democracy is democracy. If that's what the people choose, that's what the people
choose." He is definitely right that selection of government by a majority vote is a good idea, and
something that many people feel that the citizens of the US were denied in 2000. Given the already massive problems with
early voting in Florida it may be
that the real winners in a tied election will be the legal teams assembled by both candidates, who will have plenty of work to do. It is ironic that the country that wants to bring democracy to others, by force if necessary, can be so inept at arranging its own free and fair elections.
Biblical Stooge - here is an
interview with Hershel Shanks, editor of
the
Biblical Archaeology Review,(BAR), in
which he attacks the way the Israeli authorities have handled the
investigations into the so-called James ossuary (see
Box of Hot Air?). This now discredited
artifact (see Faking It),
a stone box for holding bones, dating from around the first century, has
an inscription that includes the names of Jesus, Joseph and James. The
combination of these three names to a Christian is like finding the names
Moe, Larry and Curly for a Stooges fan - only the inscription, or at least
part of it, is not authentic. The whole story of the ossuary and another
bogus artifact, the
Jehoash Tablet, can be found on the BBC
Horizon website. Shanks, apart from
editing the BAR (regular readers will know 80 considers the term
"biblical" archaeology ridiculous) is also an author and one of his works,
in collaboration with Ben Witherington III, is called
The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story & Meaning
of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus & His Family. Its
main subject was the ossuary. This was brought out very swiftly after the
ossuary story broke, but before the doubts about its authenticity were
widely aired. Was it a cash-in? Maybe, but currently Amazon has 180 used
and new copies starting at $0.50. (The reviews are worth a read) It hardly
seems reason enough for Shanks to question the methods and probity of the
Israeli team that debunked the box, and the tablet, and whose
investigations led to the arrest of Oded Golan, the supposed middle-man in
the sale of these artifacts, and the discovery of a forgery workshop at
his premises. You'd think it would be a subject on which Shanks is
unlikely to dwell - but apparently not. He is happy to agree that " Shimon Gibson hyped this
cave thing with John the Baptist. I think
that's probably true, and some people say that I hyped the ossuary too
much, which I think is not true." 80 sees little difference. Shanks
is entitled to his opinions, but as 80 has said before, to look at near and
middle-eastern archaeology and history through biblical blinkers is to be
blinded to the evidence. (see
Missing, One Empire)
October 28th 2004
Clone Clash - the United Nations has been debating a ban on human cloning, on and off, since 2001. Recently, after
two days of of further debate, a decision still has not been reached. In 80's view this long drawn out process will never bring any kind of clear cut resolution because the subject under discussion is not about science but about religion. The UK, Japan, and the many other countries opposing a ban, prefer a more flexible, Belgian, solution. They are clear that they are in no way promoting the idea of reproductive cloning, but wish to develop therapeutic cloning for the possible huge medical benefits of the technology. The other side, backing a complete ban, originally proposed by Costa Rica, seems unable or unwilling to differentiate between the two kinds of cloning. This is not from ignorance of the science involved but because the opposition is based wholly on religious grounds despite any claims to the contrary. The representative from the Philippines objection to even therapeutic cloning, as it
"would have the undesirable result of perfecting the technologies that could be used to clone
babies" and would be "playing with
fire" sounds very similar to the old mad scientist movie dialog "there are some things Man is not meant to know". New Scientist
quotes Gregory Stock, from the University of California in Los Angeles, who accurately assesses the true nature of the debate,
"This is about a religious issue that is not resolvable by logical
discussion." It is particularly hypocritical that those who oppose even therapeutic cloning cite as one reason the concern that any cloning could lead to the exploitation of women. Most of these countries are dominated by religions which already, in 80's view, do not value women as much as men. Therapeutic cloning, as
already pursued by the UK, involves cloning embyos and harvesting stem cells from them. The embryos are then
"destroyed before they are 14 days old and never allowed to develop beyond a cluster of cells the size of a
pinhead." That such a potentially beneficial technology should be universally banned for reasons of religion and superstition is a very worrying prospect. Can these countries in favor of a ban not be able to tell the difference between
"cluster of cells the size of a pinhead" and a suffering human being, for example, the late Christopher Reeve? George Bush's administration, the real power behind the Costa Rican proposal, is desperately trying to force a world ban, for without one, independently minded states within the US, such as
California, will simply pursue their own research, whether the Federal government likes it or not. Of course if the US chooses
John Kerry the whole nature of the debate will change........
Satan's Sailor - the British Royal Navy (RN) is in the news this week for officially recognizing its first serving Satanist. Naval technician Chris Cranmer, claims to have been a follower of Satan for the last 9 years. The
Church of Satan itself was founded in San Francisco and its precepts are, unsurprisingly, based on selfishness and self indulgence. In this
BBC report two individuals, both Christian, are asked to comment on the story. The first is an ex-Tory minister who left the Church of England (CofE) and became a Roman Catholic because of the CofE's ordination of women. She professed to be
"utterly shocked" at the thought of a Satanist in the RN, although a good case could be made that her chosen church causes more pain and suffering in the world today than any mere handful of Satanists. The second is the director of the
Reachout
Trust, an evangelical Christian ministry. This bunch provides information on
"cults, occult, new age and all groups holding to non-biblical
teaching". This seems to include Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons as well as Satanists. Commenting on Satanism in particular, director Doug Harris told the BBC
"Following such tenets and working them out practically in your life seems to produce a selfish person not a member of a
team." By this he would seem to imply that Cranmer is not suited to serve in the Royal Navy, but this is not necessarily true. If a Satanist is convinced that teamwork,
obviously essential on a warship, is the best strategy for his/her survival, then they would be a perfectly suitable crewmember. Exactly how Cranmer will be treated by his shipmates is an entirely different matter.
Straining for Faith
- here is a
charming little item about the German theologian and constipation sufferer, Martin Luther, from BBC news. It seems the toilet, upon which he sat for hours straining and formulating his ideas on salvation, has been discovered. Archaeologists are excited about the find as usually only grander buildings are preserved. Perhaps it was in this little room that
the great man also composed his vicious diatribe against the Jews, called
"On the Jews and Their Lies". As you may see from
this
translation, the work, much like Luther himself, was full of crap. According to the BBC piece
"Luther left a candid catalogue of his battle with constipation but despite this wealth of information, certain key details remain obscure - such as what the great reformer may have used in place of toilet
paper." In 80's view it is a pity he did not use the pages of On the Jews and Their Lies. Perhaps understandably modern day Lutherans, such as
these, have found a way around the embarrassing fact that their figurehead wrote anti-semitic nonsense - they ignore it.
Bring Them On - in a rare instance of Islamic terrorists doing George W Bush's bidding, there is good evidence that the jihadi's destination of choice is Iraq. In
July 2003 the President made what is perhaps his most fatuous remark ever - which is, in itself, quite an achievement.
"There are some who feel like that the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is bring them
on," Bush said. "We've got the force necessary to deal with the security
situation." This article in the New York Times
(reg rqd) examines the growing evidence for streams of young Muslim men from Europe headed for the turmoil in Iraq. When they are done there, if past evidence is anything to go by, they will return to Europe
and elsewhere to apply the murderous skills they have learned. A French intelligence official told the NYT
"We consider these people dangerous because those who go will come back once their mission is accomplished. Then they can use the knowledge gained there in France, Europe or the United States. It's the same as those who went to Afghanistan or
Chechnya." This certainly seems to answer the question of whether
the invasion of Iraq has made the world a safer place - not one bit.
October 29th 2004
Ancient
Dwarves - many papers are running with
the astounding discovery of a hitherto unguessed member of the human
family. Dubbed "hobbits", these people lived perhaps 18,000 years ago on
the island of Flores in Indonesia. They were barely a meter tall and had,
compared to modern humans, small brains. This did not seem to affect their
dexterity as stone tools have been found associated with the remains. It
is speculated that these folk, properly called Homo floresiensis, were
isolated on the island and evolution selected those of smaller size owing
to scarce resources. This effect has been noted with other island dwelling
species. It is speculated local legends of little people mean that Homo
floresiensis possibly co-existed for a while with Homo sap. Given modern
human's
record, this may explain why they are no
longer around, although at least one scientist, Bert Roberts of the
University of Wollongong, thinks it is possible they may still exist
somewhere in the deep jungle. It is interesting to note the way the
discovery has been reported - the San Francisco Chronicle
refers to h. floresiensis as "proto-humans"
which would seem to indicate the writer considers them to be in some way a
forerunner of modern humans. This reflects the wrong, and yet widespread
belief that evolution leads up to that perfect creature - us. In fact the
tree of life is more like a bush, and we are just one twig among others.
In the UK
Guardian, Tim White of the University of
California, Berkeley, wonders "How will the
creationists cope?" with the news. As their beliefs are divorced
from reality and rooted in myths and fairy tales, 80 confidently predicts
the discovery will have no effect whatsoever. For those, who, like 80,
find the hobbit label insufferably cute just be thankful, for it could
have been worse. None of the newspaper wits have realized the obvious
cultural reference. These folk were dwarfs and the palaeontologists have
found seven of them. Heigh-ho, heigh-ho...............
Outfoxed
- Rupert Murdoch has revealed an unsuspected streak of wry humor.
Speaking at the News Corporation's annual
general meeting in Adelaide, on coverage of the US election race by Fox
News, he said "We don't take any position at all.
We're not in the least bit biased, we're a fair and balanced company."
And pigs are masters of aeronautics............
Cagey
Tactics? - for many people who were
less than pleased with the outcome of the US 2000 presidential election
one state came to represent what they saw as the crooked end of the US
electoral process - Florida. It seems that this dubious distinction
will be retained in 2004 - certainly
according to Greg Palast, reporting on BBC TV's Newsnight program.
(Available
online for 24 hrs from Tuesday October
26th from 22:30 UK and 5:30 EST Click Latest Show) To quote the BBC news
web page " A secret document obtained from inside
Bush campaign headquarters in Florida suggests a plan - possibly in
violation of US law - to disrupt voting in the state's African-American
voting districts." This involves what is referred to as a "caging
list" of "1,886 names and addresses of voters
in predominantly black and traditionally Democrat areas of Jacksonville,
Florida." The only purpose of such a list, it is claimed, is to
challenge voters in order disrupt the process and deter them from casting
their vote. The BBC page says "Republican state
campaign spokeswoman Mindy Tucker Fletcher stated the list was not put
together "in order to create" a challenge list, but refused to say it
would not be used in that manner." What does seem puzzling is why
such a low level clerical matter should be of interest to Bush campaign
bigwigs in Florida and Washington. It is difficult not to see all this as
an attempt to affect the vote in what is shaping up to be a very close
contest, and one that may well end up in the courts. The reputation of the
BBC for impartial and objective reporting will be seen by many as adding
weight to such suspicions of electoral skullduggery. Meanwhile, in Ohio,
Republicans are challenging the eligibility of 25,000 registered voters,
alleging fraud by Democrats. They intend to field more than 3,000
volunteers around the state to check voter's credentials. The UK Guardian
says the Republican's check of voter
registrations turned up "120,000 duplicate names,
and an unknown number of ineligible voters, including a murder victim and
two suspected terrorists." 80 hopes that Iraqi officials are taking
notes on how to run a trouble free election.......
October 31st 2004
Finding
Faith Through Fear - it is Halloween
time again and here is a
story from the Washington Post (WP) about
groups of evangelist and fundamentalist Christians trying to turn this bit
of harmless seasonal silliness to their advantage. The clever scheme is to
outgross the usual "haunted houses" popular with kids by portraying their
own brand of horrors, both real and imagined, in the hopes of scaring
people into faith. Instead of witches, broomsticks, ghosts and pumpkins
they tend to feature such things as a " Hell House,
a morality play featuring a gay man dying of AIDS, a lesbian suicide,
drunken driving and a botched abortion -- and the reeking, fiery hell that
is the consequence of such sins..." This charming bit of
religionist propaganda was formulated by Rev. Keenan Roberts, pastor of
Destiny Church of the Assemblies of God near Denver, according to the WP.
He peddles how-to kits at $299 a pop for those who wish to stage their own
shows, including nice little touches such as "how to
select the best cut of meat to depict an aborted fetus -- and tips for
dealing with skeptical journalists." The idea that people have to
be scared into belief by such graphic depictations of horrors is
repellent, and shows how desperate and scruple-free these religionists
are. If anyone other than Christians mounted such shock displays expressly
to frighten children and the gullible there would be an outcry. It is a
depressing fact that over the last month one such "scare into faith"
exhibit by a group from Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, has attracted
20,000 people. Just how many of these succumbed to the message "....
if they die tonight, where will they go?" is not mentioned.
Enter the
Ghoul - like some grisly Halloween
spectre, the skeleton in the bin Laden family's closet, mass murderer and
religious fanatic, Osama bin Laden has popped up another low-tech video
appearance just a few days before the US elections. If his intention was
to stiffen the resolve of whoever becomes President to hunt him down,
along with his confederates, then the ghoul has likely succeeded. The
heavily bearded apparition also seems to have managed to knock the news of
the horrific death toll of Iraqi civilians off the front pages, (see Price of Freedom below) but then indulging
his own ego may be more important to him. The real message bin Laden
conveyed was the obvious fact that he is still around - which merely
confirms what a misguided and tragic irrelevance the invasion of Iraq was
to the hunt for international terrorists. If resources had not been
diverted by the Bush administration from Afghanistan to Iraq, bin Laden
could well be staring at the four walls of his cell right now and have
only his own trial in prospect, instead of planning further mayhem.
Price of
Freedom - one of the more notorious
quotes from the ongoing campaign in Iraq was that of General Tommy Franks,
in reference to Iraqi civilian casualties, "We don't
do body counts". Now someone else has, and the total is shocking
and almost beyond belief. The website simply called
Iraq Body
Count has been trying to keep track of "civilians
reported killed by military intervention in Iraq" - the maximum
figure shown is 16312 on October 29th. Now a new study of the death toll,
quoted
here in the Guardian, shows this figure
to a huge underestimate. "About 100,000 Iraqi
civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the
invasion" So goes the report in the prestigious British medical
journal, The Lancet, by a group of Iraqi and US public health officials,
led by Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
in Baltimore. It goes on to say "The risk of a
violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion".
This makes President Bush's pronouncements about bringing freedom to the
Iraqi people seem like a very sick joke indeed. The battle for their
"hearts and minds" was lost long ago. 80 fully expects the grisly total of
100,000 dead to be disputed by the US and its coalition partners in a
nitpicking damage limitation exercise. For argument's sake then let's be
drastic and halve that number - 50,000 dead - does it sound any better? (A
summary and the full report (PDF) is
available online at The Lancet after
registration.)
November 3rd 2004
Bleak
Outlook - for the first time the
American people have elected George W Bush as president. It would be nice
to think that the closeness of the final result would be a signal to his
administration to be more inclusive and to practice some "compassionate
conservatism". This is, of course, hopelessly optimistic, for Bush is not
a politician in that sense. It is far more likely that he, and his
cohorts, will take the result as an endorsement of their actions over the
past four years, and will continue to dish out more of the same. Expect
more erosion of the barrier between church and state, more weakening of
environmental pollution regulations, more tax breaks for the rich, and
more alienation of the USA's traditional allies. Regarding President Bush,
80 can do no better than to quote Winston Churchill, "He
has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"
Announcement - from the Department of
the Bleeding Obvious. The UK's Mars lander, Beagle 2, failed because of
lack of funding from the UK government. Dr Ian Gibson, chairman of the
House of Commons science and technology committee
told the BBC "As a
result, the scientists had to go chasing celebrities for sponsorship when
they might have been testing rockets." This may be a revelation to
some, but it is very old news to anyone with an interest in the UK's
contribution to space research. The amount of money involved was paltry by
government standards, but science apparently takes a backseat to important
projects such as funding schools teaching
creationist drivel.
Curse of
Cassandra - as the end of the year
approaches psychics of various kinds will offer their predictions for the
coming year. From those who write in
trashy tabloids to the ghastly (and
equally trashy)
Sylvia Browne (see her prediction
record here), a frequent guest on
uncritical TV shows, such as
Larry King's, they all have one thing in
common - a conspicuous lack of success (see
New Year's Crystal Balls). Their
predictions are no better than chance guessing - and often not even
that good. Demonstrating that his hit rate leaves these psychic frauds
in the dust is columnist Harley Sorenson, writing for SF Gate. He lists a
series of his predictions that have been
proved to be right on the money. One sample should suffice, about the
invasion of Iraq, which you will recall took place in March 2003. Here is
Sorenson almost a year earlier, in April 2002, when he wrote that the US
was being set up "for a war with Iraq, a war that
will cost thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of lives ... you and I
will be told that our sons and daughters will be fighting in Iraq because
Saddam has suddenly unlocked the secrets of weapons of mass destruction
and is about to blackmail the world." Accurate or what? Obviously,
unlike the psychic con-artists, Sorenson lays no claim to paranormal
powers, but modestly states "None of my predictions
was rocket science. They all relied simply on public information and a
small dose of common sense." Two things that all of his
prognostications have in common is that they are unremittingly downbeat
and have had no effect on the course of events. It seems that Sorenson for
all his "common sense" is doomed to share the fate of Cassandra,
prophetess of Troy. For offending the god Apollo she was cursed to
foretell events accurately, but never to be believed. (It was she who
warned of the Trojan horse and was ignored by her ill-fated countrymen.)
Sorenson, our modern day Cassandra, does make one final prediction
regarding the winner of the US presidential race, "...I'm
predicting victory for a Yale graduate and "Bonesman" (member of Yale's
secretive and exclusive
Skull and Bones society).
The final margin will be, as it was in 2000, a black-robed 5-4, same five,
same four."
Quote
- "We have been contacted by followers of the Wiccan
religion, and they indicated they have been offended after seeing
elementary school depictions of witches with long noses, warts, cauldrons
and such." So says said Tony Apostle, a school's superintendent in
Puyallup, Washington, who has banned Halloween displays from 31 schools.
It seems it is not just the fundagelicals who are miffed by harmless
Halloween silliness, the Wiccans have now jumped on the idiot bandwagon. A
parent of two kids affected by the decision
told the Washington Post "It
is unusual for Puyallup to make the national news. We made it by being
ridiculous."
November 5th 2004
Biblical Bilge - still with matters archaeological is an item from
SFGate.com on the discovery of the
remains of a ship, near the ancient port of Dorus in Israel. The timbers
have been carbon-dated to the 9th century BCE. This seems enough for
marine archaeologist Kurt Raveh to take wing on a flight of fancy,
unsubstantiated by any evidence whatsoever, a not unusual situation for
those who espouse the non-discipline of "biblical archaeology". He has not
the slightest hesitation in using the radio-carbon date to connect the
ships's remains with the mythical King David and his son Solomon. "I
took a little piece of wood and sent it to laboratories in Switzerland.
This week we got it back, and it turned out to be from the time of David
and Solomon, 3,000 years old." The problem with this assertion is
that there is no evidence, bar one disputed inscription, for David.
Furthermore, Solomon's great empire, described in the bible, is never
mentioned by any of the surrounding civilizations with whom he was
supposed to have traded and exchanged diplomatic missions. The writer of
the SFGate.com piece, Matthew Kalman, seems to swallow these biblical
romances unquestioningly, as does another expert quoted, ancient boat
specialist Yaacov Kahanov of Haifa University, who, referring to Dorus,
says "In King Solomon's time, this was the major
port for the Israelite kingdom." Only once does real world
archaeology impinge upon the story when Kalman states "If
the remains are indeed 3,000 years old, it would be the first
archaeological artifact ever found from the era of the first kings of
Israel, with the possible exception of several huge stones at the base of
the Temple Mount in Jerusalem." The Temple Mount stones are only
attributed to the time of Solomon following an inference from the ancient
writer Josephus. If these stones are discounted Kalman's sentence confirms
that there is no other evidence of a kingdom of David, or an empire of
Solomon, other than the bible tales. Oddly this does not stop him, and the
others quoted, from treating fabulous tales as true history - this is
typical of "biblical archaeology" where real evidence recovered from the
earth is of less consequence than ancient stories. (80's attention was
drawn to both the above stories by David Meadows' excellent weekly
newsletter,
Explorator
See here for the story of the
Solomonic pomegranate that wasn't)
Cell Block - one consequence of the Bush administration's election
victory is that the push, via Costa Rica's proposal to the UN for a
complete worldwide ban on cloning, whether therapeutic or reproductive,
will go on. (see
Clone Clash). Meanwhile in California,
the somewhat more savvy electorate voted in favor of
Proposition 71, which pledges $3 billion
over the next 10 years for stem cell research, via the
California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative. This is one
of the areas where Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger finds himself
at odds with the White House, which approaches the subject from a
religious point of view, and is more concerned with the wellbeing of a
dot-sized cluster of cells rather than the search for possible cures for
many crippling diseases. So far the US government has withheld funds for
research on any cell lines other than the 22 derived before August 2001.
Recent research now
indicates that these approved cell lines
may well be useless for medical treatments for human beings. It seems they
were grown on a scaffolding of mouse feeder cells which, it is now
learned, causes the stem cells (properly human embryonic stem cells or
hESC) to take on rodent characteristics. This would mean that they would
provoke an immune response from any human being in which they are
implanted. This pretty well renders research for human applications
pointless on the government approved hESCs - plus a further study suggests
that 5 of the 22 lines were so difficult to grow that they may not be "clinically
useful" anyway, reports New Scientist. The continuing debate in the
UN and elsewhere on cloning is perhaps a pointer to the malign effect a
theocratically-inclined White House will have on many subjects of global
importance - such as the
withdrawal of funding for groups that
help combat the spread of HIV AIDS, but who also commit the heinous crime
of promoting contraception on our massively overcrowded planet. To say
four more years of Bush and co. heralds a new Dark Age is perhaps going
too far, but the clear light of a rational, scientific worldview will need
ceaseless promotion lest it become dimmed further by the forces of
religion and superstition.
Bible
Basher Bitten - 80 was distressed to
read of the
ill-treatment of a lion in Taipei Zoo.
The poor beast was minding its own business, lolling around dozing, as
well-fed carnivores are wont to do, when its siesta was interrupted by a
Christian. A man leaped into the lion's enclosure, shouting "Jesus,
will save you" to the lion, and its companion. He then, somewhat
rashly, called out, "Come, bite me". The lion
obligingly did so, sinking its teeth into the man's leg (and his arm,
according to
this report). Instead of being rewarded
for its obedience, the unfortunate creature was driven off with water jets
and tranquilizer darts. It is suggested that the man was possibly living
out a delusion that he was the biblical character Daniel, who also had a
close encounter of the leonine kind. On a more serious note, it is to be
hoped that both lion and human make a full recovery from this traumatic
experience. If you think that 80 shows little sympathy for the man, you
are right. Too often a pleasant, post-prandial doze has been interrupted
by evangelizing bible-bashers at the door. So far 80 has shown great
restraint and has not bitten any of them, other than verbally.
November 7th 2004
The
Men Who Stare at Goats - a new 3-part documentary series had its
debut on Channel 4 in the UK on Sunday. Called
Crazy Rulers of the World (CRotW) this
first part was dedicated to the various whackos that have succeeded in
extracting money from the US military for their crazy schemes. It is
well-known that the CIA's
Stargate program managed to waste
millions looking into the possibility of
covert surveillance via remote viewing
(RV). The Skeptic's Dictionary
describes RV as "the
alleged psychic ability to perceive places, persons and actions that are
not within the range of the senses." whereby the practitioner can
use " psychic power alone to dowse the entire
galaxy, if need be, for whatever one wants: oil, mountains on Jupiter, a
lost child, a buried body, a hostage site thousands of miles away, inside
the Pentagon or the Kremlin, etc." The only people who benefited
from this waste of time and money were those who still trade on the
supposed cachet of having been involved with the project, the better to
sell their
nonsensical services to the gullible.
Crazy Rulers of the World brings things up to date, detailing the work of
folk like
Major General Albert Stubblebine, ex-head
of the US Army's Intelligence and Security Command, who believes, among
many other things, that you can walk through walls - you only have to
summon up the willpower to do so. He couldn't - and bruised his nose.
Another bunch set up a lab at Fort Bragg in order to learn how to kill
goats by staring at them - hence the title of the first episode of CRotW,
The Men Who Stare at Goats. The big (supposed) scoop of the show is that
these and equally nutty programs have been revived in the service of the
"War On Terror". (Perhaps we are witnessing the dawn of Dubya's
faith-based military, for when reason is discounted in favor of gut
instinct and blind faith by the commander-in-chief, they can but follow.)
80 stoically managed to sit through the first 20 minutes or so, but the
ravings of one ex-military nut job after another soon swamped the bullshit
detectors. Especially the video showing one
Guy Savelli
mentally influencing the behavior of his pet hamsters - or was it the
other way round? (Here is a
discussion of martial artist Savelli,
including mention of his ability to "drop a goat"
using his mind. The correspondent backs up this story by revealing a
little of himself "This might sound funny to some
people, but I don't always believe in pure science.") If you have
the stomach for it, a book of the series, called The Men Who Stare at
Goats by Jon Ronson is available - although you could also read it for
free - by remote viewing.
There's More - since writing the above, 80 has found an article in
USA Today telling of an Air Force report
that calls for $7.5 million to study "psychic
teleportation". Asked why the Air Force Research Lab was sponsoring
the study a spokesman said "If we don't turn over
stones, we don't know if we have missed something." Before these
clods and others start turning over stones why don't they they check with
people who actually know something about testing paranormal claims -
CSICOP
or James Randi
would be a good start - and a damn' sight cheaper. Spookily enough (or
not) Randi's
newsletter this week has a paragraph or
two about a remote viewing outfit,
Psi Tech, who have managed, using their
awesome RV powers, to come up with a totally
erroneous explanation for the crash of
American Airlines Flight 587 in November 2001. Read an accurate report
here in New Scientist. For usefulness and
practicality, remote viewing is definitely in the chocolate fireguard
category.
Babylon Graffiti - here is an interesting piece from
al Jazeera, the news outfit that manages
to be a whipping boy for just about everyone involved in the current
conflicts in the Middle East. (A passing thought - if al Jazeera is
attacked by all sides for perceived partiality then they must be getting
something right. Such a situation is surely also familiar to the BBC) It
seems that American troops are leaving graffiti in the ancient city of
Babylon. Before anyone decries the desecration of this ancient site, the
walls being defaced by the GI's inscriptions are of recent origin. They
were built on top of the original walls in an act of grandiose vandalism
by Saddam Hussein, which did not endear the erstwhile dictator to
archaeologists. In fact al Jazeera notes that "The
English-language graffiti is not widespread and does not appear to have
caused extensive harm. Arabic script is also scrawled on the walls. US-led
forces have spent tens of thousands of dollars repairing ruins and
protecting them from looters, and are investigating whether US and Polish
heavy machinery and rotor wash from helicopters are inflicting damage."
As Major David Gilleran, an army chaplain on the site, wisely observed, "This
place represents the greatness in human history. We're just passing
through."
November 9th 2004
Vacuous Values Voters - in an
interesting piece on the role the
Christian religion played in the recent presidential election, Harley
Sorenson, writing for SFgate.com, comes up with a telling quote from
George W Bush in March 2001. Paraphrasing Lincoln, he quipped "You
can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you
have to concentrate on." It certainly worked on November 2nd 2004.
Bigot Unbowed - here is a
page from the BBC on the future ambitions
of
failed European Commissioner designate
and rabid religionist, Rocco Buttiglione. His appointment to the
Commission was effectively blocked following outrage at his opinions on
gays and the role of women, which closely toe the line followed by his
friend in the Vatican, Karol Wojtyla, aka the Pope. The snappy name for
the position taken by Buttligione is "theo-con" - and yes, it is as bad as
it sounds. It is
defined as a description of a
conservative who believes that "religion should play
a major role in forming and implementing public policy".
Buttiglione is an unpleasant individual who likes to disguise his
prejudices as something else - something he smugly regards as morally
superior - religious conviction. Label it how you will, it is a very good
reason for keeping this person away from any political office where he can
dictate to others. A secular Europe cannot allow his, or anyone else's,
superstitious beliefs to
become law in any way, shape or form. At
the moment he and his fellow religionists have been stymied, although many
states in thrall to Catholicism would like to see his influence grow.
Whilst Spain has turned its back on the malign influence of the Catholic
church,
newcomers to the Union such as Poland and
Malta are still, in many ways, under the
Vatican's thumb. It is not acceptable for a union of democratic states to
be influenced by a religious bloc of any kind. Such a move would impinge
badly on the ideal of inclusivity for a multicultural society. Meanwhile
Buttiglione is reduced to the old standby of thwarted religionists - he
whines about persecution - a subject on which the Catholic church is
expert, although it is rarely on the receiving end. Buttiglione
extrapolates falsely from his rejection by the European Parliament to the
denial of posts as teachers or professors to Catholics. This is absurd
scaremongering, as is his claim of being treated like a "Catholic
witch". He was not treated as a witch, but as a religious bigot
whose worldview is unacceptably warped by his beliefs. As a private
individual he is entitled to believe whatever nonsense he wishes - as a
politician in a pluralistic union whose individual citizens hold many
beliefs and none he is a dangerous and divisive anachronism. His avowed
intent to continue to push for "Christian values"
in Europe merely reveals that his selfish desire to impose his beliefs on
others is undiminished by his recent defeat. He, and those who follow his
agenda, should be strongly resisted at each and every opportunity, not
just within the EU but anywhere in the world.
"Men never do evil so completely
and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal
Clone Quote - "Bush is entirely willing to
let patients die rather than abandon his symbolic acts of respect for
embryos (symbolic because funding does not affect the number of embryos
destroyed each year)," said Charo, the University of Wisconsin
professor, referring to the fact that in vitro fertilization clinics often
discard embryos not used by couples. From a
Wired article by Kristen Philipkoski.
November 11th 2004
Exit the Crisco Kid - and good riddance. US Attorney General John
Ashcroft has tendered his resignation in a letter to President Bush. His
tenure will be remembered for the erosion of civil liberties in the name
of security, his
excessive religiosity, and several high
profile terrorist cases that were more
hype than substance. The outgoing prude
will also be remembered for spending taxpayer's money (allegedly $8000) on
drapes to cover the bare breasts of a
statue of the Spirit of Justice. It seems he could not keep his mind on
the job with those nipples pointing at him. His time in office is summed
up by David Cole, a law professor at Georgetown University, in the
New York Times (reg rqd), . "We
had an attorney general who treated criticism and dissent as treason,
ethnic identity as grounds for suspicion and Congressional and judicial
oversight as inconvenient obstacles. He was a disaster from a civil
liberties perspective but also from a national security perspective."
What Cole neglects to mention is that Ashcroft's failings matched the Bush
Administration's shortcomings only too well. It would be hoped that things
can only get better. And then you see that one top contender mentioned by the New York Times to replace the
anointed one would certainly be no improvement. Alberto
R. Gonzales, White House counsel, is the author o