January 1st 2005 Non Sense
January 3rd 2005
A Dead Parrot
January 5th 2005
An Unlikely Ally
January 7th 2005
80's TV Supplement
January 9th 2005
Plug for the Dead?
January 12th 2005
Fakery Foretold
January 15th 2005
Non Vox Populi
January 17th 2005
Cammittee Report
January 19th 2005
Stickers Stuck
January 20th 2005
The Masque of King George
January 22nd 2005 Fundamental
Dangers
January 24th 2005
Murderous Rhetoric
January 25th 2005
Condom Split
January 26th 2005
Reality Check
January 28th 2005
Murky Waters
January 31st 2005 Iraq's Choice
February 1st 2005 Monkey
See
February 4th 2005 Unforgivable Delay
February 6th 2005 With
Friends Like These
February 8th 2005
Wedge Cat
February 9th 2005 Gospel According to Mott
February 11th 2005 Medieval
Wedge
February 13th 2005 Damage
Repair
January 1st 2005
Non Sense - in the
aftermath of the Indian Ocean tsunami there have been reports noting how
animals seem to have avoided the waves, leading to renewed speculation as to
whether they can either predict earthquakes or detect them at great
distances by some unknown sense. The very first thing to note is that most
of the reports are not independent, and merely recycle the
same material and quotes that originated in
a Reuters' piece. The initial impression that they are widespread in origin
is illusory. Furthermore, when looking at such reports, it is worth bearing
in mind that initial observations are merely
anecdotal with all the caveats that apply,
as not enough time has elapsed for proper study and, quite rightly, all
efforts in the stricken areas are humanitarian in nature. There may well be
many dead animals, as yet unnoticed, given that relief workers will have
more pressing matters to attend to. This piece from
CNN, like most others, quotes H.D.
Ratnayake, the deputy director of Sri Lanka's Wildlife Department, "No
elephants are dead, not even a dead hare or rabbit. I think animals can
sense disaster. They have a sixth sense. They know when things are
happening." Several points can be raised here - most damage ocurred
along the shoreline, with generally little incursion inland. How many
elephants, hares and rabbits frequent the beach, especially in areas of
heavy human population? Also, this "sixth sense", does it detect the
earthquake itself or the ensuing tsunami? If the latter, can this sixth
sense detect the direction of the wave and somehow tell the animal a safe
direction to flee? Does this sense use some kind of triangulation to
pinpoint the source of danger? Also does this sense tell animals how far to
flee in order to be safe? And lastly did it tell them that fleeing to higher
ground was safe but lower ground wasn't? If it managed all these things it
is a very comprehensive, not to say miraculous, sort of sense. It is
unlikely that this marvellous power evolved in elephants, hares and rabbits
to combat the effects of tsunamis, which are comparatively rare events -
especially when compared to the lifespan of a rabbit - so how did it come
about? On the little evidence so far there is no justification for claims of
such a "sixth sense" in animals. The question also arises did humans once
have it and lose it? If so, why? Do our closest relatives, the chimps and
bonobos, still have it or is it only manifested in non-primates? It is far
more likely that given some animals' "ordinary" senses such as hearing and
smell are so much more acute than those of humans these may well have served
to alert them of possible danger. Let's not invent some "sixth sense" where
none seems to be needed.
Quote - from a
letter by Richard Dawkins in the Guardian
responding to letters on Martin Kettle's
article about religious people's attitude
to the tsunami disaster. " Not only does science know
why the tsunami happened, it can give precious hours of warning. If a small
fraction of the tax breaks handed out to churches, mosques and synagogues
had been diverted into an early warning system, tens of thousands of people,
now dead, would have been moved to safety." An additional observation
by 80 is that the number of accurate predictions of the disaster by psychics
and fortune tellers exactly equals the number that predicted the 9/11
atrocity - zero. Will people continue to pay these charlatans for their
useless prognostications? Most assuredly.
January 3rd 2005
A
Dead Parrot - Of the responses to Richard Dawkins' letter (see
here) in the Guardian that from a Dr G J
Welch (see
here) is worth singling out - although not
for any great insight, memorable turn of phrase or even originality. In fact
it is for the opposite of originality that the letter is noteworthy - it
parrots and perpetuates one of the more idiotic calumnies aimed at atheists.
To quote Welch "As a Christian, I know exactly why I
should love and care for others. If I were an atheist, I can't imagine why I
should bother to help anyone whose genes might compete with mine."
So, without the crutch of his supernatural belief Welch thinks that he would
cease to help anyone, that he would lose any empathy that he now possesses
for those, like the tsunami victims, who are desperately in need of such
help from the more fortunate. The idiocy of his position immediately becomes
evident when one considers the
huge amount of money raised by the British
public for the relief of those suffering along the shores of the Indian
Ocean. This is the same public which is generally acknowledged as growing
increasingly secular and the subject of
much handwringing by representatives of the major faiths. A God, or
bogeyman, to use Dawkins' term, is not necessary in order to feel
compassion.
Unarticle - an ugly word for an ugly concept. In George Orwell's
novel 1984 those who fell foul of a dictatorial government became erased
from existence - they became, in the official language of
Newspeak, an
unperson. 80 has taken this idea and
applied to to a modern phenomenon - the UNARTICLE. "Dr.
Terry Polevoy is a self-appointed health watchdog. He investigates and
challenges products, services and theories that are marketed with claims he
believes to be false, unsubstantiated or even illegal." So runs the
intro to an article about the work of Polevoy, an indefatigable opponent of
quackery in all its forms, by Barbara Kermode-Scott, and originally
published online in
Medical Post (MP). Don't bother to go there
to read the piece for it has mysteriously disappeared and a
search of MP's site using the word Polevoy
will only reward you with a link to a blank page. Kermode-Scott's item has
become an unarticle. It would appear that
Rogers Publishing, which publishes many "vertical
trade publications and information products", including Medical Post,
also does a lot of
business with the sCAM (so-called
Complementary and Alternative Medicine) industry. In the past, because of
his activities exposing the crooks, frauds and kooks that abound in
alternative medicine, Ontario-based physician Polevoy has been the subject
of libellous attacks and all manner of abuse in order to silence him. His
stated mission as quoted in the unarticle is "I think
that medicine-generic medicine-any kind of medicine-healing arts
medicine-has a responsibility to be honest, to publish and to study things
that work and disprove them if they don't work." Those who attack or
try to silence Polevoy fall into two broad categories (although with many
crossovers) - the sCAM evangelists, convinced of the rightness of their
therapies, usually in the face of contradictory evidence or no evidence at
all, and the sCAM profiteers, who profit from promoting questionable
alternative medicine products and wish to protect their bottom line. It
would seem Rogers Publishing is one of the latter, hence the disappearance,
or to be more accurate, censorship, of the Polevoy article. A classic
example of greed triumphing over ethics. For the background details to this
sinister and worrying episode take a look
here. The original article is posted
here so that you may judge for yourself
whether it transgresses any bounds of truth or accuracy. The interpretation
of these events as an example of blatant censorship is convincing, and shows
a disregard for truth that is deeply troubling - naturally, if Rogers
Publishing has an alternative explanation they wish made known, 80, and
other members of the
Anti-Quackery Web Ring and the
Skeptic Web Ring, would be happy to publicize it. Make it your
New Year's resolution to let Rogers Publishing know your opinion of their
behavior - contact addresses and phone numbers are
here - scroll down. Don't hold your breath
for an answer or explanation...........
(thanks to Paul Lee of the excellent
Quack-Files
site for the heads-up on this)
January 5th 2005
An
Unlikely Ally - James C. Dobson, described in the
New York Times (reg rqd) as the "most
influential evangelical leader" in the US, has announced his
intention to interfere in the process of appointments to the Supreme Court.
He has threatened six Democratic senators with being put "in
the bullseye" if they block President Bush's choice of appointees.
The six are up for re-election in 2006 and Dobson would marshall
conservative (ie right-wing religious reactionary) voters against them. This
is apparently the first time Dobson, founder of the evangelical organization
Focus on the Family,
has overtly intervened in politics, but this does not sit well with many
that would seem to be natural allies. Charles W. Colson, "another
influential Christian conservative" has warned against such action
saying "To think that way demeans the Christian
movement, we are not anybody's special interest group." This is a
very interesting development and one that shows the Bush administration
cannot automatically count on support for all its objectives from the
Christian right. This was made obvious from a statement,
available online, from
Dr Chuck Baldwin, founder-pastor of the Crossroad Baptist Church,
ex-State Chairman of the Florida Moral Majority, annual member of the
National Rifle Association, life member of Gun Owners of America and
supporter of
Roy "Ten Commandments" Moore. Heck, this
guy is even a converted alcoholic like Dubya himself but he has gone on
record as saying "No one can honestly question my
commitment to pro-life, pro-family, conservative causes. That being said,
the Religious Right, as it now exists, scares me." He goes on to say
that the Religious Right "has obviously and patently
become little more than a propaganda machine for the Republican Party in
general and for President G.W. Bush in particular. This is in spite of the
fact that both Bush and the Republican Party in Washington, D.C., have
routinely ignored and even trampled the very principles which the Religious
Right claims to represent. Therefore, no longer does the Religious Right
represent conservative, Christian values. Instead, they represent their own
self-serving interests at the expense of those values." This is
pretty fierce stuff from a man one would automatically assume to be backing
Bush and friends. It seems Baldwin is scared of two developments in
particular, quite justifiably in 80's view. One is the erosion of civil
liberties brought about by the Patriot Act and the creation of the
Department of Homeland Security with little or no protest from his fellow
conservative religionists. In addition to this supine behavior, Baldwin
finds " Another disconcerting feature of today's
Religious Right is its attempt to Christianize political entities which it
supports and to demonize political entities which it opposes. This trend is
especially scary." Baldwin seems a most unlikely ally for opponents
of the Bush administration, but he is also genuinely concerned about
attempts to weaken the wall between Church and State saying, "I
used to believe that liberals were paranoid for being fearful of
conservative Christians gaining political power. Now, I share their
trepidation." It is not very often that 80 finds common cause with
someone with Baldwin's credentials. If he is not a lone voice, and there is
no reason to think he is, Bush's second term may not be quite as he, Cheney,
Rove and the others, thought it would.
January 7th 2005
80's TV Supplement - for those with access to Channel 4 in the UK a
one-off
special tonight from illusionist Derren
Brown may well prove interesting. Brown has attracted 80's attention
before, once over his Russian Roulette show and again with
The Seance.
(This latter attracted a large number of viewer complaints over how some
extremely gullible (the uncharitable would call them stupid) students were
suckered into attending a seance and scaring themselves to bits.) The new
show, Derren Brown: Messiah features our eponymous hero "in
America attempting to raise questions about the validity of certain
religious and spiritual belief systems; belief systems that people are
encouraged to base their lives upon - such as new-age faiths and
mainstream Christianity. Can he get certain authority figures to endorse
him as the real thing?" according to his website. In an
interview he states two of his targets "are
new-age beliefs and mainstream Christianity." Referring to his own,
now defunct, Christian belief he says "I slowly
realized that true belief of any kind - Christians, new-agers, committed
cynics - all fall prey to a similar circular, self-fulfilling logic. I saw
that although my faith was culturally endorsed, it didn't stand up to any
more scrutiny than the wackiest new-age belief." 80 will definitely
be in front of the TV for this show - unlike the upcoming
Jerry Springer - The Opera from the BBC,
to be aired on Saturday. This show has become the center of more
whiny protests from Christians and
others, no doubt emboldened by the BBC's craven behavior over
Popetown
and the recent successful Sikh "censorship
by riot" of Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti's play, Behzti. This time it
looks as if the Beeb will stick to its guns in the face of protests. So
why will 80 not be watching? The show just does not appeal, simple as
that. The same option not to watch is equally open to the protesters but
this is not enough - they wish to deprive others of the chance as well. As
the BBC puts it "It is the BBC's formal duty to
reflect society and bring such plays to a wider audience who might not
otherwise be able to see them at a theatre. Viewers have a right to see
it. Those who are likely to be offended have a similar right to turn it
off." Also see the National Secular Society's (NSS) take on the
Springer Opera fuss
here. If you are as concerned as 80 about
the disproportionate influence unrepresentative religious groups have upon
Blair's government and the media in Britain please
join
the NSS and help do something about it.
Penn Mightier Than Sword - 80 was pleased to catch on Showtime
cable a while back Penn and Teller's series, Bullshit! In this the magic
pair feature all manner of things they take issue with, to put it mildly,
in shows entitled Talking to the Dead, Alien Abductions, Feng Shui,
Creationism and other assorted silliness. For those unable to see the show
there is a good 3 DVD set of the first series available, but a word of
warning for those outside DVD Region 1 (U.S., U.S. Territories, Canada,
and Bermuda). In 80's experience the disks play perfectly on a DVD player
that has been "chipped", ie fitted with a hardware upgrade, for
multiregion viewing, but will do nothing in a player that uses a software
fix to achieve compatibility - as the ads say, your mileage may vary. On
the subject of restricted access, if you are outside the US don't bother
to look at the
Showtime page devoted to P & T's
Bullshit! - you will not be allowed in. All that you see is this message "We
at Showtime Online express our apologies; however, these pages are
intended for access only from within the United States." Quite how
this sits with P & T, both avowed libertarians, is not known. For more on
the show, and Penn Jillette himself (he's the large abrasive one, as
opposed to the silent cherubic one) see an interview in Reason where he
talks of
Love and Memory and Humanity. He also has
a chance to discuss his novel, Sock, which he wrote partly to address the
question, following his father's death, how does an atheist deal with
really deep grief? 80 has yet to read Sock but this quote certainly acts
as an incentive to do so, "Faith felt good, faith
always feels good, it probably feels better than heroin and that’s why
faith has done much more damage…What’s the difference between God and a
sock monkey? There is a sock monkey." Also in the interview is
Penn's reaction to the 9/11 atrocity, which bears repeating, "People
have to realize that having an imaginary friend may be dangerous. When
9/11 hit, the second thing I said to myself was, “This really is what
religious people do.” Those people flying the plane were very good, very
pious, truly faithful believers. There’s no other way to paint them."
(His first thought was the same as
George Carlin's, “There go our
civil rights.") By the way, Penn and Teller will be amongst the many
excellent guests at James Randi's
The
Amazing Meeting 3, January 13-16 in Las Vegas. The guest list
includes Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer, Joe Nickell, Richard Wiseman,
Christopher Hitchens and many others. (Incidentally, as a bonus on the
Bullshit! DVD set P & T are interviewed by Randi himself.)
January 9th 2005
Plug for
the Dead? - now here's a strange coincidence - spooky some might say.
Just as a new film is released about so-called "Electronic Voice Phenomena"
(EVP) which no doubt is in need of some free publicity, the BBC manages to
dig up
a Scottish woman, Linda Williamson, who
thinks EVP allows her to hear the voices of dead relatives. What is EVP? The
Skeptic's
Dictionary describes it as "the alleged
communication by spirits through tape recorders and other electronic
devices." One common method is that used by Williamson, where a tape
recorder is left running in a place supposedly with no one around but when
the tape is played back, with the volume cranked up, voices and other noises
can be heard. This sounds like the auditory equivalent of pareidolia -
described
by the Skeptic's Dictionary as "a type of illusion or
misperception involving a vague or obscure stimulus being perceived as
something clear and distinct." With pareidolia the burn marks on a
tortilla are discerned as the face of Jesus, and with EVP faint interference
is plucked out of white noise and perceived as the voice of a dead and much-
missed relative or a deceased politician. EVP is far from new and was first
known to be studied by
Friedrich Jürgenson followed by Dr
Konstantin Raudive in the 1960's. Like most "paranormal" phenomena the
effect is completely unconvincing to a skeptic and explainable by
conventional physics - electromagnetic radiation is everywhere, a lot of it
radio, tv and cellphone transmissions. If you leave a recorder running with
the recording level way up you are very likely to pick up all sorts of stray
transmissions (or people nearby you were unaware of) - some of which may, to
the gullible or impressionable ear, sound just like late Uncle Fred. That
the messages sometimes have to be played backwards or slowed down may mean
old Fred is confused - dying can do that to a chap. That the messages
received are as devoid of meaningful content as the mutterings of a medium
does not seem to deter believers. As Chris French told the BBC "People
want to believe." and the common factor behind examples of EVP he has
heard is that people are "reading meaning into what's
actually random noise". Seemingly less random is the BBC's sudden
interest just at the moment when a movie on the subject is out -
White Noise, starring Michael Keaton in
which "A man is contacted from beyond the grave by his
murdered wife." - using EVP of course. The page on the movie at the
Internet Movie Database has attracted one
early review which called it "totally
believable". The unbiased nature of this comment is called into
question by the reviewer, who tells us "I can tell you
as a professional ghost researcher, the portrayals are quite realistic and
believable." Carla Meyer,
writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, is
not so easily impressed, calling it a "rather boring
horror film". Meyer is also troubled by the film's suggestion that
EVP is genuine "Noise" is also weirdly insistent that
electronic voice phenomenon is legitimate. A postscript assures us that only
a small fraction of spirits contacted through the process is hostile. Who is
behind this shameless plugging, the Ghost Advisory Board?" ... or the
British Broadcasting Corporation?
January 12th 2005
Fakery Foretold - every year the so-called psychics, charlatans all,
make predictions for the coming 365 days. Luckily for them, and their bank
balance, the general public has a short memory and soon forgets these
prognostications, which are almost invariably wrong. The "almost" is there
because, on the shotgun principle, if you fire off enough pellets you are
bound to hit something now and again. The Committee for the Investigation of
Claims of the Paranormal, CSICOP, is less deficient in the memory department
than most, and has published a
review of predictions made for 2004, in
which Gene Emery looks at the failed guesses of the psychic con-artists.
Emery also invites those who claim to know what will unfold in 2005 to
contact him with their guesses/foretellings, the only proviso being "they
must be for unexpected events guaranteed to make the headlines in 2005."
Somehow, after looking at his comprehensive shredding of last year's crop of
dumb and wholly inaccurate forecasts, 80 feels he will not have many takers.
The last word is Emery's, "Given their track record,
it's amazing that a psychic can tell you when the 10 O'Clock News is going
to come on." (For previous year's predictions and how they fared see
here)
Pat's
Prophecies - it is not just so-called psychics making predictions for
this year. Pat Robertson, religious bigot, or, as his
website
gushingly says, " broadcaster, statesman, author,
humanitarian, businessman and Christian" has been
channeling God. It seems the Man Upstairs has told Robertson what
2005 holds. Surprisingly the Deity, with the whole Universe to watch over,
is fixated on American business and politics, just like Pat. He will "will
remove judges from the Supreme Court quickly, and their successors will
refuse to sanction the attacks on religious faith.". Furthermore "2005
is going to be a year of extraordinary prosperity for this nation... the
American stock market is going to surge upward..." As for President
Bush "basically he is positioned for a series of
dramatic victories which I hope will hearten him and his advisers. They
don't have to be timid in this matter because the wind is blowing at his
back..." With a lot of that wind issuing from Robertson. Just to show
how strong Robertson's, excuse me, God's, grip on reality is, He also
forecast that many Muslims "..will be turning to the
gospel, to Jesus Christ. I think many of them already are...." How
many of his fans will hold Robertson (or God) accountable at the end of the
year for all this tosh? 80's prediction is - none.
Big
Question - the Edge Foundation is,
according to its website, a group whose "informal
membership includes of some of the most interesting minds in the world."
A look at the list of contributors confirms this. The Foundation's mandate "is
to promote inquiry into and discussion of intellectual, philosophical,
artistic, and literary issues, as well as to work for the intellectual and
social achievement of society." As part of this brief, a question was
posed to 120 members, "What
Do You Believe, Even Though You Cannot Prove It?". The answers
are available on the Edge website and make for fascinating reading. Among
those contributing to the exercise are John Barrow, Susan Blackmore, Paul
Davies, Richard Dawkins, Freeman Dyson and Rupert Sheldrake. The answers
vary in length from a short essay to the single-sentence brevity of Bruce
Sterling, who responded "I can sum my intuition up in
five words: we're in for climatic mayhem." Bookmark this page, you
will want to return, as the answers given here will intrigue, enrage and
inform - but, in 80's experience, never bore.
January 15th 2005
Non Vox
Populi - well, the BBC showed Jerry Springer - The Opera, despite the
actions of such groups as Christian Voice, which, in order to harass those
it believed to be responsible for blasphemy, published their phone numbers
on its website. This resulted,
according to the Guardian, in the BBC 2
Controller and the director of television being "deluged
with "threatening" and "abusive" phone calls." The BBC also received
a record number of complaints, but the content of the messages have led many
to smell a rat - a Christian rat in this case. It appears that a "large
number of those complaints were by email and used a similar form of words."
The internet makes it almost too easy for such "copy-and-paste" exercises to
give a false impression of the numbers of complainants. It is similar to the
technique used by those who complained about the number of swear words in
the show. The number was inflated massively by adding together the swear
words and then multiplying the result by the number of cast members. It can
be expected that such methods will become common practice among groups who
wish their personal beliefs to be given the force of law, no matter how
unrepresentative they are of the majority of the population. It must seem to
many ordinary folk that the Christian Voice, instead of being peaceful and
mellifluous is in fact whiny, grating,
homophobic,
intolerant, offensive, and
ignorant. It must be stressed that whether
members of Christian Voice themselves indulged in offensive or threatening
calls to BBC management is not known, but by the very act of publishing the
phone numbers on its website Christian Voice has shown all too clearly the
sort of company it keeps. Stephen Green, director of the group, now admits
that it was "naive" to have published the BBC2
Controller's number, which was removed after complaints from BBC lawyers.
Naive barely covers it - what the hell did Green think would happen? Green
still hopes to bring a private prosecution against the BBC for the archaic
common law offence of blasphemy. One is led to wonder why an omnipotent,
omniscient, omnipresent deity would need the help of Green and chums to
punish blasphemers - whatever happened to good old fire and brimstone? "Meanwhile",
the Guardian tells us, "the company behind the stage
show is aiming to cash in on the latest controversy surrounding the
award-winning musical. It said anyone who brought a Bible to the box office
of the Cambridge Theatre, in central London, while purchasing their ticket
would pay a mere £10."
Update - to the item above. Here is an informative and entertaining
article from the UK Guardian on Christian Voice, called
Moral Minority. It is written by Stuart
Jeffries who worryingly asserts that Christian Voice's "political
agenda is more akin to Bush's Republican right than that of any major
British party." Stephen Green, the group's director, is interviewed
and reveals himself to be typical of the rabid (he would no doubt say
zealous) religionist in that instead of offering a rational argument for
his position he apparently thinks it sufficient to
quote from a "holy" text. Rather than
give his views overwhelming force, as he apparently thinks it does, this
parroting of Iron Age and 1st century scriptures and fables merely makes
him sound out of touch and eccentric. Besides, as the old saying goes,
even the devil can quote the scriptures. "Beware of
false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they
are ravening wolves.." (Matthew 7:15)
Christian Taliban? - "A kind of Christian
Taliban, modelled on the Religious Right in America, is forming in this
country, and they are attempting to dictate what can and cannot be said
about religion. For all our sakes, that must not be allowed to happen. It
has never been more important for religion to be held up to close scrutiny
and critical examination. It must also, like every other ideology, be open
to satire and mockery. A culture war is developing in Britain, and it is
time for liberals and others who value free expression to speak out more
forcibly. If they don’t, the freedoms that we cherish will be rapidly
eroded." Terry Sanderson, Vice President, National Secular Society. For more
see
here and to join the NSS please go
here.
July 17th 2005
Cammittee Report -
in the the US the Institute of Medicine has released a 350 page report on
sCAM (so-called Complementary and Alternative Medicine) - which may be read
here. Before plunging into the document, a substantial investment
of time, it would repay the curious to have a look at this
critique of the report by Stephen Barrett,
M.D. of Quackwatch. It does little for the report's credibility that Dr
Barrett notes the "National Center for Complementary
and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), which provided funding for the report,
limited who could be on the "CAM" Committee by barring all persons whom the
project administrators perceived as critics of irrational “CAM” practices.
However, many of the committee members have economic and/or occupational
conflicts of interest or strong commitments to irrational "CAM" ideology."
Dr Barrett not only
backs up this observation but has also
helpfully listed the report's main recommendations, to which he then
responds. These recommendations do not stand up very well to his scrutiny.
The fact that this report was published at all seems, in 80's view, to be
more of a recognition of the huge revenue sCAM generates than any real
desire to investigate these therapies for efficacy. "Either
it is true that a medicine works or it isn't. It cannot be false in the
ordinary sense but true in some 'alternative' sense." This
observation by Richard Dawkins of what is, after all, only common sense,
does not seem to have been taken on board by the producers of this report.
Diary Dates -
February 12th is Darwin Day, an international event celebrating the great
man's contribution to our understanding of the world. As the
official website explains "The Darwin Day
Celebration was founded on the premise that science, like music, is an
international language that speaks to all people in very similar ways. While
music is both intellectual and entertaining, science is our most reliable
knowledge system, and it has been and continues to be acquired through human
curiosity and ingenuity. Moreover, evolution, introduced by Charles Darwin,
has become the central organizing principle for all basic scientific
research; particularly in biology but also in physics and cosmology."
Also worth noting is the
Center for Inquiry's Third Annual Florida
Conference on the theme, How Will Our Democracy Survive? Progress in a
Regressive Society. This takes place from February 11-13th at the Deauville
Resort Hotel in Miami Beach. For details and a list of speakers please take
a look
here.
DeLayed Reaction -
here is a charming little item that nearly slipped under 80's radar. Tom
DeLay, the
less than squeaky clean House majority
leader (ethics? what are they?) has increased his lead over other contenders
in the crowded race to be one of the most despicable creatures in the world
of US politics. In a live Congressional Prayer service broadcast following
the horrific devastation of the tsunami in countries surrounding the Indian
Ocean, DeLay, in the words of the
Amcop blog, "gets up
to the pulpit, and -- striking a beautiful note in light of the 150,000 dead
from the floods referenced by his colleagues -- lets loose with some Matthew
7, beginning at verse 21." For those who do not have a bible handy
this is the passage where Jesus delivers the parable of the wise man who
built his house on rock and the fool who built his on sand. "Everyone
who listens to these words of mine, and acts on them, will be like a wise
man, who built his house on a rock: The rain fell, the floods came, and the
winds blew, and buffeted the house, but it did not collapse; it has been set
solidly on rock. And everyone who listens to these words of mine, but does
not act on them, will be like a fool who built his house on sand: The rain
fell, the floods came, and the winds blew, and buffeted the house, and it
collapsed and was completely ruined." Afterwards DeLay sat down
without comment - he obviously thought he had made his point - these
unbelievers brought it upon themselves. As the
DemWatch blog (which links to an
audio file of DeLay's reading) puts it "Tom
DeLay is either blindingly stupid or heartlessly cruel. Either way, he
should be ashamed of himself." (Thanks to Dave for the heads-up on
this)
January 19th 2005
Stickers Stuck - a
while back 80
wrote about Cobb County, Georgia's school
authorities and their daft idea of defacing biology textbooks with stickers
proclaiming "This textbook contains material on
evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living
things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied
carefully and critically considered." Quite understandably some
parents took legal action, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) over this injection of thinly-disguised religion into the science
class, for, in spite of a disguise, this is
what it is. Now federal Judge Clarence Cooper has given his
ruling on the matter, finding the placement of the stickers is an
unconstitutional government intrusion on religious liberty and ordered they
be removed immediately.The
ACLU website quotes Rabbi Scott Saulson, a
board member of the ACLU of Georgia, regarding the introduction of faith
issues in the science class, "People who wish faith to
compete with science are asking faith to be judged by the same standards as
theory, which is a standard of reasonable proof. Faith is unique in that it
is not predicated upon proof. To continue to mask religious belief as
science will sooner or later besmirch both faith and religion." As 80
has noted before, when religions make claims that can be tested by science,
it is the religion that is always the loser. Good though this victory may be
for rational education, it is only the outcome of one battle in an ongoing
war. In a world whose future is dependent on science and technology the US
cannot afford to have a less than effective education system - and that
means one untainted by a supernatural worldview. (on a related theme see
A Nation of Faith and Religious Illiterates
by Stephen Prothero, writing in the LA Times.)
Help With Strings
- supplying humanitarian aid alone is not enough for some organizations -
they want to take advantage of other's misfortune to follow their own
religious agenda. This certainly seems to be the case with a bunch called
World Help, whose stance on other cultures and religions is
shockingly ignorant and bigoted. Here is the introduction to a page
describing its "mission" to India, "In
January 2005, MISSION will travel to the country of India, where God is
overcoming hundreds of years of false religions and idol worship."
This would certainly be news to the inhabitants of that country, who, if
World Help has its way, will soon be knee deep in churches, "Our
strategy for the next 7 years is to plant 100,000 organized churches and 1
million house churches in the least-reached area of the world ...
specifically in the North India state of Uttar Pradesh." World Help
is also active in providing aid to the tsunami- devastated Indonesian state
of Aceh - but instead of offering help for purely humanitarian reasons, it
is in fact bait for the conversion to Christianity of those in need. In
conservatively Muslim Aceh this has been met with
warnings from a prominent Islamic scholar,
Dien Syamsuddin, about proselytizing in the region. He is concerned about a
backlash against aid workers, saying "Do not do this
in this kind of situation, the Muslim community will not remain quiet. This
is a clear statement, and it is serious.". This reaction was
triggered in part by news that World Help planned to adopt 300 children
orphaned by the tsunami and raise them in a Christian children's home - a
plan the group says it has now dropped. The danger here is that World Help,
and other evangelical organizations, will jeopardize ALL of the relief
efforts by their underhand conversion campaign, thereby further endangering
those they claim to be helping. Is it not enough for these zealous
ignoramuses to help those suffering from the tsunami disaster purely out of
compassion for their fellow human beings in distress, without treating the
situation as an opportunity to peddle their brand of religion?
Springer Tour - it
has been announced that Jerry Springer- The Opera is to go on tour in the
UK. Expect apoplectic rage from the likes of
Christian Voice. Also, a BBC Radio 3
producer has resigned in protest at the corporation's decision to air the
show. According to
this BBC news page "Antony
Pitts said he rejected the notion that because the show was a satire, it
allowed the Christian faith to be ridiculed and he said believed blasphemy
laws had been broken." It is, of course much easier to ridicule
something if it is absurd in the first place. In the words of Mark Twain "You
believe in a book that has talking animals, wizards, witches. demons, sticks
turning into snakes, burning bushes, food falling from the sky, people
walking on water, and all sorts of magical, absurd and primitive stories,
and you say that we are the ones that need help?" It is worth noting
that by the time the current run of Jerry Springer - The Opera ends it will
have been performed 609 times live on stage to great acclaim, with barely a
peep out of outraged Christians. Now of course every zealot for a thousand
miles wants to jump on the bandwagon.
Quote - in the
Washington Post, from an anonymous "senior
administration official" illustrating the
current view of the electoral process
embraced by the Bush administration "I would . . .
really encourage people not to focus on numbers, which in themselves don't
have any meaning, but to look on the outcome and to look at the government
that will be the product of these elections." He (or she) was
referring to the upcoming poll in Iraq, where voter numbers will be strongly
influenced by the violence of "insurgents" that the US and the interim Iraqi
administration appear hopelessly unable to counter, and which may well
result in not just a low turnout but a Sunni
boycott. Nothing like a little managing of
expectations when confronted with the inevitable. Somehow a poll that
delivers an Iran-influenced Shiite theocracy doesn't seem to fit with the
neocon aspiration of bringing democracy to the Middle East.
January 20th 2005
The Masque of King
George - as might be expected there is a wide divergence of
views on whether George Bush's second inauguration should be such a lavish
and expensive event, considering the nation is at war. The San Francisco
Chronicle
quotes Rep. Anthony Weiner, Democrat-New
York City, "These are sober times. ... The image that
is most troubling is of a president in black tie holding a champagne flute
at a time when so many soldiers are eating out of a plastic pouch while
getting shot at in Iraq." He is not alone in his disquiet - about 60
protests of various kinds are planned for Thursday by anti-war, pro-choice,
civil liberties campaigners and other groups. The White House sees no need
to rein in the celebration, war or not, and in the evening there will be no
less than nine inaugural balls. 77-year-old Charlie Brotman, who will be
doing the announcements for the 13th time, told the Chronicle, "It's
just a few hours of entertainment. The war isn't going to stop tomorrow.''
In 80's view it is a bloody expensive few hours of entertainment, costing
upwards of $40 million in privately raised funds, without taking into
account the cost of the accompanying security operation. According to the
New York Times (reg rqd) the city of
Washington's share of that bill will be $18 million. Homeland security
supremo Tom Ridge has confirmed the federal government will also spend
millions, but even he doesn't know the total cost. The Times paints a
picture of the nation's capital whose "grand buildings
and marble statues seemed to disappear behind curtains of steel security
fences and concrete barriers." So with, as the Chronicle reminds us,
1,500 military personnel killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, and more than
10,000 wounded, the party will go on. Anybody remember the old Roger Corman
movie,
The Masque of the Red Death? The arrogant
Prince and his courtiers party on while his subjects, shut outside the
castle, die in droves..... On a related note here is an
analysis page from the BBC that asks
whether the US president is now as powerful as a monarch and discusses a new
book by Professor Stephen Graubard,
The Presidents: The Transformation of the American
Presidency from Theodore Roosevelt to George W Bush, in which he
claims "...since Ronald Reagan, the powers of a
president and his "courtiers" have become increasingly untrammelled".
Graubard is particularly unimpressed by the fear-mongering tactics of the
current administration,"That we have never lived in
such dangerous times is - to use a four-letter word - crud." Also see
Emil Guillermo's bitter piece, "Bush's
Bluff" on the utter failure of the search for WMD, "Bush's
justification for war -- that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction
-- was just a stone-cold bluff. There were no weapons of mass destruction.
The only things Bush pre-empted were the facts."
Inaugural No-Nos -
for those wishing to attend the Bush inauguration the United States Capitol
Police have
produced a helpful list of "prohibited
items" for onlookers. These range from the obvious such as "Firearms,
weapons of any kind..." to things that could express dissent, such
as, "..posters, signs, placards..." to the
seemingly innocuous, "..strollers, chairs, umbrellas..".
Just in case they have missed anything there is a catch-all line at the
bottom of the list forbidding, "..any other items at
the discretion of the security screeners that may pose a potential safety
hazard." Such items may well include an attachment to civil
liberties, a fear of burgeoning theocracy and a deep and gnawing anxiety
over the outcome of the next four years.
January 22nd 2005
Fundamental Dangers
- here is an
op-ed by Susan Jacoby, director of the
Center for
Inquiry-Metro New York, writing in the New York Times (reg rqd),
reflecting on the sad fact that for most of the last century and into this
one there has been a near ceaseless struggle over the teaching of evolution
in US schools. With the rise of the religious right, skirmishes in this
ongoing war seem to more frequent and can do little to help students of
biology in their studies. In a world that will need a new generation of
scientists to combat the menace of HIV AIDS, mutating bird flu, West Nile
virus and other, as yet unidentified, deadly threats, teaching kids Iron Age
fairy tales in biology class could prove disastrous.
Creationism,
and its thinly-disguised bastard offspring,
Intelligent Design, are a threat to the future health of the US
population and will have the additional effect that cutting-edge research
will take place in other countries, countries not shackled to the myths of
the past. Without the explanatory power of the theory of evolution biology
lessons will make little sense - understanding is not gained by attributing
the complexity of living beings to a capricious supernatural being - that
route is a dead-end. The signs are already there, with the stultifying
effect of religion on science education already visible, as Jacoby notes, "Perhaps
the most insidious effect of the campaign against evolution has been
avoidance of the subject by teachers, who, whatever their convictions, want
to forestall trouble with fundamentalist parents. Recent surveys of high
school biology teachers have found that avoidance of evolution is common
among instructors throughout the nation." Perhaps the beginning of
the 21st century will be looked back on as the time when the US ceded the
crown of scientific leadership to others, others who are less in thrall to
comforting fairy tales. This will not only affect the nation's health, as
noted above, but will also have disastrous economic consequences, as the
wave of scientific advance leaves the US behind, drifting in a
fundamentalist backwater.
Sensational Scots
- congratulations to the sub-editor at The Scotsman who came up with one of
the most intriguing headlines in a while -
One in five Scots has blood tie to ancient Iraq.
The article itself is a sensationalist plug by Sharon Ward for a new TV
series and book called
Scotland: The Story of Scotland Before History
by television presenter and producer, Alistair Moffat. The Scotsman piece
mentions some surprising claims made in the book, including the one alluded
to in the headline, that 20 per cent of Scots have Iraqi blood. The Iraqi
reference is there purely to catch the eye - the revelation that descendents
of Middle Eastern farmers exist in Scotland, and all over Europe is
not a new one. The shows in the series, we
are told, "dispel the myth that the population in
4000BC was made up of grunting cavemen running around in animal skins."
Anyone with even a passing knowledge of Scottish archaeology can point to
sites such as
Skara Brae (circa 3200 BCE) or
Maes Howe (circa 2700 BCE) as evidence of
how sophisticated these early inhabitants were, far from being "grunting
cavemen" - and again this is no revelation. The Scotsman also
reports, in another non-scoop "... that many Scots
spoke Old Welsh before Gaelic." The early Scots in fact spoke
Goidelic,
one of the two branches of the British language, the other being Brythonic,
from which Welsh evolved. All of these things are unremarkable and can
perhaps be traced more to Sharon Ward than to the book of the series. The
publisher's page is far more sober and does not mention the claim that 80
has saved until last. It seems that "the mythical land
of Atlantis existed in what we now know as the North Sea". according
to the Scotsman. Here Ward has been unable to resist the temptation to
associate the tired old Atlantis of fable with an inundated land - in this
case the Dogger Bank. The real story of
Doggerland is intriguing enough, without
resorting to the cheap thrill offered by the name Atlantis. Whether the
Scotsman article, with its grunting cavemen and Atlantis talk, has rendered
Moffat a disservice remains to be seen - the book itself is out January
31st. (For another theory involving Atlantis and the Dogger Bank see
Leprechauns of Atlantis For current Atlantean silliness (will it never end?) see this
piece of drivel linking the recent tsunami
to the sunken city - which has changed its
location once more, according to "Spanish-Cuban
investigator and scriptologist Georgeos Diaz-Montexano" who says it
was located "between Spain and Morocco." Thanks to
Explorator for these last two links.)
January 24th 2005
Murderous Rhetoric
- threats and violent protests by religionists over perceived insults to
their beliefs are now a regular part of our daily news. Recent examples
include the
Sikh protest over the play Behzti, and the
death threats made against the play's author, the publishing of private
telephone numbers of BBC staff by Christian Voice and the
subsequent threats of violence, and the
disgusting murder of film director
Theo van Gogh, for offending fundamental
Islamists. Even the word for a religious edict or ruling in Islam,
fatwa, has become part of our everyday
vocabulary, but with the narrow meaning of religious death warrant. Most
Westerners became aware of that particular term February 14th 1989, when the
Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran's then spiritual leader
condemned author Salman Rushdie and put a
price on his head for a fancied insult to his interpretation of Islam. In
the intervening 16 years the malevolent influence of religious zealots of
all kinds has become worldwide, exacerbated by George Bush's so-called War
on Terror and his creation of a huge recruiting ground for Islamic fanatics
by the botched occupation of Iraq. Now that gentleman and his neocon cronies
have begun
saber-rattling in earnest towards Iran,
which gives us the bizarre situation of a theocratic wannabe threatening an
existing theocracy. Since Khomeini's original fatwa on Rushdie things would
appear to have changed in Iran. The Iranian government formally withdrew the
murder edict in 1998 and was rewarded by the upgrading of diplomatic
relations with Britain, a situation which the British seem very keen to
retain. Perhaps the hope here is that such diplomatic contacts aid in
European efforts to curb Iran's development of a nuclear bomb. If so, things
have just got more complicated. The current supreme leader of Iran,
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeated the death threat, using a term from
sharia law, describing Rushdie as "mahdour al-damm
mortad" which
this piece in the Times translates as an
apostate whose blood may be shed with impunity. What is the reaction of the
Blair government, who are themselves busy trying to push through a religious
hatred law? The Foreign Office have fallen back on the argument that the
Ayatollah didn't really mean it, describing the murder edict as "...
just the standard rhetoric." and that he was speaking as a spiritual
leader and not as a head of state. The Times quotes an unnamed "Tehran-based
analyst" who also dismisses the comments saying, "This
isn’t shocking — it’s nothing new." One wonders if this analyst would
be so laid back if he was the subject of the fatwa. It is also doubtful
whether your average fundamentalist Islamist will appreciate the rhetorical
niceties involved, hearing only a renewed call to murder Rushdie. They can
only be encouraged by the fact that a $2.8 million bounty on Rushdie is
still on offer in Iran.
SpongeBob Fatwa -
meanwhile, humorless conservative Christians in the US have found a new
target for their righteous wrath, the kid's animated cartoon character,
SpongeBob SquarePants. Just think of the
other targets they could have chosen for their condemnation, from Osama bin
Laden to Kim Jong-il, but no, they have chosen to look petulant and idiotic
by attacking a drawing of a sponge.
Dr. James C. Dobson, psychologist,
hate-mongering bigot and founder of
Focus on the Family,
has drawn a bead on SpongeBob for appearing in what he terms a "pro-homosexual
video" which also features other kid's TV characters Barney and Jimmy
Neutron. Quite what the problem with SpongeBob is seems to be a bit of a
mystery - the video promotes tolerance and multiculturalism and makes no
mention of sexual identity. It has already aired on several networks, which
must mean it is pretty innocuous given how TV companies are in a frenzy of
self-censorship right now - even to the extent of Fox
blurring a shot of a cartoon character's
naked butt. It is not really the video that Dobson and fellow zealots are
upset about, but something else. They believe there was a plan by the makers
of the video to "mail it to thousands of elementary
schools to promote a "tolerance pledge" that includes tolerance for
differences of "sexual identity." according to the
New York Times (reg rqd). It appears the
accusation is baseless and, even if true, hardly worthy of condemnation -
Christian groups are always whining about tolerance and respect - but seem
unwilling to extend them to others. One can only view their paranoia about a
so-called "gay agenda" as perhaps a way of channelling their obvious
fascination with the subject. 80 has a far from original theory that such
raving homophobes are merely attempting to hide from their own deep-seated
yearning to take a walk on the wild side.
January 25th 2005
Condom
Split - back in October 2003 80 wrote about the Roman
Catholic church's litany of lies regarding the efficacy of condoms in
combatting the global epidemic of HIV AIDS (see
Wicked). Its representatives spread, and
have yet to retract, totally false allegations of condom porosity to the
AIDS virus, because they are frightened by its other use - as a
contraceptive. This would clash with the RC view of women as baby factories,
churning out more Catholics for the greater glory of God. Now it seems some
porosity is evident in the Vatican's uncompromising stance on the matter,
with fluids of dissent seeping out in Spain. Perhaps the church in Spain is
feeling a little more independent under the new
socialist government as it now acknowledges
that "condoms could play a role in the global fight
against Aids." This BBC report
tells us Bishop Juan Antonio Martinez
Camino, a spokesman for the Spanish bishops, has endorsed the use of condoms
and "sexual restraint". (80 believes this means
abstinence, rather than a reference to S and M) While this changed attitude
is long overdue, it is nonetheless very welcome indeed. The next question
is, what do the old men in the Vatican think of this Spanish independence?
Although there has not been an official line on the condom/AIDS
ineffectiveness lie at Catholic HQ, there has also been no effort made to
silence the liars, despite pleas from the
World Health Organization. and exposure
elsewhere. According to
this report from the Herald Sun "...the
Vatican - where Church doctrine is set out - quietly but firmly reiterated
the official line, and Catholic leaders elsewhere followed suit."
Bishop Jose Luis Redrado Machite said the use of condoms was "contrary
to Catholic morality" as opposed to, say, the sad plight of the
millions of orphans, their parents dead from AIDS, left to starve
in Africa and elsewhere which appears to be more acceptable. The Vatican
hierarchy once again stands exposed as an unfeeling, out of touch and
unthinkingly cruel group of old men, living in a world that no longer exists
outside their dogma-stuffed heads, who would not understand the meaning of
empathy or compassion even if it came and bit them on their sanctimonious
asses - they are not fit to wash the feet of the Spanish bishops.
Update - to Condom Split (see below). It
looks as though some papal arm-twisting has been going on. Whether Bishop
Juan Antonio Martinez Camino, who announced the change of mind on condom use
to fight AIDS, has had a visit from the Inquisition is not known. At any
rate the liars have carried the day and it is hypocritical business as usual
from the Roman Catholic Church. The Spanish bishops have
confirmed that Catholic doctrine "...says
use of condoms implies immoral sexual conduct." How immoral it is to
condemn millions to death was not mentioned. The cruel old men in the
Vatican are beneath contempt. Let's hope the brief flowering of Spanish
ecclesiastical free will is a sign of things to come. Meanwhile, expect to
see deaths from HIV AIDS continue to rise wherever the Catholic church
continues to stifle opposition to its illogical and cruel stance.
CHILDREN ORPHANED BY AIDS ALIVE AT END OF 2003 - GLOBAL TOTAL
15
MILLION.
Matthew 18:6
But whoso shall offend one of these little
ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were
hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
January 26th 2005
Reality Check - the Washington Post (reg req)
echoes concerns, expressed by 80 (see
Fundamental Dangers) and other observers,
that with the school science curriculum being undermined in many states by
Creationist/Intelligent Design promoters, the US is in danger of losing its
position as a leader in world science. Other countries, unhampered by
religionist interference in education, will leave America in the dust. The
Bush administration seems little concerned, and the President's rhetoric
serves only to encourage those with a biblical world view. Perhaps it would
engage the neocons's attention if it was pointed out that a lead in science
is essential for the next generation of weapons - something that may get
through their thick skulls instead of a more reasoned argument. Even this
may not be enough to persuade them of their folly in not actively opposing
religion's intrusion into the science class - don't forget these are the
kind of arrogant fools who believe drivel such as "We're
an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality" to
quote an unnamed presidential senior
adviser speaking in 2002. It is obvious nothing has been learned since then.
As the Post editorial says "To teach intelligent
design as science in public schools is a clear violation of the principle of
separation of church and state. It also violates principles of common sense.
In fact, the breadth and extent of the anti-evolutionary movement that has
spread almost unnoticed across the country should force American politicians
to think twice about how their public expressions of religious belief are
beginning to affect education and science." The "American
politicians..." phrase is studiously non-partisan and rightly so.
While it is the right-wing Republicans who are leading the move away from
science to an Iron Age, biblical worldview, the Democrats merely make
matters worse by trying to
compete with them in religiosity. Many in
the other Western democracies who wish America, if not Bush and chums, well
are looking on in horror. It is like watching an old friend indulging in a
self-destructive habit, apparently oblivious to the consequences. Far from
being the
New American Century beloved of the
neocons, the 21st century will be dominated by those who do not turn their
back on reason and science. This may be Europe, or China, for if the current
trends persist it certainly won't be the land of the free and the home of
the brave. When Dubya has finished reading "My Little Goat" perhaps he
should read just one line from Philip K Dick, "Reality
is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
Randi
and the Skepchicks - here is
great report from Richard Abowitz, writing
in the Las Vegas Weekly about The Amazing Meeting 3, (TAM3) held January
13-16th. TAM3 is an annual skeptic's convention and jamboree and also a
fundraiser for the James Randi Educational Foundation. Abowitz certainly blows out
of the water the common misconception of skeptics as a bunch of no-fun
killjoys and neatly summarizes the event, even fitting in a plug for Randi's
Million Dollar Challenge, which has yet to
be successfully claimed, despite the fact that the world is full of
self-proclaimed psychics and mediums of one sort or another. To quote
Abowitz "I'm as Mulder as the next guy: I want to
believe. But if this talking-to-the-dead shit can be done, it would have
passed the same tests that aspirin and penicillin did, and Randi's wallet
would be a million bucks lighter. So, for those of you who want to put your
faith in a miracle worker, or anyone who promises to perform the impossible,
ask yourself before you write them that first check whether they would be
willing to take the Million Dollar Challenge. It may open your eyes. And
when they say no, you may want to think about donating to JREF, an
organization that, to paraphrase noted skeptic Frank Zappa, protected you
from discovering the big difference between kneeling down and bending over." (and the Skepchicks? Read the
article)
January 28th 2005
Murky Waters - in
the Guardian's
Bad Science column Ben Goldacre continues
to do battle with misleading or nonsensical advertising claims - this week
it is Penta water ('ultra-purified, restructured
micro-water') that has attracted his attention, and rightly so, as
well as the publications that parrot Penta's daft claims without question*.
80 first learned of Penta and their wonderful product in the James Randi
weekly Commentary, which chronicled how, in 2001 Mr. William D. Holloway of
Penta Water first signed up for the
Million Dollar Challenge and then backed off. In order to win a
million bucks from the James Randi Educational Foundation all Holloway had
to do was to substantiate his claims for his water, something that, when it
came to the crunch, he was unable, or unwilling to do. Randi prints the
ensuing correspondence he had with Holloway prefacing it with
this comment "What follows is the complete
correspondence between myself and a Mr. William D. Holloway, whose web page
for "Penta Water"
www.hydrateforlife.com should be visited,
first, for a better understanding of what follows. You will see here how
condescending, arrogant, and patronizing these people can be. They're
convinced of their own infallibility and invulnerability, and wonder how it
is that they suddenly find themselves in full retreat before the facts that
they must face as a consequence of the million-dollar challenge."
This was the beginning of a long-running saga which can be followed through
the Commentary
archives. (a link to the current Commentary
is always to be found in the left margin on this page, along with other good
stuff including Bad Science). Now Goldacre is himself finding scientifically
rigorous evidence for Penta's claims impossible to trace, although they say
they will be sending him a reference. Given Randi's experience, 80 suggests
Goldacre doesn't hold his breath on this one. Watch this space. For more on
dodgy water claims see
Wonder Waters.
*(Men's Health, Daily Mirror, Evening Standard
and Waitrose Food Illustrated should all be ashamed of themselves)
Fawlty Flummery -
do take a moment to read
this great piece by David Kipen, book
critic of the San Francisco Chronicle, on how much of George Bush's second
inaugural speech was filched from elsewhere. It's not just Dubya however,
such recycling is rife among politicians, according to Kipen. Some people
are getting very tired of the practice, "During all
the fawning inaugural post-game shows last Thursday, only one commentator
had the temerity to wonder over an open microphone whether it would be
asking too much for the leader of the free world, just this once every four
years, to write his own damn speech, without any help from the West Wing
term-paper mill." Kipen tells us. Great stuff, but who said it? Read
Kipen's piece to find out. Other commentators have noted cribs in Bush's
speech, including James Meek
writing in the Guardian, who finds the text
not only full of Mosaic fire, which is unremarkable, but it also employs an
image lifted from Russian literature, which certainly isn't. "But
the key fire passage in the Burning Bush speech - "We have lit a fire as
well; a fire in the minds of men" - actually has its origins in a novel by
the 19th century Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Devils, about a
group of terrorists' ineffectual struggle to bring down the tyrannical
Tsarist regime. One of the characters declares that it is pointless to try
to put out a fire started by terrorists: "The fire is in the minds of men
and not in the roofs of houses," he says." Not quite what George had
in mind perhaps....but then he can always just flatten the houses. At least
he managed to comply with
Basil Fawlty's famous injunction, "Don't
mention the war!"
January 31st 2005
Iraq's Choice - further down this page (Vote
for Peace) 80 quoted a sentence describing the violent mayhem
that led up to Iraq's polling day and posed the question "Would
YOU take a stroll along to the polling booth?" The answer appears to
be from many Iraqis, yes - the Guardian
reports an estimated turnout of 57%, with
other sources quoting as high as 60%. This compares more than favorably with
the
pathetic showing from the British
electorate in their 2001 General election, of a mere 59%. As far as 80 can
ascertain none of these voters in the UK, a mature democracy, faced threats
of car bombs and beheadings to keep them at home. Comparison with the
US turnout in the 2004 presidential race,
which was hailed as the highest since 1968, is also less than flattering -
it was still only 61%. Other countries, such as Belgium and Australia,
counteract voter indifference/lethargy by making it a legal requirement to
cast a vote, which looks good on paper but leaves one wondering how many
cast a ballot purely to avoid a penalty and how many really take an active
interest in the future government of their country. In Iraq, where the last
election was a complete mockery resulting in endorsement of Saddam Hussein,
there can be no doubt the voters on Sunday were active participants, who
believed their choice will affect their future. This does not mean that the
violence attendant on the bungled occupation of Iraq and internal disputes
will cease any time soon, but the determination of such a large percentage
of the population to exercise its rights must surely send a message to the
most rabid fundamentalist terrorist or ex-Baathist "insurgent" that violence
cannot win. Although a massive rejection of the men of violence it must be
borne in mind the much better than expected turnout is a tribute to the
bravery of ordinary Iraqis in seeking self-determination and not an
endorsement of the preemptive invasion and botched occupation of their
country.
Caught, Straw-Handed - the straw man argument is generally accepted
as an underhand ploy and anyone caught using it suffers an instant loss of
credibility. There are two variants of this stratagem in 80's view, one is
that of trying to refute someone's view by misrepresenting it and the other
is more extreme, fabricating a fallacious argument out of whole cloth and
presenting that as the opposing view. The handy thing with the latter
is that there is so much more leeway when one devises a fictitious viewpoint
from scratch, giving much more of an opportunity to make one's opponent look
ridiculous. This can of course backfire, particularly when the views or
arguments attributed are so absurd as to render the whole exercise
self-defeating. There is a steadily dwindling group of scientists who have
yet to accept the impact of human activity on climate change despite what is
now overwhelming evidence. It would seem that these deniers are becoming
desperate. (This group have a spokesman of sorts in the shape of novelist
Michael "Jurassic Park" Crichton whose latest opus is a thinly described
diatribe against "global warming". The book,
State of Fear, is summarily dealt with by
Chris Mooney and judged to be
Bad Science, Bad Fiction) But back to the
straw man - see if you can beat this for stupidity - the recent devastating
Indian Ocean tsunami was a result of global warming. How anyone can connect
the effect on the ocean of a submarine earthquake and global climate change
seems completely illogical, and yet this is what Daniel Sarewitz, a
professor of science and society and director of the Consortium for Science,
Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University and Roger Pielke Jr., of
University of Colorado, Boulder
claim "global warming" advocates are
saying. This piece by Simon Mansfield,
The Big Lie: Tsumani and Global Warming, at
Space Daily pulls no punches in expressing disgust at such a ploy, and
tellingly juxtaposes a press release about Sarewitz and Pielke's allegations
and another jointly from Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace. The latter
plainly states "A number of articles have appeared in
recent days wrongly claiming that Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have
linked the devastating Indian Ocean earthquake to climate change. We want to
make it clear that we have made no such link." If you think you can
smell burning don't be too concerned - it is just a scruffy little straw man
going up in smoke. Luckily, metaphorical smoke contains no pollutants...
Vote For Peace - Mark Fiore gives a helpful list
of Iraqi voting
Do's and Don'ts delivered by Ballotman in
his latest animated flash cartoon. Meanwhile John F Burns,
writing in the New York Times (reg rqd)
gives the statistics for just one week in Iraq's capital city, "Baghdad
was hit by 7 suicide car bombings, 37 roadside bombs and 52 insurgent
attacks involving automatic rifles or rocket-propelled grenades. The suicide
bombs alone killed at least 60 people and injured 150 others." Would
YOU take a stroll along to the polling booth?
February 1st 2005
Monkey See - a new study may go some way to explaining the popularity
of fawning over "celebrities" in
magazines and TV shows like
I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here. On another note, it also
demonstrates that viewing porn is not exclusively a human activity.
Researchers at Duke University Medical Center have been studying macaque
monkeys and their reactions to certain images. They found that, perhaps
unsurprisingly, male "monkeys will give up their juice
rewards in order to ogle pictures of female monkey's bottoms." The
researchers feel that this act is "akin to paying for
the images" and to 80 it sounds reminiscent of the human porn
business. It also may show that such interest is not a new thing, a curse of
our modern godless society, as many religionists would have us believe, but
something we primates inherited from the distant ancestors we share with
macaques. This will give those same religionists another reason to rail
against evolution - as if they needed one. That's it! The fiendish (read
atheist) scientists corrupted the monkeys with their lascivious
experiments..... Far more interesting, and less obvious (at least to 80) is
that those same monkeys would also "pay" to see pictures of their fellows,
but only those at the top of the heirarchy. As
this report in Live Science comments "Maybe
that's like you or me buying People magazine." (or Hello! or OK or
any of countless others). Interestingly, the researchers found that the
simian celeb fans had to be paid (in juice) to view images of low status
individuals. One particularly intriguing finding was that the monkeys in the
study had not personally interacted with the subjects in the photos but had
gauged their status, high or low, purely from observation. Lest you wonder
what the point of the whole procedure was, apart from perhaps shedding an
evolutionary light on humankind's taste for porn and/or celebrities, it was
in fact to provide insights on the deeply puzzling condition of
autism. The work was sponsored by the National Institute of
Mental Health and the Cure Autism Now Foundation, the aim being to learn
about the social machinery of the brain and its application to autism. The
study also displays the serendipity that can occur, when a researcher finds
not just data applicable to the questions being asked but also other,
unintended insights. The report will appear in March issue of
Current
Biology.
Miracle Babies Scandal - has still yet to be resolved. Self-styled
archbishop Gilbert Deya, running out of wiggle room despite his
protestations of innocence in the Miracle Babies saga, has turned to a
popular defence (reg rqd) of the cornered cultist -
he "..has accused the media, the judiciary and the
Kenyan and UK authorities of torturing and humiliating his family and church
members." The fact that evidence is lacking to substantiate these
allegations is not an obstacle for the archbishop - where is the evidence to
support his claims of miraculously impregnating post-menopausal members of
his congregation? It is nowhere to be found behind his blustering
smokescreen of threats and claims of persecution. 80 has been
following Deya and his antics since August
last year and now things may be moving toward a resolution with
a report that "Kenyan
Police Friday kicked off an international probe to establish a possible
relationship between a United Kingdom-based Kenyan preacher, Archbishop
Gilbert Deya’s “Miracle Babies” claims and an upsurge in global child
trafficking." The Kenyan cops are quoted as linking Deya with "various
cases of human trafficking in Uganda, Kenya and Nigeria." The sooner
Deya is returned to Kenya to face charges the better for all concerned,
especially the distraught parents who believe their children were stolen. As
the Kenyan police uncover more evidence his continued presence in the UK is
surely untenable.
Wrong
Writer - surprise, surprise graphology is yet again revealed to be
nonsense on a par with Rorschach inkblots, polygraphs and ouija boards.
After a press conference featuring Bono, Bill Gates and Tony Blair at the
economic summit in Davos a set of doodles was
found and assumed to be Blair's. Several UK
papers drafted in graphologists to analyse the scribbles and notes hoping
for deep psychological insights. Observations were made that the penmanship
revealed Blair to be "a bit of a daydreamer hoping for
the best" and "an aggressive, unstable man who
is feeling under enormous pressure" and also "not
a natural leader". It now appears the graphologist's conclusions were
more likely based on the knowledge that Blair was the writer rather than any
real analytical skill, as the jotter was in fact the one used by Bill Gates.
Time for some rapid graphological backpedalling and claims of misquotation
from the so-called experts consulted by the British press. It is not just
the graphologists who have egg on their faces but the newspapers as well,
who still have yet to learn that graphology is not a science but a
pseudoscience. What is more worrying than this cock-up by the handwriting
gang is that
many firms use their claptrap to
assess suitability of job applicants - they might as well use
astrology - hold on, some of them do. Here
is a
damning look at graphology by
neuroscientist Barry Beyerstein - it took 80 about 30 seconds to find it -
an easy task but one apparently beyond the abilities of the hacks that hired
these charlatans. The last laugh seems to be with Blair's spokesman,
quoted in the Guardian, "We
look forward with amusement to explanations by a variety of psychologists
and graphologists of how various characteristics ascribed to the PM on the
basis of the doodles, such as 'struggling to concentrate', 'not a natural
leader', 'struggling to keep control of a confusing world' and 'an unstable
man who is feeling under enormous pressure', equally apply to Mr Gates."
February 4th 2005
Unforgivable Delay
- one of the overriding themes in coverage of the recent commemorative
ceremony in Auschwitz, the concentration camp where over a million people
were murdered by the Nazis, was that never again should such a thing be
allowed to happen. And yet it is happening in
many places
around the world
right now. One of these places is
Darfur, in Sudan. A report from the UN commission investigating
the ongoing violence there has said what is happening is not genocide but
mass killings and enforced displacement of civilians. 80 is sure the people
in Darfur, 70,000 of whom have been murdered and 2 million of whom have been
forced to flee their homes will appreciate the distinction. To quote from
the UN report "The commission found that [Sudan's]
government forces and militias conducted indiscriminate attacks"
including "killing of civilians, enforced
disappearances, destruction of villages, rape and other forms of sexual
violence, pillaging and forced displacement, throughout Darfur".
According to this
BBC report the commission concluded that
the Sudanese government "has not pursued a policy of
genocide" but that some unnamed government officials may have
committed "acts with genocidal intent". The US,
in the shape of Colin Powell, accused the Sudanese government of genocide in
September of last year. (see
Racist Murder in Darfur). Apart from the
dispatch of a largely ineffectual African
Union force to the area nothing else seems to have been done to halt the
violence. Now the UN wants those accused of human rights violations "which
may amount to war crimes" to be referred to the International
Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. One would think that this would at least
be a start, but the US will oppose this move as it objects to the court.
Most of the other UN security council members favor using the existing ICC
but the US wants to set up a new tribunal at another court already
investigating the Rwanda genocide. The American aversion to the ICC stems
from a fear "that the court could bring politically
motivated actions against American personnel abroad." according to
the
New York Times (reg rqd) How this
intransigent and
timewasting stance adopted by the US
appears to the men, women and children suffering right now in Darfur is not
known, but it can only serve to confirm to the rest of the world that the
Bush administration, despite conciliatory noises from Condoleezza Rice, is
still determined not to be a team player. (also see
History Repeats Itself?)
Quote
- "The I.C.C. could start tomorrow saving lives, with
the Rwanda tribunal route, you're talking about another year of killing."
Kenneth Roth, the executive director of
Human Rights Watch in the
New York Times (reg rqd).
February 6th 2005
With
Friends Like These - President Bush's State of the Union
speech
contained a reference to an ally of
the US, Saudi Arabia, and expressed the hope that
"The
government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by
expanding the role of its people in determining their future."
So far
there has been little sign of any real commitment by the Saudi royal family
to such a goal - in fact the government there is expending resources, not at
home but in the US. Here is
news
of a report from the Center for
Religious Freedom entitled “Saudi Publications on Hate
Ideology Fill American Mosques”. This was compiled over the course of
a year from " over two hundred original documents, all
disseminated, published or otherwise generated by the government of Saudi
Arabia and collected from more than a dozen mosques in the United States."
What it reveals is condemnation of democracy as un-Islamic, at least by the
Saudi's fundamentalist Wahabi standards, and more worryingly "it
gives detailed instructions on how to “hate” the Christian and Jew".
Those who leave Islam, the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs bluntly states,
should be killed and for a Muslim who indulges in homosexuality or
heterosexual activity outside marriage “it would be
lawful for Muslims to spill his blood and to take his money”. Perhaps
those that repeatedly accuse many people in the Western
democracies of "Islamophobia"
should make themselves aware of the Saudi's efforts to destroy any peaceful
co-existence between followers of different religions or none. In complete
contrast to the Saudi attitude is that of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, prime
minister of Malaysia and chairman of the Organisation of the Islamic
Conference, who has
called for Muslims to "close
the great divide" between themselves and the West. 80 wonders how the
Wahabists of Saudi Arabia view his statement "It is
our duty to demonstrate, by word and by action, that a Muslim country can be
modern, democratic, tolerant and economically competitive." The huge
difference between Abdullah's forward looking attitude and the medieval
mindset of the Wahabi fundamentalists demonstrates clearly the danger of
treating Islam as a monolithic structure, bent on religiously motivated
violence. All the voices of reason in Islam do not capture the headlines as
well as a single suicide bomber, but they are there, and their views demand
wider dissemination. (The full 89-page report, “Saudi Publications on Hate
Ideology Fill American Mosques", can be downloaded
here in PDF Acrobat format)
Condoms Continued
- it now appears that a more lenient Roman Catholic attitude to the use of
condoms as a means of combatting the spread of AIDS after the brief false
dawn from the Spanish Bishops (see
Condom Split) is back on the agenda. This
welcome news comes courtesy of Cardinal Georges Cottier, theologian of the
pontifical household, according to
this Guardian report, and previously known,
at least to 80, for
Taking Satan Seriously. Although Cottier's
statement is hardly that of enthusiastic endorsement it is to be hope that
it will start to turn the tide of lies that has been the norm. (see
Wicked). Cottier has acknowledged that the
AIDS epidemic is now so serious "the use of condoms in
some situations can be considered morally legitimate". He manages to
square this change in attitude with Catholic thought by saying, "The
virus is transmitted during a sexual act; so at the same time as [bringing]
life there is also a risk of transmitting death, and that is where the
commandment 'thou shalt not kill' is valid." The theological
acrobatics are of no import but the fact that the church is softening its
resistance to condom use certainly is. It is to be hoped that it was merely
a coincidence that Cottier spoke out while his boss, Karol Wojtyla (aka the
Pope), is in hospital. It would be a tragedy if Cottier backpedalled, like
the Spanish bishops, when Wojtyla recovers and resumes the reins. Current
word from the Vatican is that the old boy,
who has been suffering complications attendant on a bout of 'flu, will
remain in hospital "for another few days".
February 8th 2005
Wedge
Cat - escapes creationist bag. Those who have read 80's maunderings
on the anti-evolution brigade have noted that little distinction is made
between Creationism and
Intelligent Design (ID). In fact 80 has described ID as
Creationism's poorly-disguised bastard offspring on more than one occasion,
so it is nice to have this view confirmed by none other than the
Discovery
Institute itself. Chris Mooney,
writing in the American Prospect, tells us
"Now, at long last, we're getting acquainted with the
new anti-evolutionists. And they seem very familiar." How does he
know this? It seems the Discovery Institute slipped up and placed on the web
a document that gives the lie to its supposedly scientific, as opposed to
religious stance. This was the
Wedge used to introduce religion into the science class, which is
now revealed as a sham. Many folk have known this for a long time but it was
good for the Institute itself to spill the beans. As Mooney puts it "But
the Discovery Institute made a key tactical error. Somehow, a document that
seems to bare the true soul of the institute leaked onto the Web. You can
read it
here, with Discovery's gloss on it.
Unfortunately, not even the most consummate rhetorician could explain away
lines like, "Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the
materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with
Christian and theistic convictions." Once it
lets its guard down, anti-evolutionism hasn't changed a bit." By the
way it is probably not worth trying the link indicated - it now leads to a
PDF Acrobat file, called The Wedge Document - So What, which 80 was unable
to open (although others may have more success). An error message tells you
"this viewer cannot decrypt this document".
This makes it pretty obvious that the Discovery Institute does feel it has
something to hide. One drawback (or advantage) of the internet is that once
the cat is out of the bag it can be hell's own job to stuff it back in again
- try this
page courtesy
of The
Houston Atheist Society (and Google). Update - even this page is
now no longer available. Still, 80 was prudent enough to have saved a copy.
If this has copyright implications any offended party would have to admit to
being the originator - which could prove interesting... Update - the Wedge
Document can now be viewd
here.
Havana Hooey - 80 was amused to note that President Fidel Castro of
Cuba thinks that George W Bush is "deranged".
Well, it takes one to know one. Even more amusing were Castro's remarks
distancing himself from the US and Europe - this
article from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer
quotes him as saying that his Caribbean island nation, "doesn't
need the United States. It doesn't need Europe. What a wonderful thing to be
able to say, that (Cuba) doesn't need any assistance - it's learned to live
without it." The president has obviously put a new spin on the
meaning of the word assistance, as he failed to mention the help he gets
from his new friends, China and Iran. The latter loaned Cuba
$26 million recently in a deal that is "part
of a bilateral cooperation agreement between the two countries covering key
areas such as banking, farming and biotechnology." As for China,
apart from a loan of
$400 million in 2001 it has
aided
the Cuban economy in other ways, with a range of
business deals including "$500
million investment in the island's key nickel industry" and donations
of " $6 million to Cuban hospitals, as well as cloth
for school uniforms worth about another $6 million. China also agreed to
finance 1 million television sets for the Cuban market." No wonder
Castro needs no assistance from the US or Europe....... Talking of the US, a
look at the list of
foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury securities
reveals they now total a stunning $1.75 trillion - $217 billion of which is
China's. It's a funny old world.........
February 9th 2005
Gospel According to Mott - censorship is on the rise all over the
place and while different tactics have been involved, the prime mover
remains the same, religion of one sort or another. As detailed in this
report in the New York Times (reg rqd) by Frank Rich, "The
Year of Living Indecently" TV companies in the US are now
self-censoring, fearful of attracting the unwelcome attention of such
po-faced guardians of public morals as Secretary of Education, Margaret
Spellings who took fright at an "animated rabbit
hobnobbing with actual lesbian moms while visiting Vermont to learn how
maple syrup is made." This is in step with the SpongeBob SquarePants
nonsense and even the
censoring of the violent opening scene in
"Saving Private Ryan". This official approach to censorship is happening in
the US because the current administration is in step with the Christian
moralists who want their own narrow views to become the law for all. In
Europe, it is somewhat different, the censorship is motivated by fear, fear
of violence by zealous religionists of all kinds, be it Sikhs
rioting in Birmingham over the play Behzti,
or the creepy
Christian Voice bunch posting their
victims' private phone numbers on a website in the UK, or the
disgusting murder of film maker Theo van
Gogh by a Muslim extremist in the Netherlands or the
banning of a painting in Sweden. The
ripples from the van Gogh killing are still
spreading through Dutch society - leading
to the organizers of the Rotterdam Film Festival's decision
not to show van Gogh's and Ayaan Hirsi
Ali's film Submission, for fear of a violent reaction. In some instances
this attempt to stifle free expression has happily had the opposite effect.
Nicholas Hytner, director of the National Theatre in the UK seems determined
to tackle the forces of repression head on by mounting a deliberately
challenging season of plays. In this
Guardian piece Hytner condemns the Home
Office for its "pathetic" response to the
violence over Bezhti. One item on the new season's playlist is a work by
Howard Brenton about the inventor of Christianity, fanatic and misogynist,
St Paul. Brenton, described
here as "a major and
frequently provocative voice in British post-war political theatre"
has attracted the attention of uptight religionists before. His 1980 play,
The Romans in Britain, staged at the National, led Mrs. Mary Whitehouse of
the National Viewers’ and Listeners’ Association, a self-appointed guardian
of public morals, to take out a
private prosecution against the director
Michael Bogdanov for gross indecency. These days such a reaction would
likely be judged too mild for many, as different faiths vie with each other
to stifle expression, with the effective
collusion of a government scared by the
thought of losing votes. Sikh, Muslim, Christian and other zealots are now
all too ready to embrace the ethos of the old Mott the Hoople song, "Violence,
violence, it's the only thing that'll make you see sense......".
Male
Nipples - here is a quote from the wonderfully waspish Maureen Dowd,
writing in the New York Times (reg rqd) about a planned Creation Museum for
those unable or unwilling to understand the theory of evolution. "Do
male nipples prove evolution?...Nipples may be biologically de trop for men,
an "expert" on the site notes, but that doesn't mean they resulted from
natural selection. They could just as well be a decorating feature of the
Creator's (like a hood ornament). Who are we to question His designs, since
we cannot presume to comprehend His mind?" Read the rest
here and check her archived columns
here. Apologies - the archives with the
dollar signs are not free -d'uh.
Hot
Water - last week 80 mentioned, not for the first time, the excellent
Bad Science column in the Guardian by Ben Goldacre. In
Murky Waters 80 noted that a product called
Penta Water had rightly attracted Goldacre's skeptical eye. Not only is it
difficult to find any scientific evidence whatsoever of Penta's claims for
its "ultra-purified, restructured micro-water",
as Goldacre discovered, but this bunch had also fallen foul of James Randi
back in 2001, who
described them as "...condescending,
arrogant, and patronizing...". It would now appear that someone has
taken exception to Goldacre's piece last week, as he has subsequently
received threatening and abusive text messages. This nasty little action
would seem to have backfired as whoever sent these unpleasant messages has
now got Goldacre's full attention - something they may well regret as the
police are now involved. Not entirely unconnected perhaps, Goldacre received
a phone call from "PR guru Max Clifford to apologise
for a "hotheaded" Penta staff member." See this week's
edition of Bad Science for the full story. (for more from 80 see
Wonder Waters)
February 11th 2005
Medieval Wedge - spare a moment to think of the Iraqi women who voted
in the recent election there, braving terrorist threats, bombs and bullets.
It would be tragic if they did so only in order to end up with fewer rights
under the law than they had under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. The
votes counted so far are heavily in favor of the Shiite majority, which is
hardly a surprise, and their dominance will no doubt translate into great
influence on the wording of the country's yet to be written constitution.
The Shiite ayatollahs will push for the inclusion of as much Islamic
shariah law as they can. The effect of this
will be to demote women to the
second class role they have