Wholly Cloth
- in the world of Christian relics the cloth
popularly known as the Turin Shroud has a special place of its own. One that is
likely to be usurped only when, or if, the Holy Grail turns up in the vaults of
Rosslyn Chapel, in a garage sale somewhere
or on eBay. Speculation on the origins and
meaning of these two items is as strong now as it ever was, perhaps even more so
now that the areas of ignorance where "God did it" is the only explanation are
shrinking at what (happily) seems an exponential rate. (see
God of the Gaps). Human beings, ornery
critters that we are, still have blind faith, which continues to function
even, or especially, in the face of contradiction. But for many that in itself
is not enough, they need artifacts, actual physical evidence to bolster their
belief. This is one reason for the existence of that strange hybrid of science
and religion, biblical archaeology, which is a whole field unto itself and not
to be confused with archaeology proper. (Biblical archaeology has
spawned, perhaps unwittingly, a flourishing modern day
relics industry - as in the
James
Ossuary) Another manifestation of this search for a physical prop for faith is
the aforementioned Turin Shroud, the study of which has even generated a name
for itself, sindonology. 80's handy WordWeb dictionary program found two similar
definitions, a. the scientific study of the Shroud of Turin and b. study of the
shroud of Turin. (In 80's view b. is the more accurate.) Now, given that the
shroud's documented history starts no earlier than the middle of the fourteenth
century, and that carbon-14 dating tests carried out in 1988 date the cloth to
the period between 1260 and 1390 one could be forgiven for thinking that's it, case
closed. The shroud is no more than a well-executed pious fraud. Medieval Europe
churned out relics by the dozen, from various
vials of of Christ's blood to many
wooden splinters of the "true cross". The shroud itself was not unique, and
various miraculous cloths of one sort or another are known. These include the
Mandylion and the
Veronica,
both of which bore the likeness of Christ, and several other shrouds, some with
a full-length image, the
most famous being that of Besancon, which was destroyed during the French
Revolution.
This somewhat
unreliable page (it connects the Shroud to the
Priory of Sion, now known to be a
hoax) mentions some
of these shrouds, which were a must-have item in the piety
stakes, not to mention the extremely lucrative pilgrim trade carried on by most
big medieval churches and
monasteries. Most interesting of these is perhaps the Shroud of Cadouin, first
known in 1115 and which, we are told, was destroyed in 1933 by Christian vandals "when it
was found to be of 10th century Egyptian manufacture with quotations from the
Koran." On further investigation it seems that the page just quoted,
from www.mystae.com, is more than "somewhat" unreliable. This tourist-oriented
page,
Cloister of Cadouin, tells us "The Museum of the Holy
Shroud evokes 8-centuries of pilgrimage and religious fervour linked with a
relic that has long been considered as the Holy Shroud to have enveloped the
head of the Christ. This fatimide tissue dating back to the end of the 11th
century is in an exceptional state of preservation; it can be seen in the
Chapter House." Glory be, the shroud is resurrected! There is even a
picture. (Let this be a reminder to all, including 80, of the fallibility of
many web pages.) There is no doubt, however, out of all the shrouds and face cloths the
Shroud of Turin is the daddy, and any new claims made for it are bound to
receive wide and, in the main, credulous coverage. (It is 80's view that underneath many a journalistic skin
is a gullible medieval peasant.) As mentioned above, the shroud has been given a
medieval date but now this has been disputed. At one stage in the 16th century,
and possibly earlier, the relic was repaired following fire damage. This work
is connected with the latest claim for authenticity from Ray Rogers, a
retired chemist from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, US. Published
in Thermochimica Acta Rogers'
research and chemical tests purport to show that the 1988 samples used for
dating were in fact material from a repaired area and therefore not an accurate
indication of the age of the whole cloth. Rogers made much of the fact that
vanillin, a substance formed by the thermal decomposition of lignin, a compound
found in plant material such as flax, falls with the passage of time. Rogers
claims that vanillin was detectable in the 1988 sample cloth (and other repaired
areas) but not the rest of the shroud - therefore the shroud must be older.
Using a determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss Rogers estimated the
shroud may be between 1,300 and 3,000 years old - a dating that was received
with glee by shroud enthusiasts. This news was widely and, in some cases,
excitedly reported, but it is
not the whole story.
Enter
Joe Nickell, veteran investigator for the Committee for the Scientific
Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP).
In this article
he closely examines Rogers' methods - and finds them lacking, even down to the
provenance of the samples Rogers used, as they "..could
have come from the cotton gloves or clothing of the Turin’s cloth’s handlers".
Rogers can hardly be unaware of earlier research on the material of the shroud
by microanalyst Walter McCrone which invalidates many of Roger's conclusions.
This is also a poor reflection on the quality of Thermochimica Acta's peer
review process. Did they not read up on McCrone's findings? Did they not know
the 1988 sampling scrupulously avoided the repaired areas? Read Nickell's report
for more detail leading to his final conclusion, "Science
has proved the Shroud of Turin a medieval fake, but defenders of authenticity
turn the scientific method on its head by starting with the desired conclusion
and working backward to the evidence—picking and choosing and reinterpreting as
necessary. It is an approach I call “shroud science.” "
Another examination of Roger's claims in an
excellent piece of work by Steven D. Schafersman also pulls no punches, calling
them "An
Exercise in Pseudoscience". and points out that Rogers is a far from
unbiased researcher. "Ray Rogers is a member of STURP
(Shroud of Turin Research Project, an organization totally composed of believers
in the authenticity of the Shroud) and accepted the authenticity of the Shroud
from the very beginning of their work in the middle 1970s." Again Schafersman makes the same point as Nickell, "The
real story in this controversy is not the mistaken age of the Shroud of Turin,
but the misjudgment of a science journal editor and the breakdown of its peer
review process." As for Rogers and STURP, Schafersmann is utterly damning,
"For over twenty years I have claimed that arguments based
on science and technology that purport to demonstrate the Shroud's authenticity
are nothing more than pseudoscience, and pro-authenticity Shroud advocates are
pseudoscientists. This includes Ray Rogers and all the other STURP members with
the exception of Walter McCrone, a former member of STURP and the single
individual with scientific integrity and professional competence among them."
It merely remains to state what is obvious to everyone except the "shroudies",
as they have been dubbed, which is that, even if Rogers' dating for the main
cloth was accurate, and it definitely is not, all that you would have is a very
old piece of material with an image on it - even calling it a shroud is an
assumption - there would still be no evidence that it is a burial cloth, let
alone the burial cloth of a
possibly fabulous New Testament character. The shroud is as much a fake as
the James Ossuary or the
Jehoash Tablet
and those who desperately cling to claims of its authenticity must find another
relic on which to pin their faith. (For more on the whole shroud story you can
do no better than take a look at The Skeptical
Shroud of Turin Website - recommended)
Quackbusters? - it is not everyday that you
find out you are part of a
huge conspiracy, one which profits from the sale of overpriced, ineffective and often
dangerous pharmaceuticals and also supresses information about other highly effective
and revolutionary unconventional therapies. It is deeply shocking to discover
that you can be unwittingly enrolled in underhand tactics and lies in order to
improve the bottom line of an international drugs conglomerate. How did this
happen? To be honest, there was a clue way back in 2003, but at the time it did
not seem significant - now I know differently. On December 12th of that year
80 received a Subscribe email for The View from Number 80. A subscription
confirmation was sent off as usual and the reply came back "There has been a
mistake. would you please UNsubscribe me? Sorry for the confusion and thank
you..." 80 does not quibble with those who unsubscribe - if the unsubscriber
wants to tell you why, that is fine, if not they are left in peace, so a
confirmation message was sent, reading "No problem - you are unsubscribed." This
time, somewhat unusually, there was an answer to the unsubscribe email, which
read "How are you affiliated with quackbusters?" This question at the time meant
little, beyond being a reference to a
Daffy Duck movie (and a poor one at that) and was not deemed worthy of an answer. No
more was heard from that particular correspondent.
But the niggling question remained, who or what was Quackbusters? A little
digging revealed that it is the name the looney wing of the alt. med. community
give to what they see as a vast conspiracy to peddle dangerous and ineffective
drugs in order to boost the profits of large pharmaceutical companies, or "big
pharma" as the jargon has it. This conspiracy is responsible for the suppression
of "natural" treatments as well as the persecution of those who have discovered
breakthrough therapies for, say, cancer. ( the name
Hulda Clark
springs to mind as an archetypal example of the latter - also see
Cancer
Parasite.) These conspiracy nuts do not just complain about the suppression of
various wonder treatments, but also take action against those they perceive to
be the conspirators - sometimes in very unpleasant ways, alleging all kinds of
misconduct and repeating smears against health campaigners across many
alternative medicine websites. Here is but one
example defaming
Terry Polevoy,
a Canadian doctor and
campaigner against health fraud and quackery (see
Unarticle for more on Polevoy and dirty tricks). These cowardly liars are
keen to appear as the underdogs, when in fact many of them make a very good
living from selling useless or dangerous treatments to the ill-informed, the
gullible and the desperate. The terminally or chronically ill generally make for
easier targets. One apparently self-appointed guardian of public health is
Tim Bolen (actually Patrick Timothy Bolen) who styles
himself Consumer Advocate (note the capital letters, often a sign of delusions
of grandeur. It is noteworthy that for many who have been "helped" by Bolen's
advocacy in fact found it to more like a kiss of death. Here is an
overview of
his activities.) Bolen produces a newsletter described on his Quackpotwatch
website as "Millions of Health Freedom Fighters - Newsletter" is about the
conspiracy, by a group calling itself the "quackbusters," to suppress
leading-edge health care in North America. No studies have ever been done to
determine the level of suffering, and death, inflicted on Americans because of
the activities of these conspirators...yet."
The main target of his bile is the excellent
Quackwatch website which is a "Guide to Quackery, Health
Fraud, and Intelligent Decisions". Set up by Dr Stephen Barrett, it is an
extremely well-researched information resource that is fair and accurate. This
is apparently enough to drive the likes of Bolen into frenzied attacks that, in
80's view, verge on the unbalanced. Should you think I exaggerate just take the
time to read "The Last Days of the Quackbusters" - and don't
laugh, this guy seems to believe every last word and is obviously a very angry
and bitter person. As an antidote to this misplaced hysteria read
this item on Bolen from Stephen Barrett,
which illustrates the huge gulf between the truth and Bolen's delusions. So how
come 80 was asked about his Quackbuster's affiliation? There would seem to be a
couple of possible reasons. One is membership of the
Healthfraud discussion
list, a forum for professional health practitioners and anyone concerned about
the false claims made for various sCAM* treatments and the lack of regulation thereof. The other is perhaps the number of
links on 80's site to the aforementioned Quackwatch and Paul Lee's excellent
Quackfiles -
plus 80's membership of the
Anti-Quackery web ring. But one thing 80 is not,
and that is
a member of any conspiracy (not even a willing dupe) - this "conspiracy" would
appear to exist only in whatever Bolen, and those like him, keep between their
ears. A final, and obvious point, is that the activities and products of large
pharmaceutical companies should be subjected to rigorous scrutiny just as much
as so-called complementary and alternative medicine. (For more on Bolen (if you
can stomach it) and his manic crusade against the "Quackbusters" read this page
from the
Quackfiles.
Rather than have Bolen hog all the limelight, here is a hysterical
conspiracy rant from a chiropractor*
called Duffy - "This site is dedicated to the propagation
of useful knowledge pertaining to health and welfare from the naturalist's
viewpoint and was created to counterattack an assault on my profession by agents
of the AMA who MISrepresent themselves as “QUACKBUSTERS” acting “in the public
interest". Dr Duffy is obviously not a man to cross - his
bio makes him sound a bit of a
superman - but then it is safe to assume that he wrote it himself. "Prior
to entering chiropractic, Dr. Duffy distinguished himself educationally during a
twenty-one year air force career (age 17-38), by attending eight major
universities while simultaneously participating in the research, development,
and flight testing of the B52 and B58 nuclear bombers."
For a list of his contributions to the advance of medical science look
here - and stop
sniggering. As a complete contrast you can read about the work of "quack
catcher"
Dr. Robert
Baratz, president of the
National Council Against Health Fraud,
in combating nonsense masquerading as medicine, and surprise, surprise, who pops
up once more like the proverbial floater in the swimming pool? Bolen.This
bothers Baratz little, "What have I got to lose?
Many of these people prey on the desperate, the uninformed. Besides losing your
dignity to some degree, you're out a lot of money and you stand to lose your
health." (Thanks to Paul Lee for these last two
gems.......)
Science Foes - the scientific endeavor to understand our universe is the only
self-correcting human activity. Every claim or theory stands or falls by whether
it is confirmed by the result of properly constructed experiments. If a new
discovery contradicts scientific orthodoxy (or the current paradigm, to use that
irritating buzz word) and is found to better explain the facts then what has
gone before is jettisoned, or recognized as a limited description of reality, a
special case. (A well-known example of the latter would be Newtonian physics and
Einsteinian physics. Newtonian physics is fine for voyaging to the moon and
planets with great precision, but fails to describe what happens when great
masses or near light speeds are involved.) Although sloppy or deliberately
misleading claims abound, it is in the nature of science to reveal, and correct
or discard these over time. Many of those who are anti-science ( which is not
quite the same as anti-scientism
although there is considerable overlap) such as creationists, new age types and the
many misunderstood geniuses, (MG) on the fringes of science, tend to hold to the view
of science as some monolithic edifice, presided over by the white-coated holders
of orthodoxy, a scientific priesthood. This is a demonstration more of their
ignorance of how science works rather than anything that corresponds to real
life. This is not to say that new ideas don't meet resistance but, if worthwhile,
they become part of our picture of hows things are. The story of
helicobacter
pylori and the understanding and treatment of stomach ulcers is a good
example of this.
Each anti-science group has slight variants on this view of a rigid scientific
hierarchy, but the generalization is fairly accurate. Creationists like to stick
to their own particular patch most of the time, which involves denying the
evidence for Darwinian evolution. They have to deny (or even ignore) it, as the
evidence supporting natural selection is so overwhelming refutation is not
possible - not even by the pretend scientists who espouse
Intelligent Design.
Creationists have several tactics, but one relevant to this discussion is their
frequent reference to scientific blunders (in their view) such as
Piltdown Man, and, more recently,
the Archaeoraptor scandal.
(For more on archaeoraptor see
here) Both are held up as
examples of the perfidiousness of science and proof that any evidence that
contradicts their literal, biblical worldview has been similarly manufactured.
The new agers, and others
who
should know better, treat science as just another human social construct and no
more valid than other "ways of knowing". The fact that the cosmos does not agree
with this stance seems to bother them not at all. To quote physicist Richard
Feynman, "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Although here he is talking about the
application of science, ie technology, his point is still valid. While we are
with Feynman it is worthwhile quoting his own thoughts on the limits of science,
"I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as
the next guy." This also applies to scientists who stray into fields other than
their own or who are highly selective when it comes to evidence for their
cherished beliefs - think of those whose names are brandished by the Discovery
Institute and others, such as the
Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness
(IDEA) Club, as proof that
some scientists at least support Intelligent Design. Another example would be
Rogers and the Turin Shroud (see above).
The MGs are those whose theories are often created ex
nihilo, with no relationship to any scientific work that has gone before, or
those who hold to theories that have been disproved, and yet they continue to
tinker with them. Vitalism is certainly an example of the latter and a favorite
of fringe and alternative medicine. This is the ancient belief that living
things have a life energy of some kind. (The
major drawback that this energy is only detectable
by psychics, therapeutic touchers, many chiropractors and other assorted
nuts and fantasists entirely subjectively is hardly an argument for its reality.) The MG's frequently
compare themselves to misunderstood or persecuted geniuses of the past - Galileo
often being a favorite. Carl Sagan had an answer for this, "But the fact that
some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are
geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the
Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." If you have dreamed
up a new form of energy (or resurrected an old one) for it to have any shred of
validity it must not contradict what is already known - or if it does, you had better
have some damned good evidence - think Cold Fusion. Announced, not in any
peer-reviewed journal, but in a press conference (a sure sign of dodginess, see
Good Guys below) Cold
Fusion not only has little theoretical underpinning, but also experiments
demonstrating the effect do not appear to be replicable, at least not in anything even
approaching a
consistent fashion.
Magic works in this one-off way, science does not.
The most recent scientific scandal that is bound to become fodder for
creationists and other anti-science types is the case of Professor Reiner
Protsch von Zieten, a German anthropologist, who has been forced to retire
following accusations of "falsehoods and manipulations". It has been revealed
that his sensationally early dates for various human fossils are false, and this
may well lead to the revision of the picture of human beings from 40,000 to 10,000
years ago, making it much less likely that homo sapiens and neanderthals
co-existed. It seems he was discovered after trying to sell some university
property, specifically his department's entire chimpanzee skull collection (!). This led
to an inquiry into the Professor's increasingly unlikely claims in which it was
learned that he was even unable to operate his own carbon-dating machine. This
report in the UK Guardian helpfully lists three other scientific scandals, the
aforementioned Piltdown man and archaeoraptor and also the case of Japanese archaeologist
Shinichi Fujimura, who was found to be salting sites with items he would later
"discover". It is notable that these are not failures of science but failures of
human beings. This is not how opponents of science like to see it - if one
fossil is faked, then all of them are seems to be the creationist view in
particular. The fact that it is the scientific community that is keeping its own
house in order passes them by unacknowledged. When was the last time (or even
the first) that a so-called creation scientist has produced genuine evidence debunking
evolution? They trumpet hoaxes such as those above only after science itself has
already revealed them.
This is not to say there are not turf wars within science and disputes
concerning the interpretation of evidence, but for the anti-sciencers to claim
these as proof of the failure of science is preposterous. There is also a
category of scientist who having found his or herself in error will not only
admit this, but will even publicize the fact. Try imagining the same thing
happening in two other major human pursuits, politics and religion. In modern
politics to admit that in the light of later evidence one has changed one's mind
on a subject, instead of being greeted as a good thing, is met with tabloid
screams of a humiliating U-turn. Still, at least it does happen, however rarely,
but in religion, particularly the established abrahamic religions,
authority is all and anyone who questions this, particularly in our times of
resurgent fundamentalism, may even be putting their life at risk. This has been
illustrated recently with calls even within the famously wishy-washy Anglican
church for the return of
heresy trials for those clergy who
cannot bring themselves to
believe in the virgin birth of Jesus and similar childish nonsense. The
penalties for believers who question the tenets of Islam
can be far harsher, death
being the main one for such independence of thought. Religion appeals to those
who want certainties - which is also why they don't like science which is in a
perpetual state of inquiry, and ideas and theories are always open to revision in
the light of later discoveries. Far better to deal with an uncertain reality
than to settle for reassuring fairy tales.
(The above few paragraphs do not deal with another foe of science,
the politician.
That is a subject for another time.)
Good Guys - the name of Robert Park, Professor of Physics, University of
Maryland will be familiar to many readers as the sometimes acerbic author of the
free weekly email newsletter, What's New, (subscribe
here) with his
byline "Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University
of Maryland, but they should be." Park is the author of the book Voodoo Science,
of which Richard Dawkins has said, "Professor Park does more than debunk, he
crucifies...You'll never again waste time or your money on astrologers, 'quantum
healers', homeopaths, spoonbenders, perpetual motion merchants, or
alien-abduction fantasists." High praise and deservedly so, Park takes no
prisoners in his campaign against flawed thinking and pseudoscience. In response
to the use in courts of "expert" witnesses who are often anything but, Park came
up with a list of seven signs of voodoo science to help judges (and juries) better assess
evidence from these experts. A list of these is
available online happily, hosted by the
Chronicle of Higher Education.
As Park says in his introduction, "There is,
alas, no scientific claim so preposterous that a scientist cannot be found to
vouch for it. And many such claims end up in a court of law after they have cost
some gullible person or corporation a lot of money. How are juries to evaluate
them?" The first two headings echo some of the points made in the paragraphs
above, 1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media. and 2. The
discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her
work. The other five headings are equally spot on in 80's view and find
application outside the courtroom as well, as Parks makes clear, "I began this
list of warning signs to help federal judges detect scientific nonsense. But as
I finished the list, I realized that in our increasingly technological society,
spotting voodoo science is a skill that every citizen should develop." 80 would
go further and say they should be taught in schools as one part of that
shamefully neglected subject, critical thinking. (For a caustic view of Park
take a look at this
review of Voodoo
Science by the late Eugene Mallove, described elsewhere as a
torchbearer for
Cold Fusion.
Mallove does manage to highlight one thing on which 80 does not agree with Park,
and that is his total antipathy to human spaceflight - but then no one is
perfect)
The Independent Investigations Group (IIG) "investigates fringe science,
paranormal and extraordinary claims from a rational, scientific viewpoint, and
disseminates factual information about such inquiries to the public." This group,
who meet monthly at the Center for Inquiry - West
certainly lives up to its mission statement - and often provides much amusement along
the way. The Investigations page does not appear to have been updated recently
but where else can you find James van Praagh nestled next to Sparky the Wonder
Dog? The only difference between the two is poor Sparky doesn't know he's a
fake. Sparky's trick of barking a number between one and six in response to a
"telepathic" message was in fact a modern instance of the
Clever Hans effect,
whereby the mutt was reacting to non-verbal clues from his owner. As the IIG
tell us "... when we conducted our test with (the owner) out of Sparky’s sight,
Sparky’s apparent psychic powers vanished. In fact, his accuracy fell to 3%.
Sparky’s accuracy with a Frisbee, however, was terrific!" 80 doesn't know how
skilful van Praagh is with a frisbee but the IIG found he is no great shakes as
a medium. They attended a taping of his TV show, "Beyond", and heard the great man
tell a lady "You almost died, honey, because I’m being told by your husband that
you were spared, you were saved, OK? You were saved. All right? And I know . . .
something about Jesus here, OK? Saved with Jesus . . . or something about Jesus,
and if you believe in Jesus, or a religious element, and I don’t know, maybe a
church with the name 'Jesus' in it? Or there is something about Jesus. Or
there’s . . ." All this blatant fishing was rendered moot when it was
revealed the lady in question was Jewish. Needless to say that particular
reading did not make it into the broadcast show. One of IIG's latest
investigations involves so-called psychic detective Carla Baron, "...who has solved fifty cases in the
past twenty years, or has solved no cases in the past three years, depending on
whether you believe her or us." Great stuff!
Clods - in contrast to the above, here
are a couple of websites that are worth a look, if only to mock. The first came
to 80's attention through the
National Secular Society's Newsline (February 4th 2005) when, in the letters
column, this request appeared from one Mark Pryde "I was
hoping you could help me, I’m 16 and have just embarked on making a new secular
website. I was hoping you could take a look and give me some tips? It’s at
www.NAC.piczo.com"
This seemingly innocent request was met with this editorial comment "This
is not what it purports to be, and Mark thinks he’s very clever tricking people
into visiting his illiterate website, but it’s interesting in a sad kind of way."
When you click on the link, the site, New Age Christians, is indeed sad, not sad
as in "showing sorrow or unhappiness" but sad as
inept, lame and pitiful - couldn't this guy at least use a spellchecker? 80 is
no expert with coding webpages but even his modest efforts look very professional compared
to the poorly formatted junk which serves as a vehicle for Pryde's unoriginal,
ignorant, homophobic drivel. (He also has a disclaimer about any offence caused
by the ads served on his pages, saying they are beyond his control - on 80's
last visit there was a picture of socialite airhead jezebel
Paris Hilton.) The title of
the page "Our Views" is no
doubt supposed to imply Pryde has company in perpetrating this site, but the
whole setup has loner written all over it. Here are a couple of quotes to give a
flavor of the level of Pryde's intellectual attainment, which seems to be just
below that of Sparky the Wonder Dog - on a good day.
Religion - We believe that science does have a place in a
modern Christians (sic) society. However, people must realise that Science is a
theory just like Religion. Just because we have 'proved' that the moon is made
of rock, does not mean it doesn't contain cheese.
Homosexuality - We believe that Homosexual people have a
mental disorder. GOD does not make mistakes, however he does give us challenges.
Science should see this challenge and try to provide a cure for gay people.
A far more urgent priority would be a cure for smug, childish, untutored bigots.
Mr Pryde obviously spends a lot of time alone with his computer - one wonders
why he does not use his time more productively - self abuse is always an option.
The World Prayer
Team obviously think they are doing vital work and would like to enlist you
in their endeavors. Here you can start a Prayer Session or submit a Prayer
Request, so that you, and others who log onto the site, can join together in caning
the Almighty's ears about some problem or other. They also post prayer alerts,
to focus the awesome power of wishful thinking onto needy causes. The current
Prayer Alert asks us "Please be in prayer for the people
affected by the recent earthquake in Iran. Pray for the families who have lost
loved ones and for safety and guidance for the rescue workers as they search for
survivors." What is not explained is why the omnipotent and omniscient
deity that caused the earthquake in the first place should pay any attention to
their whining. A monetary contribution to those "rescue workers" would be a
bloody sight more useful than any amount of sanctimonious online collective
grovelling to some imaginary bogeyman.
Competition - Spot the Clods. Still
with the subject of prayer do take a look at these two sites, devoted to
helping President Bush bring peace and enlightenment to the world, often at the
barrel of a gun. Try and see if you can spot which one is genuine, and which is
the parody. First is the
Presidential Prayer Team and second is the
Presidential Prayer Squad.
There are no prizes for the right answer but you will surely get your reward in
heaven - as Bush will undoubtedly get his.
Quotes
"PRAY, v. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a
single petitioner confessedly unworthy" Ambrose Bierce,
The
Devil's Dictionary
"Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which
deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense."
Carl Sagan
*
"Chiropractic - a therapy that where it is effective it is unoriginal, and
where it is original it is in fact a religion and of no medical value."
Ross W Sargent (see
Faith-Based Medicine)
"For centuries, theologians have been explaining the unknowable in terms
of the-not-worth-knowing." H. L. Mencken
"The meaning of life is not to be discovered only after death in some
hidden, mysterious realm; on the contrary, it can be found by eating the
succulent fruit of the Tree of Life and by living in the here and now as
fully and creatively as we can."
Paul Kurtz
"A cult is a religion with no political power."
Tom Wolfe
"It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value."
Arthur
C. Clarke
