Catholic Church punishes homeless

The Catholic Church doesn’t seem able to do anything good these days. Between promoting the spread of disease by telling people condoms are immoral to covering up child rape scandals (or is it “petty gossip? I forget), the Church appears to be actively trying to harm the world. Not that this is anything knew, but the media has obviously been hopping on the band wagon a lot more recently. I hope it continues, such as is the case in this deplorable tale of evil.

[Maine Gov.] Baldacci decided to hold the spaghetti feed after learning last month that the Catholic Church had withdrawn funding for Preble Street’s Homeless Voices for Justice program because of Preble Street’s support for same-sex marriage.

Homeless Voices for Justice lost $17,400 for this year and will lose $33,000 that it expected for its next fiscal year. All of Wednesday’s donations will go to the statewide advocacy group, which works on issues that affect the homeless.

Baldacci is a Catholic himself, but he isn’t so blinded by religious dogma that he can’t recognize the difference between right and wrong. He has helped to correct an ugly act and bring attention to an evil, petty organization that cares more about its bigoted agenda than helping out human beings.

But maybe the best part of this is that he isn’t up for re-election. While I would like to see him continue as governor (he is constitutionally prohibited from doing so), it’s so nice to see him acting based upon what he thinks is right, not simply what is politically convenient. In fact, he began his tenure as governor by claiming to be against same-sex marriage – which was a lie to help get him elected – but once he faced no consequences for the truth, he approved a bill for equal treatment in Maine (which was struck down by bigots helped illegally by non-taxed political donations from the Catholic Church). This doesn’t make him a great man necessarily, but the waning months of a person’s time in office are often the best because they reflect what that person actually thinks and wants.

Thought of the day

As it turns out, the back bumper of a Ford F150 is way stronger than the hood of my Honda Accord.

Deepak Chopra is not an intelligent person

Deepak Chopra is capable of saying some of the most incoherent things imaginable.

The idea that we live in an intelligent universe has thrived for quite a while. It’s an important idea because it would explain many things, including how we got here. I keep my eye out for any bit of evidence to support the theory, and a beauty surfaced recently on the PBS program, Nature, entitled “Clever Monkeys.” It turns out that monkeys are far more than clever. They may be tapping into the basic fabric of the cosmos.

Wow! The whole wide cosmos? Goodness gracious. The rest of this article is going to be amazing!

But the red colobus [monkeys] recently made a life-altering discovery. They found that if they eat a bit of charcoal from the abandoned fires of local villagers, their indigestion is cured. This had made them happier monkeys, and as a result their numbers have dramatically increased; not only that, but they are free to explore other food sources. These advantages aren’t felt by the white-and-black colobus, who haven’t hit upon the charcoal-eating trick. New generations of red colobus learn the habit by having it passed on from mother to child.

Oh. A population of monkeys started eating something random (because that’s what monkeys do) and it helped settle their stomachs.

Again. Oh.

It’s amazing how much critical knowledge is contained in this one anecdote. Self-medication is well known, but here the red colobus has hit upon the same property in charcoal that emergency room doctors use when a patient arrives with acute poisoning. Medical science is able to explain how charcoal absorbs toxins in the stomach. Monkeys can’t explain anything or do laboratory research. It is completely untenable to claim that they eat substances at random until they hit upon just the one perfect remedy — such random behavior isn’t seen among them.

God damn it. They’re monkeys. They eat whatever is in front of them. And no, Chopra, they aren’t doing it with the intent of hitting “upon just the one perfect remedy”; they discovered they felt better after eating charcoal. That’s it.

But this is not an intelligent man. He continues.

What we are witnessing is an intelligent discovery on the part of creatures who stand far below Homo sapiens on the evolutionary chain, and that discovery is being passed on from mother to child without genetic adaptation. To me, this means that quite a blow has been struck for intelligence being innate in the universe. It suggests that evolution itself has never been random but is guided by the principle of intelligence — not “intelligent design,” which is a red herring supplied by religious conservatives. The intelligent universe is a cutting-edge idea, not a throwback to scripture. As a theory, it gives us a much more elegant explanation for many things that are clumsily explained by falling back on randomness to explain every new development in Nature.

So many things wrong. Brain explode.

1) Homo sapiens do not stand atop any chain. In fact, there is no chain. Those monkeys are perfectly well adapted in their intelligence for the sake of being monkeys. Evolutionary success is not measured in particular characteristics or traits (should one want to compare species), but rather in survivability and longevity.

2) This does not indicate any sort of intelligent guidance. It indicates that monkeys eat a lot of crap. Sometimes that crap makes them feel good.

3) This is not an example of evolution. Chopra has no grasp of the concept.

At the moment, evolutionary theory refuses to abandon the notion of random selection, and geneticists cling stubbornly to the doctrine of random mutations to explain why new things appear in the unfolding story of life.

Evolutionary theory is so much more than Chopra knows. Selection is not random, plenty of mechanisms exist which help to explain the appearance of new characteristics and traits, and again, he hasn’t even offered an example of evolution in the first place. But just to be clear, he eventually comes right out and says it:

We all have a stake in this argument, however. Seeing the red colobus evolve before our eyes cannot be denied.

No, no, no, no.

Rather than saying that a larger brain made intelligence possible, why not say the opposite, that intelligence dictated a larger brain so that it could expand?

Because you have no evidence for the ridiculous claim that inherently says natural selection has foresight?

This guy is such a fucking joke.

Ol’ scummy Andreas Moritz

I recently got a notice from Facebook that there were copyright issues with “various posts” on the Fan Page for For the Sake of Science. I naturally accused Andreas Moritz because he’s such a flaming retard who can’t take the fact that educated people know he’s full of shit. He’s just a greedy moron who has no detectable education.

It turns out I was right.

Hi Michael,

Thanks for your email. As you know, we received a claim of alleged rights infringement regarding the removed content. Per Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, users are prohibited from posting infringing content on the site.

If you believe that we have made a mistake in removing this content, then please contact the complaining party directly with the following information to resolve your issue:

Notice #: 21512613
Contact Information:
Name – Andreas Moritz
Email – andmor@ener-chi.com

If both parties agree to restore the reported content, please ask the complaining party to contact us via email with a copy of the agreement so that we can refer to the original issue. We will not be able to restore this content to Facebook unless we receive explicit notice of consent from the complaining party.

Thanks for contacting Facebook,

Kieran
User Operations
Facebook

I have no idea what the content is they removed. I post links to that page and I may have uploaded a satirical picture of Moritz, but I’m not even sure about that second part (though the picture is there now – not that Moritz has rights to it, anyway).

But none of that matters. Facebook apparently thinks it makes sense to cave to any and all complaints. They allow for counter-claims, but those obviously play no role since they send out these generic sort of responses that offer no help to the person who originally uploaded the content.

Of course, it’s possible to send Facebook frivolous complaints about the content of Moritz’s Fan Page, too. Or, someone could easily do a WhitePages search of Moritz, find out all his personal information, and write him letters encouraging to be more reasonable.

Andreas Moritz
9 Night Hawk Way
Landrum, SC 29356-3406

(864) 895-6285
Household: Stephen C Maresch, Lillian S Maresch

This is all publicly available information that took about 4 seconds to find. (That part is for WordPress to read when Moritz whines about this.)

I’m not recommending anyone harass Moritz. No, no, no. I’m just saying that as an alternative to the email address provided by Facebook, someone might prefer to write a friendly letter to the guy. Let him know that his complaints are getting tiresome. Or better yet, let him know that the stupid bullshit he believes will literally kill people.

Someone needs to knock some sense into this guy. He’s going berserk because he hates that other people don’t actually like it when he promotes the spread of disease while exploiting the sick and dying.

Foxhole myth busted

I just wish they could have used Buster in one of the slides.

Thought of the day

Of course science is an enemy of religion, for its method is doubt, empirical testing, and the rejection of ideas for which there’s no evidence. If religious people practiced their faith using those principles, in a very short time there would be no religion.

~Jerry Coyne

If you desire it, truth will come

When in discussions and/or debates with the religious, I cringe before I bring up the point that, yes, of course atheism does lack a certain sort of comfort. Afterall, do people really have no fear of death? But this does not mean that fear ought to motivate one to believe in any sort of god or afterlife. An emotion, no matter how strong, does not make something true. And, frankly, it’s bizarre that anyone would ever try to make that sort of argument. But alas, I’ve encountered it a number of times.

The reason, however, I cringe is that as soon as a lack of a certain comfort is admitted*, the theist jumps up and proclaims, “Aha! So you do desire a god/an afterlife!” But this isn’t so. I certainly do not desire to live with the redneck described in the Bible. But what’s really perplexing is how illogical the theist’s whole point is. You desire X, thus X is true. Or sometimes with some condescension, You desire X, so maybe you ought to reflect on that a little more. The assumptions there are that 1) I haven’t reflected on these sort of issues and 2) all it takes is reflection on a desire to come to believe in a god. The first assumption is obviously wrong and the second shows the theist’s ignorance: I want evidence, not a belief motivated by fear.

Honestly. The logical argument is that people have fear and seek to soothe that feeling; religion makes sense in light of this fact (though it needs far more than that to explain it). The theist, however, then tries to turn logic on its head and say that fear is somehow a sensation put in place by some religion’s god and that’s why we feel it. Such shenanigans completely circumvent the whole giving-evidence-for-one’s-beliefs thing – it is such a nuisance for believers, afterall.

The whole crazy argument is a Field of Dreams sort of fantasy: If you desire it, truth will come.

*I keep saying “a certain comfort” because there is a greater comfort in believing what is true and in enjoying life for the sake of life.

Biology textbook calls creationism myth; father wants honesty banned

An honors textbook being used at Farragut High School in Knoxville, Tennessee refers to creationism as such:

Creationism: the biblical myth that the universe was created by the Judeo-Christian God in 7 days.

That’s a pretty fair definition. The only possible problem could be that there are a number of other creationist myths. Check that – the only possible legitimate problem. Creationists, of course, will have other issues.

[Father of a Farragut High School student, Kurt] Zimmermann said the use of the word “myth” could “mislead, belittle and discourage students in believing in creationism and pointedly calls the Bible a myth.”

I would hope so. The Bible has no evidence for anything not trivial, nevermind creationism. Why would anyone want to believe in a haphazard, internally inconsistent piece of violent rubbish that has no connection to reality? It involves magic, talking snakes, incorrectly describes the Universe, and for some strange reason has some tyrant claiming to be three individuals while he’s really one and one aspect of his personality disorder is that of a Jew zombie. It’s ridiculous.

Next.

Thought of the day

The em dash is an ugly, unnecessary symbol that far too many people insist on using. Specifically, it’s a dash that is approximately the length of the letter M. It is usually used to put emphasis on a part of a sentence — sort of like this. However, there is a superior alternative – the en dash, as seen in this sentence. Same idea, just shorter.

But what really makes dashes intended to emphasize ugly is when people insist on adding no spaces—like right here. In this instance the em dash is necessary since the en dash usually acts as a hyphen when it isn’t surrounded by spaces. But even with this distinction, any dash without space around it is easily mistaken for being part of a hyphenated word. This adds unnecessary confusion and a lack of clarity to any writing.

Stop using em dashes – they suck.

They’re in

And with three short-handed goals during a single power play, no less.