Category: Uncategorized

People are so entirely predictable. An email came in two days ago from Carol Smith in response to this week’s column on how Dawkins and Gore are prostituting science to sell humanism and global socialism, respectively:

While Richard Dawkins makes the distinction between science and politics very clear, at least to me, apparently that has escaped your notice, even though you quote his very words to that effect. It is unfortunate that you are unable to state your position without representing that of others.

I wrote back: You are incorrect, Carol. Have you read “The God Delusion”? I can only presume you have not. It is a book concerning how we should conduct human affairs, therefore Dawkins has no standing, the book is fundamentally misleading and Dawkins is using his reputation to prostitute science.

Prompting this reply:

I have read The God Delusion. I have it here, and plan to have Dr. Dawkins sign it in September. Many scientists write on political and social issues. They do not forfeit that right by virtue of their being scientists. You would apparently deny that right.

I wrote back: I wouldn’t deny him the right to write about anything he likes. But he shouldn’t expect to do so without criticism, which he doesn’t take at all well. The point is, Dawkins has literally no idea what he is talking about outside of his area of scientific expertise. For example, ask him what percentage of the 1,763 wars in recorded history were caused by religion. Or, ask him if Christianity is falsifiable. Or if a network monitoring program MUST be bigger than the network it monitors. These are easy, basic questions directly related to the subject of his book and he gets them all wrong.

Also, he is a complete moron to put any stock in Sam Harris. For example, go to page 229 of “The God Delusion”. 25 cities, right. WHAT INTEGER CAN YOU DIVIDE 25 BY TO GET 62 PERCENT? 15 of 25 cities is 60 percent. 16 is 64 percent.

Sweet Darwin, they call themselves scientists and they can’t even catch a basic error in division.

No response, of course… as apparently Ms Smith was too busy running around trying to dig up some dirt. Dig up all you like, Carol, believe me, there’s truckloads, but none of it is going to make Dawkins any less wrong. I suggest that you worry more about this.

Engineers aren’t scientists and they don’t do science. Except, of course, when scientists want to claim credit for something brilliant that engineers have done. From the comments at Pharyngula:

Engineers aren’t scientists. TECHNOLOGY isn’t SCIENCE. And when engineers try to act like scientists, they are apt to pull off howlers like this recent example reported in NewScientist: “Mars rover finds “puddles” on the planet’s surface”.

Those guys thought they could do planetary geology. They wrote a paper that was ACCEPTED by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (since retracted, but THOSE guys acted as if they could peer review GEOLOGY!).

Some other quotes that amused me in the discussion about the contempt which scientists (physicists) have been known to hold for butterfly collectors… that is to say, biologists.

“I should finally point out that as a mathematician I am neutral in the debates between soft sciences light biology and physics.”

“You’re either a scientist or a biologist.”

“Physical objects ‘run’ on physics itself, you twit.”

The interesting thing is that with the current advances in artificial intelligence, economists will finally be able to begin doing the sort of scientific experiments that have been impractical until now without the full support of a totalitarian dictator. I think it would be a very good thing to see much more strenuous testing of economic hypotheses, as this would hopefully allow us to destroy whatever shards of credibility still cling to socialism and Keynesianism.

I don’t celebrate July 4th. I will happily do so when the united States of America are again free, independent and sovereign. In the meantime, I’ll pass.

So, enjoy the fireworks, anyhow.

The new Prime Minister Gordon Brown continues Blair’s betrayal with a masterful example of Doublespeak:

Gordon Brown yesterday ruled out holding a referendum on a new European constitutional treaty as part of a wide-ranging package of reforms to give “more power to Parliament and the British people”…. Later this year, Mr Brown is expected to sign a new treaty incorporating the bulk of the EU constitution – including a new foreign policy chief, a permanent president and the surrender of 52 national vetoes – rejected by voters in France and Holland in 2005.

How do the British people possess more power when they aren’t even allowed to vote on their own political negation? This is a clear demonstration of the evil of representative democracy; each of the three major parties promised the referendum that is now being denied by those democratically elected officials.

Unless the English people stop this process, their enslavement is assured. I find it incredible that the English, who bravely battled every invader from Julius Caesar to Adolf Hitler, will so meekly submit to the deceit of a treacherous Scot and allow their island nation to be conquered by the Continent at last.

Three Lions? More like Fifty Million Lambs.

ML wants to get jiggy wit it:

I’m not terribly impressed with credentials, but you seem to be.

Do you have any credible degree in science?

Do you have any credible degree in philosophy?

Do you even have a degree in literature?

For that matter do you have any credible degree in theology?

What then, by your own evaluation system, gives you the right to criticize your betters, the ones who have taken the time to do their homework? the ones that have taken the effort to actually study, in depth, the subjects about which they speak?

I strongly suggest that you stick to fiction. That way you don’t have to be accountable to anyone for anything you say.

Free speech gives idiots the right to criticize those who have done their homework. I strongly support free speech.

Go for it Vox, show the world how ignorant you are. I didn’t say you were not intelligent, just ignorant, that is ignorant, “lacking knowledge”.

BTW, yes, I have read Dawkins, and I have read Collins, and many many more. I don’t just read those with whom I agree. Critical thinking demands reading all sides of a problem. When it comes to truth, majority does not rule. Credentials do not rule. But, those who do not use their ability to think critically seem to be in the majority. I guess you are in the majority.

Typical woman. No evidence, no logic, just petty insults and an appeal to authority. The amusing thing is that you actually appear to think Dawkins has done his homework. Just to give two of many examples, here’s an accurate summary of his case that a religious upbringing is worse than childhood sexual abuse:

1. mention a letter from one woman abused by a priest
2. relate an apocryphal story about Alfred Hitchcock
3. talk about a Christian haunted house
4. repeat a comedienne’s routine
5. quote a letter from a guy who’s upset that he got dumped by his girlfriend.

I don’t know about you, but I’m convinced! That’s some demmed fine science right there. No doubt it couldn’t have been done without all those decades of experience as an evolutionary biologist. Second, on page 229, do tell me what number of cities over 25 equals 62 percent. Sixteen? No, that’s 64 percent. Fifteen? No, that’s 60 percent. Dickie boy is either careless about his homework or he can’t do third-grade math.

Now, go make yourself look pretty and leave the critical thinking to those few men who are capable of it. And in answer to your question, yes, I have a credible degree in science. A university even gave me a piece of paper that says so.

Al Gore may want to rethink that whole “more government power will stop global warming” idea:

Pollution kills three quarters of a million people in China every year, according to previously unreleased World Bank statistics. The figures, almost twice previous estimates, were calculated using a new statistical model. But they have been suppressed until now because the government feared they would cause social unrest, according to reports.

Let’s run a little facts and logic over the situation. If a certain form, or forms, of pollution causes global warming, then a government structure which bears a causal relationship to more pollution would be undesirable if the goal is to reduce global warming.

So, here’s the question. Do societies with a greater amount of centralized power tend to have more or less pollution? The evidence of Eastern Europe versus Western Europe, the USSR versus the USA, and China versus Japan strongly suggests that stronger central authority is causally correlated with more pollution.

Therefore, one must conclude that it is probable that increasing central authority will have the effect of making global warming – assuming that it is, in fact, man-made – worse. Precisely how, we cannot say, but we can reasonably state that the odds are very good that it will.

Of course, the odds are even better that global warming is nothing but a stalking horse for those seeking global governance.

Riffs from JamieR

In Yemen, a suicide car bomber blew himself up Monday at the site of an ancient temple popular with tourists, killing eight people and wounding seven, police said. Most of the tourists were from Spain, and this means they won’t be able to finish their ‘Out Of Your Western Fucking Minds’ holiday tour of Yemen, Egypt, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The attempted London car bombings were meant to be detonated by calls to mobile phones in the two vehicles, but failed for technical reasons, the Evening Standard reported today. In related news, men in beards have been camping out to be first in line for the British launch of the iPhone.

3 men have died in a fast-moving Utah wildfire. The 30 spouses have been informed of their passing.

In his latest bid to counter the tide of anti-Americanism in the Muslim world, President Bush is appointing a special envoy who would demonstrate to Muslim communities “our interest in respectful dialogue and continued friendship.” The Muslim world said it had sent a similar special envoy, but had taken the initiative much earlier than the Americans, in September 2001.

Hope springs eternal in the Three Monkey Republican breast:

Obama and Clinton together raised $59 million. Giuliani and Romney raised $31 million.

This leads Stanley Kurtz of NRO to ask: “Could contributors holding their money for Thompson at least partly explain the low GOP figures?”

Sure, but this is just another indication of what I have been writing since well before the 2006 elections, that Hillary is going to win in a landslide. The Bush administration’s repudiation of conservatives, the borders and national sovereignty is the reason Republican fundraising is down.

As it should be. You’d have to be insane to support any Republican not named Ron Paul at this point. He probably can’t win, but supporting anyone else is guaranteeing a sixth Bush-Clinton presidential administration.

An interesting twist in the globalist saga. That sound you hear is the sound of Dan Brown’s writer’s block shattering into a million pieces.

A Chinese secret society with 6 million members, including 1.8 million Asian gangsters and 100,000 professional assassins, have targeted Illuminati members if they proceed with world depopulation plans, according to Tokyo-based journalist Benjamin Fulford, 46.

‘Trust me on this, the illuminati have failed because of their racism. Although other peoples understand that the West is a slave society, those living there do not realize it. The illuminati do not control China, India or now Russia. They are about to lose power. We are like people living in Berlin before the collapse of the Berlin wall. The illuminati are like the Wizard of Oz; once you pull aside the curtain you are surprised by how weak they really are. They rely on illusion. Once the illusion is gone, they are just a bunch of weak old men.

I’d take the Yakuza and the Triads over our Enlightened would-be masters any day. The organized gangs are far more reasonable and civilized, although I don’t recommend getting caught up in their occasional power struggles. Some idiot prosecutor ordered the arrest of the top dog in Napoli last summer and set off a succession war that took months to settle down. I don’t buy this story for a second, though. No on one Earth has use for 100,000 assassins.

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
– David Rockefeller, Memoirs

You know, it’s not exactly a conspiracy when they’re publishing books telling you exactly what they’re doing and you can read the blueprints on their websites that are open to the public. Mr. Rockefeller may want to think twice before sending out for Chinese or sushi these days. Still, even though he doesn’t look like much, there’s something about him that suggests he’ll go all Emperor Palpitane on your ass and start shooting lightning bolts out of his fingertips.

Dr. Helen has stirred up a bit of a discussion with her post on the discovery that women are twice as likely to be physically abusive as men. I didn’t bother commenting on it the first time, since this is completely obvious to anyone who has ever been around men and women. While I’ve never hit a woman first outside of the dojo, I’ve been slapped, hit, bitten or otherwise attacked ten or twelve times that I can remember off the top of my head – no, not by Spacebunny and seldom by anyone I was dating – and I’ve only physically retaliated twice. Once by blocking a second slap in such a way as to break the wrist, once with a hard backhand that sent the woman flying and left her half-unconscious.

The problem is that these days there is a presumption of male responsibility for any physical conflict, regardless of who initiated it. I remember Warren Moon getting arrested for shoving his wife after she nearly crushed his skull by throwing a thirty-pound statue at his head. Like Mrs. Moon, it’s insane.

While I think turning the other cheek is the right thing to do outside of a relationship, I think it is disastrous within a relationship. Given what I’ve seen of the relationships where the woman is physically abusive, (I was going to say physically and verbally abusive, but that would be redundant, all physically abusive women are verbally abusive as well), I think it’s much better to teach consequences by striking back hard than to put up with that sort of lunacy. If a women realizes that the threat of the police won’t get them out of a justified ass-kicking, she’s very unlikely to initiate violence.

And if the woman wants to call the police, so be it. The relationship is over. Count your blessings. A few days in jail is vastly preferable to a life sentence with an abusive woman.

Start nothing. Finish everything.