In this week's episode, our collective uber-ADD was in full effect. So Tara and I manage to make our way to everything from Spontaneous human combustion, UFO's and paranormal beliefs, to TMNT remakes, future technology, as well as a few other things. All in all, I think it's a fun episode. If you agree, why not Subscribe on iTunes ? Also, I had a sudden burst of inspiration during production. So those of you who make it past the outro music, will be handsomely rewarded. Well, reward might not be the right word. let's just say, something lurks just beyond the closing credits this week, and leave it at that....

In This Weeks Episode: We begin with a brief mention of Mississippi's recent decision to finally ratify the 13th amendment - I make up for last week's Pope song with a bit of wholesome x-tian rap - A Texas man does his best to make a Horseman baby - while a Florida man earns a fine for harassing (not a euphemism)  a baby manatee - an Oklahoma man spontaneously combusted, or not (not) - And Tara discovers the looming Michael Bay TMNT remake - Physicists learn to make ghosts - google glasses are finally starting to look cool - a Russian man gets caught cheating via street view- as well as a few other things along the way.

Our Favorite Things: Tara recommends the website insidedish.com, which allows  restaurant workers to rate their employer. For my pick, I've chosen to recommend Ray Kurzweil's most recent book " How To Create a mind, the secrete to human thought revealed."

It's late, so is the episode, I'm tired. The End.

In This Weeks Episode: Pope Ratzinger set to step down at the end of February - The Russian Meteor thing -  Group claims to have definitively Identified Bigfoot DNA - Counting the days till the conspiracies begin, following The conclusion of the Chris Dorner case - The world's shittiest cruise - A drunken Florida man, a car fire, and a taco.

Our Favorite things: Tara shares the rest of her comics from last week's trip to the comic shop, while recommend zefrank's True Facts videos.

VIA: Left Hemispheres

Is it really possible that in all this time, I've only ever even touched on the glorious disaster that is the cult of Scientology, but once? Yes, it appears that is the case. And even when I did, it was really more about Russia's banning of Hubbard's books, than it was the church itself. Time to fix that. Because as the so-called "church" has been spreading out over the years, it's hit a few... let's call them snags, along the way. In the last few years in particular, along with Russia's efforts to ban Hubbard's writings, countries like France and Belgium have attempted to eject the group, by labeling them a criminal organization, primarily based on charges of fraud. And there are rumblings abound, that similar actions are soon to follow in various other places where scientology has only just begun to spread . All of which, is well and truly deserved, in my opinion.

The newest set of fraud charges the organization is currently facing here in America, are being alleged in a lawsuit filed by a couple in Tampa Florida. Luis and Rocio Garcia claim they were mislead into donating $420,000 into the church for charity and relief efforts, as well as for the construction of  the groups "Super Power building". A building which the Pinellas county Property Appraiser's Office has valued at $80 million, but lists as fully tax exempt, and which has sat unfinished in downtown Clearwater FL, since 2003.

From the Tampa Bay Times (which wrote a surprisingly thorough article on this):

"Plaintiffs Luis and Rocio Garcia of Irvine, Calif., name five Scientology corporations as defendants, including the church's main entity in Clearwater. The former church members say they gave Scientology more than $420,000 for the massive "Super Power" building in Clearwater that has never opened, church services they never received and humanitarian projects that never materialized.

The deception went as far as producing phony videos of church earthquake relief efforts to induce parishioners to give, said the Garcias' attorney, Theodore Babbitt of West Palm Beach.

The lawsuit focuses on Scientology leader David Miscavige, saying he exerts control over an "interdependent network of entities" that extracts as much money as it can from parishioners and denies promised refunds. It alleges the church improperly uses donations to finance Miscavige's "lavish lifestyle" and to stifle critics with private investigators and lawyers.

"We believe that these lawsuits will put an end to these practices," Babbitt said.

Clearwater church spokeswoman Pat Harney said: "The church has not been served and has no comment. However, we understand from media inquiries this has something to do with fundraising, and we can unequivocally state all funds solicited are used for the charitable and religious purposes for which they were donated." "

According to the article, the couple also claims they've spoken to dozens of other former members, and similar lawsuits are coming.

Unfortunately, even if the Garcia's allegations against the church are true, and there are plenty of reasons to believe they are, how much success they'll have fighting an organization as well funded as scientology, remains to be seen. After all, we're talking about an organization whose ranks likely only number somewhere in the tens, maybe, hundreds of thousands* -despite their assertions of Tom Cruise having reached over a billion people with scientolgy's message- who still manage to find the capital and resources to defend themselves against entire foreign governments. But with the growing number of similar suits, potential suits in waiting, and the onslaught of bad publicity, criminal charges, and all of the just plain embarrassing allegations that continue to be waged against the organization, there is some hope. And while I doubt we'll ever see an absolute end to scientology as an entity, it seems to be ever more likely that we are at least seeing the beginnings of the end of what little legitimacy it's managed to create for itself in the eyes of the general public.

Now if we could just get people to apply the same critical eye to "transubstantiation" or the vatican's banking practices.

Baby stepping towards apostasy...

Ba-by steps.... (1,000,000,000 bonus points to you if you get this reference, BTW.)

-CAINE-

Source: Tampabay.com

*The actual number of "practicing" scientologist, is debatable, and ultimately unconfirmable, as the "church" goes to great links to keep said figures as vague and confusing as possible.

Finally, because I simply cannot resist any opportunity to share it, THIS mangled train wreck of crazy. Which you may have forgotten existed. But I didn't, Oh no my friend. I remember it well.

Every once in a while the Internets gives us something we just can't help but be thankful for. Sometimes, it's a brief video of one of your favorite astrophysicists dancing to a Michael Jackson song. Other times, it's something so seemingly surreal, you just can't help but ponder how it came to be. The subject of today's entry, most definitely falls into the later category.

In his video "Antichrist Numerology In Gangnam Style", as well as countless other acts of crazy on his YouTube channel (including several more on both songs in question), former furniture engineer (cause apparently, that's a thing you can be) turned self-proclaimed "Co Prophet of The End Times" and "Third Eagle of the Apocalypse" AKA William Tapley, uses the age old pseudoscience of numerology to decipher the deep philosophical meaning behind the videos for "Gangnam Style" and Carly Rae Jepsen's, "Call Me Maybe". Both of which it turns out, are littered with secrete messages from the Antichrist. Which I don't completely disagree with. Well, I do. But I would like to think that the creators of such things are actually THE devil.   

Using the convoluted, Sudoku-like number game, that is numerology, numerologists like Tapely (who's also a Catholic, BTW. Which seems conflicting, but, whatever) are able to add, subtract, multiply, divide, and otherwise BS their way into discovering triple fives and sixes or whatever else they might like, wherever they may go looking for them. From there, it's just a simple matter of applying the correct (and always predictable) theological/supernatural associations, with a little bit of confirmation bias, and serving of personal agendas in order to make your case.


In his video breakdown, The Co-prophet wastes little time before offering irrefutable proof of his claims; beginning his dissertation by decoding the scene to the left. A scene which he believes, is obviously meant to be a depiction of the four horseman of the apocalypse, as well as the lesser known two scantily clad dancing girls of the rapture.

In fairness, I added the bit about the dancing girls. But, really? THOSE are the four horseman? How disappointing would THAT be?



From there, we move on to the first "REAL" bit of numerology in the video, when Tapley clearly establishes that PSY is meant to rep his man the dark lord, based on the appearance of the number 18 on a column in this next scene. Which, as he clearly explains, can be decoded as:  

" 8 + 1 = 9, Or, of course, as the Antichrist's number, 6+6+6."

Yes, of course it could.  It's like when your math teacher taught you that 11 + 2 = 13. Unless of course it doesn't. In which case, the answer is 4. No? ... Never happened? DAMN YOU PUBLIC SCHOOLING!

Later, PSY apparently goes on to meet his rival, "the man in yellow" (believe me I'm just as shocked as you are to find out there's apparently an actual story arc involved) who young William pegs as a representation of the g-o-d, because he is: A) PSY's enemy. Remember, PSY is the devil. And, B) There are 3 fives on the man in yellow's license plate. I mean, really. They're right there. Ya, they're separated by some other stuff, but they're there. You can't argue with facts, man.

There's also another long winded and convoluted bit about the number of numbers a woman in the video has on her shirt, and who/what she's supposed to be. But otherwise, things pretty much deteriorate completely from that point into personal interpretations about god being depicted as cowardly (since his guy wears yellow) and weak (since his guy looses) and a few other pretty standard Antichrist/rapture related apocalypse nonsense about multiculturalism, ETC. but there's nothing particularly entertaining about them. And my absolute favorite of Tapley's mental leaps in this video, actually comes in his much less thorough decoding (in this video anyway) of Carly Rae Jepsen's, Call me maybe. Which, again, he concludes to be a nuanced allegory for the war between god and the antichrist. In this case, with Carly representing Satan/sin, and the gay man in the video representing god, based on the iron-clad logic that his fake phone number begins with the prefix 555. But that's not even the best part.

That honor goes to the astonishing feat of mental contortion required for his decoding of the song's chorus. Which he believes is the Antichrist announcing his arrival, by saying:

" I [The Antichrist] just met you, and this is crazy [This, being the tribulation] so here's my number [gives you the mark of the beast] so call me maybe [my name is Mabus]". Yes, THAT, Mabus.

Mabus, if you don't know, being one of MANY interpretations of the name given to the Antichrist by Nostradamus. That's right, he actually managed to find a way to force a Nostradamus reference into all of this. Amazing.

It could probably go without saying that this is all ultimately very silly, if for no other reason, then because this man has clearly put more thought and consideration into the content of these two songs and videos in nine minutes, than anyone involved in creating them did in the entire production process. But the real, and ultimately unanswerable question you have to ask when you discover people like William Tapley is; is he for real? And the truth is, Poe's law is a thing for a reason. And with something this seemingly overtly insane, you can never really know for sure. Although I am inclined to think he means it. Because if this IS a character, and not a genuine statement of belief. He has both, persistence (given he's been at this since at least 2008) as well as one dry-ass sense of humor.

And I haven't even mentioned his music yet...

-CAINE-

Last night I received a comment on a post I wrote in 2010 "The Pope Says I'm a Nazi (t-shirt available soon)" I was planning to just reply in the comments and move on but, well... There's just too much to deal with, and the claim that Darwin was somehow responsible for Hitler, is one I have yet to deal with here anyway. So I responded briefly to direct the commenter to this entry, where I could address his comment in full without trying to force a small essay into the comment section. So, pop over and read the original entry for context ( Don't worry, it's short) and then read on if you like.


"Ratzinger's statement you quoted is indeed full of incorrect ideas, but not completely. There were indeed many pastors, christians etc. who did speak out against the Nazis (and protected Jews) and that did indeed pay for it with their lives. The church of Rome did nothing but help Hitler most of the time. Roman Catholicism is a false Christianity. According to Nuremberg trials evidence, the Nazis next target after the Jews was the Christian church. The truth is that Nazism was founded in Darwinism - which in turn was founded on materialism (atheism) - and which led to their mission of eliminating the "inferior races" in order to better build the "master race", all by helping evolution along by artificial selection."


I wrote this quite some time ago when I was less careful about my wording, since no one was really reading anyway. So, I agree that my statement that EVERYTHING he said was wrong, was too general. There were of course pastors, ETC., who did oppose Hitler, protected Jews, and died because of it. And though the claim that Hitler intended to attack the christian church is speculative, it seems reasonable to think that Hitler would have targeted outside religions, as he would likely have viewed their position of power and influence in the world as a threat to his own. However, none of that changes the purpose of Ratzinger's statement or my objection to it, as the statement in question was meant to deliberately misrepresent- A) atheism as evil and destructive- B) Hitler's actions as the ultimate example of said evil and destruction- and C) The catholic church, and by proxy religious faith, as the noble savior of mankind. None of which is supported by the facts of reality.

As for the rest of  your comment.

First- materialism is not atheism. There are plenty of materialists who also choose to maintain a belief in god, as Christians are often delighted to point out. There are plenty of otherwise empirically minded scientists in the world who also believe in god; though they are certainly the minority

Second- Your claim that roman catholicism is "false christianity", is problematic. Though you weren't specific as to why you believe it "false". All (or at least all 3 Abrahamic) religious faiths, are ambiguous belief systems. Meaning- because they reject "materialism", the god on which they are based has not -or cannot be- directly observed, verified, quantified, or defined by any empirical means. And because their exact historical origins are also confused and obscured, and their doctrines treated as interpretive, you have no meaningful way (historically or philosophically) by which to assert your definition of "true" christianity, over anyone else's.

Finally- The claim that Hitler was influenced by Darwin or Darwinism, is old, tired, and nonsense.  Darwin's books were banned (as were atheist/freethought groups) by the Nazi regime, because Hitler rejected the idea that Aryans could have evolved from "lower orders" of animals; an interpretation BTW, which is identical to the modern creationist position on evolution. Though Hitler did make statements in Mein Kampf resembling the concepts of natural selection, the views he expresses most closely resemble ideas expressed within social Darwinism;[2] which was created by a British Philosopher and "agnostic realist" named Herbert Spencer;[2] not Charles Darwin. More importantly, there are NO examples of Hitler directly citing Darwin, Darwinism, ETC. as the inspiration for his deeds. So any such links can only be implied through personal interpretation.

When it comes to Christianity, on the other hand. Hitlers writings and speeches are littered with Christ-based justifications for his actions. Such as:


Of course, this does not prove that Hitler did what he did because god told him to, therefore- all religion is evil. In the same way "This idea sounds like natural selection" or " Darwin influenced Spencer" , doesn't prove that Darwin inspired Hitler. But what it does do, is provide a material link between Hitler's stated philosophy, and his stated interpretation of "god's will" and christianity; which, weather you agree with it or not- you have no viable means of disputing. There is no such fact-based historical link between Darwinism/atheism, and Hitler's actions or motivations.

-CAINE-

 

Today's episode of My Favorite Show,  is the last of the episodes we previously recorded. So some of the stories on today's episode are admittedly a bit out date at this point, but we liked it. And it is the first episode where we, in particular I -really start to rail against politics and religion. Which is gonna be a thing that happens on this show, given how much I hate politics, and the fact that we're both godless heathens. So please check out today's episode, share if you enjoy, and we'll be back with newer content next week.

In today's episode, "Mr. Smith Steals A Yeti Hand":  Young girl mistaken for a skunk, shot at Halloween party- a woman questions the logic of placing deer crossings in high traffic areas- Home schooler fears homosexuality may lead to a duck uprising- Rep Paul Broun (who thinks science is from hell) vs Darwin- Charlie Fuqua wants the death penalty for unruly kids, even though he writes like one- Bigfoot attacks an RV - The catholic church has a new saint - I defame Mother Teresa and the Church -Jimmy Stewart Steals a Yeti hand -IOS Games: Tentacles Enter the Dolphin, Plague Inc - and  Bees making technicolor honey.

Tara's favorite thing for the week, is the VERY dark, weird, and vulgar (You've been warned) South African rap-rave group Die Antwoord.

My favorite thing for the week:

The Nerdist Podcast Episode #267 with Tom Hank

-CAINE-

Last week, a website called Big Think, released the above video, in which Bill Nye shares some of his thoughts on why creationism is not an appropriate thing to teach children to believe. Not surprisingly, this prompted a predictable response from both sides of the..issue? Debate? No... Ummm.... AH: Prompting a predictable response from both sides of the ongoing commentary on the meaningless and distracting waste of time that is the non-theory of creationism and intelligent design, and the non existent scientific controversy over evolution. Which the creators of said non-theory have deliberately manufactured, in order to try and keep their nonsensical, simpleminded little fantasy about the nature of reality alive just a WEEeee-bit longer. Ya, that seems right. Unwieldy, yes. But right.

In case you don't know (are you new here?), creationism (young Earth creationism, creation science, intelligent design, ETC.) is a made up, pseudo-scientific means, of  attempting to prove a literal interpretation of the bible, through the age old  art of special pleading, and a little good ole fashioned misinformation, self-delusion, and denial. But -like every other established cell of the Abrahamic religions- intelligent designers aren't content to live in their own lukewarm pool of happy ignorance, and have spent the better part of the past 60 years or so, attempting to subvert science education, and even the public understanding of the basic words and terms associated with science, in order to wedge their personal religious beliefs into the public consciousness. Their tactic of choice for achieving this goal, has been through continued and still ongoing attempts to eliminate or at least retard the teaching of evolution in public schools, while deliberately re-branding and mislabeling their own biblically inspired belief system as a legitimate science. Which, not to spoil the ending for you, BUT- it isn't. 

Just in case I haven't been clear enough about my feelings on the subject yet, either here or in past writings, it's safe to say that I am not a fan of creationism/intelligent design; or whatever the hell it is they may be calling themselves this week, or at any point in the future. More to the point, it's one of the many worthless ideas in the world that I see as deserving of only ridicule, disrespect, and out right dismissal, as it is of absolutely no intellectual value whatsoever. I genuinely don't think I can make my feelings about it any more clear than that. And yes, the fact that it's a religious interpretation of reality doesn't win it any points, where my particular world view is concerned. But the real reason I think creationism deserving of  uninhibited criticism and attack, is the fact that it's creators and promoters openly and deliberately work to deny and disguise the religious nature of  their beliefs, in order to subvert the general public's understanding of the scientific facts of reality. Also, it's just silly.

Whatever your feelings on people's rights to their personal beliefs and interpretations of reality; and on a personal level, I'm fine with people believing whatever nutty thing they like, provided it doesn't impact my existence in any way shape or form; determining the value of creationism is simple. Your proposed model of reality is either, A: a personal philosophical view without need of outside verification. Or B: it's a scientific theory. You don't get to have it both ways. If it's a personal choice, then you are free to shield both it and yourself, from the facts which contradict it. But, if you choose to label what you believe a science, then it must stand up to critical scrutiny and the trials of the scientific method. If it cannot, and intelligent design (creationism, ETC.), can't, then it is not science.

-CAINE-

According to many of the world's various pimps of the gospel, many people, particularly the youth of today, have a hard time understanding and connecting with the biblical word. Now, I know it might seem obvious to you why a disjointed collection of bronze-age myths and parables forced together to form a book filled with the alleged immutable truths of an unprovable sky-god, might seem silly from a 21st century, we all just watched a probe land on Mars via the Internet, sort of perspective. Because, well, it is.

But did it ever occur to you that maybe the real problem is that those often barely coherent, 2000 year old ramblings, are still being presented to the youth of today in the form of a 16th century old English translation? Ya, me neither.Then again, much like you, I prefer logic and reason over blind faith and denial. Houston pastor Chris Seay, on the other hand. Well, let's just say he CLEARLY prefers option B.

Which is precisely why Seay decided to enlist the help of Frank Couch, vice president of translation development for Nashville based religious publisher Thomas Nelson, not to mention a team of translators, poets and musicians, in order to create his very own modern translation of the bible called, "The Voice". Oh, and did I mention that it's basically written in the form of a screenplay? Ya.

Via The Voice homepage:

"The Voice is a dynamic equivalent translation that reads like a story with all of the truth and wisdom of God's Word. Through compelling narratives, poetry, and teaching it invites readers to enter into the whole story of God with their heart, soul, and mind. This bold new translation engages readers like no other Bible."

Notice that line about it being a, "dynamic equivalent translation that reads like a story"? Ya, that's code for, " we added words as we saw fit, in order to better sell our own interpretation of god's "true" word.". That's right, because merely adding stage directions just wasn't enough, Seay and company also decided to add some lines of their own. Ya know, for the sake of continuity, and maybe to flesh out some of the supporting characters a little.

But don't worry, Seay and Couch's team of re-interpreters was careful to italicize all the things they added to the original. So there's no way anyone will be confused about the original content and context of the text. We'll all just have to assume they've also devised a way of acting "italicized" as well, so the audience won't get all confused about which parts god wrote, and which parts Seay and friends just threw in for the sake of their would be hacky screenplay. Since they choose this format, in part, in the hopes of inspiring x-tian groups to put on more plays.

So if you'd like to have a bit of fun and frustration all at the same time. Then I suggest you head on over to hear the voice, and use their handy-dandy search feature, to read their translation of any bible verse you like. I recommend the tale of Lot and his daughters, which has always been one of my personal favorites. Because I've always felt that nothing summarizes the worth of biblical morality, quite like a tale that manages to glorify god's wrath, genocide, blind obedience, and the many virtues of drunken incest, all at once.

-CAINE-

VIA:National Geographic

Pentecostal snake handlers - They actually prefer the term serpent handlers, but, I have long standing tradition of not respecting the wishes of stupid people. Also, I think snake handling sounds dirtier, so- are a tiny subset of  x-tianity, that believes handling poisonous snakes to be a way of both testing and proving their faith in god. This particular brand of religious based idiocy was created in the late 1800's, by George Went Hensley, in a small church in Tennessee. And is currently practiced primarily in a handful of tiny congregations throughout the Appalachians, and other parts of the southeastern United States.

Because, somehow,  "Snake handling Preacher Killed By Snake", was shocking enough a headline to make national news. Though to me, it's about as shocking a story as the one associated with, "Man stands in Rain, Ends Up Wet.", would be. This, thankfully tiny group of religious nuts, managed to find it's way into the headlines last week. When -apparently- famous snake handling preacher Mack Wolford,, succumbed to a bite he received from a yellow timber rattlesnake at an evangelistic event in a state park about 80 miles west of Bluefield, in West Virginia
  
Now, obviously, a man is dead, and that's very sad for the people who cared for him. But I have another rule: It's impossible for anything tragic to happen to you, if you choose to deliberately engage in in the practice of tempting death on a regular basis. This rule applies to extreme sports, snorting chemicals for recreation, fans of The Dave Mathews Band*, and most certainly, irritating venomous animals as a means of asserting your belief in your invisible friend's will to protect you from harm. Which is the whole point of snake handling in the first place.

But while believers in the godly virtues of snake fondling do justify their practice of deliberately pissing off poisonous creatures, as a means of showing their dedication to god. There are also, according to those who practice the ritual, a number of misconceptions about their beliefs. The most common of which being that the faithful believe they either cannot get bitten, or that if they are, they will not die, thanks to some special protection granted them through their covenant with god. Personally, I suspect this particular "misconception" exists primarily because the entire faith is based, as far I can tell anyway, on two quotes from the new testament. Both of which specifically mention escaping death and or injury at the hand of venom and poison, based on a special covenant with god:

(Mark 16:17-18) And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover -

 And-  (Luke 10:19) Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.


So apparently, turns out god was serious about the, taking up and treading upon of serpents and scorpions bits, just not so much with the, avoiding death and harm, bits. Which is great. Cause, ya know, otherwise it's really hard to explain to people how your particular brand of BS could be true, when those who practice it continuously die as result, despite god promising you that very thing would not happen.

Glad we cleared that up.

-CAINE-

*Publicly broadcasting the music of Dave Mathews is CLEARLY an act of aggression and hatred towards others. Like all violent acts, it is only reasonable to assume you may someday justifiably suffer retribution, as a direct result of your own actions.

As you may already be aware, for some time now the Vatican has been dealing with a bit of a "scandal".

What?...No, not THAT one.

I mean, geez, how many times must the Vatican barely acknowledge the church's long standing practice of both harboring and enabling pedophiles by shielding them from prosecution and paying victims to keep their mouths shut, before you, insensitive, immoral heathens, stop harping about it? [What sarcasm?] No, this time it's something - apparently- even more, embarrassing, scandalous, and inconvenient to admit, than the fact that the religious cult on which your city-state is built, is filthy with pedophiles and the men who love to help them get away with it.

Saturday, the Vatican charged the Pope's personal butler Paolo Gabriele, with aggravated theft, in connection with the so-called Vatileaks scandal -Ya, I know. But at least the media's not making everything a "gate" anymore- after claiming to have found him to be in possession of confidential documents. Encouragingly -where public perception of the Vatican's credibility is concerned- many seem to feel Gabriele is not actually the man behind the Vatican leaks, but, rather, a scapegoat in the organization's attempt to save face. Which seems likely, given the circumstances. Me personally, I'm still just trying to process the idea that the pope has a butler. When did he become Batman?

For those of you unfamiliar with the whole Vatileaks thing: For several months now, the Italian media has been publishing leaked letters from the Vatican concerning various conflicts, power struggles, and potential corruptions, within the church-state. As usual, the holy state has done it's best to try and minimize damage from the leaks, and challenge the validity of the claims made within them, by painting itself as the victim of an insidious plot designed to undermine the church's authority and moral standing. But that task got a lot harder this week, with the publication of; Your Holiness: The Secrete Papers of  Benedict XVI.

Published by journalist Gianluigi Nuzzi, Your Holiness, is filled with even more leaked documents and letters from within the Vatican city walls, including some directed to Cap'n pointy-hat himself. And following the book's publication, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, head of the Vatican Bank, opted to step down from his position, due to information in the book regarding his mismanagement of said financial institution.

As for the feelings of the man in the silly hat on the subject. Pope Palpatine didn't actually address the scandal or his butler's arrest directly in today's pentecost Sunday address. But he did have the following to say: 

Translation: It's getting way harder for us control information, and people are starting to actually question what the Vatican, as well as the church, say and do, rather than blindly following whatever I say out of fear- and that makes pope-y all sad and junk.

We can only hope he's right, and the current level of distrust surrounding his silly little country spreads to his religion and grows, and grows, until finally- no one cares what he, his alleged country, or his church, has to say about anything, anymore.


-CAINE-

VIA: www.telegraph.co.uk (and various others)

I usually try and reserve most of the photo only stuff to the tumblr, but this one was just too good.

And just in case you don't get the reference:


So remember kids. Before you go calling someone "bald head". You might wanna make sure that someone isn't one of god's crew. Otherwise, the all loving, benevolent super-being in the sky, just might send bears to rip you, and forty of your innocent adolescent friends into tiny, little, bits. And That'll show ya.

NOW  STOP MAKING FUN OF MY PONYTAIL AND GET OFF MY LAWN, YA LITTLE BASTARDS!!!

-CAINE-

Last week I finally got around to writing about Tennessee's new monkey bill and the creationist/intelligent design movement's ongoing efforts to subvert science education, by forcing the fantasy of their belief system into the classroom. Since then, I've had creationism and evolution on the brain. So I thought I'd try writing up a series of posts about the subject. Today: A few examples of science directly observing the process of evolution as it happens.

But first, a quick reset.

In case I wasn't clear before, there is no question amongst scientists as to weather or not evolution took place, either in our own genetic past, or that of every other living thing on the planet. We know this because, contrary to creationists arguments, fossil records alone -though certainly not "complete*"- are enough to confirm that evolution is a real process responsible for the forming of all species, and almost certainly life itself. Modern genetic studies have gone even farther in mapping, not only the relation of all species to one another, but the points at which specific biological mutations led to their diversification; the point at which one genetic makeup changes (evolves) enough to become another. But in the monkey bill entry, I brought up the idea that evolution was not only a scientific reality of our biological past, but that it was still an ongoing process in the world today. One of the things that makes this, as well as the idea of evolution in general a hard fact for may people to accept, is that evolution happens too slowly in complex, long living organisms, to be observed in real time. But that doesn't mean it can't be observed at all.

Because of their rudimentary genetic makeup and brief lifespans, which can allow for the passage of  thousands of generations in a relatively short amount of time, single celled organisms like bacteria, are invaluable in the study of evolution. The E. coli bacteria in particular, has played an integral role in it's study.

 Arguably one of the most definitive and direct observations of evolution ever made, was published in the 2009, result of a research experiment conducted at Michigan State University. The experiment was conducted by Professor Richard Lenski, on a sum total of 40,000 generations of  E. coli bacteria, grown over the course of  20 years. By the 20,000-generation midpoint, researchers discovered 45 mutations among surviving cells. Mutations, which, in accordance with the theory of Darwinian evolution, afforded those generations of the bacteria distinct survival advantages over their ancestors. One of the the most dramatic examples of the evolution of the bacterial colonies in Lenski's experiment, was one population of  bacterias development of the ability to utilize a carbon source other generations and populations could not.

The Michigan state experiment is just one of the many examples of E.coli in particular, being used to directly study and observe the evolutionary process as it takes place, and there are countless other examples of similar experiments to choose from. A recent favorite of mine -What? How could you not know by now that I'd be the kind of guy who'd have a list of favorite scientific experiments?- was a result published just this year.

In an experiment lead by researchers Travisano and William Ratcliff , brewers yeast was successfully coaxed into evolving into a multi-cellular organism. The yeast was grown in flasks of nutrient rich broth. Those flasks were shaken once a day, and the yeast which sank to the bottom of the flasks was removed, leaving the free-floating yeasts behind. After just 60 days, the yeasts which clumped together had grown into permanent clumps of individual yeast cells, displaying all the tendencies associated with “higher” forms of life, including: a division of labor between specialized cells, juvenile and adult life stages, and multi-cellular offspring. Now, because the yeast was exposed to artificial pressures to grow larger, including artificial selection at the hand of the researchers involved, it could be argued that this was not a "natural" evolutionary process. But it does show that seemingly complex traits like multicellularity, can actually develop astonishingly quickly under the right conditions.

But let's be honest, all the bacterial experiments in the world, no matter how unambiguous the result, aren't about to convince the hardcore evolution denier; which is the only proper way to describe someone who chooses to ignore the factual reality of evolution, in case you disagree with my usage of the term.

-CAINE-

* The incomplete fossil record is something of a logical fallacy. Not only because most creationists choose to ignore the existence of transitional fossils, but because it implies 1) That all the steps in the evolutionary process from point A to point B, have been identified. And 2) That such a thing could even exist, since, given that many creatures would not have left any physical evidence behind, it could not.

As usual, my work schedule has kept me from getting to the blogs all week. But I've got a whole onslaught of evolution vs creationist-themed posts planned for the weekend. For now, here's Lewis Black's take on the "scientific theory" that the Earth is 6000 years old, and all Dinosaurs used to be happy vegetarians that lived peacefully along side man in the garden of Eden.

More to come tomorrow...

-CAINE-

One of the many things I missed commenting on during my latest hiatus from the web, was the passage of the so-called "Monkey Bill" in Tennessee. This bill grants teachers in the state the right to teach the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories like, climate change, human cloning, and evolution, with little fear of repercussion. The idea of allowing individual teachers to promote their own personal agenda under the guise of teaching any subject is so obviously flawed a concept, it seems utterly insane that anyone would even suggest it. That is, of course, unless personal agendas, not academic freedom or even truth,  are what you actually care about, as is the case with the supporters of this bills, and others like it. Then it starts making sense.

The "strength and weaknesses" argument, or the idea that teachers should be allowed to "teach the controversy" of certain scientific theories -specifically, evolution- is a tired, but growingly successful tactic employed by religious creationists. The group adopted the strategy as part of a pseudo-scientific makeover the organization underwent, following their defeat at the hands of a1987 supreme court ruling, which rightly deemed the teaching of their religiously based fiction in public schools to be a violation of church and state. In response to this defeat, Creationists manufactured a completely non-existent scientific controversy (more on that in a minute), relabeled their efforts a struggle for academic freedom, adopted the, extra sciency-sounding moniker: "Intelligent Design", and went back to lobbying for their cause: Undermining the teaching of science and circumventing the separation of church and state, in order to infect public education with religion.

But just for fun, let's pretend the creationist agenda really is about education (which it isn't) and not about promoting a religious agenda through pseudo-science (which it is). So what about the scientific controversy surrounding the validity of Darwinian Evolution? I mean, if science isn't even sure evolution is real, isn't that something children should know about?

It certainly would be, if it were true. But it isn't.

There is NO scientific controversy as to weather or not evolution is true, NONE.  To science, evolution is as much a fact of reality, as gravity; which is also absolutely true, and also "just a theory". Yes, there's an ongoing effort to fully understand the specific mechanisms which drive the phenomena of evolution, and to complete the paths it has taken to drive all species on the planet to their current states; because that's how science works. But there is NO question as to weather or not evolution has taken place, or that it continues to take place today.

As for Creationism/Intelligent Design, on the other hand. The lack of scientific evidence supporting the handful of quantifiable claims they're willing to make, is equally definitive. IN other words, there isn't any. Which is the problem with trying to label your religious fantasy a testable, provable science; people will try and test it, and then end up disproving it.

The simple fact is, the "theory" that we live in a universe that's 6,000 to 12,000 years old; that all the organisms on the planet were either designed as they exist today, or, after escaping extinction by taking refuge from a world-wide flood on the deck of mythical boat, underwent some ridiculous, made up, hyperactive version of evolution in order to diverge into all of the species on the planet today- simply does not fit with reality.  Evolution on the other hand, like climate change (sorry, it's real too. But we'll deal with that another day), does. And the only place any controversy about evolution exits, is in the mind of creationists.

-CAINE-



 

-CAINE-

Posted by Youtube user: Thunderf00t