This is the video that introduced me to QualiaSoup. I really would love to have people view this video again and again, and make critical thinking a true New Year resolution.
Dr. Richard Carrier Highly Endorses My Book!
1 week ago
Just a blog of some guy. Actually, it's a place for me to collect info, and is here more for me than you (so if I happen to insult you with something written here, too damn bad). I don't really have a single thing that I talk about, just whatever happens to catch my attention. Maybe it will be interesting; maybe you'll be bored to death. I just hope that you get some information or enlightenment out of it when you come to visit. So please visit often!
It is Christmas Eve, and I have almost lived through this year’s annual greatest of holidays. At midnight, Christmas will begin, and twenty-four hours later it will end. It will be over! But not yet. At this writing, the world is shutting down in anticipation. The 24 Hour Kroger closed at 6:00 pm. Gas stations are closing. People are smiling. Even NRP is playing Xmas music.CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE POST.
Lots of people are in church. Children are nestling to greater or lesser degrees of snugness in their beds awaiting, or fearing, the coming of Santa, an anagram for Satan. Lots of people are getting drunk, and lots are getting laid.
Santa Clause is coming to town. Not a very good modern role model actually. Overweight; labor laws scoffer; animal rights ignorer; and—believe it with horror—a smoker!
Some folks will die in car crashes from negligence and some will die by their own hands from, inter alia, pills, or pistols, unable to deal with what they experience as the depression and loneliness of the day. And it will be observed how awful it was for this to happen on Christmas. How dare they stain the wonder and magic of Christmas with their blood?
After the ripping of the packages, some fine meals will be consumed and much booze will be ingested.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF HIS EXPLANATION!Watch The Lunar Eclipse Saturday
Tomorrow (Saturday December 10) the Moon will pass into the Earth’s shadow, causing it to plunge into ruddy darkness, an event called a total lunar eclipse. These happen roughly twice a year somewhere on Earth, but this is the last one visible in North America for more than two years, so even though it’s in the morning it might be worth a look for you.
You can get all the info you need on watching the eclipse from my pal Alan Boyle over at the Cosmic Log, including timing, locations, and where to watch live online, too. NASA has a page with more detailed information as well. This one favors US folks farther west; the Moon will have set when the eclipse really starts for East Coast folks.
But the fun begins when the Moon starts to enter the deepest part of the Earth’s shadow at 12:45 UT (04:45 Pacific US time), and the last bit passes into shadow at 14:06 UT (06:06 Pacific). Deepest eclipse is about 25 minutes after that. Interestingly, for people in the western US, that’s around the same time as sunrise. For me, the Sun rises at 07:12 (Mountain time) Saturday, and the Moon sets at 07:14 — when it’s still partially eclipsed! Unfortunately, the mountains to the west will block my view of the setting Moon.
But for those of you with a clear horizon to the east and west, you may get an extraordinary opportunity to very briefly see the Sun and eclipsed Moon at the same time! Normally this isn’t possible; by definition the Moon and Sun have to be directly opposite each in the sky to get an eclipse at all.
But due to a quirk of geometry and atmospheric physics, it is possible. The Earth’s air acts like a lens, bending the light from objects near the horizon. Because of this effect — I give a full explanation here — you can actually see the Moon for a minute or two after it has physically set; its light is bent "around the corner", so to speak, so both it and the Sun will be over the horizon for a short amount of time. You can face west to see the setting eclipsed Moon, then turn around and see the rising Sun in the East!
In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.
Who is more humble? The scientist who looks at the universe with an open mind and accepts whatever it has to teach us, or somebody who says everything in this book must be considered the literal truth and never mind the fallibility of all the human beings involved?
- Keynote address at CSICOP conference (1987)
I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.
- Interview with Charlie Rose (1996)
In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, "This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed"? Instead they say, "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way."
- "In the Valley of the Shadow", Parade, 1996-03-10
- Pale Blue Dot, p. 50
Whereas the sentiment, "In God We Trust", has been an integral part of United States society since its foundingThis is not true. While many of the founders may have placed their trust in God, it was made quite clear in the writings of several of the founding fathers that this nation was a secular one. It should further be noted that it was not even the official motto of the United States until 1956.
Whereas in times of national challenge or tragedy, the people of the United States have turned to God as their source for sustenance, protection,wisdom, strength, and directionAlthough this may be true of a majority of the people, it is not true as a blanket sentiment. There are many individuals who have turned to multiple gods or to no god at all, but rather have looked to one another for comfort and solidarity.
Whereas John Adams said, "Statesmen may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand."While he may have said these words, the writers and backers of this resolution ignore what else President Adams wrote in the Treaty of Tripoli:
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religionConcurrent Resolution 13 raises up one religion (or a class of religions) above all others. You have taken steps to exclude by sentiment those who do not believe in God, those who believe in multiple gods and those who have no belief in any deity of any sort. The language of the resolution makes it explicit that the intent of the resolution invokes religion, rather than a secular cause. Furthermore, wedding government and religion in such a manner sets a dangerous precedent. It is both bad politics and bad religion, for while Christianity is currently the dominant religion in this nation (in terms of number of practitioners), it may not always be so. Using the secular government of our nation for en explicitly religious reason such as this opens the door to further waste of time and resources, as well as the establishment of resolutions and language associated with religious matters in the future, to the detriment of all citizens of this country.
Before I do anything else, I simply have to present this insanely cool Hubble image of the galaxy cluster MACS J1206, which lies at the mind-numbing distance of 4.5 billion light years from Earth:CLICK HERE FOR THE REST OF THE ARTICLE (Trust me, you WANT to do this).
[Click to enclusternate, or grab the bigger 2564 x 2328 pixel version.]
Like I said, insanely cool. The cluster has thousands of galaxies in it, and a total mass of something like a quadrillion — that’s 1,000,000,000,000,000 — times the mass of our Sun!
The image was taken as part of a program called CLASH, for Cluster Lensing And Supernova survey with Hubble. A large group of astronomers from ten different countries are observing more than two dozen such distant clusters to look for many interesting things, including exploding stars (which help us gauge the expansion rate of the Universe), very distant galaxies (to help us understand the early Universe), and to look for dark matter.
Dark matter is stuff that doesn’t emit light, but has mass. Careful observations over the years have ruled out pretty much every form of normal matter we can think of, from simple hydrogen clouds to black holes. Whatever this stuff is, it’s weird, not matter as we know it.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE (Again, you really, really NEED to do this!).Astronomers have found when and how the cosmic fog was lifted
Take a look at the image displayed here [click to redshiftenate]. Every object you see there is a galaxy, a collection of billions of stars. See that one smack dab in the middle, the little red dot? The light we see from that galaxy traveled for 12.9 billion years before reaching the ESO’s Very Large Telescope in Chile. And when astronomers analyzed the light from it, and from a handful of other, similarly distant galaxies, they were able to pin down the timing of a pivotal event in the early Universe: when the cosmic fog cleared, and the Universe became transparent.
This event is called reionization, when radiation pouring out of very young galaxies flooded the Universe and stripped electrons off of their parent hydrogen atoms. An atom like this is said to be ionized. Before this time, the hydrogen gas was neutral: every proton had an electron around it. After this: zap. Ionized. This moment for the Universe was important because it changed how light flowed through space, which affects how we see it. The critical finding here is that reionization happened about 13 billion years ago, and took less time than previously thought, about 200 million years. Not only that, the culprit behind reionization may have been found: massive stars.
OK, those are the bullet points. Now let me explain in a little more detail.
As I look to each of you, I see my own sorrow in your eyes. Behind the tears that fall for my sister, Susan, I see great love and admiration. I know that Susan would be humbled to realize that you’ve taken time from your busy schedule to join in celebration of her life and on behalf of our family; thank you for the support that you’ve offered at this difficult time.
If anyone asked Susan what her finest legacy to the world is, she wouldn’t have hesitated to say, “my family”. She was the proud mother of Cole, Sommer, Noelle, and Grace, and I hope that each can remember that while they have lost a link to the past with Susan’s death; they will always be her hope for the future. Albert Einstein once said, “Our death is not an end if we can live on in our children and the younger generation.” I’m comforted by the fact that Susan will be revered, loved and remembered for decades yet to come.
My sister was an intelligent, funny, strong willed, determined and vivacious young woman. She was a skilled labor and delivery nurse and loved her job. She enjoyed running and biking and was, by her own admission, an open book. She loved to laugh (often) and was spontaneous and fierce. While she seemed strong as steel, the reality is that she was as fragile as crystal and it is this fragility that brings us here today.
It seemed that Susan had it all. She was at the top of her professional years and had many more years to live and many more lives to influence. Yet she faced internal demons none of us even knew of. Many of us feel a selfish guilt right now. We are not just wondering “why” but we are wondering “what”….What could we have done? In the end, as long as we were good and faithful friends to Susan, we did all that we could do. One of the glories of being human is that we get to make choices, and while I don’t agree with my sister’s choice to end her life; it is one she made, and in the end, my wish is that she has found the peace she was looking for.
I don’t think of my sister in the past tense because she is always going to be a part of my memories. I will always remember my younger sister as an inspiration and gift in my life and I am going to miss her more than words can say.
I don’t harbor anger or resentment towards Susan for her final act. She was ill and she did not get the help she needed. Maybe her self reliance and determination prevented her from admitting this illness to herself, thus disallowing necessary help.
Death is the final equalizer for all of us. For most, death comes naturally after a life of many decades. To some life is cut short through no specific plan of an individual through disease or accident. Sadly, others suffer from a misunderstood disease of mental illness and they lose perspective on life and irrationally end it for themselves.
There is so much we don’t know. We don’t know what led her to think that she had no other choice and we wonder at the despair that at last got out of hand and drove her towards her decision.
But…we are not here to hand out blame. Adlai Stevensen once said, “It is not the years in a life that counts; it is the life in the years.” I will be the first to tell you that Susan packed a lot of life in her years and it is that very life that we celebrate today.
An example of her determination, iron will, and the life she led. During the lobster festival in Maine, they have a lobster crate race. Susan tackled that race with her usual gusto. She had clearly won the race, but she kept going. Even after she set the record for that race, she kept going. Not satisfied with just breaking the record, she wanted to make that record her own. She kept going to the point of exhaustion and made that race her own personal property! That record stood for well over a decade. That is the type of person that I will always carry with me.
Moving into the future without Susan by our side will be odd. However, as long as one is remembered they are not truly dead, and if we carry memories of Susan in our heart, she will be with us always.
In her memory, I would like to read a poem written by Edwin Harkin of the UK, in 1981. I think Susan would have liked this:
You can shed tears that she is goneor you can smile because she has lived.
You can close your eyes and pray that she’ll come backor you can open your eyes and see all she’s left.
Your heart can be empty because you can’t see heror you can be full of the love you shared.
You can turn your back on tomorrow and live yesterdayor you can be happy for tomorrow because of yesterday.
You can remember her and only that she’s goneor you can cherish her memory and let it live on.
You can cry and close your mind,be empty and turn your backor you can do what she’d want:smile, open your eyes, love and go on.
Rest well, Susan. I miss you terribly.
It happens so often that we are inured and desensitized to it. Creationists spout lies and distortions about science and reality, and no one disputes them (except an occasional high school student who challenged Michele Bachmann’s assertion that Nobelists denied evolution). Politicians like Rick Perry and Bachmann get up and brag about their doubts about the reality of global climate change and evolution, and they become the darlings of the GOP. Partisan media like Fox News and their parent company NewsCorp admit that they are receiving money from GOP candidates, or funneling it to them, and no one seems to care. News Corp and Rupert Murdoch get away with all sorts of outrages in their tabloids, yet they are so powerful that British politicians and cops dare not cross them—until their actions are so extreme that all of the UK is disgusted with them. But every once in a while, the cat is let out of the bag, and someone says something that reveals how these people are either abysmally ignorant of reality because of deluded ideology, or they are smart enough to recognize it but play along in a cynical grab for power over those who are ignorant or ill informed.CLICK HERE TO READ THE WHOLE BLOG ENTRY! Please do, he says some really pertinent things. There is also a series of quotes at the start of his blog article that are all worthwhile reading. As a matter of fact, these quotes lead directly to a post made by Phil Plait over at Bad Astronomy that is right in line with this. He has a post he calls GOP senior officials quietly trying to restore science to their agenda which I think is worth reading:
The latest incident occurred when two pundits on Fox News were discussing the GOP candidates. They point to Jon Huntsman as the sole candidate who would admit that global warming is real (Romney, Gingrich, and others who also once admitted it are now backtracking to kowtow to the extremists who vote in GOP primaries and caucuses). They comment that he’s losing ground to Rick Perry, who made false claims not only about global warming but also about how scientists were allegedly committing fraud. One of the Fox anchors, Clayton Morris, says it it in no uncertain terms:
Certainly, if you dive into the weeds a little bit on this global warming thing, you see that it seems the facts are certainly on Huntsman’s side on all of this and fact checkers have come out, and we’re actually having our own brain room look at this right now, that any of Perry’s comments don’t seem to hold a lot of water. But it doesn’t matter, because what’s resonating right now in South Carolina is helping Governor Perry tremendously. He fired back at Huntsman on global warming and gaining traction, facts or not.
If you’ve read this blog for more than a few nanoseconds, you know how incensed I am over the blatantly antiscience trend in the Republican leadership. As I have pointed out before, supporting the reality of global warming or evolution is akin to political suicide if you are a candidate for office in the GOP. The attacks on science by the far right are not new, but the openness and outspoken nature of it are fairly recent. Even Newt Gingrich, who used to a be a strong supporter of science, is making Michele Bachmann-level misstatements about it.CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE BLOG ENTRY. Even though Secretary Schultz messed up the Senator Moynihan quote a bit, I was glad to see this. As I lamented a while back, it's sad that adhereing to reality is a career killer for a GOP candidate...
So I was very glad to read an article at the National Journal saying that older leaders of the Republican party are trying to re-establish the role of science in the GOP:
But quietly, many acknowledge a deepening GOP schism over the issue, as many moderates grow increasingly disturbed by their party’s denial of proven science. A number of influential Republicans who have left the battlefield of electoral politics are now taking action in an effort to change the GOP’s stance.And we’re not talking about lightweights, either. People like former (under Bush I) Secretary of State George Shultz, who said this:
"My own opinion is that this [climate change] problem is very real," Shultz told National Journal. "I recognize there’s a lot of people pooh-poohing it. Whether they like the science or not, there’s a huge problem coming at us. There’s a huge melt coming in the Arctic regions. There’s melting taking place." Of Republicans like [Presidential candidate Rick] Perry who deny climate science, he said, "They’re entitled to their opinion, but they’re not entitled to the facts."
This past weekend I had an experience I wanted to share with everyone. In the past, I would have simply done so on my own blog, but as I’ve become a public person and my chances of finding and keeping a job in my profession depend on me not being the outed atheist I have been in the past, I’ve tended to downplay such posts over the past few years. But the experience this weekend was too frustrating not to use to make a point that many in the atheist movement, have been hammering at for a long while now.
I have a tendency to do quite a bit of science outreach and this past weekend, I set up a telescope in a public place. I had a large number of people stopping by and my objective was just to let them look and marvel. I’d answer questions, but I wasn’t out to shove science factoids at them, and absolutely wasn’t going to bring up religion. Yet at one point, it happened. It wasn’t a theist that did so, but another of the bypassers that made some off hand comment that didn’t make room for any sort of God. A theist, standing nearby objected and although I’m not quite sure how (I was too busy having to adjust the telescope) they got onto the topic of Jesus invalidating the laws set forth in the Old Testament.
This is where I jumped in on the conversation. I pointed out that this depends on who you ask. Most Christians accept this, yet others note that Jesus at some point mentioned that Jesus claimed to come to “uphold his Father’s word”. This is an argument I’ve heard from several preachers. It’s often the basis for maintaining emphasis on Levitical laws to hate on gays. As such, the blanket statement from the theist, that Christianity as a whole rejects the OT laws and that he could treat his interpretation as the one true version. I made a few other quick notes that what various sects of Christianity, and other faiths that draw their basis from the Torah, deem as important varies wildly. And that was the end of the conversation at that point.
Yet a few hours later, as I packed up my telescope, the theist came walking by and asked why I was so “hostile to Christianity”.
I admit that I stumbled on this one. I didn’t think that I had been. I hadn’t in any way said that it was wrong, or even he was wrong. I only noted that there’s lots of interpretations on a vague source and no way to know if they were correct. He responded, not by disagreeing, but instead calling me “arrogant”, “close-minded” and “elitist”.
I’ll skip the part with all the other tropes where he tried to claim that science was just another religion, or that evolution didn’t have evidence, or the fossil record was incomplete, or that we’d never seen species diverge, and that Christians are horribly persecuted. I think we all know silly these arguments are. If you don’t, leave a comment and I’m sure someone will come along and explain it.
I’m not going to get into those because they really don’t phase me. They’re lies that are taught by religion that theists have never been taught to critically analyze so they blindly parrot. I really can’t blame them; religion is convincing and skeptical thinking isn’t taught in schools.
What does bother me is the attempts to claim that I was being “hostile”, “arrogant”, “close-minded”, and “elitist”. And here I thought I’d been being damn accommodating. I didn’t make the claim there was no God. I didn’t insult him personally. I just mentioned that there were many interpretations within the Christian faith. This is a simple fact that I would think is broadly recognized.
Yet it’s enough to make Christians feel attacked and lash out, playing the victim card, claiming that atheists are being mean.
And that’s the point I want to get at.
Phil Plait says not to be a dick.
I wasn’t.
But I was perceived as one.
This, and countless other experiences show that accommodationism doesn’t work. We don’t have to actually attack religion to be offensive. Simply existing will do it. And as this experience shows, even mentioning that other Christians may disagree will do it. It’s not atheists that scare them. They’ve been taught to fear every shadow, including their own.
In many equal rights movements, we hear about how simply the fear of being thought of as different will effectively silence the oppressed. “Gay baiting” (the practice of insinuating an opponent is gay in an effort to shame them so others stop listening) is a perfect example of this. Events like this are a direct parallel. Atheists are being shamed into silence for fear of being a dick. Even when they do discuss it, we often substitute other words like “skeptic”, or hide behind the “agnostic” label.
All because we don’t want to be a dick.
And that’s a damned shame. It’s a shame that pointing out something as mild as “Christians disagree” makes me a dick. And it’s a double damned shame that such things are so offensive that I’m asking JT to post this, because my employment may depend on not being even perceived as a dick.
We’re in a catch 22 here, which is exactly what the theocratic superpower wants.
What do I make of this? The lesson I’ve been so starkly reminded of here is that I can’t worry about being a dick when placed in such a situation. If I’m going to be thought of one no matter what, I should make the best, most devastating arguments possible. Someone else might be listening.
Which is exactly what happened this weekend. During the entire exchange, a young girl (who later told me had just started college) was listening. She approached me afterward and told me she could see where the better argument lie and that, having grown up in a tiny town, she had never seen anyone able to stand toe to toe with someone so adamant about their religion. I didn’t ask if she was religious. I didn’t need to. Even if she was, it was clear that the exchange left a deep impression.
And that’s what is important. We can’t let ourselves be shamed into silence because of some people that toss up their defensive distractions, calling people arrogant and elitist, whenever challenged. Because people are listening. And whether some people get freaked out over it, being right actually works.
Geometric ProbabilityWhich is why the Kepler results really are in line with what we know of the universe. Kepler has been up there for a short while, and has a possible list of nearly 2000 planets just looking at about 150,000 stars for only a couple of years! So if only 1% statistically transit, that would mean that just randomly 1500 systems would have the correct orientation (given the results to date, that makes sense). And given that about 7500 stars were eliminated from consideration due to being variable of one sort or another... I think it would be pretty safe to say that pretty much every star out there has at least some sort of planetary body around it.
Transits can only be detected if the planetary orbit is near the line-of-sight (LOS) between the observer and the star. This requires that the planet's orbital pole be within an angle of d*/a (part 1 of the figure below) measured from the center of the star and perpendicular to the LOS, where d* is the stellar diameter (= 0.0093 AU for the Sun) and a is the planet's orbital radius.
This is possible for all 2pi angles about the LOS, i.e., for a total of 4pi d*/2a steradians of pole positions on the celestial sphere (part 2 of figure).
Thus the geometric probability for seeing a transit for any random planetary orbit is simply d*/2a (part 3 of figure) (Borucki and Summers, 1984, Koch and Borucki, 1996).
For the Earth and Venus this is 0.47% and 0.65% respectively (see above Table). Because grazing transits are not easily detected, those with a duration less than half of a central transit are ignored. Since a chord equal to half the diameter is at a distance of 0.866 of the radius from the center of a circle, the usable transits account for 86.6% of the total. If other planetary systems are similar to our solar system in that they also contain two Earth-size planets in inner orbits, and since the orbits are not co-planar to within 2d*/D, the probabilities can be added. Thus, approximately 0.011 x 0.866 = 1% of the solar-like stars with planets should show Earth-size transits.
A paper has been accepted for publication in a science journal (PDF) where the author has analyzed data from NASA’s Kepler planet-finding observatory, trying to figure out how many Earth-sized planets there might be in the galaxy orbiting their stars in their habitable zones; that is, at the right distance so that the star warms the planet enough to have liquid water. In the paper, he estimates that on average 34% (+/-14%) of Sun-like stars have terrestrial planets in that Goldilocks zone.CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE POST.
34%!
I can explain how he got this number. But I can also explain why I think this needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Let me be clear: it’s possible he’s right, and I suspect he may very well be. His math looks good to me. But a couple of assumptions he had to make need to be pointed out, and I want that to be clear before the media start running around saying there are billions of Earths in the galaxy based on this.
Here’s the deal. Kepler is an orbiting observatory that’s staring at about 100,000 stars, looking for dips in their light when an orbiting planet passes in front of them from our perspective. The length of time the dip takes gives us the orbital period of the planet, and the size of the planet (if the star’s size is known, generally true) can be determined by how much light is blocked. I talk about how this works in a little more detail in an earlier post.
I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking.Yesterday I found out that my sister took her own life. It was a very sad shock and a huge tragedy. Personally, as an atheist, all the evidence supports the position that once electro-chemical processes stop in the brain, that's it. That person is no more, and no one will ever be able to interact with them in any way ever again. It is the final equalizer for us all. For most, death comes naturally after a life of many decades. To some it is cut short through no specific plan of an individual through disease or accident. And sadly, some suffer from a misunderstood disease of mental illness, and they lose perspective and irrationally end it for themselves.
The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.
- Carl Sagan "In the Valley of the Shadow" PARADE magazine (10 March 1996)
ORIGINAL POST HERE!Justin Griffith documents some of the treatment of non-believing soldiers who resist being forced into going to religious services by their superiors. A former Marine NCO writes to him about his experiences in boot camp when he requested permission not to attend church services on Sundays. As usually happens, he was forced to clean the barracks instead; he was also berated repeatedly by his drill instructors.
July, 7th 1998 I went to Marine Corps Basic Training in San Diego, CA. Shortly after being assigned to Platoon 1103 and meeting our Drill Instructors, the first Sunday of my enlistment rolled around. We sat in one of the theaters and listened to a Chaplain speak, telling us that they offered services for almost any form of religion and that after he was finished we were to get in line for our appropriate religion. He also said that there was a non-denominational group that would discuss our relationship with god. Lastly he said that we did not have to attend any church services if we did not want to.As Justin notes, this is a story that you hear constantly from atheist soldiers. The experience seems to be so routine as to almost be a matter of official military policy. This particular soldier was even arrested for refusing to attend a religious service, though no charges were filed because the arrest was clearly illegal.
I looked for the “not attending church” line, but could not find it. I was instead ordered to line up in the non-denominational line.
I sounded off, “Sir, This Recruit requests permission to not attend church services, Sir!”
Another platoon’s Drill Instructor interrogated and berated me for quite some time as I continued to respond with that phrase. Finally he gave in and took me back to the barracks where my Drill Instructor did the same. Eventually he too gave in and put me to work cleaning different areas of the barracks.
My Senior Drill Instructor (a church choir singer and devout christian) was then informed. He attempted the interrogation and berating, having the same effect. Later he had both a private and a public “Hats off” more polite conversation urging me to attend church services. Again I sounded off with the phrase that became my mantra. ”Sir, This Recruit requests permission to not attend church services, Sir!” He then seemed to want nothing to do with me since I wouldn’t “Do this for him.”
At least he stopped trying to force me to go.
Here’s Justin’s own story:
There are two choices we can make when faced with this in boot camp.This is why what Justin is doing in organizing Rock Beyond Belief and and in giving a voice to all atheist soldiers is so important. Atheist soldiers can no longer just sit back and take the abuse, they must speak up if they have any hope of ending it. By holding that event at Ft. Bragg, we are getting the attention of the Pentagon and letting them know that the rights of atheists are just as important as the rights of Christians — and that we’re going to be watching to make sure they get the point.
1) Clean up and get yelled at every week – a punishment for not believing in god. 2) Go to a religious service and tune it out.
I tried both. I was not allowed to write letters, sleep, or even sit down. If for even one second I wasn’t actively cleaning, the Drill Sergeants would throw sand across the (freshly) waxed floor, or otherwise punish me. They get really creative. I was a special case because just before graduation, I was seriously injured. This extended my stay from the standard 9 weeks to a grueling 30-something weeks long.
The US is increasingly portrayed as a hotbed of religious fervour. Yet in the homeland of ostentatiously religious politicians such as Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, agnostics and atheists are actually part of one of the fastest-growing demographics in the US: the godless. Far from being in thrall to its religious leaders, the US is in fact becoming a more secular country, some experts say. "It has never been better to be a free-thinker or an agnostic in America," says Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the FFRF.I did get a particular kick out of one paragraph though (emphasis mine).
The exact number of faithless is unclear. One study by the Pew Research Centre puts them at about 12% of the population, but another by the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture at Trinity College in Hartford puts that figure at around 20%.
There are other indications, too. For a long time studies have shown that about 40% of US adults attend a church service weekly. However, other studies that actually counted those at church – rather than just asking people if they went – have shown the true number to be about half to two-thirds of that figure.In other words; are the theitards lying for jebus again? If it wasn't so totally expected, and exactly the modus operandi they have been under for decades, I would be surprised (or maybe I wouldn't).
But while Perry complains about the feds’ response, he and Texas lawmakers have also been called to task for huge cuts to state firefighting resources passed earlier this year. The two-year budget that took effect last Thursday includes a 75 percent slash to volunteer fire departments — from $30 million to $7 million — and a one-third cut to the Texas Forest Service. State Sen. Kirk Watson (D-Austin) said this year’s fires near the capital city underscore the need to better fund the emergency-services districts stretched thin at the outskirts of Texas’ growing cities.And in case all the denialists legislators want to pass the buck and attempt to not accept at least partial blame:
Texas’ 879 volunteer departments are the first line of defense against wildfires for much of the state. The forest service, with 230 firefighters and 15 trucks, provides statewide support. After that, help comes from the federal government and other states.
In fact, the Texas firefighting force that’s battling flames right now is a result of a beefed-up budget approved by legislators in 2009, after the forest service succeeded in convincing lawmakers it was a wise investment. In 2008, Texas was coming off another serious drought, and a wildfire season two years earlier that required huge federal assistance including $34 million in FEMA grants.And in case Parry thinks this is just a one time thing, keep in mind:
In a funding request for 2010-2011, Texas Forest Service directors made a strong case for a bigger up-front investment from the state. “National mobilization costs 3-4 times per unit (a firefighter, a dozer) as it does to have our own state resources,” directors wrote, and take longer to arrive. “It takes three to five days to mobilize out-of-state resources. Our urgent resource requests could be efficiently alleviated if we had adequate state resources to rapidly attack and keep wildfires from turning into large, complex, multiple-day events.”
“We have examples of communities being burned because the state did not have enough resources,” directors wrote. The legislature responded with a $15 million bump in forest service funding, as the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported in April.
This year, though, lawmakers rolled back the forest service budget, mostly by cutting its funding for grants that help volunteer fire departments buy new equipment.
Texas’ drought is no temporary arrangement, though, and the ongoing urban sprawl will ensure homes keep crawling farther out into wildfire territory.Yeah, I call this guy an idiot, and I think rightly so. It's his kind of anti-reality based fantasy thinking that will drag this country into third-world status faster than anything else.
But thanks to cuts made this year by the Legislature, when those fires start up next year, and the year after that, Texas’ volunteer fire departments will head out to battle those flames with the same trucks and gear damaged in this year’s fires.
Ten years have now passed since many of us first felt the jolt of history—when the second plane crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. We knew from that moment that things can go terribly wrong in our world—not because life is unfair, or moral progress impossible, but because we have failed, generation after generation, to abolish the delusions of our ignorant ancestors. The worst of these ideas continue to thrive—and are still imparted, in their purest form, to children.