Levels of Woo. (Where Do You Rank?) A Blog Short

I'm currently working on a blog post regarding the anthropic principle. Most of the major religions of course are anthropic. Sure it's about God (by whichever name you want to call him) but it's all about Humans and God's relation to them. All other species (and women) are regarded as property to be owned and used for your pleasure, at your leisure. Even the planet Earth itself is merely something to pass through as the real life begins after death in heaven or hell - after humans meet their God for judgement.

We are pattern seeking, conspiracy driven, mammals that have a hard time thinking the universe doesn't revolve around us. Just span back through the years of scientific thinking to see this. We think the universe has us at the center. Not just our species but each of us as individuals. Our subjective experience forces us to view the world through this collective anthropic lens. These characteristics combine to make us very illogical, even in 2014 with all this modern technology, light speed travel and communication, in a booming information age. Don't get me wrong. We are on average smarter than we were a few hundred years ago. Though you wouldn't think so if you visited a local mall or Walmart in this country. Idiocracy is very rampant. Just turn on a TV. (Ouch! my balls.)

It's not just religious superstition that dominates the minds of this country. Many of us are pulled in by the lure of all sorts of unsubstantiated claims. Some things like Alchemy have gone into the waste bin of history, but something equally as unscientific such as astrology is still widely accepted among the population. Many laugh it off when confronted by a skeptic, and comment that they know it's silly but the patterns are there, you can't deny it. Leos and Capricorns just act that way or fill in the blank. Cognitive dissonance is strong with things like these. These people know better but almost enjoy the hobby of the belief itself. It's odd, but many people do this. These things we skeptics call "Woo". It is a term used to describe anything that has no actual evidence to back it up.

Just browse the New Age section at a local bookstore and you'll see the levels of Woo. There are many books on conspiracy theories. Many conspiracy theories (the really good ones that are still around today) have some kernels of truth to them, some points that are factually sound, however these facts are forcibly connected together by the conspiracy theorist to present a faulty theory. Random facts (that may be disturbing or alarming) shouldn't always necessarily be connected to fit a narrative. But that's what appeals to our mammalian brains. We have evolved and done so well by connecting patterns and making theories and stories about the world we live in. We probably needed these traits to survive throughout our evolutionary past. We simply outsmarted our prey.

I was browsing through the Christian and New Age sections the other day at Barnes & Noble and I wondered what a chart would look like for ranking one's "Woo". If the highest marks signified the most extreme cases of Woo how many "Woo" marks would I get? I think a ranking chart could look something like this...

(Ranking from Highest Levels of Woo to Lowest Levels of Woo)

1. Religion.
Of course this is a huge category that we could divide into subcategories of the most ridiculous of religions with clearly some blatant problems like Scientology and Mormonism. Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism would be next of course (these awarded some less Woo points due to the fact they have the social stigma involved - simply, they are the most popular in our world today and culturally ingrained in so many people from birth) Buddhism would be last more than likely. Buddhism is an atheistic religion. There is no god in the religion, however there is much unsubstantiated superstitious nonsense with ideas like Karma that have no evidential backing behind it. This of course goes for prayer (in whatever religion you are in, to whatever god you are praying to). Prayer is the ultimate anthropic signpost. God cares about you, don't ya know? There is zero evidence prayer works in any way. There have been controlled experiments and prayer has not met the burden of proof in any way shape or form.

2. New Age
This is a broad category like religion. This umbrella would contain under it conspiracy theories (9/11 was an inside job, the Illuminati are controlling everything, big foot, Sasquatch, Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, JFK assassination, ancient aliens, alien abductions, etc) homeopathy, astrology, remote viewing, crop circles, astral projection, alternative medicine, chakras, crystal power, and so on. These things could of course also be ranked within this category. Obviously if you believe in the David Icke theory that our powerful world politicians are actually shape-shifting Reptilian Aliens then you are probably at the top of the list. Even my friends who are conspiracy theory buffs don't go that far down the rabbit hole usually. Of course there are actual Unidentified Flying Objects (identified as such correctly by an bystander since they don't know what they are), but there is no reason to believe these crafts are alien crafts from outer space. Let's try military industrial complex first. Of course there are such things as crop circles, but they are made by crop circle artists who are all (as far as we know) human. Homeopathy and crystal healing have no sound scientific evidence on either side. The same goes with remote viewing, and astral projection is actually sleep paralysis.

3. Purpose Driven Lives and Everything Happens for a Reason
This is where I rank the least amount of Woo. Most people think anthropomorphically all the time. I know I do. Most people do as we live our daily lives. We sort of have to don't we? But thinking that the universe has a plan or a purpose of everything happening for a reason basically means you think that our species is the pinnacle of the universe. This of course ties into the heart of all religions, but even the nonreligious can think that there is some deeper meaning to events in nature and we are at the center of this meaning. We've all heard -- "Oh I had this dream one night and then the next day I saw the same thing in my dream!" The matrix is glitching! Coincidence? No Way! This is the Cosmos telling me something. What does it mean?! There is no meaning to these dreams. We dream every single night and we forget about how many times we dream nonsense. Of course in a large number set of "dreams each night" you are bound to eventually have a dream about something that coincides from your day the next day. It's not the universe telling you something - it's just mathematical probabilities. The same thing goes with rare events happening. Things that seem like the Universe is "telling you something", showing you a sign are just something that happens. It's simply a matter of probability taking from the mathematical principle called the Law of Large Numbers. Basically it states that given a large enough universe with large enough options through large amounts of time and you are not only bound to get rare events happening but it is a mathematical certainty that you will. Thinking even remotely mathematical about the world is truly eye opening.

You all may be depressed now but don't just sign up for nihilism just yet! Despite what you may have heard http://www.theolatte.com/ the choices are not only "Jesus or Nothing". We have options. We can be happy basking in the most Truth we know about the universe and reality in any given time period in human history. That's intensely mind-blowing! You don't have to wallow in this idea that we are so insignificant (which we are) compared to the Cosmos. You don't have to dwell on the fact that there is no cosmic purpose that involves you. Just think of us as the universe knowing itself. You can think of us as a highly intelligent species understanding the universe more than any other species we know. That's fucking awesome! How is that in any way depressing? There couldn't be a better time to be alive! Educate yourself and read away that Woo!

I know I usually post links to check out after one of my blog entries. Here's a "red pen" criticism from my friend about this blog... Enjoy:

The One and Only Species That Matters: Animal Abuse in the Bible

If a PETA activist hitched a ride in a time machine sometime in the future and was placed back into Biblical times they wouldn't know where to start protesting with all the carnage. Any scientist or even animal enthusiast that loves surrounding themselves with other species of animals to study them or find companionship with them would find it difficult to worship a God who hates all animals. One would think. We are of course animals ourselves as well. We are apes and we evolved like ever other species of living organism on planet Earth.

Of course a case can be made using the Bible that God hates certain tribes of the human species. He clearly favors one over others; just google "slavery in the Bible" and read the verses for yourself. The Old Testament is a whole lot of the Jewish God wiping out many humans in one fail swoop (see flood story in Genesis) or selective baby killing (see passover). However, this blog entry will focus solely on Yahweh's treatment of other species of animals other than humans here on this planet in which He created.

It's best to start at the beginning. In Genesis 1 we see God creates the entire planet for human beings. Our species is special. The entire ecosystem of planet Earth was created for us and we are commanded to "subdue it" (Genesis 1:28; 9:1-3; Psalm 8). This of course flies in the face of sustainable living (realizing that our actions and activities are putting other crucial species into extinction is extremely problematic for our own species survival.) So we see how God considers the ranks: 1. God - then 2. humans (which of course we can make a strong Biblical case within this category a sub-hierarchy of 1. Man  - 2. then woman.) - then lastly 3. other species of animals. *Often tho the Old Testament will lump in women (property) with livestock (property) so the line between 2 and 3 is blurry. Of course at the time these texts were being written there was no such thing as science and thus no such thing as biology which classifies homo sapiens as a part of the animal kingdom as well.

I once had a Christian friend tell me I was mistaken to think that Christianity is consistently committing an anthropic fallacy because first and foremost God is what matters not humans, and that may well be true but it would be hard to argue against the ranking I define above - simply, humans are ranked above all other species of animals. The entire universe, this planet, This entire thing - was made FOR us. We outrank the rest of it (all except God of course). It's basically the opposite of environmental conservation. Think of it that way.

Before the first chapter of Genesis ends we see God's philosophy towards how humans are to treat his created planet (and please recall and keep in focus the current known size of the cosmos and amount of other stars besides our sun with orbiting planets happen to be in the billions of galaxies swirling about a mass of empty space) In other words "we are special" is a either the greatest understatement OF ALL TIME or simply an anthropic fallacy. Option B seems more plausible to me. Anyways, we are to conquer nature and make it our bitch basically. As apparent in other religions (other than Christianity and a few other big ones) some eastern religions or Native American, we must fit into the cycle of life with all the other plants and animals. As an ex-hippy/tree hugger, trust me I know how taking a philosophy to the extreme can be laughable and counterproductive to say the least. Watch the show Portlandia to further illustrate this point. There is actual scientific evidence that connects biodiversity to ecological health. We don't have to look much further than seeing what modern human activity (for example the burning of fossil fuels) has done to the planet. Climate change is happening now.

I must address first that there actually are a handful of verses in the Old Testament that on the surface seem to suggest Yahweh wants us to be kind to other species of animals (If you haven't figured it out by now the Bible gives a sort of bipolar view on so many topics - it contradicts itself consistently and offers of conflicting advice in many pages). There are verses in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Jonah, Psalms, and Proverbs that when on a quick read seem kind to animals. (Exodus 23:12; Deuteronomy 5:14; Deuteronomy 22:4; Psalm 147:9 for example). However, it's important to understand the context in what you are reading as we've all been told a million times by Christian apologists. As we pull back and look at the view of animals at the time (not unlike the view towards women) we see the Bible is consistent with the "subdue" the Earth commandment in the first chapter of Genesis. Animals are important to God because animals are useful for humans. This seems to brush away most of these positive verses on animal treatment pretty quickly.

So obviously animal sacrifice happens and that's gross and completely irrational ... and clearly animal cruelty. If one is to follow down the rabbit hole of Biblical logic here (*theology) we land at the foregone conclusion which is the Creator of the universe needs animal blood. A case could be made that God is a vampire. Well if vampires can be defined as a dead human that craves living human blood then I guess he could since he said his son (a God/himself) to satisfy his blood lust for the ultimate sacrifice in the New Testament. But for now let's go back to animal sacrifice - what makes it most creepy, I think, is that God just likes to watch it. That's it! What a waste! He doesn't do anything with this poor dead sacrificed animal once it's been all burnt up. It isn't like he is lapping up the blood with his "tongue" - assuming he does have a sort of extra- dimensional, supernatural tongue here - since you know, we humans were created "in His image" and all. Christian theology is very complicated.

Then we get to the flood story (Genesis 6). In this Biblical narrative God punishes all humans with a worldwide flood, which kills every living thing except Noah and his family along with a handful of each species. Some could argue this is showing God's compassion towards other species of animals as to not kill them all, well I guess the Omniscient Creator of the cosmos is sort of like nation states going to war right?- there is unfortunately collateral damage. He'll sort it out later. Clearly we see this in the flood story with all the other animals (that are sinful by default?) Yahweh even has this problem with homo sapiens as He commands the killing of innocent women and children in the Old Testament via his favorite tribe. He even directly kills (via the "Angel of Death") the first born Egyptian babies (unless of course you are a member of his favorite tribe and also put that ever popular animal blood over your door.) Blood lust everywhere up in this bitch!

I also have always wondered why God doesn't give free will to other species animals. I would say some Christian apologists would disagree here, but he certainly suspended their free will when they like robots marched onto Noah's boat. That's kind of creepy. Was it their choice to split into two (how was that choice made?) and to come onto the ark or did God merely take over the driving seat in the animal brain to fire the neurons that fire the muscle fibers that bring that dinosaur or this cockroach onto that boat? These are really important philosophical questions.

What about the plagues? (Exodus 7:14-11:10) We see once again the animal free will conundrum crop up here too. Where the locus' brain taken over by Yahweh (or some lower ranked angel) and there was no free will or did they have a choice in the matter? Frogs from the sky? How did they get there? Miracles don't need explaining obviously because the airtight axiom "God did it that settles it" applies here. We live in a natural world that sometimes get's wacky weird when frogs fall from the sky and rivers fill with blood. (#BiblicalBloodLust!) We read in this passage that all the fish in the rivers die (obviously!) That seems cruel and unusual. Where did the blood come from? Which animal's blood made these rivers of blood? What's the back story? Did an angel on instructions from God slit the throat of thousands of animals before hand then place the blood into these rivers? No that's silly - the H2O turned into plasma "magically". I forgot about the "God did it that settles it" axiom there. Damn, I always forget to apply that equation. I'll learn. This needs more study.

Not only did God kill all the innocent Egyptian first born babies but he also killed the first born of all of their live stock (Exodus 12:29) as well not to mention all the Egyptian livestock with storms of fire and hail. One gets the drift at some points that the writers of the Old Testament books are just really going out of their way to ham up the blood and guts. They must always include all the property damage (livestock, women, etc) that follows God's wrathful punishment. It's like bookkeeping of how horrific and evil God is, I guess. I don't know. So it seems obvious already that God hates not only Egyptian babies (unless they are part of a collateral damage problem that shows the infallibility of Yahweh's nature of course) but other species of animals.

In Leviticus 14 we see more animal abuse, but I suppose it's acceptable since it's used for medicine. Ever want to know how to cure that annoying leprosy? Try this:

It's a whole process that lasts 8 days unfortunately, first you get your local priest (obviously) and two clean and living birds. Also grab some cedar wood, scarlet, and hyssop. The priest will then command that one of the birds be killed over an earthen vessel over running water.

As for the living bird, well the priest will take it, the cedar wood, the scarlet, and the hyssop, and dip them all in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water. This is when science/religion required seeing lots of blood involved.

*Remember too - this is God the Creator Mind behind the Big Bang and all the known universe getting it wrong on how to cure a disease. Funny how many believers will not accept the overwhelming consensus of biologists, paleontologists, and geneticists who understand the theory of evolution is a fact or 98% of all climate scientists but will accept an all-knowing, all-powerful God who gets it dead wrong on a specific disease. Strange how that works isn't it. Confirmation bias much?

We're not done here. Haha! don't get up just yet, your leprosy isn't quite cured. Then what you are going to want to do is have the priest sprinkle the blood seven times (don't try to skimp only sprinkling 6 times now!) on the patient with leprosy. He will be pronounced clean after this, but wait we don't see animal cruelty here. God commands that the living bird with his dead bird friend's blood all over it is to be set free into an open field. What a beautiful image! See God is fair and balanced! You have to wash your clothes and groom still, after all of this; Oh, and you have to stay outside of your home for seven days. But on the seventh day you can shave all the hair off your head and your beard (sorry ladies, you are out of luck - you get to KEEP your leprosy) and your eyebrows (obviously. Nothing weird here). And I realize this is redundant but you must once again wash everything (your body, your clothes) and THEN you are clean!

Just kidding!

On the eighth day you take two male (obviously) lambs without blemish, one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, three-tenths of an ephah (bushel) of fine flour mixed with oil as a grain offering, and one log of oil. Then the priest who preformed the first operation will present the man with leprosy, with all those other random things to Yahweh, at the door of the tabernacle. And the priest will then take one male lamb and offer it as a trespass offering, and the log of oil, and wave them around a bit. Then he shall kill the lamb. The priest will then take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it on the tip of the right ear of the man with leprosy, on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot.

It's not over. Then the very same priest will take the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand. He will dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and sprinkle some of the oil with his finger seven times (not 5 or 4!) before the God. You are probably asking what about the remainder of the oil on the priest's hand?! Good question. Well, the priest will put some of the tip of the right ear of the man with leprosy, on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot, on the blood of the trespass offering. The rest of the oil that is in the priest's hand is to be put on the head of the man to be cured. Afterward all of this the priest will finally kill the burnt offering. Finally after all this the man will be clean.

In Isaiah 11:6-9 it says,

The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf and the lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them. The cow and the bear shall feed; their young shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. The sucking child shall play over the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea.
The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, the lion shall eat straw like the ox; and dust shall be the serpent’s food. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain, says the LORD. - Isaiah 65:25

In these two passages from the Old Testament we see a prophetic view of the future, returning to a sort of Garden of Eden-style utopia again. Can it not be argued that instead of the sins (which are actually vaguely defined if not laughably disagreeable in the Bible with most in grey areas in ethics and morality - which support a bottom-up naturalistic morality that evolved over time by the way) of one species of animal (humans) affecting the entire living ecosystem on planet earth (leopards and lions prey and viciously tear apart other species of animals due to HUMAN SIN rather than the theory of natural selection??) No.

In Isaiah 1:11-17 we see God satisfying his blood lust finally for other animals, or on closer inspection we see that God isn't asking for the blood sacrifices to necessarily stop just that they need to come from a place of genuine sincerity. His favorite tribe had to REALLY REALLY REALLY mean it when they pointlessly lit an animal on fire on an alter for the Personal All-knowing Creator Mind behind the Big Bang. Try re-reading that paragraph again with a straight face.

And then there's the New Testament... 

For starters lets take the nice verse we remember from when we were children about God caring so much for the sparrows; so how much more does he care about us humans? How beautiful right? This passage in Luke 12:6-7 pulls at the ole heart strings on first read but remember to take a step back and look at this from another angle too. This of course confirms the same mantra from the Old Testament from way back in the first chapter of Genesis. Remember the ranking? 1. God. 2. Humans (still not quite clear where this begins since genetics and everything we know about evolution tells us there is no such thing as the first two of any species, but we'll go ahead and look past those facts for the moment and pretend we should even be talking about any of this in the first place) 3. All other species of animals.

We see too in Matthew 12:11-12 that Jesus explains how much more important human beings are than sheep, but it gets really exciting when Jesus casts demons out of a demon-possessed man and throws them into pigs. (Mark 5; Matthew 8:24-34; Luke 8:26-39) Clearly this should have even the most bashful of the animal rights activists up in arms. These poor pigs right? One minute you are minding your own business, the next minute you have fucking demons all up inside you. This of course causes the pigs to drown themselves (free will questions here? No??) What's really confusing in the Luke version of the story is that the demons inside the poor human bastard beg Jesus to cast them into the herd of pigs. Then directly after this they drown themselves. Complex theology here apparently. Lesson being?: Demons think they want to be inside of pigs rather than being cast into hell but realize once inside it's not really all it's cut out to be. I don't know. Of course sort of off topic but this does bring up an interesting question of do other animals have souls?

In my on-going email discussions with my Christian friend ( http://www.theolatte.com/ ) he has made it clear that he has a principled outlook on human beings- that humans have some immaterial part to them (that very part described is the "soul" or "spirit" or "essence" or "the supernatural You" that goes to heaven or hell when you die.) He believes there is in direct evidence for this. There isn't. I would be willing to bet that most average believers believe in demon possession (like Exorcist-style). I would also assume my friend does (though he would admit it/word his response very carefully as any good Christian apologist should) since he accepts this account of Jesus casting demons out of the man. It is safe to say he at least believes that our human bodies (the natural part) is a shell to house the immaterial part - the REAL YOU!. This is nothing new. Many people believe this "ghost in the machine" theory. It's actually what most people believe in 2014. It's in all the religions and in most New Age concepts of astral projection, alien abduction, etc. Sadly. Again, no evidence for a a "ghost in the machine". We naturalist think we are our bodies. Simple as that.

However, I would suggest too that most Christians accept that other species of animals do not have souls. (God clearly treats other species of his creation as if they don't as we've seen thus far). No dogs go to heaven, unfortunately. It's Christian dog-ma. OK that was bad. I apologize. When they die its like they return to the what it was like before they were born (which is what we atheists think happens with our species as well). There is no heaven for other species of animals, no hell to be punished since they never sin (even though they rip apart other animals, have sex before marriage, and even have butt sex with the same gender - disgusting!) Our best evidence points to these creatures not needing a savior like our species does because they have no souls and they have not sinned (they just get punished for human sins - because that's fair * See flood story and everything else I've said above). I think most Christians would agree with this.

Is this consistent with this soulless animal religious theology if we see demons possessing these pigs? Is there a contradiction here? I am rusty on my scientific laws of "demon possession" (i.e. a supernatural agent placing itself inside of a natural agent.) --- (This happened with Jesus too by the way. He was born into human flesh. Jesus the man you read about in Reza Aslan's book Zealot is a shell, with the REAL Jesus inside!) To be a species that can be possessed you must be a physical shell first and foremost but, to have a physical shell you must have a soul to place inside the shell, right? Other animals should have souls if demons can take over the driver's seat (soul) and control "the machine". There must be a Christian apologist out there that can give us an answer to this problem.

Finally Christianity lets go of the blood addiction of animal sacrifice around 70AD. This is where we see Jesus/Son of God/God/Holy Ghost being the final sacrifice needed to appease the Father God/Himself/and the Holy Ghost. Which makes sense if you think about it.

Actually, wait....

The main thing we can take away from the Bible's attitude towards other species of animals is that the Bible is anthropocentric. My friend may argue this point with me saying the ultimate purpose of the Bible is to glorify God, either way all we need to do is simply look at the texts, realize the hierarchy that is 1. God - 2. Man (then woman) - then 3. Other species of animals. This is the ranking system made clear in the pages of Scriptures. I would think most Christians wouldn't see a problem with this at all. However, when right from the beginning pages of the Old Testament we read the Creator of the universe commanding that we make this entire planet (including all of it's living organisms) our "bitch" (not a direct quote) then we have a problem.

Stage set for: Climate changed - caused by human activity.

The very believers who accept this book as the Word of God are the same believers who vote, who help shape policy by their political action. Now, this becomes our problem. We, as rational atheists much stand up to this nonsense and inform the general public (of which most are Christian) that climate change is not only real but we need to take care of this planet and undo as much as we've already done to this delicate global ecosystem. Because if we do not we will not survive as a species no matter how many prayers we send up to heaven. There are some promising strides being made in some Christian denominations that are progressive and in tune with the importance of being conservationists instead of treating this planet like our own personal playground. God said it, I believe it, that settles it .. isn't going to fly when we're all dead from global warming in the future. We must educate the ones we love and the ones we can't stand and wait for a better day when this type of dogmatic ignorant religious fundamentalism is buried in the ash heap of human history.

Here's a really good blog article and source I used for this blog entry:

https://sites.google.com/site/thechristiandelusion/Home/the-bible-and-animals

Ramadan for the Non-Muslim 2014

Well, it's that time of year again. It's fasting time! Time to take off those pounds for Allah! A year ago I observed (in the loosest of senses) Ramadan. It's a Muslim practice of fasting and prayer. One hitch, I'm not only not a Muslim, but I'm an atheist. Last year I wrote 4 blog entries about my experience and this year it basically slipped my mind. It started almost a full week earlier this year. What in the world? So I decided to start late. The Muslim friend that I practiced Ramadan with last year of course is strictly following his religion currently, but I am not. Almost a full week has went by. It started on June 28th this year. I have decided however to use all the great things about Ramadan and trash all the other religiosity of Islam.

So I am currently observing Ramadan for the Non-Muslim. Here's how we do this. Same rules (sort of). We do not eat solid food until sun down until the end of Ramadan. However, unlike strict practicing Muslims (who do not even drink water or any liquid of any kind until sundown) we only drink juice. So essentially this is a juice diet until sundown where you break your juice fast with a small healthy meal.

Prayer is a very integral part of Ramadan. Muslims begin their fast just before the sun rises with a deeply personal prayer to Allah. Throughout the day (coinciding with times one would normally eat a meal) prayer is offered up to Allah. Of course as atheists we not only don't believe in Allah, but we don't believe in any of the other hundreds of gods our species has created throughout its fascinating history. We can pull a David Lynch here and focus on meditation instead. We can use the time to calm our nerves, and focus in on our breathing, let go of thought and simply exist. This is more of course borrowing from the various godless Eastern religious practices, but naturalizing these things allows us to keep the helpful, healthy tenants of the religion while carving off the fat of all the superstition.

I suggest taking aspirin for the first week at least, juice diets (at least for me) give me massive headaches. This is probably due to detox, but it's a good thing. Your body is being shocked by all the nutrients. Also, I suggest (as my brother rightly mentioned today to me) to cut out as much coffee intake as possible. I would add alcohol to that list too.

I have considered, yet haven't actually done this yet, replacing the "prayer time" the Muslim Ramadan allots for with exercise. If one were to get hardcore about coming up with a legitimate set of dogmatic rules for the Non-Muslim Ramadan it would be interesting to set specific exercises at specific points during the day to help center and focus you while your body goes without food.

Anyways, I may add more from time to time to keep anyone who cares updated with my Non-Muslim Ramadan month. Or I may just give up and eat a big cheeseburger for breakfast. I'll keep you posted but for now "Happy Non-Muslim Ramadan". There is no God! ... but these rituals sure are fun. Thanks Islam!

Here's a few juicing recipes I recommend trying (juice or blend these:)

beet leaves
watercress
dino kale
swiss chard (whatever color)
spinach
parsley
2 apples
1 banana
fill to brim with either aloe vera water or coconut water
(Blend)

a meal I suggest to break your godless atheist fast:

boil beets, turnips, carrots, and purple potatoes.
Spiralize squash, add mushrooms, tomatoes, onions, and organic green and red peppers (saute these with a little olive oil in a pan) (this is your side dish)
cook up some brown rice or quinoa as the base.
slice up and add beets, turnips, carrots, and purple potatoes to the bed of brown rice or quinoa. Garnish with green onion. Add sauteed veggies with dollop of plain yogurt and Sambal or Siracha (for spice). Use lemon to add to flavor as well.

1. Jesus or Nothing? How about Jesus Died for Nothing? / 2. Ghosts Are People Too! (2 Blog Shorts)

1. Jesus or Nothing? How about Jesus Died for Nothing? 

As I've mentioned many times in previous entries, I was raised in an Evangelical Christian home. The specific denomination was Baptist. Most people in my life (family and friends) did and still do even accept young earth creationism. Now, most of these people, I think I can safely say, haven't done their homework. Most reject the entire theory of evolution or at the very least when applied to our species. So it's safe to say these well meaning Baptist Christians reject something they haven't taken the time to learn the basics of. That being said, we know that in those that are educated in the sciences will accept the validity of the theory of evolution (even when it deals with human origins). Well, simply because it is probably one of the strongest theories in science (with so much evidence to support it no scientist really questions it anymore)

A few years back I stumbled across an NPR article and interview titled "Evangelicals Question the Existence of Adam and Eve". In this article we meet Albert Mohler who I was introduced first to me by my friend who is the dean of a Christian college (I have mentioned him before). Albert Mohler was once his boss. Albert Mohler explains here

http://www.albertmohler.com/2011/08/31/adam-and-eve-clarifying-again-what-is-at-stake/

that if Christianity let's go of a historical Adam and Eve then Christianity is done. I couldn't agree more. I think many would agree with this too on all sides of this. Some Christian theologians have tried desperately to reconcile a metaphorical Adam and Eve in several different ways all of which are refuted by renowned biologist Jerry A. Coyne (author of Why Evolution Is True) here:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115759/adam-eve-theologians-try-reconcile-science-and-fail .

Of course if one is at all familiar with not only the theory of evolution by natural selection but specifically the origin of homo sapiens we understand there is no such thing as "the first two" of any species. Obviously "divine magic" has no place in the field of paleontology, but it is well understood by those who have looked at the evidence that it is impossible for there to have been a historical Adam and Eve. We know too much about the human genome, we know too much about species populations, radiometric dating of bones, teeth, etc to accept the Adam and Even story as a literal, historical event. There simply could not be a historical Adam and Eve.

As Christian apologists do what they do best and search everywhere for ways to bend the real worldview provided to us all by scientific evidence to fit with their specific dogma from Scripture, more and more evidence is piling up on our ancestors and our closest relatives. The picture of our past as a species gets clearer ever day. Just read the scientific journals. The professionals in their fields are pulling back the curtain on our origins. What isn't in the scientific journals is a historical Adam and Eve.

If you haven't noticed yet, one of the most difficult things to do is to get any of the New Christians to name specific problems they have with the scientific evidence paleontologists, geneticists, biologists have presented for the origin or our species. Why? A good amount I would say do not know enough of the science to speak to human origins, but others must know to accept the science (from the majority of professionals in that field of study) is suicide for their religious worldview. Once you open the door to the evidence on human origins (as Darwin has already done for us over a hundred years ago) you shoot your theology in the foot before you can even introduce a Savoir to the mix. This is where Mohler and I agree completely. So what's the option? Well, Mohler doesn't seem to ever give specific scientific evidence to counter the claims made by professional scientists (since he apparently knows more on the subject, enough at least to reject it as false). We see the dodge. The deflection is in full color.

Mohler and many Evangelicals like him will go down with the ship and that's precisely what they've done and are continually doing. It's ongoing. I just spent almost six to seven months reading and discussing a book called The Atheist's Guide to Reality by Alex Rosenberg with my good friend (the Dean of a Christian school I have already mentioned). In our email exchanges he explained how he thinks atheists do not have a moral framework in which to base anything. Basically, embracing atheism leads to nihilism. He has even written a book (in which I will review soon) called Jesus or Nothing with this very theme. However, it seems to me if the framework for your entire religion hinges on a historical Adam and Eve and science has conclusively proven that there was no such two people then cannot the same thing be attributed to your worldview? Where is a Christian's theological framework to their worldview if Adam and Eve never existed?

Without Adam and Even, as Mohler points out, we have no original sin. We have no atonement for the sin of humanity without a historic Adam and Eve to commit the first sin. We still debate whether Jesus was a real person let alone died, and rose again and all this. Even if these things could be historically proven conclusively (and don't let any Lee Strobel-like apologists tell you that it has been, because it hasn't) that still is meaningless without Adam and Eve. Forget Jesus or NOTHING, if there was no historical Adam and Eve (which we have solid scientific evidence to prove there was not) then Jesus died FOR NOTHING. And he must have (if he even existed) because the evidence shows there was no Adam and Eve.

See, we don't even have to talk about why an all-knowing, all-loving/wrathful bipolar Patriarchal God needs to shed the blood of himself/his son (like following some ancient cult spell or curse rulebook) to die for this one species of ape to knock Christianity to its knees. See, we don't need even get to the reality of talking snakes, donkeys, and bushes to take out the blood cult most call Christianity. Christianity was destroyed by Darwin over a century ago. Move on.

Check out my friend's book Jesus or Nothing here:
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/jesus-or-nothing-dan-dewitt/1116874863?ean=9781433540462

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Ghosts are People Too!

I just came back from a very fun family vacation (with my girlfriend, my brother, and my mother and her boyfriend) to Southern California and Catalina Island. We had a beach house that we rented and relaxed by the ocean for a week. On Catalina Island we all laughingly (I think.?) said it would be a fun idea to go on the local ghost tour. Well, obviously it was going to be a joke. It was essentially a tour of the main street of the city of Avalon as the tour guide told ghost story after ghost story. At one point I said to my mom, "Maybe at this point the tour guide should just tell us when we get to a building where there wasn't a haunting."

My brother laughed as he downloaded the "ghost locator" Iphone app that the tour guide told us to download.  We located multiple ghosts. Each giving a very vague message. One happened to be located once exactly on top of the tour guide (thus we concluded she was probably a ghost, ... obviously). The tour guide explained the 7 layers of paranormal dimensions and instructed each of us to take pictures .. "You very well may pick up some orbs!" She said (AKA ghosts - which are very tiny circular dead humans apparently). My girlfriend caught a couple dust or water particles on camera in a few pics. I am skeptical of the orb thing. Did I need to say that?

Anyways, we all had a good laugh and that was that. We stopped at the gourmet coffee shop near where we were staying and gathered around the table to tell our own ghost stories from our past. I had a few myself. One was when I was in college in Missouri my friend John and I worked at a resort where we cleaned up and set up banquets for various corporate events or dinners. It was an exhausting job that wasn't worth the money and kept us there sometimes til 3am. This resort was said to be haunted. We discovered this at orientation. Apparently someone of some significance to the resort in the early 1900s had a daughter that killed herself by jumping of this cliff near the building that was eventually called "Dorothy's Presence" (which was eventually turned into a gift shop. Ghosts are good capitalists). The human resources employee giving us the tour during orientation said many guests of the resort have witnessed Dorothy's ghost (clothed in her 1900s original white party dress and hat). 

One night around 2:30am or so John and I were taking a quick smoke break out the back of one of the many buildings at the resort while out of the corner of my eye I caught Dorothy. A woman dressed in an all white dress slowly walking down into the woods nearby. She appeared somewhat transparent, and floated while she walked. I screamed very loud like a little girl and literally jumped sky high then clung to my friend John. He was confused because he didn't see it. However, my story as convincing to me as it was (at the time) was not as convincing as a few others presented by my family. One story involved multiple people witnessing the same supernatural event. Needless to say, I was the only supernatural (ghost, angel, demon, etc) skeptic around this table. I used to believe in angels and demons when I was a Christian. I am no longer a Christian (as my mom and her boyfriend still are and admitted that night specifically to belief in such supernatural things as angels).

I am also confused by Christians that profess a belief in ghosts and also adhere to Christian dogma (which is when you die you either go to heaven or hell.) This isn't even a purgatory situation - since my family isn't Catholic, nor if they were would ghosts describe what the Catholic church teaches on purgatory. Aren't these contradictory beliefs? You can't be in heaven or hell and still roaming around knocking over lamps and opening and shutting doors randomly after you die. Also, why are we so prone to assume these ghosts are humans that have died. If death (afterlife) is essentially the same "experience" as before life  - just nothingness (which is what I believe) then if we were to take the next step to believe in these ghosts why couldn't they be "pre-birthed" humans? Confirmation bias all the time everywhere with us fallible apes.

Carl Sagan once wrote that yesterday's demon possessions are today's alien abduction. He's right, though angels and demons still exist too for some. No one talked of aliens (at least as we can tell by the literature) in our distant past. The supernatural beliefs have shifted and evolved over time. Each claim (whether it be ghost sightings, demon possession, guardian angel sighting, alien space craft sighting, or alien abduction) should be taken on a case by case basis. I am pretty confidence in saying most accounts can most likely be explained by natural phenomenon.

It's easy to piss people off, or even offend family and friends when you attack their beliefs regarding something they witnessed or a story of someone close to them witnessing something supernatural. It's so personal, it's a very deep subjective experience in some cases. So a skeptic has to somewhat be careful on what one says. I mostly kept my mouth shut during these conversations. I expressed my disbelief and no one pressed me on it. Maybe I should have expressed more, but like I said, it's a touchy terrain to tread down with the people you love most.

I vividly remember my aunt telling me a story when I was young about her son's guardian angel. My cousin was very little and my aunt was driving down the road while he started choking. (which, by the way, I would like to interject is a pretty good example of "UNintelligent design" within our "made in the Image of God" species) Anyways, she immediately pulled the car over into an abandoned parking lot. It was late, she said, no one was around. She tried desperately to get my cousin to spit out what was keeping him from breathing. To no avail. Out of no where -- she explained -- a man in an all black suit pulls up in a limo, jumps out, grabs my cousin and performs the heinrich maneuver. He spits out the piece of food he had lodged in his throat. My aunt grabs my cousin, in tears, hugging him, asking him if he is OK. She said after a mere few seconds she looks over to thank the man that just saved her son's life and sure enough... he was GONE! He had completely disappeared - thus, ... her conclusion: guardian angel. I shared this with my family around the table as we sipped our coffee and ate our dessert.

You probably are a good enough skeptic to pick apart this story for what it is. And hopefully a good enough skeptic to pick apart my own personal "ghost" experience I mentioned above. What my aunt concluded from this event doesn't have enough evidence to support her conclusion. The entire experience is riddled with issues and variables. This is the same aunt that recommended my father read Pastor John Hagee's new book about the "blood moons" signaling certain Biblical events soon to come. She also recommended he read the "dying and going to heaven" bestselling books - A child has a near death experience about arriving in heaven, a neurosurgeon has the same near death experience (well, only same in the way that they confirm what they already knew prior to their near death experience - which is the Christian religion and stories in the Bible talking about heaven. They are not similar experiences in that one is flying on a giant butterfly while the other is explaining how everyone is a little kid in heaven.) The neurosurgeon has more credibility than a child obviously so Eben Alexander's book Proof of Heaven holds more weight among believers BUT the loveable kid's story is just so much more cute since it's a little boy's experience, which made it sell more copies. Seems we collectively prefer cute kid accounts of "after death" experiences over a scientist's "after death experience". Check the sales numbers.

Life isn't simple. Being a skeptic and thinking scientifically and philosophically are noble and best attempts to get at the underlying truth to our reality. This is all we have. The best tools are our reasoning capabilities through our own conscious experience. We are easily tricked, easily superstitious (just ask a sports fan). We use phrases like "Lord willing," or "knock on wood" or "pray for me" or "wish me luck". Why? None of it makes actual sense in the cosmos we know. We aren't affecting the outside shared reality of the universe with our minds here. We're not all a bunch of Professor Xaviers here from Xmen.

I should have stood up at the table and proclaimed loudly, "I used to believe in a god, demons, angels, aliens, ghosts, etc etc but I no longer accept claims without sufficient evidence to support them. ESPECIALLY extraordinary claims such as something like witnessing the supernatural happening! It feels good to tell ghosts stories because we have evolved a social set of playfulness and fear and struggle and the LOVE of stories that channel these things. That's it. Can't that be enough?! ... Can not that be enough?!" Then I could have slowly sat back down after the diatribe to crickets and

 .. "DUDE COME ON! .. why you always have to ruin the fun?!"
I think I chose wisely in retrospect. Haha!

In the car on the way back I argued that in the United States we need to invest more in education. I didn't want to go off course talking about how the department of education wastes tax payer money through various programs that bog down the system and so on as my mom's boyfriend took the conversation. What I meant by this was according to the polls asking basic questions to the citizens of this country we are embarrassingly ignorant of all sorts of subjects in mathematics and sciences. This is why we need shows like the new revamped Cosmos series to educate the people of this country. When polled almost half the citizens of this country do not accept the theory of evolution. Don't get me started on climate change. There are people that claim to know more about certain specific fields of science (such as the climate change and evolution deniers) than the majority of scientists. Think about that for a second. That's insane. And if you have ever listened to talk radio, watched a debate with a young earth creationist or turned on Fox News you will see these people are proud of their ignorance. Sad. Do what you can to educate those that are ignorant of these things that are well accepted in the scientific community.

"The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the ignorant are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell

Check out Catalina Island Ghost Tour if you ever visit Avalon:
http://www.ghosttoursofcatalina.com/

Everything In Moderation: What I've learned about Religion and Atheism in My Own Life (A Blog Short)

Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. 

Proverbs 22:6

Train up a heavily religious indoctrinated child and he/she will either stay in "the religious bubble" or become an advocate for Anti-theism (or at the very least an agnostic or atheist). Not always true of course, there are exceptions, but moderation seems to be the key. I looked for verses to fit the moderation theme I wanted to do for this blog, but none would fit with what I was talking about, so unlike most Evangelical pastors or I will not just snatch a Bible verse and make it fit to the point I'm trying to make. Indoctrinate a child (as in the documentary "Jesus Camp"- style) and you will either see a "Jesus freak" or "devout Muslim" or "Elder in the Church of Jesus Christ" or (name your religious zealot)... OR a God Delusion reading, Christopher Hitchens citing Anti-theist. It's not nurture vs. nature. It's a little of both actually. Read Stephen Pinker's "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature". It's the power of cultural evolution and neural conditioning working together.

The majority of my friends that were brought up with moderate or mild religious dogma mixed with a  healthy dose of science, philosophy, and history in the public school system usually don't think much of these things. I would consider them Apatheists:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheism

One of my friends was raised in that environment and is an atheist but considers this question long settled in philosophy years ago. Which it was. Christian apologists just refuse to accept it. I mean what is religion if it isn't constantly moving the goal post to make the evidence "fit" to your faith? The New Christians (I have a few friends in this group) who are more culturally literate, fashionably creative, graphic design savvy, and open to liberal ideas such as gay marriage. Well, some are. Some of my New Christian friends just ignore the question. Usually anything difficult gets ignored in conversations. Denying homosexual the same rights as heterosexuals is uncomfortable to talk about for those that seem so progressive in their faiths otherwise.

But we are needy creatures, emotional beings that appeal to emotion, and religion (at least Christianity) is probably 90% emotion (as most of it's followers are ignorant of the Bible, and most use pleas to emotion to convert people to their faith *See move "God's Not Dead") and the rest theology, history, etc. We are pattern seeking mammals, that find "doing science" or I should say thinking scientifically about the most things difficult to say the least. Just ask a person on the street to name the first 6 elements on the periodic table or what a day or a year actually is. Doing science is hard, thinking scientifically is not easy. It's not directly obvious to us in our everyday life. We take gravity for granted. We come up with conspiracy theories with no evidence to support them. We always pick the easiest routes. Most prefer stories. Most prefer Father figures behind the curtain of this cosmos. One that watches and cares for you. (Ignore Somalia - You see, that can be explained because Satan owns this particular planet now and the risen Jesus will come again after waiting for his cue in heaven on the Mt. of Olives followed by a lake of blood of his opponents... anyways, it gets complicated. All true tho!)

I always say that the academic discipline of complex Biblical apologetics can be summed up by just a few simple concepts: All the bad/evil in the world can be attributed to sin due to "the Fall" of humans. This apparently goes for 99% of all species that have ever lived going extinct. - Man's sin. We are assholes, clearly! Our single species allowed all other species (that's right, 99% of all the species that have ever lived on planet Earth) to go extinct. Oops. Also, slavery wasn't REALLY slavery in the Bible. So ya know... The All-Knowing Perfect Moral Lawgiver letting us know it is OK (and even mandated in some verses) for human beings to own other human beings. But don't mix fabrics! Gross!

But that's off topic.

I had a recent face to face with the reality of the religiosity of my family. My father was hospitalized a few months ago. He stunned me over the phone as I'm still trying to deal with the severity of the situation. He had to get blood transfusion, he was bleeding internally and was in need of surgery to attain a diagnosis. As he's telling me all of this I'm in the break room at my job, still frozen in shock as he gets off the phone my dad says "please pray for me, son!" It didn't even register what was happening as I'm saying "Um, sure.. Ok dad. Please take care and call me as soon as you know anything. I'll come home ASAP." Did I pray for my dad to a God I don't think exists. Of course not. But as usual ... it prayer is useless and doesn't matter. You'll see why...

My aunt came to take care of her brother while he was still unsure what was wrong with him. She stayed with him overnight at the hospital. My dad has always been close to my aunt. She is his youngest sister of the two. She is also extremely Christian. She is very devout in her faith. I have mentioned her and my uncle before in previous blogs entries of my trips back home. She is vocal about her Christianity. They were very excited to see "God's Not Dead" movie together and she was pushing John Hagee's bullshit bestseller "Four Blood Moons". I always roll my eyes when I say that or even type that title. It's just a natural reaction to these "non-fiction" books on Biblical prophecy being fulfilled. How can this be believed by a thinking person in 2014?! I mean seriously?! Do people not have a single ounce of skepticism in their body these days?!

My dad came through surgery with flying colors and I'm happy to announce the cause of the internal bleeding was nothing too serious and is manageable with medication. Of course they called and texted me with the great news, attributing this great news with God and his grace and mercy and so on. I just thought ... how sad. The poor doctor who performed the surgery. The scientists, biologists, human anatomists, medical doctors of the past that made all these great medical discoveries to be able to perform such a surgery weren't even mentioned at all. How much money and time and brain power went into the education of these smart people and how do they not get even a simple sentence in a text message saying "Thank these amazing doctors for what they do to give us this great news!"? Us humans are so disconnected with reality. The greatest accomplishments are taken for granted and attributed to the invisible Father in the sky. While at the same time rich snake oil salesman pastors get rich and respect by saying lunar eclipse are prophetic by pulling shit out of their ass. How sad. How pathetic.

It has been brought to my attention multiple times that the reason I even have this blog or vent or rant so much in emails or in conversation about religion is because I was raised so strictly in fundamental Christianity. I was sheltered from everything secular, well as much as could possibly happen. A few non-Christian rock bands or movies would find their way into my childhood/teenage years, but not many. I grew up late. I became an anti-theist in my twenties after two full years of Bible college, and as I've settled down a bit in my 30's, I still enjoy a good rant on religion from time to time... obviously.

So everything in moderation. Of course when I have kids they will more than likely be brought up atheists as I have no religion to promote to them as they grow up. I will teach them religion and how some people believe this: Christianity (most of your family) and how some people they may know believe this: Islam. And so on... My son or daughter will most definitely be shown the spectrum of the history of religion (the dead ones) as well as the lasting modern religions. They can make up their own mind in regards to believing it or not. The approach will be educational though not indoctrination like my past. That is nonnegotiable for me. I don't believe in brainwashing children with any dogma unsupported by evidence. I think everything in moderation is smart. So if you must indoctrinate your child, maybe don't do it quite like I was, don't surround your child with ONLY your religious belief. Give the kid options. Never smother. That's what being a smart parent is about in my opinion. I think some people in my own family would even agree with that now in hindsight.

Religion as a natural phenomenon is just as fascinating to me as art or music. It's history, its origin is beautifully human. It's unique (as far as we know) to our species. Doesn't mean it's all true. Of course not. They ALL can't be true, but they can all be untrue. That is simply another reason why I don't believe in God.

And now I feel that I must pull a Marc Maron here by ending this blog entry waxing poetic with a self-centered evaluation: I am guilty of living a life drastically outside the rule that "everything in moderation is for the best." Whether it be alcohol use, tobacco (in my past), obsessively collecting books and movies, blogging, or obsessing over religion or atheism. I have been told by the person that is the closest to me that I should really try to find a way to strike a balance in my religious/anti-religion obsession. She is an Apatheist if I had to label her. She is daily bombarded by my rants. I feel for her. I will never be able to shake my childhood indoctrination completely; unlike my brother, who apparently can, I may be always doomed to think on these things and think on them every single day. But this is something I should be able to control to some extent. Many have. We need an AA for to help with "religious/anti-religious ranting" addiction.

There has to be healthier ways to configure these thoughts in my mind. I often attribute it to the complexity that is deep philosophical questions and how it is really OK to constantly try to unravel the puzzle of existence of "this ALL!" Of the Cosmos. It's fascinating! It's fun! Humans have been doing it for thousands of years! There are things I need to come to grips with in my life to allow me to move on.

The fact my family is Christian and can be vocally so is one of these things. It may always be rocky and a hard road to travel in the future as we are on polar opposite sides of the spectrum of the God question. I just hope our relationship stays strong and that we continue to love each other unconditionally despite whether we're a die hard Anti-theist or a vocal Baptist Christian. I can only hope to find the formula for my life that will give me some peace and those surrounding me can be in peace too. Hopefully I can also discover something that may be able to shift the moderation problem for me. It can't come soon enough.

Science Doesn't Disprove God (Salon Aritlce Review)

Science Doesn't Disprove God: Where Richard Dawkins and New Atheist Go Wrong:

http://www.salon.com/2014/04/19/science_doesnt_disprove_god_where_richard_dawkins_and_new_atheists_go_wrong/

This is a great article. What's always fascinated me is if Neanderthals made art. Also look at this article:
http://www.nature.com/news/neanderthal-culture-old-masters-1.12974

There seems to be some evidence to support they at least buried their dead, which is ritualistic, which does point possibly to a belief in an afterlife / which could possibly mean they had a rudimentary religion of some sort. Maybe not. The art thing is still in dispute as the author of the Salon article points out.

However, when the Amir mentions how "art" seems to be the dividing point to separate us from other hominid species (and makes us officially "human") the point appears to be lost on Amir that this idea of "conceptualizing things" or "symbolizing things" (the very thing that probably separates us from other species of animals) is where A LOT of sociobiologists think the concept of "god" was created. At that very point in our history.

Also a friend of mine pointed out too trying to pinpoint a point where "we became human" with all these special features our species has that others do not is like trying to pin point when beavers exactly became more precise dam builders. As in all things with evolution, it is very gradual and impossible to pin down.

However When Amir writes,

To what extent can evolutionary theory answer this question? Evolutionary science cannot indicate to us the location of the point on the continuous evolutionary scale, which Dawkins believes is there, at which human consciousness arises. Evolutionary theory is unable to tell us how life began, how eukaryotic cells evolved, how intelligence came about, or how consciousness arose in living thing

I couldn't agree more with him. Evolutionary science isn't magic. It only tells us so much about our existence. Abiogenesis is a field of science that deals with origin of life questions as he mentions, but philosophy is still alive in my opinion (where I disagree when the brilliant Stephen Hawking says "philosophy is dead") and we need to create a working theory of the rise of consciousness in our species. Cognitive science is working on this too. It's a real thing. I just bought a book about this last night on my nook called "The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory" by Chalmers

Here's the thing. I mostly agree with this article. Dawkins and some of the new atheists are not philosophers. I don't think science has disproven god necessarily. (though I think it has thoroughly disproven many historical or scientific truth claims made in the various ancient "holy" books of the big monotheistic religions alive today.) I do think that philosophy has disproven the idea of "god". Most working professional philosophers are atheists. Like most of academia, atheism is by far the norm (in all fields of study - minus theology of course. Though a great deal of Biblical scholars are nonbelievers. *See Robert M. Price). It's the "common people" the "citizenry" that are still struggling with this "is there a god or not" question still.

I personally think this question was settled years ago. There is no god. (at least not like any of the ones we've came up with over the years) There is just no evidence for him/her/it.

Amir is right. We have never seen consciousness be created by any other human being and should be very skeptical of claims that in the future this can happen with robots or whatever. He writes,

Consciousness, symbolic thinking, self-awareness, a sense of beauty, art, and music, and the ability to invent language and pursue science and mathematics—these are all qualities that transcend simple evolution: they may not be absolutely necessary for survival. These attributes of the human mind may well be described as divine: they belong to what is way above the ordinary or the compulsory for survival. The origins and purpose of consciousness and artistic and musical and literary and scientific creativity remain mysterious. Why would evolution alone bring about such developments that appear to have little to do with the survival of an individual or a species?

There is some problem here because some of these attributes can actually be connected to evolution. First, this self-awareness thing needs to not be a part of this list since other species of animals like some apes and dolphins are self aware (via mirror tests). Symbolic thinking may strictly be human. Of course art and music are interesting things that seem strictly human but like we said there could turn up to be evidence for cave paintings that are of Neanderthal origin. Not yet though. It's hard to be conclusive as you see in that Nature article I posted here. To me the invention of science and mathematics (just another form of symbolic thinking) is the greatest unique human accomplishment because it isn't "natural" for us to think scientifically because it goes against what "seems right" in our guts. Think about how most people don't know how to do science. Or math!

I wouldn't say these things are necessarily divine, just... mysterious. the one thing we don't NEED to do is attribute "mysteries" with supernatural gods, or "cosmic purposes" or whatever (we made these mistakes in the past, obviously ... just look at what used to be "god's wrath" now is just a hurricane) In science "The god hypothesis" is just completely useless and unnecessary. He's right that science can't disprove god. God is an ever-changing mystical idea. Science only uses what is useful for experiments. So to me, the God concept is just unhelpful and offers nothing to the conversation. This is what gave rise to the atheist mock god "The Flying Spaghetti Monster". We can postulate anything or anyone as "god". Religion can always move the goal post too, but makes liberal religions mold and change along side secular humanism. Why the rituals? Why the superstitious outdated silliness? I just don't see the point personally.

I still think that Amir would do well to read reports from primatologist like Francis deWaal to see just how "human" other primates are. His new book "The Bonobo and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates". So in this regard the gap isn't quite as drastic as some would say. I would say our intelligence . Science - the very thing this article is arguing against (well, scientism I guess, basically) is the most unique human creation. Even more than art or music (though these are wonderfully beautiful human contributions)

BUT saying that, he is dead on when he says our brain is vastly more intelligent than all other animal species. He sites great examples of classical music to Einstein's theory. Brilliance is our mantra. I love the Daniel Dennett quote. That man is a goddamn genius. I can read his writing (even when most of it goes right over my head) any day! :)

He finishes with these very powerful words that I think sum up nicely where all the sciences and humanities must converge to find an answer to:

We are faced here with one of the greatest unsolved mysteries in the history of science: At what point in hominid development and evolution does human consciousness appear? What exactly is our consciousness? What makes us different from animals? What gives us the powers to create and to think symbolically and to develop language?

However, mysteries do not equal "God". The concept of God among those that are quite literally the smartest among us apes is a concept that has been settled. God IS dead. 

Sorry Kevin Sorbo.

A Walk Through the Bible with Magog

Just as a pig can be possessed by a demon a human body can be possessed by something else. Call it a ghost, an gin, a demon, an angel, a son of god, these bodies are clearly just shells. And as with the example of demonic swine this isn’t just reserved for homo sapiens. Lord knows how many of our past ancestors like homo erectis or Neanderthals were plagued as hosts to these supernatural beings.

People believe this today. And yes it is 2014. March to be exact and I just got done debating the soul with a friend of mine who is a Christian. He wrote a new book about his ideas about godlessness vs. god. He cannot admit that he accepts the whole of the theory of evolution. Which is to say – the part involving human beings. Which is to say - he disagrees with 99.9% of professional biologists. He must know more then them. Strange. If I could ever be able to convince him of the actual science that leads us to these conclusions that homo sapiens evolved from lower species of animals then I could of course ask at which point did God insert the “soul”? Remember too, through the lens of biological evolution it’s a nonsensical question to ask when was the first human being. Yeah, hate to break it to everyone reading this but the Adam and Eve story, ... yeah well it's a story. That's it. So Christianity fails before it even gets going, but let's pretend I didn't just write all of that and move on.

This "ghost in the machine" is a notion based in human animal introspection going back millions of years. Fear of death gave us religion and other cultural phenomenon such as afterlife stories and of course stories of hell if one not adhere to whatever form of religion was around at the time.

The Christian myth is essentially the most powerful to us today in America since it is the most commonly practiced religion followed closely by Islam. Muslims accept Jesus as a great prophet, but not the son of god, as is aptly named by author and history Reza Aslan in his book “No God but God”. However in Christian dogma the real fun begins. 

Let's take a tour through the Bible:

THE OLD TESTAMENT

Here we have in the beginning (I guess the Big Bang?) a god named Yahweh, who created this universe. That’s right. He created it perfect. A rebelling angel that was cast down to this perfect planet (guess God didn’t see this coming or did since he is all knowing or this instantly makes no sense) takes the form of a snake and convinces the first two homo sapiens (which evolutionary biology tells us is impossible) that they should listen and eat of the forbidden fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. That’s right we see right off the bat Yahweh doesn’t like knowledge. Ouch. How foretelling. It gets more fun…

After these two bipedal apes eat from this forbidden fruit they recognize they are naked. *Sin = nakedness. Which by that rational all other species of animals (minus your little pet chihuahua that you dress up in a tutu) are in sin. What a fair and balanced God! (Remember God- only Yahweh- and Fox News are tight!) The God of the Bible is so full of anthropomorphic fallacies its not even funny. Almost makes a rational thinking person think that this whole thing may be concocted from the minds of a few bipedal apes. Hmmm. 

Nah.

It's probably all true.

Everything becomes terrible after “sin” entered the world. You need an advanced degree in theology to say what I’m about to say next, - At this point sin entered the world and death by sin. So everything died. Before this nothing died. NOTHING. Not even black holes. Of course it’s up for debate among Christian cosmologists whether black holes and colliding galaxies even existed before the “fall of man”. They’re working on it. These hard scientific questions aren’t easy. We still need more time to examine these things. Can I get a ... Anthropomorphic fallacy?? What?

Here's some things that are explained by Sin by most Christian apologists:

Human anatomy which is riddled with problems (most humans first dying of tooth decay, pathogens, sanitation problems, child mortality rate is staggeringly high in those early years) = SIN. Again, collapsing stars, black holes swallowing up stars with possibly habitable planets = SIN. (All of which is a mistake by 2 human beings by the way.) 99% of all animal species on this planet going extinct = SIN. The endless list of the problems with the human anatomy alone (allergies, choking to death while eating and breathing, mismatched diseases etc) = SIN

Christian apologetics can be summed up as "God did it" or it's all "due to sin". Takes years of seminary to get these advanced degrees to basically learn the "god of the gaps/sin caused all bad things" arguments.

God at this time is busy flooding the earth due to homo sapien’s sin, but not being a total dick by keeping 2 of every animal species (including dinosaurs) and putting them on a large wooden ship that would by a mathematical certainty snap apart immediately once at sea. A strong case can be made for Unintelligent Design just using the Bible itself. Thoughout the Old Testament we see God having to wipe out clusters of humans because they weren’t living up to what he wanted form a species that has free will. Or this just makes no sense. 

Stay with me

After the mayhem of destroying all of every species of animal (except a couple of each species) he moves on with his chosen people (yep, God has a favorite tribe of people among his human creations – the Jews!) It’s like a team. Go Chicago Bulls! Go Jewish people!

Now the fun part: Jesus. Remember we have to first get ourselves to accept our intuition and introspection.  We must be convinced that we are something or someone inside our bodies. We are not our bodies, but these bodies are merely vessels and the essence of what’s inside (our soul/spirit/essence/whatever) is truly us. We are spiritual beings having a human experience as one New Age book is titled. (not the reptilian guy) If you don’t believe that and feel like you know enough cognitive science to accept the data that supports that the mind is a projection of the brain or at least there is zero evidence of a mind existing outside of a brain then you may have a problem with the next bit:

THE NEW TESTAMENT

So the blood bath of the Old Testament comes to an end and the all-loving all-powerful, all-just God who sanctions the killing of mass groups of people (and raping the women, ... I’m sorry I meant little girls) while also etching a commandment in stone saying that killing is wrong. Not hypocritical. We are here with a fresh breath of air into the New Testament (the less barbaric of the testaments) where suddenly prophecies are being fulfilled (see James Randi on the hoax of prophecy fulfillment and that should about put that to rest). We are graced (literally) with a young Jewish boy. He later follows in his “earthly” father’s footsteps and becomes a carpenter.

Everyone loves Jesus. America loves Jesus! Bill O'Reilly loves Jesus! Fox News loves Jesus! Everyone I freakin' know loves Jesus! He comes from lowly beginnings, humble, eventually preaches to sell your riches and give to the poor ... but also says to take up your sword and fight ... so some conflicting messages going on here. No wonder every possible type of human endeavor whether good or bad for society has had “Jesus on their side”. Think slavery (which was sanctioned in the Old Testament) or the civil rights movement. Think Democrats or Republicans. Rich or poor both are justified by Jesus' conflicting messages. If one was to literally follow the teachings of this man one would have the experience not unlike AJ Jacobs did in his book “Year of Living Biblically”. War, peace, rich, poor - Jesus is your guy!

But again Jesus' body wasn’t Jesus. Was it? Was Jesus the outlier (according to most people who believe in a soul) where he really was one with his body?! Was Jesus physical body and Jesus’s soul connected – fused, if you will? If he felt the pain and agony on the cross does that not suggest Jesus is his physical body? It's so confusing. If Jesus was a ghost in the machine (or Jesus’ soul was inserted into this body by God the father/who was also him/and a holy ghost– don’t ask about the damn ghost it gets too complicated – or it’s all made up, I'm still not sure.)

Jesus’ soul went somewhere for 3 days as his body lay decaying in a tomb according to the Bible. Some say he went to hell and conquered death and snatched some magical keys like some Lord of the Rings storyline. Maybe. Or maybe he chilled out in purgatory for 3 days kicking it with some sinners like he did on this planet. Either way what we do know is that Jesus soul is/was real – it left this plane of existence – thus it was supernatural, and that this "Son of God essence" went away from it’s body for 3 days.

Good news! Jesus synched back up with the "ape suit Jesus" and pulled himself off the grave and walked around (among other resurrected saints too by the way - read your Bible!) and became the “risen savoir” obviously. I mean who else rose from the dead?! (Except Lazareth – who clearly wasn’t the Son of God… I mean come on don’t make me laugh! Being dead and then coming back to life - even if you could prove it wouldn't prove you would be the Savior or anything! Duh.) Now we will assume that Jesus (the son of God miracle part of Jesus not the physical tortured part) healed his decaying body since in three days the human body starts to decay quite noticeably. 

No need for skepticism here.

Now this is where it gets a bit weird. Jesus goes around meeting with people he knew. As in the gospel of Luke he assures them all he is NOT A GHOST (Remember Jesus acknowledges that ghosts are real here) but it is him in flesh and blood. So again, remember this is Jesus (the same Jesus soul 3 days before he died) and this newly healed ape body is now walking, talking, and breathing and testifying that he is in fact the Son of God. 

He even eats with others after his resurrection. I always say if you have died and been resurrected after a few days you better EAT SOMETHING! Your body needs essentially vitamins and minerals now more than ever. Some have suggested doing this 3 days dead in the tomb diet, but I think it's pseudoscience. Doubting Thomas stops by and lives up to his name. He needs proof (unlike the rest of humanity to come) that he is in fact the risen savior. He feels with his own hands the nail holes and spear holes and believes he is in fact the Son of God. *Side note, I think I make a pretty strong case that Thomas was a poor scientist then because he still should even then be skeptical. There are other options than this man before you is the Son of God just because you felt his holes.

FAIR AND BALANCED: Anyways, despite the rest of humanity never getting the option to feel for ourselves the living savior's holes we are to accept with faith (how convenient!) that Jesus was not only real but the Son of God. Since as we've established if you are raised from the dead it makes you the Son of God (excluding the multitude of other saints resurrected and Lazareth as mentioned in the Bible, and of course this is in hinging on if you believe the beginning of this article I have written – that there is even a God in the first place).

It’s hard to discuss atheism with Christians because you not only have to deal with not believing in the One True God (no God but God) but with Christianity you have to deal with that God having a son who is also and/or God. And I haven’t even added the third more ridiculous layer of the Holy Ghost. (remember ghosts are real)  It’s exhausting. And how a Christian doesn’t see that the burden of proof in their court is beyond me. I'm an atheist... I got nothing. You're a Christian and you've got: A  Creator God (who doesn't need a mother or father) that has a Son/(which is also the Father) with no mother/and what the hell, throw a Ghost in there - make it Holy (which is also a Father/Son). This Son/Father/Ghost combo became a human being... to fix a mistake from 2 humans tricked by a snake... I can go on. 

and I will.

I’m still not done. Here’s now what happens. Jesus takes his newly resurrected body (remember it is flesh and blood according to Jesus’ own words) and ascends into heaven. OK. So Jesus (the physical homo sapien part which is housing his “son of god” soul) is shot up into the sky and into outer space according to the eye witnesses of the Bible. Sounds like an UFO sighting doesn’t it? Well, it’s not, don’t be ridiculous! Intelligent beings from another planet?! Don't be absurd! it’s the Ghost/Son/Father flying off into outer space. Carl Sagan once tried to calculate Jesus ascension as any working astrophysicist should. He concluded that even if Jesus traveled at the speed of light he wouldn't have yet escaped our galaxy. Jesus hasn’t even left our galaxy. Think about that.

Maybe Voyager will find him somewhere out there. I suppose if Voyager did find Jesus out there one would have to expect to see a "Son of God soul" devoid of any recognizable homo sapien body as that would have been shredded upon leaving earths atmosphere at that speed obviously. So those atoms and molecules that made up the body (the shell) of the Son of God is floating around somewhere in outer space. If they were to find their way back to earth – just imagine the money one could make or just imagine the power one would have collecting these. Screw Jesus toast! I want Jesus atoms!

So is this the end? Jesus said that he would return in the lifetime of the ones that witnessed his ascension. 

Did he? 

No. :(

Was Jesus a liar? 

Yes.

There are other books like Revelations in the New Testament that talk about the "End of Days" and horse/scorpions and and water turning into blood (standard plague shit). Don't focus on the glaring fact that the writers of Revelations hadn't read a modern biology book talking about how many mass extinctions the earth has had since the beginning of life. Don't think anthropomorphic fallacy. Don't think these men where ignorant of every possible bit of information modern science has given us about this entire planet's history. These men where channeling the one true God when writing these horse/scorpion predictions. Trust them. Believe them. Remember the Bible (in its entirety) is true, and grown ups get degrees in theology that consider this as real and relevant in 2014. Always cling to the Christian logic: The Bible Said It I believe It That Settles It. The Bible is true because the Bible says it is true.

That's some solid logic!