Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Ray Comfort is at it… Again

I recently found out about this: http://www.livingwaters.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=383

About anything I could say about it is here: http://www.thegoodatheist.net/2009/06/dont-read-this-version-of-origin-of-species/

Centuries after the dark ages we still have religion attacking science.  Why?  Why is it necessary to discredit science?  Can't you just simply have your beliefs and leave the rest of us alone to learn about things based in fact? If we had listened to you lot we would still be in the dark ages. 

Why the deception Ray?  Why is it necessary to distribute a scientific work with a 50-page rant against it at the beginning?  I've never heard of such a thing before.  It's despicable.  If I hadn't already left Christianity long ago, that would be enough to convince me that you lot are absolutely beyond any shadow of a doubt FUCKED IN THE HEAD!  Thousands of college kids will remember this later in life.  This will ultimately work against what you're trying to achieve.  Take some advice: Believe in God all you want, share whatever stories you want, convert as many people as you want, but stop being a fucking prick.  Leave science alone.  If you don't believe it, that's your right.  Nobody is forcing you to be an intelligent human being (obviously).  But make your point without having to attack known science with half truths, outright lies and logic fallacies.  Stop preying on the young.  In other words, stop behaving like Republicans.  Stop proving Richard Dawkins right.

Ray Comfort: you, sir, are an asshole.

Monday, May 3, 2010


On September 11, 2001 nineteen terrorists took control of four commercial airplanes.  Two of them were flown into the World Trade center, collapsing both towers.  One was flown into the Pentagon.  On crashed in Pennsylvania, as the passengers decided to fight back.

The total number of confirmed deaths for this atrocious act was 2,973 (not including the nineteen perpetrators).  When men come to our country and murder our civilians, we call it terrorism.

This act, the senseless killing of nearly 3,000 American lives so enraged this nation that we went to war.  President George W. Bush sent the troops to Afghanistan, where the mastermind of the attack was alleged to be cowering, and went after his ass. 

For a while.

Then we went to Iraq because Saddam Hussein may or may not have weapons of mass destruction that he may or may not intend to use on American Soil and he may or may not have some terrorists there too.  So we pre-emptively kicked the crap out of his country (that means we struck first.  We weren't provoked).  We found and captured the man who hadn't actually attacked us but probably was maybe going to.  We turned him over to the new government we installed there and they executed him promptly.  Scratch one bad guy. 

Meanwhile we're not really focused on finding the guy who killed nearly 3,000 American civilians anymore.  Iraq was far more important.  The cost of the war in Iraq is well documented.  We paid for our invasion of Iraq with over 4,000 American Soldiers.  When we send our young men and women to another country and they get killed then, we call this patriotism.

Meanwhile, as a result of our invasion and conquer of the sovereign nation of Iraq, since 2003 100,971 of their civilians have died.  When we send men to another country and their civilians die, we call this collateral damage.

Just to recap:

American civilian deaths: 2,973 as a result of a terrorist attack.
American soldier deaths: 4,287* as a result of our invasion.
Iraqi civilian deaths: 100,971* as a result of our invasion.
*Afghanistan statistics not included. 

And we're completely baffled as to why people in the Middle East don't like us.

In Dalton Trumbo's classic book "Johnny got his gun", he added an additional introduction in 1971 responding to the then current Vietnam War.  To avoid possible copyright issues, I'll paraphrase as much as possible, but I would much rather type it in verbatim. 

He says that 40,000 dead young men (the number of dead American soldiers at the time) was equal to 3000 tons of bone and flesh.  124,000 pounds of brain matter.  50,000 gallons of blood.  1,840,000 years of potential life lost.  With 4,000 dead, you can easily adjust these numbers for Iraq.

300 tons of flesh and bone.
12,400 pounds of brain matter.
5,000 gallons of blood.
184,000 years of lost potential life.

The math is a slightly harder for the Iraqi citizens.

7500 tons of flesh and bone.
310,000 pounds of brain matter.

You get the point.  These numbers should make you vomit.  If they don't, you need to ask yourself why.

Saturday, May 1, 2010


I recently pointed out somewhat facetiously that the number of death threats towards President Obama is 400% higher than the number of death threats towards President Bush (II) during his term. 


While there's a subtle understated fact that the irrational anger against him is reaching a frightening level, I put it somewhat ironically, stating that of course fewer people threatened Bush.  He was the only thing standing between us and Cheney as president!

It was in somewhat bad taste I admit, and I completely glossed over the fact that this completely debunks the right's claims that the anger against Bush was just as extreme.  As an aside, Bush gave us some very good reasons for being angry at him, but I've been through that before. 

Someone pointed out the 2007 movie "Death of a President" as evidence of how much more extreme it was against Bush. I've never seen this movie, but I have to say now that I'm aware of it, I'm intrigued.  It obviously has some moral undertones to it, but the plot sounds fascinating.  What if Cheney really had become president?  How much worse might it have been?  And this hardly seems like a Bush hate movie.  It actually looks quite thought provoking.

The movie synopsis, though, reminded me about the Patriot Act of 2001.  There were so many contemptuous acts committed by the Bush administration, that it's sometimes hard to remember all of them, but this one is important.  This was the point at which our civil rights began to be eroded.  If you don't remember, go read up on it.  Right now.  I'll wait.

Seriously now, how is that NOT a big step towards fascism?

And this is the part that confuses me.  The Tea Party marches and shouts "Obama is a Fascist", he's "destroying the Constitution" and "eroding our civil rights".  These claims were all made over health care reform. 

Can some right-winger please explain to me how health care reform is more fascist, more unconstitutional, and violates our rights more than the Patriot Act?  If you can't (and you won't, just admit it), then where were you when this happened?  Why no marches then?

Have we all really gone THAT mad?

… what's that?  Do I hear crickets?