A to Z Blog Challange: We Were Fung Shui Farting (F)

Farting in church – In first grade, Jimmy Sauer and I were punished by a nun for laughing in church. She didn’t know why we lost it. We were held after church ended. I was sure my father would kill me. He didn’t. Jimmy was the one who started it when he farted.

Fung Shui (foong shway) – makes sense. Shocked? For us to live in harmony with our environment rather than against it is what this ancient Chinese philosophy is all about. However, the exploiters of new age woo-woo would not miss the opportunity to scam us with paid-for fakery. There is more fake fung shui out there than real, so keep your bull shit flag close at hand. Be skeptical.

Faith – My adult son was fretting as we drove home due to our gas gauge showing empty for a long time. When we pulled into our driveway at home, I said, “Oh, ye of little faith.” He had good reason to worry. We were driving on fumes. I got lucky. Faith is a non-rational belief contrary to the evidence. Very often people equivocate faith and belief with conclusions which are fact-based upon lack of evidence. I say there are no gods because there is no evidence they exist, Roman and Greek mythology notwithstanding. That is not faith, it is based purely on evidence, or the lack of.

Friggatriskaidekaphobia (Paraskevidekatriaphobia) – Our next one is in September of this year. This is the morbid, irrational, and superstitious fear of Friday the 13th. This may be the #1 superstition in America today. There is even a web site; http://www.friggatriskaidekaphobia.com/

There is also a similar word for fear of the number 13 (triskaidekaphobia). Some people do not have enough to worry about, right? Apparently, when you can pronounce it, you’re cured.

This video is a must watch and listen.

He who farts in church sits in his own pew.

A to Z challenge: Equivocating Extreme Ecotoplasmic Exorcisms (E)

Equivocating – is using ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself. It includes being evasive, noncommittal, vague, or ambiguous. One may evade or dodge the issue, beat about the bush, hedge, hedge one’s bets, fudge the issue, or parry questions or shilly-shally. I’m sure that I have wrapped myself in this when cornered. See also palter and tergiversate.

Ectoplasm – is clear in the movie Ghost Busters. See it if you haven’t. It’s in the movie, as are the producing spirits. You gotta be a true believer to buy into this garbage, but that is what it’s all about. Mediums and psychics have allegedly produced this stuff, fake ghost snot, of course, but some mumbo-jumbo types still believe it’s real.

Exorcism – is real. There’s even a movie, The Exorcist. Scared the living shit out of me, back in the day. The problem here is the reason for exorcisms is bull shit. There are no evil spirits. Real harm has been done to people with and without serious mental health problems. The Catholic Church stands behind this crap, but I doubt if all RC’s find it believable.

Extreme Unction – used to be last rights for the dying, and for many it still is. A sacrament “instituted by Christ” for spiritual aid and health, includes remission of sins, and to restore bodily health to a seriously ill Christian. The priest rubs blessed (by a bishop in RC, or by priests in orthodox) oils onto body parts (maybe even men’s loins; women, maybe not).

Every RC priest I’ve known hates this. Tipping is allowed. Only priests can do it, not deacons or nuns. Therefore, you might call a priest for a dying Catholic. The priest may condemn you to hell for interrupting his dinner/sleep/poker-night or whatever for such nonsense. It’s BS, but if you’re trying to cover all your bases, make the call.

A to Z Blog Challenge: Divine Druid Dreams (D)

Divination (fortune telling) – is nonsense. It is an attempt to foretell the future or discover occult knowledge by interpreting omens or with supernatural powers.

For example: anthropomancy is by reading organs of newly sacrificed humans, bronchiomancy is reading the lungs of a sacrificed white llama, cephalomancy is from reading a donkey’s head, cromniomancy is onions, haruspicy is reading the guts of sacrificed animals, hepatoscopy is specifically their liver, astrology, dowsing, myrmomancy is watching ants, necromancy is talking to the dead, omphalomancy is from the belly button. There are also dreams, bird flights, tea leaves, or cheese holes, reading bubbles of piss, and finally (one that makes sense) divination by wine. There are many more.

Sounds crazy, but are these are no more looney than thousands of people believing a man or woman when they say, God spoke to me. I don’t think fortune tellers are making a killing reading belly buttons these days but give them a deck of cards and a glass ball—Lady Wanda-woo-woo is divining all the way to the bank.

Druids – actually existed as a group. They exist today as a way of looking at human life within nature. Ancient druids were the wise men (and women) of the Celts. They were written about in different ways by ancient Roman writers and may have been a religious group in some way. However, little information is known other than they predated the Celts in the British Isles because the practices were private and there are no real temples or written traditions.

Druidry was integrated with Celtic culture and Druids were held in high esteem apart from the warrior class as judges, prophets, soothsayers, wise men and keepers of the collective memory.

I like the tie to nature and have few issues with groups that hold nature in high esteem. I do too, but not as gods or a religion. There is no proven historical link between ancient Celtic druidism and modern-day Wicca, but the claim has been made.

Dreams – are normal. Other animals also appear to dream. Making important real-life decisions, or foretelling the future with dreams may be fun, but it is unreliable woo-woo and may be dangerous. Much too much in the way of (conflicting) books and articles have been written about dreams over the years for me to dive too deep here. I have never believed that any god talks to any animal or human through dreams. It came to me in a dream. In your dreams. Dream on, dream on, dream on…. I like music about dreams.

A to Z Challenge: Giants, Cults, and Coincidences (C)

Cardiff Giant – is currently on display as America’s Greatest Hoax, this fake fossil is 10-feet tall with 21-inch feet from about 1869. P. T. Barnum was so impressed by its popularity, he had a copy made. It was a fake of a fake, but people still paid to see them, knowing, but not believing, they were fakes. Apparently, people could not be persuaded that this was not a real giant like the one in the Bible called Goliath. Given proof to the contrary, they still believed it to be a real fossil and paid to see it. Even with irrefutable proof, people will continue to believe what they want.

Cults – are:

How members of large religions refer to smaller religions or denominations (Mormon, Scientology, Amway, Order of the Solar Temple, Heaven’s Gate, Jonestown).
How I refer to all religions due to the us versus them thinking; intense brainwashing/indoctrination; criticism and humiliation; fear, anxiety, and paranoia; controlled information. Also, beliefs in heaven, hell, angels, devils, gods (living and dead), reincarnation, trinities, transubstantiation, and the list goes on and on.

Membership consists mostly of manipulated and deluded people and especially children.

Coincidences – The word used to name the reason for actual events that people who believe in one or more gods do not believe in. This is the opposite of everything happens for a reason. The best-known homages to a coincidence are shit happens, and it is what it is. Maybe these could be shit caused by god. See the law of truly large numbers to take a deep dive into this term.

A to Z Blog Challange: The B’s of Questions, Controls, and Codes

Begging the (and the loaded) question. – I had to call an unscheduled board meeting in December to vote on budget issues that had come up suddenly and needed to be voted upon before the fiscal year ended. The village baboon asked me, “Why did you wait until December to address those issues?” I regret being kind by explaining that I did not know about them before that.

You beg the question when your premises assume without proof the stand/position that is in question. More examples:
Question: How do you know that the bible is divinely inspired?
Answer: Because in the third chapter of II Timothy it says, “all scripture is given by divine inspiration of God.”
Prosecutor to defendant: So how did you feel when you killed your wife?

Brainwashing (mind control) – indoctrination to accept regimented ideas. We are all indoctrinated with many things. Religion is probably the biggest one and that indoctrination often continues for a lifetime and is more noticeable later in life. Stress, isolation, and repetitive (perceived or real) threats are effective tools.

It is important to understand that (for purposes of definition) this involves control of the thoughts or actions of another without his or her consent.

Bible Code – Apparently, predictions of contemporary events and some birthdays have been surmised from the bible using computers to decode what some believer thinks god placed there. If so, only god knows why. It is ridiculous. Run enough words and letters of any large book or books through some computer program and it might just come up with the name of the 50^th President of some country that does not exist yet.

So? You don’t have to be agnostic or atheist to recognize this bull shit for what it is.

A to Z Blog Challenge: Three Logic Fallacies (A)

Ad hominem fallacy – is attacking the person rather than the argument or point itself. The personal is irrelevant to the argument the person is making.

A guy posted to me on Facebook, Your an idiot.

I replied, It’s you’re. You’ve been schooled by an idiot.

Since this happens so often, religion and politics are poor topics (blogs excepted).

Ad hoc hypothesis – is an argument to explain away facts that seem to refute theory or research outcomes. It is created because woo-woo is often just that. This fallacy is common in paranormal research and in the work of pseudoscientists.

A lot of ESP research with poor results is defended as being tainted by the thoughts of non-participants. When the light flashes, we are experimenting, so everyone must stop thinking and feeling or our findings will be bogus. Sho’nuff.

Argument to ignorance [argumentum ad ignorantiam] – is a logic fallacy claiming something is or isn’t because the opposite has not been proven. Two sides are:

1) god exists because you cannot prove she does not,

2) god does not exist because you cannot prove that he does.

It basically uses what we do not know. Medicine uses this. We lack enough research to know if that is healthy, thus it is not healthy.

Essay: Proof God Exists

A young man, a believer at the time, once asked me regarding my skepticism of the existence of (in his case) the one true god, what kind of proof I would accept. My answer was simple: God. You, me, the neighbor’s cat, the magnificence of the universe, the remarkable unlikeliness of human existence (much less me being one), all of nature and the cosmos are not proof or even evidence that any god exists.

About one year ago I had a lump on my arm that appeared to be a one- or two-centimeter cyst. I asked my primary care doctor if I could have it removed since it detracted from my otherwise magnificent handsomeness, called my vanity. He said and wrote into my medical record that I had a small sebaceous cyst on my left forearm. He went on to say that he would refer me, if it was bothering me. I said it was. I agreed that it was a cyst.

I reported to a surgeon who said it was a cyst. She measured it and found it to be of the necessary size to qualify for surgical excision. I delayed the appointment slightly due to other overlapping medical issues, and since this was still only about my ego. I thought the other issues to be more important.

I eventually had the surgery, and with a local anesthetic, she skillfully removed the lump, showed it to me, and said, “See? It is only a cyst.” She sewed up the two-inch incision and placed the ugly cyst in a sample bottle for analysis by the pathology laboratory. She could have tossed it in the trash.

When I met with her again ten days later to remove the stitches, the surgeon explained that the lab sample was slow in being returned by the path lab. She said that was because it was determined to be soft tissue sarcoma, an uncommon form of cancer that grows on soft body tissue, as opposed to bone (another form of sarcoma). The tumor was determined to be aggressive growing with only minimal margins showing in the sample. She had already scheduled my appointment with an oncologist. Everyone thought it was a cyst, but I had cancer, and still would if my ego had not stepped in. I believed it was a cyst, as did every person I knew and every doctor in my medical chain. We were all wrong. Everyone was wrong.

It took the path lab about a week to complete their review. The only proof anyone had that I had cancer was a scientific lab report. After more time and referrals, I ended up with a sarcoma surgeon. Wait and see was one treatment option, but not the one I chose. We decided on 25 radiation treatments to the affected area on my arm followed several weeks later by radical surgery to remove all soft tissue, including skin, from wrist to elbow. It turned out to be much less than that, but the removed area was about three inches long by two inches wide. I don’t know how deep. All removed tissue was sent to pathology for review.

Driving home after surgery I told my wife that all of this was based upon one lab report that may have been mistaken. It happens, maybe, right? If so, all this radiation and surgery and hospital stuff was for naught. Maybe I did not have cancer at all. I believed I did. I am a skeptic but in this case, wishful thinking is something I was willing to entertain. No one had questioned the first lab report.

After a few days I spoke with the sarcoma surgeon, and he reported that the second sample lab report was back and it indicated that residual cancer cells were present in the second sample, meaning that the original minimal margins had not removed all cancer. But he did. Now I had two reports claiming that sarcoma cancer had been in my body. That is all the proof anyone has, but now everyone agrees that the lump on my arm was cancer, although one doctor explained that it may have originally started as a benign cyst and later became malignant. I don’t know. Maybe.

There was a lump. It was removed (twice) and bombarded with radiation. But the only proof I had was what others had told me after pathology had weighed in. I believe I had cancer and now I take regular tests to monitor for more. I believe this because I have reports written by experts I have never met. I don’t know how the lab tested the first or second sample or made their determinations.

I have read a lot about sarcoma. I have read much more about the existence of a god or gods and how humans should believe and behave because one or more of these gods exist. I have no scientific report. No one claims to have seen the God of Abraham, not even Abe. Scripture was written by men, or perhaps women, we don’t really know who wrote it. The only proof anyone offered regarding god is faith and miracles that allegedly (no evidence or proof of them) happened long ago.

What proof do I need? No one has ever seen a god. I have tried, but I get nothing. For now, I would want to see a god for myself, because I have no believable scientific evidence that any god exists.

Empty metaphysical arguments are not enough. Noisy religion is not enough. The unsupported opinion of the majority is no longer enough. The possibility of any gods existing is further exacerbated by what I experience, see, and hear in the real world.

I believe I had cancer based upon the evidence I have. I also believe I may be cancer free today. I’m optimistic for now. That is my faith, but now everyone wants evidence that is ironically referred to as no evidence of disease or NED.

If you have proof god exists, show me if you want. Otherwise, there are no gods because there is no evidence of god (NEG). I could be wrong. But if I went with what everyone thought to be true, I would still be walking around with deadly cancer growing in my arm. Maybe.

Bill

“Relationships prove that God exists.” ― Nityananda Das, Divine Union
(Well now, that is about as good as it gets. Silly me! How’d I miss that?)

Review: Why Are You Atheists So Angry?

This is a review of Greta Christina’s 2012 self-published book titled, Why Are You Atheists So Angry: 99 Things that piss off the godless.

Bottom line up front (BLUF): I enjoyed finally reading this book. I learned from it, and I recommend it to any atheist, anyone who must deal with an atheist or atheism in any way, or who believes in a god or gods.

Jim recommended the book via blog comment. Greta Christina is a well-known atheist activist (writer and artist) who promotes activities to apostatize people away from religion. I reviewed the e-book version.

She begins the book with quotations from MLK and M. Gandhi supportive of anger as a motivating human force leading to constructive change.

In the intro, Greta explains her book, why she wrote it, and why she is angry. In Chapter 1, she lists the ninety-nine things she is angry about. I agree and especially liked what she said about reality, her criticism of religion, and of many religious people. She finishes the chapter saying that she could have listed 200, 500, or 100,000 things. 99 is enough.

The only thing I do not like about this book is the title. It’s misleading, applies only to the first chapter, and relates to why the author is angry. The book is much more and better than that. People are not angry because they are godless. They are angry because of things done in name of god or religion.

Chapter Two addresses challenges to her anger by answering questions from people of belief, something she does often in the book. Chapter Three explains why religion is at fault. Her main premise is that there is no reality check in religion, and bemoans how it makes people more vulnerable to deception and fraud.

In Chapter Four she aims her criticism at moderate and progressive religion, while Chapter Five pulls in New Age religions. In Six she involves the spiritual but not religious crowd. Chapter Seven captures ecumenicalism and interfaith (coexisties, my term) in her criticism. I acknowledge my agreement with virtually all of what I read.

In Chapter Eight Greta explains some reasons why she does not believe in God – an extra good chapter that does not align with the book’s title.

My favorite chapter was Nine, “Why ‘Religion is Useful’ is a Terrible Argument – The Santa Delusion.” I found her discussion enlightening and her arguments useful.

Chapter Ten explains why Gretta does what she does as an atheist activist. It’s a good explanation. Then, in Eleven she examines the validity of activism and champions each person doing his or her part, even if it is living as a good and descent human being. She accounts for the efficacy of that in Chapter Twelve.

Christina dedicated Chapter Thirteen to talking about anger and compassion. It’s short. So is Fourteen, which compels further action on the part of atheists.

Chapter Fifteen is an extensive list of resources – a good one, but this book has been out for seven years and has a lot of blog posts in it. I checked out some of the blogs and found them active and well, except one.

Greta’s blog reports that she is taking a break from writing, but it is linked (click) here. She has instructions on how to order any format of the book (click) here.

https://freethoughtblogs.com/ is also good with many resources and blogs listed. Try it.

Two good resources for looking stuff up are The Skeptic’s Dictionary; and The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, a fun bible source.

“…One of the things that makes me angriest about religion is the way it makes people trivialize reality in favor of their wishful thinking. … I care passionately about reality, and get ticked off when people treat it like a petty nuisance. … Every unsupported belief you hold makes you more vulnerable to others…and less likely to value skepticism and critical thinking at all.” All quotations from the book by Greta Christina.

Catholic Church Says Agnostics Indifferent

This is my third and final pitch on how the Catholic Church (RCC) views the non-believer community. The words of the Catechism (in italics) try to parse clarity of agnosticism. But, I think it still fits into what I’m trying to get at: the RCC is no expert on anything outside her own stained-glass windows. While these paragraphs twist being agnostic into a bad light, I end with my own view of agnosticism.

2127 Agnosticism assumes a number of forms. In certain cases the agnostic refrains from denying God; instead he postulates the existence of a transcendent being which is incapable of revealing itself, and about which nothing can be said. In other cases, the agnostic makes no judgment about God’s existence, declaring it impossible to prove, or even to affirm or deny.

So let it be written, so let it be wrong. Again, the CCC tries to decorate the tree of logic with ornaments from other trees. First the basics. How many forms? Agnostic is the view that ultimate reality (such as a deity) is probably unknowable. I am atheist and I agree with that. It is a philosophical or religious position characterized by uncertainty about the existence of a god or any gods. That’s it. No forms. Easy button pushed. If the author of paragraph 2127 can prove the existence of god, just do it, man!

2128 Agnosticism can sometimes include a certain search for God, but it can equally express indifferentism, a flight from the ultimate question of existence, and a sluggish moral conscience. Agnosticism is all too often equivalent to practical atheism.

Same wrong song, second verse. Anyone can do any of these things. A believer of any religion, an atheist, or an agnostic can search for god (among other things), be indifferent, question existence (or science), have a sluggish moral conscience, or exercise practical atheism. None of that is confined to agnostics. Furthermore, nonpracticing RCs can be living the life of practical atheism. Anyone can.

I don’t care what anyone says, an invisible deity (as well as many other things) is impossible to prove or disprove.

Throw whatever kind of arguments you want on the fire, we are all essentially agnostic. Nobody knows. Some swing hard to thinking god exists, some are playing a game with Pascal’s Wager, while others of us are confidently smug in the certainty that there are no gods. In between everyone else slides along a scale that excludes nobody. That makes us all agnostic. It also makes the term useless.

It tells us nothing more than how a person chooses to identify, which, when you think about it, is what this entire discussion has been about.

If you say you believe in a god or gods, then you are a believer. If you cannot say that you believe god exists, then you are an atheist. It may be a weak, flippy-floppy, and unsure atheism. But a non-believer is what you are.

Yes, there may be a god, a devil, a tooth fairy, and one each leprechaun under my bed. But I am uncertain and that should be good enough.

I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure — that is all that agnosticism means. ~ Clarence Darrow

A to Z Reveal – The Weird World of Indexed Skepticism (according to Bill)

During April, Dispassionate Doubt posts will be personal definitions, explanations, and conclusions regarding gods or other sundry beliefs, superstitions, religious practices, and logic fallacies held or done by otherwise normal, intelligent human beings.

I will not set out to offend. However, some folks, such as hard-core Evangelical Protestants, Southern Baptists, devout Roman Catholics, Muslims of any sect, or people who are super serious about god, religion, metaphysical philosophy, or some other ontological fantasy may sense an unintended mild ribbing.

I may unintentionally omit some things, but I’ll try to give no woo-woo a pass. These may not be the posts for you, but I hope you read them and take no offense. People do weird shit and it’s funny.

I’ll select terms relevant to the beliefs, deceptions, and delusions many of us face along with some I think too unusual to pass up. I hope to provide explanations that expand the various thoughts and ideas, some of which may be new to you. I’ll keep it as simple as possible.

I use some references, but these are mostly my ideas. I’ll be as real, accurate, true, or humorous as possible given my personally sober, eye rolling, skeptical observations, with a dash of the ironic.

I’m told controversy is interesting and I want to be interesting. I may permit the cloud of adult language to shade some posts, but if I use too many of George Carlin’s seven dirty words, (<—adult content) the A-Z Admins may act. I have no such plans. They’ll have enough to do.

The theme, or purpose, is to address terms and issues related to human beliefs, deceptions, delusions, and pseudoscientific phenomena (pronounced woo-woo) from this skeptic’s point of view, for which I expect to be corrected by believers and skeptics alike.

One man’s woo-woo, of course, is another’s deeply held belief system. ~ Julia Moskin

Do you recall The Penn & Teller series titled Bull Shit? My vision is a little bit like that, only without all the effort, accuracy, expertise, or time devoted to a single issue – mostly it’s my written opinion. Capisce?

Examples of what the A to Z words could be like are:

Agnostics: are soft atheists who do not want to piss anyone off.
Godless Heathen: is a very specific way to identify an atheist with attitude.
Demonic Possession: is something that never seems to happen to an atheist.
Nones: are people who, when getting to the question of what religion they are, check mark none. They may be nothing, anything (even atheists), or undecided. Not the same as no preference. The opposite of a nun.

I won’t reuse these. My definitions and explanations will be longer and maybe more serious, but I’ll keep them short enough for a quick read.

This TED talk by Michael Shermer is about 15 minutes, but he gets my (his) point across better than I ever could. Watch it if you can.

Hope to see you on Monday, April Fools Day (how apropos!) for A to Z, but I will be posting up some stuff between now and then.

***Bill

Scientific prayer makes God a celestial lab rat, leading to bad science and worse religion. ~ Michael Shermer