|
AB ABSURDO |
The View from Number 80 |
|
|
Given the dynamic nature of the web it is possible that some of the sites that were live when last visited have gone the way of the dodo and the passenger pigeon. This is sadly beyond 80's control and your forbearance is requested. (Tip - a search for cached versions of missing sites is often productive using either Google or The Internet Archive Way Back Machine.)
Jesus Aliens Robosnakes
Dec 99 more to
follow - eventually
Backwards Glances 2002
Backwards Glances 2003 part 3 Backwards Glances 2004 part 1 January 7th to March 31st Backwards Glances 2004 part 2 April 3rd to May 30th Backwards Glances 2004 part 3 June 1st to July 31st Backwards Glances 2004 part 4 Aug 2nd to Sept 30th Backwards Glances 2004 part 5 Oct 1st to Dec 30th Backwards Glances 2005 part 1 Jan Ist to Feb 14th Backwards Glances 2005 part 2 Feb 15th to March 31st Backwards Glances 2005 part 3 April 1st to July 30th Backwards Glances 2005 part 4 July 1st to Sept 30th Backwards Glances 2005 part 5 Oct 1st to Dec 31st Backwards Glances 2006 part 1 Jan 7th to Mar 14th Backwards Glances 2006 part 2 Mar16th to May 15th Backwards Glances 2006 part 3 June 19th to Dec 24th Backward Glances 2007 part 1 Jan 6th to May 16th Backwards Glances 2007 part 2 May 19th to Aug 20th Backwards Glances 2007 part 3 Sept 5th to Dec 21st Backwards Glances 2008 part 1 Jan 6th.... A word of warning - owing to the Glance's attempted topicality some of the links below may be even more ephemeral than usual. (Tip - a search for cached versions of missing sites is often productive using either Google or The Internet Archive Way Back Machine.) These are large pages and may be a little slow to load depending on your internet connection. BAD ARCHAEOLOGY COMMITTEE FOR SKEPTICAL INQUIRY (formerly CSICOP) SWIFT - JAMES RANDI'S WEEKLY COMMENTARY (Pat Condell's site. Here is his You Tube page) the user manual for your brain, in comic-form (flash) Space News Historical Jesus or Jesus Myth: The Jesus Puzzle
The European Human Rights Centre (EHRC)
represents over 100 non-governmental and other not-for-profit
organisations interested in the promotion of Human Rights throughout
Europe and beyond
IS
THERE A GOD?
80 is an Amazon Associate - proceeds (if any) go
towards site upkeep
For inexpensive and reliable website statistics
Make your mouse clicks count - give to
charity below
News
you cannot do without
"Mike's List is a free, almost-weekly e-mail newsletter that goes out to
more than 34,000 of my friends, press colleagues, industry insiders and
miscellaneous digerati. My readers, contacts and spies send me incredible
information every day. And I scour the globe looking for
off-the-beaten-track tech stories that go unreported, underreported, or
should never be reported by the mainstream press."
Space News and much more
Why Number 80? This is a question that
arises often (well, twice) and refers to the reason for the name of this
site, rather than "why bother?" - to save searching
here
is the lowdown on Number 80 - so now
you know............. |
The View from Number 80 was originally an occasional newsletter or ezine. Its subject matter was the huge number of sites on the web. Whilst the only consistent criterion for inclusion was whether a site caught 80's somewhat fickle attention there was a definite emphasis on sites that tread, and often stray over, the border into pseudoscience, flim-flam or irrational claims. Number 80 tried to give them critical attention and, in many cases, a certain amount of ridicule. It is 80's contention that "we live in a fascinating, beautiful and, let's face it, dangerous enough universe without complicating matters with gobbledegook." The site, and Number 80, have evolved (what else?) in an attempt to respond to items of current news as well as web sites. Old issues of the newsletter, Past Views, are archived in the sidebar and run from December 1999 to May 2005. Below you will find the current content which is also archived in the sidebar under, unsurprisingly, Number 80 Archive. You may also want to see Faith-Based News, a collection of news items reflecting the influence of superstitions of all kinds around the planet. The email link at the bottom of the page is for feedback and comment if you think it may help. If you place a link to Number 80 on your own website could you please link to this homepage - thanks. You can now search this site using PicoSearch - click here or scroll down this page, where you will also find the Freethunk! du jour, du semaine, whatever.
Faith-Based News - check out Faith-Based News, a collection of links to news and comment reflecting the influence of religion/superstition/pseudoscience/irrational beliefs (this now includes so-called "alternative medicine") around the globe. Another Minor Rant - it makes sound sense
to consult with experts before
making an important decision. This could be a
private individual perhaps looking for the best shares in which to invest
or maybe deciding whether to have surgery or drug therapy of some kind.
You would look pretty stupid having consulted a financial advisor or
doctor if you decided to ignore their expert advice and invested in a
useless company or opted for alternative therapy as opposed to real
medicine. The UK government is in danger of looking even more incompetent
and foolish than it does already by ignoring advice from experts in two
areas (there are no doubt many more) that of the
classification of
cannabis and
legislation on abortion. The
Advisory Council on the Misuse
of Drugs (ACMD) has made it clear to the British home secretary that
moving cannabis from class C to class B "...is neither warranted, nor will it
achieve its desired effect". After a nine month review in which the ACMD
"...decided by 20 votes to three to recommend that cannabis remain a class C
drug" the home secretary has decided to re-classify anyway, apparently
swayed more by
tabloid horror stories of super powerful forms of dope than
by real evidence. As drugs information charity
DrugScope puts it
"Unfortunately, the message given by this decision is that drugs policy
can be driven as much by political considerations, media headlines and
scare stories as by the evidence." The cardinal plaintively asks "What did we do to generate unbelief? We need to examine what we might have done to give people a misleading idea of God." Unbelief has grown because it is obvious the whole god thing is a nonsense and merely a way for people like O'Connor and Trujillo to exercise unearned and undeserved power over the lives of others. Epicurus dealt with God 2300 years ago and no amount of waffle from churchmen has been able to refute the old Greek's logic in any meaningful way. "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" This Guardian article tells us that Murphy O'Connor "...called for a better dialogue between believers and non-believers based on mutual esteem, rather than a rejection of difference, in order to address the split between the Gospels and culture." Mutual esteem? How can you have a meaningful and respectful dialogue with someone who believes that because you reject his absurd sky fairy myth you will burn for all eternity in hell? The sooner Murphy O'Connor and his ilk are a thing of the past the better and their removal from the public sphere should be a priority for anyone interested in human rights. Murphy O'Connor refers to the "mystery of God" but the only mystery is why people still fall for this primitive hogwash. (See here for a piece by Terry Sanderson of the National Secular Society on Murphy O'Connor's self-serving drivel) Go Yoko! - as well as being a pack of lies, half-lies and selective quotes the creationist movie Expelled uses John Lennon's song Imagine without permission. This Alternet blog tells us "You know that stupid Ben Stein movie Expelled, that argues in favor of "intelligent design" and chastises the sane for not allowing religious bullshit to be taught in science classes? Apparently, they used the John Lennon song Imagine in the film . . . without permission. Yoko Ono, one of my all-time favorite feminists, isn't having any of that shit. The issue came to her attention when bloggers started accusing her of selling out. And so she slapped the filmmakers with a lawsuit." (More on Imagine and Expelled here and also see Expelled Execrated and this) Why don't you take your
anti-Christian junk someplace else? - a while
back 80 wrote about the excellent work by Charles Gadda in exposing the
scandal of an exhibition of the Dead Sea Scrolls at the
San Diego Natural
History Museum (SDNHM). In a nutshell the exhibition gave a highly
partisan view of the current state of research concerning the scrolls and
their link, if any, with a nearby site called Khirbet Qumran. As noted at
the time Gadda was on the receiving end of attacks that did not address his
actual and well-substantiated findings but dwelt on trivia unrelated
to the matter in hand. The fact that the exhibition relegates or ignores
recent research into the scrolls, their provenance and Qumran and sidelines one of the foremost
researchers,
Norman Golb
and
others on the grounds of not
wishing to confuse the public is reprehensible and betrays a distinctly Christian partisanship. This means not
that those involved happen coincidentally to be Christians but that their
view of history and what information is acceptable to put on public exhibition is
distorted by their faith. As we shall see, to suggest this leads to
accusations of being anti-Christian, when the real concern should be the
distortion/omission of findings that contradict a particular agenda. This
is dishonest and an affront to true scholarship. Gadda has now written a
further article
posted on Now Public examining a 3D film reconstructing the site at Qumran that is part of the exhibition.
This has drawn further vituperation against himself and Golb. As Yogi Berra
said, it's deja vu all over again. It is then claimed that
the film "...suggests some important findings that weigh in on the debate of
the nature of the Qumran settlement." seemingly oblivious to the fact that
the film is a reconstruction of the site and not the site itself. To
speculate on a reconstruction the rationale of which is open to question takes
the whole exercise a huge step away from reality and on to the slippery slope
to fantasy. It must be remembered that the garbage in, garbage out
rule is not restricted to the world of computing. The description of the
technique on the
SDNHM page is itself worthy of comment,
"First, the model
allows us to illustrate and visualize reconstructed sites. Computer
modeling assists the archaeologist in articulating and communicating his
or her vision of what the site actually looked like in antiquity. This
technique reveals to laypeople—those who cannot easily visualize
three-dimensional structures from site maps or floor plans—what the site
looked like in antiquity. The second, and perhaps more valuable, benefit
of virtual modeling is that the model actually allows researchers to test
new theories, ideas, and reconstructions. Virtual modeling allows the
archaeologist to test certain interpretations, much like an automobile
designer tests certain designs for structural and performance flaws in a
virtual setting before producing the actual object" The film only shows a
"...vision of what the site actually looked like in antiquity" and is
therefore totally unsuited as a basis for further speculation on the site's use.
The auto design analogy is closer to the truth than perhaps the
writer intended - in that the finished product is a fabrication. The fantasy of some kind of
proto-Christian community producing the scrolls is just that, a fantasy
with no supporting evidence. This is an example of faith rather than facts
skewing interpretation of the findings on the ground. That this is so is
evidenced by the extraordinary vehemence exhibited by some commentators
toward Golb and Gadda - instead of directing criticism toward their
written work a strong personal element intrudes. Such ad hominem attacks
are reliable evidence for the poverty of the critics' argument. It is hard
to defend the invention of a monastic sect based almost solely upon the
finding of what are claimed to be inkwells. Even more risible is the
reference to a "scroll shelf" in the artist's reconstruction (see PDF
above). There is no evidence that such shelves were ever there and even if
there were how does one tell a "scroll shelf" from a regular one? There is
no evidence that unquestionably confirms a link between Qumran and the
writers of the scrolls - something that is assumed in the film and in the
exhibition. Do read Golb's dissection of the script for more instances of wishful thinking winning out over dispassionate
research. 80 does not intend to go through all the comments, there are far too many, but one point is repeated frequently, although its relevance to the discussion is tangential. The question of how Golb obtained the movie script from the SDNHM occurs with monotonous regularity with the implication of impropriety by Golb. Irrelevant but apparently fascinating to some of the contributors the question is repeated ad nauseam - the effect of which only caused 80 to be impressed by Gadda's (almost) unfailing patience in answering these nitpickers. Quite why they do not contact Golb himself is not clear. The result is, if the criticisms of the film and exhibition are so wrong, why not refute them instead of attacking the individuals involved or harping on about irrelevancies? This whole business merely points up once more, if any repetition is needed, that the scrolls exhibition is unscholarly and partisan, it ignores the latest findings in favor of an interpretation that sits better with a certain group's faith position, and roundly deserves condemnation by anybody that holds dispassionate historical and archaeological research dear. The attacks on Gadda and Golb merely illustrate the dearth of learning and theological agenda of the attackers. Far from all this being a storm in an inkwell important principles are at stake. Archaeology, in the atmosphere of aggressive religiosity that now pervades society is becoming a football kicked around merely to further sectarian, and associated political, interests. This can be seen not only in this unseemly row over the scrolls exhibition but also, for example, in excavations in Jerusalem where fact-based interpretation of archaeological finds plays second fiddle to those with religious, political and cultural axes to grind. Such a lowering of standards must be resisted fiercely wherever it occurs and scholars such as Golb and dogged investigators such as Gadda are to be commended for the part they are playing. * Scrolls of Dishonor, Scrolling Along, Faith-Based Reality and Objective Obfuscate (Also see from Wikipedia Critiquing the Qumran-Essene Hypothesis and Recent Archaeological Analysis) Contrast and Compare - watch Wafa Sultan, a Syrian-born American psychiatrist (see Voice of Reason) take on Egyptian Islamist Tal'at Rmeih with great effect then watch Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi (Ken Livingstone's pal - see below) give a completely inaccurate and tendentious description of Wafa Sultan's remarks. Far from appearing a great scholar he makes a complete fool of himself. Does he not realize how easy it is to make such a comparison between clips? As it is, it's clear that his response is not to what the lady said but to what he thought she said, although this of course assumes he was listening in the first place. (These You Tube clips were brought to 80's attention by Newsline, the free weekly email newsletter of the National Secular Society) Scientists Strike Back
- very much in the "happy news" category are a
couple of stories about science taking on nonsense, namely astrology and
so-called alternative medicine. Researchers tracked 2000 babies born in
1958, most born within minutes of each other looking at "...100
different characteristics, including occupation, anxiety levels, marital
status, aggressiveness, sociability, IQ levels and ability in art, sport,
mathematics and reading - all of which astrologers claim can be gauged
from birth charts."
according to the Daily Telegraph. The result? "The scientists
failed to find any evidence of similarities between the "time twins",
however. They reported in the current issue of the Journal of
Consciousness Studies: "The test conditions could hardly have been more
conducive to success . . . but the results are uniformly negative."
So, in this, possibly the most comprehensive test yet, astrology is shown
to be codswallop. Naturally those who make a very good living from
hoodwinking the gullible are not going to change their ways - not when
they can earn £600,000 ($1,190,275) a year with bullshit. It sure beats
working.. (Also see
The Big Business of Astrology) Poor Choice, No Choice - the old cliche goes that you can judge a man by the company he keeps. Cliches become cliches because they have a kernel of truth about them, which is more than 80 can say about the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. This champion of the people is apparently happy to share a platform with a deeply homophobic and misogynist Muslim cleric by the name of Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Apparently as al-Qaradawi has condemned al Qaeda Livingstone finds him acceptable company and useful for courting the Muslim vote (if such a thing exists) in the current mayoral race. That the cleric is on record condoning suicide bombing and wife-beating and calling homosexuality an "evil practice" doesn't phase Livingstone at all - a man who was once a champion of the left now happily embraces a promoter of bigotry. Such a lapse is welcomed in some circles - there is even a "..group called Muslims 4 Ken, which is aiming to mobilise Muslim voters to help re-elect Mr Livingstone for a third term on May 1." This same group has been attacking Livingstone's Conservative rival, Boris Johnson, accusing him of being an "Islamophobe and a racist" according to the Daily Telegraph. In the wake of the 7/7 London bombings Johnson wrote an article called "Islam is the problem" and has written elsewhere of the violence inherent in the Quran. Of course now he is running for mayor Johnson is backpedalling, saying "The problem is people who wrench out of context quotes from the holy book of Islam, the Koran, and use it to inspire evil in men's hearts." If Johnson had read a piece by Adrian Reddy, entitled The truth about Islam...and where to find it (from the excellent Butterflies and Wheels) he would have learned that taking the Quran out of context is a standard ploy not of "Islamophobes" but of Islamist apologists. Reddy's piece shows how deliberate cherrypicking by such apologists is the equivalent of lying by omission, leaving out the exhortations to violence and prejudice against followers of other religions but retaining the less offensive sections. Interestingly Reddy uses quotes from Livingstone's chum al-Qaradawi to illustrate his point. Poor Londoners, the two front-runners in the race to govern the capital are an Islamist appeaser and a right-wing buffoon. 80 would like to think such an abysmally poor choice would benefit other contenders such as the Liberal Democrat or Green candidates but this is unlikely. Getting voters out of the two-horse, Labour or Conservative mindset just isn't going to happen. (In 2005 Livingstone defended inviting al-Qaradawi to the UK and produced a dossier supposedly countering those who opposed his action. This page from the Gay and Lesbian Humanists takes Livingstone's dossier and comprehensively refutes his claims. It should be required reading for anyone tempted to vote for Livingstone.) Quote - "People must ask themselves why this earthquake occurred in this area and not in others. Whoever examines these areas discovers that they are tourism areas . . . where the forbidden acts are widespread, as well as alcohol consumption, drug use and acts of abomination . . . and sexual perversion . . . Don't they deserve punishment from Allah?" Yusuf al-Qaradawi on the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake illustrating his intuitive understanding of the complexities of plate tectonics. Taken from a 2005 piece by Peter Tatchell called An Embrace That Shames London on Livingstone and al-Qaradawi. Religion of Fear - is the title of the latest video from Pat Condell and well worth six minutes and forty eight seconds of your time. Here is an index of all his pieces to camera. Speechless - Pope Ratzinger is quite a linguist according to this Guardian report - he speaks "English, French, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese and Russian." Yet the same report (scroll down to the last couple of paragraphs) tells us when he met one victim of priestly abuse he had nothing to say in any language, "One of those, Bernie McDaid, described to Associated Press how he told the Pope about abuse he suffered as an altar boy, which he said had been both sexual and spiritual. "I said: 'Holy Father, you need to know you have a cancer in your flock and I hope you will do something for this problem. You have to fix this.' " McDaid said the Pope looked down at the floor and then back at him, "as if to say 'I know what you mean.' He took it in emotionally. We looked eye to eye." McDaid is perhaps being overly charitable here, maybe Ratzinger had nothing to say because he was uncomfortable with his own past actions. On most of his tour though the sheer pressure from those who will not stay quiet about abuse have actually caused Ratzinger to raise the subject (reg rqd) himself - something long overdue. It has the added benefit of cutting into the time the old boy would have otherwise spent attacking secularism, science and technology, those evils of the modern world. It parallels in a way how the Chinese only want to talk Olympics but the rest of the world wants to talk Tibet. Darwin Online - well worth a look in this week's New Scientist is Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions. Unlikely to convert a creationist/ID clod it is interesting and informative for those who would like to learn more about the subject and even has a couple of eye-openers for those who think they know it all. It is divided into two main sections, Shared Misconceptions and Creationist Myths, the former includes Evolution produces creatures perfectly adapted to their environment and Evolution is limitlessly creative while the latter includes Accepting evolution undermines morality and Evolution is an entirely random process. Also of interest for the first time the complete works of Charles Darwin are available online. We are told "This site contains Darwin's complete publications, thousands of handwritten manuscripts and the largest Darwin bibliography and manuscript catalogue ever published; Darwin Online also hundreds of supplementary works: biographies, obituaries, reviews, reference works and more." The books are presented in an easy to read two-pane view with a reproduction of the original page on the right and a plain text version on the left although you can view either in isolation. The navigation is intuitive and well-designed - in fact, intelligently designed, to coin a phrase. The site is a considerable achievement and an amazing resource. Regulating the Unreal - The Spiritual Workers' Association that represents the liars, ghouls, fantasists and charlatans that call themselves "Mediums, psychics, tarot card readers and spiritual healers" are whining about a new piece of European Union legislation which will make them subject to consumer protection regulations. When the law comes into force on May 26th the Telegraph tells us "it will be the psychic's responsibility to prove they did not mislead or coerce credulous consumers." (Do they have any other kind of consumers?) If the powers that these people claim to possess are real they shouldn't be too concerned but many of them, at least those who are not deluding themselves, know perfectly well that it is merely moneymaking claptrap. 80 would have been far more impressed if they had complained about the legislation before it was announced but funnily enough this didn't happen. Update - Here's a report from Reuters about a bunch of these "Spiritual Workers" marching to to Downing St to present a petition. We are told "They say the new rules will shift the responsibility of proving they are not frauds from prosecutors and onto them." This should always have been the case. If their claimed powers were real surely they would have nothing to worry about? They are now crying persecution and claiming their money-making activities are actually a "religion" and should be exempt. Which of course leads you to wonder why religion shouldn't have to prove its absurd claims in court as well. Sadly this is never going to happen. No One There - here is a quote from the Washington Post (reg rqd) regarding Joseph Ratzinger's (aka the Pope) upcoming visit to the US from Joseph Komonchak of Catholic University, "He's been concerned that the mystery of Christianity come through. He is concerned that people are inclined not to even look at [Christianity's] primary claims." The mystery is how people manage to fall for this tosh. 80 was inclined to look at just one of Christianity's primary claims, arguably the most important - the claim that in 1st century Judea there actually lived a man whose story is told in the canonical gospels- and found the closer you look the less there is to see. Appeals to material outside the gospels, such as the epistles and Josephus produce the same result. Try reading Earl Doherty's The Jesus Puzzle (online as well as a book) and The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man (love that title) by Robert M Price. Somehow 80 feels that this is not quite what Ratzinger has in mind. Talking of Ratzinger here is an item about him and that great judge of character George W Bush - who famously looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes and saw his soul. When Bush was asked what he saw in Ratzinger's eyes he gave a one word and immediate answer, "God". Favorite trashy merchandise for the Pope's visit to the US? A T-shirt emblazoned "I love my German Shepherd". Perhaps the verbally-challenged Bush meant to say "Dog" not "God" - just so long as he doesn't start humping your leg. After all Ratzinger was known as the last Pope's (the late JohnPaulGeorgeRingo II) rottweiler - although 80 thought pontiff's mastiff was snappier. Toilet Talk - "It now seems unlikely that a theory will ever emerge which could completely replace Darwin's theory of evolution. But should that happen, scientists would be committed to investigating it fully. Intelligent design is emphatically not that theory, as it has systematically failed to stand up to any scrutiny. But, like a turd in the u-bend, it just won't go away." So says Adam Rutherford writing in the Guardian about the creationist movie Expelled in a piece aptly titled Devoid of intelligence. Science and Religion - given a world that faces huge challenges such as global climate change, energy shortages, food shortages (these two are connected), water shortages, antibiotic resistant superbugs and the rest you would think that those vying for the most powerful job on the planet would consider it prudent, nay imperative to discuss the only human activity that can effectively address such threats - science. This was the thinking of several bodies (and 11 Nobel laureates) in the USA which suggested a debate on science and technology between the presidential hopefuls - on the face of it a fine idea. Is it going to happen? No. But the two Democratic contenders are going to attend the Compassion Forum which "..will provide the opportunity for candidates to discuss how their faith and moral convictions bear on their positions on these important issues." These issues, listed on the Compassion Forum web page, include "..domestic and international poverty, global AIDS, climate change, genocide in Darfur, and human rights and torture." McCain, the Republican anointed, has declined the invitation to attend but then he is probably still trying to work out the difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims. (If McCain does get into the Oval Office the world had better be ready for a senior moment lasting four years) Part of the reason that the Dems are attending this forum is to be given a chance to parade their religiosity in the only developed nation that thinks a candidate's supernatural beliefs are more important than their ability to rationally engage with the world's problems. These people can talk about god and compassion until the cows come home but "fine words butter no parsnips" and no amount of prayer, wishful thinking by another name, is going to help humanity cope with the huge challenges of the 21st century. Even if the candidates don't give a damn about the rest of the world (not something 80 believes) you would think pure national self interest would sting them into taking science more seriously. Have they taken on board the concerns of people like Shawn Laurence Otto, one of those lobbying for a Science Debate 2008? He has said "For the last 60 years, science and engineering have been responsible for half the growth in the U.S. economy. But if current trends continue, by 2010 90% of all scientists and engineers will live in Asia. Do the candidates have a plan to keep the American economy strong and to tackle America's major challenges like climate change, energy security, education and healthcare - all of which revolve around science?" In light of their current performance the answer is a depressing no. The phrase 'ship of fools' is not inappropriate to the situation Engage Brain
- before opening mouth. "I’m trying to understand
the philosophy that you want to spread in the state of Illinois. This is
the Land of Lincoln. This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in
God, where people believe in protecting their children.… What you have to
spew and spread is extremely dangerous, it’s dangerous--It’s dangerous to
the progression of this state. And it’s dangerous for our children to even
know that your philosophy exists!" Representative Monique D. Davis in
a
tirade against atheist activist Rob Sherman in the Illinois General
Assembly (audio available
here and comment from Keith Olbermann
here) Brain Gym Junked - do take a moment to enjoy the Guardian's Charlie Brooker tearing into the pseudoscientific claptrap that is Brain Gym. Brooker is one of those writers who seems to function best when very, very annoyed and the fatuous drivel put out by those plugging Brain Gym is the equivalent of poking a sharp stick through the bars of his cage. Here is a quote to whet your appetite "Wander round Brain Gym's UK website for a few minutes. It's a festival of pseudoscientific chuckles where impressive phrases such as "educational kinesiology" and "sensorimotor program" rub shoulders with bald admissions that "we are not yet at the stage where we have any scientific evidence for what happens in the brain through the use of Brain Gym". Look at the accredited practitioners of the art: top of their list of qualified Brain Gym "instructor/consultants" is a woman who is apparently also a "chiropractor for humans and animals". That's nothing: I read tarot cards for fish" Great stuff - and if you think Brooker hasn't administered a good enough kicking see what Ben Goldacre of Bad Science (who has been on to this for a good while) has to say about this quackery that has managed to infiltrate hundreds of UK state schools in Brain Gym - Name & Shame. Update - see BBC TV's Newsnight on Brain Gym - some of this is priceless. Although it is undeniably funny the real story isn't - with official blessing kids in schools in the UK are being fed total crap. This is utterly irresponsible and those teachers who have embraced Brain Gym are deluding themselves. The anecdotes of those who desperately wish for it to be true are not acceptable as evidence of efficacy. The scene with children parrotting the Brain Gym spiel is disturbing. Part two is here in which Jeremy Paxman interviews one of the perpetrators of Brain Gym - who fares poorly, very poorly indeed. When accused of spouting "arrant nonsense" and "idiotic statements" the guy flounders. Paxman is merciless (his trademark) but this guy richly deserves it. How To Be A Good Atheist
- these days there is a lot written and spoken,
usually in the form of spluttering indignation, about the so-called New
Atheists. But what is new about them? They have attained a higher public
profile as a reaction to increasingly strident and assertive religiosity
and not because of any deep need to eradicate religion (a surely
impossible task). Triggered by the rise of militant Islam more and more
religious groups are claiming the right to influence legislation at a time
when, in the UK, fewer and fewer people align themselves with any
organized religion. In the USA, a country I have described elswhere as
"half-choked on its own religiosity", the term atheist, to the majority at
least, is anathema and a sure bar to political office and yet few people
in either country really know anything much about atheism itself. Nick
Harding's book, How To Be A Good Atheist, (Oldcastle
Books ISBN 10: 1-84243-237-0) is an excellent introduction for those
who wonder just what makes someone an atheist - and particularly those
that who find no comfort in religion. and feel alienated. As Harding's
dedication states "For font dodgers everywhere - there are more of us
than we think". In the first chapter he defines the term (you may be
surprised to know there are several different shades of atheism) and also
takes on the claim that not to believe in a deity somehow makes you
immoral. In doing so he, as in the other chapters, offers further reading.
His book is short and to the point but if anyone wishes to further discuss
the points he makes these reading recommendations are invaluable. Check Out - the first of two shows on BBC Radio 4 by Ben Goldacre of Bad Science called The Rise of the Lifestyle Nutritionists. Program one is available online now, among its subjects are Diet Quacks and Snakeoil, Health Gurus and the Science of Nutrition. Expelled Execrated - read Richard Dawkins on the creationist/intelligent design movie Expelled. Dawkins was among several scientists who feel they were duped into contributing to the film by the producers and obviously has a great interest in the finished product. Amusingly Dawkins was in line with P Z Myers for a screening when Myers was recognized and asked to leave - although Dawkins, arguably a much higher profile evolutionist and atheist, was left to "enjoy" the show. Dawkins' piece is, in 80's biased opinion, priceless. Update - also check out Expelled Exposed - "Keep checking this space for the National Center for Science Education's official response to the Ben Stein movie Expelled; for now, we hope you will find this collection of resources helpful."
(from Cectic - the user manual for your brain, in comic-form. Updated every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.) Arrogance and Obduracy
- thy name is O'Brien. Science, or rather the
scientific method relies upon open-mindedness and honesty to change a
hypothesis when evidence contradicts it. In this way closer and closer
approximations to reality are possible but possession of absolute truth
can never claimed. This brings to mind a couple of quotes from
Richard Feynman, the first on the
need for honesty in dealing with evidence, even when that evidence may
conflict with a cherished belief or assumption, "The first principle is
that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
The second is about how little we really know, "We are at the very
beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we
grapple with problems. But there are tens of thousands of years in the
future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can,
improve the solutions, and pass them on." Now compare this
statement from Cardinal Keith O'Brien, head of Scotland's Catholic
church, who has agreed to meet scientists over his opposition to parts of
the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill - but on one crucial
condition, "My only condition would be that the scientists were also
willing to accept instruction from our Churches and peoples of faith on
basic morality, on what human life really is, on the purpose of our life
on earth and so on." What an arrogant fellow this churchman is - he
won't even meet the scientists unless he is allowed to lecture them. He
obviously has no interest in learning anything as he apparently already
has all the answers - at least to his own satisfaction. The fact that he
has various Muslim groups on board is not a case of interfaith dialogue -
it is more a case of "my enemy's enemy is my brother" as they stand
shoulder to shoulder against medical advances. Alien Twins? - Happily Geert Wilders' anti-Quran film Fitna seems to have gone off* like a damp squib (but see update below) as far as extreme reactions go - although it has garnered plenty of publicity for the right-wing bleached blond and his small political party. What, to 80, is far more interesting is the similarity between Wilders and the alien Exeter from the classic SF movie This Island Earth. They could be twins. (*although the Motoons row took a couple of months to erupt after some determined stoking)
Heinous: noun, meaning shockingly brutal or cruel. A Reuter's report tells us "Iran said a film by a Dutch lawmaker that accuses the Koran of inciting violence was "heinous" and called on European governments to block any further showing, Iran's official news agency reported on Friday." Now, let's see which is more heinous, making a film that points out the violent nature of the Quran or hanging kids from a crane for being gay? Mmm, that's a tough one...(see below Warning - Free Speech May Be Offensive and you can see what all the fuss is about here - for the moment at least. 80's one word review? Unremarkable) Update - the link above to LiveLeak, the bunch which was showing Wilders' movie Fitna, now contains a statement that the video was withdrawn following threats made against their staff. So business as usual - accuse Islamists of violence and they are so affronted by this vile calumny that they threaten you with ......violence. Update 2 - YouTube is hosting the movie if you register. The reason given is "This video or group may contain content that is inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube's user community." The Morality of Lying - two good pieces here about British premier Gordon Brown backing down before the dishonest onslaught of unelected men in dresses over whether a free vote should be allowed on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. First up is Polly Toynbee writing in the Guardian - in the light of the vote on sections of the embryology bill being cast as "moral" matters she wonders just how far this "moral" argument can be made to cover a whole raft of legislation. Why is it only matters with a religious dimension that are accorded a moral right to a free vote and not others? As she puts it "I would certainly see no reason why the religious conscience is treated as more precious than other MPs' moral views. On the great questions of war, climate and social justice, the cardinals and bishops never muster their heaviest artillery. They keep their powder dry for their own bizarre morality, focused as ever on sex and fertility - but why should those issues be sacrosanct for MPs' free votes?" Meanwhile David Aaronovitch writing in the Times doesn't beat about the bush - in Wicked untruths from the Church he takes issue with the inflammatory, emotional and above all utterly inaccurate descriptions of this vital scientific research made by churchmen, particularly Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh and Tom Wright, Anglican Bishop of Durham. Aaronovitch concludes "Like most of the Godless (or Godfree), I have no desire to proselytise for atheism or to persuade people out of religions that may offer them comfort and companionship. But there is a growing shrillness and unpleasantness - yes, an unscrupulousness - about the way that some of the top faithful increasingly choose to conduct their arguments. This needs to be combated because, for all their talk of conscience, what Dr Wright and Cardinal O'Brien really seem to want is to tell the rest of us how to live." I Blame the Bloody Atheists - a report in the Times tells us that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia "..has for the first time announced plans to launch a dialogue between Islam, Christianity and Judaism." And the reason for this ground-breaking, unprecedented interfaith pow-wow? It appears the King "..said the major faiths shared a desire to combat "the disintegration of the family and the rise of atheism in the world". Quite right too, you can never be too careful about those atheists with their fatwas, suicide bombings, misogyny, homophobia and flying airplanes into skyscrapers...oh, wait. That was religionists. Alright then, who attacked Iraq causing untold loss of life and disruption and further destabilization of the Middle East? Oh, that was religionists too, George and Tony. OK, try again. Who are those bastards spreading lies about how condoms do not protect you from HIV AIDS and, although unelected, attempt to sway the voting in democracies against vital medical research? Damn, more religionists. Last try. Who are the lunatics who want to kill a cartoonist for his work, or an author for his or hers? Bugger - religionists again. Is there nothing these atheists have been up to? Yes, they have dared to question the beliefs of the the religionists with their fatwas, suicide bombing, misogyny, homophobia and flying airplanes into skyscrapers etc etc. That's good enough, let's make an end of these wicked atheists before they make us all see reason. Tibet Petition - see here Also read Dominic Lawson on Why China might have Olympic regrets. and this piece (reg rqd) on the disruption by protestors at the lighting of the Olympic torch in Olympia. Flagellation and Food - "The Church does not recommend it, because the Church is against self-flagellation." So says priest Norman Vitug of "San Pedro Cutud, a hamlet that has become well known for its crucifixions" commemorating the Jesus Easter myth. It would seem that the good priest has not heard of Opus Dei and the cilice. Talking of Easter here is an item from 80 in 2006 on suitable cuisine for the celebration. "This may come a little late for this year's paschal celebrations but the Easter Bunny Stew brought to you by the Landover Baptist Church is bound to taste good any time of the year. If the leporine repast whets your appetite why not follow it with The Passion Fruit of the Christ Easter Soufflé? Divinely delicious....." Warning - Free Speech May Be Offensive - 80 is not sure what Geert Wilders is up to with Fitna, his yet to be seen film on the Quran which reportedly compares it to Mein Kampf, but there seems to a large element of self promotion. Dutch TV stations, cowed by threats of violence (real or imagined) have refused to screen the short movie so it was announced it would appear on the Web. Now that seems in doubt as the web site host is "..investigating complaints that it may have breached guidelines on hate language. It said the site was suspended until it was established whether the content of the site violated Network Solutions' terms of acceptable use. They include "material that is obscene, defamatory, libellous, unlawful, harassing, abusive... hate propaganda" and "profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable material of any kind" according to this BBC report. Let's face it someone somewhere is always going to be offended at something so Network Solutions' acceptable use casts a very wide net. This kind of pre-emptive censorship is not acceptable. Some might call Wilders a bleached-blond, right-wing nutter but his views should be given an airing. As with the Danish cartoons business most of the reaction to Wilders' film has the appearance of being orchestrated - how easy is it to lay your hands on a Netherlands flag in Afghanistan? 80 has facetiously suggested before the whole thing is a plot by flagmakers to increase turnover for there is a farcical element to these bearded rent-a-mobs crying "death to the Netherlands". The frightening thing is that someone, often one of the rioters themselves, is liable to be injured or killed - which is not farcical at all. If Islam does not want to be seen as a repressive and violent religion it would be a good idea when accused of such things NOT to threaten repression and violence. It's a simple idea and could catch on. Otherwise you only play into the hands of the Wilders of this world, allowing them to say "See, I told you so". A bit like the Christian "turning the other cheek" idea - not that such a concept has noticeably entered into the echoing space between George Bush's ears - but it could be worth a try. When children bully someone at school and the victim reacts in a frenzied fashion more often than not this only encourages the bullies to provoke a repeat performance - perhaps we could all learn a lesson from the playground in this respect. We cannot have people walking around on figurative eggshells all the time because their opinion may be considered offensive by some group or other. On this subject see Appeasing Islam by a visibly, and justifiably angry Pat Condell. McCain's Crusader Friend - in all the fuss over Barack Obama's outspoken preacher, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, not enough attention, in 80's view, is being paid to his opposite number John McCain's holy man, televangelist Rod Parsley. 80 has looked at this individual a couple of times before - not a pretty sight. See Shredded Parsley and Weapon for Sale. This 2005 article by Sarah Posner in The American Prospect examines Mr Parsley, and describes him thus "Meet Rod Parsley: rising star of the religious right, GOP ally -- and subject of lawsuits over his church governance and secretive fund-raising practices." It will be interesting to see whether McCain's buddy receives the kind of scrutiny and publicity that is focussed on Obama's holy man - if so McCain might want to distance himself from someone "...who has called upon Christians to wage a "war" against the "false religion" of Islam with the aim of destroying it." McCain needs to be asked how much he agrees with the man he has called a "spiritual guide." This piece by David Corn in Mother Jones goes some way toward explaining why McCain would want to court Parsley "In 2004, Parsley's church was credited with driving Christian fundamentalist voters to the polls for George W. Bush. With Ohio expected to again be a decisive state in the presidential contest, Parsley's World Harvest Church and an affiliated entity called Reformation Ohio, which registers voters, could be important players within this battleground state. Considering that the Ohio Republican Party has been decimated by various political scandals and that a popular Democrat, Ted Strickland, is now the state's governor, McCain and the Republicans will need all the help they can get in the Buckeye State this fall. It's a real question: Can McCain win the presidency without Parsley?" An even more immediate question is can McCain, a presidential candidate, justify his closeness to a religious bigot who wants to wage war on Islam? This question needs airing loudly and often - in some ways Jeremiah Wright is a pussycat compared to Parsley - at least, as far as 80 knows, Wright has not called for worldwide religious war. Hillary's Holy Family - but what about the third player, Hillary Clinton - does she also have a religious skeleton in her closet? You bet. Read this piece by Barbara Ehrenreich called Hillary’s Nasty Pastorate and learn about The Family, a group that "..takes credit for some of Clinton’s rightward legislative tendencies, including her support for a law guaranteeing “religious freedom” in the workplace, such as for pharmacists who refuse to fill birth control prescriptions and police officers who refuse to guard abortion clinics". Also see this piece, Jesus plus nothing: Undercover among America's secret theocrats by Jeffrey Sharlet to learn more about The Family from the inside. Again, one has to wonder why is Obama the only one hauled over the coals for his embarrassing religious connections? Update - here is an interesting piece from Christopher Hitchens on Obama and Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Quote - "I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore." from Silent No More (2005) by Rod Parsley - reviewed here by Kenneth Krause who, having reached the final chapter, tells us, "At this point, one might wonder whether the pastor wants his readers to worship the Christian God, or to worship Rod Parsley." See McCain's Crusader Friend above. Saudi NIMBYs - a Daily Telegraph report tells us that "Saudi Arabia is to launch a retraining programme for 40,000 Islamic clerics as it struggles to remove militant sympathies in Osama bin Laden's homeland." Wahhabism has created its very own nest of vipers and now, along with the rest of the world, it has to deal with the consequences. The article, by Damien McElroy, Foreign Affairs correspondent, includes this rather odd paragraph "Links between al-Qa'eda and Saudi Arabia's religious hierarchy moved from diplomatic liability to national crisis after the group carried out terrorist attacks in the kingdom in 2004 and 2005. Until these attacks, Mr Sheikh ruled out wholesale reforms as unnecessary." McElroy seems to be forgetting that other "terrorist attack", you know, that business on 9/11 - fifteen of the 19 hijackers on that day were from Saudi Arabia - surely that must have caused a little embarrassment? Did it have to take attacks in the Saudi homeland before they saw the need to rein these bastards in? Even today boosted oil revenues support madrassas around the world that preach hatred. Whether the "reformist wing of the royal family" which is behind the re-training will be able to teach these old dogs new tricks remains to be seen - don't hold your breath. Getting the djinn back into the bottle is always going to prove trickier than letting it out in the first place. Do Read - Mark Morford's typically hyperbolic take on the Vatican's list of 7 modern deadly sins or Sins 2.0 as he puts it "This just in: If you're an obscenely wealthy drug-dealing pedophile stem-cell researcher who drives a Hummer and doesn't recycle, you are totally going to hell. Oh please, like you didn't already know. Hey, the Catholic Church wouldn't lie, mister. The Big Book o' Deadly Sins apparently has a whole new addendum and it looks like it ain't just gluttony and lust and murder and hot porn and witchcraft and coveting thy neighbor's way cool Flickr photo stream anymore. That stuff is for wimps. Serfs. Lutherans." Spot the Fantasist -
"The battle in Iraq is noble, it is
necessary, and it is just. And with your courage, the battle in Iraq will
end in victory."
George W Bush, President, USA My God, it's full of stars
- 80 was saddened to hear of the death of
science fiction (SF) author and futurist
Arthur C Clarke. Many years ago,
when I first discovered the delights of SF, Clarke was one of the "big
three" the other two being Isaac Asimov and Robert A. Heinlein, both of
whom he comfortably outlived. Clarke's fiction at its best combined
great technological knowledge and respect for the laws of physics with the
ability to explore the more mystical dimensions of human experience. Brian
Aldiss noted this in his survey of SF, Billion Year Spree, when he wrote
"His literary abilities are traditional, and his prose workaday. But he
rises to a certain strength when he manages to unite the thinking and
dreaming poles of his nature". Aldiss singles out two novels, both
from the 1950s, as good examples of this successful amalgamation, The City
and the Stars and Childhood's End, a choice with which 80 agrees.
Ironically it is Clarke's "workaday prose" that is one of his strengths,
its very ordinariness making the exposition of some quite
metaphysical ideas painless for the reader. Although Clarke himself
said he wanted to be remembered as a writer his prediction of
geostationary telecommunications satellites, made in the magazine Wireless
World in 1945 was the beginning of his career as a futurist - see his
Profiles of the Future. He was also valued as a commentator by the media
during the Apollo missions (the Apollo 13 command module was named Odyssey
in his honor) and was also an early member and driving force of the
British Interplanetary Society. Clarke left instructions that his funeral be
private and secular. "Absolutely no religious rites of any kind,
relating to any religious faith, should be associated with my funeral."
(Also see
this
short obituary from Humanist Network News and a
perceptive piece in the New York Times) No Shit - "Investigate thoroughly, so if you want to start investigating from here you are most welcome. Check our various offices ...They can examine my pulse, my urine, my stool, everything." the Dalai Lama responding to accusations by the Chinese that he is behind the current unrest and violence in Tibet. That's odd, 80 thought the reason was the Chinese occupation and attempted assimilation of that country. Update - there is now a petition addressed to Chinese President Hu Jintao "As citizens around the world, we call on you to show restraint and respect for human rights in your response to the protests in Tibet..." Another Minor Rant - remember when you could read a newspaper or watch the TV news and not hear one word about religion? Things have certainly changed now with religionists, spurred perhaps by the example of militant Islam, complaining about this, being offended by that, wanting exemption from the other, and all the while demanding that their irrational beliefs should be respected. No wonder that atheists have themselves become more vocal in an attempt to redress the balance and knock religion off its special perch - a perch that is presumed to protect faith from the kind of scrutiny given every other human cultural artifact. We cannot return to religion-free news, nor perhaps should we wish to. By being more assertive religion and the faithful have stepped into the crosshairs and they and their beliefs have become part of a target-rich environment. A by no means exhaustive search of the online press over the last day or two serves to illustrate not only the higher profile for religion but also how absurd and/or divisive it can be. The debate over state funding of sectarian schools in the UK is a regular item, with Brown's government, like Blair's, keen on giving public money to religious organizations to run schools. One reason frequently offered for this is the claimed higher performance of such schools - a performance that is illusory when one takes into account the way such schools select pupils. A recent study by Institute of Education shows that "Covert selection by religious state schools has fuelled social segregation in education, some of the most respected academic authorities on schools admissions have told MPs. Class and ethnic divides between faith schools and other state schools have grown since 1990 and are worst in areas where faith schools apply "potentially selective" admissions criteria, research shows." Will this alter the government's thinking on this? Probably not - the espousal of religious schools is a faith position and is not based upon a rational approach. Sectarian schools, despite all the obfuscation and well-meaning blather, are inherently divisive. Each religion claims to have the only answer thereby automatically ruling out the legitimacy of any other - this not only applies to religions but also to sects within a religion such as the Roman Catholics and the Anglicans or Sunni and Shia Muslims. These groups compete with each other in order to have first crack at warping young, impressionable minds - social inclusiveness doesn't enter into it. (Also see this piece by Alan Sokal, "Taking evidence seriously - Public policy decisions should be based on evidence. So why are taxpayers funding faith schools and alternative therapies?") Meanwhile, reports still abound of the Roman Catholic church's desire not only to stem the tide of modernity but, where possible, to reverse it. Ratzinger's reintroduction of older forms of service in Latin is just one element. Even apparent efforts to keep up with a changed world like the newly suggested list of mortal sins are really harking back to older times - in this day and age who needs a celibate fantasist in a dress lecturing them on morality? Lists of sins are so medieval - especially when such a list contains anti-science entries to boot such as "...carrying out morally debatable scientific experiments, or allowing genetic manipulations which alter DNA or compromise embryos". By all means such research should be debated but just because you have an imaginary friend in the sky does not automatically entitle you to pontificate on such matters. Roman Catholic bishops have cropped up elsewhere recently, for instance Rt Rev Patrick O'Donoghue, Bishop of Lancaster wants to censor the books available in school libraries. Just to show his grasp of the relative merits of books on school shelves this cleric "...likened books which criticise the teachings of the Church to works that deny the Holocaust took place." So questioning his absurd fairy tales is equivalent to denying a documented genocide took place, is it? This guy really needs to get a grip. Let's hope this clod's own publication, Fit for Mission?, is kept out of school libraries for perpetuating cruel and dangerous lies. O'Donoghue wrote "The secular view on sex outside marriage, artificial contraception, sexually transmitted disease, including HIV and Aids, and abortion, may not be presented as neutral information."So-called" safe sex was based on the "deluded theory that the condom can provide adequate protection against Aids". Spouting such nonsense on the efficacy of condoms is, in 80's view, not only irresponsible and wicked it makes O'Donoghue effectively the murderer of any poor sod that reads his drivel and takes it for gospel truth and subsequently develops HIV AIDS and succumbs to a fatal infection (and also any partners of that person). Not that O'Donoghue will lose any sleep over it - comforted by his and his church's twisted version of "morality". Another Catholic bishop has "..claimed gay campaigners are conspiring against Christian traditions". And the proof offered? It seems that according to the Bishop of Motherwell, Joseph Devine "..gay community had aligned itself with minority groups, including Holocaust survivors, to make it appear they were under persecution." Which is pretty underhanded of them. Firstly it is the Catholic church that has the monopoly on crying persecution at the drop of a hat, and secondly it is the Catholic church that is often doing the persecuting - as shown by Devine's own daft accusations. In case you should think the
Catholics have the monoply on nutty bishops see
this article on the Archbishop of Canterbury's latest contribution to
the world pool of wisdom. He tells us "The problem is with our own
inability as a society to know what to do with discoveries of science. Man
playing God is not a problem about science. It's a problem about our
decisions about the results of science and we shouldn't be so much afraid
of science as we should about our own inability to have a clear moral
perspective on these matters." Funnily enough "Man playing God" is
exactly what Williams and his pals do every day when they claim to know
just what the Almighty wants from us miserable sinners. A scientific
experiment carried out under exactly the same conditions will give the
same result whether conducted by an atheist, a Christian, a Hindu or a
Muslim. Find two clerics from two different faiths who agree on how the
deity/deities want humans to behave and I will show you a bloody miracle. A second essay from Spinoza's Lens is by Ibn Warraq, author of Why I am Not a Muslim, (a book which he manages to plug a couple of times) called "Is an Islamic Reformation Possible? Towards a Vatican II of Islam" Initially one might think that setting the bar of achievement by mentioning the Vatican at all is not a good step or a wise one but such is the grievous state of Islam and its stifling effect on education and human rights that even something approaching Vatican II would be a real breakthrough. Statistics quoted by Warraq should be enough for you to appreciate the stultifying effect of the prophet's dead hand. In the Arab Human Development Report of 2002, published by the United Nations Development Programme, we are told “..the total number of books translated into Arabic in the last 1,000 years is fewer than those translated in S |
