The View from Number 80

June 15th 2009

Telegraph Turns Tabloid - The Daily Telegraph sinks yet further in its printing of trivial crap, published without regard to facts or even common sense. See this uncritical drivel, printed sans byline, about a "crop circle" shaped like a phoenix rising from the flames. It is not a crop circle (few of them are simply circular these days) but an agricultural graphic (AG), and a finely executed one at that. It is not, as gormlessly reported by the Telegraph, "...referencing the possibility of a cataclysmic event occurring on December 21, 2012, which coincides with the end of the ancient Mayan calendar." This is the sort of answer you get from asking self-styled "crop circle experts" who parrot New Age gibberish at the drop of a hat. The reporter, if the writer of this piece of infantile inanity can be called that, failed to ask anyone with half a brain cell about the design, let alone inquire after the poor bloody farmer who is no doubt less than amused by several hundred pounds worth of damage done to a food crop - not to mention the extra harm inflicted by "experts" and other dimwits dowsing and trampling about looking for leylines and other figments of their tawdry imaginations. The paper only slightly redeems itself by providing an impressive slideshow of recent AGs. Far more interesting were the crop circles (more properly crop marks) that have revealed a "...huge prehistoric ceremonial complex" in Southern England, pre-dating the nearby Stonehenge by a thousand years. According to the National Geographic "...the site includes the remains of wooden temples and two massive, 6,000-year-old tombs..." Such a discovery, especially in an area already well-studied, is amazing. It makes AGs, attractive though many of them are, and the nutters who think they are mystical message to humankind, pale into richly-deserved insignificance. For more on the find see the Damerham Archaeology Project. (80 wrote about AGs back in 2000 - see The Cereal Artists or Ever Increasing Circles)

Another Telegraph journalistic triumph is the stunning news that "Britons should have plenty to smile about on Friday June 19 as it's officially the happiest day of 2009." And just where did they dig up this piece of information? From the same place they got last year's revelation that "June 20 is the happiest day of the year according to a maths formula worked out by an academic." The "academic" in question is one Cliff Arnall who has a knack of knocking up nonsensical formulae, which at first glance may appear to be scientific, but are in fact bollocks. This is amply shown by Ben Goldacre in his Bad Science entry entitled (MediaSlut - Ideas) + Money = CorporateWhore. Kinda says it all, doesn't it? Arnall has previously insulted our collective intelligence with "bogus equations" purportedly "... proving that some arbitrary date in mid-January is the most miserable day of the year for Sky Travel; proving that some arbitrary date in mid-June is the happiest day of the year for Walls ice cream; and so on." That, by the way, is a quotation from Goldacre as is the phrase "bogus equations" - for as we all know you can get into no end of trouble using the word bogus these days - just ask Simon Singh.

Update to the above - even the Guardian, the paper that runs Goldacre's Bad Science column has joined the party with a piece on Arnall's rubbish. In fact it goes further in attributing the "happiest day of the year" claptrap to "scientists" as in "According to scientists, today is the happiest day of the year". The article beneath mentions only Arnall - there are no other "scientists". Such uncritical nonsense from national newspapers reveals not only lazy reporting but also an idiot attitude to science effectively reducing coverage of the subject to "My my, look what those crazy boffins are up to now".  

Indefensible - Stung by the reaction to the absurd Simon Singh libel case (see here) Richard Brown, a chiropractor himself and vice-president of the British Chiropractic Association, has written a piece for New Scientist called In Defence Of Chiropractic. Here is an interesting riposte from A canna’ change the laws of physics that effectively demolishes Brown's poorly-stated arguments. Meanwhile that other pillar of "faith-based medicine" homeopathy is in the news, firstly for a quack nasal spray that could lead to the permanent loss of the sense of smell and secondly for a row concerning the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). This bunch have relaxed proper scrutiny in order to accommodate so-called Complementary/Alternative Medicine (sCAM). This has resulted in the MHRA giving a licence to homeopathic pills (Arnica 30c) "...under a scheme that allows traditional remedies to be sold without proof that they work."

Quite understandably this has angered those who support evidence-based medicine and who can see no reason why homeopathic nostrums should be exempt from standard procedures. Professor David Colquhoun, a pharmacologist at University College London has pointed out that "...that licensing products without scientific evidence has "made a mockery" of the MHRA's responsibilities." This Guardian piece tells us "The approved labelling for Arnica 30c pills says they can be "used within the homoeopathic tradition for the symptomatic relief of sprains, muscular aches, and bruising or swelling". Professor Colquhoun writes: "The average consumer is unlikely to know that 'used within the homoeopathic tradition' is a form of weasel words that actually means 'there isn't a jot of evidence that the medicine works'." To quote Richard Dawkins, "Either it is true that a medicine works or it isn't. It cannot be false in the ordinary sense but true in some "alternative" sense. If a therapy or treatment is anything more than a placebo, properly conducted double-blind trials, statistically analyzed, will eventually bring it through with flying colours. Many candidates for recognition as "orthodox" medicines fail the test and are summarily dropped. The "alternative" label should not (though, alas, it does) provide immunity from the same fate."   (Psst!  Wanna score some "homeopathic plutonium"? See this hilarious piece from Respectful Insolence revealing what ignorance and make-believe lies behind this sCAM)

Lucky Escape - the latest addition to the growing group of religious whiners are some witches complaining about Roman Catholic persecution after being banned from holding a Halloween meeting in a parish social center. They should be thankful they got off so lightly - the holy book of the Catholics says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live".

After You, Cardinal - the Telegraph tells us that Cardinal Zen, "One of the Catholic Church's most senior clerics has told Catholics in China not to 'give in' to pressure from the state-sanctioned church and to remain loyal to the Pope even to the point of 'martyrdom'."

Dressed To Thrill? - Hardly. The Times tells us  "A Muslim waitress has been awarded a £3,000 pay out for sexual harassment after being made to wear a revealing red dress for work. Fata Lemes, 33, quit her job after claiming that the low-cut dress was “disgusting” and made her look like a “prostitute”. Miss Lemes, a Bosnian Muslim, had told an employment tribunal that she “might as well have been naked” in the dress.“I was brought up a Muslim and am not used to wearing sexually attractive clothes,” she said." Not so Muslim perhaps, in that she likely served alcohol to customers. It seems that this award will not be the end of the matter for we are further informed "But lawyers acting for the Rocket Bar where she worked, have tried to re-open the case after a picture emerged of Miss Lemes on Facebook showed her wearing a plunging T-shirt exposing her cleavage while she was at the beach." Hmm, one could be forgiven for thinking this woman is a hypocrite after some easy cash and is prepared to use her religion to do so. Her original claim was for an excessive £17,500. The Sun obliges us with what would seem to be the Facebook picture and also a photo of a smiling Lemes apparently modelling the "disgusting" dress. Additional - not wanting to be left out, here is a Jewish couple who feel they should be compensated for their nonsensical beliefs.

A Minor Rant - The Telegraph informs us that "The BBC faces a clash with the Church of England over claims that its new head of religious broadcasting has given preferential treatment to minority faiths. Concerns over the appointment of Aaqil Ahmed, who was poached by the corporation from Channel 4 last month, will be raised in a Church document to be published tomorrow. It calls his move to the BBC a "worrying" development and accuses the corporation of treating religion like "a freak show""  What right does the C of E have to dictate to the Beeb? None. The country is effectively secular and the corporation should reflect this. The BBC already broadcasts more than enough religion. The author of this whining, Nigel Holmes, also says "Religion is higher on the political agenda than ever before and we are crying out for programmes that give a moral view." This high position on the political agenda is not from merit but because other religions have seen how cowardly politicians can be when Islam screams and throws its toys out of the pram. Another reason is the misguided and cynical attempt by government to use religious groups as a kind of cut-price social services and the resultant fuss when these bigots try and opt out of equality legislation. Holmes' assumption that religion provides a moral view is silly - superstition is not required for morality. Anyway, surely it is far better for someone to be moral because it is the right thing to do and not because of threats of divine punishment? Oh, by the way religion is a freak show. Virgin births, talking snakes, flying horses. Freak show.

Party Poopers - those Barbie-obsessed weirdoes the Muttawa, the Saudi Arabian religious police, are in the news once more. They busted "...67 Filipino men at a drag party." Perhaps these guardians of public virtue were in a snit as no one had thought to invite them.

Tantrik Twaddle - it seems that ol' black magic don't do squat. See here for the story of attempted murder by magic and how it failed on live TV. Hilarious stuff.

Witch Hunt? No Scrutiny? Yes - as predicted by 80 (and plenty of others) the British Chiropractic Association would appear to have scored an own goal by suing science writer Simon Singh for using the word "bogus" in respect to chiropractic's unproven claims of efficacy. The scrutiny the libel case has brought to bear on chiropractic, far from supplying welcome free publicity, has made many folk question the treatments offered. It has also given some chiropractors, in this instance McTimoney Chiropractic Association (MCA), the willies over attracting regulation regarding the unsubstantiated claims for the treatment's efficacy in treating a wide variety of ailments. This article by Chris French (referencing the excellent Quackometer blog) not only gives a synopsis of the Singh case but also tells of the effort to cover its collective arse by the MCA because of a "witch hunt" against its members. In this instance read "witch hunt" to mean long overdue scrutiny and skepticism. It also means enterprising individuals (see Adventures In Nonsense) taking action where chiros' websites go against consumer trading laws and fail to comply with the recent findings of the Advertising Standards Authority by reporting the offenders to Trading Standards. It is to be hoped that the critical attention chiropractic has attracted by its legal action will spill over into other areas of so-called Complementary/Alternative Medicine (sCAM). There is some evidence of this already occurring with homeopathy. There is an additional irony in the chiro's use of the term "witch hunt" - witchcraft doesn't work either. (For further information see Zeno's Blog)

Additional - to the above. Do read this most enlightening exchange between blogger Adventures In Nonsense and Chiropractic Life (CL) which illustrates just what a crock chiropractic is and how wilfully ignorant chiropractors are. It would be funny except for the mention of the manipulation of very young children "...since a few hours after birth.." and the very real danger that people will forgo real, evidence-based medical treatment for this hokum with dire consequences for their health. It is noteworthy that Chiropractic Life claims on its site (as of 20th April) that chiropractic care helps with health issues including "...asthma, allergies, infant colic..". Infant colic is also referenced here on a page laughingly titled Looking For Health In All The Wrong Places. As the Advertising Standards Authority puts it "We considered that, whilst some of the studies indicated that further research was worth pursuing, in particular in relation to the chiropractic relief of colic, we had not seen robust clinical evidence to support the claim that chiropractic could treat IBS, colic and learning difficulties." 

Berks and Burkas - Pat Condell's latest offering is on the subject of the burka, that outwardly visible sign of a woman's subjugation. Such clothing is not a mandatory requirement of Islam but it says a huge amount about the men who push for its adoption. These Islamist nitwits reveal two things about themselves, firstly that they possess no self-control over their libidos and instead of getting a grip on their own lusts want to blame women for inciting them. The second is, paradoxically, women scare them shitless. Why do women have a lesser status than men in Islam? Why do Islamists oppose education for women - to the extent that in countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan they maim or kill those teachers who do not accept their prohibition? Because the empowerment and education of women would spell the end of their patriarchal boy's club in which they get to dictate to others how they should live. There is something deeply flawed in a religion or culture that behaves thus. As for the women, often recent converts, who frequently choose of their own free will to, as Condell puts it, dress like Darth Vader, they would appear to be in love with the idea of making a statement by their dress - although the reaction of most Westerners is pity (and sometimes revulsion) not admiration. The only message they are sending is that they are deeply sad individuals. (Jesus and Mo' and their old pal Moses talk burkas)

Camp Quest UK - the Times reports on a new summer camp for kids that is being backed by Richard Dawkins. The camp is religion-free, leading to inaccurate descriptions of the camp as "atheist". It is a place where all the usual summer camp activities take place but in addition the kids attending will be taught critical thinking skills, something missing from the school curriculum. As one parent said of his children attending the camp, “I’m very keen on not indoctrinating them with religion or creeds. I would rather equip them with the tools to learn how to think, not what to think." Given such a clear mission statement how does the moronic Times sub-editor link the piece on the UK news page? "Dawkins sets up kids camp to groom atheists". Note the emotive use of the word "groom" in connection with kids with its offensive pedophilic connotations. This is not a mistake but a deliberate cheap and nasty jibe by an anonymous little creep on the Times' payroll. The leader page does somewhat better and tries for a humorous perspective on Camp Quest. It even cracks a joke. Pity it's a sad, unfunny one. See here for how Stephen Colbert does it right. (The Camp Quest UK web site is here and the US one here)

"Children at Camp Quest aren’t “required” to be atheists. We want to encourage children to think for themselves and to evaluate the world critically and thus draw their own conclusions. However, parents should be aware that we adopt a critical, scientific approach as opposed to a “faith-based” approach. At Camp Quest, children aren’t taught that “There is no god”. Instead, they are taught to come to their own conclusions, but more importantly, that “It’s OK not to believe in a god”." Camp Quest welcome page.

Gilbert Deya and a Pain In the Anus - 80 has a question. Why is self-styled Archbishop Gilbert "Miracle Babies" Deya apparently still in the UK rather than before a Kenyan court answering charges of baby-smuggling? Instead of explaining himself to the authorities in Kenya it seems he is still in the UK and operating a TV channel - the Deya Broadcasting Network. The British Home Secretary ordered his extradition in January of last year but it now appears he has taken his case to the European Court of Human Rights. About the only good thing to come from his continued presence is that it gave Robert Popper a chance to write a hilarious piece about Deya's TV show, having endured three hours of frenzied and sweaty miracle peddling. Popper's piece may be funny but Deya's unscrupulous claims of healing are not - the gullible are in danger of forgoing real medical treatment for his hysterical nonsense. From Popper's description it is another miracle that this buffoon doesn't drive people away but sadly there seem to be plenty of folk ready to fall for his schtick. Here is Popper's opening paragraph which deserves quoting in full. "If your idea of a pleasant Saturday afternoon is to watch a terrifyingly sweaty man with a voice like a shredding machine shredding another shredding machine, pummel words repeatedly into your face, while captions such as, "She has pain in the anus" flash up on the screen, then you are sitting in my living room right now." 

Cult Coverage - it is well worth a moment of your time to see this special report from the St Petersburg Times on the Scientology cult, including the low-down on the outfit from "high ranking defectors", with tales of "random whimsical " beatings and a look at the tragic Lisa McPherson story. Fine reporting that deserves as wide a coverage as possible. For more on this deeply sinister cult and its methods see Operation Clambake. (Scientology In A Nutshell)

A Cross To Bare - yet more whining over the wearing of magical amulets, in this case a crucifix. As 80 understands it a crucifix differs from a plain cross in that it has a little  man nailed to it in a representation of an ancient barbaric method of torture and execution. This vile practice was widely used in the Hellenistic world and the Roman Empire, although Christians often act as though their godman Jesus was the only one to undergo crucifixion. (It can be mildly amusing to point to someone's crucifix and say "My, that's nice. Who is that, Spartacus?") In this instance a Christian hospital worker described as "devout" has been banned from wearing the amulet at work by her health authority employer which claims it could "harbour infection". 80 assumes they mean a physical infection and not a dangerous meme. By the way, the devout label is not necessarily a good thing - remember, the 9/11 suicide-murderers were devout. Rather than accept wearing the magic charm in her pocket as the authority suggested, Helen Slatter has left her job. This shows an exhibitionist tendency on her part (see Look At Me I Am Praying) and also reveals her job to be the main casualty of the infection her amulet carries. The news report also refers to Slatter as a "divorcee" which jars with the description of her as a devout Christian - see Matthew 19:6 in the Christian operating manual. So, to summarize, we have a woman whose need, for whatever reason, to publicly display a magic amulet at her place of work trumps her need for employment. She is devout enough to insist on wearing her amulet, behavior nowhere mentioned in the New Testament, but not so devout as to pay any attention to the NT's unambiguous prohibition on divorce. Is she deserving of sympathy or even admiration for her stance? The rational answer has to be no.

Doubly Unclean - a while back 80 speculated as to whether a devout Muslim (or Jew, for that matter) would feel defiled if they caught swine 'flu. Not only would they have contracted a possibly fatal illness but also they, albeit unwittingly, would have broken their religion's porcine taboo as well. That "unwittingly" won't let them off either, Yahweh and Allah, originally a storm god and a moon god respectively, are not exactly known for being reasonable. The organizers of the hajj, the Muslim pilgrimage to the birthplace of that Arabian religion, Mecca, expect a possible 4 million attendees this year and obviously many of them will be infected, even if they exhibit no obvious symptoms. Saudi health officials have sensibly requested that "The elderly, young, infirm and pregnant should stay away from this year's hajj..." Also fever detecting cameras will be installed at the main airport in Jeddah. In addition pilgrims are being asked "...to cover their noses when sneezing, cough into tissues and wash their hands with soap." (Such care for the pilgrims is a recent development) All very sensible precautions but one is given to wonder why the god at the center of all the ballyhoo let swine 'flu exist in the first place. But then 80 never could understand the finer points of theology. Come to think of it, 80 never found any point to theology in the first place...

"Theology is the effort to explain the unknowable in terms of the not worth knowing."  H.L. Mencken

"Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn’t there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything."  Robert A Heinlein

CSI Vatican - taking advantage of the current media fascination with forensic investigations Pope Ratzinger has revealed his own astounding skill. The pontiff (and ex-Luftwaffe flak gunner) recently stunned the world with his ability to identify the owner of bones almost 2000 years old. Using only the flimsiest of evidence the man formerly known as the Panzer Kardinal was able to state with absolute certainty that "...small fragments of bone" glimpsed by experts who inserted an optic fiber probe into an unopened tomb belonged to one Paul, a misogynist religious fanatic and tent-maker revered by Ratzinger's own death cult. Rumors now abound that the pontiff has been offered a 26-part  TV series with CBS tentatively named Ratzi, Relic Hunter. A spokesman said the Pope was unlikely to take up the offer as he was busy full time with his other activities which include lying about the efficacy of condoms in fighting the spread of HIV AIDS and covering-up child abuse cases. What a loss to the entertainment world....

Mooning Over Apollo - expect over the next few weeks a barrage of stories and TV shows commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Apollo Moon landings. The Guardian has been quick off the mark with several features, including a page debunking the moronic Moon Landings hoax. It does a fairly good job but the best example out there is from Phil Plait, of Bad Astronomy. He thoroughly shreds the so-called evidence offered of a hoax in the Fox TV "documentary" called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?" Of course the more rabidly offensive moon conspiracy theorists will never be convinced of the truth and for those 80 endorses the Buzz Aldrin response, a bunch of fives... (Mind you, this is pretty damn funny. As is this review of a TV documentary about Neil Armstrong.) Update - see here Cumbrian Sky's take on the hoax believers good stuff. Thanks to Bad Astronomy for the heads-up.
 

"The introduction of sharia law into this country is a recipe for a dichotomous legal system that holds Muslims and non-Muslims to different standards. This is not a matter of eating halal meat or seeking God's blessing on one's marriage. It is a challenge to what we believe to be the rights and freedoms of the individual, to our concept of a legal system based on what parliament enacts, and to the right of all of us to live in a society as free as possible from ethnic-religious division or communal claims to superiority and a special status that puts them in some respects above the law to which we are all bound." Denis MacEoin, Civitas press release

Shameful Sharia Shambles - my, what a surprise. Thinktank Civitas has released a report which finds that "Sharia courts should not be recognised under Britain's 1996 Arbitration Act". We are told that "According to Denis MacEoin, author of Sharia Law or 'One Law For All'?, sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation that derive from the values of the Enlightenment and are inherent in modern codes of human rights. Sharia rulings contain great potential for controversy and may involve acts contrary to UK legal norms and human rights legislation." 80 (and countless others) has pointed out before that the treatment of women and girls under this Arab legal system infringes their human rights and has no place in the UK. MacEoin's report also reveals that the number of these courts operating in Britain is not the half dozen or so we thought, but a shocking 85 "...operating largely out of mosques." How the hell has this been allowed to happen? It is another example of the failure of multiculturalism. The people that run these mosques are determined to keep their fellow Muslims ghettoized and ignorant. This country already has a functioning legal system and although it has its faults any fool can see it is infinitely preferable to an arbitrary, misogynist and capricious religious system run solely by men.

It seems that while Britain's socialized medicine and benefits systems are acceptable to these people the laws of the country are not. The current law, which allows the use of tribunals for mediation in certain prescribed areas does not permit arbitration, ie judgements handed out by fatwa. It is unlikely many people who have gone before these sharia courts know that they are already covered by the British legal system, or if they do, they have been intimidated into using the Arab system. The chances of a woman going against her husband's or her male relatives' wishes is not likely to happen so patriarchal is Islam. The upshot of this is that there are many citizens of a civilized European country in the 21st century who are subjected to a medieval legal system - a system that has little to do with justice as understood by the majority of the population. The greed and ineptitude of this country's lawmakers has been paraded before us ad nauseam for the last month or so but it is still amazing to find that they have apparently acquiesced in the destruction of Muslim women's human rights. If you feel outraged by this, and you bloody well should, please support the One Law For All campaign. (Also see No to sharia law in Britain by Denis MacEoin and to learn what sharia can be like on the receiving end see Sharia law and me. Here Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain, tries to shoot the messenger rather than address the built-in inequalities of sharia. Shifty is the word that springs to mind)

"Under most interpretations of Islam a person who leaves the faith is an apostate who can be put to death. While this threat remains, it cannot be accepted that sharia councils are nothing more than independent arbitrators guided by faith. The reality is that for many Muslims, sharia courts are in practice part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation, backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat. The underlying problem is that sharia law reflects male-dominated Asian and Arabic cultures. It cannot therefore be accepted as a legally valid basis even for settling private disagreements in a country like ours, where our law embodies the equal legal status of everyone, regardless of race, gender or religion. Our system is based on moral and legal equality or it is nothing. Moreover, further encouragement of sharia law, far from helping integration, will undermine the efforts of British Muslims struggling to evolve a version of Islam consistent with a tolerant and pluralistic society."  David Green, Civitas press release

A Rantlet - there is a telling sentence in the Telegraph's report on the public execution in Yemen of an alleged child-killer. It is this, "The deeply religious desert country has a poor human rights record and it is unclear if al-Raghwa had a fair trial." Religion and human rights are often at loggerheads, particularly if that religion is Islam. Just look at the sick joke that is the Islamic Human Rights declaration. Human rights are by definition for all humans, not some particular religious subset. But then Christians too treasure their god given right to behave as heartless, discriminatory bastards - just look at the new Anglican splinter group set up to preserve so-called biblical values - that is, to cherish the right to oppose "... the ordination of gay clergy, blessings for gay marriage or civil partnership, and the consecration of women bishops." One of the foremost members of this group is Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, a nasty piece of work if ever there was one. His absurd and offensive assertion that homosexuals should "repent and be changed" is taken on by George Pitcher, a C of E priest and the Telegraph's Religion Editor in a piece called There's no pride in bashing gays, Bishop. It appears in order to combat what Nazir-Ali sees as the threat from Islam he proposes a more fundamentalist Anglicanism.

What is it with these people? Given the gross inequalities all too obvious all around this planet their "solution" is not to end them but to perpetuate them. It is disgusting that these flawed and prejudiced individuals still have the gall to maintain that they hold the high moral ground. A fine example of this is pope Ratzinger, tricked out in his jaunty little crimson hat, wagging his finger at the global financial world. He should deal with the many child rapists in his own cult before lecturing others. This is not to say that global commerce's practices are acceptable, they are decidedly not, but what does this old bigot have to offer as a solution? He is obviously missing more than a few marbles when he urges the financial sector to "...rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity". Perhaps that hat is a mite too tight. Since when was big business ethical? He also took the opportunity to have a pop at one of his hobbyhorses, birth control, claiming, without offering any evidence, that it is forced upon poor communities. Coercion, should it exist, is wrong but it is those very communities that are unable to feed and educate their offspring, communities where many women die in childbirth, or are condemned to be mere producers of babies, shackled by patriarchal religion. But then that suits Ratzinger right down to the ground - the more ignorant, poor folk in the world the greater his power base.

The Rat in the Hat

Obama the Muslim - here is an amusing piece by Mark Morford, a man wanted in 15 states for syntax abuse, on a survey that reported that a "...whopping 89 percent of Americans know that President Barack Obama is not a Muslim..." Morford takes this as good news before looking at the down side, that 11 per cent of the population are dumber than dirt. Update - do see Morford's latest column on the surprise news that Caribou Barbie is stepping down from the governorship of Alaska. It seems he will miss her, "Now that you've up and quit as America's favorite hottie milf ditzball politico moose-slashin' anti-choice anti-feminist destroyer of linear grammar, we feel adrift and lost, a nation without its favorite squeaky purple balloon."  Read the rest here.

Dare To Be A Daniel - "I'm an atheist, but I'm very relaxed about it. I don't preach my atheism, but I have a huge amount of respect for people like Richard Dawkins who do." "There we go, Dan, that's half of America that's not going to see the next Harry Potter film on the back of that comment." Daniel Radcliffe, star of the Harry Potter movies in a recent interview.

Potter Be Damned - "At first glance, the movie appears to be completely harmless in its tone and makeup. However, it is what is lurking behind these books and movie that is so dangerous. Demons and the knowledge of witchcraft and the dark occult arts are just waiting behind the scenes of these books for anyone who wants to try and take the next step to actually try any of these things out." An essay on the evils of Harry Potter apparently by Michael Bradley. Trust him, he's right on this - his god "personally conveyed" it to him.

Blasphemy Challenge - the writers of the wonderful Father Ted TV show have joined a group of secularists opposing Ireland's recently introduced nonsensical and regressive blasphemy legislation. Arthur Mathews and Graham Linehan are backing Atheist Ireland's challenge to the law which will take the form of "...a statement blaspheming all the major religions in Ireland, including Christianity and Islam." Linehan, quoted in this Observer report, says the justice minister Dermot Ahern should be challenged on the definition of blasphemy, "This is insanity. Please, Mr Ahern, define the things we can't say, please! Can we say, 'Jesus is gay'? Or can we ask, 'Is God in a biscuit?' Could he tell us what it means? It is just insanity. After all, there are things contained in the holy books of one religion that are blasphemy to another religion. The logic behind this comes from Alice in Wonderland." The penalty for blasphemy can be as much as a fine of €25,000.

Wisdom of Father Dougal Bishop Facks: So, Father. Do you ever have any doubts about the religious life? Is your faith ever tested? Anything you would be worried about? Any doubts you've been having about any aspects of belief? Anything like that?
Father Dougal: Well, you know the way God made us all, right? And he's looking down at us from heaven and everything?
Bishop Facks: Uh-huh.
[nods]
Father Dougal: And then his son came down and saved everyone and all that?
Bishop Facks: Yes.
Father Dougal: And when we die we're all going to go to heaven?
Bishop Facks: Yes. What about it?
Father Dougal: Well, that's the bit I have trouble with...

A Thought For The Day - BBC Radio 4's Thought For The Day (TFTD) slot is back in the news again. For those that don't know, TFTD is a short, 3 minute section of the morning news and current affairs show, Today, which is given over to believers of various kinds to relate current news items to their beliefs and offer some kind of theological reflection on the Big Questions raised by world and national events. In the main TFTD appears incongruous, condescending and often very silly. The web site Platitude Of The Day does a great job of translating the waffle, revealing the dross and sheer banality beneath the verbiage of many contributors. Any genuinely thought-provoking stuff is a rare occurrence. TFTD is incongruous in that the rest of the Today program tries scrupulously for balance in its material but the "god slot" has only religious contributors and there is no right of reply. For a long time now the National Secular Society and others have pushed for the inclusion of other voices, secular voices which would give the slot a desperately needed wider perspective. This has been refused by the BBC over the years with the claim that there is little enough religious coverage and that TFTD is one small area of one program. This argument is wrong and does not withstand even cursory examination. A look at the schedules of BBC TV and particularly radio reveals a plethora of religious shows of one sort or another. Guardian columnist Michael White offered this line recently saying, "Secularists dominate the airwaves for the other 23 hours and 57 minutes of the day, so why not keep three minutes for the faiths?" He was soon put in his place by philosopher and writer A C Grayling who supplied a list of just "...some of the daily and weekly programmes put out by the Religion and Ethics Broadcasting Unit of the BBC". After seeing the list White, to his credit, conceded that Grayling had a point (Note how the BBC combines Religion and Ethics under one heading - it seems the corporation is unaware that ethical behavior is perfectly possible without faith). Naturally the steadily dwindling Church of England is not happy with the idea of allowing secular contributions. This piece in the Times quotes a Church of England spokesman, "We would strongly resist moves to add non-religious voices to one of the few protected spots in the schedule where religious views on issues of the day can be expressed openly...". Well, he would say that wouldn't he? In a largely secular country with little or no interest in organized religion a special area ring-fenced for faith heads to spout off without challenge is something worth fighting for.

One outstandingly daft commentary on the TFTD dispute comes from Michael Gove, writing in the Times. He gives the impression, at least in this piece, of being one of those sad types for whom the entire mind-boggling universe isn't enough - he cannot picture a worldview that doesn't include irrational belief in the unproven and unprovable. He appears to be the sort that Douglas Adams had in mind when he said "Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" Gove sarcastically says, "Yes, of course, they should allow atheists on Thought for the Day. But isn’t it curious that those who affect to despise religion seem so desperate to copy what the religious do?" In this particular case all the non-religious want to do is to offer their own thoughts and reflections on the news of the day. Surely Gove doesn't think such an activity should be solely reserved for believers? Perhaps he does, as he is simple-minded enough to equate atheism with a dull and mechanistic view of our amazing cosmos. Sadly we will never know for sure as the article deteriorates (quite how something that starts at such an abysmally low level can deteriorate further is a puzzle - but Gove manages it) into a galumphing and embarrassingly unfunny attempt at what Gove no doubt fondly imagines to be humor. The big wheeze is that if atheists (Gove refers to atheists throughout, ignoring the many agnostic and secular points of view that opening up TFTD to the non-religious would permit) are allowed onto the sacred 3 minutes why not not let - gasp - the Devil contribute? This then allows Gove to take a pop at all the things that appear to irritate him - in other words he uses the piece for a tedious whinge, on a par with the crap served up on TV's Grumpy Old Men. It was only when 80 belatedly looked at Gove's background that it all suddenly made sense, the caricaturing of atheists, the clumsy, cringe-inducing attempts at humor and the protracted whining. Michael Gove is a Conservative politician, the poor chap.

Homeopathic A & E - Mitchell and Webb's hilarious vision of a hospital's emergency department run by devotees of so-called complementary/alternative medicine. Also see the pair's There Is No God.

Oh, The Irony - "While we do not wish in any way to detract from devotion to Our Lady, we would also wish to avoid anything which might lead to superstition." County Limerick diocese statement on the many gullible folk who have flocked this week to a  church to pray at the stump of a recently cut willow that is claimed to have the silhouette of the Virgin Mary. To 80's untrained eye this means she must have looked like a slightly overweight penguin. (Also see Jackson Stumped below)

Hardly Bankrupt - "The Church Commissioners, who manage the Church of England's investments, has been hit by the recession and the value of its portfolio shrank to £4.4 billion during 2008 compared with £5.7 billion in 2007." Not financially at any rate.

The Case For God - is a book by religious apologist and ex-nun, Karen Armstrong. Rather than a traditional review do read John Crace's digest of the work - a condensed version which saves you the tedium of actually wading through Armstrong's offering. Hilarious stuff.

The Catholic church is a force for good in the world - this is the subject of a debate to be held on October 19th at the Methodist Central Hall, Westminster, London. Tickets are available for a fairly steep £25 but the cost may well be worth it. Defending the proposition are a Nigerian Roman Catholic Archbishop, John Onaiyekan and the British Conservative politician Ann Widdecombe. Widdecombe, (whose name is misspelt on the debate announcement) converted to Roman Catholicism in 1993 in reaction to the Anglican church's decision to ordain women priests. Opposing the motion are Christopher Hitchens, journalist, writer and one of the so-called "new atheists", a label he attracted after the success of his book God Is Not Great, and Stephen Fry, actor and writer. This may be a case of 80's prejudices showing but the Archbishop and the politician seem seriously outgunned. Adding to their troubles will be the recent publication of the Ryan Report which revealed horrific stories of child abuse at the hands of the Catholic clergy. This follows on reports of abuse and subsequent cover-ups elsewhere in the world. Coupled with the church's lies about condom efficacy in combating the spread of HIV AIDS and its attitude to gays, the religionists will have an uphill struggle. It is noteworthy but not necessarily indicative of the outcome of the debate itself that an online poll on the proposition is showing 1% for and 98.7% against.

Barmy Swami - India has demonstrated that homophobic bigotry is not exclusive to the abrahamic religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. A Hindu guru, one Swami "Baba" Ramdev, a popular TV star, has petitioned India's supreme court over the recent legislation dropping India's law criminalising homosexuality. Ramdev claims that gays can be "cured" by using his own particular (and lucrative) brand of mumbo-jumbo, "It can be treated like any other congenital defect. Such tendencies can be treated by yoga, pranayam and other meditation techniques." Ramdev was in the news a few years ago over claims that there were "... human bones and animal parts in herbal drugs produced by his pharmacy." Nothing, however seems to have come of this and Ramdev continues to coin it in peddling his "medicines". His yoga, he claims modestly, cures not just homosexuality but can also "...can clear blocked arteries, lower blood pressure and cure diabetes, asthma, cancer, slipped discs, cervical and arthritis pain, kidney failure and poor eyesight."  Eager to jump on the anti-gay bandwagon is an astrologer, Sushil Kumar Kaushal, who has also petitioned the court claiming "...even animals don't indulge in such activities...". Here the astrologer is definitely wrong as recent research has confirmed. Still, one can hardly expect accurate information from someone who makes a living hawking unsubstantiated nonsense. (On the subject of Hindus, Burger King's moronic advertising people managed to offend by using the image of the goddess Lakshmi next to a burger on a poster campaign. Well thought out guys - don't these clods realize every religion is now playing the outrage game? Talk about goring sacred cows.. Thanks to Mediawatchwatch)

Jackson Stumped - what took them so long? The first report of Michael Jackson being seen in a tree stump has appeared. This shows the late singer and chimp owner is already high in the heavenly hierarchy. Trees and stumps are the preserve of the most famous one night stand of all, the Virgin Mary. Here for your delectation is a slideshow of holy apparitions - beware, some of these require not just the eye of faith but both eyes of faith wearing image intensifiers aided by the Holy Magnifying Glass of Saint Rorschach.

Theological Ruminations - swine 'flu pandemic worries have caused some Roman Catholic churches not to offer communion wine for fear of spreading infection among the faithful as they all swig from the same chalice. This is a very sensible move but it may seem to some to be at odds with the doctrine of Transubstantiation. This is the belief that the communion bread and wine are transformed into the actual body and blood of the god man, Jesus. Apart from the cannibalistic implications of this miracle one would think that if the wine becomes such an holy fluid surely it would nullify mere viruses? Luckily the church already  has an answer for this one. To our everyday human senses the bread and wine appear not to change at all - which is just as well, as forcing down a chunk of flesh and a glug of blood would likely deter many would-be celebrants. Now, to get round this one clever theologians insist that transubstantiation really does take place but  is not accessible to the human senses, i.e. sight, taste, smell or touch. This is known as having one's cake and eating it. Yes, the miracle occurs but not in any form that you can actually detect. This of course leads one to wonder how on earth do they know it happens? The answer is they don't, but this is where faith comes in. The Catholic Encyclopedia entry on the history and theology of transubstantiation is worth a look, if only to marvel at the convoluted semantic wriggling involved to justify claims of this imperceptible miracle.

So, the upshot is that to our gross physical perceptions the bread and wine are just that, bread and wine, and are perfectly capable of transmitting a physical object, such as a 'flu virus. This subtle chicanery allows the church, at least to its own satisfaction, to claim that god, or maybe one third of him, is "...really, truly, and substantially present" during the ritual without needing any supporting evidence whatsoever. Why one third? That would be according to the doctrine of the Trinity in which three gods are in fact one but also still three. That is three persons but one being. That is to say they have one identical essence or nature and yet remain three persons. Puzzlingly Jesus, like the other two components, Dad and the Spook, has existed eternally even though the New Testament describes his birth and death. His supposed thirty odd years as a human was like a short break from routine. In fact a very short break indeed - compared to eternity thirty years isn't even a drop in the bucket. Anyway, this cunning Trinity idea allows the church to have three gods and yet still somehow claim to be monotheistic.

It is worth noting here that neither the Trinity or Transubstantiation are mentioned in the Catholic's magic book, the bible - they made it all up themselves. Theologians must share the ability of the White Queen in Through The Looking Glass in that they apparently believe "...as many as six impossible things before breakfast." and very likely even more than that. No wonder some Christian apologists berate the likes of atheist writers Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens for not understanding the complex subtleties of theology. On the other hand that may be because theology is a load of old bollocks. The whole field of study is an exercise in begging the question in that the existence of the object of study, god, is assumed with no supporting evidence. Aah, the devout would say, that is where faith comes in - which is in fact begging the question with knobs on. 80 leaves the last word to Thomas Paine "The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."

Sickness - as well as worrying about swine 'flu (see above) there is another plague that should trouble the Roman Catholic church, not a virus but the predilection of so many of its celibate clergy for raping children. The Times tells us "A report detailing the alleged sexual abuse of 450 children by Roman Catholic priests in the Archdiocese of Dublin was handed to the Irish Government yesterday."  This follows hard on the heels of the Ryan Report released earlier this year (see Wholly Despicable) which revealed that "Rape and sexual molestation were "endemic" in Irish Catholic church-run industrial schools and orphanages". This latest report sounds all too disgustingly familiar with the ecclesiastical authorities doing their old trick in which "...bishops sought to cover up the activities of paedophile priests by moving them from diocese to diocese, thereby facilitating the abuse of children over a wider area." . Perhaps this ploy should be called the Cardinal Gambit after that unholy pair Law and Murphy O'Connor. Next time you hear a representative of this church on the TV and radio taking the high moral ground against, say, contraception or gays just remember the children worldwide that have suffered and no doubt still suffer at the hands of these pious creeps. These are not rare isolated cases. A barrel that contains so many rotten apples is irrevocably tainted. (see Catholic sex abuse)

Apologists For Evil - Pat Condell comes out swinging his metaphorical fists at the whiny multicultural left, those who accuse anyone that speaks their mind about the vileness of Islamism of being racist and/or Islamophobic, and gives them a well-deserved and long overdue drubbing. If you are sick and tired of being expected to pussyfoot around for fear of offending some bearded twat who loathes you, your beliefs and culture Condell is a breath of fresh air. 80 sent the video link to a friend who replied "One, cannot disagree with a single word or sentiment - exactly spot on." I cannot add anything to that.

"Islam is a way of life. It is a system of beliefs based on divine revelation… As a Muslim, one cannot choose to follow parts of Islam and disregard others." Nadia al-Awady, a freelance science journalist based in Cairo.

"(The above) illustrates well how scientific truth is sacred until it contradicts the holier truth of the Qur'an. During Islam's scientific boom years, such an attitude could just about survive alongside scientific inquiry – although many of Islam's greatest scientists were sceptics, theists or agnostics. However, in the modern world, science fact increasingly contradicts religious myth and, for the Arab world to advance, it needs not only to invest more in research, it also has to hold universal truths above religious ones." Khaled Diab writing in the Guardian

God and Sex and All That Stuff - Mark Morford is saddened how his concept of a transcendental being is cheapened by human beings. He questions whether such a deity is interested in the minutiae of our existence - especially our sexual activities and preferences - and takes a pop at the odious Mark Sanford on the way. "Really, it almost does not matter in which God you believe, what sect or major denomination. Nearly all are of the same idea, offer up the same unquestionable truth: Of course God cares what you do, who you screw, upon which sliver of dust-choked holy land you live, how high you raise your flag and which statue you kneel before. This is the greatest wonder of all: In the impossible vastness of time and space, God cares most desperately, most fanatically about this particular swirling blue dot of inconsequential dust we call home. Hey, we invented God, right? We can do with Him whatever we want." Read the rest of God Is Not Your Bitch.

A Million Dollar Affliction? - Steve Miller (not the musician but a club DJ) has the opportunity to turn adversity to his advantage. Miller claims, according to this report, "...he has been forced into exile by a powerful allergy to Wi-Fi internet waves which leaves him feeling dizzy, sick and disorientated." Note that he appears not to be affected by all the other electromagnetic radiation around from cellphones, TVs, radios, radar, the Sun, etc just Wi-Fi. This makes it seem that Miller can not only directly detect  electromagnetic radiation but does so only within a fairly narrow band of frequencies. This ability is remarkable and would seem to transcend normal human senses - in fact it is paranormal. Here is where the opportunity comes in - Miller could be in the running to win a million dollars from the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF). This prize is on offer to anyone who can demonstrate paranormal abilities and Miller certainly fits the bill. So instead of hiding out in "The only place where he says he can escape the "electrosmog" ... his own home – a detached house with 18in thick granite walls in a village near Falmouth, Cornwall." he should get in touch with the JREF and apply. Although he will have to explain why he carries a Wi-Fi detector - surely of all people he doesn't need one? Unless of course the whole story is bollocks and he is just garnering himself some free publicity - but how likely is that? Under the original story in the Sun  we are told "Steve's new Afterlife album, Electrosensitive, is out now on Defected Records."

An Embarrassing Ally - back in May this year 80 wrote about the scandals emerging over Italian leader Silvio Berlusconi's sexual proclivities (see Playboy v Prelate). These had led to Cardinal Walter Kasper, head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity to fire a shot across the aging Lothario's bows and 80 looked forward with glee to a full-blown row. Since then, despite the steady drip, drip of revelations concerning the perma-tanned priapic buffoon's partying there has been no further comment from the Vatican, with which Berlusconi has been on good terms. Now in the Telegraph's latest report, which has transcriptions of "sex tapes" supposedly featuring Berlusconi and one of his coterie of "escort girls", it is noted "Political insiders said the graphic nature of the tapes, if true, could prove fatal in Mr Berlusconi's close relationship with the Vatican and almost certainly ruled out an audience with the Pope before the Parliament resumes in October." So far the self-appointed guardians of morality in the Catholic church have yet to wheel out any big guns. Berlusconi has backed the Vatican in its condemnation of abortion, contraception and gay marriage and in the tragic case of Eluana Englaro but when an ally becomes such a total embarrassment Ratzinger will surely be forced to act. Update - it seems that the horny old goat prime minister has decided to rein in his appetites somewhat to avoid censure from the Vatican.

A Vain Hope - "Flogging is part of the penal code which we are in the process of revising. We have our fair share of extremists like any other country but we are in the process of changing into a liberal Islamic democracy." Farah Faizal, the Maldivian High Commissioner to London quoted in the Telegraph. A liberal Islamic democracy? Surely this is a contradiction in terms, such a fabulous beast exists nowhere on the planet. The Maldives' government gets top marks for trying but what it seeks is impossible. Secularity and the recognition of human rights are essential to proper democratic governance. Neither concept is at home in Islam. (Also see here)

Sharia Danger - the Times tells us "Increasing numbers of non-Muslims are turning to Sharia courts to resolve commercial disputes and other civil matters...". If true this is very disturbing. The source for this is the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and is not, as far as 80 can ascertain, independently verified. The MAT naturally would like to claim this is so in order to put its Arabian religio-legal system in a good light, especially as "...the MAT is planning to triple the number of its courts by setting up in ten new British cities by the end of the year. It will expand its network further by acting as an advisory body to dozens of other Islamic courts, with the intention of achieving national consensus over rulings and procedures." Why anybody with access to the regular courts would want to use a system that is capricious and that also treats women as of less legal standing than men is a mystery. An MAT spokesman, Freed Chedie, told the Times “We put weight on oral agreements, whereas the British courts do not.” Chedie obviously thinks this is a good thing but surely this would reduce litigation to a travesty of justice in which litigants can indulge in a "yes you did, no you didn't" school playground level of argument with no proper resolution. Chedie also spoke of standardising sharia courts "We would train most of the imams so that a lady in Glasgow would receive the same form of service as a lady in London." But not obviously the same form of service rendered to a man. Anyone plugging the supposed benefits of sharia over the UK's real legal system who does not address the former's inherent gender inequality is effectively lying by omission and should be trusted no further than one can comfortably spit a grand piano.

Those who think sharia law is a good idea ought to realize that even its limited adoption is the thin end of a very nasty wedge. Here are some items of current news gleaned in less than five minutes on the web. In Malaysia "A Muslim model from Singapore has been sentenced to flogging by a Malaysian Islamic court after she confessed to drinking beer at a nightclub here." In the UK we learn "The Saudi Arabian princess who was granted asylum in Britain after giving birth to an illegitimate child feared flogging and stoning if she was made to return home.". Oh yes, the US and UK's great ally, Saudi Arabia, where we are told, "According to Amnesty International, there were at least 102 executions of men and women by stonings, floggings, beheadings and hangings last year and the charity claims there are at least 136 more people on death row". In the Maldives "Dozens of young women ... have been flogged in public as punishment for extramarital sex. In one of the worst cases, an 18-year-old woman received 100 lashes in public earlier this month in the capital Male." We are further informed, "The young woman punished ... fainted during the flogging. Two men who were her co-accused escaped punishment." Amnesty International is again on the case, saying "...that about 180 men and women are awaiting flogging after being sentenced by both informal Islamic sharia courts and criminal courts for having sexual intercourse outside marriage." This is not justice, it is primitive barbarism. Such violence and cruelty lies at one end of the sharia continuum - at the other end is the sort promoted by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal. But it is a continuum. Sharia is a foreign religio-legal system, it does not belong in Britain. Those that are desperate to be judged by bearded mullahs should do the obvious thing and relocate to a country that espouses sharia. When a religion steps outside the mosque or church and attempts to supplant the law of the land that is when it has gone too far and should be deemed incompatible with a free society.

Simon Singh Talks About Chiropractic and the censorship of science. Part one and part two. Highly recommended.

Simon Singh Libel Case - see Jack of Kent's excellent blog for the latest news in the case of Simon Singh and the British Chiropractic Association. The BCA is the bunch that was apparently incapable of producing evidence of efficacy for some highly debatable treatments and so consequently chose to muzzle writer and journalist Singh by recourse to Britain's absurd libel laws. Singh's original (edited) article is below. For a list of sites carrying Singh's piece see Sense About Science. (Also see Witch Hunt? No Scrutiny? Yes and Imagine. For more on chiropractic  and its hazards take a look at Chirowatch)

Beware the spinal trap - Some practitioners claim it is a cure-all, but the research suggests chiropractic therapy has mixed results - and can even be lethal, says Simon Singh.

You might be surprised to know that the founder of chiropractic therapy, Daniel David Palmer, wrote that '99% of all diseases are caused by displaced vertebrae'. In the 1860s, Palmer began to develop his theory that the spine was involved in almost every illness because the spinal cord connects the brain to the rest of the body. Therefore any misalignment could cause a problem in distant parts of the body.

In fact, Palmer's first chiropractic intervention supposedly cured a man who had been profoundly deaf for 17 years. His second treatment was equally strange, because he claimed that he treated a patient with heart trouble by correcting a displaced vertebra.

You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact some still possess quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything, including helping treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying - even though there is not a jot of evidence.

I can confidently label these assertions as utter nonsense because I have co-authored a book about alternative medicine with the world's first professor of complementary medicine, Edzard Ernst. He learned chiropractic techniques himself and used them as a doctor. This is when he began to see the need for some critical evaluation. Among other projects, he examined the evidence from 70 trials exploring the benefits of chiropractic therapy in conditions unrelated to the back. He found no evidence to suggest that chiropractors could treat any such conditions.

But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic.

In 2001, a systematic review of five studies revealed that roughly half of all chiropractic patients experience temporary adverse effects, such as pain, numbness, stiffness, dizziness and headaches. These are relatively minor effects, but the frequency is very high, and this has to be weighed against the limited benefit offered by chiropractors.

More worryingly, the hallmark technique of the chiropractor, known as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust, carries much more significant risks. This involves pushing joints beyond their natural range of motion by applying a short, sharp force. Although this is a safe procedure for most patients, others can suffer dislocations and fractures.

Worse still, manipulation of the neck can damage the vertebral arteries, which supply blood to the brain. So-called vertebral dissection can ultimately cut off the blood supply, which in turn can lead to a stroke and even death. Because there is usually a delay between the vertebral dissection and the blockage of blood to the brain, the link between chiropractic and strokes went unnoticed for many years. Recently, however, it has been possible to identify cases where spinal manipulation has certainly been the cause of vertebral dissection.

Laurie Mathiason was a 20-year-old Canadian waitress who visited a chiropractor 21 times between 1997 and 1998 to relieve her low-back pain. On her penultimate visit she complained of stiffness in her neck. That evening she began dropping plates at the restaurant, so she returned to the chiropractor. As the chiropractor manipulated her neck, Mathiason began to cry, her eyes started to roll, she foamed at the mouth and her body began to convulse. She was rushed to hospital, slipped into a coma and died three days later. At the inquest, the coroner declared: 'Laurie died of a ruptured vertebral artery, which occurred in association with a chiropractic manipulation of the neck.'

This case is not unique. In Canada alone there have been several other women who have died after receiving chiropractic therapy, and Edzard Ernst has identified about 700 cases of serious complications among the medical literature. This should be a major concern for health officials, particularly as under-reporting will mean that the actual number of cases is much higher. If spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.

Simon Singh is a science writer in London and the co-author, with Edzard Ernst, of Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial. This is an edited version of an article published in The Guardian for which Singh is being personally sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association.

Quackery - "Spinal manipulation may be effective for relief of appropriately selected cases of low back pain, but manipulation to correct chiropractic's imaginary "subluxations" is quackery." from Quackery: How Should It Be Defined? by Stephen Barrett, M.D.

Dhimmwits - is the name of an occasional section noting the craven attitude taken by many in authority in accommodating the demands of whiny and/or aggressive religionists. This will mainly focus on Islam, not out of "Islamophobia", a nonsense word if ever there was one, but because it is stroppy Muslims that started the current burgeoning rivalry between religions as to who can be the most offended or outraged by secular society. Quite often the dhimmwits actually appease in advance, an acquiescence down payment, as it were. A recent example, the Times informs us, is the Avon and Somerset Constabulary, which "... has begun to equip its female officers with a uniform issue hijab to wear when they enter a mosque." Why should  police officers in the execution of their duty need to wear anything other than the proper police uniform? Naturally because Islam is inherently misogynist it is only the women who have to cover up, although it has been suggested facetiously that perhaps policemen should wear little stick-on beards when entering a mosque.

Almost as disgusting as this pre-emptive appeasement is the weasel-worded crap given to justify it. The Times reports "A spokeswoman insisted that they were not intended purely to cater for Muslim cultural sensibilities but were multi-faith. They are designed to be used in any place of worship and can be used to cover the head or the shoulders. For example, plain clothes officers could use them to cover their shoulders in a Catholic Church, or they can be used to cover the head in synagogues," she said." This is utter bollocks as the very next paragraph reveals "The scarves were however developed in a joint project with the Aklima Initiative, which focuses on working Muslim women, and the Mosque Initiative - both Islamic groups." Naturally an imam quoted thinks it is a good idea, ''This will go a long way in encouraging a trustful relationship between the police and the Muslim community..." As 80 has suddenly decided to become a devotee of the Flying Spaghetti Monster from now on he will refuse "a trustful relationship" with the guardians of the law should they enter his house without wearing the mandated pirate regalia. (To learn about Dhimmis see here)

Bishop Bashing - the Roman Catholic Archbishop of England and Wales, Vincent Nichols has issued a warning about "Websites such as Facebook and MySpace" saying they "...encourage teenagers to view friendship as a "commodity" and are leading them to suicide..." Well, Mr Nichols, perhaps before talking about things of which you apparently know very little you should put your own house in order. Your church has gained notoriety around the world over the raping of children by a supposedly celibate priesthood - causing untold harm to hundreds if not thousands of children, their childhood stolen and their lives ruined by such disgusting abuse. This is the same church that is doing its best to wriggle out of the European Commission's planned Equal Treatment Directive - branding it "wholly unacceptable". No, Archbishop, the rape and abuse of children by priests and nuns is wholly unacceptable, not a law that would require you and your church to treat human beings equally. Just because your and your fellow clergy's prejudices and bigotry are dressed up as "deeply held beliefs" doesn't make them any less abhorrent. You profess concern over children on social networking sites and yet seem unaware of the harm that your church does to young gays, for instance. You take the high moral ground all the while believing that those who don't follow your church's precepts and dogma will burn forever in hell. Think about that. Your wring your hands over young people on the web and yet you genuinely believe that your loving god will inflict everlasting torture on gays, atheists and anyone else that doesn't agree with your superstitions. Not content with causing misery for many in this life you wish to continue the persecution and cruelty in the next. It is a great relief to some of us that your "afterlife" guff is bullshit, but what about the many poor sods that are convinced there really is a hell? What about a young gay Catholic going through agonies of guilt and the fear of hell because of your bloody religion? You are, to quote your own book, like a whited sepulchre, "...which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness."  Your hypocrisy deserves nothing but contempt. (Here is Mark Morford's take on the archbishop's blather - Jesus Fears Your Facebook Profile)

Priceless - Dara Ó Briain on Homeopathy & Nutritionists vs Real Science.

Statement of the Bleeding Obvious - but welcome nonetheless. "Homeopathic medicine has not been shown to have any benefits at all and should not be used as an alternative to conventional treatment." Dr Hamish Meldrum, chairman of the British Medical Association quoted in the Daily Telegraph.

Quackery By Appointment - as 80 has said before homeopathy is useless beyond a placebo effect. It is best at dealing with minor illnesses that would have got better anyway. When it is offered for serious, life-threatening diseases such as malaria or swine 'flu it actually becomes dangerous and those offering homeopathic treatment for such ailments should have to prove its effectiveness to the same standards as conventional pharmaceuticals. Failure to do this should result in prosecution for endangering a patient's life. The Telegraph informs us that a firm called Ainsworths, quacks by appointment to the Queen and aging king-wannabe Charles Windsor "...has been accused of "quackery" for supplying bottles of pills labelled as "Swine Flu Formula". for people suffering from the disease. The British Medical Association (BMA) warned it would be dangerous if the treatment caused people to delay seeking medical help and said the pills should not be used as an alternative to conventional treatment."  We are further informed "The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has announced that one of its enforcement teams will examine the company's claims over the effects the pills can have." As, in common with all other homepathic "medicines", the swine 'flu treatment contains no active ingredients this should prove interesting. Homeopathy is one of the oldest quack treatments on offer to the ill-informed or gullible - surpassed perhaps only by acupuncture - if you believe the claims made for the antiquity of needless needling. For more on homeopathy see this page from UK-Skeptics and this entry in the Skeptic's Dictionary. From the Quackwatch site check out Homeopathy: The Ultimate Fake by Dr Stephen Barrett and see Mitchell and Webb's hilarious Homeopathic A & E.

Wright Wrong - As a response to an Adam Rutherford article on resurrection in his Alpha Course series Tom Wright has produced a piece entitled The resurrection was as shocking then as it is now. Wright, the Guardian tells us is "... the Bishop of Durham and an internationally renowned New Testament scholar, who specialises in the historical and theological study of the resurrection". Well, if he is internationally renowned it doesn't say much for the standards of scholarship, something made abundantly clear in many of the comments posted below his piece. Wright gives us a list of nine points that he imagines support his case that the resurrection of Jesus was a real historical event. Even a cursory glance shows that they don't. Here are just a few things that caught 80's eye. In point two Wright refers to "...the close-up, often first-hand evidence both for what happened and for what Jesus' first followers made of it all." The earliest writings in the Christian New Testament (NT) are the letters of Paul. Strangely Paul seems to know little or nothing of the earthly Jesus' career chronicled in the much later gospels. Paul was writing within 20 years or so of Jesus' supposed time on earth and yet the Jesus Christ he describes is a spiritual being, having more in common with the deities in contemporary mystery cults than the life and mission of a Galilean preacher. In fact even when Paul could have bested his adversaries by quoting the gospel Jesus he fails to do so. It is claimed that this is because he chose not to do so. A more believable explanation is that he knew of no such earthly Jesus.

In point three Wright baldly states "The historical evidence for Jesus himself is extraordinarily good." No, it is not. There are no contemporary accounts of his life and, as seen above, the earliest references to him do not appear to refer to a real, flesh and blood inhabitant of Nazareth. The gospels were written at least 40 years after the events they purport to portray and are not biographies as we would understand them but theological tracts showing how the messiah fulfilled supposed earlier prophecies. They also have the very great disadvantage of being written, on most dating assessments, after the disastrous Jewish war with Rome in which many thousands died and records destroyed.  The amount of contradictions between the synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke are glaring enough without even looking at John, which tells a very different story with a highly evolved theology of its own. The historical evidence for Jesus is about as good as that for King Arthur. (See this on the oft-cited Flavian Testimony)

In point four Wright says "... through Jesus, the creator of the world launched his plan to rescue the world from the decaying and corrupting force of evil itself." Yet we must ask the obvious question, if the creator made all there is did that same creator also make evil? No amount of theological wriggling can disguise this problem. It is not some unfathomably deep mystery but inconsistent nonsense. Wright goes on to refer to the "...rescuing rule of the creator, breaking in to creation. If this stuff didn't happen then Christianity is based on a mistake. You can't rescue it by turning it into a philosophy." It is wrong to call it a mistake - it wasn't a mistake at all but the growth and evolution of a Judaic/Hellenistic savior cult, one which shared characteristics with many others at the time. On the subject of the other resurrections featured in the gospels (but never mentioned by Paul) such as that of Lazarus, Wright claims for no reason at all "The other "raisings" in the NT are of course what we would call "near death experiences" – people who are clinically dead and then find themselves called back." The gospel writers seem to think these people were actually dead, bereft of life etc... How then does Wright differentiate?

In point seven Wright says of the Jesus' post-death appearances "You can't explain how they came to say what they said unless there were both several "sightings" of and meetings with someone they took to be Jesus, alive again, and an empty tomb where he had been." The earliest "appearances" mentioned are in Paul's letters and appear to be visions of a spiritual being, the Risen Lord, and not actual physical appearances. What's more he mentions Christ appearing to James and Cephas (Peter) and 500 others and at no time does he treat these visions any differently from his own, ie visions of a spiritual being. It is only the much later gospels that insist on a physically resurrected ex-corpse, complete with wounds. Paul nowhere mentions them.

In point eight Wright argues for the resurrection as an integral part of his faith and as an unique event. In fact there were, as mentioned above, many virgin-born, dying and reborn savior cults around at the time and Paul, our earliest witness, describes something very much like them, sharing many characteristics. When this fact was pointed out to early Christians by pagans the response was that these other saviors and cults had been manufactured by the devil in advance to discredit their claims of a unique Jesus. (I believe this is still the official line of the Roman Catholic church in explaining these unfortunate similarities) In point nine Wright comes up with the incredible claim "It is possible to argue historically for the truth of Jesus' resurrection. I and others have done so and the case is remarkably good." He might have done so to his own and his fellow believer's satisfaction but any proper historical examination of the sources shows that he is deluded. If he claims, and he does, that there was a real person called Jesus, an itinerant preacher from Galilee who was crucified by the authorities in Jerusalem for sedition he should start with trying to prove it. Having done so, then he can go on to address the supernatural elements of the story such as the resurrection. It is dismaying that someone who is supposed to be an eminent scholar in his field does such a poor job. (For references on this subject see these articles by Richard Carrier, these essays on Christianity, and Earl Doherty's meticulously researched The Jesus Puzzle.)

Without A Prayer - this report tells us of the inhabitants of a "deeply Roman Catholic" village in Switzerland who are worried about the retreat of the Great Aletsch glacier. Until recently they were more concerned about its advance, but global climate change, despite the denialist idiots, is at work even here. Back in the 17th century, we are told the villagers entered into a pact with their God, pledging "... to lead virtuous lives. In exchange, God would spare their homes and livelihoods from being swallowed by Europe's largest glacier as it expanded toward the valley with heavy winter snows." Obviously they were not virtuous enough as the local priest, the Rev. Pascal Venetz said there were "countless, horrible natural catastrophes" in his parish from the 17th to the 19th centuries as the glacier expanded. Now they are asking Ratzinger to allow them to change the terms of their covenant.  Venetz said that the " Villagers should continue with the vow, but the request for divine assistance should be adjusted to conform with the changing reality of nature"  Instead of mucking around with all that fiddly scientific stuff why doesn't the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) just beg the Christian Sky Fairy to reverse the effects of global warming? Let's face it prayer has worked so well for the villagers in the past, right?

Ramadan - in a piece about the courageous actions of Lubna Hussein who is facing the prospect of a barbaric judicial assault for the heinous crime of wearing a pair of trousers Nesrine Malik makes an unfortunate gaffe. Hussein's case has been deferred, possibly because of international scrutiny and the brave protests by Sudanese women and Malik notes "The new date for the trial, 7 September, falls in the middle of Ramadan. This will work in Hussein's favour. Ramadan is a month when Muslims are supposed to renounce violence and refrain from all intolerant behaviour, dedicating the fast to peaceful contemplation." 80 is not the first to note the implication here is that for the rest of the year Muslims can be violent and intolerant. Who would have thought it? (These two, perhaps?) Ramadan in many countries is a joke, an excuse for unhealthy night-time bingeing after the day's fasting.

Dhimmwits - it is not often that 80 finds himself in accord with the Daily Mail, but the exercise undertaken by South Yorkshire Police reaches new heights of idiocy. We are told "Three female police officers were ordered to dress up as Muslim women for the day just to see what it felt like.They wore traditional burkhas as part of a scheme designed to help police interact better with the Islamic community. Two covered their faces with hijab headscarves and niqab veils, leaving only narrow slits to see through, and another wore Muslim dress and a headscarf showing her face." Note that this panders to the more extreme end of the spectrum of Islam - most women do not dress up in these demeaning tents. (See Pat Condell on the burka) It hardly needs to be said that police money and time should be spent on catching criminals and not pandering to the "Muslim community", whatever that is. Following on the heels of the Avon and Somerset Constabulary and its hijab tomfoolery this is a worrying sign of the police losing sight of the main purpose of their job. Compare the above dhimmwit nonsense to the brave stand taken by Lubna Hussein in Sudan, who is threatened with a flogging for wearing trousers.

The police should certainly treat all members of the public with respect but aping their customs is pathetic and would appear to be an attempt to garner some cheap publicity. For many people, including 80, this shows the moronic lengths to which the multicultural bureaucrats will go to further their discredited agenda. This sort of nonsense goes hand in hand with the establishment of various religious police associations, the latest being pagans. Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: “We have nothing against pagans, or anyone else, observing their religion, but it should have no place in policing. We now have a police force that encourages members to identify themselves in religious terms and that cannot be good for community cohesion. The police are there to serve the whole community, not bits of it, and when people put their religious identity before their identity as police officers, suspicions can arise that they will not treat everyone in the same way. If there is one public service that it is essential should be secular, it is the police force. Instead, we have this burgeoning of religious groups within the force, each demanding special treatment. It’s not the way to do it. All these sectional groups — whether based on religion, race or sexuality — should be dismantled before they cause real problems.”

Democracy Iranian Style - "Who has voted for whom is not the question …today we need a national will. We need to join forces." Mahmoud Ahmedinejad aka the Poison Dwarf, quoted in the Guardian.. "Who has voted for who is not the question"? This vile, murderous little man obviously can't get his head around the idea of voting for your preferred candidate and expecting your vote to be counted.

Homeopathy Is Useless - beyond a placebo effect. The World Health Organization (WHO), obviously part of the Department of the Bleeding Obvious, has warned that "People with conditions such as HIV, TB and malaria should not rely on homeopathic treatments...". 80 would add that people should not rely upon homeopathic treatments at all, or at least restrict their use to conditions that get better in a few days anyway. The WHO's statement was in response to a letter from the Voice of Young Science network, part of Sense About Science. Naturally the peddlers of homeopathic quackery have been vocal in their reaction the news, including Paula Ross, chief executive of the Society of Homeopaths, who admitted "...it was right to raise concerns about promotion of homeopathy as a cure for TB, malaria or HIV and Aids.". This would be fine but she then went on to make an irresponsible and dangerous assertion, that as far as 80 can tell, is backed by no evidence whatsoever. "There is a strong and growing evidence base for homeopathy and most notably, this also includes childhood diarrhoea." To say such a thing about one of the main child killers in the Third World verges on the criminal and is breathtaking in its stupidity. 

A strong and growing evidence base? This study looked at "Homeopathy for childhood diarrhea: combined results and meta-analysis from three randomized, controlled clinical trials." and cautioned "...sample sizes were small and results were just at or near the level of statistical significance." It concluded "Homeopathy should be considered for use as an adjunct to oral rehydration for this illness." In other words it can be used as well as the standard, effective evidence-based treatment. Hardly a ringing endorsement. This report concludes "Homeopathy Has Minor Role in the Treatment of Acute Childhood Diarrhea" but then goes on to say "In the small study examined, use of homeopathy shortened the course of diarrhea by approximately one day". That's a minor role, if ever there was one. It also noted "...there is still no proven mechanism of homeopathy." Given that childhood diarrhea is such a killer and responds well to conventional treatment why even bother with homeopathy? Sadly both studies recommend further research. Hahnemann's quackery has been around for some 200 years and further research is still recommended? Homeopathy is unsubstantiated and, in some circumstances, dangerous nonsense and any more money spent studying its effects may just as well be flushed down the toilet. (For more on homeopathy see here)

"The separation, veiling and hiding of Muslim women — however individually assertive some are in private — is a troubling reflection of a tradition (still strong in much of the world) of giving women inferior status in property, marriage, divorce and self-determination. Also, like the niqab or burka covering the face, it carries an atavistic undertone of sexual suspicion that is equally offensive to men: as if one glimpse of bright hair or bare arm would provoke them to rape." Libby Purves, writing in the Times over the row concerning a segregated Muslim wedding. One guest, an MP, walked out when he found he could not sit with his wife.

It's Not The Moon That's Cracked - but the clod that posted this nonsense.

“The Press would never have reached the decision it did on the grounds that some might be offended by portrayals of the Prophet Muhammad. The decision rested solely on the experts’ assessments that there existed a substantial likelihood of violence that might take the lives of innocent victims.”  Yale University Press. See below.

"‘We do not negotiate with terrorists. We just accede to their anticipated demands’. That is effectively the new policy position at Yale University Press,” Cary Nelson, the president of the American Association of University Professors in an open letter regarding the publication of a book on the Motoons sans the Motoons. See below. Also see Yale Surrenders by Christopher Hitchens. Update - blog PajamasMedia sees financial motives behind Yale's decision in Yale & the Danish Cartoons: The Plot Thickens by Roger Kimball. Also of interest "TV programme Nova and politician Geert Wilders will not be prosecuted for publishing controversial Danish cartoons which poke fun at Mohammed, the public prosecution department said on Tuesday." Some sense in the Netherlands. More on the ruling here.

Dhimmwits - the New York Times tells us that a new book "...“The Cartoons That Shook the World,” should not include the 12 Danish drawings that originally appeared in September 2005. What’s more, they suggested that the Yale press also refrain from publishing any other illustrations of the prophet that were to be included, specifically, a drawing for a children’s book; an Ottoman print; and a sketch by the 19th-century artist Gustave Doré of Muhammad being tormented in Hell, an episode from Dante’s “Inferno” that has been depicted by Botticelli, Blake, Rodin and Dalí." The Danish Motoons row showed the world how threats and acts of violence are militant Islam's first resort to any perceived slight. This is not "Islamophobia" (a nonsense word) but recognition of what happens in today's world, over and over again. Yet many Muslims are probably completely unaware that at other times it was acceptable to make images of the founder of Islam.

The director of the Yale University Press, John Donatich, defended his decision to remove not just the Motoons but all the other depictions by saying that he had published other controversial books but, regarding this particular one, he didn't want blood on his hands. So much for the reputation of the "religion of peace". Reza Aslan, a religious scholar and author approves of the book but withdrew "...his supportive blurb that was to appear in the book after Yale University Press dropped the pictures. The book is “a definitive account of the entire controversy,” he said, “but to not include the actual cartoons is to me, frankly, idiotic.” To see images of Mohammed, including many Islamic ones, check out the Mohammed Image Archive which is "...a compendium of images that depict Mohammed (the 7th-century founder of Islam), spanning all historical periods, cultures and genres." We are told, "The inspiration for this Archive came from the global controversy over the publication of Mohammed cartoons in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, and the need for a comprehensive and even-handed look at the wide variety of Mohammed depictions in Islamic and Western societies from the Middle Ages until today. It will remain online as a resource for those interested in freedom of expression."

“You can count on violence if any illustration of the prophet is published. It will cause riots, I predict, from Indonesia to Nigeria.”  Ibrahim Gambari, special adviser to the secretary general of the United Nations and the former foreign minister of Nigeria quoted in the NY Times.

It's a Sign! - in fact that's exactly what it is. (Hat tip to Deborah)

Déjà Balls - 80's sense of déjà vu raised its spooky head when reading of the "...owner of a 4-inch diameter crystal ball (who) got a nasty shock when she returned from visiting a chum to find the vitreous ornament had torched her flat." We are further informed "...the "unforeseen" blaze in Worle, Somerset, was caused by the £30 sphere focusing the sun's rays onto the back of 53-year-old Kim Yeates's telly, which then exploded, setting fire to her sofa." A spokeswoman for Avon Fire and Rescue Service confirmed the crystal ball as the culprit for the fire, and noted it's "very uncommon for this to happen". In August, 2005 80 noted the story of Herve Vandrot in Great Ball of Fire. Sunlight, concentrated by Herve's crystal ball, was blamed for a fire at his flat in Edinburgh.
 

Simon Singh - is continuing the court battle over his libel case with the British Chiroquactic Association. The latest news from Singh himself is available on the Sense About Sense site. (Also see here)

A Wing And A Prayer - we learn from the Telegraph that "A group of rabbis and Jewish mystics flew over Israel chanting prayers and blowing ritual ram horns in the belief that they would be able to stop the spread of swine flu in Israel."  Fantastic! But 80 was then disappointed to read "A local charter plane carrying about fifty people, most of them bearded ultra-Orthodox men cloaked in black, circled the country by air on Monday hoping their prayers would be heard." It would have been much more impressive if they had foregone the use of an airplane. You can just picture it, a flock of rabbis in flying in formation, prayer shawls flapping, like a gaggle of devout, skull-capped geese. "The purpose of the flight was to stop the (swine flu) epidemic so that people will not keeping dying from it," said Rabbi Yitzhak Basri. Although if this stunt proves unsuccessful it shouldn't be taken as evidence of the non-existence of god, he didn't add. Update - here is an amazing video of these nutjobs in action.

Worshipping Mammon - this article informs us that "Catholic officials in Italy have warned their countrymen against worshipping money before God as fever mounts over a lottery prize now worth €131.5m (£113m), the largest ever seen in Europe. "This is a form of idolatry, where we turn not to God but to money," Domenico Sigalini, the bishop of Palestrina told Vatican Radio." This bishop is part of an organization that "...owns more land globally than any other organization on the planet..." and coins it in "Total donations made at a parish level in 2003 were $8 billion..." One wonders if the good bishop is aware of Matthew 19:21 in his magic book? "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me." Perhaps the bishop would like to follow his god man's advice? The church is flogging a dead horse - lotteries are far too easy a source of revenue for cash-strapped governments. But it is not just about idolatry, it is also about fighting rival superstitions "The lottery plays on Italy's superstitious fondness for numerology, particularly in the south, another thorn in the side of church leaders."

Marijuana, gateway drug to Jesus - the inimitable Mark Morford investigates the facts behind marijuana. Does it lead to heroin or even worse, to Scientology? He reveals the truth in his own outrageous, syntax-wrecking way.

Pass The Sickbag # 1 - 80 had serious trouble hanging onto his breakfast after reading the drivel that St Tony, the patron saint of pre-emptive war, chose to inflict on the delegates to the Communion and Liberation conference in Rimini, Italy. Not that said conference deserves any sympathy for asking this creep to come and patronise them in the first place. The Smirking One is still incapable of realizing how divisive religion really is, as demonstrated by his plea for faiths to unite in the face of "...aggressive secularism". As there is now good evidence that the attack he and Dubya launched against Iraq was inspired by their religious faith it would appear that we need more aggressive secularism not less, in order that such a murderous and inept crusade is not repeated. The nauseatingly unctuous "Blair spoke on a stopover during his family summer holiday in the Mediterranean where he was photographed and – not for the first time – criticised as a guest on Rising Sun, the five-deck yacht of American software billionaire Larry Ellison, anchored off the Sardinian coast." The Daily Mail gives more detail on the Smarmy One's vacation, describing him as "...cavorting on a yacht with a personal butler to rub in his suncream." Given Blair's track record try and read the following from his speech without feeling an overpowering urge to vomit. "To represent God's Truth, not limited by human frailty, or by the interests of the state or by the transient mores of a community, however well intentioned; but to let that truth bestow on us humility, love of neighbour, and the true knowledge that indeed passes all understanding." Never mind so-called "true knowledge", the fact that anyone pays attention to this pious puke from a war-mongering millionaire with blood on his hands passes all understanding.

"Ever since I began preparations to become a Catholic, I felt I was coming home; and this is now where my heart is, where I know I belong" No, where you belong Mr Blair is in The Hague.

Pass The Sickbag # 2 - James Murdoch, the spawn of media emperor Rupert "Dirty Digger" Murdoch, writing in the Guardian drags in Charles Darwin to back up an attack on the BBC, equating publicly-funded broadcasting with creationism. Quite who he is attempting to impress with such an inappropriate analogy is a mystery - certainly not most of the commentators on the piece who enjoy themselves at his expense. Even the title of the article, "Put an end to this dumping of free news", is inaccurate. BBC news is paid for through the UK's TV licence system. The BBC, while far from perfect, is still the benchmark for quality television - a benchmark against which Murdoch's TV empire compares very unfavorably. The Sky satellite operation has so many subscribers purely because the Murdoch chequebook buys up coverage of many, if not most, big sporting events. It is nauseating to read about how "...people value honest, fearless, and independent news coverage that challenges the consensus." from someone whose firm inflicts the biased, dumbed-down crap that is Fox News on the world. The television output from the Murdoch empire is utter dross compared to much of the Beeb's output and this is why Rupert's boy is whining.

The idea that any part of the Murdoch empire presents "fearless, independent news" is a sick joke. That any Murdoch paper or news show is independent of the Digger's prejudices is utter nonsense. Another target for young James is the TV, radio regulator OFCOM, whose "... repeated assertion of its bias against intervention is becoming impossible to believe. If the diverse broadcasting ecology it calls for is to be achieved, intervention in the media should only be contemplated if serious harm to consumer interests is evident."  This of course has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that on its web site OFCOM states "Ofcom believes that requiring Sky to make its premium channels available to other retailers on a wholesale basis is the most appropriate way of ensuring fair and effective competition." Quite how well James Murdoch will do as his father's chosen successor is an open question but if the boy's self-serving hypocritical waffle is anything to go by things do not bode well for those who value independent, quality media. Update - "Viewers and listeners are rallying around the BBC, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today. It shows rising levels of trust in the broadcaster and increased public support for the licence fee.The results challenge claims that the BBC's growth has a "chilling" effect on consumer choice, made last month in a speech by James Murdoch, European chief executive of News International."  Also see Charlie Brooker on the young Damien James.

Dumb Quotes Of The Day - here are a couple of quotes that perhaps the speakers wish they hadn't said. In a report on the alleged kidnap and threatening at knifepoint of a Muslim man whose house had previously undergone a "firebomb" attack we are told "Councillor Pat Richardson, leader of the BNP group on the local council, said her party was not behind the attacks on Ramjanally. "Firebombing is not a British method. A brick through the window is a British method, but firebombing is not a way of showing displeasure," she said." Kristallnacht, the British way? Pat, your fascist roots is showing. In a piece attempting to defend the indefensible, the incarceration of Muslim women in shrouds and masks, Nesrine Malik makes a ludicrous plea in her final sentence, "What will help Muslim women is spending less time and effort being outraged on our behalf and more on differentiating the different faces and needs behind the burqa." Quite how do you do that, Nesrine? X-Ray vision?

Qurantroversy - the author Sebastian Faulks is in trouble for being less than impressed with the Quran. The Mail quotes him from an interview in the Sunday Times Magazine  describing the book "...as just 'the depressive rantings of a schizophrenic' with 'no ethical dimension'. He went on to say 'With the Koran there are no stories. And it has no ethical dimension like the New Testament, no new plan for life. It says ‘the Jews and the Christians were along the right tracks, but actually, they were wrong and I’m right, and if you don’t believe me, tough — you’ll burn for ever'. That’s basically the message of the book.' Naturally the Mail found a rent-a mouth to comment on this. "Ajmal Masroor, an imam and spokesman for the Islamic Society of Britain* said Faulk's statements ran the risk of stirring religious hatred against Muslims. Attacks on Islam are nothing new, but the danger is this will have a 'drip, drip' effect. People don't seem to understand the consequences of saying things like this could be quite severe. History tells us it can encourage hatred." What drivel - Faulks' opinion of the Quran is hardly an attack on Islam. Muslims shouldn't be so touchy - it smacks of a lack of confidence in the religion and its book. People are wary of Muslims because it is impossible to open a paper or watch the news without being made aware of Islamist violence around the world and not because of one novelist's opinions - opinions for which he has already apologized. That he felt he had to do so speaks volumes about Muslim tolerance and free speech.

Riazat Butt, writing in the Guardian, also takes Faulks to task and comes up with the tired old line, "The Qur'an was not written in English, nor is it normally read in English, so of course the scriptures lose something in translation. Should Faulks want to fully appreciate and experience the Qur'an, he should brush up on his classical Arabic." How many Muslims are up to speed with their classical Arabic? Not many. Funnily enough the Christian bible has been widely translated and doesn't seem to have suffered that much. What is it with the classical Arabic? If Allah is a universal god and the prophet's message is for all humankind why is this most important text only understandable (and not always then) in classical Arabic? It sounds more like an Arab god talking to Arabs. Butt continues "Most, but not all, of the Qur'an's stories are based on tales from the Old Testament, so if he thinks the Qur'an is a bit rubbish at capturing the imagination, then it follows the Bible is a bit of a let-down too." No this doesn't follow at all. Inept plagiarism  is a more likely explanation. What the Quran needs is the application of the kind of textual criticism that the Christian Bible has undergone in order to fully understand the history of its composition and subsequent amendment. Sadly Islam is not yet confident enough to allow such a project to proceed. For many scholars the threat of the threat of violence is enough to act as a deterrent. (Also see Virgins, What Virgins? on the problems of translating classical Arabic. Here is the Skeptic's Annotated Quran that makes for interesting reading as do these articles from the Institution for the Secularization of Islamic Society. Finally here is Christopher Hitchens on the subject reading from his book God Is Not Great) *see here about the level of support for this unrepresentative bunch.

"I felt incredibly claustrophobic and like my whole personality had been taken away. It was really shocking for somebody who relishes freedom above all other things." Kate Humble, UK TV presenter, talking to the Radio Times about being "obliged" to wear a full-length abaya and scarf when filming in the Middle Ages Saudi Arabia.

September 8th 2009

Poor Scotland - first it gets the obnoxious, oddly-coiffed Donald Trump and now Baba Ramdev, described in the Times as "...the superstar swami, one of India’s most charismatic and controversial gurus" is setting up shop on the little Scottish island of Little Cumbrae. And setting up shop is the term for it, as Ramdev has earned millions peddling yoga and quackery in the form of ayurvedic medicines and treatments - the latter ranging from "...having warm oil drizzled over one’s body to induced vomiting." This vomiting can also be brought on by looking at past claims and statements of this guru. Back in July this year Ramdev petitioned to have the Indian Supreme Court "...overturn a ruling ... which legalised homosexuality." This holy man "... argued that homosexuality was a curable disease and that sufferers could seek a cure." No doubt such a cure would involve giving money to Ramdev.

He is also on record as saying in a TV interview " Gays are mentally sick and I do not support them. I can never change. And I have cured all major illnesses, including cancer." Nice guy - and modest too. Never one to miss a passing lucrative band wagon this fakir says "People with strong immune system cannot be affected with swine flu. Through yoga and pranayama, you can keep your immune system, particularly the respiratory system, strong." Pranayama, by the way, is form of yoga breath control based upon the primitive and outmoded idea of Pra-na, life force, or vital energy. This claptrap lies behind many so-called complementary and alternative medicines and therapies (sCAMs). This article tells us of a recent war of words with Bollywood star Celina Jaitley, who has challenged Ramdev's views on gays. The great man is again quoted, demonstrating his ignorance and offensiveness “Homosexuality is like a virus and if it affects you, you have nowhere to go, they (gays) are like animals who do not realize what brings happiness. They are selfish and only care about themselves and not their families.”  Perhaps he should bone up on some findings of Western medicine - he might learn something.

"While my body was asleep, I think my soul rode on a triangular-shaped UFO and went to Venus. It was a very beautiful place, and it was very green." Miyuki Hatoyama, wife of Japan's new prime minister, in her book Very Strange Things I've Encountered. This would be the same Venus, second planet out from the Sun, with a dense atmosphere of 96.5% carbon dioxide and a surface temperature hot enough to melt lead. That doesn't sound very green. But then Mrs Hatoyama also claims that she met Tom Cruise in a past life, when he was Japanese.

Tabloidgraph - the Telegraph tells us "Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, has encouraged people to undergo a day of fasting to help them gain a better understanding of their ''Muslim neighbour''". Why on earth would 80 want to do that? What will Boris suggest next - a little dianetic auditing so as to better understand Scientologists? How about a chicken sacrifice with the local followers of Santeria so as to understand them? Participating in someone else's delusion is not understanding - it is condescension. Another inane item from the Telegraph asks "Has Jesus Christ been spotted on Mars?" Maybe, if he was visiting friends in the JPEG artifact city in Hale crater. The story's sub-heading goes "Some people claim to have seen the faces of Jesus and the Virgin Mary on a piece of cheese toast, in a baby scan, on a pretzel, and even in a blob of dried chocolate." What about the birdshit? They missed out the birdshit. And the fence post.

Doesn't Add Up - Simon Singh more recently better known for his troubles with the litigious British Chiroquactic Association writes a piece in the Guardian about the nonsensical equations that newspapers like to publish in order to give verisimilitude to stories that are no more than PR puffs. These are things like the silly happiest/saddest day of the years stories backed by spurious formulae from the likes of Cliff Arnall. Singh tells us "...I am working with Voice of Young Science to find the most appalling equation to appear in the UK national press over the next 12 months. Towards the end of 2010 we will be giving a prize for the dodgiest equation, but so far we do not have a name for the award, so any suggestions would be much appreciated. And, of course, please help us by keeping an out eye for pseudo-equations in the media."  Singh first came to 80's attention in 2002 with an excellent BBC radio series on mathematics called Five Numbers, later followed by A Further Five Numbers. The shows are in 15 minute chunks and are still available to hear on the web, just click the links. 80's particular favorite is the mind-boggling episode on infinity - or should that be infinities? Singh will be giving a lecture at the British Science Festival on September 6th titled Why Journalists Love Stupid Equations and Other Problems In the Media.

Way To Go, Fargo - welcome news via Pharyngula of Fargo's Freethought Day on September 24th backed by the mayor, no less. Nice one, Red River Freethinkers. Now wait for the whining from the poor oppressed Christians about how persecuted they are.

Narcissistic Personality Disorder - is Catherine Deveny's diagnosis of the deity Blake called Old Nobodaddy. Richard Dawkins puts it another way "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." But, as Christopher Hitchens has pointed out, it takes the New Testament god to condemn you to be tortured for all eternity.

Il Buffooni - the comic opera starring Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi takes another step toward an open row with an increasingly exasperated and censorious Vatican. In the words of that great statesman George W Bush, bring it on. Update - the shit starts to fly. According to the Times "An emerging rift between the Vatican and Silvio Berlusconi, the embattled Italian Prime Minister, has widened further after top church figures rallied to defend Dino Boffo, the Catholic editor whose private life was the subject of renewed attack by one of the premier’s newspapers yesterday.  Il Giornale, the Berlusconi family-owned newspaper, yesterday continued with a campaign to expose Mr Boffo as a homosexual with a police record, despite growing evidence that the stories are souring an increasingly fraught relationship between the Italian leader and the Catholic church."  80 has been waiting for things to reach boiling point ever since Playboy v Prelate. By the way, doesn't Mr Boffo sound like a household cleaning product? Or is he the other sort of boffer?

Vive La France - 80 always assumed that it would be the Germans that did for the sinister Scientology cult - but now it seems that long overdue task is to be undertaken by the French. In this piece from the Guardian we are told "It claims to be one of the world's fastest-growing new religions but a battery of legal cases threaten its very existence in this secular country". Naturally the cult's mouthpieces are whining about persecution but the French authorities are more interested in prosecution. The sordid reality is a world away from the glossy Hollywood stars used as frontmen for the cult, as the tragic cases in France reveal. For more information on Scientology see Operation Clambake - oh, and if you are unlucky enough to meet a cult member be sure to ask them about Lisa McPherson.

Why Stop At Ten? - "A list of the top 10 worst Biblical verse (sic) has been drawn up, which includes approval for sexism, genocide and slavery. Readers of the humorous Christian website shipoffools.com were asked to submit their 'favourite' worst verses to compile the list, in a light-hearted project called Chapter & Worse."  Light-hearted? A frightening number of people still think the bible is an operating manual for human beings. That is no laughing matter - just look at this bunch. Much more comprehensive is the Skeptic's Annotated Bible which groups bible verses under useful headings such as Absurdity, Injustice and Cruelty and Violence. It also does the same for the Quran and the Book of Mormon.

Not Even Remotely Likely - the Telegraph newspaper is not the sole purveyor of lazy and irresponsible journalism but it is a field leader. The latest example is an article called Can psychics be good for your health? and is subtitled "A phenomenon known as remote viewing, which claims to use psychic powers to 'see' what is invisible to the naked eye, may have an intriguing role to play in healthcare". Even before the article begins it is worth pointing out there is no such "phenomenon" as remote viewing (RV). The oft-cited fact that during the Cold War governments threw money away on various types of psychic hokum including remote viewing does not prove there was anything to investigate in the first place - although it does speak volumes about the gullibility of those prepared to spend tax dollars on hogwash. This particular article's take is that the cash-strapped British National Health Service "...is involved in an ongoing trial to establish whether RV has social and medical applications." But who would you ask to look at this unproven nonsense? Obviously someone with a track record in such things, which is why we are told "Andrew Usher, dean of the British Institute of Homeopathy, and a (non-clinical) partner in an NHS practice in Scotland, is working with a GP to determine if RV can save lives. Usher's Med RV project uses a team of remote viewers around the world who try to detect illnesses that have been missed by conventional scientific and medical procedures." Homeopathy and remote viewing - what a combo.

The writer of the piece, Lucy Pinney, then unquestioningly regurgitates the claims of "...most celebrated remote viewer ... Daz Smith.." without once questioning whether RV actually exists. She tells us "Smith has used RV to visualise GPS co-ordinates and exact details of locations and crime scenes – helping police to track down lost children, as well as human remains and criminals on the run."  His proof of these astounding claims? "He showed me letters of thanks for his help in finding the bodies of a missing US Army staff sergeant, and a Kansas suicide victim." Did she try to independently verify this? No. She merely repeats Smith's spiel. Pinney even tried RV for herself and then she asked Smith for "...his internet-based team of remote viewers to help me with a specific question." concerning the infidelity of her late ex-husband. She describes the answers as "...colourful, jerky impressions: the effect was like reading blank verse. They did not answer my question but they described my husband, scenes from his life and mannerisms with such accuracy that it made me cry." This sounds like a typical case of selective memory whereby a psychic, such as a medium or in this case a remote viewer, throws out a bunch of vague impressions and the subject/dupe, albeit unconsciously, retains in memory those that fit and discards those that don't. This can be quite successful at convincing people that a reading was uncannily accurate when in fact it is they themselves who are doing all the work. If the inquiry is emotionally upsetting, as it was for Pinney, then the effect is all the more impressive. But stop and think, if RV really works what could be revealed? How about Osama bin Laden's current location? Now that would be a coup. But does Pinney bother at any time to question Smith's claims? Does she bother to ask for a dissenting view? No. Her only gesture in that direction is a mention of Richard Wiseman's less than rigorous Twitter-based RV experiment. RV as described in her article and used by Smith appears to be little more than a form of cold reading. For a detailed and skeptical look at RV see this page.

Sensationalist Archaeology - regular readers of this page's maunderings will know 80 has little time and no respect for pseudo, fringe or cult-archaeology. Robert R. Cargill calls it sensationalist archaeology and defines it thus "Sensationalist archaeology is nothing new. As long as there have been objects discovered in the Holy Land, there have been those that insist the objects prove a particular faith claim. A chunk of wood on a mountain is Noah’s Ark. A chunk of wood in Jerusalem is the Cross of Jesus. And a chunk of wood in the Red Sea is proof of the Exodus. Unsubstantiated claims by amateur archaeologists are not new, nor are their direct-to-the-public media attempts to capture eyes and hearts in the age old effort to capture dollars. As P. T. Barnum prophetically said, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”"

In a great piece for The Bible and Interpretation web site Cargill looks at the claims of one Jimmy Barfield, who claims to have "deciphered" the mysterious Copper Scroll, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and supposedly a list of hidden treasures. Here we learn of the breathtaking combination of ignorance, arrogance and religious fundamentalism that informs Barfield's "research". (An earlier piece on Barfield is here) Dr Cargill, regular readers will also recall, was instrumental in the unmasking of Raphael Golb, the son of scholar Norman Golb, who led a bizarre campaign under numerous pseudonyms concerning the provenance of the Dead Sea Scrolls which ended with his arrest for alleged identity theft, criminal impersonation and aggravated harassment. 80 was one of those duped into correspondence with Sarah Epstein, one of Golb's multiple aliases. Cargill's page on the Golb affair makes for fascinating reading. Also see 80's piece The Man Who Wasn't There. For Barfield's laughable Copper Scroll Project click here.

September 10th 2009

Touched By Religion - well, by your priest at any rate. It is ironic that institutions that arrogate the high moral ground over the sexual proclivities of others often facilitate sexual abuse of one kind or another. This is not confined to the best known example, the Roman Catholic church, which often gives the impression of child rape being part of its dogma so widespread has been its incidence within the bells and smells brigade. A survey by researchers at Baylor University found "One in every 33 women who attend worship services regularly has been the target of sexual advances by a religious leader..." according to the Washington Post. We are further informed that the research team "...found that the problem is so pervasive that it almost certainly involves a wide range of denominations, religious traditions and leaders." Also "The study found that close to one in 10 respondents -- male and female -- reported having known about clergy sexual misconduct occurring in a congregation they had attended."

This makes the disgusting news from South Africa less of a surprise "A church in South Africa that provides refuge for thousands of homeless Zimbabweans is investigating allegations of child sex abuse. A teacher at the Central Methodist Church in Johannesburg has been suspended and evicted after being accused of soliciting a girl for sex." We are told by the Guardian "Bishop Paul Verryn, head of the inner city church, said he feared the problem was widespread and an internal commission had been set up to examine the claims." Whenever people are given power over others it will be abused - especially when those people are considered to be above such temptation, such as priests. They can use their religious authority to silence those who would speak out. Diana Garland, who co-authored the Baylor survey, acknowledges this "..when you put it with a spiritual leader or moral leader, you've really added a power that we typically don't think about in secular society -- which is that this person speaks for God and interprets God for people. And that really adds a power." Anyone that doesn't recognize the potential for such abuse within a congregation by an authority figure is a fool.

Update to Does Britain Condone Religious Murder? "Thanks to everyone who has been taking action on behalf of Hussain Muradi – several 1,000 of you that we know of in the last 48 hours. He has now been released from the Dover Immigration Removal Centre and given temporary admission; we can now help secure his right to asylum. We will let you know how you can help further as the new representations for Hussain are made in the coming weeks and months, but thanks again for everything you have done so far! It has made a world of difference.

Upon his release early afternoon today, Hussain asked Maryam Namazie to pass on the following message: ‘I would like to thank everyone who has been supportive of me in the past few days, sending faxes, emails, making phone calls, on Youtube and elsewhere. I’d especially like to thank the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, the British Humanist Association, my local MP Robert Marshall-Andrews, my solicitor, Maryam Namazie, Andrew Copson and Nora Mulready. It’s a great day for me but my fight is not yet over. I have only been given temporary admission and will have to sign in at a police station every week until my case is resolved so I will be looking to you for help in the near future.’  ". (Email update received Monday 14th with links added by 80) 

Does Britain Condone Religious Murder? - "I was not born to be a Muslim and be afraid of God and more importantly I did not sign an agreement with him/her /it to worship him. As a child, religion has been forced upon me. I have been forced to pray, fast, etc… In Afghanistan where I was living, questioning the existence of god or religion is deemed blasphemy and punishable by stoning to death. Now in the UK I have the opportunity and courage to declare who I am. I AM A FREE MAN WITHOUT ANY EXTRA BONDAGE ON ME." So said Hussain Muradi, activist of the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain [CEMB] and One Law for All Campaign, who was detained on September 10, 2009 and is facing imminent deportation back to Afghanistan where he will face the death penalty for ‘apostasy.’ To send this man back to Afghanistan is effectively the same as sentencing him to death. The UK has no capital punishment and yet the authorities seem content to send Muradi back to face certain death. If you are outraged and disgusted by such callousness click here to send a message to Phil Woolas MP, Minister of State for Borders and Immigration. So, does Britain condone religious murder? Perhaps Mr Woolas can enlighten us.

No To Darwin - "It is unbelievable to us that this is still a really hot potato in America. There's still a great belief that He made the world in six days. It's quite difficult for we in the UK to imagine religion in America. We live in a country which is no longer so religious. But in the US, outside of New York and LA, religion rules..." Oscar-winning producer Jeremy Thomas on the failure to find a US distributor for the movie Creation about (gasp) Charles Darwin. "Movieguide.org, an influential site which reviews films from a Christian perspective, described Darwin as the father of eugenics and denounced him as "a racist, a bigot and an 1800s naturalist whose legacy is mass murder". His "half-baked theory" directly influenced Adolf Hitler and led to "atrocities, crimes against humanity, cloning and genetic engineering", the site stated."  Ignorant fools - but influential fools apparently. (The film is reviewed here by New Scientist)

Good For Something - the Times tells us "Women’s votes are the focus of an investigation in Afghanistan after it emerged that thousands of ballots were cast at women-only polling stations in a province with only one female election worker. Female turnout across the most dangerous and conservative parts of the country appeared suspiciously high..." So these misogynist bastards have decided women are good for something - even if they don't exist.

Turning a Blind Eye to Misogyny - if you read nothing else today do read this piece by Nick Cohen. The description of double standards, condescension and sheer intellectual smugness of so-called liberal relativists left 80 in a state of rage and sorrow that we failing so many women around the world. Celebrating diversity? Bollocks.

Fleshly Thoughts -a friend recently asked 80 what a mysterious sign meant on a flyer for a pizza delivery firm. It was the sign for halal meat and the small print below said all meat used by this bunch was halal. Now while they are portrayed as hating each others' guts devout Muslims and devout Jews have a surprising amount in common - something many put down to Islamic plagiarism. That aside, they certainly share a requirement that animals slaughtered for food have to be conscious when their throats are cut. In the UK this is forbidden on humane grounds - except for Jews and Muslims whose superstitions are allowed to trump animal welfare. The average Brit is a meat eater, but like many such in developed nations they have become totally divorced from the often cruel processes that result in the neatly packaged gobbets of flesh available in the supermarket. The absurd fuss in the UK press recently over a  sheep that was slaughtered after being cared for by schoolchildren is a good example. The school, wisely in 80's view, is teaching kids where their food comes from, ie that cuddly little lamb over there is walking cuts of meat. The kids were allowed to vote on whether the sheep they had raised should be slaughtered to raise money to buy more animals. The kids were fine with this but amazingly some sentimental nitwits tried to campaign for a reprieve. 80 blames the clods who gave the animal a name.

Long ago Lewis Carroll's Alice discovered the perils of getting to know your food - a theme revisited in Douglas Adams' Restaurant At The End Of The Universe. Now if you must eat meat, and 80 doesn't, then surely the animals should be dispatched as humanely as possible. There is no justification for Jews and Muslims to be allowed to dodge this. Scotland for Animals is campaigning now to put a stop to such ritual slaughter, although they are aware of the danger of medalling with religious "rights" - particularly those of Muslims. So uncomfortable are many people with the idea of animals suffering that there has even been a suggestion that those creatures bred for meat should be genetically engineered not to feel pain. 80 can't help but find something very weird about this. If you cannot face up to the way animals are treated in order to supply you with affordable meat, give up the meat. Schoolchildren should be taken to factory farms and slaughterhouses to see how they work. In the not too distant future not eating meat will become a necessity rather than a choice if practical action is taken over global climate change. The production of meat animals is hideously inefficient - the grain used to feed cattle could feed many millions of people. As the area of arable land shrinks, grain for cattle should go to starving humans. This is without taken into account the greenhouse effect of the methane in cattle farts. Within 20 years it may well be that meat will return to being an occasional treat rather than a staple. But all of this still doesn't address the real elephant in the room - there are just too many people on this planet. Contraception is the greenest technology of all.

Ding Dong - the witch is dead. Hulda Clark, cancer quack extraordinaire is dead. Orac, writing on the Respectful Insolence blog strikes, in 80's view, the right note. For an overview of Clark's "career" see this from Quackwatch. Sadly this deluded woman leaves plenty of disciples behind to carry on peddling Zappers and other pseudoscientific crap.

Moving In Mysterious Ways - the Telegraph tells of "Gunther Link, a devout Catholic, prayed to be saved after he was trapped in a lift – but was killed when he went to church to give thanks and the stone altar fell on him. Link, 45, died instantly as he was crushed under the ancient 860lb monument in the Weinhaus Church in Vienna, Austria."

Blair Blather - one of the first things one notices when looking at the three "abrahamic religions" is their exclusivity. To the monotheistic Jews the Christian idea of a son of god is blasphemy. To the Christians the thought of Jesus being just one more prophet in a succession that culminates in the final prophet Mohammad is blasphemy. The Christians believe the only way to god is through Jesus who fulfilled/supplanted Judaism. The Muslims claim their prophet has the last word which supersedes all previous revelations, ie Judaism and Christianity. The Muslim holy book is full of condemnation for Jews and Christians. None of these faiths is in any way compatible with the other which leads one to ask the question what the hell is Saint Tony Blair on about? The warmongering millionaire, addressing the Royal Society for the Arts in London "..said that it was not enough to “tolerate” people of different faiths. Muslims, Jews, Christians and members of all faiths must treat each other as “equal”" This is never going to happen. He claims that intolerance between religions is the "dark side" of faith when in fact it is built into these religions at a fundamental level. The fool doesn't realize that religion is part of the problem, not the solution. After all, his own faith inspired him to wage war.

September 17th 2009

Censored Searching - now there is a special search engine so that weak-willed Muslims are not tempted by the wicked delights of the internet. The Times enthusiastically informs us "The world’s first "Islamic orientated" internet search engine, which flags content that might be considered "haraam" – or forbidden – by Muslims, has been hailed a success by its creators after it attracted more than 500,000 users in its first two weeks on the web." Far be it for 80 to rain on anyone's parade but how sure are the owners that all these hits on the web site are kosher legit? This is only anecdotal evidence but 80 has heard of many folk typing in search requests with the deliberate aim of triggering the site's prissy little warning about unsuitable subjects. This has become quite a game in some circles, akin to poking a snappy little dog with a stick and having it bark "haraam". Such naughtiness could well have boosted the hit rate. 80 of course doesn't encourage such silliness but it is remarkable how inconsistent the application of the haraam warning is - see for yourself. "Honor killing" ie familial murder, for instance, is considered less haraam than "pornography". Reza Sardeha, who runs the site, reveals more halal internet is on the way in the form of, wait for it, Islamic widgets. The mind boggles.

CSI - in the beginning was CSICOP (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal ) and it did mighty deeds - and not a little intelligent debunking. A short while back the name was changed to Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) in keeping with the current remit to promote skeptical thinking in all spheres and not just the paranormal. This change was reflected in the content of the committee's magazine, Skeptical Inquirer. The latest issue has articles on Power Line Panic and Cell Phone Mania, Violent Video Games and Subliminal Persuasion as well as scrutiny of psychics, UFOs, ghosts and other bunkum. Now the CSI web site has had a facelift and it is chockfull of skeptical goodness, including articles from Skeptical Inquirer by folk like Joe Nickell (“Investigative Files”), Massimo Polidoro (“Notes on a Strange World”), Massimo Pigluicci (“Thinking About Science”), Robert Sheaffer (“Psychic Vibrations”) and Martin Gardner's occasional column titled “Notes of a Fringe-Watcher.” Other items include a Powerpoint presentation by Harriet Hall, Tooth Fairy Science and Other Pitfalls: Applying Rigorous Science to Messy Medicine and articles from the Naked Skeptic. 80 has been a supporter of CSI and a subscriber to Skeptical Inquirer since the 1980s. Highly recommended.

Imposed Patterns - given enough random points the innate pattern-making ability of the human mind will see shapes, connections that are not actually there. Most of the constellations in the sky would seem to confirm this (see Apophenia). This was always the trouble with seeking celestial alignments for prehistoric sites - there are so many stars you can align them with almost anything. The same goes for ley lines. 80 rather suspects this may be the case with Tom Brooks, author of a new book Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: the Discoveries of Tom Brooks. That title should be the first clue that we are not in academia - trumpet-blowing and serious scholarship seldom make good bedfellows. It seems that Mr Brooks has, according to the Telegraph, "...analysed 1,500 sites stretching from Norfolk to north Wales. These included standing stones, hilltop forts, stone circles and hill camps." The only criterion apparently is that they are in "eyeshot" of each other. We are then told he "...found that they all lie on a vast geometric grid made up of isosceles 'triangles'. Each triangle has two sides of the same length and 'point' to the next settlement." No trivial exercise I am sure, but does superimposing triangles over disparate monuments from varying periods of prehistory actually tell us anything useful?

Mr Brooks says yes, and in so doing demonstrates a nice line in hyperbole, ''To create these triangles with such accuracy would have required a complex understanding of geometry. The sides of some of the triangles are over 100 miles across on each side and yet the distances are accurate to within 100 metres. You cannot do that by chance. So advanced, sophisticated and accurate is the geometrical surveying now discovered, that we must review fundamentally the perception of our Stone Age forebears as primitive, or conclude that they received some form of external guidance. Is sat-nav as recent as we believe; did they discover it first?'' Please let that question be rhetorical. There may well be a "complex understanding of geometry" involved but this is more likely to in Mr Brooks' brain and not those of our ancient ancestors. Oh, by the way, modern scholarship does not view our "Stone Age forbears" as primitive and hasn't done so for a long time. They were certainly as intelligent as Brooks. He then offers a false choice between his theory and the even more outrageous suggestion that the ancients "..received some form of external guidance."  Does he mean ancient astronauts?

There is another choice though, and that is Brooks is simply wrong and his enthusiasm has got the better of him, leading him to see a triangular system he himself has superimposed on ancient sites - not all of which are settlements. It wouldn't be the first time that someone has published a book on a cherished idea somehow missed by conventional scholarship but which does not bear up under scrutiny. Think of cult archaeologist Graham Hancock who has a great following who buy his many books about an Atlantean ur-civilization but is considered a bit of a joke by historians and archaeologists. Mr Brooks invites suspicion by publishing a book rather than a paper that could then be professionally reviewed. He also does himself no end of harm by coming out with remarks such as "Created more than 2,000 years before the Greeks were supposed to have discovered such geometry, it remains one of the world's biggest civil engineering projects. It was a breathtaking and complex undertaking by a people of profound industry and vision. We must revise our thinking of what's gone before.'' 80 has not read Brooks' book as yet but these initial signs are less than promising.

Past Of The Master - a while back there was much hilarity over an Islamic Atlas of Creation, a cobbled together piece of ill-informed bunkum with images famously filched from a fly fishing site. The book is one of several produced by one Harun Yahya, aka Adnan Oktar. This great scholar was so stung by Richard Dawkins' opinion of his atlas (see here) he responded not with reasoned argument and evidence but by getting Dawkins' site banned in his native Turkey. At first glance Oktar would appear to be a suspiciously well-funded buffoon with a taste for the outrageous. His photos online make a him look like a villain from one of the lousier Bond films or better still Dr Who's nemesis, the Master. An article in New Humanist describes him thus "...accompanied by an entourage of men and women dressed in expensive, identical, designer clothes, their eyes concealed behind sunglasses. In his trademark garb – well-groomed beard, white linen suit and designer shades – he cuts the figure of a man of authority and influence, a man confident in his own importance." But then Halil Arda, the author of Sex, flies and videotape: the secret lives of Harun Yahya asks, "But is anything about him what it seems?" and then proceeds to take a close look at this man's let's say, colorful past. This makes for fascinating reading and is an excellent piece of investigative writing. Suffice it to say 80's opinion of Oktar was even lower after reading Arda's piece than it was before - something I would have thought impossible. Expect the New Humanist to to be banned in Turkey sometime soon.

September 23rd 2009

Pointless Studies? - 80 was dismayed to read of plans for the UK "...government ... to stop funding "pointless" university research, forcing academics to prove that their academic inquiry has some relevance to the real world..." A scheme for subjecting academic research to scrutiny by dullards obsessed with league tables and penny-pinching is a dreadful one. Many things that enrich our lives or save them came from serendipitous events or "blue sky" studies. The idea that a politician or civil servant would be able to predict in advance a study's economic return is ridiculous. But are things as bad as they first appear? We are told "From 2012, each university department will submit evidence to be rated, with 60% of marks awarded for the quality of their research as judged by academic panels, 25% according to the "impact" the research makes and 15% according to the quality of the department. This will rate the department's research strategy, staff and postgraduate development and engagement with the public."

At least a previous idiotic plan to do away with peer review has been scrapped. However, Sally Hunt, the general secretary of the University and College Union is not convinced "Academic research should never be at the behest of market forces. History has taught us that some of the biggest breakthroughs have come from speculative research and it is wrong to try and measure projects purely on their economic potential." David Mitchell in his Guardian column puts his finger on the problem "The trouble is that, for a moment, it sounds perfectly sensible to demand that researchers justify their means in terms of their projected ends, but so, for a moment, does Noddy's idea of building the roof of a house first so that it keeps the rain off while you build the walls. Academic research with a demonstrable economic goal is not the sort that most needs government help. If you'd said 20 years ago: "I'd like to develop a drug that cured erectile dysfunction in men", I imagine you'd have got plenty of private sector takers. As it happens, Viagra was also discovered by accident, when someone was trying to develop heart medicine, but you get the idea."
 

The One Law for All Campaign is organising a rally in on November 21, which will be held from 1200–1400 at North Carriage Drive in London's Hyde Park to mark Universal Children's Day and International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. Maryam Namazie, one of the organisers of the protest says: "The rally aims to raise still further our opposition to Sharia and religious-based laws in Britain and the world, including the imposition of Sharia this year in Somalia and Pakistan's Swat region and of the 'rape laws' in Afghanistan. It also aims to show our solidarity with people standing up to political Islam everywhere, including in Iran, and our support for universal rights and secularism.  The rally will also defend the right to asylum for those who have fled Sharia and calls for an end to racism and cultural relativism." More information.

"The ultimate aim of Islamic education is the realisation of complete submission to Allah on the level of the individual, the community and humanity at large". Yusuf Islam, the driving force behind the state-funded Islamia School in Brent, north London. State-funded ie paid from your taxes. Quote taken from Newsline, the National Secular Society's  free weekly email newsletter, as is the item below.

Pope to visit Britain – but not everyone is pleased. The news that the reactionary head of the Catholic Church, Joseph Ratzinger, is to be accorded a state visit to Britain next September was greeted with dismay by the National Secular Society this week. The Pope will meet the Queen and speak in both Houses of Parliament. The whole visit will have the full panoply of a visiting head of state, although the Vatican has only a few hundred (all-male) inhabitants.

Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "This is dismal news indeed. Why Britain should seek to laud such a nasty extremist is beyond me. We should not forget that his 'teachings' have resulted in the banning of condoms in developing countries where HIV is decimating the populations. He encourages population growth in places where starvation is common. He persecutes homosexuals, treats women as second class citizens, has colluded in the large-scale cover up of child abuse. His Church interferes illegitimately in politics and undermines democracy. It siphons huge amounts of money out of poverty-stricken economies – what is there to celebrate about such a bigot? The NSS will be joining other groups in protesting against the celebration of this ghastly man's presence here."  You can join the NSS here.

Hood Ban - "Tesco has been accused of religious discrimination after the company ordered the founder of a Jedi religion to remove his hood or leave a branch of the supermarket in north Wales. Daniel Jones, founder of the religion inspired by the Star Wars films, says he was humiliated and victimised for his beliefs following the incident at a Tesco store in Bangor. The 23-year-old, who founded the International Church of Jediism, which has 500,000 followers worldwide, was told the hood flouted store rules." according to the Guardian. "Tesco said: "He hasn't been banned. Jedis are very welcome to shop in our stores although we would ask them to remove their hoods." So, no burkas either in Tesco then? To be fair the all-devouring, dairy farmer-devastating, local shop-destroying juggernaut also showed that it has researched the subject quite thoroughly "Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda and Luke Skywalker all appeared hoodless without ever going over to the Dark Side and we are only aware of the Emperor as one who never removed his hood." But then they ruined it by adding, "If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they'll miss lots of special offers." Still applies to burka-wearers too. And nuns...

Good Questions, No Answers - “Over the centuries, many people, including many Christians, must have asked themselves… ‘What is the point of the church?’ All those crusades, burning of heretics, wars of religion: what were they for? If there really is a God, why doesn’t he show himself directly to the people outside the Church? Well, of course he can and does. But, if he does, why do we need a church at all?” Bishop of Stafford, the Rt Rev Gordon Mursell, quoted in the Telegraph. Mursell himself appears to offer no answers and fails to provide evidence of his god showing himself to people outside the church. The context was a rant sermon blaming emails and text messaging for the breakdown of the family. Perhaps the poor chap is himself technologically challenged. He also said "In the city of Stoke-on-Trent, where I live, the principal industry is making china and pottery products – dishes, plates, cups, etc. This industry is in terrible decline, not only because of the world recession, but because families no longer have meals together." Perhaps they are all buying cheap Chinese crockery instead. The Bishop, we are informed, made his comments in a sermon in Güstrow Cathedral to celebrate a 20-year link between the diocese of Lichfield and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Mecklenbur. One wonders if these Lutherans follow their founder in his hatred of Jews.

Shock Disclosure - “If homosexuality being inborn is what makes it acceptable, why does racism being inborn not make racism acceptable?” the talk show host asked. “I’m sorry — I mean, this is the way my mind works. But apparently now we don’t choose racism, we just are racists. We are born that way. We don’t choose it. So shouldn’t it be acceptable, excuse — this is according to the way the left thinks about things.” The disclosure being that Rush Limbaugh, the purveyor of this poison, actually claims to have a mind - and that it works. It's there in that tuberous head - just next to the OxyContin stash. More on the great man's views on segregated bussing here.

Dem Bones, Dem Bones - them highly lucrative and deeply revered dry bones are on tour in the UK. The bones of St Thérèse are drumming up the gullible and boosting sales of religious trinkets for the Catholic church. The Catholic hierarchy must be ecstatic at the thought of a return to the glory days of the Middle Ages. Thérèse is described by one correspondent as a child-nun - she died aged 24. Child-nun - reflect on that for a moment - how pathetic, how redolent of a lost childhood subverted by a creepy, guilt-ridden death cult. Even post mortem poor Thérèse (or at least her thigh and foot bones) is still made to do the will of her masters, being carted around the country boosting the sale of tawdry junk to the faithful, the fleecing of the flock. You can gauge how effective her intercession is as the BBC tells us "Her remains were taken to Baghdad seven years ago in the hope of averting the Iraq conflict..."  Oops, obviously not one of her successes - but then Blair and Bush were already doing god's will and pulled rank on her. 80 finds this whole Thérèse show distasteful and grisly and Matthew Parris, well he is bloody livid. Also see Simon Jenkins on the touring bones and the humoring of religious nutjobs - only he calls it tolerance.

A Waste Of Time - we learn from the Times today that the Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols is a health expert. He must be, as he is using his office to promote praying for health. Obviously Nichols hasn't given this prayer business anything like the amount of thought as did the late, great theologian George Carlin. "Trillions and trillions of prayers every day asking and begging and pleading for favors. 'Do this' 'Gimme that' 'I want a new car' 'I want a better job'. And most of this praying takes place on Sunday. And I say fine, pray for anything you want. Pray for anything. But...what about the divine plan? Remember that? The divine plan. Long time ago god made a divine plan. Gave it a lot of thought. Decided it was a good plan. Put it into practice. And for billion and billions of years the divine plan has been doing just fine. Now you come along and pray for something. Well, suppose the thing you want isn't in god's divine plan. What do you want him to do? Change his plan? Just for you? Doesn't it seem a little arrogant? It's a divine plan. What's the use of being god if every run-down schmuck with a two dollar prayer book can come along and fuck up your plan? And here's something else, another problem you might have; suppose your prayers aren't answered. What do you say? 'Well it's god's will. God's will be done.' Fine, but if it gods will and he's going to do whatever he wants to anyway; why the fuck bother praying in the first place?"

Nominative Determinism - A study has found that "U.S. states whose residents have more conservative religious beliefs on average tend to have higher rates of teenagers giving birth, a new study suggests. The relationship could be due to the fact that communities with such religious beliefs (a literal interpretation of the Bible, for instance) may frown upon contraception, researchers say. If that same culture isn't successfully discouraging teen sex, the pregnancy and birth rates rise." It is surely only coincidence that the study researcher is called Strayhorn....

Number 80 Home Page   80's Recommended Reading  Links from Number 80

©Copyright 2001- 2009 Ross W Sargent All rights reserved  
  (all images are copyright of the respective owners)