Mr. Bezos,
You can lose $1 billion in a day and you hardly even feel it. Blue Horizon is a grand idea, and those of us who love space exploration applaud your efforts and hope you succeed.
We get it. You have vision.
Now take that the energy behind that vision and use it for a better workforce. Because the last thing the planet needs are giant floating warehouses marring our skies so that you can make even more fucking money. This idea is a one gigantic civil lawsuit just waiting and itching to happen.
In the meantime, get over yourself.
Regards,
Matt
Thursday, December 29, 2016
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Thoughts on Orlando and Gun Control
Wow. It's been a long time since I've been here. But in light of the massacre in Orlando, Florida, I feel compelled to say a few things.
I need to be clear that I do not take lightly what happened in Orlando. Nor Aurora. Nor Newtown. Nor any other place where gun violence took its bloody toll. I have no idea what it's like to watch my friends or loved ones die in a rain of bullets. However, it seems that there is a great deal of confusion with regard to not only gun laws, but the differences between guns themselves, particularly the AR-15.
Predictably, there has been a myriad of articles being written after Omar Sateen took 49 lives and injured 53. Most of the authors mean well, writing with such passion and conviction as if their words would summarily end gun violence once and for all. Over at Rolling Stone, there has been at least one such article written by constitutional scholar, David S. Cohen. In the article, "Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment", Cohen provides examples of constitutional faux pas that needed to be repealed. However, Cohen's claim with regard that the Founder's "blatantly wrote racism" into the Constitution is well off the mark. Cohen is, of course, referring to Article I, Section II, Clause III, which states:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may include within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
Cohen's interpretation of this clause is based on the long-held falsehood that the Constitution determined that black people are only three-fifths human. This is patently and demonstrably false, as the clause has nothing to do with race, but political representation. Happily, however, the 12th Amendment repealed the aforementioned clause.
But the main premise of Cohen's article is that the Second Amendment is something that is a "threat to liberty and a suicide pact" and needs to be repealed post haste. Instead of making a sound reason for why the Second Amendment needs to be repealed, he makes an appeal to emotion by inferring that the Founders were mere musket-toting revolutionaries that never could have foreseen that technology would someday make weapons that could kill multiple people by simply squeezing the trigger once. Not surprisingly, Cohen is wrong about this myth as I will elaborate on shortly. He furthers his emotional appeal by stating that we should just be allowed to enjoy our liberties to enjoy a night out with friends.
Meanwhile, another article at Rolling Stone has resurfaced since Orlando that was written by feminist and social justice warrior, Amanda Marcotte. This inanity of Cohen's article is a work of genius compared to Marcotte's. Entitled, "4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing", it continues Rolling Stone's ongoing agenda to destabilize the American society and replace it with a socialist utopia.
As the title describes, the article provides four pro-gun arguments which Marcotte attempts to destroy. But she unwittingly destroyed her own argument by displaying her ignorance of common sense, let alone anything that is based on fact.
Let's review Marcotte's article, one pro-gun argument at a time.
1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
The very first objection Amanda puts forth isn't based on fact, but emotion. The last time I checked, a gun of any kind can't just get up by itself and kill anyone. Someone had to obtain the weapon, learn how to shoot it, think about the person(s) they wanted to kill, find them and put all of that knowledge into action. By Amanda's logic, no one should be allowed to own a car, rope, knife, Louisville Slugger, or even water. Either way, if someone has the intent to kill, they're going to find a way with or without a gun.
So, say it with me, Amanda - Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Period.
2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
Of all the gun owners I've even known, I've never heard any of them say this. Marcotte would like you to think that there hasn't been an example of an armed civilian that stopped an active shooter.
If Marcotte had done as much as a Google search, she could have fact-checked her statement about law-abiding citizens stopping gun-wielding murderers thereby saving herself the embarrassment of looking like a complete fool.
But let's suppose that Amanda's right. Even if her premise was true, take into consideration the fact that places where mass shootings occur have the tightest gun restrictions. If a law-abiding citizen were allowed to carry weapons in those places, there wouldn't be as many people shot dead as a result of a gunmen that has lost his mind. Why should Marcotte or any other liberal be shocked when shooters go for the softest targets where no one can shoot back because of the laws their braindead legislators passed won't allow them to?
Marcotte is hoping that her readers are stupid and lazy enough to do their own research to verify if she is telling the truth. I am happy to disappoint you, Amanda.
Examples of good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns can be found here, here, and here. One of which just happened last month. Almost all of them happened in the past 30 years, Amanda.
Oh, by the way - there are some reports that it took the Orlando Police Department three hours to respond, Amanda. If someone inside Pulse had a firearm, there may have been fewer lives lost on June 12, 2016 in Orlando, FL. And if anyone should garner at least some of the blame for what happened in Orlando, the FBI definitely deserves some. They've received multiple warnings about Mateen years before June 12, not to mention the fact that he was their terrorist watch list. Funny that they took him off.
3. "But, mental health!"
Law-abiding citizens who are of sound mind and body do not arm themselves to the teeth and spray bullets, Amanda. How else should address the mental state of assassins, Amanda? Cuddle them and tell them it's not their fault?
4. "Second Amendment, baby!"
Shortly after I started my blog, there was a shooting in Pittsburgh in which three police officers were killed. This one hit close to home because I'm from the Pittsburgh area. I was inspired to write a blog post about this shooting in which I questioned if the Second Amendment should be repealed, not unlike Cohen's premise.
But the more educated I become about the nature of mass shootings and the frequent failure of gun laws that are supposed to protect us, the more I'm convinced that concealed carry is a viable option for stopping active shooters. So much to the point, that I'm actually considering arming myself. Which is a tremendously huge decision for me. My wife is vehemently against guns in any way, shape or form, other than using rifles for putting food on the table. But primarily because I have a boy that loves getting into places and touching things he knows that he shouldn't. These two reasons are the only ones that have prevented me from purchasing a firearm.
What's that? I don't own a gun? You mean, I'm not a gun-crazed lunatic like this troglodyte?
No, I don't own a gun and I have more respect for my flag and country than Ted Nugent ever dreamed of.
But this line from Amanda's article astounds me the most:
The irony here is thick like a stinky cologne.
First, notice that Amanda nailed the problem right on the head in the last sentence without her even realizing it. Because we all know that people that who happen to not be maladjusted are in dire need of psychiatric treatment and should be banned owning guns. But I have to ask - do you know how many gun laws are on the books, Amanda? The short answer is over 16,000. And how many of those gun laws did Omar Mateen observe on June 12, 2016? Yep. You guessed it; zero.
So, when are you going to realize that the Dylann Roofs and Omar Mateens of the world don't give a flying shit about law, Amanda? And when are you going to learn that soft targets like Pulse night club, a place where guns are strictly prohibited, attract active shooters like moths to flame?
Orlando, FL. Charleston, SC. Aurora, CO. Blacksburg, VA. San Bernardino, CA.
Newtown.
How are those gun laws working for you, Amanda?
I need to be clear that I do not take lightly what happened in Orlando. Nor Aurora. Nor Newtown. Nor any other place where gun violence took its bloody toll. I have no idea what it's like to watch my friends or loved ones die in a rain of bullets. However, it seems that there is a great deal of confusion with regard to not only gun laws, but the differences between guns themselves, particularly the AR-15.
Predictably, there has been a myriad of articles being written after Omar Sateen took 49 lives and injured 53. Most of the authors mean well, writing with such passion and conviction as if their words would summarily end gun violence once and for all. Over at Rolling Stone, there has been at least one such article written by constitutional scholar, David S. Cohen. In the article, "Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment", Cohen provides examples of constitutional faux pas that needed to be repealed. However, Cohen's claim with regard that the Founder's "blatantly wrote racism" into the Constitution is well off the mark. Cohen is, of course, referring to Article I, Section II, Clause III, which states:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may include within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
Cohen's interpretation of this clause is based on the long-held falsehood that the Constitution determined that black people are only three-fifths human. This is patently and demonstrably false, as the clause has nothing to do with race, but political representation. Happily, however, the 12th Amendment repealed the aforementioned clause.
But the main premise of Cohen's article is that the Second Amendment is something that is a "threat to liberty and a suicide pact" and needs to be repealed post haste. Instead of making a sound reason for why the Second Amendment needs to be repealed, he makes an appeal to emotion by inferring that the Founders were mere musket-toting revolutionaries that never could have foreseen that technology would someday make weapons that could kill multiple people by simply squeezing the trigger once. Not surprisingly, Cohen is wrong about this myth as I will elaborate on shortly. He furthers his emotional appeal by stating that we should just be allowed to enjoy our liberties to enjoy a night out with friends.
Meanwhile, another article at Rolling Stone has resurfaced since Orlando that was written by feminist and social justice warrior, Amanda Marcotte. This inanity of Cohen's article is a work of genius compared to Marcotte's. Entitled, "4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing", it continues Rolling Stone's ongoing agenda to destabilize the American society and replace it with a socialist utopia.
As the title describes, the article provides four pro-gun arguments which Marcotte attempts to destroy. But she unwittingly destroyed her own argument by displaying her ignorance of common sense, let alone anything that is based on fact.
Let's review Marcotte's article, one pro-gun argument at a time.
1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
The very first objection Amanda puts forth isn't based on fact, but emotion. The last time I checked, a gun of any kind can't just get up by itself and kill anyone. Someone had to obtain the weapon, learn how to shoot it, think about the person(s) they wanted to kill, find them and put all of that knowledge into action. By Amanda's logic, no one should be allowed to own a car, rope, knife, Louisville Slugger, or even water. Either way, if someone has the intent to kill, they're going to find a way with or without a gun.
So, say it with me, Amanda - Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Period.
2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
Of all the gun owners I've even known, I've never heard any of them say this. Marcotte would like you to think that there hasn't been an example of an armed civilian that stopped an active shooter.
If Marcotte had done as much as a Google search, she could have fact-checked her statement about law-abiding citizens stopping gun-wielding murderers thereby saving herself the embarrassment of looking like a complete fool.
But let's suppose that Amanda's right. Even if her premise was true, take into consideration the fact that places where mass shootings occur have the tightest gun restrictions. If a law-abiding citizen were allowed to carry weapons in those places, there wouldn't be as many people shot dead as a result of a gunmen that has lost his mind. Why should Marcotte or any other liberal be shocked when shooters go for the softest targets where no one can shoot back because of the laws their braindead legislators passed won't allow them to?
Marcotte is hoping that her readers are stupid and lazy enough to do their own research to verify if she is telling the truth. I am happy to disappoint you, Amanda.
Examples of good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns can be found here, here, and here. One of which just happened last month. Almost all of them happened in the past 30 years, Amanda.
Oh, by the way - there are some reports that it took the Orlando Police Department three hours to respond, Amanda. If someone inside Pulse had a firearm, there may have been fewer lives lost on June 12, 2016 in Orlando, FL. And if anyone should garner at least some of the blame for what happened in Orlando, the FBI definitely deserves some. They've received multiple warnings about Mateen years before June 12, not to mention the fact that he was their terrorist watch list. Funny that they took him off.
3. "But, mental health!"
Law-abiding citizens who are of sound mind and body do not arm themselves to the teeth and spray bullets, Amanda. How else should address the mental state of assassins, Amanda? Cuddle them and tell them it's not their fault?
4. "Second Amendment, baby!"
Shortly after I started my blog, there was a shooting in Pittsburgh in which three police officers were killed. This one hit close to home because I'm from the Pittsburgh area. I was inspired to write a blog post about this shooting in which I questioned if the Second Amendment should be repealed, not unlike Cohen's premise.
But the more educated I become about the nature of mass shootings and the frequent failure of gun laws that are supposed to protect us, the more I'm convinced that concealed carry is a viable option for stopping active shooters. So much to the point, that I'm actually considering arming myself. Which is a tremendously huge decision for me. My wife is vehemently against guns in any way, shape or form, other than using rifles for putting food on the table. But primarily because I have a boy that loves getting into places and touching things he knows that he shouldn't. These two reasons are the only ones that have prevented me from purchasing a firearm.
What's that? I don't own a gun? You mean, I'm not a gun-crazed lunatic like this troglodyte?
No, I don't own a gun and I have more respect for my flag and country than Ted Nugent ever dreamed of.
But this line from Amanda's article astounds me the most:
"But sure, if you think it's that precious, we can compromise: If you love the Second Amendment that much, feel free to live in a powdered wig and shit in a chamberpot while trying to survive off what you can kill with an 18th century musket. In exchange, let those of us living in this century pass some laws so we can feel safe going to class, or the movies, or anywhere without worrying that some maladjusted man will try to get his revenge by raining down death on random strangers."
The irony here is thick like a stinky cologne.
First, notice that Amanda nailed the problem right on the head in the last sentence without her even realizing it. Because we all know that people that who happen to not be maladjusted are in dire need of psychiatric treatment and should be banned owning guns. But I have to ask - do you know how many gun laws are on the books, Amanda? The short answer is over 16,000. And how many of those gun laws did Omar Mateen observe on June 12, 2016? Yep. You guessed it; zero.
So, when are you going to realize that the Dylann Roofs and Omar Mateens of the world don't give a flying shit about law, Amanda? And when are you going to learn that soft targets like Pulse night club, a place where guns are strictly prohibited, attract active shooters like moths to flame?
Orlando, FL. Charleston, SC. Aurora, CO. Blacksburg, VA. San Bernardino, CA.
Newtown.
How are those gun laws working for you, Amanda?
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Ice bucket challenge? No, thanks.
I'm going to make this a brief entry into my blog, which nowadays really hasn't seen much action. I've lost interest in blogging, but every now and then, I feel the need to say something. So, if you know me, whether you're a friend or family member, and this pisses you off, then sobeit.
Unless you've been living under a rock over the past month or so, there has been a feverish pitch for you to accept the Ice Bucket Challenge. One of the dimwits that conceived this idea just drowned in supporting this insipid idea. Sorry, I'm going to be one of those cold-hearted bastards that says there's one less idiot that we have to worry about.
So far, I have received two challenges; one from a family member and one from a dear friend. I have yet to raise a finger to accept either challenge. Here are the reasons why:
1. First and foremost, I couldn't give a shit less about ALS. Yes, it's a horrible disease that robs even the strongest of men of their strength. But, frankly, I simply couldn't care less about it.
2. If I give to charity, it's going to be something that I truly care about, like St. Jude's, the Four Diamonds Fund, soldiers in need, the homeless, and light pollution awareness.
3. The more someone tries to guilt me into do something I don't really want to do, then I'm going to become more resistant to that cause. Stop begging me for money.
4. I care about light pollution, but you'll never see me give a passionate plea to raise money to try to end light pollution pouring out of my neighbors sodium lamp.
5. Finally, what about other diseases that people don't know or care about? If every time some poor afflicted soul of some wasting disease makes an impassioned plea for money, and we like fools come running to throw money to that cause, we would eventually go broke. But even so, so what? What about lupus, any number of flu viruses, cyclopia, or anencephaly?
So, instead of giving your money to a cause with a bunch of celebrities pulling at your heart strings, give your money to a cause that you care about, not Jimmy Fallon. Don't give in to a guilt trip by your friends and family just because you want to look like a nice person.
And here's another thing, and it's about the phoney, self-aggrandizing Bill Gates. This fraud is worth $76 billion. He makes so much money that if he were to bend over and pick up a $100 bill, he'd actually be losing money. As of this writing, the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised about $50 million dollars for ALS research. In other words, Bill Gate's single-handedly has the ability to donate enough money to pay for all the money that the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised 1,520 times. Not to mention that this is the same Bill Gates who donates money to eugenics causes. Bill Gates might fool others, but he damned sure doesn't fool me.
So, if by not pledging myself to be a part of the aura of false piety known as the Ice Bucket Challenge makes me an asshole, then I guess I'm an asshole, and I'll wear that title like a badge of honor.
Unless you've been living under a rock over the past month or so, there has been a feverish pitch for you to accept the Ice Bucket Challenge. One of the dimwits that conceived this idea just drowned in supporting this insipid idea. Sorry, I'm going to be one of those cold-hearted bastards that says there's one less idiot that we have to worry about.
So far, I have received two challenges; one from a family member and one from a dear friend. I have yet to raise a finger to accept either challenge. Here are the reasons why:
1. First and foremost, I couldn't give a shit less about ALS. Yes, it's a horrible disease that robs even the strongest of men of their strength. But, frankly, I simply couldn't care less about it.
2. If I give to charity, it's going to be something that I truly care about, like St. Jude's, the Four Diamonds Fund, soldiers in need, the homeless, and light pollution awareness.
3. The more someone tries to guilt me into do something I don't really want to do, then I'm going to become more resistant to that cause. Stop begging me for money.
4. I care about light pollution, but you'll never see me give a passionate plea to raise money to try to end light pollution pouring out of my neighbors sodium lamp.
5. Finally, what about other diseases that people don't know or care about? If every time some poor afflicted soul of some wasting disease makes an impassioned plea for money, and we like fools come running to throw money to that cause, we would eventually go broke. But even so, so what? What about lupus, any number of flu viruses, cyclopia, or anencephaly?
So, instead of giving your money to a cause with a bunch of celebrities pulling at your heart strings, give your money to a cause that you care about, not Jimmy Fallon. Don't give in to a guilt trip by your friends and family just because you want to look like a nice person.
And here's another thing, and it's about the phoney, self-aggrandizing Bill Gates. This fraud is worth $76 billion. He makes so much money that if he were to bend over and pick up a $100 bill, he'd actually be losing money. As of this writing, the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised about $50 million dollars for ALS research. In other words, Bill Gate's single-handedly has the ability to donate enough money to pay for all the money that the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised 1,520 times. Not to mention that this is the same Bill Gates who donates money to eugenics causes. Bill Gates might fool others, but he damned sure doesn't fool me.
So, if by not pledging myself to be a part of the aura of false piety known as the Ice Bucket Challenge makes me an asshole, then I guess I'm an asshole, and I'll wear that title like a badge of honor.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Members of Reach America, please sign in
If you are a member of the Christian youth organization, Reach America, whether you are a student, staff member, or Gary Brown himself, welcome.
You might have noticed that your Facebook page has come under a bit of verbal abuse lately, from the likes of those like YouTuber, TheAmazingAtheist. However, you will not find that here. However, what you will find, admittedly, is a disdain toward religion, particularly Christianity. Why Christianity? Because, being a former member of the flock, I am more familiar with it than any other religion.
You may say to yourself, "There is no such thing as a former Christian," to which I say, bologna sauce. No one spends hundreds of dollars on books, tapes, and going to lectures if they don't really believe it. No one gets up at 7:00 AM on a Sunday morning to go sit in a pew for 2 hours, then Sunday school for one more hour, then fellowship afterward, if they don't really believe it. No one spends hundreds of dollars on Evangelism Explosion lessons if they don't really believe it. No one spends hours per week in the prayer closet if they don't really believe it. No one gives 10% of everything they earn if they don't really believe it.
After hearing all of that, you might say to yourself, "No wonder you left Christianity; you were miserable in trying to earn your way into Heaven," to which I might remind the reader, faith without works is dead (James 2:14-17).
Before we go much further, I have a question for you. Have you noticed anything about Reach America's Facebook page that might seem a little odd? Like everything there is a little "too" perfect? Have you noticed that there aren't a whole lot of opposing ideas there that last more than 24 hours? Have you noticed that there is no free exchange of conversation or ideas? That the only people who are allowed to post comments there are Christians?
I made a post there a few days ago that was a little unpopular. In that post, I challenged the youth of Reach America to begin asking tough questions, and I even accused the Reach America staff and Gary Brown himself of indoctrinating them. I stand firmly by that sentiment, and offer any of them, including Gary, to take me to task over this.
Trying to get any kind of dialogue going with Gary Brown and the staff members at RA, I sent an e-mail directly to Gary, himself. I even posted the video below for Gary, hoping that he would respond.
I waited for a few days, fearing that he wouldn't respond, until one day I logged into my Facebook account and saw that he did e-mail me. However, the gist of his e-mail was that he did not want to correspond to me, nor did he want to have any kind of contact with me, either through Youtube or e-mail.
I sent him one last e-mail, wished him farewell, but also informing him that I would be monitoring RA for factual errors and holding his feet to the fire, and if there was a site that was running their information, I'd be there to challenge their beliefs and claims.
Anyway, if you're a member of Reach America, welcome and feel free to browse the information you find on this blog. If you so desire, please feel free to challenge any of the things that I have posted.
Regards,
Matt
You might have noticed that your Facebook page has come under a bit of verbal abuse lately, from the likes of those like YouTuber, TheAmazingAtheist. However, you will not find that here. However, what you will find, admittedly, is a disdain toward religion, particularly Christianity. Why Christianity? Because, being a former member of the flock, I am more familiar with it than any other religion.
You may say to yourself, "There is no such thing as a former Christian," to which I say, bologna sauce. No one spends hundreds of dollars on books, tapes, and going to lectures if they don't really believe it. No one gets up at 7:00 AM on a Sunday morning to go sit in a pew for 2 hours, then Sunday school for one more hour, then fellowship afterward, if they don't really believe it. No one spends hundreds of dollars on Evangelism Explosion lessons if they don't really believe it. No one spends hours per week in the prayer closet if they don't really believe it. No one gives 10% of everything they earn if they don't really believe it.
After hearing all of that, you might say to yourself, "No wonder you left Christianity; you were miserable in trying to earn your way into Heaven," to which I might remind the reader, faith without works is dead (James 2:14-17).
Before we go much further, I have a question for you. Have you noticed anything about Reach America's Facebook page that might seem a little odd? Like everything there is a little "too" perfect? Have you noticed that there aren't a whole lot of opposing ideas there that last more than 24 hours? Have you noticed that there is no free exchange of conversation or ideas? That the only people who are allowed to post comments there are Christians?
I made a post there a few days ago that was a little unpopular. In that post, I challenged the youth of Reach America to begin asking tough questions, and I even accused the Reach America staff and Gary Brown himself of indoctrinating them. I stand firmly by that sentiment, and offer any of them, including Gary, to take me to task over this.
Trying to get any kind of dialogue going with Gary Brown and the staff members at RA, I sent an e-mail directly to Gary, himself. I even posted the video below for Gary, hoping that he would respond.
I waited for a few days, fearing that he wouldn't respond, until one day I logged into my Facebook account and saw that he did e-mail me. However, the gist of his e-mail was that he did not want to correspond to me, nor did he want to have any kind of contact with me, either through Youtube or e-mail.
I sent him one last e-mail, wished him farewell, but also informing him that I would be monitoring RA for factual errors and holding his feet to the fire, and if there was a site that was running their information, I'd be there to challenge their beliefs and claims.
Anyway, if you're a member of Reach America, welcome and feel free to browse the information you find on this blog. If you so desire, please feel free to challenge any of the things that I have posted.
Regards,
Matt
Saturday, July 21, 2012
DiscoTute stepped in it again
I read an article yesterday by PZ Myers titled, Forever Disappointed. The gist of the article was the inability of the Biologic Institute, funded by the Discovery Institute, to provide evidence for their claims. In this case, they deny that fusion in chromosome 2 in humans, by which they branched off from other primates ~6 million years ago, ever took place. Biologist Carl Zimmer, among others, took exception to DI's ongoing jackassery, and asked them for the evidence to their claims on BI's Facebook page. It wasn't long before the BI went from going on the offensive to damage control, insisting that they were being "pestered" by Zimmer.
After a few attempts at getting an answer, followed by deafening silence, BI finally gave sneering reply to Zimmer, asking "Carl, you write books for a living. Do you rehearse their content on your blog for anyone who asks?" BI later stated that Facebook is no place intended for debate. They ultimately threatened to put the kibosh on the whole conversation, then stated that their comments would be moved to BI's website. Of course, you shouldn't be surprised there are no public comment threads at their site.
We don't want any kind of true scientific inquiry, do we, DI?
DI's David Klinghoffer has since invited Zimmer to a "debate", to which Zimmer has said no. As Myers asks, why should he? He asked for evidence to DI/BI's inane claims in an open forum, which they denied providing that evidence, and then sneered at him. Now they're proclaiming victory, and I won't let that happen in light of their flagrant dishonesty.
I'm no mathematician, physicist, or biologist. I am simply a guy from Pennsylvania who cares deeply about the pursuit of science and detests when science is intentionally misrepresented by creationists in order to indoctrinate the public.
Take notice of a few things here:
1. Intellectual dishonesty by DI.
2. The inability to provide evidence to their claims.
3. Lack of real scientific research by DI.
4. BI does not welcome scrutiny by the scientific community (1, 2, 3).
Also, keep in mind that chromosome 2 was used as evidence in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in 2005 by Kenneth Miller, a professed Catholic and evolutionary biologist. Furthermore, the judge, John Jones III, is a professed Christian who ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that the teaching of creationism in a high school science class was unconstitutional.
As of the time of this writing, Zimmer is still asking BI to disclose the source from which they base their denial of chromosome 2, and they're still not answering.
After a few attempts at getting an answer, followed by deafening silence, BI finally gave sneering reply to Zimmer, asking "Carl, you write books for a living. Do you rehearse their content on your blog for anyone who asks?" BI later stated that Facebook is no place intended for debate. They ultimately threatened to put the kibosh on the whole conversation, then stated that their comments would be moved to BI's website. Of course, you shouldn't be surprised there are no public comment threads at their site.
We don't want any kind of true scientific inquiry, do we, DI?
DI's David Klinghoffer has since invited Zimmer to a "debate", to which Zimmer has said no. As Myers asks, why should he? He asked for evidence to DI/BI's inane claims in an open forum, which they denied providing that evidence, and then sneered at him. Now they're proclaiming victory, and I won't let that happen in light of their flagrant dishonesty.
I'm no mathematician, physicist, or biologist. I am simply a guy from Pennsylvania who cares deeply about the pursuit of science and detests when science is intentionally misrepresented by creationists in order to indoctrinate the public.
Take notice of a few things here:
1. Intellectual dishonesty by DI.
2. The inability to provide evidence to their claims.
3. Lack of real scientific research by DI.
4. BI does not welcome scrutiny by the scientific community (1, 2, 3).
Also, keep in mind that chromosome 2 was used as evidence in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in 2005 by Kenneth Miller, a professed Catholic and evolutionary biologist. Furthermore, the judge, John Jones III, is a professed Christian who ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that the teaching of creationism in a high school science class was unconstitutional.
As of the time of this writing, Zimmer is still asking BI to disclose the source from which they base their denial of chromosome 2, and they're still not answering.
Thursday, July 5, 2012
The Promise of Living
Speaking of Americana, take some time during this hot, humid, summer day to enjoy some beauty from the greatest American composer that ever lived.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLVyRvp2Qbg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLVyRvp2Qbg
Proper flag etiquette
Like any other town in the United States, State College is patriotic. Drive around town and you're sure to find flags being mutilated as they are torn apart by the wind on the back of a Harley, cars with red,white, and blue ribbon magnets with messages that admonish us to remember P.O.W.s/M.I.A.s and "Support Our Troops" -- those magnets are probably made in China.
If you're lucky enough, you might even find a house with a flag proudly displayed that is frayed with holes in it, bleached by the elements, no lighting on it at all, or dragging on the ground. But if you're really lucky, you might find that there are a few of us who actually know a thing or two about proper flag etiquette.
Last night at the Central Pennsylvana 4th Fest, there were a few things that got on my nerves. Fast.
First, as the National Anthem was being sung and the order was given for all to rise, there were a few around me who bitched and moaned about having to get off their rear end. Second, as the Star-Spangled Banner was being sung, I noticed that the most patriotic of those in attendance (you know, the ones wearing red, white, and blue and wearing t-shirts with some patriotic commentary), did not place their right hand over their heart. Rather, they opted to put their hands in their pockets or fold their arms.
While these two things irritated me, I wasn't ready for the douchebag with Old Glory draped over his shoulders and a flag bandana wrapped around his head, running around like he's some sort of neo Captain America. For those of you who know me, you know that while I tend to bitch a lot, I rarely get heated enough to say anything about things that upset me; I tend to keep my mouth shut. But this time, I had to say something. I simply yelled to this malcontent that it wasn't a cape. He turned, looked around quizically, then summarily blew me off.
I got to thinking about this, and then I realized that it might not entirely be his fault. Maybe nobody took the time to tell him that doing such a thing was a grave disrepect to the flag, veterans, prisoners of war, those killed in action, or active duty members of the military. With that in mind, if you'd like to become more savvy about the flag, I direct your attention to United States Code, Title 4, Chapter 1 - The Flag.
If you're lucky enough, you might even find a house with a flag proudly displayed that is frayed with holes in it, bleached by the elements, no lighting on it at all, or dragging on the ground. But if you're really lucky, you might find that there are a few of us who actually know a thing or two about proper flag etiquette.
Last night at the Central Pennsylvana 4th Fest, there were a few things that got on my nerves. Fast.
First, as the National Anthem was being sung and the order was given for all to rise, there were a few around me who bitched and moaned about having to get off their rear end. Second, as the Star-Spangled Banner was being sung, I noticed that the most patriotic of those in attendance (you know, the ones wearing red, white, and blue and wearing t-shirts with some patriotic commentary), did not place their right hand over their heart. Rather, they opted to put their hands in their pockets or fold their arms.
While these two things irritated me, I wasn't ready for the douchebag with Old Glory draped over his shoulders and a flag bandana wrapped around his head, running around like he's some sort of neo Captain America. For those of you who know me, you know that while I tend to bitch a lot, I rarely get heated enough to say anything about things that upset me; I tend to keep my mouth shut. But this time, I had to say something. I simply yelled to this malcontent that it wasn't a cape. He turned, looked around quizically, then summarily blew me off.
I got to thinking about this, and then I realized that it might not entirely be his fault. Maybe nobody took the time to tell him that doing such a thing was a grave disrepect to the flag, veterans, prisoners of war, those killed in action, or active duty members of the military. With that in mind, if you'd like to become more savvy about the flag, I direct your attention to United States Code, Title 4, Chapter 1 - The Flag.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
