The Shroud of Turin? Seriously?

Well, it's just been reported in the news that a team of "researchers" (I will not dignify them by calling them scientists) have come forward with the claim that the Shroud of Turin is authentic.  The incredible part isn't that a bunch of religiously motivated people have attempted to twist science into confirming their faith.  That nonsense has been going on ever since before Darwin turned the cannon of science against religion 151 years ago.  What's incredible is that so many reporters would report it as though it were at all credible!

Now, everyone knows that radiocarbon dating put the shroud's age at between 1260 and 1390 C.E., thus making it a medieval forgery.  But these researchers say that the sample of the cloth used to make this measurement was likely taken from a piece that was likely repaired with newer material after a fire burned parts of the shroud.

If the PolitiFact meter were put on that one, it would say, "Pants On Fire!"

Shown above, is the shroud itself.  It's not as large as I would have liked, but it will do.  That white rectangle in the lower left is where scientists clipped a 2" by 8" section which could be atomized for the Carbon-14 test.  It's pretty obvious that this section is contiguous with the rest of the cloth.  And if that's not enough, there's a PBS documentary that filmed the section being scissored out, and anyone can see bloody well that it's not a "repaired section."

But just for the sheer hell of it, let's play along.  Let's say the shroud breaks with every Jewish tradition in folding the body up in a single piece of cloth (not done) folded the long way (also not done) and leaving a narrow, two-dimensional imprint pattern, as if the ultraviolet rays emitted from Jesus upon resurrection only went in a single parallel, straight up or straight down, rather than in a dispersed, outwardly-radiating pattern (as you might expect) which would have created an unrecognizably darkened smear instead of a photograph.  You then have a scriptural problem.

The Book of John, chapter 20, verses 6 and 7 clearly state that Jesus' burial cloth was in strips, not a single piece, and that a separate burial cloth had been around Jesus' head.  So, logically, we have only three choices:  1.) This passage from The Book of John is fake, 2.) The Shroud of Turin is fake, 3.) They are both fake!  The only option we do not have is that either of these things support Christianity!

So go on, you stupid reporters, and uncritically pass along this story without one, single guffaw.  Oh, how I miss Christopher Hitchens at this moment.  Hell, I miss H.L. Mencken!

Meanwhile, most high school graduates in America can't find Italy on a map, much less Turin.  Now you tell ME which is the more important story!

Eric

Brrring!!! Here's Your Wake-Up Call!

Lots of stuff to talk about, but they all revolve around one, basic theme:

It's time for a wake-up call!

Brrrrring!  Here's your wake-up call regarding education in America.  Iran has captured a billion-dollar spy drone.  And why?  Was it shot down?  Lucky grenade-launcher shot?  NO!  It was captured because the Iranians, these backwater, third-world, religious hacks with nothing to offer but oil, out-thought us in computer software technology!  They hacked US? Yes, THEY HACKED US!  And not only did they hack us, they hacked the most cutting-edge piece of expensive-assed technology in our military arsenal!  Imagine!  On the eve of the era of robotic warfare, Iran, fucking IRAN, mind you, has up-ended us!

This happened because we have been lax in our education standards.  Not enough boarding schools in the inner city, poor education quality, cutting of funding at critical junctures, teachers unions having incompetent leaders, and bringing down slash-and-burn Republicans down upon all of us as a direct result.  Hell-LO!  We'd better start thinking of high school as middle school and college as high school, or we're in big trouble!  We'll end up getting more third-world hackers upending us!  And when the inevitable day arrives when we have robotic drones defending our freedom, we'll find some Islamic terrorist hacking our own robots and turning them upon our own cities.  Or worse, Israel.

Brrrring!  This is your wake-up call regarding so-called American supremacy!  The United States can no longer sit back on its haunches and assume that we are leaders in world technology.  Hell, we're not even leaders in world economy anymore!  And unless we want our military weapons built in China, with software designed in India, we'd better get off our asses and quit playing around!  That means we're ALL going back to school.  Not just me!  It doesn't matter how old or young you are.  We're all re-taking technology 101.  Because right now, we're still believing that desk-top computers are cool.  Hell, Bill Gates built his company when everybody else was still ga-ga over digital watches!  No, our smart phones and iPads are going to take over, and that means any terrorist hacker will have immediate access to everyone's belt-clip and waistline!  Unless we wake up!

Brrrring!  No more playing around with science and technology!  If we're going to survive, as a nation, as a people, if democracy is going to have even a snowball's chance in hell, then we've got to stop pretending that science isn't science, and learn what's really true.  No more creationism being taught to kids in high school and hoping our colleges and universities eventually clean up the mess!  No more failure to recognize the brain as defining the being by fooling ourselves into thinking that conception is the place to draw the line regarding new life.  No more wishing, hoping, and yes, even praying, that global warming is a hoax.  Science, people!  Not politics!

And speaking of which...  Brrrring!  Here's your wake-up call regarding the general scientific ignorance surrounding steroids in sports.  Oh, yes!  There's a connection, here.  We're all stunned over the Ryan Braun  allegedly positive test for (it's assumed) anabolic steroids.  But as I dealt with in a previous post, false positives for drug tests are a real danger in any profession.  Especially with sports, because what makes a great athlete great is a naturally high level of testosterone, above and beyond what the normal person has.  That means a false positive for testosterone is just one fluke chemical imbalance or incompetent lab tech away.  And the best athletes will always be at the greatest risk.

Am I calling Ryan Braun innocent?  He's innocent until proven guilty, yes!  But what I'm really trying to say is, the same general scientific ignorance that let one of our billion-dollar drones get hacked is quite possibly the same thing that let our million-dollar athlete get jacked!  One incompetent fool in the wrong place at the wrong time can cost us big!  Having too few science professionals and too many incompetent technicians virtually guarantees it!  And if having terrorists gain control of our military doesn't scare the piss out of you, then maybe losing our star sports hero for 1/3rd of an entire baseball season will.

Brrrring!  Here's your wake-up call regarding how silly it is to put sports above the stuff that really matters!

Enough with the scientific ignorance already!

Finally, let's all say a non-prayer for a hero of fighting scientific ignorance, who came forward to shake up our culture at exactly the right time.  Christopher Hitchens, the landmark journalist and unabashed atheist, just passed away at the age of 62.  Let's face it, 62 is young, these days.  If you haven't read Hitch-22, please do so.  He gave us all a wake-up call.

Eric

The Christmas Card Conundrum

It's that time of year again.  (I don't really need to describe it, do I?)  And with all the shopping for presents and hubbub, there's the inevitable barrage of (ugh!) Christmas cards.

The problem with holiday cards can best be summed up this way:  Suppose I want to send people cards.  I make out a list of people to send cards to, and send them out, thinking that I'm doing something nice.  But, without fail, there are always a few inconsiderate boobs who end up sending me a card when I didn't send them a card, making me look callous and insensitive to those nice people.  Meanwhile, all those who received a card from me who didn't send me a card in return feel guilty due to the fact that I sent them a card, but didn't get one in return.  It seems like the number of people who got cards from me but didn't reciprocate, and who sent me cards when I didn't send them one, always outnumbers the people who got cards from me and sent one in return!  So, to those few friends of mine who were nice enough to NOT send me a Christmas card this year when I didn't send them one either, I decide to reward by sending a card next year!

You know what? Screw that.  Now you all know why I don't bother with Christmas cards.

I don't much bother with cards in general, either.  The people who send them mean well, I know they do.  It's just that they think they're sending me a little piece of paper to let me know that they're thinking of me, when in reality they're sending a piece of paper to convince themselves they're doing something nice to a person they probably don't know very well and to whom they can't think of anything to say in a meaningful letter or e-mail.  So, I get this sappy little message which I didn't ask for, and don't particularly want, which is supposed to make me all warm-and-fuzzy, when all it really does is put me in an ethical dilemma over whether or not I keep this useless item in permanent storage in a shoe-box, there to be toted by me from apartment to apartment and residence to residence for all eternity, or whether I have to subject myself to permanent guilt by throwing it in the trash.  This is doing something nice for me?  I didn't ask for this huge responsibility to be thrown upon my shoulders!

For this reason, I dispensed with the feeling of guilt over cards a long time ago.  They go out with the sale ads, un-clippped coupons, and overdue tuition notices.  If I get one, I smile, then throw it away without a second thought.  The nice person who sent me one isn't really going to police what I do with it by stopping over and asking where on the mantle her card is being displayed (unless she's a Jewish grandmother), so why should I mind getting rid of it?  For that matter, why should anyone else, especially the sender?

Not that I don't, at some level, appreciate getting a card.  As I say, there is some genuine good feeling behind the act of sending one.  But if it's going to make my friend feel guilty about eventually throwing it out, why send it in the first place?  My more rational friends realize this.  They never send me cards, and I gratefully show my appreciation of this by never sending them cards either.  Not for birthdays, not for graduations, not for holidays.  It's quite a relief, actually, to have such understanding friends who are so good as to be pleasant enough to spend time with, but who will never stuff my mailbox with clutter.  Life is good.

Sometimes I rather like getting a card.  For example, I got one recently from the National Center for Science Education, signed by Dr. Eugenie Scott and her wonderful staff.  Now THAT'S a card I intend to keep in my files for all eternity, not just because such a prestigious organization would bother with me, but because those are all people I really love over there.  And if some future biographers feel that I actually merit attention, and want to go through my things, they'll find that card, and know how genuinely close I felt to all those kindred souls.  Beautiful!  A card, when given in the right way, and given for the right reason, at the right time, can be a good thing!

Nevertheless, there are always people who think that giving a card is some ubiquitous thing that is to be done whenever one wants to give the appearance of being nice, and that's hardly being nice at all, in my estimation.  Just yesterday I received a card from the office staff at work, most of whom go about their business in a different building from me, and who haven't seen me in a little over three years.  They all signed it.  I know that this was meant as a gesture to make me feel welcomed, part of the team, one of the family, etc.  But really it's just a corporate gimmick designed to make me feel happier in a job that is far beneath my talents and abilities, and pays me according to that standard.  I'm certainly not the only employee to receive such a card.  Everyone, from the janitorial staff to the cafeteria cooks, got one.  So how really special is it then?  I honestly don't know which is worse: that this supposedly nice gesture came about as a result of corporate edict inflicted upon everyone by the boss from on-high, or that a percentage of resources, which at least included purchasing costs and the five or ten minutes (at least) of each staff member's hourly wage that everyone had to sacrifice in order to sign all these cards together.  I could think of far better uses for their time, and considerably far better uses for the money!  I'm thinking, just to get back at them, that I should send them a huge glossy saying "Merry Christmas!" with an overtly flamboyant flower bouquet.  That would certainly serve them right, wouldn't it!

On second thought, nah.  They wouldn't understand.  They'd probably just send me an even bigger card next year.

Eric

Computers and Economics

In this wonderful age of technology we live in, computers can do amazing things.  They can bring characters like Golum to life so realistically that we can believe he can actually exist (or that a creature can be that anorexic and still kick a hobbit's ass).  They can connect people together in a mass social network that requires terabytes of memory and gigawatts of power.  They can bring us smart phones, teach us a foreign language in several weeks, or make a killing in the stock market based on a two-tenths of a millisecond faster processing speed than a competitor.

So why the hell can't all this computer power make us smarter in economics?

With the competing ideas of economics in our ridiculously hyper-divided political "system," in full scale war, what we, the people, need more than ever, is a game-like computer model that shows us just how economics works, whereby we can see how a nation like the U.S. does using various economic approaches.  In other words, you can play the computer game as the United States, tweak government-controllable factors like money spent on education, raising or lowering of taxes, raising or lowering of interest rates, raising or lowering of social programs, and then hit "fast forward" to see how the nation will look in the future.

What a great idea!  Every citizen could simply plug in Mitt Romney's ideas vs. Barack Obama's ideas to see which one produces the better future!  And with a tool like that, all the rhetoric becomes meaningless!  What an essential tool!  Every voter should have one!

Unfortunately, all we have is Simcountry.

Why is it that games that involve money and economics always need some sort of war going on?  You harvest crystals, gather spice, tap lands, or do some other inane thing for money which has nothing to do with the real world.  What a waste!

Such computer models exist.  We know they're out there.  Ben Bernanke, our current Fed Reserve Chairman, developed such a computer model back in the 1980's.  The University of Chicago has one.  M.I.T. has one.  The University of Wisconsin, I hope, has one.

What I don't get is why we all don't have one.

All it takes is one, JUST ONE  economist who has access to such a computer model to releasee it into the general public, maybe even make it into a game, and all this political bullshit we're enduring will go away.  Even if a model which is slanted to one side or the other is released, it won't matter, because the opposition will respond in kind, and people will be able to evaluate for themselves.

JUST ONE ECONOMIST!  Is that too much to ask?  Anyone out there?  Anyone?

When economic information is so very critical to our survival, both as a nation, and to ourselves personally, I guess I can no longer fathom why we all clamor with "angry birds" or internet cats.

Eric

Your Designated Driver

I'm sometimes given to quiet musings which are of little importance to anyone else but me.  It is, in fact, my favorite way to spend my free time.  But periodically I stumble upon a thought which the world must know about because it has world-changing and life-saving consequences.  This blog post shares such a thought with you.  Pay attention.

I see how our culture sometimes uses designated drivers on assigned party nights during the weekend.  Good thing, there, but not nearly enough of that's happening.  And I was watching our Brewers win over the Cardinals last night (Har, har!) when I saw a commercial for Captain Morgan, where a single rower was towing the party barge back to the Captain's ship.  The caption read, "Designate a driver.  Captain's orders."  But how lonely that one rowboat guy looked!

That's when it occurred to me:  Most designated drivers happen to be male, and they're missing out on some of the party to be the driver.  So here's my big thought, and remember, it could save lives!  If you are part of a party with a male designated driver...

Make sure that driver gets laid!

Just imagine how many more guys will be willing to be the designated driver if our culture insists that we repay their invaluable service with some well-earned nookie!  With more designated drivers lining up to get behind the wheel and get lucky, drunk driving will decrease dramatically, and lives will be saved!

So there you have it!  Call it the "tushy for taxi" rule!

Oh, and female designated drivers get their feet rubbed by a tan, muscular athlete!

Eric

More Applications of Poe's Law

The more I contemplate Poe's Law (see previous blog post), the more applications I find for it.  It was initially meant for fundamentalism, true, but there are so many other areas where something is so ridiculous that it can't be parodied without someone mistaking it as genuine.  Specifically, I've identified several other areas where Poe's law fits:
Commercial advertising
Politics
Television and film production
Sports fans
Modern art
Hip-hop culture
Country/Western music

Now, at first glance, none of these things appear to have anything in common, other than they are so ridiculous that doing a parody would result in people mistaking them for the real thing.  But why?  Could there be some common element that links these seemingly disparate subjects together?  Certainly hip-hop culture and country/western music are linked by low-brow, simplistic styles of music, and commercial advertising, politics and entertainment production all have the distinction of trying to sell sub-standard products to the masses.  But what about the others?  How do simple music styles and selling products relate?  How do they both relate to fundamentalism?  Or modern art?  How to they relate to sports fans?

I believe the answer has to do with one thing.  These ridiculous behaviors all come into play whenever there happens to be a large group of people following a trend or charismatic leader blindly.

It makes sense.  When people follow blindly, rationality goes out the window, and with it, the sense of "Oh, my god, I'm really making an ass out of myself!"  There's something about getting swept up in the mob mentality which appeals to our primal, animal brain, the core of which is, essentially, that of a rodent.  Yes, there's a little bit of lemming in each of us.

Perhaps we might wake up to certain things in our lives as a result.  We might say of hip hop culture, "You know, the music's only good because the Motown greats it raps over were originally good.  These clowns have no musical talent."  Or, "You call THAT art?  My five-year-old could do that!"  And it begs the question, just what OTHER areas are there in my life where I'm following blindly?  Do I really have to tolerate commercials which announce "Omnaris, To The Nose!" by spending my money on their product?  Indeed, can't we all just not buy any shit which REPEATS the same nonsense over and over again?

Homework assignment:  Look yourself in the mirror and ask, "What am I doing in my life where I'm following stupid stuff blindly?  And what can I do to change it?"  We ALL have such areas in our lives, so no fair trying to insist that you've got no such areas.  Go on, explore your life.  Find that area where you're being led about by the nose.

And then eliminate it.  Liberate yourself!

Eric

Class Warfare?

It seems that Our Trophy President is making a big push for job creation, and is using tough language to get it through congress.  He's even used the v-word (gasp!), which he hasn't used in the three and a half years we've been watching him.  He says he'll veto any bill which balances the budgets solely on the backs of ordinary people, without ending the loopholes which allow the rich to be taxed at a much lower rate.

Bully for you, Barry.  We knew you had a bit of fighter in you there, somewhere.

John Boehner, in response, said that he didn't feel "class warfare" was showing good leadership.

And with that "class warfare" comment, both Fox News and MSNBC have proceeded to fall all over each other in a comical effort to see who can miss the point the most.  This is hardly unusual - we've come to expect this kind of partisan myopia from these sound-byte generators.  And seemingly as always, I appear to be the only one in the Dairy State cursed with realizing what's going on.

The heads on the Right are insisting it's class warfare, while those on the Left are assuring us that it's not class warfare at all.  Naturally, this is all an irrelevant tangent that both sides have gone off on.  Even if it is somehow "class warfare," it does not follow that it would automatically be bad legislation as a result.  Class warfare has often produced good legislation, such as the liberation of slaves, or the sufferage of women.  So class warfare, if it is such, is entirely moot.  The question we should be asking is whether or not it is fair legislation to ensure Warren Buffet's secretary gets taxed at the same percentage rate he does.  So far, the public agrees that when Buffet highlights the discrepancy in taxation rates between low income and high income people, he's got a valid point.

That having been said, I wish to do something very rare.  For once, I'm going to agree with John Boehner!  That's right, I agree with him!  This IS class warfare.  And the Left is absolutely wrong in denying that.  But it's not class warfare of the poor against the rich.

No, it's class warfare of the rich against the poor!

And those waging the war are the ones bent on denying anything remotely close to fair opportunity to the masses, and keeping the playing field as tilted as possible in favor of the super-rich at all costs.  (Three guesses who.)  In other words, it's not the poor waging class warfare against the rich, but rather it's the poor trying to get the rich to stop waging class warfare upon them!

And to those who insist "government spending has not created one job," I assign this homework assignment: Walk up to any police officer, fireman, teacher, highway-construction laborer or groundskeeper, and ask him/her if more government money has helped create his/her job.  Yes, private industry creates most jobs, but some jobs are, in fact, government-paid, and we'd be very foolish to deny that.

It seems Our Trophy President's opponents are bent on a two-part plan: First, to keep Obama from being effective, and second, to then attack him for his ineffectiveness. (Brilliant, that!) Oh, and hope that no one fingers them as the cause of the ineptitude!

Here's a thought: How about for once, instead of making everybody suffer just to deny Obama one little victory, we let the President win one, and put people to work for once?  We need jobs now! Not after 2012!  I don't know about you, but I'm sick and damned tired of the scorched-earth mentality which is willing to sacrifice us all to the false idol of talk radio.  Someone needs to come down from the mountain and put that particular golden calf out of its misery.

Come to think of it, I wonder if maybe the golden calf of the Biblical book of Exodus was not a cow's calf, but rather an elephant's calf?

Eric