Taking a break.

Taking the rest of November off. More blog posts to come in December.

Picture/Quote of the day (November 20, 2009).

 (NASA)

What object has created more inspiration than the Hubble Telescope?

Picture/Quote of the day (November 19, 2009).

(Nasa)

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men." -Martin Luther King, Jr

Picture/Quote of the day (November 18, 2009).

(ESA): The pair of galaxies NGC 1531/2, engaged in a spirited waltz, is located about 70 million light-years away towards the southern constellation Eridanus (The River). (lisence: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported)

"Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people." -Carl Sagan

Picture/Quote of the day (November 17, 2009).

(A stunning image released today by the Gemini Observatory captures the graceful interactions of a galactic ballet, on a stage some 300 million light years away, that might better be described as a contortionist's dance.)

"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." -Carl Sagan 

Picture/Quote of the day (November 16, 2009).

(Image of Boomerang nebula taken by Hubble Space Telescope)

"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent."  -Carl Sagan

Picture/Quote of the day (November 15, 2009).

(This image of M64 was taken with Hubble's Wide Field Planetary Camera 2) 

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." -Carl Sagan

Picture/Quote of the day (November 14, 2009).

(PGC 29194 (Antlia Dwarf) galaxy by Hubble space telescope)

"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." -Carl Sagan

Bible on Slavery (Part 3): Leviticus 25:44-46

Many believers will overlook the verses which are pro-slavery because of the ones that show their god was against the enslavement of the Jewish people by the Egyptians. However if these people were more knowledgeable about their own book (or not feigning ignorance) they would know/admit that was not the intended message of the writers. The quote being discussed here is found in the book of Leviticus.

The people of Israel are the LORD's slaves, and he brought them out of Egypt; they must not be sold into slavery. Do not treat them harshly, but obey your God. If you need slaves, you may buy them from the nations around you. You may also buy the children of the foreigners who are living among you. Such children born in your land may become your property, and you may leave them as an inheritance to your children, whom they must serve as long as they live. But you must not treat any Israelites harshly. - Leviticus 25:42-46

The primary message here is straight forward, it is only wrong for "the people of Israel" to be slaves. The Bible is by no means anti-slavery — only against the enslavement of "God's people". How convenient for them. I feel these verses knock down any argument which claim the Bible is anti-slavery.The Jewish people being enslaved by the Egyptians, and God opposing it, had nothing to do with opposing the institution of slavery (except for that one convenient case).

These verses do not only refute a poor argument, they also give insight into the backwards perspective the writers possessed. Starting off: "You may also buy the children of the foreigners who are living among you". In this case the Jewish people cannot be enslaved, but foreigners can. What does this show? It shows the writers viewed people that were different then them as lowly (pure bigotry). "Such children born in your land may become your property, and you may leave them as an inheritance to your children, whom they must serve as long as they live". The writers look to establish the concept of slaves as being only property — to be handed down. It's wonderful the writers included this bit: "whom they must serve as long as they live" — how awful would it be to have to continue serving after death? Also, realistically, how much work can a corpse do? It's good to know the writers had this all thought out.

Bible on Slavery (Part 2): Ephesians 6:5-6

Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling; and do it with a sincere heart, as though you were serving Christ. Do this not only when they are watching you, because you want to gain their approval; but with all your heart do what God wants, as slaves of Christ. -Ephesians 6:5-6

These verses display how the New Testament teachings are not all what they are cracked up to be. Breaking it down, starting off with the first verse: "Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling; and do it with a sincere heart, as though you were serving Christ". This verse has an interesting message; that message is that Jesus is equated to being a slave master. It instructs people to not only obey their slave masters with "fear and trembling", but to do so while having "a sincere heart". This is the sort of mentality that is found all over the Bible. The idea that fearing something is equal to showing respect and love towards it — in reality it is the opposite. When normal people are fearful of something, they typically grow to dislike it (fear is not meant to be enjoyable). Fear (feels bad) is on the opposing end of the spectrum to love (feels good). Those that think fear brings respect and love, are blissfully ignorant to reality (which is probably why God is portrayed as being a fatherly figure). When a person fears another person, they obviously will be less inclined to be honest with them. This shows which side the writers were on, writing scripture to keep slaves in-line; if they could not instill enough fear to make them obey, certainly the idea of a god would be scary enough.

On to the next verse: "Do this not only when they are watching you, because you want to gain their approval; but with all your heart do what God wants, as slaves of Christ". This verse attempts to draw parallels between slave masters and Christ — entitled to similar love and respect. They want slaves to not only behave, but to love their slave masters, just like they love Christ — naturally the writers would view themselves as godlike — which is not the least bit arrogant (sarcasm). This verse also describes slavery as beings a thing which "God wants". If only we had obeyed what God wanted, slavery would still exist in the United States — how nice would that be?

Picture/Quote of the day (November 13, 2009).

(This NASA Hubble Space Telescope image of the Antennae galaxies (NGC 4038 & 4039) is the sharpest yet of this merging pair of galaxies.)

"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. " -Carl Sagan

Bible on Slavery (Part 1): Exodus 21:20-21

Multiple examples of acceptance and support of slavery are found within the Bible. In modern times the majority of Believers do not take these parts all too seriously. However in the not too distant past, these verses were used to justify the practice of slavery. The first set which will be discussed here is found in the book of Exodus — 21:20-21.

When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be punished; for the slave is his money. -Exodus 21:20-21

Obviously the Bible in this instance is in support of the institution of slavery; let's break these verses down for the underlining meaning. The first part:  "When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished". This shows that even in the past, slaves were viewed as more then just property, being that if they died from the owners abuse, the person that killed them would gotten punished —which is presumably more then the murder of ones own livestock (cows, sheep etc.). Details on what the punishment would be were left out. This was probably intentional, the writers wanted to show that they viewed slaves as being slightly higher then livestock, but did not want to declare slavery itself as immoral. The only impact this verse would have had would have been in the form of a slap on the wrist for murderer, if even that. The next part: "But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be punished; for the slave is his money.". This verse shows the true views of the writers, that slaves, in the end are mere property. A slave owner gets a "punishment" for committing murder, and nothing for nearly doing so. The writers had a void in basic human compassion and morality. Slavery is a very immoral practice, why anyone would look for morality in a book which condones it is beyond me.

Picture/Quote of the day (November 12, 2009).

(Hubble Illuminates Cluster of Diverse Galaxies: Abell S0740)

"Personally, I would be delighted if there were a life after death, especially if it permitted me to continue to learn about this world and others, if it gave me a chance to discover how history turns out." -Carl Sagan

Evil of the Bible (Part 4).

This series of verses are a bit longer then normal — originally the quote was only going to be from 32:26-29, however it seemed better to include the earlier verses to add context to why Moses had the people murder their "sons" and "brothers".

  And as soon as he came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, Moses' anger burned hot, and he threw the tables out of his hands and broke them at the foot of the mountain. And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it with fire, and ground it to powder, and scattered it upon the water, and made the people of Israel drink it. And Moses said to Aaron, "What did this people do to you that you have brought a great sin upon them?" And Aaron said, "Let not the anger of my lord burn hot; you know the people, that they are set on evil. For they said to me, 'Make us gods, who shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.' And I said to them, 'Let any who have gold take it off'; so they gave it to me, and I threw it into the fire, and there came out this calf." And when Moses saw that the people had broken loose (for Aaron had let them break loose, to their shame among their enemies), then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, "Who is on the LORD's side? Come to me." And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together to him. And he said to them, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'Put every man his sword on his side, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.'" And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses; and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. And Moses said, "Today you have ordained yourselves for the service of the LORD, each one at the cost of his son and of his brother, that he may bestow a blessing upon you this day." -Exodus 32:19-29 RSV

So Moses found "the people of Israel" worshiping a calf. Moses has all of the believers in his god come to him: "then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, 'Who is on the LORD's side? Come to me'". He then instructs them to get their swords and go on a killing spree: 'Put every man his sword on his side, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.'" Naturally the sheep obey, they murder "about three thousand men". The end of this quote is great: '"Today you have ordained yourselves for the service of the LORD, each one at the cost of his son and of his brother, that he may bestow a blessing upon you this day'". They go on a killing-spree, murdering their sons and brothers only to get a "blessing", I bet none of them had regrets about that (sarcasm).


These verses have specific messages contained within them. The first message, or religious moral is: nonbelievers in God should be killed, even if they are your own relatives. The second being: if a guy that claims to talk to an invisible being, demands you kill your family, you do it — he can't be crazy, he must be a prophet (sarcasm). Believers have faith that schizophrenia did not exist during biblical times (check out: Schizophrenic Inspiration).

Evil of the Bible (Part 3).

These Bible verses found in the book of Isaiah are another example of why the Bible is not a book of morality, but a book of hypocrisy and hate.

The LORD says, "I will bring disaster on the earth and punish all wicked people for their sins. I will humble everyone who is proud and punish everyone who is arrogant and cruel. Those who survive will be scarcer than gold. I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken out of its place on that day when I, the LORD Almighty, show my anger. "The foreigners living in Babylon will run away to their homelands, scattering like deer escaping from hunters, like sheep without a shepherd. Anyone who is caught will be stabbed to death. While they look on helplessly, their babies will be battered to death, their houses will be looted, and their wives will be raped." The LORD says, "I am stirring up the Medes to attack Babylon. They care nothing for silver and are not tempted by gold. With their bows and arrows they will kill the young men. They will show no mercy to babies and take no pity on children. -Isaiah 13:11-18

If you are new to Bible verses like these ones, you may be surprised by how disgusting and immoral they can be. Let's break this quote down, starting off with: "I will bring disaster on the earth and punish all wicked people for their sins. I will humble everyone who is proud and punish everyone who is arrogant and cruel." The Lord is saying that he is going to bring disaster on those that are wicked, along with punishing those who are "arrogant and cruel". How hypocritical is that? What is more cruel then: "While they look on helplessly, their babies will be battered to death". On what planet is battering defenseless babies in-front of their parents not cruel? (on a planet with religion of course).

Then we have this part: "They care nothing for silver and are not tempted by gold". Of course they wouldn't be bought off, why would they be? — they can just steal the gold and silver from the houses, which is much easier ("their houses will be looted"). 


We also have the raping of women in this quote as well ("wives will be raped"). According to the Bible, rape is not an immoral act, as long as the reasons are righteous. The quote ends with: "They will show no mercy to babies and take no pity on children". This is natural in a biblical sense, only a person of morality and human decency would show pity towards babies and children; when the reasons for barbaric behavior are divine, compassion is the last thing on the mind.

Bible verses like these are horrible. While they may not be based on actual historical events (however they may be) — they show the primitive, barbaric mindset of the writers. But the writers are long dead, the true primitives are the people that attempt to justify these nasty stories; primitives are those that use the Bible as a source of morality and inspiration.

Killer Angels

When most think about what angels are, they think of a human-like figure with white wings, a halo, and having no imperfections. Thinking that an angel would be involved in mass-murder would surprise many people. The following is two examples found in the Bible of killer angels.

That night an angel of the LORD went to the Assyrian camp and killed 185,000 soldiers. At dawn the next day there they lay, all dead! -2 Kings 19:35 GNB

An angel killing 185,000 people. The idea of an angel going on a killing spree like this would probably surprise many Believers. It's a shame the Bible doesn't go into detail for how the angel slaughters those people, I suppose people need to use their imaginations here.

My angel will go ahead of you and take you into the land of the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and I will destroy them. - Exodus 23:23 GNB

An angel in this case aids in the genocide of six different groups of people. Believers would try to justify the act genocide. They will do so because they view angels as being pure — free of sin. This prevents Believers from admitting that genocide is wrong, even if it is committed by an angel. They should at the very least re-think how they view angels. Perhaps have them holding an axe when they are portrayed in art, would be a more accurate image. The religious moral here is: if angels commit/aid in genocide, it is okay, they can do no wrong.

Picture/Quote of the day (November 11, 2009).

(Hubble European Space Agency: Orion, Canis Minor and Canis major)

"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." -Carl Sagan

Picture/Quote of the day (November 10, 2009).

(The occulting pair of spiral galaxies 2MASX J00482185-2507365 as photographed by the Hubble Space Telescope.)

"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." -Carl Sagan

The Universe (Part 1): How Big is The Sun?

To say the universe is large is a major understatement. The goal of this blog series is to put the size of our planet into a more accurate perspective. Starting off with a size comparison of our planet to the Sun. Many people seem content with just this planet, in-fact they are often times unable to grasp how large our own planet is. Most believe our planet is the center of everything, this close-mindedness robs those people of the real inspiration — the universe. The fact that people feel they need to get inspiration from the unknown is ridiculous, we have all this real inspiration right before our own eyes, only to be ignored by the majority.

Here is a picture of Earth. Imagine all the billions of people living here, all the cities and nations they make up, and all of the other forms of life — all of the reasons we call this planet home.

(NASA material)

Here is our sun compared in size to our planet. Keep the previous image and thoughts in mind when looking at this one. Try as hard as you can to imagine the incredibly large size of our Sun — the source of our energy, the reason we are here. This is a reality, we live our lives there, while revolving around this star. Most don't appreciate just how small we are. 
 

Notice the blue dot on the lower right-hand side, that is Earth (the ratio is an approximation)

To think that the sun only exists to provide us light and heat seems ridiculous — we only exist because of the Sun. The Sun is huge compared to our planet, but keep in mind the Sun is an average sized star (average in scale from the largest to the smallest of stars). So the next time you look up at the stars, think about how significant they are, then think about how significant you are to them.

(This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0, Attribution ShareAlike 2.5, Attribution ShareAlike 2.0 and Attribution ShareAlike 1.0)

Evil of the Bible (Part 2).

One of the most disturbing passage in the Bible is found in Ezekiel. Read this quote, if you don't find this disgusting and highly immoral, then you must be religious (religious = the believers in the Bible for this post).

And the LORD said to him, "Go through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it." And to the others he said in my hearing, "Pass through the city after him, and smite; your eye shall not spare, and you shall show no pity; slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women, but touch no one upon whom is the mark. And begin at my sanctuary." So they began with the elders who were before the house. Then he said to them, "Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain. Go forth." So they went forth, and smote in the city.  And while they were smiting, and I was left alone, I fell upon my face, and cried, "Ah Lord GOD! wilt thou destroy all that remains of Israel in the outpouring of thy wrath upon Jerusalem?" Then he said to me, "The guilt of the house of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great; the land is full of blood, and the city full of injustice; for they say, 'The LORD has forsaken the land, and the LORD does not see.' As for me, my eye will not spare, nor will I have pity, but I will requite their deeds upon their heads." -Ezekiel 9:4-10

The religious do not seem to be well aware, or care about these verses. Let's break this down, to increase the comprehension of this quote. Starting off with: "put a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it". This shows that only some of the men would be spared from the genocide, the rest would be mindlessly slaughtered. I'm sure no one forgot this line, but read it again, so it sinks in better: "slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women, but touch no one upon whom is the mark.". Its disturbing how God is targeting the women and children, why a god would target the innocent and be thought of as "all-loving" is baffling.  The imagery of this next quote is the cherry on the sundae: "fill the courts with the slain" — what is more horrifying then that— imagine seeing women and children among the "slain". Hopefully this story is complete fiction, but who knows?

It is not that God works in mysterious ways, the ways are demonic (how the religious would think of it, if it was in a different context). This is what happens when crazy people are believed to be prophets (see: Schizophrenic Inspiration). These acts are the furthest away from morality and human kindness that one can think of. However the people that believe in the Bible will be quick to write this off, providing numerous excuses for why this horrible behavior is justifiable.

Imagine instead of God telling people to do these horrible acts, it was Satan. How would the religious view the same story? I guarantee they wouldn't be trying to justify it, in-fact that would denounce it as pure evil. What is the difference? Rational people view actions as actions, but the religious view any action that helps them get into Heaven as good and righteous. The religious think if they defend this story, they are doing good — they will get into heaven for justifying evil. The religious moral of story is: if a god tells you to do something, you do it, no matter how horrifying it is.

Picture/Quote of the day (November 09, 2009).

(NASA: Hubble)

"We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." -Stephen Hawking

Cursing: The Capital Offense (Leviticus 20:9)

The LORD gave the following regulations. Any of you that curse your father or mother shall be put to death; you are responsible for your own death. -Leviticus 20:9 GNB

If you curse your parents, your life will end like a lamp that goes out in the dark. -Proverbs 20:20  GNB

Another example of a Biblical rule that is not observed in modern times (or one hopes). Those that claim to believe in this book should follow all of its advice, not just the few that sound good. It is very probable that this rule was followed in the past, children may have been killed because of this biblical nonsense. In modern times the parent would have found their way in prison for committing such an act. The Bible is against cursing but not against murder in this particular case — showing the warped views the writers of this book had. The practice of murdering those that curse their parents would have solved the cursing problem however.

In what stretch of the imagination is it moral for a parent to have their child killed because that child cursed at them? The believers in this book claim it as their source of morality, not many things are more immoral then the murdering of ones own child. While cursing a parent is not a good thing, it is nothing compared to murder. When the writers thought this up, they intended on people to follow it for all-time. For people to not follow it later on, due to advancements in society was not indented. The writers knew more about morality and reality then the people of today — or so claim the Believers. Believers are not wise enough to determine what they should or should not follow (otherwise they would be Nonbelievers). A message to Believers: follow all of it or none of it, stop cherry-picking!

Picture/Quote of the day (November 08, 2009).

 (Hubble Space Telescope (Wide Field Planetary Camera 2) image of warped galaxy ESO 510-G13)

"If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite." -William Blake

Picture/Quote of the day (November 07, 2009)

(created by NASA and ESA)

"My goal is simple. It is complete understanding of the universe, why it as it is and why it exists as all." -Stephen Hawking

Religion and Politics

In America, religion and politics are often mixed together. During most elections (especially presidential elections) the topic of religion is brought up. For the religious, it is reassuring for them to know they have the same imaginary friend as the person they are voting for. However for nonbelievers we are left out of the loop here. Religion and politics are irrelevant to each-other. Political candidates will often justify bringing up religion to show that they have a source of morality; but I would argue that it should harm a political candidate to say they get morality from religion (check out: artificial morality.) There is nothing within scripture that is relevant to running a modern secular government — a candidates' religious beliefs should be completely irrelevant.

When a politician brings up his/her religious beliefs they are sucking-up — trying to manipulate citizens to vote for them — when they should know it has nothing to do with the real issues in a political race. When I say 'sucking-up' I am obviously referring to the voters, but not just the voters; if they really believe what they say, they are sucking up to a god as well (see: The Gullible God). A person that "sucks-up" to get what they want, in my opinion, does not make a strong leader. Politicians are applying for a job — the boss is the voters, the interview is the campaign. Why would religion ever get brought into a job interview for a position in a government that has a separation between church and state? Here is an analogy to put what is being referred to into perspective..

You are the manager of a store which is centered on the vegetarian lifestyle — selling foods, books, and so on. You are passionate about your store, you love the vegetarian lifestyle, and you are looking for a person to help manage it. You have two people to interview for the position. The first person talks to you about how much they love the store, how good of an employee they would be, and how much they would love to work for you. In second interview the person talks about how much they love meat, and goes on about a steak they recently had for dinner. Which of the two would make the best employee to work at a store centered on the vegetarian lifestyle?

The answer is obvious — as it should be in the United States. A person "applying" for a job to work for the government of a country that has separation of religion and state should never bring up religion. Like in my analogy, that should be a major turn off. We have separation of church and state for a reason, people should be free to believe whatever they want, but it should never be a political topic — in-fact it should be taboo to even bring up the issue.

In America, the majority of the citizens are Believers. For many Americans, they seem much more concerned about whether a politician has the same imaginary friend that they do, instead real issues. This causes a major problem. It is nearly impossible at the present time for a Nonbeliever to get elected president (most Americans say they would not vote for one). Disregarding how intolerant that shows Americans as being, this causes a major problem for who the citizens have as options to run this nation. The perfect example of this is Sarah Palin. She made no secret of her beliefs during the last presidential election. I could go into detail for why I think she is stupid, but she does a good job doing that herself. Here are some videos that reflect this..

This video shows Palin participating in a strange religious ritual.





This video here shows that this faith-head is against science and is ignorant to the importance of scientific research — which would have been harmful to scientific progress, had she gotten into office.



A person like this not intelligent or rational — which is the complete opposite qualities we should be looking for in a strong leader. This person would be running the most powerful nation on earth. This next video is perfect for displaying how incompetent she is. People should breath a sigh of relief, knowing she did not get into office. Imagine if Mccain won and died soon after? — we would have been stuck with that for four years.




People like Sarah Palin can potentially get into office (e.g. Bush). The main reason this country isn't always able to get the best and brightest into office is because of religion (otherwise the qualification of the candidate would be the only factor).

From what I have seen, President Obama appears to be a Nonbeliever — based on the things he has said, along with his general stance towards religion and science. It seems he lied to get into office. In this country you rather need to be religious or dishonest to be elected (ironic?)

Carl Sagan: Pale Blue Dot

Carl Sagan is my favorite educator of science, he was able to explain scientific ideas in a way which gave it  incredible inspiration. This beautiful video puts into perspective our place in this universe. If you have never seen this before, you must watch it.

God's Perfect Creation (Part 2)

(This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0 License)

Two-headed snake.

.

Jesus wants your organs!

I found this message to be a bit strange.

Picture/Quote of the day (November 06, 2009).

NASA description: The Hubble Space Telescope imaged this view in February 1995. The arcing, graceful structure is actually a bow shock about half a light-year across, created from the wind from the star L.L. Orionis colliding with the Orion Nebula flow.

"The universe is full of magical things, patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper." -Eden Phillpotts

The Five-Year-Old Man (Poem)

a room existed which contained a baby

the baby grew

becoming smarter and stronger

in time becoming a man

the man had troubles with memory

only the past five years could be recalled

the man would ponder how old he was

coming to the same conclusion

he was five-years-old

he would draw on the walls

all kinds of beautiful things

memory fades as time passes

he would look at the walls in amazement

the man thought he was not alone

who drew the pictures on the wall?

the man would wonder

who was he?

who drew him?

the man's time eventually came

the walls would only last so long

when the room collapsed

the man was crushed

was it all for nothing?

five years is all it takes

for a billion years to pass

(Feel free to distribute this poem, but make sure to provide a link to the site: http://the-atheist-perspective.blogspot.com)

Picture/Quote of the day (November 05, 2009).

(picture source: NASA, ESA, the Hubble)

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality." -Carl Sagan

The Jesus Story.

 One of the most illogical stories in the Bible is the one about Jesus. There is no doubt, Jesus (if he existed) was one of the most transformative figures in the history of our species (for good or for worse). But the story surrounding him is very illogical.

Assuming most know about the basic story of Jesus, I will forgo explaining it. Here is why the story is ridiculous, almost in a comedic way.

The Holy Ghost (or God) impregnated Mary with his son (which is really himself), the purpose was so Jesus could go around telling people to be nice to each other, help the sick (which were only sick because he made them sick in the first place). Then he got executed by the Romans so his father (or himself) could forgive everyone because Eve ate fruit from some tree that made being naked embarrassing. Somehow that makes  sense to Christians. Here is an analogy to put it into perspective...

We have this person named John. John's profession was a burglar. This one day he robs this home and steals almost everything. The guy that got robbed was named Micheal. Micheal sent his son over to John's hide-out  to try to ask for the stolen items back — as well as try to convince the burglar to stop stealing. The victim of the robbery planned on having his son get killed, so he could forgive the burglar for what he did. That plan ends up working out because the son ends up getting shot to death. John (burglar) goes over to the dead body and realizes that the son was wearing a mask. He takes off the mask and finds that it wasn't Micheal's son, but was actually Micheal himself that got killed. But in reality it really was Micheal's son — Micheal is Micheal's own son. He was able to impregnate his mother with himself and when the mother gave birth they were still the same being somehow (I don't understand either). The burglar after some thought realized that the "son" was right. John started to worship the "son" as a god. He would take crackers (to represent flesh),  prune juice (to represent blood) and would fantasize about eating the guy he murdered. He felt that doing this made the robbery victim become part of him. If this story makes sense to you, then you must be a Christian.

God's Perfect Creation (Part 1)

 (This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 License, Author: Cgoodwin)

A steer with five legs.

Picture/Quote of the day (November 04, 2009).

(picture source: Nasa/Hubble)

"If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." - Carl Sagan

Bible tips for mildew. (satire)

Finding mildew in your home can be a difficult problem to deal with. Fortunately the Bible provides some great advice on what to do (Leviticus 14:33-53).

If any of you find that the LORD has sent mildew on your house, then you must go and tell the priest about it. The priest shall order everything to be moved out of the house before he goes to examine the mildew; otherwise everything in the house will be declared unclean. 

Supposedly the creator of the universe is responsible for sending mildew into peoples homes. So this is naturally a thing a priest is well suited for. Try to find a local priest and get a hold of him immediately, surely he would be glad to help.

Then he shall go to the house and examine the mildew. If there are greenish or reddish spots that appear to be eating into the wall, he shall leave the house and lock it up for seven days. On the seventh day he shall return and examine it again. If the mildew has spread, he shall order that the stones on which the mildew is found be removed and thrown into some unclean place outside the city. After that he must have all the interior walls scraped and the plaster dumped in an unclean place outside the city. Then other stones are to be used to replace the stones that were removed, and new plaster will be used to cover the walls. If the mildew breaks out again in the house after the stones have been removed and the house has been scraped and plastered, the priest shall go and look. If it has spread, the house is unclean. It must be torn down, and its stones, its wood, and all its plaster must be carried out of the city to an unclean place. Any who enter the house while it is locked up will be unclean until evening. Any who lie down or eat in the house must wash their clothes. If, when the priest comes to look, the mildew has not reappeared after the house has been replastered, he shall pronounce the house ritually clean, because the mildew has been completely removed.

It is better to have no home at all, then a home with mildew. As it was said before, any priest would be glad to help a person with mildew problems. It's obvious that the writers of the Bible knew which issues were spiritual and which were not. This next piece of advice needs to be followed in perfect detail, being that it is an animal sacrifice ritual.

To purify the house, he shall take two birds, some cedar wood, a red cord, and a sprig of hyssop. He shall kill one of the birds over a clay bowl containing fresh spring water. Then he shall take the cedar wood, the hyssop, the red cord, and the live bird and shall dip them in the blood of the bird that was killed and in the fresh water. And he shall sprinkle the house seven times. In this way he shall purify the house with the bird's blood, the fresh water, the live bird, the cedar wood, the hyssop, and the red cord. Then he shall let the live bird fly away outside the city over the open fields. In this way he shall perform the ritual of purification for the house, and it will be ritually clean.- Leviticus 14:33-53

You may be asking yourself: "how does killing a bird help get rid of mildew?" Don't worry about it, the creator of the universe knows how it works and that is all that matters. Some people think that the Bible is just a book full of superstitious nonsense, but keep in mind the writers of the Bible were much more knowledgeable about how things worked then we are today. I believe these tips put into perspective just how much of an understanding the writers had of the world around them.What I don't understand is why people don't follow this advice for mildew problems anymore. Remember, the Bible is supposedly the word of God, follow all of it or none of it, stop cherry-picking what suits your purposes.

The Stork Theory of Childbirth (satire)

There are two sides to the debate on childbirth, however both sides are not given equal time in the classroom. Storkians believe that our children should be taught both sides of this debate in the classroom. This major injustice infringes on our right as Americans to raise our children as we see fit. This is not Nazi-Germany, this is America, it is a free country; freedom of speech is something which this country was founded on. The believers in the Uterus Theory of Childbirth don't seem to believe in freedom of speech, they only want their opinion taught in health class. It's not like we are asking for health classes to only teach the Stork Theory of Childbirth; all we are asking is to teach the controversy. What are they so afraid of? If the Uterus Theory of Childbirth is so great, they should have nothing to worry about.

It is so demeaning to think that we came out of a woman's uterus, all covered with slime — to think that a stork delivers babies has so much more dignity in it. The Uterus Theory of Childbirth also has many holes in it. For example: how did the baby get into the woman's uterus? Scientists claim that the baby starts off as a single cell, and grows bigger and more complicated in time; but how could one single cell develop so much complexity in only nine months? The only proof a person needs for the Stork Theory is to just look at a newborn baby, it's so perfect. There is no way that the baby could manage to form itself inside the mothers uterus so perfectly. There would also be no light, doing anything in the dark is hard; what the scientists are claiming would be impossible. That leaves the Stork Theory as the only viable option by default.

Scientists claim to have evidence which they say "proves" the Uterus Theory of Childbirth, but that evidence isn't all too compelling when you consider the alternative explanations. Storks do not like what they do to be known (they work in mysterious ways), so they plant evidence to fool people, along with making people hallucinate. If people found out the truth, they would try to catch the storks — which is the last thing they want. The storks are able to swoop down incredibly fast, place a baby down, and leave. No one is able to see its handiwork — it is too fast for the human eye to pick up on. Few people are aware of the fact that storks can move at such high speeds (because when they are we can't see them). The best way to learn about the Stork Theory of Childbirth is to read books on the subject. 

Teach both sides, the kids should be allowed to decide for themselves. When it comes to the miracle of childbirth we should keep an open-mind.

Artificial Morality

Many Believers think religion has monopoly on morality. Those who claim that morality is acquired by scripture, without it: "no-one would know right from wrong" are the people being referred to. This is one reason why Nonbelievers are oftentimes seen as being immoral by the Believers — being that they: "have no source of morality". In my opinion the morality derived from religion is artificial. Artificial morality is morality that only exists for conscious personal benefit, this concept is similar to the blog post I made on Self-Centered Charity. Religious charity (like artificial morality) is only done for personal benefit and is not genuine (otherwise it would have nothing to do with religion). People that are only moral for religious reasons are like children that only act good around Christmas to get presents, its pathetic.

Artificial morality is similar to artificial sweeteners (although not a perfect analogy, it can be taken pretty far). When people think of food which is sweet, they automatically assume it contains sugar (sugar = genuine morality) but often instead of sugar, artificial-sweeteners are used in it's place (artificial-sweeteners = artificial morality). While both are sweet, one is found naturally, the other is man-made and is deceptive in appearance. Natural sugar is healthier then artificial sweeteners; artificial sweeteners contain no real sugar ("religious morality" contains no real morality), but it tricks the brain into thinking it does. Humans love the taste of sugar because we evolved to crave the rich calories sugar contains.

If someone made the claim that candy would not exist without artificial sweeteners, they would be laughed at and thought of as being very ignorant (the same should be the case for religious morality). While artificial sweeteners are similar enough in taste to sugar, what they are made of is way different, but it still manages to fool the brain; in the sense that the brain did not evolve to reward the consumption of artificial sweeteners, it was for real sugar (this is what makes artificial sweeteners not genuine). Regardless of how people feel towards sugar (health-wise in large amounts fall outside of my analogy), no one can deny that it brings great enjoyment for people. It is better to eat real sugar in healthy, natural amounts, then to fake it. I can imagine a world without artificial sweeteners, but I don't want to imagine a world without sugar.


The mere fact that the religious claim to be moral for such reasons show the point being made here. Any reason which is religious has primarily to with securing a spot in eternal paradise (referring to more popular monotheistic religions). This makes it self-centered in nature and not the innate morality we get from our biology (the religious claim this as well). I am not saying religious people have no genuine morality, I am saying the "morality" that only exists because of religion is artificial — people who are only moral for religious reasons are not genuinely moral (e.g. certain kids around Christmas). Artificial sweeteners fool the brain in the same way the religious think they are fooling a god (check out: The Gullible God).

People should not be moral because they wish to get a ticket to paradise after death, they should because of love they have of those around them. We all love sweet food, so let's eat real sugar, it tastes better and is better for you.