100 Reasons Why Dr. Hovind is Stupid

Sorry for the title, I know that is a straw man attack, but in his own words, he should be calling himself stupid. Really, though, the things Dr. Hovind preaches are ridiculously stupid. All of this to prove that his book of scripture is true.

Recently, I watched 100 Reasons Why Evolution is So Stupid, a talk by Dr. Kent Hovind given in Coeur d'Alene, ID, sometime ago. What a joke! Apparently he thinks that if he makes stupid little jokes then people will believe whatever he says. Even as a lay person in the world of science (geology, biology, and physics), I was able to debunk almost all of his arguments as he brought them up. The things people will believe! People living alongside dinosaurs. Ha!

Then I read How Good Are Those Young-Earth Arguments? by Dave Maston. Now we have some real arguments.

I can't stand the way young earth creationists attempt to use "science" to prove their stance is correct. The biggest blunder is that they seem to cling onto the one, obviously incorrect piece of evidence that does not fit with the rest of the very cohesive mountain of evidence. My biggest laugh was all the incorrectly radiometric dating blunders; living mollusks that are millions of years old, etc.

Anyway, if you are up for a good laugh and have a bit of spare time, give those two a shot.

Comedy v. Tragedy

God's sense of humor is very different from our own.
He does not laugh at the simple
"man walks into a bar" joke. No, God needs
complex irony and subtle farcical twists
that seem macabre to you and me.
All that we can hope for is that God
God got his good laugh and
a tragedy such as this will never happen again.

--South Park (Season 7, Episode 10, Grey Dawn)

After I finished watching all 16 available seasons of South park, I thought I should mention one of the more striking quotes. When I watched season 7, it was much closer to the Newtown, CT, massacre than now. But I still think the quote is applicable. Trey Parker and Matt Stone both say they are not atheist, but they do freely poke at all things, including religion. I think that is a fairly healthy habit to do; poke and prod at things that don't make sense.

Anyhow, this episode was about old people driving cars and killing people. But really, any tragedy, disaster, terrorist attack, etc. will work fine in this situation. If you believe in God, it makes it very hard to explain some of these tragic events. How could a loving God allow that kind of stuff to happen to His children? The LDS theology says that He cannot interfere with mankind's agency, so bad things happen because of bad people. But that doesn't account for natural disasters. Do they happen because of bad people too? I suppose some of the stuff in scripture did. That does not sound like much of a loving God; vengeful, jealous, and hateful, more like. You know, the kind of God that this quote so aptly describes.

I personally reject the notion of a God that is just messing with us. I refuse to worship such a being. I also reject the notion of a God that supposedly loves us and yet allows such terrible things to happen. Hell, I am a mere mortal and can get my kids to not kill each other. I can teach them love, respect, honesty, and all manner of goodness BECAUSE I AM HERE. God would get a lot farther in His desires for all mankind to worship his great name if he were physically here doing good things for His children that He supposedly loves.

In the meantime, I will just have to give credit for all the terrible things that happen on this planet to the same place I give credit for all the wonderful things that happen: mankind. We as a species span the spectrum from unbelievably horrible to spectacularly wonderful. And I will attribute to any God the same credit I give to Santa Claus: nothing.

Target practice

As the gun debate rages across the country, the snarky part of me says that we should forget about regulating guns because bad guys are bad marksmen.

Have you ever noticed in an action film that the villains have terrible aim? They don't seem to be able to hit the broadside of a barn at point blank range.

In real life, we now have an example of comic-book villains. A pair of thieves tries to rob a store. They have handguns. The owner has a baseball bat. The owner wins with only a shot to his LEG. One of the thieves was also hit (by 'friendly' fire?) Watch the video. Either the thieves are not trying very hard or they forgot that villains can't shoot.

The shop owner credits his survival to God's help. I credit the thieves for being idiots. Or maybe the mystical comic book power that makes villains unable to shoot straight. Either one is more likely than requiring a god to exist to save the man.  I mean really, what are the odds that a person is not killed by nine shots from less than 6 feet away? One in a million? One in a billion? I am pretty sure that the odds that a god exists are a lot longer.

The Book of Mormon Musical

A couple of weekends ago, I was able to attend a performance of The Book of Mormon musical. In two words, it was "f@ckin' awesome." That is not language that I normally use, given it is pretty offensive to many people, but Trey Parker and Matt Stone have no trouble using it when creating their shows. The show had some very offensive material in it, but it seemed to be more an integral part of the show rather than its actual content; like the makeup or costumes for the characters.

Of course, parody isn't reality, and it's the very distortion that makes it appealing and often funny. The danger is not when people laugh but when they take it seriously—if they leave a theater believing that Mormons really do live in some kind of a surreal world of self-deception and illusion

--Michael Otterson, Head of Public Affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

I don't think that anyone who actually watched the show thinks that Mormons are that crazy, living in a world of self-deception and illusion, but the truth is that many people (not just Mormons) really do live in that world. What I take from his quote is not that the danger is believing that Mormons live that way, but really, actually living that way. Living in reality (whatever that is) rather than self-deception is the only healthy way to live. I believe that humor is also an important part of a healthy life. Being a post-Mormon, part of me really wanted to see the Mormons getting poked in the eye. And they did, but it wasn't so bad as it could have been. I actually think that Trey and Matt took an almost sympathetic and kind sort of poking at the Mormons (and really at religion on a larger scale).  As my wife said, "It was very crude, but also kind of sweet."

I watched the South Park: About Mormons episode way back when I was still a true-believing Mormon. I found it amusing to hear a complete outsider's view of my beliefs and had to laugh a little. I didn't find it offensive and it did not lead me to lose my testimony. I would have to say that same about The Book of Mormon. It was funny to see a slightly twisted view of what Mormons really do believe. It was a great satire. As such, it gave a lot of food for thought. Some that the LDS church could use to feed its fleeing masses.

I have maggots in my scrotum!

--Village Doctor, The Book of Mormon Musical

The points chosen for abuse were exceptionally well chosen.

1. How can a first-world raised, nineteen (and now eighteen) year-old young man even start to comprehend the problems facing an impoverished, third-world village?
• Unless you have health, food, shelter, and safety, spiritual things don't matter. How can the Book of Mormon (or any book of scripture) cure your maggots, feed your family, keep you safe, etc.?
2. Is not acting on homosexual tendencies really just lying to yourself? Because lying is one of the big Ten.
• The song "Turn It Off" was hilarious.
3. Sal Tlake a-City does not really exist; it's a metaphor!
• All religion should be taken metaphorically. Otherwise you get terrible stuff happening.
4. Some take a lot more time to grow up.
• Arnold learned quickly that it didn't really matter what he was teaching the people; the important thing was to help them—in ways that really mattered at their level.
• Keven, on the other hand took a much longer time to really love the people and see that the Book of Mormon really could not help them (or at least until he could cure AIDS, secure the food supply, guarantee safety, and remove all scrotum maggots.)
5. Mormon Hell was a funny place.
• It's true that Mormon's have a different view on Heaven and Hell than much of the rest of Christianity, but abandoning your mission companion does not put you in the same place as Hitler or Genghis Khan.
• Mormon Hell really is anywhere you are, knowing that you could be somewhere better. So the second level of the Celestial Kingdom of Heaven would be Hell, knowing that you weren't in the first level. But to someone in the Terrestrial or Telestial worlds, both are evidence that where you are is Hell.
6. How is your story really better than mine?
• We all live believing some stories. It is likely that none of the stories in anyone's head are true. So why is the Book of Arnold any less precious than the Book of Mormon?
7. "Hasa diga eebowai" is not a bad way to live, but a better way might be to embrace a way of life that does not depend on God in the first place.

How to Live Forever

Brother Brigham was obviously full of something when he said that by living the Word of Wisdom, we should all easily be able to attain at least two hundred years of age ("The Word of Wisdom—Degeneracy—Wickedness in the United States—How to Prolong Life", Journal of Discourses, Volume 12, pp. 117-123).  Yet by pushing the evolutionary envelope, it theoretically would be possible to increase the life span of humans through selective breeding.

I am currently reading "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins.  This idea comes from there.  If we restrict having children until age 40, then after several generations, bump it up to 50, then 60, and so on, eventually, the 'old-age' diseases that are hereditary, including old age itself, would be selectively bred out.  On paper, this sounds all fine and dandy, but first off, it would be very difficult to accomplish, and second, we have no idea what the side effects would be.  Maybe nature would trade off the shorter life span for a smaller brain.  We then would all live long lives as idiots. :)  In the process, it is possible that much of the human gene pool would go extinct, which could also cause problems.

But this is certainly a much more scientifically founded idea than 'no hot drinks, alcohol, or tobacco' will make our marrow and sinews stronger, enabling us to live hundreds of years.

Religion Sucks?

Let's get started with a smash-up high thought.  This web comic was shared with me a few days back and I think it really resonates with what I am currently feeling about religion.  Kudos to theoatmeal.com.

After you have read it (two or three times), consider this question: is your religion really making you a better person, or do you act like any of the characters portrayed in the comic.

Really, I think the title should have been "Does your religion make you a better human," but that doesn't have quite the same ring to it.