Category Archives: ethics

Reform the U N Security Council!

Posted on by

The structure of the United Nations (UN) reflects the political realities shortly after World War II. Since that war ended nearly three generations ago, it’s time for a change in the UN, starting with its Security Council. Until such reforms are made, it will only be a laughingstock for decades to come.

UN Reform

There are five permanent members of that Council: The United States, Russia, France, Great Britain, and China. These have veto power over all Council decisions. I would recommend that the veto power within the Council be done away with; it only makes paralysis of the Council more likely than not. I would also recommend that Germany, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Brazil be made permanent members of the Council, with at least 20 others subject to election. The number of nations on the Security Council must always be a prime number to prevent tie votes. Only the UN Secretary-General could veto a UN resolution, but his veto could still be overridden by a two-thirds majority vote of the Security Council. In any case, no single nation should have the power to veto a resolution, because as the chart above shows, the Soviet Union abused that power more than any other nation in the early years of the UN. One wonders how many innocent people died in wars or armed uprisings of one kind or another because of this.

Related articles

Reviving the spirit of civil disobedience

Posted on by
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Image via Wikipedia

Unitarian Universalists have recently started an effort to engage in the sort of civil disobedience that civil rights activists like Martin Luther King Jr and his followers did in the 1950s and 60s, and Mohandas Ghandi did in India a generation earlier.

http://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/178994.shtml

Utah UU convicted for environmental activism

Federal jury faults Tim DeChristopher for blocking auction of oil and gases leases.
By Donald E. Skinner
3.7.11
Continue reading →

The downfall of Richard Dawkins’ credibility

Posted on by

The atheist community, of which Richard Dawkins has been seen as a leader for many years, has been rocked by this latest controversy which has shown, once and for all, that just because you are atheist doesn’t mean you leave behind all your outdated attitudes and become consistently rational. If anything, Dawkins’ blatant sexism has only made him and his atheism look worse.

He wrote this in response to a complaint by Rebecca Watson about her and other women being mistreated and disrepected at atheist and freethought conferences.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/07/always_name_names.php#comment-4295492

Dear Muslima

Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and . . . yawn . . . don’t tell me yet again, I know you aren’t allowed to drive a car, and you can’t leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you’ll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.

Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep”chick”, and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn’t lay a finger on her, but even so . . .

And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.

Richard

Talk about missing the point!

Others have denounced Dawkins and defended Rebecca on this, including Rebecca herself:

http://www.blaghag.com/2011/07/richard-dawkins-your-privilege-is.html

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/07/oh_no_not_againonce_more_unto.php

http://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/

Dawkins is dead wrong about this! Indeed, he couldn’t be more wrong if he were to suddenly endorse Young Earth Creationism. And since his position is so repulsive, the only honorable thing for him to do at this point is for him to state, in a public forum or even on his own website: “I’m sorry, I was being sexist and hypocritical and I will never make such foolish statements again.” And then shut the hell up afterwards for a long time.

Until he does that, I will never listen to him again.

Dentists, sex dolls and pedophiles, oh my!

Posted on by

This story, and variations of it, are all over the web now:

http://www.cnngo.com/tokyo/life/japanese-turn-sex-doll-dental-training-robot-976056

Japanese turn sex doll into dental-training robot

Tokyo university reveals realistic synthi-patient, claims “root canal” gags play no part in its appeal
By Mark Hiratsuka 1 July, 2011

Tokyo frequently presents a story that’s borderline fiction — sex dolls for cavity-filling practice, puhlease — but the pedigree of the new Hanako Showa 2 dental training robot tells us this is no product of a fevered imagination.

We previously saw big sister, plain Jane Hanako Showa, in early 2010, noting that the synthetic patient was being used in the Showa University dental school for more than simple caries-evacuation practice on her plumbed-in dentures.

That model even incorporated the concept of being female simply so junior dentists could learn not to accidentally fondle her breasts. We kid you not.

Silicone sheath

So, a year and a half later, little sis makes her bow sheathed not in her sibling’s PVC skin, but lifelike silicone, and sporting a host of internal modifications besides.

Hanako 2 genuinely is based on a Dutch Wife-style love doll from Orient Industry in Tokyo’s Taito Ward — trust us, you don’t want to click that link at work — giving her a head start in the “realistic” stakes.

Aside from the human-feel skin on her face, mouth and tongue, she also contains robotics that allow her to mimic a range of motions, including sneezing and gagging when clumsy trainees dip their instruments too far into her gullet.

Talkative, ain’t she?

Hanako 2 also has the gift of the gab and can chat with her human companions about how she’s feeling, what ails her and, probably, how she can manage to speak with all that medical metal in her face.

Japan being Japan, there’s clearly no scope for the tried-and-trusted medical school technique of pulling passersby in off the street for a free “checkup.”

Rather, Tokyo’s finest would-be dentists get to grapple with a chimera created originally for self-gratification, but packed instead with cutting-edge robotics and put to work in the name of a nation’s oral health. It’s a beautiful thing.

My first reaction to this was, “Wow, here’s another example of Japanese technical wizardry being put to a good use! It’s certain better to train dentists with dolls that can react like real patients than with real patients that might be injured or infected due to a mistake.” Continue reading →

What’s the worst song ever written and sung?

Posted on by

For a long time, I’ve been concerned about how popular music trends tend to make teenagers look stupid and shallow. Now, pop music seems to have hit rock bottom with THIS video by Rebecca Black:

There are lot of things just WRONG about her “Friday” song that together make it worthless, though those faults might be forgiven if they appeared individually in other pop songs.  Her singing is awful, the subject matter of the song is pointless, the lyrics are profoundly stupid, and the video is creepy because it features a black rapper following the white girl around (which is actually a racist stereotype; why tolerate that?).

Continue reading →

An unbalanced view of doing business

Posted on by

The basic goal of all businesses in a free market capitalist system is to make as much profit as possible. Of course, there is nothing wrong with making money, as long as you are honest and fair about it. But sometimes companies look at only ONE issue of making a profit and fail to see the big picture. Consider these  stories:

Micheal was hired to be a delivery assistant for Southside Deliveries in mid-November, doing what he was told would be a temporary job that would last until Christmas Eve.  Unfortunately, he was terminated after just two weeks (early December) and the excuse the company gave was “You are too slow.” Micheal was so disgusted at being tossed so quickly that he vowed never to even use Southside Deliveries as a customer. Thus Southside Deliveries, by firing him to save profits, actually lost profits they might have made from him over the next few years.

Mary was a loyal customer of Blue River Energy for years, so she reasoned that she would be an ideal employee for it as well. She was hired to be one of its Sales Representatives  and was sent to public places like shopping malls, grocery stores, convention centers, and electronics stores. At these places, she set up her booth and tried to persuade people coming there for other things to switch to using Blue River Energy as their electricity retailer. Despite her going by the book over a two month period, she never sold enough policies to satisfy management, and she was suddenly terminated by her supervisor when she went out to do another day’s work. He simply took her materials and table from her and left her in shock. Soon afterwards, she switched to another electric company, AP Power, because she felt totally betrayed.

Henry signed up for employment with a temp agency, and was sent out a week later to do work at a factory owned by Masters Manufacturing. He worked hard all day, and never got the impression from the supervisors that anything was amiss. But the next day, he got a call from the temp agency that Masters Manufacturing had rejected him. “They said you were too slow, ” was all Henry was told. Henry felt that was unjust, since he’d only done as he was told by those same people who rejected him….and vowed never to buy another cell phone or other electronic device made by Masters Manufacturing.

Now, there is nothing wrong with firing a worker who commits acts of direct insubordination or disrespect for either management or customers,  vandalism, assault of another employee, theft, drunkeness or drug abuse on the job, or some other illegal activity. In my opinion, those should be the reasons to fire employees and nothing else. Terminating someone because he is slightly less productive than someone else is a form of discrimination. What if this is due to a mental or physical disability, rather than laziness? What if the employee is new and just needs time to get used to his job? What if the employee’s contributions still count for something, as does the decision of the former employee to boycott the business after his termination?

Workers need to get together and stop letting companies bully them into ruin. They can do that by boycotting any company that treats them as disposable. Maybe if enough people start doing that, then the companies will start treating workers with more respect!

Related articles

A clear case of internet FRAUD!

Posted on by

Read this outrageous story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110613/wl_uk_afp/syriapoliticsunrestgayinternetbritainus

Blogger admits ‘Gay Girl in Damascus’ hoax

– Mon Jun 13, 4:20 am ET

LONDON (AFP) – Rights campaigners reacted furiously after a US student based in Scotland unmasked himself as the author of the “Gay Girl in Damascus” blogs, which charted the security crackdown in Syria.

Tom MacMaster, a 40-year-old Edinburgh University masters student, admitted Sunday that he was “Amina Abdullah”, who had described “herself” as a Syrian political blogger.

The Abdullah character rose to fame with her reports on the pro-reform movement, posting as “an out Syrian lesbian’s thoughts on life, the universe and so on”.

Then last Tuesday someone claiming to be her cousin wrote on the website that Abdullah had been snatched off the street by three armed men and bundled into a car bearing a pro-government window sticker.

The report sparked a wave of alarm among her online followers. Supporters even set up a “Free Amina Abdullah” group on the social networking site Facebook, attracting nearly 15,000 followers.

MacMaster finally came clean in a posting on his blog Sunday, after doubts began to emerge as to whether Abdullah really was for real. He admitted that he was the sole author of the posts.

“I never expected this level of attention,” MacMaster wrote in an “Apology to readers” posted on the blog.

“While the narrative voice may have been fictional, the facts on this blog are true and not misleading as to the situation on the ground.

“I do not believe that I have harmed anyone — I feel that I have created an important voice for issues that I feel strongly about,” MacMaster added.

“I only hope that people pay as much attention to the people of the Middle East and their struggles in this year of revolutions.”

The Guardian newspaper said that in recent days, bloggers had uncovered evidence that pointed towards MacMaster and his wife Britta Froelicher.

MacMaster is a Middle East activist, while his wife is studying at Scotland’s St Andrews University for a doctorate in Syrian economic development.

In his apology, MacMaster said he had been touched by the reaction of readers.

But the revelation of the hoax has sparked fury among some former followers of the blog, particularly those who had been campaigning for Abdullah’s release.

“This just makes me so angry,” said one comment on the Facebook group set up to press for her release.

“The situation in Syria is too dire for this sort of gameplaying!”

“Time and effort was taken away from other vitally important news stories happening in Syria,” another contributor protested.

As an Honorable Skeptic, I took little notice of “Amina”, but find the case of someone pretending to be her intolerable! Now the voices of REAL Arab political activists, gay rights activists, and others communicating via the internet will be less likely to be taken seriously, for how do we know they are not fake? Tom McMaster (or perhaps I should call him McBastard) should immediately be arrested, tried and either heavily fined or imprisoned for fraud. If Amina had been a real person that McMaster had been impersonating, he would have been committing identity theft. How can making up and portraying a fictional person, but claimed to be real, be any better?

Indeed, one of my basic principles is that it is NEVER acceptable to do bad things for a good reason or cause. The long term credibility of the cause is more important than any possible short-term gains from the deception.

Incidentally, this relates somewhat to what Rep. Anthony Weiner did with his Twitter account and the aftermath of that incident. Putting a picture of your crotch publicly on Twitter, intending it to be a private message to a woman not your wife, is stupid, but it can be overlooked. What CANNOT be tolerated or ignored is that Weiner LIED afterwards about the matter, claiming that a hacker had broken into the Twitter account. He should be condemned for that and made to resign. Back in the 1990s, I was appalled at that Bill Clinton did, having affairs with women, including Monica Lewenski, and then lying to everyone about it. He should have resigned too. But I also recognize that the attempts by Republicans to get rid of him were self-serving as well, and they have had too many of their own scandals among themselves to be taken seriously when they condemn people like Clinton or Weiner.

A critique of the Declaration of Independence.

Posted on by
United States Declaration of Independence

United States Declaration of Independence (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Declaration of Independence here refers to the document drafted and signed in 1776 declaring the separation of 13 colonies along the Atlantic coast of North America from the British Empire. It is indeed one of the greatest writings ever made in human history…..but that hardly means it is flawless. Indeed, in this age it may be considered obsolete and merit some serious criticism. I will post text from it in red and my critiques of it in green. Continue reading →

Osama Bin Ladin is no more.

Posted on by

After nearly ten years of hysteria over what happened on Sept. 11, 2001 (9-11), we finally killed the terrorist leader who was behind it. Some thoughts on that:

  1. We were fighting a war on Al-Quida, which is not a nation state. Wars normally end when an enemy nation’s capital is conquered and its leadership is captured or killed. But Al-Quida has no capital and anyone could rise to be its leader in the future. Even Bin Ladin’s death will not end the War on Terrorism; it will only end when the American people stand up and DEMAND that their government end it. That should start happening NOW!
  2. Bush Jr could have gotten Bin Ladin six or seven years earlier if he had not diverted resources from the campaigns in Afghanistan to fighting Iraq over claims of Weapons of Mass Destruction that turned out to be total falsehoods.
  3. Indeed, the simple fact that the dictatorships of both Tunisia and Egypt were brought down by popular revolts means that attempts to overthrow a government from the outside is illegitimate if that government is not even at war with other states. The Iraq War that started in 2003 was a criminal act of  aggression by the United States. If any other nation had pulled such a stunt against a weaker rival, it would have been seen from the start as opportunistic imperialism. Why should America be given a free pass to be so hypocritical?
  4. We still have dozens of prisoners at Gitmo. Those that have not been charged with any crimes should be released immediately and sent back to their home countries. There is no excuse for holding such people without scheduling trials for them all. That is simply not the American way.
Related Articles

An Open Letter to Lawrence Krauss

Posted on by

First, read this:

http://skepchick.org/2011/04/lawrence-krauss-defends-a-sex-offender-embarrasses-scientists-everywhere/

If you actually said what Rebecca Watson quoted of you, then you are one contemptible hypocrite. Not a true skeptic anymore, and certainly not an Honorable Skeptic like I try to be. Close friendship is no excuse for selling out!

Rebecca wrote:

Jeffrey Epstein is the infamous media mogul who was jailed in 2008 for paying underage prostitutes who said they were recruited by his aides. Some girls were allegedly flown in from Eastern Europe, their visas arranged by his bookkeeper.

Then she quotes you as saying:

Based on my direct experience with Jeffrey, which is all I can base my assessment on, he is a thoughtful, kind, considerate man who is generous to his friends, and all of the women I have known who have been associated with Jeffrey speak glowingly in the same words……jeffrey apparently paid for massages with sex… I believe him when he told me he had no idea the girls were underage, and I doubt that people normally are asked for or present a driver’s license under such circumstances… Moreover, I also believe that Jeffrey is an easy target for those who want to take advantage of him…

You sound like an IDIOT there! WTF is wrong with you?! I wonder if you are a sex offender yourself, to rationalize away the actions of Epstein and claim that he isn’t so bad because he has so many other “good” qualities. NO! A MURDERER is a MURDERER, and child rapist is a child rapist, period! And a skeptic is a skeptic also, and you are NOT one anymore!

https://dalehusband.wordpress.com/an-honorable-skeptic/

Another thing I am adamant about is my sense of honor, which I hold more dear to me than my life. It allows for no exceptions whatsoever. So if I have lost friends or even made enemies for standing up for my honor, so be it. If I see someone who comes across to me as a liar, a bully, or just plain rude and stupid, then I usually try to fight back. If I see someone doing or saying things that damage the credibility of the causes I happen to believe in, I deeply take offense at that because I want those causes to be protected, even at the expense of picking fights with those who are unworthy to support those causes. I believe in absolute standards of right and wrong and so I see no point in ever excusing something that is wrong because the wrongdoer is otherwise a friendly or nice guy. That’s how corruption sets in.

No matter how great the pressure, I feel that one must never “sell out”. It is being able to stand up to the urge to conform to the shallow desires and priorites of others who have a limited vision that makes one truly heroic. I choose my friends according to my ideals; I never bend my ideals for the sake of keeping friends.

That is MY standard, and I am saddened that it is not yours. Grow up!

With disgust,

Dale Husband

Haitians are no smarter than Americans

Posted on by

It seems that like Americans, who were foolish enough to elect Republicans back into control of the House of Representatives last year after all the incredibly corrupt and stupid things they did from 2001 to 2008 when they were in power, Haitians have a short memory and a willingness to trade away their freedom and ethical standards for both security and prosperity that may be promised them. They have learned nothing from their own history!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110117/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cb_haiti_ex_dictator_returns

Continue reading →

They should remake the Hindenburg movie

Posted on by

In 1975, a movie was made depicting the Hindenburg disaster. It was directed by Robert Wise and starred George C Scott. With such talent, it should have been a masterpiece. Instead, it became known as a farce.

Too much of the movie was fictional and even inaccurate, including the unsupported claim that a crew member planted a bomb on the airship. The crew member was given a different name (Karl Boerth) but in the book the movie was loosely based on, the crew member is identified as Eric Spehl, who was actually at the nose of the Hindenburg and was burned to death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hindenburg_%28film%29

Continue reading →

An example of lying outright by a company that got away with it!

Posted on by
Pac-Man (Atari 2600)

Image via Wikipedia

In 1981, Pac-Man was the hottest video game in the world, and Atari was one of the most respected video game companies. So when Atari decided to make a home version of Pac-Man for its 2600 system, people expected it to be fantastic.

It wasn’t! Indeed, it was nothing like the original! Read this review for one reaction:

http://www.videogamecritic.net/2600pq.htm#Pac-man

But look at how Atari described the game in its own manual:

http://www.atariage.com/manual_page.html?SystemID=2600&SoftwareLabelID=343&ItemTypeID=MANUAL&currentPage=3&maxPages=12

1. HERE’S PAC-MAN

We know that millions of people all over the world just love the PAC-MAN arcade game. PAC-MAN has won the hearts of men, women, and children everywhere. We also know that PAC-MAN has traditionally been an arcade game. Well, we at ATARI know all about arcade games. After all, we make some of the greatest arcade games in the world, and we know how to bring the same dynamite game play into your home.

Our PAC-MAN has all of the excitement and challenge of the standard arcade game, and you get to play in the comfort and convenience of your own home. This is especially advantageous if you still plan to make an occasional appearance at the arcade to show off your great playing skills. (Little do they know that you’ve been practicing at home all along.)

Having played both the original arcade game and the Atari home version of Pac-Man, I knew immediately that Atari was bullshitting everyone, but it somehow  got away with it!

It shouldn’t have! I would have gladly taken part in a class action lawsuit against Atari for that act of fraud on its part. If I had been the CEO of Midway Manufacturing Company, which made the arcade Pac-Man that Atari was supposed to duplicate, I would have sued Atari too!

Attacking homophobia and bullying in the Fort Worth City Council

Posted on by

Having lived in the Fort Worth area all my life, I was never prouder of that than I was when I saw this video on YouTube. For the people of Texas, there is hope for greater enlightenment as long as people like Joel Burns and myself are around!

Such courage may cause him to be voted out of office, but it may also lead to a revolution. Let us keep up the pressure to stop the hate, the violence and the ignorance.

I’ll add this much older voice to Mr Burns’ as well:

Because bigotry is evil no matter where it comes from, and even if religion or social standards support it.

What if prostitution were legalized everywhere?

Posted on by

First, see this earlier blog entry:

https://dalehusband.wordpress.com/2010/05/15/phony-feminism-takes-a-beating-on-youtube/

It has occurred to me that if acts of prostitution were legalized for both genders and all sexual orientations, then men and women who are otherwise unemployed could offer their bodies to the sexual services of others who are employed and have plenty of money, get paid for it, and thus never need to engage in harmful and even violent activities, such as bank robbing, and they would not have to go on welfare either. Eventually, the unemployed could find jobs and not need to sell their bodies anymore, though they may still choose to do so.

And it need not involve strangers either. Male and female friends and neighbors could engage in sex with each other in exchange for money, as a means of mutual support. I know if I were out of work and a woman offered me money for sex so I could pay my monthly bills, I wouldn’t hesitate to accept the offer, provided I thought she was trustworthy.

It is exactly because prostitution is illegal in most places that so much abuse is associated with it. Legalizing it would result in a less violent and more generous and tolerant society.

UUs need to stop being anti-Christian

Posted on by

For the record, I am very critical of the Christian religion. But my slamming it ends when I am dealing with a Christian who is open-minded enough to befriend and respect me in spite of my hostility towards his religion. Such a person, in turn, earns my respect. I only do battle with bigots among the Christians, not Christians in general. If I hated all Christians, I wouldn’t be a Unitarian Universalist (UU). UUs, even those that reject Christianity, are still Protestants. If not for the Protestant movement in Christianity, UUs as a denomination wouldn’t exist.

I spent one Sunday talking  with a young member of my UU church. She told me about how she visited a Baptist church while wearing a necklace with a rainbow on it, the rainbow being a symbol of gay rights. She was then confronted by the church’s pastor who demanded why she wore such a necklace. The girl then said that she liked other girls, which caused the pastor to give her a lengthy diatribe about how she was headed for hell for being gay.

Later, the UU girl brought to her church a Christian girl who was wearing a cross around her neck. The Christian was confronted by an old UU man who was quite hostile to her and an argument erupted. The UU girl was very embarrassed.

I think that old man should have faced some sort of punishment for his rude behavior. While many people, including myself, regard UU churches as a refuge from Christian fundamentalism, that does not mean we can lable all non-UU Christians as members of the “enemy”. Such an attitude never fails to disgust me. And when a UU teenager is smart enough to recognize the hypocrisy of one of her own elders, that actually gives me hope that the next generation of UUs will be more enlightened and pull UUs in general away from any form of fanaticism, including that of atheists and other anti-Christians. That simply has no place among the UUs!

Neo-Nazis on YouTube

Posted on by

One of the more ironic features about the internet is that is allows people with hateful beliefs to find each other, link up, and strengthen their sense of community. To my shock I found Neo-Nazis have infiltrated YouTube!

Look at this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLDtLN8cySY

The comments below it include:

teilhaus

It would be infinitely better than what we have now, that’s for sure.

TBow009

@UltimateDarkloid Im not interested in dominating the world. Im interested in making a homeland for white people in order to have a place for them to be free of jew persecution. White Nationalism….Hitler was a jackass and I wish he was assassinated in 1939 before he invaded Poland and later Russia….Then Europe would have been jew free. Jews have been using immigration and mescegination along with their banking/lending practices to destroy whites with race mixing and the Nazis stopped it…
What a strange statement. But it gets worse.
 
TBow009

@NextLife77 Wrong…Jews were forcing Liberalism, feminism, immigration of non whites, mescegination, they wanted to import blacks and other non whites into Europe to destroy the German people…Jews are a plague on all mankind..
AppleUploader

@smart4176 not all were bad you dumb ass, some were just normal soldiers and they fought for their country NOT for Hitler, like an example is that I would have fought for Wehrmacht but that doesn’t make me a Jew killer, that only makes me a german soldier that’s all dying under germany and the iron cross
Actually, ALL german soldiers in World War II were expected to fight for Hitler. See this:
The Neo-Nazis and their allies on YouTube include:
There are many others. We need to stand against this evil. Memories of World War II and the Holocaust have long ago faded and two new generations have grown up that only know them as historical events, and thus may be seduced by “revisionists” who want to deny the holocaust and claim that the Nazis were not so bad or that their cause was somehow justified. It wasn’t and we need to remember what the world suffered and to fight for justice and equality. Equality of Jews with Gentiles does not imply loss of power for the Gentiles. Equality is simply letting ALL people live with the same opportunities and to be at peace with each other. Let it be so.

P Z Myers screws up a critique of a religious writer

Posted on by

Myers said the following here:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/julian_would_not_appreciate_th.php

I think I’m beginning to figure David B. Hart out. I’ve been totally mystified about why anyone would consider him a credible or interesting thinker since reading his essay belittling the New Atheists, which was dreary and wearying — I compared his prose style to that of Eeyore. But note: one of his central points in that essay was that these New Atheists aren’t as smart and brave as the Old Atheists, an idea that comes up again in a new essay.

Hart has now written a column praising Julian the Apostate, of all people. Julian was a very interesting person in history, a 4th century Roman emperor who resisted the Christianization of the empire begun by Constantine by openly rejecting Christianity and endorsing a revitalization of paganism. He’s something of a mixed bag for atheists: he’s a hero for opposing the dour old monotheism that was spreading through the culture, but also a bit of a flake for encouraging the old classical religions — he was not an atheist by any means. The novel by Gore Vidal, Julian, is an excellent introduction to the doomed rebellion against Christianity.

One thing Julian also was not is a friend to Catholicism, so it’s odd to see a Catholic writer heaping praise on him. But then you discover that Hart doesn’t admire him for his views or his intelligence or his cause (although he acknowledges them), it’s because Hart has the conservative disease of believing everything was better in the past, that there was a Golden Age, and that we’re living in an era of decline and defeat right now. To these cranky old farts of stodginess, we’re always living in perpetual decline. Julian is to be admired because he also thought the generations before him were better than the one he was living in.

As a scientist, one would think he would value accuracy over merely bashing religion for the fun of it. But he made a mistake and got busted for it!

Continue reading →

It’s not a whitewash, you denialist bastards!

Posted on by

Remember when I noted the Climategate issue? I first mentioned Isaac Newton and how some of his ideas and actions were highly questionable, but since the ideas he got right proved useful enough, his wrongdoings were overlooked. No one today screams “WHITEWASH!” over that.

It was the e-mail hacker who committed a crime, remember?

https://dalehusband.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/climategate-what-it-really-means/

Thus we have now seen the depths the denialists will go to attack their targets; most of them are willing to commit crimes and/or condone those crimes committed by others to advance their cause. Yet they have the gall to demand that, on the basis of the stolen e-mails, the writers of the e-mails should by charged with fraud and imprisoned. That is sheer hypocrisy.

And as far as I know, no serious effort has been made to track down and jail whoever pulled that stunt.

Meanwhile, the scientists who were targeted have had to endure hearings on the issue. Their work has been scruntinized and their motives questioned. And the results have been as follows:

http://live.psu.edu/story/47378

http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/MannInquiryStatement.html

http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/HC387-IUEAFinalEmbargoedv21.pdf

http://www.cce-review.org/pdf/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/07/the-muir-russell-report/

So a few stolen e-mails were dissected last year, some statements within them were taken out of context and their meanings distorted and this was supposed to be the big scandal that would bring  down the movement against global warming? Such cherry picking is typical of denialists, but that is not the way science should ever be run. In the end, the climatologists have been let off the hook and allowed to resume their work. Hopefully, reforms will be made to make the process of sharing data more open and transparent, but that must be through legal means.

Climategate is a dead issue now. Let’s bury it and move on!

Scienceblogs listens to reason, not just $$$$$$$$

Posted on by

The uproar over the inclusion of a corporate sponsored blog on scienceblogs resulted in a dozen or so blogs, some of which had been there for years with a sizable readership, jumping ship in disgust. Realizing what they had to lose, the management quickly backpedaled:

http://scienceblogs.com/seed/2010/07/food_frontiers.php

We have removed Food Frontiers from SB.

We apologize for what some of you viewed as a violation of your immense trust in ScienceBlogs. Although we (and many of you) believe strongly in the need to engage industry in pursuit of science-driven social change, this was clearly not the right way.

Indeed, I would hope someone got fired over this.

Other responses:

http://scienceblogs.com/obesitypanacea/2010/07/pepsico_food_frontiers.php

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/07/repost_sugary_drinks_weight_ga.php

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/07/farewell_good_math_bad_math.php

http://scienceblogs.com/brookhaven/2010/07/a_clarification.php

http://scienceblogs.com/primatediaries/2010/07/pepsi_has_been_defeated.php

http://scienceblogs.com/bookoftrogool/2010/07/small_fry_blogging_networks_an.php

http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2010/07/more_on_pepsigeddon.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/pepsico_has_been_expelled.php

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/07/food_frontiers_is_gone.php

http://scienceblogs.com/classm/2010/07/failing_the_pepsi_challenge.php

http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2010/07/tempests_teacups_and_the_futur.php

Well done, fellow bloggers! I’m proud of you all!

Scienceblogs has sold out!

Posted on by

Corporate advertising, in the form of ads posted on websites, is one thing. But when corporate shills are allowed to set up and run a blog of their own on a website that is supposed to be about SCIENCE, not corporate advocancy, that just blows my mind!

See for yourself here!

http://scienceblogs.com/foodfrontiers/

http://scienceblogs.com/foodfrontiers/about.php

http://scienceblogs.com/foodfrontiers/2010/07/welcome_to_food_frontiers.php

I am absolutely opposed to this crap and I hope there is a massive protest against it by other bloggers at scienceblogs!

Oh, it’s already started:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/say_hello_topepsico_wtf.php

http://scienceblogs.com/superbug/2010/07/pepsi_messy.php

http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2010/07/a_pause_for_thought.php

http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/2010/07/on_corporate_content.php

http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/2010/07/more_on_pepsi.php

http://scienceblogs.com/laelaps/2010/07/a_pepsi-induced_hiatus.php

http://scienceblogs.com/whitecoatunderground/2010/07/rethinking_blog_networks_and_e.php

http://scienceblogs.com/classm/2010/07/beyond_the_pale.php

http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2010/07/sucking_corporate_dick.php

http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/2010/07/an_egoistic_perspective_on_the.php

http://scienceblogs.com/neuronculture/2010/07/a_food_blog_i_cant_digest.php

http://scienceblogs.com/pontiff/2010/07/so_long_and_thanks_for_all_the.php

http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2010/07/programming_note_thanks_to_pep.php

http://scienceblogs.com/confessions/2010/07/a_teachable_moment.php

http://scienceblogs.com/casaubonsbook/2010/07/alliances_beginning_and_ending.php

http://scienceblogs.com/casaubonsbook/2010/07/blog_suspended.php

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/07/if_i_say_something_bad_about_p.php

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2010/07/seed_conflicts_of_interest_and.php

http://scienceblogs.com/culturedish/2010/07/culture_dish_doesnt_live_here.php

http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2010/07/my_official_farewell.php

Finally, the people running scienceblogs made a statement recognizing how they had blundered, but still tried to justify the presence of the corporate blog itself:

http://scienceblogs.com/seed/2010/07/transparency_regarding_food_fr.php

Yesterday, ScienceBlogs launched Food Frontiers, a blog sponsored by PepsiCo. This isn’t the first time we’ve hosted sponsored blogs–recent ones included GE, Shell, and Invitrogen–but it is the first time we’ve received this level of criticism about it.

Frankly, we at ScienceBlogs did not do a good job of communicating what these sponsored blogs are for, give a proper explanation of what our relationship to Food Frontiers was going to be, or even properly explain what Food Frontiers is.

We have blogs from industry because we think it’s important that the story of how and why industry science gets done be part of the conversation at ScienceBlogs. It’s certainly the story of a great many of the world’s engineers, mathematicians, chemists, physicists, and biologists. These scientists necessarily have conflicts of interest, so as a matter of transparency, we’re fixing the way those conflicts are presented, in line with the best practices of scientific journals.

Bullcrap!

To the owners of scienceblogs, Seed Media Group, I say this: What a stupid thing you have done! You do NOT need corporate money that badly. You only undermine the credibility of your website and your own bloggers that have been here for years. What you need is INTEGRITY! Kill that Pepsi blog and don’t EVER do anything so underhanded again!

I AM SICK OF CORPORATIONS RULING THE WORLD!!!!!

Sinead O’Connor was both wrong and right.

Posted on by

In 1992, this Irish singer took a stand against the Roman Catholic Church for abusing children, yet when she did so, she failed to make a connection to her audience. Instead of  just telling people what the problem was, she tried to shock people as a way of getting their attention. That only damaged her career.

Soon afterwards, she made an public appearance where she was booed by the audience. They simply did not understand or  appreciate what she’d been trying to warn them about.

Nearly two decades and many more abused children later, O’Connor corrected herself with an appearance on CNN. By now, most people were ready to listen to her and she spoke about the issue with grace and understanding, as she should have done in the first place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEfC_Gi7pIs

Let this be an object lesson for activists of all types: You CANNOT force people to listen to what they are simply not ready to hear, and both timing and method are crucial to make your case. Ripping up a picture of the Pope did no good. Ripping up the Pope in writing or speech detailing what he may have done wrong does and always will do good.

The customer is NOT always right!

Posted on by

Many years ago, I worked for various McDonald’s restaurants as a cashier. And occationally, this would happen:

  1. A customer would come to my station and make an order. I would operate strictly by the book; greeting the customer, taking the order, taking the money, assemble the order, and send the customer on her way. The customer would give me absolutely no indication that anything was amiss.
  2. Then, unknown to me, the customer would go behind my back and make a complaint to a manager, claiming that I either got the order wrong in some way (especially when I was in the drive through position) or, more often, that I was rude to her, without specifying how exactly I was rude to her.
  3. The manager would later confront me about the complaint, taking as FACT without question what the customer said and demand of me what the problem was. I would be taken totally by surprize and be unable to offer an explanation for what happened.
  4. In some cases, I would be formally reprimanded by the manager with a  written report that would go on my record. I would be presumed guilty until proven innocent.

This sort of treachery shouldn’t be tolerated by any business. I suspect that customers who pull this stunt are trying to scam the restaurant in some way, perhaps to get a free meal. So here is I think what should happen instead.

  • Customers MUST make a complaint first directly to the employee that offended them. If they fail to do so, management should not be obligated to listen to them.
  • When complaining of rudeness, the customer MUST specify to both the employee and the manager the rude behavior and give details and suggest how the behavior can be corrected.
  • When discussing what happened later with the employee, the manager does not reprimand him and takes what he says in equal consideration with what the customer said earlier.

If these rules were followed, then I think employees and management would get along much better and fewer customers would be attempting to scam restaurants or other places of business.

Forbidden love

Posted on by

What do you do when your heart is bursting with romantic love for someone, who you would gladly take for a romantic partner, but you and/or  he or she is already taken and it is highly unlikely you can ever have him/her exclusively to yourself? What if that person was already a parent, meaning his/her children would be involved? What if that person had a very different lifestyle from yours? What if that person lived hundreds or thousands of kilometers away from you and it was unlikely you would move to live with him/her or he/she would move to live with you?

But what if that person also have many wonderful things in common with you that attracted you to him/her in the first place? What if that person made you feel better than the partner you are currently with? Would you risk committing adultery with him/her? If you KNEW that in the absence of any barriers, you WOULD marry this man/woman, would you engage in sex with him/her? Or even if marriage was not to be, what would happen?

Difficult issues, all of them. The older I get, the less judgemental I am about such things. At this stage in my life, the issue of polyamory looks better all the time.