Pharyngula

Zero

PZ Myers • 35 Comments (last page)

{if ""!=""} {/if}

The rules:
1. Say nothing about yourself.
2. Nominate no one else to do it.

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Zero"]

{/if}

{if "Zero"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

Alon Levy said: {{{Ø},Ø},Ø} isn't the set 3, but {0, 2}. The set 3 is {0, 1, 2} = {Ø, {Ø}, {Ø, {Ø}}}. The number of Ø's in the set representation of a natural number n >= 1 is 2^(n-1). How about a meme where we say nasty things about other people, and you have to guess who they are? I don't think guessing is possible. If you say something like, "A sexist prick who likes trolling my blog anonymously and calling every woman who gets too uppity a man-hater," you describe about ten different people.

MpM said: " "

Roadtripper said: All your zero are belong to us!

{/if}

Weird comment…

PZ Myers • 21 Comments

{if ""!=""} {/if}

Read how Emma defends Lonnie. I couldn't write something that twisted if I tried.

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Weird comment…"]

{/if}

{if "Weird comment…"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

lurker said: I'm not enjoying it, Andrew. PZ's initial reaction was right -- what kind of world is it where you can get arrested for asking for sex? As some commentators on the original thread suggested, it's not unusual for men with Latham's tastes to be overtly, and in a certain way sincerely, anti-gay -- they're just drawing a different line, between being a top or a bottom, or between receiving and giving. Sexuality does not map onto just two statuses, despite what "Emma" and a number of commenters think. But in some places the police seem very busy enforcing boundaries.

George Cauldron said:

I agree. It was "bizarre" in the sense of being over-the-top and wildly inappropriate, but once you know how the fundamentalist mind works it's easy to understand why they act that way.

Indeed, just go to the letters section of religioustolerance.org if you want to see how crazy and violent fundies can act when they get 'offended'.

Jeremy Henty said: jason (#56926}:

I don't think her reaction is all that surprising. It's called denial and projection.

I agree. It was "bizarre" in the sense of being over-the-top and wildly inappropriate, but once you know how the fundamentalist mind works it's easy to understand why they act that way.

{/if}

Perfidious Canada

PZ Myers • 52 Comments (last page)

{if ""!=""} {/if}

I'm not at all surprised that the US has plans to invade Canada (plans which, I hope, will never be implemented), but it's startling to find out there is a Canadian plan to invade the US.

The Canadian plan was developed by the country's director of military operations and intelligence, a World War I hero named James Sutherland "Buster" Brown. Apparently Buster believed that the best defense was a good offense: His "Defence Scheme No. 1" called for Canadian soldiers to invade the United States, charging toward Albany, Minneapolis, Seattle and Great Falls, Mont., at the first signs of a possible U.S. invasion.

Minneapolis?

I'm not worried. If the Canadians show up here, I'd smile, wave, and offer 'em a beer. They'd take one sip and turn around and go home.

(via Lawyers, Guns, and Money)

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Perfidious Canada"]

{/if}

{if "Perfidious Canada"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

Alon Levy said: I don't remember hearing Canadian raising in British Columbia and Alberta, though bear in mind I was there four and a half years ago, whereas in Ontario I was yesterday. I don't think there's any equivalent mock for the raising of the write vowel, because it's harder to hear, at least for me. I can easily detect the raised about vowel, but if I hadn't specifically looked for a raised vowel in nice and write, I'd never have detected it.

Dave S. said: The US would never incorporate us...especially the current administration. Too many provinces would vote for the Democrats if they became states.

B Humphreys said: Never mind "plans" ... it already happened! My uncle was employed by the Canadian Federal Government during WW2 in an organization called the PFRA (Prarie-Farm Rehabilitation Act). Among other things they build a lot of roads, dams and irrigation projects throughout western Canada. During the construction of the Alaska Highway he was contacted by the US Army core of engineers with a request to borrow some earth moving equipment for the project. He agreed because his instructions were to cooperate with the project but he did ask for the formal name of the organization that would be getting the equipment to keep his records straight. The first response was "Just put down 'US Army'". He said he couldn't accept such a generic title and needed something more specific. The officer making the request asked to speak to him alone and then informed him "The official title of the unit is 'The US Fifth Army of Occupation'" (I may have the number wrong.) So what could be worse that two neighbors planning to invade each other? How about actually doing it but nobody notices? And ... yep ... its true. We figure that if we can take Great Falls then the rest will just naturally collapse.

{/if}

Did I miss a blogosphere memo?

PZ Myers • 1 Comments

{if ""!=""} {/if}

What's with all the stories about toilet science this morning?

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Did I miss a blogosphere memo?"]

{/if}

{if "Did I miss a blogosphere memo?"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

modus potus said: I think there is a metaphor for the passing of 2005 buried here...

{/if}

Ask an exorcist!

PZ Myers • 75 Comments (last page)

{if ""!=""} {/if}

The religious are nuts. I've just read an interview with an exorcist that is full of details and rules and strange interpretations. This is nothing but modern day witch-doctorin', superstition and ignorance codified into bizarre behaviors. Catholicism has this weird polytheistic cult thing lurking under the fancy robes and overwrought architecture.

They're based primarily on the Bible, according to which God created all beings: mankind as well as the pure spirits, in other words the angels and demons.

…and lares and penates. Let's bring back the little gods!

You may be wondering how you can tell if you are possessed. It seems all you need to have done is see The Exorcist to be fully qualified to recognize the symptoms.

Are there objective criteria that can be used to determine if a person has been possessed by a demon?

The new ordinance on exorcism summarises the criteria for the event of possession very well. The clearest for me as a priest is the deep aversion to holy objects such as the cross, the rosary or the sign of the cross. Also an aversion to the word God - when it is spoken, such people get very nervous. Less significant indications are the supernatural capabilities that these people can suddenly develop. They can speak foreign languages that they've never learned. They can levitate; they can float, they can overcome gravity. Sometimes they become inexplicably strong and violent. But it's not that easy to diagnose cases of possession. I usually suggest that people see a neurologist or a psychiatrist before I get involved in their case. If I am advised by these experts that they can't help, then I can begin a spiritual treatment. As a rule, I would say that of ten people who request an exorcism, one is truly possessed.

I wonder how often this happens…the priest advises a consult with a neurologist. The neurologist examines the patient; he is floating in mid-air, croaking in Latin. Then the neurologist calmly says, "I can't help him."

While priests don't seem too surprised at levitating people, I think a doctor or scientist would be much more excited, and would be calling up the local university to get more people and equipment to study the phenomenon. It would be a sensation. We'd see photos and movies and all kinds of records of the event.

It hasn't happened. I suspect that if you are the kind of gullible priest who goes in for exorcisms, seeing a mentally ill person bouncing on a bed and babbling nonsense syllables would qualify as a demonic possession.

At the end, the priest says to the demon, "Go away! Disappear!" The demon usually answers, "No, I don't want to." It rebels and revolts. Sometimes it says "You have no power over me. You are nothing to me." But after a while, its resistance weakens. This usually happens after the invocation of the Holy Mother, she's very important for that. No demon ever dares to insult her during an exorcism. Never.

Does he have more respect for Mary than for God himself?

Apparently. Otherwise no holds are barred, and everyone is insulted: the priests, everyone present, the bishops, the Pope, even Jesus Christ. But never the Virgin Mary. It's an enigma.

Uh-oh. I've insulted priests and bishops and popes and Jesus, but I don't think I've ever said a cruel word about the Virgin Mary…yet. I'm going to have to think of something mean to say, before some kook priest decides my lack of interest in one of their demigods is a sign of diabolical intent.

(via Black Arts Diary)

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Ask an exorcist!"]

{/if}

{if "Ask an exorcist!"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

The Rev. Schmitt. said: We already know what would happen if a 'benign' religion got power: it would abuse it. Uh oh Buddhism! -The Rev. Schmitt.

PZ Myers said:

The Dalai Lama, Reform Judaism, Reconstructionist Judaism, Theravada Buddhism, Unitarianism, Jainism, Ethical Culture, Zen Buddhism, all the same?

Let's assume I know absolutely nothing about them (actually, I do know a bit about most of them). I'll ask a simple question: what makes them different? That's where you'll find the silliness, where they try to make metaphysical distinctions from one another. A trickier question: if there are common emphases on rational interpretations of the world, what makes them different from agnosticism/atheism, and what makes them religions at all? UU "churches" are often little more than social clubs for unbelievers, for instance -- I wouldn't say their ideas are silly, but I also find it hard to assign them to the category of "religion".

One last point I should have made: one of the things that these religions, and other strains of religious thought including ones with supernaturality, offer is simply art and poetry and metaphor.

I hear that argument a lot. It doesn't impress me. Art and poetry and metaphor, the whole idea of beauty, are human concepts -- they have nothing to do with religion, unless, perhaps, you are trying to claim that atheists lack art and beauty (and I don't think you are). What that really is is an attempt, endorsed by the religious, to appropriate beauty by religion rather than human talent and imagination. I rather resent that, actually, and think it is one of the more wicked arguments for religion around.

Harry Eagar said: Apparently, we are all agreed that this particular Catholic priest is crazy. On what grounds do we give the rest of them a pass? What this priest says is just the established doctrine of the Church, maintained for centuries. Just because other priests do not say much about it in public, how are we to conclude that they are sane? They swore an oath on all this stuff, you know, at ordination. As for Gary, his selective list proves nothing about religion except that minor sects don't get to flex their muscles so much. It would be more relevant to provide an example of one of these so-called peaceful sects that, when it did hold civil power, did not use it to kill people in the name of its abstract (and, to any sane person, nonsensical) theories. Even the Quakers fielded an army when they had the chance, although that's something they don't want you to know.

{/if}

What's the monetary value of a delusion?

PZ Myers • 41 Comments (last page)

{if ""!=""} {/if}

So the bun shaped like Mother Teresa was stolen. I'm wondering how the police report this kind of thing—misdemeanor, felony, major heist? It's an old piece of stale bread that would, in a rational world, be tossed out in the trash. Do the delusions of its owner add value to it?

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "What's the monetary value of a delusion?"]

{/if}

{if "What's the monetary value of a delusion?"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

arensb said: Do the delusions of its owner add value to it? Yes. My mother had, for many years, a number of worthless, to any objective observer, pieces of "art". But to her, they were precious, and she proudly displayed them on the kitchen fridge.

jaimito said: And each blasphemer quite escape with the fun, Because the insult's not on man, but the bun?

The Countess said: I think it looks like Abe Vigoda wearing a knit cap.

{/if}

Obscene drinks

PZ Myers • 6 Comments

{if ""!=""} {/if}

Jim is a braver, weirder man than I am. He got the Jones Soda holiday pack, and actually drank some of it, including the Brussels Sprout with Prosciutto Soda.

I felt a little queasy just reading about it.

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Obscene drinks"]

{/if}

{if "Obscene drinks"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

DJ said: I heard that none of the staff at Jones could even get one bottle down, of any flavor. This is a collectible, not a spray.

Jaime Headden said: What's so obscene about brussel sprouts?

Jim Anderson said: This will probably be the only advice I've ever given that someone actually heeds: shot glasses. For the love of your carpet, use shot glasses.

{/if}

Sexy geeks

PZ Myers • 3 Comments

{if ""!=""} {/if}

Everyone must tease Chris Mooney: he has just made Wired's list of 2005's 10 Sexiest Geeks. Judge John Jones III is on there, too.

I'm not, despite the fact that they say "talking intelligently about intelligent design is very hot"…but then they probably didn't have any invertebrates on the panel to do the judging (and even if they did, they wouldn't look at me twice. I'm not crunchy or slimy enough.)

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Sexy geeks"]

{/if}

{if "Sexy geeks"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

Torbjorn Larsson said: "BTW, I don't think it was the lack of invertebrates that did you in - how should they resist your affinity for spouting ink everywhere?" That didn't come out right - I must have been too tired. Oh well, I can always take comfort from another look at Elyse.

Bayesian Bouffant, FCD said:

but then they probably didn't have any invertebrates on the panel to do the judging

That's still no excuse for the complete lack of cephalopods on the list.

Torbjorn Larsson said: How dare anyone suggest that they should place on a list that holds Elyse Sewell?! Geez, PZ, you have some huge balls! BTW, I don't think it was the lack of invertebrates that did you in - how should they resist your affinity for spouting ink everywhere? No, it was the lack of robes, as Wired itself suggests. Maybe we should start a rumor that you wear robes on weekends?

{/if}

Davy Jones: my kind of guy

PZ Myers • 14 Comments

{if ""!=""} {/if}

I saw the trailer for the Pirates of the Caribbean sequel, and this stalked into view:

Oh. My. Dog. Two of my obsessions, squid and pirates, personified. I must see this movie. I went looking for more information, and found this bit of artwork:

Ack! Look at his arms! It's an arthropod! Make that three obsessions!

Come July, I'm going to be front row center. And they'd darn well better give Davy Jones (who is going to be played by Bill Nighy) plenty of screen time, or I'm going to be writing nasty letters to Disney executives…

Dear sirs;
While you have tantalized your prospective audiences with promises of a prominent role for a cephalopod-arthropod-pirate chimera for the past seven months, it has come to my attention that said glorious being was sadly missing from some of the scenes in the movie. This is clearly a case of bait-and-switch, and I will be contacting the Better Business Bureau to demand additional footage … insult to my religion … demeaning to multiple phyla … might be mollified if original costume and headgear were shipped to my address immediately.

It's a little rough, I know, but I've got time to work myself up into high dudgeon and refine my demands a little bit.

By the way, I saw the trailer at the Narnia showing, so maybe part of my disappointment with that movie can be accounted for by the fact that I'd been driven to a fevered pitch by a brief trailer, and then discovered that Narnia has no squid at all in it. Not a one. Talking beavers, sure, but the molluscs as a whole are ignored completely. Wankers.

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "Davy Jones: my kind of guy"]

{/if}

{if "Davy Jones: my kind of guy"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

Torbjorn Larsson said: Using Wikipedia, that fountain of questionary-quality info: "Saltwater crocodiles generally spend the tropical wet season in freshwater swamps and rivers (making the name something of a misnomer), moving downstream to estuaries in the dry season, and sometimes travelling far out to sea. Crocodiles compete fiercely with each other for territory, with dominant males in particular occupying the most eligible stretches of freshwater creeks and streams. Junior crocodiles are thus forced into the more marginal river systems and sometimes into the ocean. This explains the large distribution of the animal (ranging from the east coast of India to northern Australia) as well as it being found in odd places on occasion (such as the Sea of Japan, for instance)." But the arm looks more like a sea snake to me.

tigtog said: Bill Nighy with tentacles - mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. I'm having flashbacks to this comic I'm sure PZ must have seen before...

Bourgeois Nerd said: Where is this sequel set, in R'lyeh? If he doesn't say "ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn," then the movie's a gip. And, PZ, are you sure about modern crocodiles not being marine? I thought the saltwater crocs of Australia inhabited at least coastal waters.

{/if}

They can quantify that?

PZ Myers • 30 Comments (last page)

{if ""!=""} {/if}

I'm sluttier than Majikthise: 25.31% vs. 6.02%. Sean reports that Cosmic Variance has a negative slut value, which prompts me to say this about physicists: NERDS!!!!.

{if ""!=""}

[Continue reading "They can quantify that?"]

{/if}

{if "They can quantify that?"=="Open Thread"}

Latest comments:

dtl said: *Raises hand* -66.2% slut here. Why yes, I am a physicist. How'd you guess...

Blogtopus said: 57% Squidslut.

John McKay said: My URL got 42.72. Looks like oosiks count for more than squid sex.

{/if}

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Zero

Friday, January 06, 2006

Weird comment…

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Perfidious Canada

Did I miss a blogosphere memo?

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Ask an exorcist!

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

What's the monetary value of a delusion?

Obscene drinks

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Sexy geeks

Davy Jones: my kind of guy

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

They can quantify that?

Info

Members

Syndicate

A taste of pharyngula