Blithering fuckwits on NPR

As you probably know if you're reading this, I'm an over-the-road truck driver. Last week, on Tuesday, the 25th, I was driving across South Dakota. While I drive, I listen to NPR when I can. There were three things I heard that really pissed me off.

First, I caught part of Talk of the Nation, coming in on the end of the bit about the California Supreme Court (I think it was that court) upholding Proposition 8. They were interviewing a pastor about his take. I caught the tail end of his interview, and this phrase of his really irked me. To paraphrase his words, "A lot of people call me a bigot, but I'm not, because many people have shared the same beliefs for the last 5,000 years."

So, in effect, he's saying bigotry is sanctified if it's believed in long enough. I guess he must also believe in slavery and the chattel status of women, among other things, since people have also believed these things for thousands of years.

Second, someone called in immediately afterward, and asked (again, paraphrased), "I don't see why gays can't be happy with civil unions. It's the same thing, so why get so upset about it?"

I can also see him 40 years ago, saying, "I don't see why those damn uppity niggers can't be happy with their own water fountains, bus seats and schools. They're the same things, so why get so upset about it?"

Third, the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor (I think that's how her name's spelled) to the Supreme Court. They were interviewing, if I recall correctly, a liberal and a conservative blogger, and the conservative started off with something along the lines of "All right-thinking people..."

Full stop, right there. "All right-thinking people"? Here's what that boils down to:

It means, "I'm right and you're wrong."

It means that there is no room for debate, no room for consideration, no room for compromise.

It means that the only thing we will accept is total, complete acquiescence to our demands, because our demands are right, and you's are wrong.

It means that we're absolutely and completely close-minded.

It means we're bigots.

It also means that there is no point in talking with anyone who uses the phrase "all right-thinking people"

In short, "all right-thinking people" don't think.

More from Sit Down and Shut Up Ford

The Ford dealer in Mojave, CA, has issued a non-apologetic apology for their "sit down and shut up" ad I mentioned earlier. It's on their front page, and I'll copy it here for you.

This statement is provided in response to reaction prompted by a radio commercial that Kieffe & Sons Ford recently ran referring to issues of God in our schools and on our money.

For 15 years, Kieffe and Sons Ford has run ad campaigns that focus on current events. We have chosen to do this rather than presenting typical car sales ads. We do this through an agency that develops the material and sends us a package of commercials to review. From this, we select commercials that we distribute to area radio stations. Frequently we emphasize humor and patriotic themes, as we are located adjacent to two military bases. Public response over these 15 years has been hugely positive, often eliciting calls and visits from appreciative individuals. Regrettably, the commercial that has prompted the current objection to religious sentiment ("Under God", "In We Trust") was not closely reviewed by our dealership before it went live. The commercial has been replaced. We apologize to all who were offended. It is Kieffe and Sons' intention to support America and the freedoms that make this country great."

Rick Kieffe, President "

Note this bit: "Regrettably, the commercial that has prompted the current objection to religious sentiment ("Under God", "In We Trust")..."

No, it's not "Under God" or "In We Trust" that raised the ruckus, it was "sit down and shut up." That was the cherry of irony, sitting on the whipped cream of smug superiority that topped of that tasty, tasty slice of bigot pie.

If you read this, you will see that they're not actually apologizing for anything they did, they're sorry anyone else was offended, those thin-skinned whiny cry-babies.

10 more "proofs" for god

11. Argument from Creation, aka Argument from Personal Incredulity (I)
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

I see this one a lot. It boils down to: I'm too stupid to be wrong. Let's tear into it bit, shall we?

Step 1: it is implicitly claimed that evolution/creationism is a binary choice, one or the other, pick one, no other choices. Totally unproven. I have to admit, though, that I can't think of an alternative, but I'm also not so arrogant as to claim that just because I can't think of it, it doesn't exist.

Step 2: I could go into length, but PZ put it best: Ignorance is not evidence. I would add, "and neither is whatever makes you feel better."


12. Argument from Fear
(1) If there is no God then we're all going to not exist after we die.
(2) I'm afraid of that.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

You will notice that a lot of these "arguments" boil down to "I want.../I don't want..." In this case, it's, "I want to live forever/I don't want to die." So, here we go.

Step 1: So far in my life, I haven't noticed reality paying much attention to what I want to happen or not happen, or what I'm afraid might happen or not happen. I was afraid of tipping my truck over on that crappy dirt road, but that fear didn't make any discernable difference on what happened.

Step 2: So you're afraid of not existing. People are scared of a lot of things. I'm an arachnophobe, but you know, there are still spiders. Huh.


13. Argument from the Bible
(1) [arbitrary passage from OT]
(2) [arbitrary passage from NT]
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Yes, this is just as lame as it looks. You could just as well say, "1. random newspaper article. 2. Second random newspaper article. 3. Therefore, God exists."

I'm afraid to look ahead, but I'd be money that we're going to see the ultimate circular logic claim somewhere ahead: "1: The bible is the word of god, so it's true. 2: How do I know? The bible says so. 3: Therefore, god exists." I'll break that one apart when we get to it.


14. Argument from Intelligence
(1) Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid Atheists — it's too complicated for you to understand. God exists whether you like it or not.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

Ah, there's the Christian humility I've come to expect from the humble, Christ-like Christian.

Step 1: I could just as easily say, "Look, you ignorant religious fool, you're too stupid to understand why there's no god. There is no god, no matter what stupid beliefs you may hold." I won't, though. I might think it really, really loudly, depending on who I'm talking to, because some people really are just that stupid. But you what's different? I'd try until I turned blue in the face/my fingers were bleeding stumps to explain it first, repeated, at length, over and over again, until I was forced to believe that the person I was talking to actually was that stupid.

I've also noticed that the people who claim to be that much smarter, usually aren't.

Step 2. your arrogance is proof that you're arrogant, nothing more, nothing less.


15. Argument from Unintelligence
(1) Okay, I don't pretend to be as intelligent as you guys — you're obviously very well read. But I read the Bible, and nothing you say can convince me that God does not exist. I feel him in my heart, and you can feel him too, if you'll just ask him into your life. "For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son into the world, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish from the earth." John 3:16.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

Welcome to the grand American tradition that intelligence, actually thinking things through, is inferior to unsupported faith.

What does this one boil down to? God is real because I believe he is. Well, you know, I might believe I've got a million dollars in the bank, but if I did, it wouldn't change my bank balance.


16. Argument from Belief
(1) If God exists, then I should believe in Him.
(2) I believe in God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

You know what this one really is? It's the belief that I'm Special! Since I believe in God, he's real. You don't believe, but that doesn't mean anything, because you're not special, like me.

You're right, I'm not special. Never thought so, never will. Or, if you prefer, I'm a unique snowflake, just like you and everyone else in the world.


17. Argument from Intimidation
(1) See this bonfire?
(2) Therefore, God exists.

An old favorite of the Catholic Church. Believe or die in the worst way we can think of, and we've got some really creative people.

If you have to use force, or the threat of force, your claim doesn't have much else to back it up.


18. Parental Argument
(1) My mommy and daddy told me that God exists.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

Two word answer: Santa Claus


19. Argument from Numbers
(1) Millions and millions of people believe in God.
(2) They can't all be wrong, can they?
(3) Therefore, God exists.

6.something billion people on the planet. About 2 billion people are Christians, over 4 billion are not. 4,000,000,000 non-Christians can't be wrong, can they? Therefore, there is no God.


20. Argument from Absurdity
(1) Maranathra!
(2) Therefore, God exists.

That makes no sense at all. At least the "argument" is aptly named. Hey, here's an answer: "1: Brussels Sprouts! 2: Therefore, there is no god."

In the name of free speech: sit down and shut up!

I read this at PZ's place, who got it from here. A Ford dealer in Mojave, California went on the radio with a radio spot that included, among other things, this jem:

"But did you know that 86% of Americans say they believe in God? Since we all know that 86 out of every 100 of us are Christians, who believe in God, we at Keiffe & Sons Ford wonder why we don't tell the other 14% to sit down and shut up. I guess maybe I just offended 14% of the people who are listening to this message. Well, if that is the case then I say that's tough, this is America folks, it's called free speech. None of us at Keiffe & Sons Ford are afraid to speak out. Keiffe & Sons Ford on Sierra Highway in Mojave and Rosamond, if we don't see you today, by the grace of God, we'll be here tomorrow."

I won't go into the basic error, that "believes in god" does not equal "believes in the christian god."

No, I'm looking at the strongly implied claim that he can have free speech, but people he disagrees with (or who disagree with him) do not, or should not, have that same right.

Just for a second, imagine this: replace the 86/14% bit with these:

"You blacks should just sit down and shut up. This is a white nation."

"You jews should just sit down and shut up. This is a christian nation." Oh, wait, that's the claim he's basically making already, even though it's a lie.

"All you uppity women should just sit down and shut up. This is a man's nation."

Anything wrong with those?

Or how about this one: "All you damn gays should just sit down and shut up!" Actually, from some christians, this would be a vast improvement over "Let's go kill us a faggot!"

But atheists and other unbelivers? We're only minority it's unabashedly alright to discriminate against. Blacks? No. Jews? Hell, no. Women? Don't even think about it. Muslims? Only if you're a Republican speaking head. Atheists? Sure! Everyone knows that there's nothing stopping atheists from running amok, raping and killing to their empty little heart's content, whereas the devout have the word of Yaweh/God/Allah to prevent all that.

Of course, it's surely Satan confusing things by making atheists 15% of the national population, and only 0.2% of the prison population.

But, I fall away from my main point. Free speech, to be free speech, has to go both ways. You have to have the right to say what you want to say, or feel needs to be said, but so does everyone else. "I talk, you sit down and shut up!" isn't free speech, it's a form of dictatorship.

I get e-mails that say the same thing. Long, rambling, bigoted e-mails, refusing this or that right to others, and they all end with this line, or something very much like it:

"If you agree, pass it along. If you don't, delete it."

What's that mean? Boiled down, it means just what the Ford dealer in Mojave, CA meant: "Free speech for me, but not for you."

Special rights for me, not for you.

Any rights I claim for me, whatever rights I decide to let you have, for you.

And that ain't free. It isn't American. It's Christian.

proof of god?

Actually, that's proofs of god? At this page, there's a list of alleged proofs of god's existence, titled Hundreds of Proofs of God's Existence. I haven't read all of them, yet, but the ones I have all seem to have one or more holes in the reasoning.

I thought I'd go through them and point out what I see wrong with them. Not all of them at once - there's over 500 of them. I' do ten or twenty of them at a time - should be enough here to keep me in blog posts for a while.

1. Transcendental Argument, a.k.a. Presuppositionalist (I)
(1) If reason exists then God exists.
(2) Reason exists.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

This "proof" has the same hole in it that most of the ones I've looked at so far have: there's no reason given in step one, the "if-then" statement, to show that the then follows from the if. i.e. what's the connection between reason existing and god existing?

I could just as well make this argument:
(1) If believers make illogical arguments, there is no god.
(2) Believers make illogical arguments.
(3) Therefore, there is no god.

However, the logic or illogic of an argument does not directly prove its truth or falsity.

Here is an illogical argument that is still true:
(1) Water is spelled with a 'w'
(2) Wet is also spelled with a 'w'
(3) Therefore, water is wet

Yes, water is wet, but it's got nothing to do with the way it's spelled.

2. Cosmological Argument, a.k.a. First Cause Argument (I)
(1) If I say something must have a cause, it has a cause.
(2) I say the universe must have a cause.
(3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.
(4) Therefore, God exists.

A variant on the version of the first cause argument I usually see, which goes like this: "All things must have a cause; the universe must have a cause; that cause is god." The standard reply to the standard first cause argument is: "If everything must have a cause, what caused god?"

This argument has a couple of holes in it. Step 1 boils down to "because I say so," which looks to me like a form of argument from authority. Step 2, if the universe must have a cause, it will (or not) whether or not you say it must. Step 3: see Step 2. Step 4: the link between the universe (or anything else) needing a cause and god is merely alleged, and is in no way demonstrated.

Oh, yeah: what caused god?

3. Ontological Argument (I)
(1) I Define God to be X.
(2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

1: You can define god as anything you want, but if you're defining something, you're not explaining it, you're creating it.

2: I can conceive of a great number of things, but I don't assume that my conception of them is enough to make them real. In many cases, I'm glad of that. Just because I can conceive of Cthulhu does not mean I think (or want) him to exist.

4. Ontological Argument (II)
(1) I can conceive of a perfect God.
(2) One of the qualities of perfection is existence.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Step 1: Really, you can't conceive of a perfect anything. You can think of the label, "Perfect X" where X is whatever you want it to be, but slapping a label on a conception is not the same as actually being able to conceive of somethings actual "perfection."

Step 2: I can conceive of a perfect frog, but that doesn't mean there is such a thing.

(1) I can conceive of the perfect bank account, one that contains several million dollars.
(2) One of the qualities of perfection is existence.
(3) Therefore, I have a bank account containing several million dollars.
Sadly enough, a quick check shows that in fact, I do not have a bank account containing several million dollars.

5. Modal Ontological Argument
(1) God is either necessary or unnecessary.
(2) God is not unnecessary, therefore god must be necessary.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Step 1: Necessity and reality do not always overlap. A hiker has a heart attack miles away from the nearest person. He needs a doctor, badly, but has no way to communicate that need. His necessity is not matched by existence, and he dies. Did he need a doctor? Yes. Did a doctor exist there to help him? No.

Step 2: it is not shown that god is necessary.

6. Teleological Argument, a.k.a. Design Argument (I)
(1) Check out the world/universe/giraffe. Isn't it complex?
(2) Only God could have made them so complex.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

We're going to see this one a lot, in different forms. It boils down to this: "See that? Only god could do that, so god is real."

Step 1: On the whole, the universe is empty space. Not what I'd consider to be all that complex.

Step 2: again, it's not shown that god is the only possible answer for complexity.

Argument from Beauty, a.k.a. Design/Teleological Argument (II)
(1) Isn't that baby/sunset/flower/tree beautiful?
(2) Only God could have made them so beautiful.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

I told you we'd see this one again.

Step 2: Again, it's not shown that god is the only possible answer for beauty.

Shouldn't there be a matching Argument from Ugliness?
(I) Isn't that an ugly baby/dog/whatever?
(2) Only god could make anything that ugly.
(3) Therefore, god exists.

8. Argument from Miracles (I)
(1) My aunt had cancer.
(2) The doctors gave her all these horrible treatments.
(3) My aunt prayed to God and now she doesn't have cancer.
(4) Therefore, God exists.

Still waiting for proof that it was the prayer that made the cancer go away, and not the "horrible" treatments. Or plain, for reasons unknown to us, remission.

If christians really believed in miracles, especially miracles of this kind, they they're blatant hypocrites for ever going to the hospital. Sick? Injured? Wounded? Will the average christian pray for god to help them, or pray they can get to the hospital in time?

Yeah, that's what I thought, too. Medicine over miracles every time.

9. Moral Argument (I)
(1) Person X, a well-known Atheist, was morally inferior to the rest of us.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

Step 1: no connection between X's atheism (and by the way, atheism isn't a proper noun, and thus doesn't need to be capitalized) and his immorality.

"Person Y, a well-known christian, is morally inferior to the rest of us. Therefore, there is no god."

Ken Hamm, noted creationist and tax-evader, is in prison for tax evasion. Guess that proves there's no god.

10. Moral Argument

(1) In my younger days, I was a cursing, drinking, smoking, gambling, child-molesting, thieving, murdering, bed-wetting bastard.
(2) That all changed once I became religious.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

In my younger days, I cursed, drank, smoked, gambled, stole etc. That all stopped about the same time I gave up religion. (Okay, I still curse, and since I buy powerball tickets from time to time, I still gamble.)

This is as good a point as any to mention that the plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data. In other words, a friend of a friend of a relatives friend did something is meaningless.

Step 2: no link shown between giving up bad behaviors and embracing a religion.

That's enough for now, more later. I'm going to have to go read Pharyngula to wash the stupid off.