Religion a parsitic idea?

I got a great book for xmas “Religion explained” by cognitive anthropologist Pascal Boyer. Basically he stipulates how religion is a parasitic byproduct of our natural instincts.

It is created, lives breads and multiplies in human brains, basically a thought or idea that has turned parasitic that overrides reason in veak minded individuals that manage to convince themselves that the parasitic idea is reality and everything else is not.

I cant wait to read this book i will post a review as soon as i am back from my holliday trip.

Joining the knoxville forum?

Update 19 Desember 2009, LMFAO they sensored the thread on the forum! typical religious people….

In the blog stats today i saw some links from a forum in knoxville,  i got quite a lot of traffick from there so i desided to look into it.

aparently someone someone did a cut and paste from the Ultimate example against the christian faith post.

Im very flattered that someone would do this of course but after looking at the topix on this forum i was laughing so hard that i couldnt see from litterarly crying of laughter.

They have some seriously fucked up people on this forum just take a quick glance at the topics:  is a fetus a living person, what do you think of jesus christ and, i hate jesus non believers only, was 9/11 a conspirasy, etc.

Its pretty clear that there are probably some good arguments to be picked with this crowd.

I will enjoy arguing with some of these lunatics, maybe ill let some of them make posts here?

Religious vs Atheist who will live the best life

Muzolf made a seriously funny post here “how the creationists are right, evolution is wrong and my conversion to religion” part 1 and part 2. This post inspired me to make this posting.  I don’t have Muzolfs sharp witty tone, so i try to  make up by being a lot more annoying.

I was thinking about a common statement religious people frequently make “i cant imagine a life without god”, or “my life is better with (insert faith). In the past i have often argued against this by pointing out that they are probably wrong because xyz.. but i realize this is the wrong approach.

A comparative query is better i think, then the dimwitted religious hordes can do their best to argue against themselves.

If you take two people, one atheist and one religious.  Then examine their fundamental life perspective  and evaluate who is more likely to live life to the fullest? who will have the best life?

Who will live a life filled with most contentment, love, satisfaction, pleasure, and joy?

If we begin with the religious mind,  look at the little meaningless restrictions religious leaders and religious followers place on themselves. Such as for example sexual abstinence, or twisting the value of knowledge like the scientific fact of evolution is bad, lets scare the children with suffering in our imaginary hell instead!

Who the hell in their right minds makes a choice for the latter? I wonder if religious morons trade their sanity with the lie of  potentially reaching heaven after death? because when seen through the lense of getting to heaven some of religious dogma can almost make sence.

Religious people live their life a little like if it was  a video game and if they fail they have an extra guy/life that will spawn once they die.

Now an Atheist knows that when the chemical computer that we call our own consciousness shuts down that is it, end of the line. Therefor an Atheist will cram their life full since they know. That this brief spark of consciousness is only temporary and you better make the most of it while you can.

Now all things being considered who do you think will live a better life?

- The religious person who places all kinds of restrictions on themselves on the ridiculous notion that they will have a chance to do it better in the “next round”?

Or

- The Atheist that knows that this is the only time he or she has so they better make it count…

I guess you have to be as stupid as a religious person not to see that one.

How the Creationists are right, Evolution is wrong. Part Two: All the wrong conclusions.

Part 1

So now that we have established that evolution is wrong, the mountains of observable evidence for it are all fabricated by the biggest conspiracy that ever existed, that is somehow better organised as any human institution, or government ever created, and more subtle as any intelligence agency ever known. ( You know i am suprised these guys dont just take over the world, someone with such capabilities certanly could. But given that i cannot imagine humans doing such a good job, the leaders of this conspiracy must be aliens or something. )
So ahem, now that we know that, lets not even consider any alternative theory for our existence, and get to the conclusion that we must have a supernatural origin!

But there is more then one view on the supernatural. Wich one should i pick, or should i pick any? What if they are all wrong? Obviously, i dont have nearly enough information to make up my own system, and supernatural being mostly odorelss, invisible, noncorporeal… in short, not mesurable or testable in any way, i have a hard time gathering information on it to form my own conclusions. I will have to pick one of the existing views on it.
I could go with the most popular ones, but popular doesnt means in any way right, after all there were times when a lot of people believed the earth was flat. Wait! I got at least one way to test supernatural! After all if supernatural spawned the world, that means nature will allso reflect the supernatural at least partially!

After analysing nature, i finally reached my conclusion. The one religion that should be closest to the truth, or at least less wrong as the others. Behold, my conversion to SHINTO!

Monotheists and othervise any non-shintoist ( Given the Japanese relation to religion, even most shintoists themselves. ) will probably be arguing how i am wrong. Well sorry, but the evidence is conclusive.

Take a look at nature, what do you see? Hundreads and thousands of species interacting with eachother. Ahh, the harmony of nature, except if you take a closer look its anything but harmony. Evrything is constantly fighting, unless your on top of the food chain, there is allways something that tries to eat you. And unless you are one of the most basic lifeforms, anything you try to eat does its best to prevent you from eating it, ( True, in cases of plants it mostly just some spikes and thorns, or simply trying to be as of little nutrition as possible.), and no matter what you are, there is allmost certanly competition from other creatures, not to mention your own bretheren.
What kind of cruel being designs such a system? Its counterproductive and inneffective. It causes suffering for the parts of the system, and serves no purpose outside itself.
To give a comparsion, if you design a machine, you will not make the different parts of it fight eachorther, especially not in the energy consuming way nature does it. You will not have a mixer, where the cable does its best to withold electricity, while the motor has to put extra effort in taking it in, and at the same time witholding as much kinetic energy from the mixer part itself, while the whole mixer does its best to withold orange juice from you, and tries to jump at your throat the first chance it gets.

Lets take a look at individual creatures, and their bodies. The designer was apprently not that great of a planner at all. Innefective systems, errors that could have been easily avoided with a little forsight. All it would take for the digestion systems of horses and rabbits, to swap certain areas of their intestines, so it would dissasemble the food first and absorb it after. But the designer was apparently too stupid to do it right. Rabbits have to eat their own feces because of this, horses are simply innefective. Speaking of horses, whoever designed them must have really hated them. The poorly designed guts often cause a slow and painful death for the horses, as if the designer was taking delight in causing pain for them.
Creationists who convinced me often used the human eye as an exemple so i will do so myself. Did you know, that the receptor membrane is actually facing the wrong way? The designer put it facing the insides of our heads, and not in the direction we actually whant to see, while the neural endings conecting these to our brain have been put in the way of our sight, limiting it, and causing a nice blind spot, that still causes hundreads of accidents each year. Oh and dont tell me it cannot be done in another way, because it has been done correctly for octopi and for their relatives. Allmost as if someone else designed them.

See, here is where it has hit me! If i had to assume, that one god did it all, than all these would mean that he is either a cruel bastard who sees life itself as a toy to play with and loves the suffering of its creation, or a blind retard who has no idea what he is doing.
Luckily, there was another option. There is not one, or a few, but thousands of gods! Just like in Shinto ( Alternativly, one could go with Hinduism, or some ancient religion. But many have a single creator god, wich leads us back to the inplausibility of monotheism. ), wich has uncounted gods and spirits. If you assume each of these creatures was planned by a different supernatural being, it all makes sense!
Most of the Kami (god\spirit) who were working on life were not exactly geniuses, but did their best to beat the others, as if it was some sort of contest, apparently.

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Wow, this got long again. But i am not doing a third part.
So, whats our final conclusion? I got a message for you people of „Creationism” or „intelligent design” Several things actually that have nothing to do with how much evidence there is for evolution, or how stupid your religion is.

First: In Science, arguments against Theory A, is not proof for Theory B. And so far all i have seen from you are attacks on evolution. Get a clue idiots! Even if you could ( And you cant.) disprove evolution somehow, that is not a point for „Intelligent design”. You have to prove evidence for the god who supposedly created the world, and the worlds existence is NOT evidence, no matter how much you would like that. If science ever comes to the conclusion that any of its findings are incorrect, it will continue looking for answers, and i can guarantee you, it wont have anything to do with ancient superstition. (With excepcion when the object of the study is religion itself of course.)

Second: By promoting the idea that evry single lifeform was planned by whomever you worship, you are basicly saying that your god is either a jerk, or a retard! Seriously, have any of you ever taken the time to take a closer look at nature, and how it works? Have you noticed such basic facts that allmost evry living being needs to destroy another living being to sustain itself? Or the horribly bad design of our, and many other animals bodies? Doesnt that say something about the nature of the supposed creator? Here is a hint, name it “unintelligent design” and you are a bit closer to reality.

Third: If you belong to any religion, wich has a specific god to whom you have to pay your respects, arguments about a hypothetical creator have lost nothing in your reasoning. You have to provide evidence of that spefic god, because even if there is a creator, in no way would that mean that this creator is indeed your god, or anybodys god for that matter. Oh by the way, an ages old book full of fary tales is NOT evidence.

As my last words in this matter for today, let me tell you these. Please continue, make yourself and your religion look ridiculous by adhering to pseudo science.
And should you succeed taking away peoples confidence in the scientific method, no matter how sad that would be, i will still roll on the floor laughing when thanks to your actions people turn to Voodoo.

How the Creationists are right, Evolution is wrong, and my conversion to religion! Part One

Finally, my eyes were opened. How could i have been so wrong all these years. Listening to the creationists reasoning, i am now fully convinced! Our existence cannot be the result of some mindless biological process! Why? Here are the arguments.

Entropy, the second law of thermodynamics clearly states that in a closed system, there is increasing disorder! Wich is the exact opposite of what evolution does. Nevermind that neither Earth nor the Universe is a closed system. Lets pretend they are, for the sake of my argument.

Ok, but here is the next one. Where did matter come from? I know this has nothing to do with evolution at all, but its an important question. Clearly something cannot come from nothing, right? Well, except that in a mathematical model, if there is equal ammount of anti-something would appear, surely we never heard of such things as anti-matter, right? And never mind the idea that different phisics might apply to other parts of the universe, those phisicists are just silly, surely someone like me, using common sense, and without an education in higher phisics can refute their ideas as stupid. Yeah, take that phisicists! A god or several gods however, dont have to appear from nothing because, err… you know, gods dont do that. They are just… there.

But how did life start? Yeah, right, i actually explained that allready in an earlier response post on these forums, with the million in a million chance, that even if the possibility is wery slim for a self replicating organic molecule to appear, in the wast oceans of prehistoric earth, and a lot of time, that possibility will eventually happen at least once, and it doesnt needs to happen a second time. Well ok, i said that, sooo lets move on to the next topic!

Okay, so maybe the argments arent that good, but they sure convinced me! They even have proof! Supposedly there was a footprint of a dinosaur overlaying that of a human. Yeah, humans and dinosaurs lived side by side some time ago. Apparenty. I have never seen this evidence myself, and nobody credible either, but it sure is convincing. We should probably be extinct by now if that was the case, and different creatures of different ages were actually adapted to wastly different conditions, but im sure there is an explanation for that. Some god or gods made it that way, yeah, if anything else fails, i can allways pull this from my ass.

Oh to hell with it, okay, they were no dinosaurs, you here me? No dinosaurs, they are a fabrication of darwinists! Yeah i know, the bones of dinosaurs and other extint creatures were found long before Darwin lived but umm.. err, ITS A CONSPIRACY!

Yes, a conspiracy! The proof for evolution? All bogus! The similarities in different species? Thats just the creator reusing the same design plans! The genetic proof that different species are related? I know! Evry biologist who ever looked at coromosomes are actually all part of a big conspiracy and are lying! Thats right, and evry time they let you take a look and compare them, they give you forged genetic information! They even go so far as to sabotage evry electromicroscope on the world so it gives you data that support evolution. Its all a big conspiracy! And anthropologists, zoologists, and other scientists, all part of this conspiracy travel around the whole world and dig in those fossils we find! Alternatively maybe some devil puts them there if there is no way a human could have. Different species evolutionsits claim to be closely related interbreeding and having offspring? I… devils do it!

Oh and Darwin was the anticrist, a bad djinni, Loki in duisguise, a rakshasa, an oni, or possibly all things mentioned. And his theory makes people eat babies. I dont know how thats supposed to make evolution untrue, but Ad Hominem attacks are the oldest trick in the book, so i am not going to pass that up.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Thus concludes part one of creationsim vs evoltution, stay tuned for part two where we take things a bit more seriously, and take the logical step, after our not so logical conclusion that supernatural has spawned the natural.

Part 2

Why its wrong to make excuses for religion.

frankiesoup made some comments on some of my posts.  She has, unlike many of the raving idiots that get wound up by my posts, spent some time to consider her standpoint. Or at least it seams like that.  Therefor i will give a more considered response.

Basically Frankie asks – what harm does it do to let people believe whatever they want?

I have touched on this subject before, usually in response to some insane babbling from some devout believer. Its quite refreshing to get a response from someone who look like they have at least thought about the subject matter.

I will use some extracts from Frankies  comments for reference. they are in Italic.

“Thank you for replying, Muzolf and EMP – though you don’t seem to have read my original post properly. When I said ‘What harm can there be…’ I specifically excluded extremists and evangelists in my statement. (”What harm can it possibly do if people – *evangelists and extremists aside* – believe in a higher power?” were my exact words.)”

The  “what is the harm” approach is a big part of allowing the extremist problem to come into existence in the first place. Its the hoards of people that defend the right “to believe whatever they want about god, life, death and the universe”  that makes extremism possible.

This excuse-ism is so ingrained in our “politically correct” culture that many people, like Frankiesoup fail to realize how ridiculous this concept is.  In no other aspects of life are we allowed to believe “whatever we want” imagine if doctors where allowed use the same principle?  If you are holy convinced that god told you that you could cure any ailment with plutonium, should that be respected? After all, its your faith! What if you get a flock of similarly convinced individuals and you build a church to worship your plutonium? should it be respected then?

The answer is of course: No it shouldn’t.  Neither should anyone who claim to have a personal relationship with the creator of the universe be taken seriously.  Religion is organized superstition and should be treated as such. It should be ridiculed and rigorously criticized as if the person in front of you professed to believe in pixies, fairies or trolls.

(For example many Nazis actually believed the arian raze where descendants from the legendary people of Atlantis, the head of the death camps where a devout believer and we all know how that turned out.)

You see, by not addressing the fundamental problem, (Iron age folklore and superstition shouldn’t be used as life guiding principles by anybody) we or the moderates defending religion, perpetuate the problem.

For some reason a lot of people defend this “believe whatever!” idea and as a result we have countless cults ranging from the established and strange (Vatican) to the down right absurd (Scientology).

“I’m a normal person – I get as pissed off as the next guy when folk come to my house and preach to me when I’m quite clearly not interested – but the majority of religious people would never dream of imposing their beliefs on others. When asked, they’ll comment, but otherwise they’re happy to leave well alone.

Preachers turning up at your house, is not what i think of when i talk about the danger and damage religion causes every day. Think about children being denied medical treatment because their parents are members of some sect that believes prayer is the only way to go? How about female circumcision? Or children that are disowned by their parents for being gay?

Such unforgivable acts are usually carried out by the people you mean should have the right to believe whatever they want, they are ordinary Jill and Joes and are not considered extremists.

I could give countless examples of average believers whose daily actions are irrational, mean and despicable, because of their religion, this alone should merit unlimited scorn of religious belief.  After all the believer might be a nice person and its his religion that fucks him up.

At some point we have to ask the question, is the idea of freedom of religion a good one?

Consider that most religious texts are a hogposh patchwork of superstitious garbage that can be interpreted in pretty much any way you want. Take Muslim suicide bombers for instance, it doesnt say in the Koran ” strap a bomb to your chest and blow yourself up in a crowd of women and children”  but it does incite hatred especially towards perceived enemies.

If we want to keep freedom of religion as a fundamental human right, we also have to accept that Pakistan militants try to burn the danish embassy for depicting the prophet mohammed. We have to say its ok for a parent to deny medical treatment to their children. We have to accept that devout catholics shoot doctors outside abortion clinics.

Because this is what accepting freedom of religion means, unless we want to be as hypocritical as the religious themselves.

In relation to religion i can pretty much make up whatever the fuck i want “ie: scientology” call it a religion, receive tax benefits and act out as i see fit. For example i can hate everyone that is gay. Accepting this is what freedom of religion means.

Lets for instance follow a potential scenario based around the idea “hate all gays” lets say you firmly believe this is against the will of god, you want to endear yourself with god of course.  After all he  holds the keys to the afterlife and what not.

How far is the step from believing that, to picking up a gun and blowing a gay persons head off? Just recently a jew blew up a gay bar in Israel. This is what religious faith does.

rationale people can see the idea, that anyone should be allowed to believe whatever they want about god life death and the universe is an extremely bad one.  Its ridiculous, it negatively touches so many aspects of our lives, from suicide bombers to creationism the list of moronic and horrible things attributed to religious belief is practically endless.

“Finally, in response to your comment about my not knowing what life in Iran is like – fair enough, I don’t. I know what it’s like in Saudia Arabia though – the only country in the world where women are not permitted to drive and must be escorted in towns at all time by a man or face arrest. Egyptians have also offered to trade me for a camel with my husband… It’s a completely different world – a different culture – and I wouldn’t want to live there but it isn’t up to me to condemn them.”

You are wrong. It is your place to condemn them! Harshly!  By not condemning this, you are actively supporting the degradation of half of Saudi Arabia’s population. Despite what Saudis believe. Women are individuals! Sentient human beings! They have the right to self determination and to live free fulfilling lives no matter what the culture is!

Instead they are property, and you,  as a woman dear to say its not your place to condemn them?!!!!!!

Denying millions of people their birth given right, to be free is just evil! And deserves as much scorn and criticism as we can possibly muster. I would go so far as to say that the very idea is repulsive to humanity and deserves a violent response!

The sad part is, this is only one horrid example of how much suffering religion causes, you experienced someone offering a camel for you, you where lucky, your Western with a modern husband, you could leave the country, you where just a spectator.

Consider this :

What if you where an Egyptian woman and your husband actually traded you for a camel?

Maybe you had children? You would never see them again and there is nothing you can do about it. The courts, the law, everything is designed to ensure that men can continue to treat you as property.  What if your new husband is violent? what if he grows tired of raping you and just leave you in the desert? No one will lift a finger for you, after all your just a woman….

Without religion classifying women as property, this culture would never existence and Muslim men’s treatment of women  would never be acceptable behavior in any society.

Yet you defend it? Why is that? Do you still think “believe whatever” is a good idea?

What happened to the UK?

“Ruslan“ posted a comment (on my ramjet page ) where he asked me to comment on the radicalization of Muslims in Britain.

I used to live in the UK,  and i have noticed something strange happening over the years since then.

I want to comment, not just on the religious freak show that is going on, and its not limited to the Islamic cults in the UK. This strange warping of society is happening, to a certain degree,  in many western nations  including Norway. And i am not sure religion is exclusively to blame.  This trend is creating a lot of fear and hatred and one thing is for sure.  In our eagerness to be politically correct and tolerant, we are damaging ourselves and our society.

This would not be possible if it wasn’t for religious moderation. Its the religious moderates that have talked us into being tolerant of religious nonsense. Instead of treating religion with the contempt it deserves, we watch in silence while it corrupts us and our society at the core.

Before you religious cock suckers start arguing that i don’t know anything about religious countries or religion, i recommend you read some more of my blogg. I am more than fully qualified to talk on the subject of religion.

Let me mention Turkey here since this is supposed to be a Muslim country, but they are Muslim in the same way that the British are protestant (ie very few actually believe the garbage, they just get married in church since that is the tradition).

Anyway most Turkish people will laugh at you if you ask them if they are religious, the majority has no interest in religion. And i would say that the people of turkey and Turkish society are more free than Britain today.

Digression while on the subject of turkey:  If you ever visit turkey you must try a Turkish bath (hamam).

I once had the hamam experience described to me as:

“Having a large hairy guy named Achmed, working you over with fine grit sandpaper.”

Nothing could be farther from the truth, its a fantastic refreshing experiencing, it combines a full body massage and a thorough cleaning, I highly recommend it.  Its worth a trip to turkey just to experience this.

Anyhow back when i lived in the UK i used to say that it was the greatest place to live on the planet, and it was!   Noone gave a fuck what you did as long as you didn’t hurt anyone else, and you where free to speak your mind on any subject including ferocious criticism of religion.

Nowadays you cant walk a single block in the UK without being filmed by cctv from 3 different directions, and everyone are obsessed with being considerate and politically correct.

What ever happened to the sex pistols spirit of “fuck everybody!” ?

This has now gone so far that certain groups are allowed to practice sharia law in the UK, and some groups from the Muslim cult in the UK live more Islamic lives than in their country of origin.

There are so many things wrong with this that it boggles the mind, don’t worry i am not going to go into every single aspect why and how this is wrong.

Instead let us just consider what effect this has on women living in these communities. Lets face it when it comes to a religions being hostile towards woman’s rights noone does it better than the Muslims.  By allowing sharia in certain communities the British government are denying these women the same rights that any other woman would have in Britain.

Allowing a legal system that is at best medieval,  isnt respecting culture or being politically correct its denying the rights of citizens in a free democratic country. It segregates the Muslim community from the rest of the country and it fuels hatred, fear and intolerance.

Not to mention that allowing sharia anywhere is an insult to human dignity.

Israel the farce.

I have been following the political noise round the middle east and Obamas push to try to achieve real change.

Yesterday i was, to put it mildly,  disappointed when i saw Netanyahus farcical speech.

The first few sentences where promising.

“I call on you, our Palestinian neighbours, and to the leadership of the Palestinian Authority – let us begin peace negotiations immediately, without preconditions.”

The rest of the speech was just gibberish and totally contradictory the above statement

He said a Palestinian state must have no army, no control of its air space and no way of smuggling in weapons. Additionally Palestinians had to recognize that their land was the land of the Jews? and that refugees had no right to return, etc, etc, etc.

Excuse me? Is it just me or what? doesn’t these demands sort of fly in the face of talks “without preconditions”?

Arent these demands in fact in themselves preconditions? and doesn’t Netanyahu know that this stance is what has fuled the conflickt for the last 60 years?

Netanyahu concludes by announcing that the root of the problem is the Palestinians refusal to accept the jewish state?

Never mind the military occupation and daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, im sure that has nothing to do with fueling the flames of conflict and hate.

Israel is by far the most agressive state in the middle east, why american tax payers accept that their tax dollar is used for military occupation and bombing palestinian women and children i will never know.

I guess israel and palestina can look forward to 60 more bloodsoaked years curtesy of the american tax payer.

The best use of a bible ever!

The only good use of a bible! mushroom food..

Best ever! use of a bible!

Israel? what the F….

Since my trip to Iran i have been chilling in turkey, the wife and me have decided to take a break on our visit the “insane religious” nations tour.

Our next stop was supposed to be Israel followed by a trip to the Palestinian territories,  if we could get in.

We have talked a lot about this and have decided to drop the entire trip.

We actually met an Israeli tourist at our hotel and our discussions with him is what made us decide to never ever visit Israel. Not because its a dangerous lunatic asylum filled with religious morons, but because our trip there would contribute to Israels economy and we don’t want that.

Anyways the discussion with our new found Israeli acquaintance went something like this.

Us: If it where the Israelis that where in the Palestinians place, what would they do?

Israeli: Stop terrorism.

Us: If terrorism stops? The Palestinians will still be under military occupation wont they?

Israeli: ehhh yes sort of, we have a right to that land though…

Us: Who gave you the right to the Palestinian land?

Israeli: I don’t know, its what i have always been told.

Us: How are the Palestinians treated? do they have any rights? are they seen as equal?

Israeli: No Palestinians are terrorists all of them, they cant own land its ours..

Us: So what would Israelis do if they where denied property rights, along with all other rights and discriminated against because their occupiers saw them as less than human?

Israeli: ehhh i dont know really i hadnt thought of it that way?

Us: Wasn’t that the Nazi approach during WWII?

Israeli: Well … . your… …. ….. the Nazis intentionally killed millions Israel takes care not to kill civilians.

Us: Didn’t the holocaust also start out as a moderate effort that gradually grew into genocide?

Israeli: dnn uhh… … well yes.

Us: it seams like the death toll seams to be gradually increasing for the Palestinians, when will the murder rate slide into genocide?

Israeli: dnn uhh… … well i dont know, i feel uncomfortable about this…..

Us: Maybe that is the right feeling to have for the atrocities carried out by your government with supposed support from you.?

Israeli: I just havent looked at it like that before,, you are right Israel has to change course….

Israel has become like the Nazi regime, its horrible…..