I've Been Blessed With a Miracle!

So I was sitting at my dining room table at 8:42 pm on Wednesday, August 31, 2011 when I looked up at a photograph I have had hanging there for about 5 years. And LO! Jesus appeared before me in all his Heavenly Glory! I took a picture to share this Blessing with you:

Can you see Him? It's much more obvious in person than it is in this humble picture. I was struck by His holy presence and stopped to pray to him in all his Glory. Ok, actually I didn't actually pray. But I sort of chuckled at the pareidolia.

Since He's being coy in this image, I have slightly enhanced the natural image just for the sake of helping you see this Divine Miracle:

Now, can you see him?! I thought so! What an amazing blessing! I mean, here I am, a blasphemous godless heathen, and I see Jesus in a picture that I've looked at for 5 years. By the way my husband's cousin gave us this photograph which is his original work. It's a picture of pond scum on a creek. How apropos!

Ok, I was just playing with the second image, but I did see him in the photograph. I've talked about pareidolia on HDC in the past, so you should be familiar with the phenomena, which is extremely common: it is the imagined perception of a pattern or meaning where it does not actually exist.

What I found very interesting was that when I first looked up the other day and saw the face, I immediately thought it looked like Jesus. But that made me think, how the hell does anyone today think they know what Jesus looked like? Why do we all see him as looking like a surfer dude out of the Renaissance, with sandy blond, long hair, a full beard, etc?

Wouldn't Jesus actually look Arabic, with dark features and black hair? And why do we always see the same basic vague head and shoulders shape as Mary? How many countless millions or billions of Middle Eastern women, or nuns, have worn the same type of cloak? Only every woman in a burka. And every nun in a habit. But for some reason we all have this idealized idea of what this woman looked like and that affects how we perceive patterns in random noise.

But, now that I've seen him, I can't unsee him. The recognition of a human face in the random pattern of pond scum in the picture is stuck in my head as the classically accepted face of Jesus Christ, Son of God.

And this brings up the most important issue. That of miracles. We all know when images of Jesus or Mary appear, the Miracles start to happen around them. So I figure I had better keep an eye out for them. I think that they start once the image is recognized by one special person (who has their patternicity turned up). That makes sense, right? I mean, maybe the image of Jesus wasn't even in the picture all these years, and now that he has imbued the pond scum with his presence, I think I can expect some good changes in my life.

Do I get three wishes? Do I have to create a shrine? I really don't have the space for a shrine and I hate incense. I will be sure to let you know when the miracles start.

I suppose the first one would be that I should turn into a True Believer. But I'd prefer cash, if I get to put in for my three wishes.

The Secret To Teen Power is Harmful Bullshit

Awhile ago my friend's daughter turned 21 and received a copy of The Secret to Teen Power by Paul Harrington. While I'll leave it to you to mull over giving a teen book to someone turning 21, it was not well received. Of course, having written a previous article titled The Law of Attraction - And The Secret - Are Bullshit, I was keen to see how ‘insightful and helpful’ this new book was. My friend was kind enough to send it to me. It's taken me a year to get up the energy to even look at this piece of work.

My first surprise was that it wasn't written by Rhonda Byrne, who wrote The Secret. The guy who wrote this bunch of drivel is an employee for Byrne, although in the acknowledgments he says she is his best friend and mentor as well.

Let's cut to the chase of this book, which is #6 in teen health/mental health on Amazon. The reviews are mostly glowing. The ones I read were of parents and people who gave the book to kids, which I find disturbing.

Here is exactly what the Secret is: (pg 5-6)

According to science, there are certain laws that govern the Universe. There's the law of gravity - whatever goes up must come down. And there's Einstein's law of relativity - everything in the Universe is made of energy. And then there's "string theory" - everything in the Universe vibrates, everything has its own vibe. But the most powerful law in the entire Universe is ... the law of attraction. THE SECRET is the law of attraction. Everything that happens in your life all comes down to attraction. You attract all the stuff that happens to you,  every last little thing, no matter whether it's totally awesome or truly awful, it's all about you. And you do it with the power of your thoughts. Whatever you think about, that's what goes down, that's what happens.

OMFSM! My brain exploded! My BS meter overloaded. And I only got to page 6! Not only is this bullshit, it's Harmful Bullshit. We need some sanity! On the book’s page on Amazon, this is the first (most excellent) review, which sums up some of my thoughts:

Pope Ratz Charged With Crimes Against Humanity Again

Last year, Pope Ratz (aka Pope Palpatine) was charged in the UK with crimes against humanity but it didn't go anywhere. This time, because the charges were filed at the International World Court, it has to be investigated. Two lawyers from Ratz' home state of Bavaria filed a 16,500 word indictment which alleged the following:

“three worldwide crimes which until now have not been denounced . . . (as) the traditional reverence toward ‘ecclesiastical authority’ has clouded the sense of right and wrong”.

The Pope “is responsible for the preservation and leadership of a worldwide totalitarian regime of coercion which subjugates its members with terrifying and health-endangering threats”.

He is also responsible for “the adherence to a fatal forbiddance of the use of condoms, even when the danger of HIV-Aids infection exists” and for “the establishment and maintenance of a worldwide system of cover-up of the sexual crimes committed by Catholic priests and their preferential treatment, which aids and abets ever new crimes”.

Tthe Catholic Church “acquires its members through a compulsory act, namely, through the baptism of infants that do not yet have a will of their own”. This act was “irrevocable” and is buttressed by threats of excommunication and the fires of hell.

It was “a grave impairment of the personal freedom of development and of a person’s emotional and mental integrity”. The Pope was “responsible for its preservation and enforcement and, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of his Church, he was jointly responsible” with Pope John Paul II.

Catholics “threatened by HIV-AIDS . . . are faced with a terrible alternative: If they protect themselves with condoms during sexual intercourse, they become grave sinners; if they do not protect themselves out of fear of the punishment of sin threatened by the church, they become candidates for death.”

There was also “strong suspicion that Dr Joseph Ratzinger, as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of his church and as Pope, has up to the present day systematically covered up the sexual abuse of children and youths and protected the perpetrators, thereby aiding and abetting further sexual violence toward young people”.

Let's hope it sticks this time.

From: The Examiner

A Final Good Deed

For some time now I've had in mind what I want to have done with my body after I die. I know, it seems morbid, but really it's a great opportunity to make a difference even after death. The thing is, while I've told Butch (my awesome husband) and have made it clear that I want to give my body to science, I haven't followed through to make it easy for him if something unexpected happens.

My, this is so cheery as I face my 42nd birthday (March 2, gifts and Amazon gift certificates welcome! HA! Just kidding, cash is preferred. :P )

The other day a friend of mine on Facebook posted about how wasteful cemeteries are. He wrote, "Cemeteries are not a good idea. Natural resources are wasted, financial strain is put on the less fortunate, mass plots of land are deforested for coffins and burial space, names are forgotten, space is further limited, more natural resources are wasted, and religion is reinforced. We must critically think about alternatives." I agree!

So I commented about donating your body to science and he asked how to go about it. He'd never heard of it. Then I wondered, do most people not know about this final charitable act? I should find out more for myself and others and then write about it!

First, you have 2 options for donating your body after death. One is organ donation, which you can do through your state, when you renew your driver's license (I was able to sign up online). You can help up to 8 people with your donation, how cool is that? Some of those people will get a new lease on life because of you.

Did you know even an 80 year old can be an organ donor? So make sure you have your organ donor card.

The problem is, you have to die under rather specific circumstances to be able to be an organ donor. You have to basically die where you can be ventilated immediately. So if you die at home or in an accident, unless an ambulance can start ventilating you, your organs can't be used. Only 1-3% of people die in a way that they can be a donor.

UPDATE: There is actually one program, Science Care,  that lets you both donate your organs for transplant then the rest of your body for science. See below for more information. This is the program Butch and I are looking to sign up with.

In some of these cases you could still do option 2, which is donate your whole body to science.

There are 2 ways a body is used when donated this way, either for education or research. While you can save up to 8 lives with organ donation, this whole body donation can save countless lives by training potential doctors and/or helping people do important research.

Church and State Collide Again

I just received a notice from the Secular Coalition for America telling me about House Concurrent Resolution 13. It does two things; It unnecessarily reaffirms our nation's official motto as "In God We Trust", and supports and encourages the public display of that motto in all public buildings, public schools and government institutions.

This is the "fine" work of Rep. Randy Forbes, Republican for Virginia. There were 24 cosponsors, most god-fearing republicans (except where noted):  Rodney Alexander of LA, Spencer Bachus of AL, Marsha Blackburn of TN, Paul Broun of GA, Michael Burgess of TX, Jason Chaffetz of UT, Mike Coffman of CO, Michael Conaway of TX, Geoff Davis of KY, Bill Flores of TX, Scott Garrett of NJ, John Gingrey of GA, Walter Jones of NC, John Kline of MN, James Lankford of OK, Daniel Lipinski (dem) of IL, Gary Miller of CA, Mike Pence of IN, Nick Rahall (dem) of WV, Phil Roe of TN, Mike Ross (dem) of AR, William Shuster of PA, Addison Wilson of SC and Frank Wolf of VA.

I don't know about you but my Church/State Separation hackles are up. This seems like a blatant and insidious erosion of my constitutional rights. Luckily the SCA is on the case. They sent a letter to the House Judiciary members where they asked the Committee members to “focus on protecting the rights of all U.S. citizens and the integrity of the Constitution,” rather than wasting time on a resolution that does not alter law in any way.

Here are some snippets of the resolution that got me all fired up:

Whereas the sentiment, `In God We Trust', has been an integral part of United States society since its founding;

Whereas in times of national challenge or tragedy, the people of the United States have turned to God as their source for sustenance, protection, wisdom, strength, and direction;

Whereas the Declaration of Independence recognizes God, our Creator, as the source of our rights, `We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.';

Whereas the national anthem of the United States says `praise the power that hath made and preserved us a nation . . . and this be our motto: in God is our trust.';

Whereas if religion and morality are taken out of the marketplace of ideas, the very freedom on which the United States was founded cannot be secured;

Whereas as President Eisenhower said and President Ford later repeated, `Without God, there could be no American form of government, nor, an American way of life.

Are you kidding me? Where do I begin? This is so completely full of bullshit.

And how marginalized does this make minorities like atheists, agnostics, humanists, and any religious person who worships something other than "God"? This reminds me of George H. W. Bush saying that atheists aren't even citizens and don't deserve any rights.

Do these congress people even know what the separation of church and state is? Apparently not.

Well, I don't normally talk about politics, but when it comes to this issue, I have to call on you to contact your congressman if you are in one of those states, represented by one of those bible-thumping idiots.

And help me keep an eye on this issue. Let me know if you hear anything about it that we can actually take action on, although I'm pretty sure the SCA will notify me if I can write a letter or something.

Next Month I'm 'Overdosing'

On February 5 at 5:23 pm in Morgantown, WV, I am going to 'overdose', along with a group of my WV Skeptics friends, on homeopathy. I found a supplier who can get me a bottle of 200c! I don't even know what it's supposed to 'treat'. It doesn't matter. I mean, how strong is that?! 200c? Holy moses, I'll be dead in an instant! Or will I? There'll be video so you'll have to stay tuned to see if I live to blog another day.

My group, WV Skeptics, has joined the 10:23 Campaign, a global protest against alternative therapies like homeopathy. We think doctors and pharmacists should sell medical treatments that actually work.

Here is our press release. We sent it out to all the local media. So far I don't think anyone has picked up the story:

Consumers in the United States stage homeopathic 'overdose'

Consumer rights activists across America have today announced their intention to take a mass homeopathic 'overdose' next month, as part of a major global protest against the alternative remedies.

Protestors in Morgantown, WV will swallow huge ‘doses’ of homeopathic pills and preparations at 5:23pm on February 5th 2011, in a bid to raise public awareness of the fact that homeopathic 'remedies' are ineffective - putting pressure on pharmacists and healthcare providers to ensure that products sold as medical treatments actually work.

Timothy Nelms, MD, spokesman for the group, said: “Most people aren't aware that homeopathic pills are not 'herbal' or 'natural' – even homeopaths agree the pills actually contain nothing but sugar and water.

It is fraudulent for anyone to claim there are active ingredients in these preparations. My recommendation is the use of the best current, scientific, evidence-based approach to illness - homeopathy fails to meet this standard.”

The demonstration is being organized by WV Skeptics [1] as part of the 10:23 Campaign [2] - a global protest against the homeopathic remedies originating in the United Kingdom. Similar events will be taking place in dozens of countries around the world, with protests announced in Germany, Hungary, Australia and Canada.

Homeopathic 'Overdosers' Announce Global Challenge

Consumer rights activists worldwide are being challenged to participate in a global 'overdose' on homeopathic pills, in order to raise public awareness that the remedies are in fact worthless.

The '10:23 Challenge', scheduled to culminate worldwide in February 2011, is a follow-up to the protest staged by the 10:23 Campaign in the UK, which saw almost 400 demonstrators take to the streets across UK to voice their concern at the sales of the pills in leading pharmacy 'Boots', and the support for such 'remedies' on the NHS.

Michael Marshall of the 10:23 Campaign explained the plans for 2011: "This year has been a great year in the UK for raising awareness of homeopathy – with doctors, pharmacists, politicians and – above all – members of the public speaking out against this discredited 'treatment'.

"However, the case against homeopathy extends far beyond the UK - all around the world, people are being told that homeopathy is a valid form of treatment, and often with tragic consequences. It's a global problem, and it requires global action.

"This is why we're announcing the 10:23 Challenge for 2011 - we want to show global unity by gathering protesters from more than 10 countries, and more than 23 cities. Our aim is to have more than 1023 activists publicly gathering over the weekend of 5th-6th February, to make a statement: Homeopathy - There's Nothing In It.

“Of course, safety is our number one concern – not all homeopathy is prepared as honestly and cleanly as the manufacturers state, and can include real ingredients which could be potentially dangerous. With this in mind we urge anyone wishing to get involved to prepare their own homeopathic remedies, or contact the 10:23 Campaign for more information (contact@1023.org.uk)”.

Comparing Bibles: A Resource

Last night at my book club, one member who we'll call Elizabeth, talked about a website called BibleGateway.com where you can look up different verses and then pick from a list to see the verse in different bibles. I was just on their site the other day looking to see if they offered the New American Standard Bible (NASB) as a pdf, but alas they do not. But I never noticed this cool resource for what it is!

The reason I was interested in that version was because a biblical scholar, Loring Prest, who came to talk to our group told us that it was a very good translation. Since he's read the original texts, I felt that was a good recommendation.

Anyway, back to Bible Gateway. They have 23 English versions of the bible available, not to mention a bunch of other languages.

This is a great way to read the bible and see how the different translations treat the same verse.

Let's take a few examples. The first comes from Elizabeth who said to try the following verse if I was feeling immature. So of course, I had to read it:

Ezekiel 23:20

• New American Standard: 18-21 She uncovered her harlotries and uncovered her nakedness; then I became disgusted with her, as I had become disgusted with her sister. Yet she multiplied her harlotries, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the harlot in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their paramours, whose flesh is like the flesh of donkeys and whose issue is like the issue of horses. Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians handled your bosom because of the breasts of your youth.


• King James: For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.


• God's Word: She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose semen was like that of horses.

Determinism and Free Will 2a of 4

Recently, I wrote about Determinism and Free Will. It was basically an introduction and consisted of a transcript of the Reasonable Doubts guys. Well, this is the first half of their second episode on the subject. I decided to break it up into two posts because, as you can see, it's incredibly long. And it was taking me forever to transcribe it.

So in this part, the guys are talking about determinism again, especially in regards to how to deal with people who break the law or do something wrong. This is a very touchy subject but the guys explain it well, especially when they talk about parenting.

Here you go:

1:56 Dave (D): So in our previous episode, Free Willy vs the Determinator part 1, we talked some about determinism and free will, but we didn't get to the moral implications associated with a hardcore determinist world view like the three of us seem to share. And not all naturalists do.

Jeremy (J): No, we need to acknowledge that there is diversity amongst naturalists. I will say I don't feel bad going further in saying, though, I think they're wrong. I think they're demonstrably wrong. I think accepting determinism, unfortunately or not, is necessitated by a consistently naturalistic world view. But there are people who disagree.

D: But it's a very hard thing to do, and it took me a very long time to just decide that, "yes, in fact I'm going to follow the evidence", because you're giving up a lot of things, apparently.

J: You're giving up things you never had.

D: Well, yeah. But things that I thought I had.

Determinism and Free Will 1 of 4

Let's talk about Free Will versus Determinism. I first learned about this philosophical and practical debate while listening to the Reasonable Doubts podcast, which I've recommended to you in the past. They have done four episodes, plus one bonus interview with a christian apologist radio show that is too painful to sit through, on this topic. It is so interesting and important that I am going to transcribe the relevant sections of all four episodes for you. (I don't transcribe the other topics of the episode, and skip half thoughts, etc. I recommend listening to them in full)

They all build on each other. The first episode (below) was the hardest for me to grasp. I had never heard of Determinism before, and had always assumed we have free will. So if you're new to it, it seems harsh and unnatural. But stick with it. The following 3 episodes clear up a lot of the questions raised in this one. Unfortunately it takes quite some time to type them out so try to be patient with me.

Reasonable Doubts, Episode 29: Free Willy vs The Determinator

Starts at 21:16

Definition of Free Will (24:30): This is the definition that christian apologist and philosopher J.P. Moreland would take: He calls it Libertarian Agency. You are a free agent. Your actions do not have prior causes. You are the unmoved mover if you have free will. You choose to do something. You could have chosen otherwise. Not only can you initiate actions, you can also stop actions, or choose not to act. Basically we're all little gods, in a way.

26:25 Determinism in a nutshell is the opposite of that. There are external and internal forces that influence your behavior. Commonly people think of determinism as you couldn't have done otherwise. You're standing there with the gun pointed at somebody and you're forced to pull the trigger. But really it means simply that there are reasons for your behavior, forces and factors at play, external and internal prior causes. When you are making choices those choices are not uncaused. There is a chain of causes. Your choice is the effect of prior causes.

Critical Thinking For Everyone

For some time now, I've wanted to talk to you about critical thinking. I remember the bad old days when most of my thinking was emotional and reactive and I had no idea that such a thing as critical thinking even existed. It wasn't a happy time. Over the last few years I've learned to think for myself and I can't express how liberating and empowering that is.

If there is one gift you can give to a child or anyone else, it is to teach them to think for themselves. The educational system doesn't teach this important skill. It teaches rote memorization and focuses on test taking. Therefore it's up to you to learn it for yourself.

Unfortunately, I'm self taught and have no formal training in this realm. Which means sharing it with you is harder. So instead of putting it off even longer, I thought maybe we could explore the subject together and develop a plan for sharing with others in our lives or on the web. First, let's define it.

Here is a quote: [Critical thinking is a] desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture. ~ Francis Bacon (1605)

Here is the short and sweet definition:

Critical Thinking: n: the mental process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information to reach an answer or conclusion.

Science Can Answer Moral Questions

Sam Harris gave a talk at TED recently and it's now available. He talked about morals and how science doesn't have to stay silent when it comes to what is best for conscious beings. It was very interesting. Please share it around if you like what he has to say. I'd love to hear your opinions in the comments. I agree with him.



About the talk:
Questions of good and evil, right and wrong are commonly thought unanswerable by science. But Sam Harris argues that science can -- and should -- be an authority on moral issues, shaping human values and setting out what constitutes a good life.

Sam's project: Project Reason
His homepage: SamHarris.org

Tell your Senator to Stop the Federal Funding of Religious Schools

Last night Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) filed a D.C. voucher amendment to the second jobs bill under consideration by the Senate.  The D.C. voucher program uses taxpayer funds to pay for parents to send their children to private religious schools. The program is called the “D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program,” but a 2007 government report found that these vouchers do not give D.C. students seeking a private school education sufficient secular choices, forcing them to attend religious schools or remain in the failing public school system.


By design, voucher programs aid struggling Christian schools. A July 2009 report by Rutgers University on the D.C. voucher program concluded that the way the voucher program is structured “essentially push[es] students into Christian Association and Catholic schools, pricing out independent (non-religious) schools and Hebrew schools.”

By continuing this program, those of us who do not wish to subsidize someone else's church will continue to be forced to do so through our federal tax dollars.

The vote will occur sometime today. Please take five minutes and email your Senators below and tell them to vote against this amendment that would re-authorize this program.


The Secular Coalition for America opposes the use of government funds for religious purposes, including vouchers for religious schools. We agree with the founders of the United States that no individual taxpayer should be required to pay for someone else's religion. We agree with James Madison. Senator Lieberman wants us to go in a different direction.

The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship, with your tax money, funds and enables proselytizing and religious discrimination. Recipients of the vouchers who attend religious schools are not even allowed to opt out of religious activities at their school—a direct affront to religious freedom.

It is critical that you write your Senators today and ask them to oppose Sen. Lieberman’s amendment that would re-authorize this program and spend your taxes to fund the religious education of children in D.C.

Go to Secular Coalition for America to send a letter today.

Your Two Cents About the Faith Based Initiative Program

The Secular Coalition of America sent me a request a few minutes ago, asking me to write a letter to Obama about the Faith Based Initiative Program. I pretty much keep my nose out of politics, but I thought I'd pass this along because I firmly believe in the Separation of Church and State as my God Given Right! :P

Seriously, this country was founded on the incredibly important idea of religion and politics being separate. If you want to see a country where there is no separation, just go to Iran. I'm pretty sure they are a theocracy. Don't hold me to that, though. My world politics skills have never been very sharp.

Anyway, I think letter writing campaigns work best when the people or organization targeted gets absolutely inundated from all over the place with the same request. Here is what the Secular Coalition for America says:

As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama promised to abide by "a few basic principles" that would protect the constitutional separation of church and state in his plan for an expanded faith based initiative program. He was specific: "First, if you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them - or against the people you hire - on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs."

On February 5, 2009 President Obama issued his Executive Order establishing his Faith Based Intiative program. Twelve months later at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama claimed that his administration had "turned the faith-based initiative around" from its misuse during the Bush administration. But it appears the only thing President Obama has changed about how millions of federal dollars are spent is that the office guiding the direct funding of houses of worship is now called the "White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships" rather than the "Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives." Twelve months, Two words. That's not a turn around, it's a re-branding.

Go Here to Send a Letter to Obama through the Secular Coalition of America. Hey, maybe if enough of us say something it might just make a difference.

Some Great Advice by Robert Gula

I belong to a book club that has been reading Nonsense: Red Herrings, Straw Men and Sacred Cows: How We Abuse Logic in Our Everyday Language by Robert J. Gula.

I really wanted to share part of chapter 17 with you. Mr. Gula lists the most important principles to be gleaned from the rest of the book. I highly recommend getting the book and reading it. It has really helped me think more logically. The other thing it's helped me with is to realize when someone has used a logical fallacy on me. I might not remember the name, but I remember that it is nonsense. It sort of gives me a red flag when someone uses bad logic in an argument. I think that's pretty invaluable.

So here's the list of important principles from Robert Gula:

Advice For Freethinking Kids?

The other day I got an email from an atheist couple who have two kids, one 9 and one 10. They asked me for information regarding websites or literature that might deal with "god pressure" for kids at school. This would be the 4th and 5th grade. Apparently kids at their school are proselytizing and mocking these 2 kids for not believing.

The parents don't want their kids to feel like freaks and also want to help them counter the exasperated 'you don't believe in god!' remarks. Sam, the father, admits that it can be lonely to not believe in god sometimes. I understand. I feel that way too, although not as much as before I belonged to Morgantown Atheists.

Diane, the mother, says they are open to ideas and suggestions. She says they have friends who aren't religious but still believe in god. It's not the same thing.

Seeing as how only about 10% of the population would go so far as to actually use the dreaded A-word, it can be isolating to be godless in a sea of believers. As I've mentioned, I still keep my atheism to myself when around Butch's family. Some of them know we're atheists but it's never been brought up or mentioned. This means that a huge part of what I spend my time thinking about and being an activist over can't be talked about when I spend time with others. It's kind of lonely, in a way.

The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

Skeptical thinking is such a wonderful tool to have. It means you don't get scammed or BS'ed nearly as much by shoddy news or dodgy advertising. You also get to save money because you'll be less apt to buy gimmicky cure-alls that do nothing but drain your wallet and give you false hope. In his book, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Carl Sagan wrote about this. It's called the Baloney Detection Kit. (see below for an excerpt)

Michael Shermer recently made a great companion video talking about The Baloney Detection Kit: (approx. 14 min)



Here are the 10 points from the video:

Add Us To The Map!

Here in West Virginia, it seems like everyone must be traditionally religious. People wear crosses around their necks and churches seem to be on every corner. But there are godless people scattered about. When I first moved here I felt like I had to hide my lack of faith in the closet. It was oppressive, and still can be at gatherings or over the holidays.

Then I met Tim. He's a friend of mine who is also an atheist and he encouraged Butch and I to come to a Morgantown Atheist meeting. Earlier this year we did and it was awesome! Here were people who were like us, who had similar views of the world in matters of religion as us. The next month we joined the Freethinkers Morgantown Book Club too.

One thing we wanted to do at Morgantown Atheists was to get a billboard like other cities across the country and around the world. We started getting a bit more organized, then found the United Coalition of Reason. They believe that local organizations who don't even know about each other should work together, pool our resources, and reach out together to people who don't even know the little groups exist.

Before you know it, we formed the Morgantown Coalition of Reason! That's the Morgantown Atheists, the Morgantown Brights, the Freethinkers Morgantown Book Club* and the Morgantown Thomas Paine Society*. Now together we can do projects together and all kinds of good stuff. Since we got together, I've met a lot of other people from the other groups and they're great!

So the UnitedCoR helped us get our billboard! For a month we're going to be calling out to the godless of our area, letting them know where to find us, and that they are not alone. People of Reason, unite!

If you're in West Virginia, you can contact the MorgantownCoR to see about joining. In fact, you can contact me, because I'm the Coordinator.

If you're in another part of the country, think about contacting UnitedCoR to help you get organized too. United we stand. And together we can make a positive difference in our communities and around the country. :)

Amusing Ourselves To Death

I saw this comparison of Aldous Huxley to George Orwell the other day. I thought it was extremely well done and thought you might find it insightful:

Amusing ourselves to death by Stuart McMillen - Aldous Huxley, author of "Brave New World vs. George Orwell, author of "Nineteen Eighty-Four"

Skeptic? Atheist? Then Help Fix Wikipedia

I read an article by Daniel Loxton, editor of Junior Skeptic, which was about how skeptics need to pitch in and help make Wikipedia, the people's encyclopedia, a science-based resource. He says the skeptical movement has a great opportunity to help propagate accurate and scientific information with this public resource that is so widely used.

It's free and easy to contribute either a small correction or whole pages. You just need to be able to cite references. If you can add a resource to the page, you can even link directly to good skeptical websites for people. You don't need permission, and with simple edits, you don't need any coding skills.

Best of all, it’s rewarding and fun to use your skeptical knowledge to enhance an essential public resource. Furthermore, we know from our internal traffic statistics that people really do follow up on the skeptical resources cited in Wikipedia articles.

Tim Farley gives an in-depth primer on Why Skeptics Should Pay Close Attention to Wikipedia.

You can read a rundown of some basics and rules, as well as get a bunch of useful links on how to get started here.

The Wikiproject Rational Skepticism is an association of skeptical Wikipedia editors. They vigilantly keep track of articles to make sure vandalism doesn't happen. When it does, they make sure someone can go in and fix the problems quickly to get the right information back up on the site.

Another project is the Skepticwiki, which is a standalone site devoted exclusively to skepticism. It shares the wiki encyclopedia format.

Many skeptical topics are well covered on Wikipedia. But where a skeptical eye is really needed is in paranormal topics.

When people turn to Wikipedia for information on iridology or “reptoids” or chiropractic, that article may often be the only source they consult. Or, if they do consult further sources, these may often be the sources cited in the Wikipedia article. Either way, paranormal proponents have been quick to load Wikipedia with content and citations that are friendly to their own claims. Sometimes, these articles are virtual commercials for paranormal industries. In those cases, skeptics can perform a valuable public service by bringing paranormal articles up to the NPoV standard with descriptions of skeptical criticism and references to relevant skeptical sources.

On lesser-known subjects, paranormal proponents have the freedom to make sweeping, biased, and wildly unsupported claims. These low-quality articles stand unchallenged until a skeptic eventually happens to review them. Finding and fixing these is fun and satisfying for skeptical editors. Because those articles are so bad, they are easy to improve — and edits will tend to stand for a longer time.

If you have suggestions for topics to edit, or if you have edited articles, let us know!