Fighting for your theistic delusion

As atheists we like to point out to theist that their beliefs are completely irrational and are not based on any known facts. In fact as I have noted before theism is all in fact like a big conspiracy theory, yet most theists refuse to acknowledge this. So I though I would try unpack this again in a logical step by step manner.

So here is my correlation between Christianity and Conspiracy Theories.
1) Decide what you believe, don't believe what the facts say.
i.e. 9/11 was an inside job or Jesus was resurrected.
2) Go make illogical links.
i.e. Bin Laden was a CIA agent or The tomb is empty and that was where Jesus was buried.
3) Find evidence that supports your claim, and remember it can be circular and preferably by non-authorities as authorities are always evil.
i.e. Alex Jones wrote it and so it must be true even though it disagrees with 99.9 % of other reports or Its in the Bible and the Bible is real even though archeology does not agree with it.
4) When confronted with facts shout as loud as possible.
i.e. ITS CLEAR YOU ARE WORKING FOR THE ORGANIZATION I THINK IS BAD or YOU JUST HATE GOD BECAUSE YOU WANT TO SIN.

At about 3:45in the 10 minute clip below you will hear exactly what theists sound like to me. Oh and trust me its worth it, as Alex Jones really gets handed logic and rationality and he absolutely loses it. This is a perfect example of the irrational thought held by theists.

I really sometimes want to give up, as this is what the fight is like. Its rational thought fighting irrational stupidity. Lets try make this a positive 2015 and discard irrational thought.

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE.

Its okay to be wrong

When I think about what I want to write in this post, it seems that I surely must have  written this post at least a million times either in my mind or in comments and blogs. So, if you feel you have heard this from me before, maybe you have.

In a nutshell, no one likes to be wrong. Be you an atheist, theist, 9/11 truther, etc. However, today his post is dedicated towards fellow atheists. This not wanting to be wrong effect is really strange coming from atheists, as we are meant to be skeptics. Yet atheists are some of the hardest headed people I know. They truly refuse to budge. Before you point out the obvious, I know I am guilty of this too but I do try my best to be skeptical and in fact I have said I was wrong on more than one occasion when shown the facts. I will go on record further to say I also was wrong to ban one religious  commentator on my blog who I thought was a troll. The initial ban of this person was due to their comments  leading to a lot of ridiculous comment fights which seemed pointless and they were. However, it turns out the people I should have banned were the atheists  (the real trolls in this situation) that kept the in fighting going as they really did not have much constructive criticism otherwise. So, I was wrong. See its really not that hard to say.

We as atheists, we are quick to criticize theists for holding ridiculous ideas about Jesus, Muhammad, Allah, pink unicorns, Buddha and the list goes on. Yet, when we feel we are right and social justice is on our side we don't want to change our opinions. Put more simply, if you are a male like me, you don't want to sound like a chauvinist or racist. But, this is not how skepticism works, skepticism follows the facts and if people call you a chauvinist or a racist for following the facts, then they are the idiots and not you. Some obvious examples that have occurred recently which have resulted in people not being able to focus skeptically, are issues such as Michael Brown or the hollaback campaign. Or should I say that people seem to think these issue are simple race and sex issues when this has clearly been shown to be wrong.

Lastly, remember you are not alone, even scientists do not like to be wrong. But that is why the peer review process exists, to make sure that only the correct information gets printed. Follow the facts and be prepared to say, "I was wrong."

An idea for the Pakistani government to embrace

There is no such thing as moderate Islam. As I have pointed out multiple times before on this blog, the idea of moderate Islam is a sick inside joke. With this in mind I thought I would present a novel solution to most of the problems in Pakistan. So if anyone from the Pakistani government is reading this, take this to your president and parliament ASAP.

The solution is simple:

Ban Islam.

Yes, I know you may  not be rocked to the core of your being right now. However, lets be realistic about where all the violence in Pakistan is coming from. Lets be realistic and look at what is the problem that is driving against social reform such as women getting an education. What is the problem in Kashmir? What is the problem along the Afghanistan/Iran borders? With very minimal effort, you will see that one of the major, if not the major problem is that little insignificant belief in Allah and what is written in the Koran as law. Now at first take, it may not seem insignificant as so many people believe this bullshit, but it is insignificant as it is not true.

There is nothing accurate in the Koran. There is nothing scientific in the Koran. For example, there is nothing accurate in believing women are half a man. If you believe this, then you are retarded, or have some serious mental problems. Additionally, there is nothing good in wanting to kill people that want to disagree with you and draw a picture of a person called Muhammad. As you can see from these mild examples, that the belief in Allah is destroying your country and there is a very simplistic answer to this all.

Lastly, yes I know this idea is absurd as the Pakistani Government is run by Muslims. They will never want to get rid of their money and their religion. After all banning Islam would mean they have to give up both supporting extremism and their loyal voting base.

Merry Christmas to all

To all those fine people that read this blog either with rage in their eyes or nods of agreeement, I am hoping more with rage in their eyes, I want to say to you all.

Have a Merry Christmas and a fantastic New Year! If you feel insulated by this well, to you I say bah humbug and Merry Christmas.

Moderate Islam in Australia - all sick irony intended

The recent hostage crisis in Sydney, Australia shows the face of Islam for what it truly is. Its a barbaric religion that allows the so called extremists to get away with their terrorism, while the so called moderates do not bat an eyelid.

 

 (Source)

In fact I have heard from a Muslim that he agrees with what the Taliban does along the Afghanistan and Pakistan border, although he himself is not that type of person. Granted one person does not make an analysis set, but it seems that this type of opinion is not isolated. Let me be clear here, I am not calling for the mass extinction of every Muslim. I am calling for the mass extinction of a religion that teaches an ideology that has left many people dead in the name of Allah and their pedophile prophet Muhammad.

So why are so called moderate Muslims so scared to confront the so called extremists and actually speak up against the atrocities. Its simple, they can't as if they do they are going against their holy Koran and that would mean they are infidels. Just like the stupid Christians cannot accept that two men or women can have a very happy homosexual sex life and relationship. Both of these religions are based on books that were written by people who lived in a day and age when slavery, public executions and other barbaric practices were common place. The question rather should be, should we accept anything better form these fools?

Religion needs to die. If it does not die its going to carry on killing innocent people that have nothing to do with it. If you disagree then you need to wake up.

Lastly, I am so glad that Man Haron Monis is dead. To the tactical unit who got rid of this shit stain from the earth I applaud you. May your grave get pissed on everyday Man Haron Monis. This is what a shit stain looks like.

(Source)

How to be an idiot and a freedom lover at the same time

I am not sure how this happened, probably because I listen to the fantasy mind of Alex Jones for entertainment. But I came across this video on Youtube by a libertarian/anarchist group called  Freedom from Government, and I believe it shows you how to act like an idiot.

These people live on a cloud of illusion. If police did not care about anything what would happen? If you honestly think people can police themselves? Then, I present the following to you: if people could police themselves there would be no theft, there would be no rape, there would be no crime, ever. So does this happen? Easy answer, No! The facts are, that if people could police themselves there would be zero crime and then police would be redundant. However, this is clearly not the case.

All the police were doing in these video clips was asking questions. Wake up you idiots, its just questions and its acceptable. Just as I may ask someone I see walking around in my research building who they are and what are they looking for. By being evasive, you are sowing doubt in the mind of someone that is just doing there job.

Since the dawn of mankind we have slowly been progressing from hunter gather groups, to communal living, to cities, to states etc. The laws these people want, are the laws of the past, they are the laws from the bloodiest times in human civilization. How can anyone in their right mind want to regress instead of advance. There are other primates that still live in communal groups, and I have included a picture below.

(Source)

The best part is that they use the preamble for the United States Declaration of Independence on their Youtube account "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. " Creator? What creator prove the existenceof your creator before you say something idiotic. Just further evidence that these people need to grow up and stop acting like children.

Remember, its very simple. If someone asks you a question, its not that difficult to answer. Imagine going to a job interview and not answering questions. Would you get the job?

xxxx
And now I really need to start writing more about atheism and religion as a pest to society.

Once upon a time their was a riot due to the death of an innocent person....

Once upon a time their was a riot due to the death of an innocent person called Mark Duggan, these riots were called the 2011 England riots and started in London Tottenham where Duggan lived. Duggan got killed by police officers during an operation where they believed he was involved in planning an attack as well as buying illegal weapons.

These riot ended in looting, burning of cars, more deaths etc etc. Look at the video belowfor some of the riot action.

Anyway turns out that Duggan was not as innocent as his family and everyone claimed to be. In fact he had illegally bought a gun, and was been monitored by the police for some time. This is besides been arrested and investigated for murder and attempted murder. Oh and he was also convicted for handling stolen goods and smoking marijuana. So it turns out the sweet innocent boy was not so sweet and innocent, so much so that the police got cleared and the killing was deemed lawful.

When I first heard this news, I was outraged then I heard the evidence and I changed my mind. Same thing with Michael Brown at first I was outraged, but then I heard the evidence.

BTW, here is some evidence about number one star witness who said Michael Brown had his hands up then said in fact thats not true, he also said Brown assaulted or had an altercation with police officer Wilson (see 1:00 in the video below).

And then you get people saying stuff like "The most common misconception I’m hearing is that Mike Brown was significantly larger than Officer Wilson. This is incorrect. On page 198 of the official grand jury transcript, you can see that Officer Wilson testifies he is 6 ft 4 and weighs 210 lbs"
No! Brown was 292 lbs, that is a back street boy larger than Officer Wilson.

How about we listen to the police officer and give him a chance. After all it seems that he was a well trained cop, and is actually upset about what is happening in Ferguson. He thinks the riots are no good for the community.

Lastly, even if everything I have written is wrong. Even if the grand jury and the police are lying. To go running around looting, burning stuff down in good old riot fun is unacceptable for people that are meant to be taking the moral high road. Its disgusting behavior by idiots that can't think. Just go home and let justice serve its course.

Alchol and its role in evolution

Recently, there was a very interesting article published in PNAS entitled "Hominids adapted to metabolize ethanol long before human-directed fermentation". In a nutshell this article details the use and evolution of the ADH4 enzyme in the metabolism of alcohol. Interestingly, this enzyme is also important in the metabolism of Vitamin A. What the authors found was actually very impressive in that they showed this enzyme is present in the other apes as well, however it is not as effective at metabolizing alcohol as it is in humans. Then by going back into the fossil record the showed that this enzyme in humans became more active at metabolizing alcohol about 10 million years ago.

This is fascinating, as it is around that time when our ancestors are to believed to have moved from the trees into the plains. The authors believe that the mutation that occurred to create a more efficient ADH4 enzyme was beneficial to these ancestors as they were able to metabolize the alcohol that would naturally occur in fallen fruit. By being able to do this, our ancestral humans would have not being drunk and as such had an evolutionary advantage.This change in environment lead us eventually to walking upright and becoming who we are today awesome apes that can read, type and understand.

Well unless you are a creationist.Apparently, if you are a creationist this article means that we are evolved to be drunks.

Some times my palm just explodes through the back of my head.

Heavy Metal listening for your everyday Christian

In the past, I have blogged about heavy metal and the so called satanic messages it is meant to be indoctrinating children with. In fact it still amuses me that some people will not listen to certain types of music as these bands are meant to be associated with (add other deity here) and (add other deity here) worship. However, Satan is usually the god associated with heavy metal for some absurd reason. So I thought I would present a list of Heavy Metal/Hard Rock groups or acts that any Christian can freely listen to as these acts are associated with God loving, Jesus praising members or lead members.

In no particular order I give you:
1)Megadeth

 Thats right, Dave Mustaine is a Christian that said he also listens to Alex Jones.

2) Korn

 Both Brian "Head" Welch and Reginald "Fieldy" Arvizu are Christians

3) Alice Cooper

 Vincent Damon Furnier aka Alice, is a Christian.

There you have it, three great bands to enjoy when you need a bit of heavy metal release and don't want to be selling your soul to another god that does no exist.

Yes, this post is for my amusement and to help some Christians out there enjoy god music guilt free.

Michael Shermer rape allegations versus the sceptic

I have never given the rape allegations against Michael Shermer much thought really. The main reason I have never bothered is simple really, the first time I heard about it was from a quote by PZ Meyers @ Freethoughtblogs and some other quotes from the SkepChicks, and to be honest, I don't trust these groups as reliable sources. However, this idea/slander/allegation has been gaining traction in some parts of the atheist/skeptic community with quotes like "regarding Michael Shermer’s rape of a drunk woman and his subsequent protection by many of the most powerful and influential men in the atheist movement". So I thought, hey why don't we do what everybody should do when presented with claims like this, and lets go look at the evidence.

Full disclosure: I do not have access to any police reports etc. So I have to base my views on the publicly available evidence.

First I decided to do what anyone would do, I went to Google and typed in "Michael Shermer rape" and then....... I pressed the news button after all this is usually better than trusting some blog which is after all just an opinion. Yes, this is my opinion!

Needless to say, I found zero news articles (a few opinion pieces) detailing any such events. This was strange, as this is not what one would expect when such serious allegation are being thrown around. Remember that guy called Mike Tyson and his rape conviction, try typing that into Google and you will find tons of references to his conviction. So where is this all coming from? Why are people saying this is true when there is no evidence? Why should I trust one person over another person, are we not told to not believe personal testimony as it is unreliable?

I am sorry, this is not skepticism. Call me a chauvinist if you want, but the facts show that these are baseless accusations and they deserve to be discredited just as any other baseless accusation or belief.

A peer review laugh

As I have been talking about peer review recently and how it works and why it works. I thought I would give the peer review process a bit of a ribbing.

Now, it is true as I have noted that at times incorrect views or incorrect interpretations may be published in peer reviewed journals. In fact some really important papers have been retracted by the authors for making mistakes which reviewers (and they) did not notice until a year or two later. So bearing that in mind, this really made me laugh.

 (Source)

But to bring it back to how science works. This line has now been removed and if you have access you can see that science and peer review and post peer review does work.

This was and is funny, as it shows scientists are human. But more importantly, again it shows that the scientific method works.

Published peer reviewd ID manuscripts?

 So I found a page on one of the countless pesudo-science webpages for creationism on the Internet which claimed that there are multiple peer reviewed scientific articles published which support  intelligent design. I was astonished as I am not aware of any peer reviewed intelligent design manuscripts except in those creationism journals who are owned and run by creationist organizations and have no impact factor and are not scientifically accredited.

This claim was even more astounding as they claim that these articles are published in scientific journals such as "Protein Science, Journal of Molecular Biology, Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, Quarterly Review of Biology, Cell Biology International, Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum, Physics of Life Reviews, Quarterly Review of Biology, Annual Review of Genetics, and many others". Needless to say I decided to investigate a little as I really do not want to trust some pseudo science website, and who knows maybe evolution has been wrong all along.

My mission was to open the articles that the website highlighted as important papers and then press "Ctrl+F" to search for the phrase intelligent design. After all if something is supportive of intelligent design you would at least expect the phrase intelligent design. Here are the results and the number of hits listed in [brackets].

Stephen C. Meyer, “The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories,” Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Vol. 117(2):213-239 (2004) [1 hit, which lead to a massive controversy and editorial staff getting fired, also this is a literature review and not a scientific research paper.]

Michael J. Behe, “Experimental Evolution, Loss-of-Function Mutations, and ‘The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution,’” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 85(4):1-27 (December 2010). [0  hits]

Douglas D. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 341:1295–1315 (2004). [0 hits]

Michael Behe and David W. Snoke, “Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues,” Protein Science, Vol. 13 (2004).[0 hits]

William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II, “The Search for a Search: Measuring the Information Cost of Higher Level Search,” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, Vol. 14 (5):475-486 (2010). [0 hits]

Ann K. Gauger and Douglas D. Axe, “The Evolutionary Accessibility of New Enzyme Functions: A Case Study from the Biotin Pathway,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2011(1) (2011).[0 hits]

Ann K. Gauger, Stephanie Ebnet, Pamela F. Fahey, and Ralph Seelke, “Reductive Evolution Can Prevent Populations from Taking Simple Adaptive Paths to High Fitness,” BIO-Complexity, Vol. 2010 (2) (2010). [0 hits]

Vladimir I. shCherbak and Maxim A. Makukov, “The ‘Wow! Signal’ of the terrestrial genetic code,” Icarus, Vol. 224 (1): 228-242 (May, 2013). [0 hits]

Joseph A. Kuhn, “Dissecting Darwinism,” Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, Vol. 25(1): 41-47 (2012). [0 hits]

Winston Ewert, William A. Dembski, and Robert J. Marks II, “Evolutionary Synthesis of Nand Logic: Dissecting a Digital Organism,” Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 3047-3053 (October, 2009). [0 hits]

Douglas D. Axe, Brendan W. Dixon, Philip Lu, “Stylus: A System for Evolutionary Experimentation Based on a Protein/Proteome Model with Non-Arbitrary Functional Constraints,” PLoS One, Vol. 3(6):e2246 (June 2008). [0 hits]

Kirk K. Durston, David K. Y. Chiu, David L. Abel, Jack T. Trevors, “Measuring the functional sequence complexity of proteins,” Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 4:47 (2007).[0 hits]

Frank J. Tipler, “Intelligent Life in Cosmology,” International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2(2): 141-148 (2003).[0 hits]

Michael J. Denton, Craig J. Marshall, and Michael Legge, “The Protein Folds as Platonic Forms: New Support for the pre-Darwinian Conception of Evolution by Natural Law,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 219: 325-342 (2002).[0 hits]


A.C. McIntosh, “Evidence of design in bird feathers and avian respiration,” International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, Vol. 4(2):154–169 (2009). [0 hits]

Douglas D. Axe, “Extreme Functional Sensitivity to Conservative Amino Acid Changes on Enzyme Exteriors,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 301:585-595 (2000). [0 hits]

So there you have it, the most important manuscripts that suport ID have zero reference to ID. The one that did have a reference lead to a change in editorial staff and a peer review scandal. So guess that science does not exist after all.

Thats why we call them ID-iots.

xxxxx
For clarity: I could not search for 3 manuscripts as they were unavailable. Additionally, I also neglected to search a cited book, as just like the review article quoted above it is personal opinion and not scientific research.

Homo floresiensis an insight into evolution versus creationism

I was reading a comment piece a few weeks back about the so called Hobbit human fossil, more commonly known as Homo floresiensis. This fossil is fascinating due to its body structure which is unlike any other Homo species. It is mainly for this reason that when it was originally classified, it was said to be a new human species.

However, like most good science stories it did not end there. Since the initial report and reviewers requests there has been vast speculation as if it really is a new human species or in fact juts a dwarf Homo erectus? Or could it even be a pre-Homo species? Currently, there are further studies under way to determine where this species falls into the evolutionary tree for us Homo sapiens, and it really is that complicated as you can see in the picture below.

(Source)

However, the final conclusion to this comment piece sums up the situation so well. Its here that we can observe a hard-line being drawn  underneath the evolution versus creationism perspective. To understand where this fossil fits in we need more evidence. It does not matter if it is older or newer, we just need to know the truth.

Unfortunately, this is not the way Creationism works, it requires less evidence or ideally no evidence and that is not science.

Religions royal pain in the butt

I mentioned last week that Religion has been giving me some problems recently. Now I am sure at some point I may share some finer details of that event, but it really got me to thinking how much religion and religious people have affected my life due to their stupid beliefs. So here is a list of just some events off the top of my head.

1) Getting a deadline moved earlier (when I was already overloaded with deadlines) as a colleague had to go to mosque during the last week of Ramadan. Funny I don't get the same treatment to well not believe in invisible things...

2) Getting harassed when watching TV or entertaining friends by a "friendly" knock on the door.

3) Getting told that Jesus is the only psychiatrist that can solve my depression problem. Guess they don't know I was a Christian? Oh my bad..... I was not a real Christian.

4) Having to sit through prayers opening meetings.

5) Getting told the reason a friend survived a near fatal accident was God, when the exhausted doctor had just brought us the news.

6) Getting told the reason a friend had a miscarriage was Gods way of making sure only perfect babies are born and its all in his plan.

7) Getting told by a Muslim that the Koran has never been changed and its the true word of god. Of course this is only true for the Sunni, as the Shia don't understand the true word of god?

8) An ex-girlfriend dumping me as she believes we could not have a real relationship as without God threesomes are impossible. Actually I think theists don't like relationships with atheists as it makes them realize you don't need a god to be moral.

9)Getting told that the atheist (insert family relation here) who died will be seen in heaven as really said person was a Christian. In other words, this makes me feel good and I don't like to be reminded that my (insert family relation) is in hell.

10) Seeing people suffer financially, as the right thing to do is tithe the ten percent to the Church. Apparently food is for the weak?

Short list, but really just some of the reasons that religion really gets under my skin.

Needless to say this excludes all the other minor problems that religions create, like murder, rape, incest, pedophilia, war, etc. (sarcasm intended)

Social justice is bullshit

Social justice, what does it mean? This may sound like a stupid question and really it is, but I think its a good place to start when explaining why I think social justice is bullshit. The problem is basically that what is called social justice today is not social justice.

Social Justice is meant to be "a state or doctrine of egalitarianism". Its mean to be fair, its meant to be equal. However I think the people at Urban dictionary say it best when they define social justice as "Promoting tolerance, freedom, and equality for all people regardless of race, sex, orientation, national origin, handicap, etc... except for white, straight, cisgendered males. Fuck those guys, they're over-privileged no matter what."

The problem I think social justice suffers is the same problem that religion suffers. There is a lot of following the mouthpieces and proclaiming them right all the time. However, there is a huge gap in the rational thinking in the warriors that buy into the bullshit they are fed. Now, I am sure if you are all for social justice in its modern incarnation you completely disagree with me. Well let me elaborate with a perfect example. Its an example that had me angry until I saw the facts and didn't buy into the bullshit that is/was getting spoon fed.

There is a petition on change.com at the moment to get a certain Julien Blanc denied entrance to Korea to hold a seminar on how to pick up women etc. Now while I agree the guy is an idiot and he should be held accountable for the stuff he does. Granted he should only be held accountable if the ladies he "sexually abuses" actually call it sexual abuse, that after all is how the justice system is meant to work. It is important always to remember, that there is a difference between my personal opinion and what is getting claimed. There is a difference about how I feel and basically what is blatant lies to evoke a response. So let me explain further with some examples.

Firstly, this petition claims Julien Blanc endorses rape.
"His "lecture" includes not only how to degrade, manipulate women but goes as far as to include tips on how to harass and rape women."
This is a very bold claim, as I have never heard him endorse or teach how to rape. Additionally, if you make such a claim you need to back it by facts. But there are no facts, just bold claims.

Then they show you a clip from "his" youtube channel, which is in fact not his channel.
"Julien Blanc has his own YouTube channel and has recently posted a now viral video called " White Male F*cks Asian Women in Tokyo (and the Beautiful Methods to It!""
 In fact all the sources they give are not Juliens sources, except the one link which they give towards the company for which he works. So should I believe there agenda when they cannot even back it up?


So what do you get in response from all the people signing the petition?
"I do not have to be from South Korea to want women to be treated with respect and not subjected to the violence this man preaches."
"You call someone who teaches how to rape women a pickup artist? Stay away from Korea."
"what a twat! this pig shouldn't be allowed anywhere! it is never okay to do what he is doing! if i could, i'd sign this petition a thousand times! stop rape culture!"

Is this evidence of the problems with social justice? You be the judge, but let me just add that I reported this petition two weeks ago for false information and pointed them in the right direction. Needless to say nothing has changed. Seems that social justice does not care about the truth.

xxxxxxxx
Maybe as a heads up someone should contact Julien and get him to sue this group. Sorry Julien if you are reading this, I just don't care enough to report it to you myself. Frankly, I think you are an idiot.

Jesus running interference

At the moment I am dealing with some pretty heavy stuff and hope to be back blogging regularly at the end of the week. As the cause behind this delay is theists I thought it would be apt to just let everyone know that this is on of the reasons atheists want to see the demise of religion.

Really, all it does is interfere and get under your skin. Jesus should really be playing sports as he seems to be pretty good at running interference.

Polio vaccines dont kill

Anti-Vaccers like to deny the evidence supporting vaccines, so I am sure some must have read the headline to the article "Polio killed the vaccinated" (subscription only) with glee. However, when they finally reached the second paragraph of this short review of the real manuscript entitled "Robustness against serum neutralization of a poliovirus type 1 from a lethal epidemic of poliomyelitis in the Republic of Congo in 2010" they must have been crying again with darn science destroying their views.

So it turns out that some Polio virus strains have mutated so much that if you have been vaccinated before you can still get infected and suffer the consequences of contracting the disease which can range from no effect to mild paralysis to death. However, here is the kick in the teeth for the anti vaccine movement, it turns out that those people who have been recently re-vaccinated or vaccinated before coming in contact with the polio virus have a far greater chance of not getting infected. This means more vaccine is helping you rather than harming you.

As I have mentioned before if you do not get vaccinated you are an idiot. The facts are if you (or your child) gets sick from an  illness that could have been prevented by a vaccine you denied,  then it is your fault and your fault only. I do not have sympathy for you and no else should. I would feel bad for a child who had such dumb parents, but I would feel zero sympathy for the parents.

In fact I have only ever heard one good reason for not wanting to get kids or others vaccinated. This reason is based in science and is explained very well in the cartoon below.

Cyanide & Happiness @ Explosm.net

Where did the outrage go?

We all have seen the video of a lady walking around New York city and getting catcalled and what is termed "sexual abuse". Granted, I did not watch all ten hours so I did not see the sexual abuse and I am glad they kept it out of the video. To be honest there was probably zero sexual abuse though. If you have not seen the edited video then here it is and where have you been for the last month?

Needless to say there was complete outrage from the feminist movement, social justice warriors and pundits trying to say all the right things. On the other hand there were a lot of rational men and women alike that said this movie is utter rubbish and the people for this campaign should grow up. At first, I wanted to avoid this topic as I didn't want to give further attention to what seems to me to be not as severe as it is claimed to be. Another reason I didn't want to say something until now was I trust the world at times and I knew this would happen. So here I present a man getting catcalled.

Where is the outrage now? I guess its not going to come. Proves the point that either the first video was not harrasment or that equality is getting skewed.

Maybe here is some more food for thought, that is also getting overlooked. Dressing in a Hijab will not get you cat called?

Seems like there is a lot going on here in these movies and some seem to be loaded with agendas. Lets use our brains and not jump on the bandwagon. Sexual harassment is a real thing, its not just whatever you want it to be. The fact is that if the original video is sexual harassment then so is the second video. The case is shut, equality is equal for all and if you don't realize that go back to school.

The atheistic side-effect

My search towards atheism took me through many detours, many different "so-called" spiritual journeys. These journeys were sprinkled with forays into various religions and the reading of the various texts associated with these religions or life styles. The one thing this journey did do for me though was to create a lot of thinking and trying to justify various positions which do not fit well with positions that society holds in general. Now, while I am sad my atheism took so long to get too, I am also glad. I missed out on a large portion of my life when I was young that could have been employed more beneficially than going to church or prayer groups etc. But through this all, I learned a very important lesson.

The thing this process did teach me, is skepticism. This is something I believe some atheists never actually go through and its scary to think about, as there is no justification why they hold their atheistic beliefs. Its the same as theists born into the wrong religion?

In essence my atheism as I was explaining to a very good friend of mine the other day is what I like to term a side-effect. Sometimes you have side-effects in medicine. In the same way my atheism is a side effect of thinking. Atheism should not be our only goal, it should be to promote skeptical thinking.

A hard look at biblical slavery

Slavery in the Bible is for some Christians is an issue they either do not know about, or its an issue that they use all the apologetic answers for such as its not slavery its indentured servitude. I think the only way to understand this issue, is to actually look at the Bible and follow the logic. But, first lets start off and look at the common English definitions for the words slave and indentured servant

Indentured servant: a person who signs and is bound by indentures to work for another for a specified time especially in return for payment of travel expenses and maintenance.

Slave: someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay

 (Source)



Now I will be the first to admit, that according to  some sections of Deuteronomy and Leviticus this really does seem like indentured servitude. In fact Deutoronomy 15:12-14 states "12 If a fellow Hebrew, a man or a woman, sells himself to you and serves you six years, in the seventh year you must let him go free. 13 And when you release him, do not send him away empty-handed. 14 Supply him liberally from your flock, your threshing floor and your winepress. Give to him as the LORD your God has blessed you."


As such we could be forgiven if we thought this was indentured servitude. I should also not, this concept of indentured servitude is built on the false pretext that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. Deuteronomy 15:15 "Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the LORD your God redeemed you. That is why I give you this command today."

This is also the point where the line between slavery and indentured servitude disappears. As a slave is life long as it is a purchase, or a legal possession. So how are we to think about the following lines which relate to laws of indentured servants/slaves and treatment of indentured servants/slaves.
Deuteronomy 15: 17 "then take an awl and push it through his ear lobe into the door, and he will become your servant for life. Do the same for your maidservant."
Exodus 21:4, 7 and 20-21 "If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free."
"If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do."
"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."
Leviticus 25:46 " You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly." By ruthlessly they mean, beat but don't kill.

(Source)

Now stop and think.

If you have read these texts, and you still think the Bible is not supportive of slavery in all its barbaric form, then you need a head exam. Slavery was supported by the Bible and by the Christian faith until it became evident that people of other races were also people and not animals.

The Creationist who got fired

The title of this post is what I think Mark Armitage should call his personal diary of the events that ended in his dismissal from California State University, Northridge (CSUN). This is a cash cow waiting to happen after all, he can get the sympathy from all the poor persecuted Christians and then we can never learn the real story as to why he got fired even though CSUN is pretty clear on the fact that his employment was only temporary and not permanent.

So Mark if you read this post ever and you like the title "The Creationist who got fired" just throw a link to my blog in your book. I think this title would fit well next to the title of your other book "Jesus is like my Scanning Electron Microscope". On a side-note, if you think scientists lack a sense of humor and you know anything about scanning electron microscopes go read the reviews at Amazon. Top class reviews with massive amounts of irony.

It should be noted, that the one issue that lawyers defending Mark Armitage are very adamant in pointing out in this case is that Armitage is a published scientist in a accredited scientific journal with a publication entitled "Soft sheets of fibrillar bone from a fossil of the supraorbital horn of the dinosaur Triceratops horridus." (link, subscription only). Other than this article, I cant find much about him publishing in any other journals, so I think its just this one article. Although, he does now work for the Institute for Creation Research, so he may have manuscripts in the Journal of Creation.

So, what does this paper say? I mean it seems there is a horrible misunderstanding by creationists about this. In the manuscript their is ZERO mention that the Earth is only 6 thousand years old, there is ZERO mention of god, there is in fact ZERO mention of anything creationist. As such there is no reason to reject this paper according to peer review as it is scientifically sound. I will add, I have only briefly glanced through the manuscript so I could be wrong about the soundness of the article. However, even if it is faulty. There is no creationism, it is written from an evolutionary perspective.

With this in mind, then we see that this is the reason it was published. This is when we need to realize this is not creationist science. This is real science. Granted, he holds absurd views on how old the earth is and this makes him lacks credibility, but his article does not support a creationist view at all.

So why he got fired? Well, that is still unknown but I am sure the court case will get to the bottom of that. To point out one thing though, he did freely express his opinion on the age of the Earth with students, and this is in direct conflict with the  CSUN biology curriculum. Teach the Controversy?

Non-consensus science and what it means

I have written about about non consensus in science before, in fact just recently I referred to in my climate change posts. However, I think there is a big misunderstanding regarding scientific consensus that conspiracy theorists, pseudo scientists and theists alike seem to not understand.

In a nutshell "non-consensus does not make the alternative view correct."

Its really something that should seem simple, but which does not seem to be this way with people that follow illogical thinking patterns. Non-consensus means that the scientists that disagree with a certain way something is interpreted, have reasons and valid proofs to show that there interpretation could be or is correct. The thing is these scientists have evidence to back them. This is what non-consensus is, its an opposing view backed by facts. Non-consensus does not mean, I don't like this fact as it does not seem right to me in my personal opinion.

For example, when we consider creationism versus evolution. Creationists do not hold a non-consensus opinion as they have no facts to back up their claims. Creationists in fact support a false claim, as there is no proof to back what they say. In fact, some of their claims have been shown to be false, such as the flagellum.

As such dear theists, if science disagrees on something, it does not imply your opinion i.e god is correct. Its just that the non-consensus view are scientifically interpreting the results in a different way. However, the conclusions are still backed and as such it is rational. Your belief is not backed, as such it is irrational.

The dangers of religion - some links

The dangers of religion are well documented on blogs I read. In particular there is the Horror Show Sunday over at the Bitchspot by Cephus. What makes this segment special in my opinion is that there is no religion spared, and no religion focused on. Its just the facts about the dangers that all religions give to the world.

Today I really want to highlight a newish post over at the Republic of Gilead by Ahab. It has to do with the dropped charges against Micah Moore who was previously charged with murder. Turns out that religion may have had a big role to play in his confession of a crime he did not commit.

So even when it seems religion is not doing anything wrong, it is in fact creating huge problems by making people do really stupid things. I applaud Cephus and Ahab and all the other bloggers that report the crimes of religion. Its through these efforts that hopefully we can (and are) expose religion for the farce it is.

7 Things I learnt from Left Behind

 

(Source)

1) There is a cut off age for kids to be an innocent, not sure what the age is but its there. So, as a concerned Christian parent it may be better just to off your kids before that age?

2) God does not care if someones cognition is gone and they cannot accept god as there Saviour. You are going to burn! Perhaps, this is a sick little joke by god for all the people that are not really wanted in heaven.

3) You are going to be butt ass naked in Heaven. Little bit of exhibitionism never hurt anyone....well except maybe if you are not to keen on seeing mum in her full glory it will.

4) If you were born into a family that had another faith, you are not getting raptured and its all your fault.

5) There is going to be a lot of unguided fast moving metal objects around. Should we be using this as evidence that Christians should not be allowed to drive or pilot anything, ever, for our safety.

6) If you are rich the chances of getting raptured are a lot higher than if you are middle or low income. Not sure why, after all this kind of goes against the whole Camel threading through the needles eye thing.

7) Lastly, Nicholas Cage is still not a great actor.

It has been a great year for Christian movies and my reviews of them he says modestly (Noah, God is not dead, Heaven is real), but the big one is still coming. Christian Bale aka Batman as that other superhero Moses, can't wait for December.

Debating irrational thought

There is a tendency among theists to rage when atheists tell them there arguments are horrible. There is an even larger tendency for theists to rage when they are in a debate which gets voted on and they subsequently lose. They then blame atheists for voting against them as atheists are ignorant and do not understand their arguments. Those same argument which I already said above are horrible and have been pointed out as being horrible by so many people at so many different times. In fact debating theists can be extremely tiring as there really seems to be no point. It really is more like smashing your head against a wall, than an informative discussion in most cases.

(Source)

Now I still believe debating theists is worth it, even though it can be is frustrating. But I wonder how many theists realize this small but interesting fact.

If you believe in a god, but not Santa or that aliens abduct humans you are dumb.

Its really not that remarkable thing to say. In fact you believe in your god for reasons that you purport to be true. Now, I can take these arguments and insert Santa or alien abductions and these also become true. If this is not the case, then the arguments which you say are true are no longer true. Remember, that these arguments you provided have to be true for your arguments to work.

That is all there is to it, you either believe in Santa and alien abductions too, or you are dumb.

Who or what is God?

The question "who or what is god?" is a question that in my opinion gets a lot of thought and complex answers. However, why does it have to be this difficult, I think the answer to this question is immensely simple and wish to illustrate this below with three questions. Each question will have two responses, which I think shows why this question is so easy to answer.

Importantly, I am assuming these questions could be asked anytime in history, when people did not necessarily know all the answers.

What came before the big bang?

a) I don't know.

b) God.

Why does an apple fall towards the Earth?

a) I don't know.

b) God.

Why are there thunderstorms?

a) I don't know.

b) God.

When you look at these answers and the questions, it is really simple to see that god means "I don't know". Thats all God is, its the answer to a question when we don't want to say "I don't know". Its the great get out of jail and seem smart card.

I am proud to be able to say "I don't know", are you?

(Source)

Seeing what you want to see (funny)

People believe/see what they want to believe/see. Sometimes this even gets called faith.

This is a common effect that is observed in theists faith and UFO sightings among other examples. With this in mind enjoy this cartoon from Cyanide and Happiness.



Cyanide & Happiness @ Explosm.net

Deeprak Chopra answers questions he can't answer

I made a mistake and went over to Deeprak Chopra's website to see what he is up to. Needless to say, within one click on his website, I knew I had made a bad mistake and let me share with you why.

In an interview with Kyra Phillips of CNN (not sure if this was for CNN or independent), Deeprak got asked the question, what is reality?

Of course he was quick to point out that this is an open question. Fine I can live with that. I mean, the no answer is okay if you don't know and the reality question is a deeply philosophical question. Just as a side note, the question of what is reality does not allow you to insert God, the correct answer is we don't know.

Anyway Deeprak then went on a tangent to try explain what reality is. I say I think anyway as he is hard to follow. He began by asking two question which he said are open ended. They are  "Whats the universe made of?" and "Whats the biological basis of consciousness?".

So, according to Deeprak, whats the universe made of?

We, don't know is his answer. Apparently, its an open question.

Yet, he then says that dark energy is at least 70 % of the universe. Then of the 30 % left 25 % is dark matter and the other 5% is matter. This answer is correct, so why does he  contradict himself. He said we don't know what the universe is made of then goes on to explain its made of dark energy, dark matter and matter. This means you know, you answered your own question

Thankfully, we did not to have to hear Deepraks answer to the question, whats the biological basis of consciousness?

But I am pretty sure he is incorrect when he says this is open ended, as everyday we are getting closer and closer to understanding brain signals and the effects they have on this thing that we call consciousness.But here is a review article from Frontiers in Psychology if you do not believe me.

Spam mail from god

Recently, I have noticed that spam mail from the most handsome princes in Nigeria have been going through a gradual change. Either these idiots have finally worked out that people are not that gullible or they have learnt there is already gullible prey out there. With this in mind I present to you the message I got from the lovely Madame Wrede. Who in Jesus name would never lie to me about the money after all she just wants to use it for good will, and she prayed about it. Its me who has been chosen by God to undertake this mission, thats right God has chosen the atheist to undertake this mission of goodness for god.

Dear friend,

Please I will like you to consider accepting this my proposal despite that it will be surprising to you since we have not known or written before, I prayed over it before contact you as the spirit directed, and I Believe that you are a reputable and trust worthy person that I can confide in, I must not hesitate to confide in you for this sincere project. My name is Madam Ulla Wrede 56 years old Swedish. I am currently admitted in the hospital for a treatment of a brain tumor which I have been suffering for 8 years now. In fact I am contacting you because I want to make a humanitarian gesture to the location of all sensitive souls. My late husband and I had mobilized a small fortune that we want to invest in humanitarian works. But considering my health condition now, I can no longer fulfill this project by myself. I want you to complete this project on my behalf. I am contacting you after my few daily prayers with believing that you are God's chosen one to complete this project in good faith. For a favorable opinion, please get back to me for more information because I may not be able to visit anymore.

Be blessed in the name of our Lord.

Madam Ulla Wrede

On a more serious note though, how many people are taken in by similar tripe every week in churches around the world. People that get told they are gods chosen warriors and they should give handsomely to the church so that they can (insert random act of goodness here). Its sad that the Nigerian Prince scam has changed to hunting on the already gullible, as surely some of those contacted will actually fall for it. After all, if the person contacting you was told by god in prayer what could the receiver be told by god in prayer?

The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice

I have addressed the idiocy that is Saudi Arabia multiple times, but I have never addressed the idiocy that is central to the stupidity that runs through that nation. This stupidity comes from that wonderful core group called The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.

Basically, their job is to act as Allah's protector. In other words Allah (like all other gods) is so useless that he/she/it cannot keep things under control that a squad of miscreants need to be employed to enforce things like dress code, sexual decency and prayer among many others. Also, these are the guys are ready to arrest you if they find out that you are a atheist terrorist in Saudi Arabia. After all we know that Allah is the only god, and in fact all the other religions are just wrongly labeling their gods incorrectly when they use words like Shiva, Yahweh, Xenu etc.

So here is a short list (click here for some other fun ones) of things that may land you in jail in Saudi Arabia if these idiots see you doing them.
Celebrating Valentines day.
Having a beer.
Speaking to a lady you are not related too.
Singing.
Owing a Barbie Doll.

Here are things that will definetelly get you arrested and then probably a little head chopping off.
Gay sex.
Sex before marriage.
Smoking Pot.
Urinating on the Kaaba.

No, this is not people flocking to use the toilet.

(Source)

Then again, what do I know I am a terrorist after all.

Something has got to give

Usually this spot, nay this day and time, is assigned to the idiot of the week. Unfortunately I am retiring idiot of the week. Its not because I think there are no religious idiots around anymore, and its not because some religious people do not understand what I mean when I use the term idiot of the week.

Its basically, that I am under a lot of pressure career wise now, and so I don't have time to dedicate to idiot of the week.Hopefully, sometime in the future I can return to having a weekly segment. But for now, its just going to be me writing when I have time and scheduling posts a week or more in advance. For this reason, the idiot of the week may be completely irrelevant by the time it shows up on the blog and so I decided to just scrap it for now.

Additionally, to this my blogging may take a set back. But I will try still post 3 times a week. But if it becomes more sporadic, its not that I have disappeared its just that I am busy. Enjoy the posts planned for the near future and hopefully I can knock some more out soon, so that you will not even know I am missing.

I understand your faith, do you understand my evidence

This is a challenge to any theist that happens to stumble across this page. This applies particularly to theists that want to debate me.

(Source)

A long time ago, I used to be a Christian and I had faith. (Sometimes to absurd levels)

So when you tell me I just need to have faith then I will understand your arguments please realize I know what you mean. In fact, I sometimes wish life was just as easy as having faith. Then I could have faith in a god and hope that everything will come right when I have challenges in life i.e. I have faith it will just change. BTW, yes I realize I am simplifying this a lot, remember I was a Christian. However, the central argument remains the same and that is just have faith.

Now, I am no longer a Christian and I believe evidence.

Then all started  when I began questioning contradictions in the Bible among other things. It lead me to apply critical thinking to questions and not take anything on faith. So much so that I know that if I need to change something in my life, I cannot just believe it will happen I have to go out and work on it i.e. I have no faith it will just change.

So, when you say "if you had faith you would understand", I truly do understand what you are saying. You have to realize that I believe this is irrational, just as I believe someone who claims aliens abducted them is irrational.

My challenge to you is this then, how about you really critically look at the evidence I present and not just regurgitate apologetic answers. After all I understand your view, why don't you try understand mine?

Aliens and creationism

So we all know creationists are crazy right? Well turns out that they are not just crazy but they are not very nice people either according to creation.com. It turns out that creationists have opinions on aliens as well as us mere humans. What struck me about this article was two things. The first is just shocking and the second actually throws out a testable claim. This testable claim has not been shown to be true, but I am sure the creationists will spin some sob tale and claim misinterpretation when and if it happens.

So did you know that all aliens, if they exist are doomed to burn in hell? Turns out that they must burn in hell as after all they were infected by original sins curse just like us when Adam and Eve decided to go against Gods will an eat that metaphorical literal fruit. Its creationists so clearly its a literal fruit (probably an apple) that gave Adam and Eve all this vast knowledge to build things like Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel.

"Therefore, any ETs living elsewhere would have been (unjustly) affected by the Adamic Curse through no fault of their own—they would not have inherited Adam’s sin nature."

Dam, this god guy seems pretty petty. In fact you do not need to move off of Earth to see that this original sin idea is really petty. I am glad to at least see that the creationists realize that it is unjust. I gather they feel confident to say this startling fact is unjust, as they know for sure that there is no other life in our universe. Which brings us to the testable claim which will certainly be misintrepreted by us evil rational thinkers  one day.

Here is what the creationists say about life on other planets if we ever had to find something like a bacteria.
"If bacteria are found elsewhere in the solar system, it will be hailed as proof that life can ‘just evolve’. However, we have previously predicted in print that in such an unlikely event, the organisms will have earth-type DNA, etc., consistent with having originated from here as contaminants—either carried by recent man-made probes, or riding fragments of rock blasted from Earth by meteorite impacts."

This is great, as here we have creationists claiming that if we find any simple life anywhere in the universe that does not have origin on Earth, then the logical conclusion from their claim is that their god does not exist. Remember, it does not have to even be intelligent life, they deny the existence of simple life. That means all of these idiots that believe in the Ken Ham style creationism have to give up their faith if bacetria is ever found on another planet except earth.This is also the reason why I say us skeptics will be told we are misinterpreting the evidence.

So there you have it Creationisms take on aliens, or should I say their knowledge that their is certainly no chance of ever finding any type of life anywhere in the entire solar system.

(Source)

I have a feeling that if their are any intelligent life forms out there in the universe reading this blog, they are also face palming like me.

Oh, so you a naturalist....

The topic of naturalism is something that I think I am perfectly equipped to deal with in the context of what I am going to write about today. Why, do I believe I have the ability to talk so eloquently about this subject? Well, because I actually am completely clueless about the philosophy of Naturalism. In fact, because I am in no way an authority, this makes this post even more rational.

It seems that when you are debating theists that they have a profound ability of shifting the Burden of Proof or throwing in irrelevant topics. In fact the one that irritates me most is when I am debating the concept of a god, then my opponent will throw out the question or assertion, "Oh, so you are a naturalist". Hang on a minute. What does this have to do with god? All you are doing is shifting the burden of proof away from the main topic of the debate. Essentially, you are playing the card that because an atheist does not believe in the supernatural that they cannot understand your argument. Well, that's just a dumb argument. Of course any atheist rejects the supernatural. It is your burden of proof to logically show that a supernatural god exists.

So for simplification lets put it this way. When you are debating theism, the opposing view is atheism. When you are debating naturalism, the opposing view is supernaturalism (or a-naturalism). These are not the same topic and while they do flow into each other at times. It is disingenuous to shift the debate topic away from the central argument.

Your thoughts?

As a side note: I am really trying to understand more about naturalism and the philosophy surrounding it.

Idiot of the week - Juan McFarland

The idiot of the week segment while demanding always offers a few surprises and WTF moments. This week is one of those weeks where I am not even sure where to begin. I really am clueless as how to interpret this idiot of the week, as there seems to be so much wrong with it.

Firstly, Pastor Juan McFarland you are a colossal idiot for having sex with people when you knew you had HIV. Here, is me hoping you at least wrapped that godly penis of yours in a condom while you were having sex.Oh, did I mention he was having sex with members of his congregations, which brings me to the next point.

How does a pastor who is meant to be all holy get to sleeping with some of his congregation. And for that matter, why are some people from this congregation having sex with the pastor in the first place? I always though that Christianity was about abstinence unless you are married. Then again I suppose it also makes these people more blessed as they are listening to their pastor as he tells them to get down with him.

Like I said, just so much wrong with this story. But just what you would expect when you tune in for the idiot of the week.

Porn is not a problem

Preamble: This is probably a post that should create some discussion, so I am mentally preparing myself for it.

Something I have never been able to comprehend, when I was a Christian and then after that probing through the various religions trying to make sense of the fact that there is no god is the following question. Is pornography bad? Now I am not saying that you should expose children to the world of pornography at a early stage, we all know it happens eventually and usually out of parental control anyway when a friend sneaks in the latest copy of (insert graphic magazine title here).

Seriously look at these two interviews. They are fascinating.... (all these videos do not contain nudity, maybe some blurring but nothing too graphic, they are interviews). I realize the are long so scroll down if you want the short version of my analysis.

So let me ask again how can porn be bad? Seriously, these two girls have done everything they needed and have a bright career ahead. They have made absurd amounts of money, invested wisely and progressed into other careers to make even more money. Additionally, they have no regrets. Granted, this is not the way it ends for all porn stars. Then again, not every business venture succeeds some will fail and some will make it. Thats how it works that is life. So, seriously whats wrong with porn? Nothing in my opinion.

The only reason I can see someone as being anti-porn is if they are an extreme theist who wants to control how people spend their time sexually. This itself makes no sense, as why is anyone so preoccupied with what is happening in other peoples sex lives unless you have some serious sexual issues yourself.  you have no reason.

Granted sometimes people can get AIDS etc, but as with everything you do risks exist. Here is a video that tells you what risks people take when they do porn. They know this, so seriously this is not an excuse. Its just simple cause and effect.