« July 2005 | Main | September 2005 »
August 31, 2005
Finding versus looting
See if you can match the above pictures with the captions below. Notice anything different about the looter versus the finder? Courtesy of Wonkette.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 3:02 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 30, 2005
The modern day book burner
"All books can be indecent books, though recent books are bolder.
For filth, I'm glad to say, is in the mind of the beholder.
When correctly viewed, everything is lewd.
I could tell you things about Peter Pan,
And the Wizard of OZ, there's a dirty old man!"
- Tom Lehrer
FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin is on a mission to, according to a recent Salon article (via Donkelphant), change the television landscape by extending the FCC's reach to include cable and satellite services.
Martin told activists that he is privately reaching out to industry leaders to address racy content on basic cable and satellite television, says Rick Schatz, the president of the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, a Christian ministry. “He said the free rein of cable and satellite and satellite radio is not acceptable,” says Schatz, who sat in on the meeting. “He’s committed to seeing something is done during his tenure.”Martin has asked media companies to offer a new “family-friendly” tier of cable programming, a package that would likely exclude channels like MTV and Spike TV. “If cable and satellite operators continue to refuse to offer parents more tools, basic indecency and profanity restrictions may be a viable alternative[.]”
This is irritating on so many levels. Forget the fact that the FCC chairman and right-wing religious activists are trying to impose on the rest of us their particular version of what is decent. If you look at this just from a consumer's standpoint it represents a misuse of government power that should outrage liberals and conservatives alike.
Television and radio broadcasts are regulated because they are transmitted freely through the air. Anyone with basic equipment (a television or radio) can pick them up and view their contents. So if the government wants to regulate a product that is being freely distributed, they have that right. But satellite and cable broadcasts are viewed on a subscription basis. They are paid for directly by the consumer, and that consumer has the right to cancel the service at any time. If that consumer decides to purchase material that may be offensive to some sectors of society, it is quite frankly none of the government's business.
Two things about this article caught my attention. The first was the mention that Martin would like to "give the FCC the power to fine basic cable programs, like MTV's "Real World" and Comedy Central's "Daily Show," for crude and lewd content." I'm usually reluctant to take a hardline stance on ambiguous political issues, but if you start messing with the Daily Show, one of the only reasons I pay for cable service, then you've gone too far.
The second attention-grabbing quote in the article came from Patrick Trueman, legal director of the Family Research Council. Speaking about what he called hardcore pornography shown late at night on cable channels like Showtime, Trueman said: "I don't have cable just for this reason. If I had cable, I would not want my children viewing that."
Trueman should stop his activism and lobbying because he has already found the solution to his problem. If you don't like what is being shown on cable television, then simply don't buy it. There's no need to bring the government into the situation and trample on the first amendment.
Some may argue that this isn't a first amendment issue. But it is not just pornography that Martin is targeting, it is anything he finds offensive, including speech. "Certainly broadcasters and cable operators have significant First Amendment rights, but these rights are not without boundaries," Martin has said. "They are limited by law. They also should be limited by good taste." And if he is willing to censor material on subscriber services like cable and satellite that don't agree with his good tastes, one has to wonder how long it will be until he sets his sights on the Internet.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 8:32 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Where's Bill Nye the Science Guy when you need him?
From the NY Times (via Instapundit):
While scientific literacy has doubled over the past two decades, only 20 to 25 percent of Americans are "scientifically savvy and alert," he said in an interview. Most of the rest "don't have a clue." At a time when science permeates debates on everything from global warming to stem cell research, he said, people's inability to understand basic scientific concepts undermines their ability to take part in the democratic process. . . .Dr. Miller's data reveal some yawning gaps in basic knowledge. American adults in general do not understand what molecules are (other than that they are really small). Fewer than a third can identify DNA as a key to heredity. Only about 10 percent know what radiation is. One adult American in five thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth, an idea science had abandoned by the 17th century.
"Our best university graduates are world-class by any definition," Dr. Miller said. "But the second half of our high school population - it's an embarrassment. We have left behind a lot of people."
I thought we weren't supposed to be doing that, leaving children behind, that is. Maybe if we didn't spend so much time arguing about creationism versus evolution (80 years after the Scopes Monkey Trial), we could teach our high schoolers a few of the basics.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 3:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 29, 2005
Bad news from Iraq: Reality TV
You know, I try to remain optimistic. I like to think no matter what minor setbacks we encounter, humanity is progressing toward a more peaceful and enlightened existence. But I am wrong.
According to this NY Times article (via phronesisaical), we have exported a horror to Iraq so great that I feel the need to personally apologize to any Iraqi who is affected. It is so vile that it ranks third - just below death and destruction, and slightly ahead of democracy - out of the most influential exports we've brought to this troubled country. We've brought them reality television.
From the article:
Reality TV could turn out to be the most durable Western import in Iraq. It has taken root with considerably greater ease than American-style democracy. Since spring 2004, when "Materials and Labor" made its debut, a constellation of reality shows has burst onto TV screens across Iraq.True to the genre, "Materials and Labor" has a simple concept at its heart - Al Sharqiya, an Iraqi satellite network, offers Baghdad residents the chance to have homes that were destroyed by the war rebuilt at no cost to them.
This summer, a rival network, Sumeria, began running "Iraq Star," an amateur singing competition that bears more than a passing resemblance to "American Idol."
The disease known as reality television has spread so thoroughly that it led Majid al-Samarraie to say, and I quote, "This is the only good thing we've acquired from the American occupation."
I thought I could ignore reality television and it would go away. "I'll just watch something else," I told myself, not knowing how foolish I was. You can't ignore it. It spreads and adapts, like a viral infection with a 200 IQ. You start out with simple shows, like Survivor and Real World, and the next thing you know you have Who Wants My Mom to Marry a Midget?.
You may think that I'm overreacting, that reality television isn't that bad. But that's just what IT wants you to think. It's so evil that I wouldn't be surprised to learn that IT somehow engineered this whole war just so it could spread to other countries.
I'm sorry Iraq. I'm sorry.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 2:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 26, 2005
Proposition: The division between red and blue is the division between town and country
I was talking with a friend a few days ago about how increasingly divisive American politics has become, and we got onto the subject of the differences between rural and urban America. My friend was prepared to lay down a definitive proposition, that the division between red and blue is essentially a division between city and country.
While I agree with the basic observation, I think it's not that simple and would be interested in finding research on the topic. Yes, if you look at voting patterns, urban areas tend to be blue and rural areas red, but there are so many variables that can be divided along those lines that it's hard to draw any conclusions. For example, minorities live in higher concentrations in cities, and minorities (particularly African-Americans) have voted Democrat. There are many similar variables that you could use - homosexuality, religiosity, perhaps education - to partially explain the cultural differences between rural and urban areas.
But the flip side of that coin raises an interesting question: Do like minds simply flock to certain areas, or is there something about the city that influences people to be more liberal, or something about the country that influences people to be more conservative? 
I think our environment shapes our identities more than we're aware of. Some of the biggest dividers that shape who we are - religion, race, politics - are learned relative to our surrounding environment. Someone who grew up in a rural, predominantly white, extremely religious town will identify, individually and as a group, based on those surroundings. "Country boy" may be as big a part of his personality as his religion or personal beliefs. And as with most formative personality traits, he also identifies based on his opposite, the city. This is why many rural conservaties fear and cannot fathom the prospect of legal marriage rights for homosexuals. And why urban liberals have absolutely no idea why it is important for rural farmer to be able to have a gun collection.
I've lived in some of the most rural areas in the country, quite literally out in the middle of the woods, and I've also lived in the heart of major cities, and sometimes it seems like they are two completely different countries. But both my friend and I agreed, we were better off for having lived in both regions, and while we may not share the group solidarity with either group, we understand them both a little better.
Personally, I think it's a fascinating subject, and this is one of the reasons I enjoyed Sociology in college. Every action we take or idea we have, as individuals or as a society, can be represented by a number and plotted or mapped. The patterns we unconsciously form can be analyzed to reveal common elements in certain people and certain actions. Granted, there are always exceptions. There will always be liberals in red areas and conservatives in blue areas, but the trends that form suggest actions, ideas, and even beliefs, are not random or entirely individual. Somewhere in the numbers of our lives lies answers to human nature and the mysteries of society.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 6:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 25, 2005
Herbert on racial profiling
From Bob Herbert at the NYTimes:
The Bush administration has punished a Justice Department official who dared to tell even a mild truth about racial profiling by law enforcement officers in this country.In 2001 President Bush selected Lawrence Greenfeld to head the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which tracks crime patterns and police tactics, among other things. But as Eric Lichtblau of The Times reported in a front-page article yesterday, Mr. Greenfeld is being demoted because he complained that senior political officials were seeking to play down newly compiled data about the aggressive treatment of black and Hispanic drivers by police officers.
My first thought when I read the story was that burying the messenger who tells uncomfortable truths has always been a favorite tactic of this administration, which seems to exist largely in a world of fantasy. (Grown-ups don't do well in the Bush playtime environment. Remember Gen. Eric Shinseki? And former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill?)
My second thought was of a couple of stories from several years ago that dramatically illustrated the differences in the ways that white and black drivers can be treated.
Rachel Ellen Ondersma was a 17-year-old high school senior when she was stopped by the police in Grand Rapids, Mich., on Nov. 14, 1998. She had been driving erratically, the police said, and when she failed a Breathalyzer test, she was placed under arrest.
An officer cuffed Ms. Ondersma's hands behind her and left her alone in the back seat of a police cruiser. What happened after that was captured on a video camera mounted inside the vehicle. And while it would eventually be shown on the Fox television program "World's Wackiest Police Videos," it was not funny.The camera offered a clear view through the cruiser's windshield. The microphone picked up the sound of Ms. Ondersma sobbing, then the clink of the handcuffs as she began maneuvering to free herself. She apparently stepped through her arms so her hands, still cuffed, were in front of her. Then she climbed into the front seat, started the engine and roared off. With the car hurtling along, tires squealing, Ms. Ondersma could be heard moaning, "What am I doing?" and, "They are going to have to kill me."
She roared onto a freeway, where she was clocked by pursuing officers at speeds up to 80 miles per hour. She crashed into a concrete barrier, and officers, thinking they had her boxed in, jumped out of their vehicles. But Ms. Ondersma backed up, then lurched forward and plowed into one of the police cars.
Gunfire could be heard as the police began shooting out her tires. The teenager backed up, lurched forward and crashed into the cop car again. An officer had to leap out of the way to keep from being struck.
Ms. Ondersma tried to speed away once more, but by then at least two of her tires were flat and she could no longer control the vehicle. She crashed into another concrete divider and was finally surrounded.
As I watched the videotape, I was amazed at the way she was treated when she was pulled from the cruiser. The police did not seem particularly upset. They were not rough with her, and no one could be heard cursing. One officer said: "Calm down, all right? I think you've caused enough trouble for one day."
Ms. Ondersma is white. As I watched the video, I kept thinking about an incident on the New Jersey Turnpike in April 1998 in which four young men in a van were pulled over by state troopers. Three of the men were black and one was Hispanic. They were neither drunk nor abusive. But their van did roll slowly backward, accidentally bumping the leg of one of the troopers and striking the police vehicle.
The troopers drew their weapons and opened fire. When the shooting stopped, three of the four young men had been shot and seriously wounded.
The beginning of the end of Lawrence Greenfeld's tenure as director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics came a few months ago, as his agency was completing a major study showing that black and Hispanic drivers were treated more aggressively than whites when stopped by the police.
Mr. Greenfeld was overruled when he tried to include references to these disparities in a news release announcing the findings of the study. The study was then buried in the bowels of the Bush bureaucracy.
Mr. Greenfeld obviously failed to understand that the preferred methods of dealing with uncomfortable facts in the fantasyland of the Bush administration are to ignore them, or simply wish them away.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 4:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 24, 2005
Tyson Foods sued for 'Whites Only' bathroom
From US Newswire via Majikthise.
ASHLAND, Ala., Aug. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- A lawsuit filed today alleges that Tyson Foods Inc. is responsible for maintaining a segregated bathroom and break room, reminiscent of the Jim Crow era, in its Ashland, Ala. chicken processing plant. Twelve African-American employees filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, alleging that a "Whites Only" sign and a padlock denied them access to a bathroom in the Ashland plant. The complaint states that numerous white employees had keys to the bathroom that were not provided to African-American workers.The African-American employees' complaint also alleges that, after they complained about the segregated bathroom, the plant manager told them that the bathroom had been locked because they were "dirty" and announced the closing of the break room. According to the complaint, the same white employees who had keys to the "Whites Only" bathroom formed their own, private break room, using Tyson materials to construct the furniture. Initially, a locked door segregated the private break room. To the present day, locked cabinets and a locked refrigerator maintain a private break room. [US Newswire]
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 2:38 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 19, 2005
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity with New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory
Oh The Onion, how I love thee:
KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held "theory of gravity" is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling. Rev. Gabriel Burdett explains Intelligent Falling."Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.
According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God's Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.
The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue "so they can make an informed decision."
Is there anything better than good satire? I think not.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 5:17 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 17, 2005
How global is our empathy?
Raise your hand if you've heard about today's bombings in Bangladesh. Anyone? No? More than 300 explosions took place in over 50 cities across the country, and the story is nowhere to be found on the CNN or FoxNews websites.
A few weeks ago, the mainstream media was plastered with news of the London bombings. Regular programming was interrupted for special broadcasts; blogs stopped their usual partisan bickering to post about the tragedy and display little yellow ribbon icons that said "We support you London." It was a big deal.
But when an Egyptian resort was bombed a few days later, there were no "We support you Egypt" ribbons to be found. And now when a similar attack happens in Bangladesh, it barely registers on the media's radar. The only place I found coverage was on BBC (via Fark.com).
What is it that makes one so much more tragic than the other? Why do the London bombings impact people emotionally more than the Bangladesh bombings? Is it because one nation is our ally and the other not? Is it because one nation is developed and the other not? Is it because one nation is predominantely white and the other not?
I'm not making accusations of overt racism or predjudice. But I am suggesting that one of the above, or a combination, makes it easier for Americans to extend our collective identity toward Londoners, to include them in the collective "we". If it can happen in London, it could happen hear, the line of thinking goes. But if it happens in Bangladesh... well... where the hell is that?
It is in no way wrong to express sympathy for European victims of terrorist attacks. But to completely ignore brown people getting blown up sends a troubling message. This is why I don't wear the little yellow ribbons. I refuse to distinguish morally between a civilian from London dying and a civilian from Bangaldesh dying and a civilian from Iraq dying (whether by terrorist attack or American bomb). It's not that I don't empathize with each of these victims, but I don't have room on my shirt for that many ribbons.
The global struggle against violent extremism formerly known as the war on terror is supposed to be global. If America wants to convince the world that this is not a war against Islam, or another war against "brown people", then perhaps we should step back and ask why the media (and the public) doesn't seem to care as much when these acts of violent extremism happen outside the United States or Europe.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 4:41 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 16, 2005
These booths are made for Walken
A Christopher Walken for President website has been floating around the Internets lately and getting a lot of people excited. Naturally, it is a prank. Although he would probably do wonders for the nation's cowbell supply, it's hard to say the phrase, President Christopher Walken, with a straight face.
But apparently, it's not so ridiculous for some. Afterall, we've had one actor turned President, and an actor who once played a PREGNANT MAN is now governor of California. Several blogs and websites took the bait, including fark.com and Donklephant (one of my new favorite blogs, if for nothing other than the awesome name).
I really have no point in this post. I just really wanted to publish that title.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 9:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 15, 2005
People for the Ethical Treatment of PEOPLE!
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is running a new controversial exhibit called "Are Animals the new Slaves?" which compares the treatment of animals to the historic enslavement and lynchings of blacks. Naturally, people are in an uproar over this, claiming the PETA campaign is racist and an insult to all the slaves and lynching victims who have suffered in the past.
David Carr, director of special projects for PETA, has maintained that the exhibit, which is currently touring the country, leaves people with "something to chew on."
"People have shouted at us for comparing black people to animals. But the exhibit also compares other cruelties — women being denied the right to vote, children forced into labor," Carr said.
Could Carr be suggesting that we give chickens the right to vote? Or maybe we should implement labor laws for horses and set them up with a fat pension?
The philosophy of PETA's insulting comparison is based on the notion that humans and other animals are deserving of the same rights. In the PETA world, not only would humans from across the globe walk hand in hand, but we would also live in perfect harmony with every other creature on the planet. Nothing on the planet would quibble with anything else, and the only possible threat to this non-stop love-fest would be an unexpected alien invasion.
Maybe I'm being facetious, but I think PETA's priorities are a little off when they presume that animal suffering is in any way comparable to human slavery. Sure, animal cruelty is an important issue, but before we go and start uniting the species as one, we should work on uniting our own. Once we can get past the religious, racial, ethnic, political, and national boundaries that cause us to steal from, enslave, and kill each other, then we can ask the important questions, like: What's for dinner, chicken or beef?
More from: Steve Gilliard, Crooked Timber, Majikthise
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 9:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 13, 2005
I should have prepared a speech
I don't know much about the Chicago Sun-Times, but I'm sure they are the definitive authority on such subjects as weblog headlines. Afterall, columnist Zay Smith recently awarded Ablogistan the weblog headline of the week award (see here, second item down):
Weblog Headline of the Week: Ablogistan.com (www.ablogistan.com) regarding fundamentalist Christian attacks on Harry Potter: "Harry Potter and the Half-Wit Stance."
If I have any complaints, it is that I was not formally presented with an award or allowed to deliver an acceptance speech. I only came across the article by chance.
But to be honest, I was just surprised that someone from an actual newspaper was reading this stuff.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 5:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 12, 2005
In Boston, even the wildlife is liberal
In Texas, nearly all of the animals were strictly heterosexual. Granted, some may have experimented when they were young and in college, but most were afraid to pursue anything serious in such a conservative social climate.
I thought Boston would be different. It's supposed to be the heart of liberal America, but when it comes to their wildlife, Bostonians don't seem to be any more tolerant than Texans as this Boston globe article shows:
Boston's beloved pair of swans -- feted by city leaders, residents, and tourists alike as one of the Hub's most celebrated summer attractions -- are a same-sex couple. Yes, scientific tests have shown that the pair, named Romeo and Juliet, are really Juliet and Juliet.The city's Parks and Recreation Department conducted the tests months ago, but didn't announce the results for fear of destroying the image of a Shakespearean love story unfolding each year in the Public Garden.
Some advocates involved in the heated debate on same-sex marriage took the opportunity to rejuvenate their argument, with a touch of levity.
''I think this proves that there's something in the environment in Massachusetts," Brian Camenker, director of the Article 8 Alliance, a Waltham-based organization fighting same-sex marriage, joked in a telephone interview. ''Maybe it's the water that's causing all this lunacy."
Yes, you read correctly. The director of an organization fighting against same-sex marriage is suggesting that something in the water has turned the swans gay. This startling discovery should add fuel to the debate of whether homosexuality is a choice or a result of poorly filtered water.
But whether it's the water or not, this discovery will intensify the debate over the morality of homosexuality because it will prove one of two things. Either homosexuality is a phenomenon that occurs naturally, or... even swans can burn in hell for eternity.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 4:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 10, 2005
Not as catchy as 867-5309
From the Boston Phoenix:
A few weeks ago, we introduced you to Brooklyn indie agit-popsters Kids Against Combs, who’d just finished an album that used the private phone number of Fox News loudmouth Sean Hannity as its title. (See "Combs Nail Hannity," This Just In, July 15.)Sean Hannity (631) 673-8003 was set to be released on July 21 by 10-34 Records. But, according to a press release sent out last week by the band, Kids Against Combs and 10-34 were issued papers on July 15 from Hannity’s attorneys, "threatening to sue both parties if they proceeded with releasing an album named after Hannity’s home phone number and containing the political pundit’s home address in the CD’s liner notes." (The digits, meanwhile, are now disconnected; "changed to an unlisted number," says the recording.)
The band also alleges that spies from the Hannity camp — or at least some people who "looked extremely conservative Republican" and "not the type of folk that would be at any sort of live performance, except for maybe Paul Anka or Wayne Newton" — arrived to scope out a KAC performance the next day. Luckily, the band had freshly printed copies of the album for sale, sans home address and retitled The Album Formerly Known As Sean Hannity’s Phone Number ... Currently Sean Hannity Is a Democracy Subverting Douche Bag.
Despite the fact that 66 percent of our Style and Usage Panel prefer that "douchebag" be written as a compound word, they’re in unanimous agreement that the new title works just as well.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 5:23 PM | Comments (47) | TrackBack
Random thought
Is "stealing" Internet access from a nearby wireless network morally wrong? Link to inspiration
(I couldn't have posted the two entries on August 5 without using my neighbor's network. A week is just too long to wait for the cable company to set up my Internets).
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 5:21 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 5, 2005
Unintelligently designed?
Rick Santorum is someone who is often thought of as an ally to the radical right-wingers who push for the teaching of "intelligent design" in publicly funded schools. But Thursday, Santorum disagreed with President Bush's call for the teaching of the alternative to evolution, saying intelligent design lacked credibility in the scientific community. Click here to listen for yourself:
"I think I would probably tailor that a little more than what the president has suggested...I'm not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom."
Granted, Santorum says teachers should focus on holes and flaws in evolutionary theory, but he doesn't say intelligent design is a viable alternative. This is almost a 180-degree turn from what he wrote in a 2002 Washington Times column:
"Research has shown that the odds that even one small protein molecule has been created by chance is 1 in a billion. Thus, some larger force or intelligence, or what some call agent causation, seems like a viable cause for creating information systems such as the coding of DNA. A number of scientists contend that alternate theories regarding the origins of the human species — including that of a greater intelligence — are possible."Therefore, intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes.
"Yet, opponents of intelligent design contend that by including the theory in the new teaching standards, the separation of church and state will be weakened. This is false. Proponents of intelligent design are not trying to teach religion via science, but are trying to establish the validity of their theory as a scientific alternative to Darwinism."
If you were a cynical political pundit, you could point out that Santorum has flip-flopped, and you could even say he was for intelligent design before he was against it. But I don't want to play partisan games. Republicans are entitled to change their minds, as a Democrats, without it being held against them.
But as this is my second "intelligent design" post for the day, I have to take issue with the name of this alternative theory. Maybe life in the universe is too complex to have been creatively. But if the designer provided more than just an initial spark, if It really, purposefully designed the human race, one has to wonder: With all the suffering, death, destruction, war, prospect of global warming, prospect of nuclear destruction, and reality television... how intelligent was this designer?
Not to be pessimistic, but maybe he/she/it fu**ed up.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 9:44 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
First post from Beantown
OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARDI am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.
Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.
It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith.
Some find that hard to believe, so it may be helpful to tell you a little more about our beliefs. We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it. We have several lengthy volumes explaining all details of His power. Also, you may be surprised to hear that there are over 10 million of us, and growing. We tend to be very secretive, as many people claim our beliefs are not substantiated by observable evidence. What these people don’t understand is that He built the world to make us think the earth is older than it really is. For example, a scientist may perform a carbon-dating process on an artifact. He finds that approximately 75% of the Carbon-14 has decayed by electron emission to Nitrogen-14, and infers that this artifact is approximately 10,000 years old, as the half-life of Carbon-14 appears to be 5,730 years. But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage. We have numerous texts that describe in detail how this can be possible and the reasons why He does this. He is of course invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease.
I’m sure you now realize how important it is that your students are taught this alternate theory. It is absolutely imperative that they realize that observable evidence is at the discretion of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. Furthermore, it is disrespectful to teach our beliefs without wearing His chosen outfit, which of course is full pirate regalia. I cannot stress the importance of this, and unfortunately cannot describe in detail why this must be done as I fear this letter is already becoming too long. The concise explanation is that He becomes angry if we don’t.
You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature.
In conclusion, thank you for taking the time to hear our views and beliefs. I hope I was able to convey the importance of teaching this theory to your students. We will of course be able to train the teachers in this alternate theory. I am eagerly awaiting your response, and hope dearly that no legal action will need to be taken. I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence.
Sincerely Yours,
Bobby Henderson, concerned citizen.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 3:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 1, 2005
A little Monday morning perspective...
I've seen this video before, a long time ago, and came across it again today through Alas. It was inspired by Donella Meadows' writings on sustainability, a subject I was very interested in at one time, before there were multiple wars and an increasingly radical right-wing political movement to keep my attention.
An teaser:
If we could turn the population of the earth into a small community of 100 people, keeping the same proportions we have today, it would be something like this:61 Asians
12 Europeans
14 Americans (from North and South America)
13 Africans
01 Australian (Oceania)50 women
50 men67 are not christian
33 are christian (Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox)
The video goes more in-depth about the breakdown of wealth and education among these 100 people (i.e. 6 people own 59% of the wealth, etc). So, what are you waiting for... CLICK HERE TO WATCH IT.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari at 4:19 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack