Wednesday, October 1, 2014

TIME Indulges Dawkins and His Toady

TIME online has published a - what should I call it? - article By Richard Dawkins and the head of his organization. They are incensed that anyone, especially a pol, would disrespect Atheists. Dawkins, whose mantra at the Reason Conference was to ridicule, RIDICULE, those who Atheists disagree with, declares such disrespect to be HATE, when he is on the receiving end of criticism.
"Unfortunately, not only does Huckabee have to be taken seriously as a possible Presidential candidate in 2016, but his suggestion that atheists who work for the government (primarily elected officials) be summarily “fired” is an applause line in too many quarters in the United States. That nonbelievers somehow deserve to be discriminated against is a view widely shared, particularly among Christian conservatives who seem to think “religion by the sword” is an oldie but a goodie.

This latest bit of hate was offered up – where else? – at the 2014 Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C. The ritual hookup between Christian conservatives and Republican presidential aspirants is a right wing, Jesus-loves-us debauch of Homophobia, Intolerance and Militarism, a trifecta easily remembered by the acronym “HIM”."
Atheists are hypocrites of the first order. They cannot comprehend why they are not trusted. But they feel totally justified in slinging their "trifecta" slurs: non-Atheists do this: Hate Homosexuals (homophobia); Are Intolerant of the "Do Anything I please" amorality of Atheism; Are guilty of defending the western nations from the barbarians using The Military. We Atheists will call it HIM for short, meaning The Other.

They are not speaking here to the normal person on the street. They are not even talking to Atheists any more. They are merely berserkoids out on a tear, angry possibly because no one ever listens to them any more. Here they go off on the metaphor "fired" without any comprehension that it means: vote them out:
"Huckabee, in a tortured metaphor about answering phones “God is ringing,” exhorted his audience to answer the God-call by making sure only people with the right values are hired for jobs in Washington and by making sure those who “refuse to hear … God’s heart” are fired. No joke, Huckabee is suggesting that we should: 1) Find out whether government employees are true believers; 2) Fire those who aren’t.

Yes, that is illegal, which makes the suggestion all the more stunning from someone who expects to be taken seriously on America’s national political stage."
Aside from not being an American, Dawkins is also no longer rational. What Huckabee means is that there are values which are "valuable" and which stem from a morality outside the elitist self; those contrast with the Leftist "values" which are merely the opinions of the elitist Leftists who want to dictate their opinions as moral values,which are actually valuable only to themselves.
"This Republican congressional candidate in Louisiana and nephew of “Duck Dynasty” patriarch Phil Robertson, suggested on his faith-based podcast that atheism contributed to the Sandy Hook massacre of 20 children and six adults in 2012.

Apparently, the premier driver was not the mental illness from which shooter Adam Lanza clearly suffered, nor was it that an unstable man was able legally to amass a stockpile of weapons, thanks to his mother supplying them.

According to Dasher, “the reason why (the Sandy Hook massacre) happened is that we have denied as a culture that man is made in God’s image.” He said the “atheist agenda” reinforces a message that says “you don’t matter … all you are is chemical, all you are is material.”
Dasher is right, especially in the case of Columbine, where the two teens were fans of Nietzsche, and likely in the case of Lanza, in an education system that preaches Evolution, secularism, and Atheism, the religion of demeaning human life as purely physical animal, while denying any and all possibility of non-physical existence. Atheism has no common moral base or grounding, no common set of moral principles, nothing at all to base a life and worldview upon except the fact that humans evolved just the same as gorillas, turkeys and bottom-feeding fish.

But they go on:
"Had Dasher bothered to find out about atheism, humanism and the nonreligious, he would have come to understand just how precious this community views life.

Unlike Dasher, who believes there is another existence – a better one — outside the temporal, atheists, humanists and freethinkers believe they have one life and one chance to do something meaningful with it. With no supernatural arbiter to fall back on, nonbelievers know it is up to them and them alone to promote justice, compassion and a fair society."
And if one cares to actually examine Humanism, for example, one would find the totalitarian, intolerant, elitist anti-moral group of misogynists that one finds in any collection of Atheists, Humanists and freethinkers. They always disguise this as justice, compassion, and a fair society. Which is why they are not only not trusted by rational non-Atheists, but are actually trusted to do only that which they "feel" is right for themselves, regardless of any morality of the Other.
"The proof that secular people are good, care for others and build healthy societies is evidenced in cross-national studies. The research of Phil Zuckerman at Pitzer College, demonstrates that secular societies, such as Sweden and Denmark, among others, are more likely to enjoy broadly shared prosperity and a high level of societal health and happiness than traditionally religious ones, and certainly more so than the United States."
Still quoting the fraudulent data from Zuckerman, too. That is pitiful, especially since it is so fundamentally wrong: the real, major Atheist societies in the past 100 years are not Sweden and Denmark, they are the USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. When these "secular", Atheist tyrannies are taken into account, Atheism is seen for what it really is: elitist totalitarian destructivism.

And as for "good", well it was this same Dawkins who declared that he could not say that what Hitler did was wrong. There is no "Good" or "Bad", nor is there "Good" or "Evil"; Nietzsche informed the world of that. No Atheist can be Good because there is no Atheist standard for Good. Conversely, no Atheist can be accused of being "Evil" because there is no standard for Evil.

It's so obvious that any competent adult can see it:
Any Atheist who claims to be Good is lying.
And lying is not bad or evil to an Atheist. It's merely consequentialist. It's just a tactic.

And quoting a self-appelled "evolutionary psychologist" doesn't resonate with anyone but the choir: Gregory Paul makes up Just So Stories based on no substance whatsoever.
"The historically unprecedented socioeconomic
security that results from low levels of progressive government policies appear to suppress
popular religiosity and creationist opinion, conservative religious ideology apparently
contributes to societal dysfunction, and religious prosociality and charity are less effective at
improving societal conditions than are secular government programs."
Paul makes the error in cause/effect because he claims to be an Atheist-evolutionist, and fitting the narrative is what these folks do. But reality is that abandoning faith in good times merely refers to the self-centered worldview that one develops when challenges in life lessen. Humans always assume that they are the cause of good times, and therefore, the good times will continue so long as they exist. And it always ends in decadence and the rise of totalitarianism: in other words, Atheist elitist "humanist" dictatorship of "Social Justice".

In fact, Gregory Paul appears to be a non-degreed fraud:
"So who is Gregory S. Paul and what are his qualifications to opine on the salubrious quality of agnosticism? We spent a considerable amount of time attempting to discover where Mr. (Dr.?) Paul received his training in sociology and/or statistical analysis, etc. Here’s what we found:



The above blank space is not a formatting error of some kind. It is the best we could come up with to signify nada, zero, zip, bupkis, nihilo, nothing. Yes, that’s right. We found nothing. As near as we can tell, Mr. Paul has no advanced degrees in statistical analysis, demography, sociology, or any other ology. In fact, it appears as though he holds no advanced degrees of any kind. He is, in fact, an artist and freelance paleontologist who has published two books in the area of dinosaur studies that re-imagine how they may have lived and operated on this planet. And to be fair, Mr. Paul seems to be respected for this work."

Verum Serum
But they, Dawkins and droid, veer ever Leftward as most Atheists do, toward communalism, aka communism, run by the elites:
"“(W)hen we consider the fundamental values and moral imperatives contained within the world’s great religions, such as caring for the sick, the infirm, the elderly, the poor, the orphaned, the vulnerable; practicing mercy, charity, and goodwill toward one’s fellow human beings; and fostering generosity, humility, honesty, and communal concern over individual egotism — those traditionally religious values are most successfully established, institutionalized, and put into practice at the societal level in the most irreligious nations in the world today."
So the actual Atheist nations, those who dominated the past 100 years, "put into practice" all the virtues mentioned above, which are actually attributable to religion, mostly Christianity? Anyone who reads either newsfeeds or cares a single whit about the history of world political cultures would gag at this assertion. North Korea? China? The USSR? Cambodia? Venezuela? Cuba? Really?

No, just the two relatively inconsequential countries mentioned by Phil Zuckerman, data which has actually been debunked.

Bayesian Statistics, in the News

The NY Times discovers Bayesian Statistical Calculations, and even gives a shout out to the obvious problems with it:
"One downside of Bayesian statistics is that it requires prior information — and often scientists need to start with a guess or estimate. Assigning numbers to subjective judgments is “like fingernails on a chalkboard,” said physicist Kyle Cranmer, who helped develop a frequentist technique to identify the latest new subatomic particle — the Higgs boson.

Others say that in confronting the so-called replication crisis, the best cure for misleading findings is not Bayesian statistics, but good frequentist ones. It was frequentist statistics that allowed people to uncover all the problems with irreproducible research in the first place, said Deborah Mayo, a philosopher of science at Virginia Tech. The technique was developed to distinguish real effects from chance, and to prevent scientists from fooling themselves.

Uri Simonsohn, a psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, agrees. Several years ago, he published a paper that exposed common statistical shenanigans in his field — logical leaps, unjustified conclusions, and various forms of unconscious and conscious cheating.

He said he had looked into Bayesian statistics and concluded that if people misused or misunderstood one system, they would do just as badly with the other. Bayesian statistics, in short, can’t save us from bad science."

[emphasis added]
It's actually worse than that. It is a favorite of ideological hacks who place their ideology into the equation up front, thereby getting the results they want rather than objective knowledge. Bayesian calculations are an open invitation to pretend that circular arguments are justified statistically.

That's not to say that with legitimate use of non-biased input, Bayes calculations can't be valuable, as in the case of the fisherman rescued by the Coast Guard which used Bayes to anticipate the location of the drifting man. But that uses known information, regarding physical data which is not ideological as an input to the calculation. That is far different from trying to calculate, say, the existence of a deity, where any input is prejudiced by definition.

Whenever Bayes is used, the calculations must ALWAYS be scrutinized for bias, because in some venues they always will be. And that is, indeed, like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Death Panels Are Not Needed When Hospitals DNR You At Will...

If medical personnel get away with this, then they are the death panels:
"Douglas DeGuerre was an 88-year old retired school custodian and a World War II veteran. He loved hockey, reading, and music. Unfortunately, he also suffered from medical problems including diabetes, high blood pressure, and congestive heart failure.

On September 17, 2008, DeGuerre required amputation of both his lower legs. Although he was seriously ill, he still wanted to live. He and his family repeatedly told his doctors that he wanted to be a “full code,” meaning that he wished to be resuscitated in case of cardiac arrest. This was duly recorded in his hospital chart.

Five days later, the medical staff changed his status from “full code” to “DNR” (“do not resuscitate”) without consulting him or his daughter Joy Wawrzyniak, who had medical power of attorney. When Wawrzyniak came to visit her father that day, she found him struggling to breathe. Wawrzyniak (a registered nurse) grabbed an oxygen bag and tried to help her father, while begging from assistance from the hospital staff. The medical staff stood back and did nothing. DeGuerre died of cardiac arrest. According to Wawrzyniak her father’s last words were, “I’m drowning, I’m drowning.”"
Despite being illegal, it is being done. Moreover, it is just moving the act from the insurer (government bureaucrats looking at charts) to hospital staff.
"As Goldenberger notes:

In Canada, with our single-payer health care system, Rasouli’s situation has a very public bottom line: Should taxpayers foot the bill for his family’s indefinite goodbye?… When taxpayers provide only a finite number of acute care beds in public hospitals, a patient whose life has all but ended, but whose family insists on keeping her on life support, is occupying precious space that might otherwise house a patient whose best years are still ahead.

(Goldenberger also notes that, “The board is instructed by law to focus on the patient’s best interests, not the health care system’s, or the government’s bottom line.”)

Although Goldenberger recognizes that his approach would make most Americans “apoplectic,” he raises an important — and legitimate — point. Any government-funded health care system must necessarily set limits on medical spending. No government can issue a blank check for unlimited medical care for everyone. The only issue is where and how it draws that line."

[Emphasis Added]

Victims Tire of Their Messiah-Parasites

Monday, September 29, 2014

Things One May Not Say: The War on Free Speech

The Left will not allow contrary information to be disseminated if it can help it. Obama has attacked news outlets for allowing more news to reach the public than he likes. College campuses are now rampantly attacking any non-congruent opinions that might show up in speakers on their campuses. One leftist professor became violent when she came across a pro-life demonstration in a "free speech zone" (why are those necessary?), stealing a placard and striking one demonstrator who attempted to retrieve it. The rise in commencement speakers who have been run off by Leftist demonstrators has risen exponentially.

Even more dangerous is the trend toward demanding the incarceration and even death of those who disagree with major ideological tenets of the Left, especially AGW – now called Climate Justice. And the blackballing of academic applicants who question evolution is wide spread and well documented, as is the vitriol spewed by academics and sycophants against “Climate Deniers” who are equated with Holocaust Deniers as maximally evil and deludedly anti-science.

The current frenzy is “sexual assault”, the fav of the feministas who currently drive the Leftist culture. The drive against the “patriarchy”, meaning all men in general, now is the moral commandment du jour, as all Leftists bow in obeisance to whatever new directives the RadFems dictate. So when anyone questions the current moral dictates, even gently, the conversation is shut down immediately:



The current political environment is that of the constant LIE, where anything and everything which is said by the Leftists in control of the US Government is false, deliberately deceptive and ideologically manipulative. The administration is NOT the most transparent ever, is NOT truthful about any of the dozens of constitutional violations and scandals, and even deaths due to those violations and scandals. This sort of intellectually inverted environment is an underlying cause for the constant silencing attacks on all information which is contrary to their agenda and narrative.

Roger Simon has written,
“There is a sense in which the triumph of political correctness erodes free speech chiefly by negative means. It promulgates speech codes, rules against “hate speech,” and the like, but I suspect that its gravest damage is done by instilling a timidity of spirit among its charges. A reluctance to speak the truth instills an unwillingness or even inability to see the truth. Thus it is that the reign of political correctness quietly aids and abets habits of complacency and unfreedom.

This atmosphere of supine anesthesia is an invitation to tyranny. I was shocked to learn when at Winchester that Senate Democrats, led by Harry Reid, had actually introduced a bill to challenge key provisions of the First Amendment. Yes, you read that aright. Democratic senators have proposed to gut the First Amendment. If passed, the provision would enable Congress to ban movies, books, and other forms of expression that bore on political controversies. Breathtaking, is it not? As far as I can tell from here, public response to this outrageous attack on free speech has been muted. Republican Senator Ted Cruz had the right idea when he proposed replacing the Democratic proposal with the text of the First Amendment itself. His clever rejoinder, however, was unanimously rejected by the Democrats at the hearing. The First Amendment protects free speech, especially as it bears on political debate. But it is precisely such freedom that is anathema to those of our masters who prefer their citizens submissive.

It took several centuries and much blood and toil to wrest freedom from the recalcitrant forces of arbitrary power. It is a melancholy fact that what took ages to achieve can be undone in the twinkling of an eye. It seems to me that we are at a crossroads where our complacency colludes dangerously with the blunt opportunism of events. Courage, Aristotle once observed, is the most important virtue because without courage we are unable to practice the other virtues. The life of freedom requires the courage to recognize and to name the realities that impinge upon us. Day is Night. Peace is War. Love is Hate. Out of such linguistic capitulations, Orwell showed in 1984, totalitarian tyranny is born. We’ve all read the book. Have we learned that hard lesson?”

The arrogance of the Left coupled with the ignorance of the populace – schooled only in Leftist doctrine by government schools and otherwise maleducated and dependent, interested only in Hollywood’s Leftist star’s coupling and decoupling – will likely bring us as a nation to the point of no return from the necessity of renewed bloodshed in order to regain the freedoms being wrested away in the pursuit of Leftist totalitarian utopia. Those who revere the constitution have already been put on watch lists by the Administration; we are potential domestic terrorists, where Islamic killings are just “workplace violence” (still known to the Left as The Religion of Peace). The US Government now places itself as the enemy of the common American, the final inversion that the Left requires for its totalitarian grip.

Obama Unable To Tell the Truth, Therefore Korosan Group Created

The Khorosan Group Does Not Exist
It’s a fictitious name the Obama administration invented to deceive us.


"You haven’t heard of the Khorosan Group because there isn’t one. It is a name the administration came up with, calculating that Khorosan — the –Iranian–​Afghan border region — had sufficient connection to jihadist lore that no one would call the president on it.

The “Khorosan Group” is al-Qaeda. It is simply a faction within the global terror network’s Syrian franchise, “Jabhat al-Nusra.” Its leader, Mushin al-Fadhli (believed to have been killed in this week’s U.S.-led air strikes), was an intimate of Ayman al-Zawahiri, the emir of al-Qaeda who dispatched him to the jihad in Syria. Except that if you listen to administration officials long enough, you come away thinking that Zawahiri is not really al-Qaeda, either. Instead, he’s something the administration is at pains to call “core al-Qaeda.”

“Core al-Qaeda,” you are to understand, is different from “Jabhat al-Nusra,” which in turn is distinct from “al-Qaeda in Iraq” (formerly “al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia,” now the “Islamic State” al-Qaeda spin-off that is, itself, formerly “al-Qaeda in Iraq and al-Sham” or “al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Levant”). That al-Qaeda, don’t you know, is a different outfit from al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula . . . which, of course, should never be mistaken for “al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb,” “Boko Haram,” “Ansar al-Sharia,” or the latest entry, “al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent.”

Coming soon, “al-Qaeda on Hollywood and Vine.” In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if, come 2015, Obama issued an executive order decreeing twelve new jihad jayvees stretching from al-Qaeda in January through al-Qaeda in December."

Friday, September 26, 2014

Holder Bolts

The injustice of Eric Holder

"Contrary to what liberal elites think, the average American isn’t dumb and can see when someone is abusing his office and allowing politics to drive his decision-making. They may think they can fool the American people, but that is a mistake that many arrogant politicians and government officials have made in the past, and Mr. Holder is just another in a long line of such government officials. From his misbehavior in everything from the New Black Panther voter-intimidation case to Operation Fast and Furious to the IRS targeting scandal, Mr. Holder has shown the public why he is the first and only attorney general in our history to be held in contempt by the House of Representatives.

As a longtime, current employee of the Justice Department told us, Mr. Holder and his subordinates have “racialized and radicalized” the department “to the point of corruption.” They have “embedded politically leftist extremists in the career ranks who have an agenda that does not comport with equal protection or the rule of law; who believe that the ends justify the means; and who behave unprofessionally and unethically. Their policy is to intimidate and threaten employees who do not agree with their politics, and even moderate Democrats have left the department, because they were treated as enemies by administration officials and their lackeys. Another black employee who has worked for the Justice Department for decades said to me, ‘There is no justice left in Justice under this administration.’"
Holder has transparently been at war with America, and he has radicalized the Justice Department to carry this war forward. Should a constitution-friendly president be elected next, s/he will have to completely purge this - and many other - federal departments.

Headline of the Day

Happy 18th Birthday No Global Warming! After Nearly Two Decades, We're Still Waiting for the Climate to Change
...with 'bated breath...