01:26:14 - the guy say's "I'll" whereas everyone everyone else up to that point says
"I will"
"does not"
"is not"
"has not"
"shall not"
blah blah bullshit.
Beautifully shot crap. I shall continue to watch it until the end.
Thursday, 16 June 2011
Monday, 6 June 2011
Atheist Logos
I was thinking of getting some T-shirts with atheist logos and/or statements on them. At first I thought most were pretty good but then I started asking my self the question about how inflammatory they are in public, e.g. I could wear a T-shirt that said "infidel" in Arabic, or even English, but that is just likely to get me in beef with the locals. I could get one that targets Islam in less aggressive ways, showing a Qu'Ran (Koran?) with a line through it, but even next to a Bible with a line through it still has racist implications.
I like my current logo on here "Hell - admit one", but then I thought to myself an atheist knows there is no hell so it's not a true reflection of my beliefs or knowledge. And that also meant that 4 nails + 1 cross = 1 dead motherfucker is also not viable, as it implies Jesus existed in the first place. Someone probably did fill that role around that time but it's still all a bit suspicious.
It left me thinking the only kind of slogan I could really sport was one that would be amusing to people already on my wavelength, and that kinda defeats the point unless I can recruit more to the cause by my actions.
So two blogs in a row talking about recruitment. I may have to give more thought to this. The Atheist's club? The Allied Atheist Alliance? United League of Atheists? I may have to do some facebooking on this one.
I like my current logo on here "Hell - admit one", but then I thought to myself an atheist knows there is no hell so it's not a true reflection of my beliefs or knowledge. And that also meant that 4 nails + 1 cross = 1 dead motherfucker is also not viable, as it implies Jesus existed in the first place. Someone probably did fill that role around that time but it's still all a bit suspicious.
It left me thinking the only kind of slogan I could really sport was one that would be amusing to people already on my wavelength, and that kinda defeats the point unless I can recruit more to the cause by my actions.
So two blogs in a row talking about recruitment. I may have to give more thought to this. The Atheist's club? The Allied Atheist Alliance? United League of Atheists? I may have to do some facebooking on this one.
The Capacity for Idiocy
So I'm nearing the end of watching The Root of All Evil, which is a boiled down version of Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion. Mainly because I don't like reading books unless it's necessary to pass an exam but I want to understand my own atheism better and develop a strategy to make it effective.
I can't help feeling a bit uninspired from the start when he states that suicide bombers want to die. I don't think that's a true reflection of what's going on in their minds. I also don't like his forthright approach in challenging people's beliefs. I'm more of a Louis Theroux kinda guy, who uses verbal Jiu-jutsu - use your opponents strength against them. Dawkins goes head on and gets nowhere with these people, which is not surprising. The he hops on a plane to Jerusalem and asks a fundamentalist Muslim (Moslem if you prefer) what he thinks about 9/11, shortly after saying to a tour guide pointing out the site of Jesus' crucifixion "you don't really believe that do you?"
What Dawkins fails to acknowledge every step of the way is The Capacity for Idiocy - the inherent ability of mankind to believe what they want to believe. It seems ludicrous that rational, thinking people should believe in a deity and of course they aren't rational thinking people.
Let's put this into context, it has been roughly 30,000 years since homo sapiens reached it's current evolutionary state, and it was only on the 24th of November 1859 that the concept of evolution was first released to the public - a bit less than 152 years ago. Erring on the side of caution that's belief in and worship of deities for at least 29,848 years versus a chance to discard it for just 152. 152/29,848 = 0.0051 or about 0.5%.
Now not only do people like religion, not only has it been ingrained in them since the dawn of the question "why are we here?" not only does it define our culture and customs but moreover, so much more importanly than this is that people, to this day, and for the foreseeable future, do not have the capacity to understand science.
Science is hard - I studied biology, physics, chemistry and mathematics at school and I worked at it because I had a purpose, an ability, support from my parents and teachers. A conducive, nurturing environment. I went on to study maths and physics at A-Level and subsequently Mechanical Engineering. Moreover I wasn't brainwashed into the doctrines of religion, so even my peers who studied at the same level and were better than me - but who were brainwashed - believed in a god.
Not only that, for those that did ever reach some sort of enlightenment on the issue, they would have to turn their back on their own parents, their grandparents, their friends, their lovers - or future lovers. Why should they? What's their incentive? What do they gain by becoming an atheist? Absolutely nothing. There is nothing to be gained by becoming an atheist and only things to lose.
And so The Capacity for Idiocy prevails to this day, the brainwashing continues and as far as I can see the only solution is to teach atheism as a specific course - not just enter it as a subset of religious studies, not just expunge it with science, to formally and forcibly overturn the brainwashing of religion. To indoctrinate free thinking in the masses at primary school. But o-ho the fundamentalists are one step ahead there, amassing themselves and forming lobbyist groups who can steer whole nations.
So I guess we have to amass too. To join together and form groups who cannot be ignored. To recruit, educate, promote, lobby, expand and develop the cause. It seems like the salami approach, one slice at a time, or "change by stealth" as I've also heard that called. I think I prefer the diluting view, add enough fresh water to salt water and it will become drinkable. Or distil the salt out. Getting on a plane to Jerusalem and saying "you don't really believe that do you?" to a few people isn't going to change anything, except to make them more hostile.
I can't help feeling a bit uninspired from the start when he states that suicide bombers want to die. I don't think that's a true reflection of what's going on in their minds. I also don't like his forthright approach in challenging people's beliefs. I'm more of a Louis Theroux kinda guy, who uses verbal Jiu-jutsu - use your opponents strength against them. Dawkins goes head on and gets nowhere with these people, which is not surprising. The he hops on a plane to Jerusalem and asks a fundamentalist Muslim (Moslem if you prefer) what he thinks about 9/11, shortly after saying to a tour guide pointing out the site of Jesus' crucifixion "you don't really believe that do you?"
What Dawkins fails to acknowledge every step of the way is The Capacity for Idiocy - the inherent ability of mankind to believe what they want to believe. It seems ludicrous that rational, thinking people should believe in a deity and of course they aren't rational thinking people.
Let's put this into context, it has been roughly 30,000 years since homo sapiens reached it's current evolutionary state, and it was only on the 24th of November 1859 that the concept of evolution was first released to the public - a bit less than 152 years ago. Erring on the side of caution that's belief in and worship of deities for at least 29,848 years versus a chance to discard it for just 152. 152/29,848 = 0.0051 or about 0.5%.
Now not only do people like religion, not only has it been ingrained in them since the dawn of the question "why are we here?" not only does it define our culture and customs but moreover, so much more importanly than this is that people, to this day, and for the foreseeable future, do not have the capacity to understand science.
Science is hard - I studied biology, physics, chemistry and mathematics at school and I worked at it because I had a purpose, an ability, support from my parents and teachers. A conducive, nurturing environment. I went on to study maths and physics at A-Level and subsequently Mechanical Engineering. Moreover I wasn't brainwashed into the doctrines of religion, so even my peers who studied at the same level and were better than me - but who were brainwashed - believed in a god.
Not only that, for those that did ever reach some sort of enlightenment on the issue, they would have to turn their back on their own parents, their grandparents, their friends, their lovers - or future lovers. Why should they? What's their incentive? What do they gain by becoming an atheist? Absolutely nothing. There is nothing to be gained by becoming an atheist and only things to lose.
And so The Capacity for Idiocy prevails to this day, the brainwashing continues and as far as I can see the only solution is to teach atheism as a specific course - not just enter it as a subset of religious studies, not just expunge it with science, to formally and forcibly overturn the brainwashing of religion. To indoctrinate free thinking in the masses at primary school. But o-ho the fundamentalists are one step ahead there, amassing themselves and forming lobbyist groups who can steer whole nations.
So I guess we have to amass too. To join together and form groups who cannot be ignored. To recruit, educate, promote, lobby, expand and develop the cause. It seems like the salami approach, one slice at a time, or "change by stealth" as I've also heard that called. I think I prefer the diluting view, add enough fresh water to salt water and it will become drinkable. Or distil the salt out. Getting on a plane to Jerusalem and saying "you don't really believe that do you?" to a few people isn't going to change anything, except to make them more hostile.
Sunday, 5 June 2011
Black Swan
Spoiler alert.
I always wanted to be a film critic. Not for money or professionalism of course just I love to slate films. In fact I like to slate EVERYTHING. yummy yum yum.
I was told this was a good film and so I watched it, and it was. I enjoyed seeing the attractive girls dancing around, I liked the mysterious character development and the what's coming next atmosphere. The simple test of whether I get along with a film or not is whether I watch it all the way through on a first attempt and in this case I made it right to the end.
The shitty stupid end where it turns out she's just nuts. Sorely, sorely disappointed. I'm not especially au fait with Natalie Portman's work but I thought Star Wars 1-3 were dire so I guess I should have suspected she was shit at choosing decent films to perform in. I saw her in an SNL skit and that was amusing so I guess I was giving her the benefit of the doubt.
Marks out of 10 for Black Swan? I give it 5, purely because the ending was such a let down and showed such a lack of imagination. Everything else was flawless and I would happily watch it again for it's artistic contribution and for inspiration. Such a shame, such a shame.
I always wanted to be a film critic. Not for money or professionalism of course just I love to slate films. In fact I like to slate EVERYTHING. yummy yum yum.
I was told this was a good film and so I watched it, and it was. I enjoyed seeing the attractive girls dancing around, I liked the mysterious character development and the what's coming next atmosphere. The simple test of whether I get along with a film or not is whether I watch it all the way through on a first attempt and in this case I made it right to the end.
The shitty stupid end where it turns out she's just nuts. Sorely, sorely disappointed. I'm not especially au fait with Natalie Portman's work but I thought Star Wars 1-3 were dire so I guess I should have suspected she was shit at choosing decent films to perform in. I saw her in an SNL skit and that was amusing so I guess I was giving her the benefit of the doubt.
Marks out of 10 for Black Swan? I give it 5, purely because the ending was such a let down and showed such a lack of imagination. Everything else was flawless and I would happily watch it again for it's artistic contribution and for inspiration. Such a shame, such a shame.
What if you're wrong?
"This is probably going to be the most simplest one for you to answer..."
I kinda like that prefix. This is Dawkins we are talking about, a man who has written arguably the most profound books ever on the idiocy of religion. Although I have to admit I enjoyed watching the video, much like I enjoyed watching Superman when I was a kid.
Saturday, 4 June 2011
Rantorama
My first ever blog, it would be nice if it was something profound wouldn't it? Well it's not gonna be. It's gonna be the in(s)ane ramblings of a schmuck. However there's some stuff I just need to get out and since I don't have a wife or even a girlfriend then on the internet it shall go.
So what is my blog going to be about? Whatever crosses my mind most likely.
Why is it called earplugger? Because earplugs was taken.
Why plug ears at all? Simple. The world pisses me of and sometimes I just need to shut out the stupidity.
So this blog is a rantfest. I don't have a great deal to rant about today though, I just got 95% on an assignment for one of my OU courses and that is cause for celebration. Bad wine is on the menu but decanting it 6 times makes it a whole lot more palatable.
Which reminds me, I haven't taken my beta blockers today. Down the hatch, yum. The leaflet says to avoid alcohol, ha! If I did that I wouldn't need the damn things in the first place.
So yeah I got 95% woohoo I'm a happy man. However happiness is, in my experience, a short-lived thing, and I have to say the course is about as interesting as me on a first date. Why do it you cry? Well because I'm trying to change my job and have decided I want to get into regenerative medicine. In fact I don't want to change my job because my current job is sitting around doing not very much at all and I like it. I'm 32 and I haven't been to work for 4 months. I wake up every day and just lie in bed until I feel like getting up. And then I tend to eat something and watch cartoons. It's an easy, easy life. However all good things must come to an end and when my money dries up alas I will be forced back into a life of slavery.
And just like that I have my first rant topic: Work. I'll save it for a new blog though AS THIS ONE IS GETTING DANGEROUSLY TLDR.
So what is my blog going to be about? Whatever crosses my mind most likely.
Why is it called earplugger? Because earplugs was taken.
Why plug ears at all? Simple. The world pisses me of and sometimes I just need to shut out the stupidity.
So this blog is a rantfest. I don't have a great deal to rant about today though, I just got 95% on an assignment for one of my OU courses and that is cause for celebration. Bad wine is on the menu but decanting it 6 times makes it a whole lot more palatable.
Which reminds me, I haven't taken my beta blockers today. Down the hatch, yum. The leaflet says to avoid alcohol, ha! If I did that I wouldn't need the damn things in the first place.
So yeah I got 95% woohoo I'm a happy man. However happiness is, in my experience, a short-lived thing, and I have to say the course is about as interesting as me on a first date. Why do it you cry? Well because I'm trying to change my job and have decided I want to get into regenerative medicine. In fact I don't want to change my job because my current job is sitting around doing not very much at all and I like it. I'm 32 and I haven't been to work for 4 months. I wake up every day and just lie in bed until I feel like getting up. And then I tend to eat something and watch cartoons. It's an easy, easy life. However all good things must come to an end and when my money dries up alas I will be forced back into a life of slavery.
And just like that I have my first rant topic: Work. I'll save it for a new blog though AS THIS ONE IS GETTING DANGEROUSLY TLDR.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)