Most people assume the Republican Party is opposed to welfare and other forms of social spending. Various reasons are given including social programs being a form of class warfare redistributing wealth downward from the hardworking rich to the lazy poor. Are Republicans and their Dixiecrat/Blue Dog Democrat brethren really opposed to welfare? The facts are in the Federal Budget.
The Nuclear power industry cannot make a profit without the help of the American tax payer. The Nuclear Power Industry therefore gets $7.1 billion per year in profit subsidies. The federal government gives away nuclear research ($468 million per year), insurance subsidies in the event we have an American Chernobyl ($3 billion per year), uranium fuel enrichment ($2.3 billion per year), reprocessing spent fuel rods ($340 million per year), nuclear waste storage ($420 million per year), and nuclear plant decommissioning ($2.1 billion per year). Ask your Congressman if profit subsidies are his idea of capitalism?
The oil and gas industry is profit subsidized by tax payers to the tune of $2.4 billion per year. The Oil Depletion Allowance cost tax payer more than $1 billion per year by allowing oil companies to deduct an extra 15% from their gross income they derive from any oil or gas wells which remain in production no matter how long that well is active. If the price of oil drops below $20 per barrel, the deduction gets bigger. How would you like a 15% income tax break for staying employed? The Intangible Drilling Cost Deduction is another profit subsidy costing tax payers more than $500 million per year. Oil companies are allowed to deduct 70% of the cost of drilling a well in the first year. Over the next 5 years the remaining drilling cost can be deducted. If an oil company drills a dry hole, 70% of the cost of that dry hole can be written off. For the oil companies, failure is profitable. The Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit is another $500 million profit subsidy. This boondoggle allows oil companies to deduct from their bottom line the high cost of extracting oil from nearly depleted deposits. Write your Congressman and ask why we the tax payer should guarantee the super profits of the oil companies.
Mining Subsidies of $3.5 billion per year guarantee mining industry profits.The Mining Law of 1872 allowed the Canadian mining company, American Barrick, to extract $10 billion in gold from public lands in Nevada. American Barrick paid only $5,190 in lease fees and paid the American tax payer not one red cent in royalties. Chevron Oil company and Manville corporation paid $10,000 in lease fees to the American public and extracted $4 billion in platinum and palladium from their mining operations on public lands in Montana. They also paid no royalties to the American tax payer. Finally, the big corporate miners can deduct 85% of the projected mine exploration costs in the first year of the operation and they can treat the sale of coal, gold, iron ore, etc. as a capital gains and thereby pay less in income taxes. On the other hand, guess who gets to clean up the mining mess left behind? Ask your Congressman who is waging class warfare on whom?
And while you're at it, also ask your Congressman for a list of individuals, corporations, and foreign nations who own a million dollars or more of your national debt. Since it is you, the tax payer, who must pay back these trillions of dollars in national debt, don’t you want to know who has you on a leash? You will be surprised by his response!
May 2001
Sunday, May 20, 2001
Thursday, May 10, 2001
Corporate Welfare
During the month of November 1940, four months after its completion, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, affectionately known by the locals as “Galloping Girdy,” spectacularly collapsed during a 40 mile per wind. Local officials were dumbfounded and after several unsuccessful attempts to explain the disaster, Theodore von Karman from the California Institute of Technology was called in to help. Von Karman was an expert in fluid dynamics (how liquids and gases move). Immediately Von Karman built a scale model of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and placed the model in a wind tunnel. The scale model was accurate in every possible way including duplicating the tensile strength of the steel girders used to construct Galloping Girdy. After several months of testing, Von Karman concluded the cause of the bridge collapse was the 40 mile per wind. Like a window rattling when a helicopter flys over, or an opera singer breaking a wine glass with her voice, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge had a natural resonance frequency that matched a 40 mile per hour wind. The bridge simply rattled itself to pieces when the wind blew at precisely 40 miles per hour.
Before Von Karman, engineers never thought to use scale models to test their designs. Today civil engineers and especially aeronautical engineers use exact scale models in wind tunnels and a variety of other stressed environments to insure the air worthiness of their air planes and missiles.
Last week George W. Bush announced he was going to tear up the Anti- Ballistic Missile Treaty and build the antimissile defense shield known as “Star Wars.” The idea behind Star Wars is to build a “defensive” missile capable of shooting down an “offensive” missile. These offensive missiles typically move at about 25,000 miles per hour. Using the method of scaling pioneered by Theodore Von Karman, Star wars would be equivalent to shooting down a bullet with a bullet. Since the fastest bullets travel at no more than about 1,500 miles per hour, the task becomes even more difficult. To complicate matters, suppose the 25,000 mph bullet could release thousands of highly light reflecting BB’s designed to hide the bullet within the cloud of BB’s. Which target do you aim and shoot at?
Is it possible to shoot down a bullet traveling at 25,000 mph hiding in a cloud of BBs with another bullet ? The answer is no. No one knows how to do that nor will anyone in the next 20 years, if ever, figure out how to do it. Then what is President Bush up to? The answer is obvious: Corporate Welfare.
Corporate Welfare is just one example of the reactionaries in the Federal Government and on Wall Street waging class warfare against the American middle and working classes. Billions of hard earned tax dollars will be spent on the Star Wars program which has no hope of being built . On the other hand, the big corporations who will get the Federal contracts to build Star Wars will become wealthier and more powerful endangering our democracy.
May 2001
Before Von Karman, engineers never thought to use scale models to test their designs. Today civil engineers and especially aeronautical engineers use exact scale models in wind tunnels and a variety of other stressed environments to insure the air worthiness of their air planes and missiles.
Last week George W. Bush announced he was going to tear up the Anti- Ballistic Missile Treaty and build the antimissile defense shield known as “Star Wars.” The idea behind Star Wars is to build a “defensive” missile capable of shooting down an “offensive” missile. These offensive missiles typically move at about 25,000 miles per hour. Using the method of scaling pioneered by Theodore Von Karman, Star wars would be equivalent to shooting down a bullet with a bullet. Since the fastest bullets travel at no more than about 1,500 miles per hour, the task becomes even more difficult. To complicate matters, suppose the 25,000 mph bullet could release thousands of highly light reflecting BB’s designed to hide the bullet within the cloud of BB’s. Which target do you aim and shoot at?
Is it possible to shoot down a bullet traveling at 25,000 mph hiding in a cloud of BBs with another bullet ? The answer is no. No one knows how to do that nor will anyone in the next 20 years, if ever, figure out how to do it. Then what is President Bush up to? The answer is obvious: Corporate Welfare.
Corporate Welfare is just one example of the reactionaries in the Federal Government and on Wall Street waging class warfare against the American middle and working classes. Billions of hard earned tax dollars will be spent on the Star Wars program which has no hope of being built . On the other hand, the big corporations who will get the Federal contracts to build Star Wars will become wealthier and more powerful endangering our democracy.
May 2001
Friday, April 27, 2001
”...where most men have a heart
Many years ago before my brother left the teaching profession, my brother taught high school history. Among the many innovative techniques my brother introduced to his history classes was to do a content analysis of movies which captured the tenor of the times. When teaching the Cold War my brother would screen the Stanley Kubrick black humored, “Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Love the Bomb.” Several days after the screening, a vice principal who had a reputation for preaching the gospel at every turn approached my brother accusing him of showing his history class a pornographic movie. “Pornographic movie?” my brother asked. “Yes,” said the VP, “Didn’t you show a movie named Dr. Strangelove! “
A few months later that gospel preaching VP was quietly retired when he was caught preaching the gospel in his office to a pretty 16 year old while pantless . The more cynical teachers at the high school pointed out that if the VP was a pinko-atheist-meathead, the Board of Education would have made an example out of him. But, because of the VP’s widely known religious zeal, the more pious members of the Board allowed the problem to go away. Such is the hypocrisy of the pious and such is the moral point obviously missed by that ignorant self serving School Board.
Which leads me to the following: Edward T. Graney and his gang also missed the obvious point that there is no causal connection between juvenile crime and ice cream sales, prayer in school and the drop out rate, prayer in school and the beating of students, and finally the lack of prayer in school and student gun play. The connection between troubled white middle class kids living in pious white middle class communities and the need for these students to shoot their classmates and teachers is complex requiring in depth study. What Graney and his gang provide the people of our town in their incessant letter writing to the Coastline is a reactionary knee jerk self-serving analysis devoid of any reason or substance. To tell the people of our town that reintroducing prayer in school will stop kids from shooting each other is utterly ridiculous.
On the other hand I must thank you Mr. Edward T. Graney for your Good Friday letter to the editor last week. Your cold war rhetorical excesses coupled with your mangled use of the English language oozing like an infected sore with hate and contempt made clear to me and the people of our town that your religion is merely a facade behind which lies an Archie Bunker political and social philosophy. The difference between you and Archie, however, is the fact that we all know deep down inside Archie Bunker was nothing more than a confused big hearted working-class stiff . To quote the writer John Reed in another context,”...where most men have a heart, you have a sack of pus.”
A few months later that gospel preaching VP was quietly retired when he was caught preaching the gospel in his office to a pretty 16 year old while pantless . The more cynical teachers at the high school pointed out that if the VP was a pinko-atheist-meathead, the Board of Education would have made an example out of him. But, because of the VP’s widely known religious zeal, the more pious members of the Board allowed the problem to go away. Such is the hypocrisy of the pious and such is the moral point obviously missed by that ignorant self serving School Board.
Which leads me to the following: Edward T. Graney and his gang also missed the obvious point that there is no causal connection between juvenile crime and ice cream sales, prayer in school and the drop out rate, prayer in school and the beating of students, and finally the lack of prayer in school and student gun play. The connection between troubled white middle class kids living in pious white middle class communities and the need for these students to shoot their classmates and teachers is complex requiring in depth study. What Graney and his gang provide the people of our town in their incessant letter writing to the Coastline is a reactionary knee jerk self-serving analysis devoid of any reason or substance. To tell the people of our town that reintroducing prayer in school will stop kids from shooting each other is utterly ridiculous.
On the other hand I must thank you Mr. Edward T. Graney for your Good Friday letter to the editor last week. Your cold war rhetorical excesses coupled with your mangled use of the English language oozing like an infected sore with hate and contempt made clear to me and the people of our town that your religion is merely a facade behind which lies an Archie Bunker political and social philosophy. The difference between you and Archie, however, is the fact that we all know deep down inside Archie Bunker was nothing more than a confused big hearted working-class stiff . To quote the writer John Reed in another context,”...where most men have a heart, you have a sack of pus.”
Friday, March 30, 2001
Jesus-Jesus-Jesus
I had originally planned to retire from the letters column in the local newspaper. But the ear shattering quiet of all those community hypocrites who raised holy hell over the ongoing religious/political debates in the local newspaper, but said nothing as the gang of three reactionaries known as Al Enderle, Edward T. Graney, and Jay Grant continued to drone on and on has forced me out of my self imposed silence. Over and over again these reactionaries and their tiny band of community supporters have demonstrated how pervasive the disease of ophthalrectalosis is in our town. Their absurd and unsupported opinions only spreads the disease wider.
The straw that finally broke the camels back were the absolutely stupid remarks made by Graney and Grant on the subject of education. Again and again Graney and Grant propose simple solutions for terribly complex problems. Again and again Graney and Grant play a one note symphony; jesus-jesus-jesus-jesus-jesus-jesus. Does your back hurt? Jesus will fix it. Constipation? Pray to jesus. Erectile dysfunction? Forget the blue pills, jesus has the answer. Kids killing each other in school? Praying to jesus will stop the carnage.
Here are some statistics: Every year without let up, as the amount of ice cream consumed increases and decreases over the course of the year, the juvenile crime rate also increases and decreases. Plotted on a graph, as ice cream sales rise, so does the crime rate. What can you conclude from this fact? Grant, ed.al. would tell us to stop selling ice cream and pray to jesus.
Here are some more facts: When the United States did allow prayer in the public schools, teachers and administrators were also allowed to beat students with leather belts, beat their students with specially designed paddles which had holes drilled into them to reduce air resistance as the paddle was swung, beat students with broom handles, cat-o’-nine-tails, and rulers. Students could be tortured by forcing them to kneel on sharpened straight edges. In the days when we all prayed to jesus every morning, the drop out rate in high school was more than 60 percent among whites and almost 90 percent among none-white students. When we prayed to jesus, the public schools were segregated just like Calvary Chapel middle and high schools are today. Upon graduation from our holy high schools, girls could not enter medical school, law school, veterinary school, or any of the university sciences. Girls could become English teachers or they could go to secretary school or “finishing school.” Girls could also get married and stay at home popping “diet pills” to boost their mood as they suffered in isolation. So let’s follow the advice of Grant et.al. and turn the clock back to the early sixties and before, genuflect to jesus, and, as an added incentive, lets also begin practicing ice cream prohibition.
The straw that finally broke the camels back were the absolutely stupid remarks made by Graney and Grant on the subject of education. Again and again Graney and Grant propose simple solutions for terribly complex problems. Again and again Graney and Grant play a one note symphony; jesus-jesus-jesus-jesus-jesus-jesus. Does your back hurt? Jesus will fix it. Constipation? Pray to jesus. Erectile dysfunction? Forget the blue pills, jesus has the answer. Kids killing each other in school? Praying to jesus will stop the carnage.
Here are some statistics: Every year without let up, as the amount of ice cream consumed increases and decreases over the course of the year, the juvenile crime rate also increases and decreases. Plotted on a graph, as ice cream sales rise, so does the crime rate. What can you conclude from this fact? Grant, ed.al. would tell us to stop selling ice cream and pray to jesus.
Here are some more facts: When the United States did allow prayer in the public schools, teachers and administrators were also allowed to beat students with leather belts, beat their students with specially designed paddles which had holes drilled into them to reduce air resistance as the paddle was swung, beat students with broom handles, cat-o’-nine-tails, and rulers. Students could be tortured by forcing them to kneel on sharpened straight edges. In the days when we all prayed to jesus every morning, the drop out rate in high school was more than 60 percent among whites and almost 90 percent among none-white students. When we prayed to jesus, the public schools were segregated just like Calvary Chapel middle and high schools are today. Upon graduation from our holy high schools, girls could not enter medical school, law school, veterinary school, or any of the university sciences. Girls could become English teachers or they could go to secretary school or “finishing school.” Girls could also get married and stay at home popping “diet pills” to boost their mood as they suffered in isolation. So let’s follow the advice of Grant et.al. and turn the clock back to the early sixties and before, genuflect to jesus, and, as an added incentive, lets also begin practicing ice cream prohibition.
Tuesday, February 20, 2001
The Bush Family Hustle
The following was written by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis: "The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
According to the Republican strategist Kevin Philips writing in the Washington Post, (7/4/1992), “What you’ve got with Bush (George senior) is absolutely the largest number of siblings and children involved in what looks like a never-ending hustle. Lets take a closer look at what Kevin Philips is talking about.
On June 20, 1990, George W. Bush, a director of Harken Energy, sold the bulk of his Harken stock for $848,000. A week later, the stock plummeted in value on news of a large quarterly loss. Time Magazine reported, it was widely assumed that insider knowledge prompted the sale. George Jr. took his Harken profits and on a $600,000 investment in the Texas Rangers arranged by President George Senior, George Jr. made 15 million dollars!
In 1985, Jeb Bush lobbied the federal government on behalf of International Medical Centers (an HMO) owned by Miguel Recarey to increase Recarey’s Medicare business ultimately to a total of $1 billion. The following year, Jeb received $75,000 from Recarey. Recarey later fled the U.S. under indictment, suspected of up to $100 million in Medicare fraud. In 1988 Jeb defaulted on a $4.5 million loan from Broward Federal Savings and Loan. The default helped trigger the S&L’s collapse, which cost taxpayers $222 million. Bush repaid only ten percent of the irregular loan and, contrary to Federal law, got to keep the building in the Miami financial district that collateralized the loan.
In 1991, George senior’s brother Jonathan Bush was fined $30,000 in Massachusetts and $4,000 in Connecticut for violating registration laws governing securities sales. Jonathan was barred from securities brokerage with the general public in Massachusetts for one year
In 1989, when Japanese organized crime elements were seeking to extend their financial interests into the U.S., Prescott Bush arranged investments by a Japanese Mob front company, West Tsusho, in two U.S. businesses, Assets Management and the software firm Quantum Access. The Japanese company was identified by Japanese police as a front company for one of Japan’s largest organized crime syndicates. Bush was paid $500,000 for help in arranging the company’s purchase. Shortly thereafter both U.S. companies filed for bankruptcy, looted dry.
In 1990, federal regulators filed a $200-million lawsuit against Neil Bush, an officer of Silverado Savings and Loan, accusing him of gross negligence contributing to its $1 billion collapse. Neil got off paying only $50,000 in a settlement of the $200 million federal suit against him. He didn't have to worry about his $250,000 legal bill, as Thomas Ashley, a friend of President George Bush senior and the head of a banking association that was lobbying the federal government for bank deregulation, formed a legal defense fund to pay Neil’s legal bills. On the other hand, the tax payers got stuck with the billion dollar bailout.
P.S. December 2009: I recently became aware of the following website: http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/bush_crime_family.htm
February 2001
According to the Republican strategist Kevin Philips writing in the Washington Post, (7/4/1992), “What you’ve got with Bush (George senior) is absolutely the largest number of siblings and children involved in what looks like a never-ending hustle. Lets take a closer look at what Kevin Philips is talking about.
On June 20, 1990, George W. Bush, a director of Harken Energy, sold the bulk of his Harken stock for $848,000. A week later, the stock plummeted in value on news of a large quarterly loss. Time Magazine reported, it was widely assumed that insider knowledge prompted the sale. George Jr. took his Harken profits and on a $600,000 investment in the Texas Rangers arranged by President George Senior, George Jr. made 15 million dollars!
In 1985, Jeb Bush lobbied the federal government on behalf of International Medical Centers (an HMO) owned by Miguel Recarey to increase Recarey’s Medicare business ultimately to a total of $1 billion. The following year, Jeb received $75,000 from Recarey. Recarey later fled the U.S. under indictment, suspected of up to $100 million in Medicare fraud. In 1988 Jeb defaulted on a $4.5 million loan from Broward Federal Savings and Loan. The default helped trigger the S&L’s collapse, which cost taxpayers $222 million. Bush repaid only ten percent of the irregular loan and, contrary to Federal law, got to keep the building in the Miami financial district that collateralized the loan.
In 1991, George senior’s brother Jonathan Bush was fined $30,000 in Massachusetts and $4,000 in Connecticut for violating registration laws governing securities sales. Jonathan was barred from securities brokerage with the general public in Massachusetts for one year
In 1989, when Japanese organized crime elements were seeking to extend their financial interests into the U.S., Prescott Bush arranged investments by a Japanese Mob front company, West Tsusho, in two U.S. businesses, Assets Management and the software firm Quantum Access. The Japanese company was identified by Japanese police as a front company for one of Japan’s largest organized crime syndicates. Bush was paid $500,000 for help in arranging the company’s purchase. Shortly thereafter both U.S. companies filed for bankruptcy, looted dry.
In 1990, federal regulators filed a $200-million lawsuit against Neil Bush, an officer of Silverado Savings and Loan, accusing him of gross negligence contributing to its $1 billion collapse. Neil got off paying only $50,000 in a settlement of the $200 million federal suit against him. He didn't have to worry about his $250,000 legal bill, as Thomas Ashley, a friend of President George Bush senior and the head of a banking association that was lobbying the federal government for bank deregulation, formed a legal defense fund to pay Neil’s legal bills. On the other hand, the tax payers got stuck with the billion dollar bailout.
P.S. December 2009: I recently became aware of the following website: http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/bush_crime_family.htm
February 2001
Friday, February 2, 2001
Culture Wars
The subject of this letter was supposed to be about how Chuck Smith, in the name of his Christian self appointed moral authority, fleeced his flock for millions of dollars. The story would have continued with Chuck Smith translating millions of dollars into hundreds of million of dollars using his connections among political reactionaries here in Orange County and in Washington DC. But, Jay Grant, another self appointed moral authority and friend and mentee of Chuck Smith, would rather use his withered little column in the local newspaper to pointedly ignore Smith’s fraud and instead write about himself. More specifically, Jay Grant whines in his weekly withered little column “Veiling the Truth” (1/26/2001) sobbing about how misunderstood he has become (talk about ego, eh, Jim Kerr!).
One way to decide if Jay Grant is the truly misunderstood, is to examine the public record. Quoting liberally from the Bible, Al Enderle, writing in the local newspaper (8/11/2000), declares homosexuality is not about love. Al Enderle asks, ”Why would a man want to have sex with another man?...Is it love or is it lust? I suggest that it is lust because, were he to really love the other man, he would choose not to do it even though be (sic) wants to.” Al Enderle concludes,” I just don’t agree...that God is tolerant of homosexuality, lying, stealing, adultery, etc.”
Edward T. Graney, wreiying in the local newspaper (8/25/2000), writes a garbled and almost illiterate letter weaving a weird theory of hatred for orthodox Jews and why the reader should “...be diligent and vote for the morality in the Republican platform.” Graney tells us orthodox Jews are a defiance of Christianity, orthodox Jews will never enter a Christian church, and orthodox Jews believe all Goyum are unclean. Where does Edward T. Graney get his ideas? From the Holy Bible, where else? (Dt.17:2-7, 1 Kg.18:40, Mt.23:31, Mt.27:25, Jn.5:16, 7:1, 7:13, 10:31, 11:8, Jn.8:44).
On September 8, 2000 the self-righteous and misunderstood Jay Grant decides to weigh in supporting Enderle and Graney. Grant writes, “I applaud Mr. Enderle and Mr. Graney for having the courage to put themselves on the firing line with their regular contributions to this paper. I’m sure they both fully understand there’s a culture war going on and to endorse the Lord, Scripture or absolute truth is going to usually bring a stinging rebuke from the numerous atheists, secularists and other assorted skeptics scattered throughout our town.”
Does Jay Grant rebuke Enderle’s and Graney’s scurrilous homophobic and anti-semitic remarks? Not at all! Jay Grant “applauds” Enderle and Graney lauding them as brave foot soldiers in the “culture war” against the enlightenment. Does Jay Grant distance himself from homophobia and anti-semitism of the Holy Bible? Are you kidding! Jay Grant embraces the Holy Bible as “absolute truth.” Five months later, Jay Grant is singing a different tune. Did you have an epiphany, Jay Grant, or are you again blowing smoke hoping to write an Orwellian history for yourself?
Unlike Jay Grant’s contradictory, self serving, and cloudy view of reality, Jim Kerr has both feet planted firmly on the ground. Jim Kerr knows what’s important and what is irrelevant. For Jim Kerr, view obstructing power lines are an absolute horror for our town. Everything else about our town is simply, simply, simply boring.
One way to decide if Jay Grant is the truly misunderstood, is to examine the public record. Quoting liberally from the Bible, Al Enderle, writing in the local newspaper (8/11/2000), declares homosexuality is not about love. Al Enderle asks, ”Why would a man want to have sex with another man?...Is it love or is it lust? I suggest that it is lust because, were he to really love the other man, he would choose not to do it even though be (sic) wants to.” Al Enderle concludes,” I just don’t agree...that God is tolerant of homosexuality, lying, stealing, adultery, etc.”
Edward T. Graney, wreiying in the local newspaper (8/25/2000), writes a garbled and almost illiterate letter weaving a weird theory of hatred for orthodox Jews and why the reader should “...be diligent and vote for the morality in the Republican platform.” Graney tells us orthodox Jews are a defiance of Christianity, orthodox Jews will never enter a Christian church, and orthodox Jews believe all Goyum are unclean. Where does Edward T. Graney get his ideas? From the Holy Bible, where else? (Dt.17:2-7, 1 Kg.18:40, Mt.23:31, Mt.27:25, Jn.5:16, 7:1, 7:13, 10:31, 11:8, Jn.8:44).
On September 8, 2000 the self-righteous and misunderstood Jay Grant decides to weigh in supporting Enderle and Graney. Grant writes, “I applaud Mr. Enderle and Mr. Graney for having the courage to put themselves on the firing line with their regular contributions to this paper. I’m sure they both fully understand there’s a culture war going on and to endorse the Lord, Scripture or absolute truth is going to usually bring a stinging rebuke from the numerous atheists, secularists and other assorted skeptics scattered throughout our town.”
Does Jay Grant rebuke Enderle’s and Graney’s scurrilous homophobic and anti-semitic remarks? Not at all! Jay Grant “applauds” Enderle and Graney lauding them as brave foot soldiers in the “culture war” against the enlightenment. Does Jay Grant distance himself from homophobia and anti-semitism of the Holy Bible? Are you kidding! Jay Grant embraces the Holy Bible as “absolute truth.” Five months later, Jay Grant is singing a different tune. Did you have an epiphany, Jay Grant, or are you again blowing smoke hoping to write an Orwellian history for yourself?
Unlike Jay Grant’s contradictory, self serving, and cloudy view of reality, Jim Kerr has both feet planted firmly on the ground. Jim Kerr knows what’s important and what is irrelevant. For Jim Kerr, view obstructing power lines are an absolute horror for our town. Everything else about our town is simply, simply, simply boring.
Friday, January 19, 2001
Calvary Chapel
Jim Kerr’s letter in our local newspaper is perplexing. Mr. Kerr seems to think the debate being played out in the letters column between myself and others and Jay Grant, Al Enderle, and others is somehow personal.
The personal religious beliefs of people are none of my business. If Al Enderle and Jay Grant and Edward T. Graney and that crowd at Calvary Chapel want to speak in tongues, handle snakes, roll about on the floor, perform the “placing on of hands” rituals, or do whatever they do in their churches, temples, synagogues, or mosques, I have absolutely no objections. There is, however, a caveat. Once these folks come out of their respective houses of worship and attempt to dominate the public debate over public policy by means of intimidation, false claims of moral authority, back room political deal making, and outright lies, then as citizen of a democracy one must engage this dishonesty by clearly and forcefully pointing out publicly their fraudulent claims.
Mr. Kerr, If you had been paying attention to the letters of Al Enderle, Edward T. Graney, and Jay Grant et.al. over the last year, you would have read how these men write Bible based justifications for anti-semitism, anti-feminism, anti-enligtenment, homophobia, and just plain foolishness.
For example, in 1978 Chuck Smith, the head priest of Calvary Chapel and assuredly a hero of the crowd mentioned above, produced a “documentary” film titled Future Survival. The script of this so-called documentary was also published as a book titled Future Survival: How you can survive the coming crises! (ISBN 0-936728-02-7). In his book Chuck Smith tells us that as an expert on Biblical prophecy and according to his reading of the Book of Revelations, “I am convinced that the Lord is coming for His Church before the end of 1981”(pg. 20). How does Chuck Smith know the world will end in 1981? Because Israel was founded in 1948 and since a biblical generation is 40 years long and since the Tribulation where Jesus returns to earth last for 7 years, all of this adds up to the end of the world in 1981! (pg. 17,19-21). What signs should Christians be looking for so they may survive the coming crisis? According to Chuck Smith, Christians should be supporting increases in the Pentagon budget. Smith tells us “Russia has a decided military advantage over the United States....” and ”... that the SALT II treaty is selling the United States down the river.” What will Russia do with this decided military advantage according to Smith. The Pentagon must be strong enough in order to help Israel repel a Russian invasion of Israel. “Russia feels that the conquest of Israel and the Mideast will be her first strategic move to world conquest. So, as God said, ‘I’m going to bring Russia into the slaughter by bringing her into the Mideast against Israel.’ (pg. 19). Nowhere did Smith’s “expert” reading of Revelations show him that Russia would ignominiously collapse into economic depression and military decay. Smith made millions of dollars off his absurd and BS laden documentary and book. What did Smith do with all the ill gotten booty?
Mr. Kerr, you inserted your opinion into the debate based on a misreading of the facts. It is certainly your right to express your opinion, but in the words of Abraham Lincoln, “It is sometimes better to sit quiet and be thought a fool then to speak up and remove all doubt.”
The personal religious beliefs of people are none of my business. If Al Enderle and Jay Grant and Edward T. Graney and that crowd at Calvary Chapel want to speak in tongues, handle snakes, roll about on the floor, perform the “placing on of hands” rituals, or do whatever they do in their churches, temples, synagogues, or mosques, I have absolutely no objections. There is, however, a caveat. Once these folks come out of their respective houses of worship and attempt to dominate the public debate over public policy by means of intimidation, false claims of moral authority, back room political deal making, and outright lies, then as citizen of a democracy one must engage this dishonesty by clearly and forcefully pointing out publicly their fraudulent claims.
Mr. Kerr, If you had been paying attention to the letters of Al Enderle, Edward T. Graney, and Jay Grant et.al. over the last year, you would have read how these men write Bible based justifications for anti-semitism, anti-feminism, anti-enligtenment, homophobia, and just plain foolishness.
For example, in 1978 Chuck Smith, the head priest of Calvary Chapel and assuredly a hero of the crowd mentioned above, produced a “documentary” film titled Future Survival. The script of this so-called documentary was also published as a book titled Future Survival: How you can survive the coming crises! (ISBN 0-936728-02-7). In his book Chuck Smith tells us that as an expert on Biblical prophecy and according to his reading of the Book of Revelations, “I am convinced that the Lord is coming for His Church before the end of 1981”(pg. 20). How does Chuck Smith know the world will end in 1981? Because Israel was founded in 1948 and since a biblical generation is 40 years long and since the Tribulation where Jesus returns to earth last for 7 years, all of this adds up to the end of the world in 1981! (pg. 17,19-21). What signs should Christians be looking for so they may survive the coming crisis? According to Chuck Smith, Christians should be supporting increases in the Pentagon budget. Smith tells us “Russia has a decided military advantage over the United States....” and ”... that the SALT II treaty is selling the United States down the river.” What will Russia do with this decided military advantage according to Smith. The Pentagon must be strong enough in order to help Israel repel a Russian invasion of Israel. “Russia feels that the conquest of Israel and the Mideast will be her first strategic move to world conquest. So, as God said, ‘I’m going to bring Russia into the slaughter by bringing her into the Mideast against Israel.’ (pg. 19). Nowhere did Smith’s “expert” reading of Revelations show him that Russia would ignominiously collapse into economic depression and military decay. Smith made millions of dollars off his absurd and BS laden documentary and book. What did Smith do with all the ill gotten booty?
Mr. Kerr, you inserted your opinion into the debate based on a misreading of the facts. It is certainly your right to express your opinion, but in the words of Abraham Lincoln, “It is sometimes better to sit quiet and be thought a fool then to speak up and remove all doubt.”
Friday, December 29, 2000
Blowing Smoke
Jay Grant is again blowing smoke. Here is what Jay Grant is really saying in his withered little column “Veiling the Truth” (12/8/2000): The universe is perfect and precise in its creation and the universe is in perfect balance. God created the universe as is and the universe is perfectly tuned. Therefore, evolution in all its forms is impossible.
Perfection like heaven itself is changeless, static. Perfect balance again is another way to say, nothing changes. According to Grant, the universe must look like god and heaven. The truth is the universe is not balanced or perfect.
Jay Grant undermines his own argument from the get-go. He rightly tells us, our universe is continually expanding. An expanding universe is by definition continually undergoing change, creating and recreating itself moment to moment. What causes the universe to accelerate away in all directions? More than three centuries ago, Sir Isaac Newton taught the world that only an unbalanced force can cause an acceleration. Therefore, the entire universe had or is presently experiencing an unbalanced force. That initial unbalanced force is known as the Big Bang.
Jay Grant writes the universal gravitational constant (=6.67 x 10-11Nm2/kg2, a really tiny number) is an example of god’s perfect balance. Again, Jay Grant undermines his own argument. In an accelerating universe, the universal gravitational constant is getting smaller as everything in the universe moves away from everything else. Because of the acceleration given to the universe by the Big Bang explosion, the universal gravitational constant is not constant at all but is itself undergoing change.
The universe is also filled with variable stars. Variable stars change their brightness over time. Cepheid variable stars and RR Lyrae stars first grow bright then after a few days or months, these stars grow dim again. What causes this variation in brightness? The inward pull of gravity and the outward push of nuclear induced radiation are out of balance with one force winning for a time only to be reined in by the other force. When the outward push of radiation can no longer hold back the inward pull of gravity, a huge cataclysmic explosion occurs. Nova and Super Nova stars blow themselves up spewing forth the chemical ingredients that will eventually evolve into life itself. From the nuclear fusion furnaces of stars to the DNA ovens coding for the diversity life: talk about undergoing a spectacular change!
Jay Grant is correct when he says there are hundreds of billions of stars in each galaxy and there are billions of galaxies in the universe. In the universe, no two galaxies look alike. There are great groupings of galaxies which are known as spiral, elliptical, and irregular shaped galaxies. These islands of stars distributed throughout the sea of space-time are all different in size, particular shape, and the number of stars they contain. With all these differences, which one is the perfect galaxy in this perfect universe? Jay Grant does not tell us.
As astronomers look deeper into the distant reaches of our universe, they are also looking back in time. Telescopes are actually time machines that look into the past. In the distant past, the universe was filled with quasars. There are no more quasars in the present universe. What happened to all the quasars? They evolved into galaxies.
Perfection like heaven itself is changeless, static. Perfect balance again is another way to say, nothing changes. According to Grant, the universe must look like god and heaven. The truth is the universe is not balanced or perfect.
Jay Grant undermines his own argument from the get-go. He rightly tells us, our universe is continually expanding. An expanding universe is by definition continually undergoing change, creating and recreating itself moment to moment. What causes the universe to accelerate away in all directions? More than three centuries ago, Sir Isaac Newton taught the world that only an unbalanced force can cause an acceleration. Therefore, the entire universe had or is presently experiencing an unbalanced force. That initial unbalanced force is known as the Big Bang.
Jay Grant writes the universal gravitational constant (=6.67 x 10-11Nm2/kg2, a really tiny number) is an example of god’s perfect balance. Again, Jay Grant undermines his own argument. In an accelerating universe, the universal gravitational constant is getting smaller as everything in the universe moves away from everything else. Because of the acceleration given to the universe by the Big Bang explosion, the universal gravitational constant is not constant at all but is itself undergoing change.
The universe is also filled with variable stars. Variable stars change their brightness over time. Cepheid variable stars and RR Lyrae stars first grow bright then after a few days or months, these stars grow dim again. What causes this variation in brightness? The inward pull of gravity and the outward push of nuclear induced radiation are out of balance with one force winning for a time only to be reined in by the other force. When the outward push of radiation can no longer hold back the inward pull of gravity, a huge cataclysmic explosion occurs. Nova and Super Nova stars blow themselves up spewing forth the chemical ingredients that will eventually evolve into life itself. From the nuclear fusion furnaces of stars to the DNA ovens coding for the diversity life: talk about undergoing a spectacular change!
Jay Grant is correct when he says there are hundreds of billions of stars in each galaxy and there are billions of galaxies in the universe. In the universe, no two galaxies look alike. There are great groupings of galaxies which are known as spiral, elliptical, and irregular shaped galaxies. These islands of stars distributed throughout the sea of space-time are all different in size, particular shape, and the number of stars they contain. With all these differences, which one is the perfect galaxy in this perfect universe? Jay Grant does not tell us.
As astronomers look deeper into the distant reaches of our universe, they are also looking back in time. Telescopes are actually time machines that look into the past. In the distant past, the universe was filled with quasars. There are no more quasars in the present universe. What happened to all the quasars? They evolved into galaxies.
Friday, December 22, 2000
Does God Exist?
Mr. Enderle, I will see your astrophysicist who believes in god and raise you a Methodist preacher, a Baptist minister and two Catholic priests who no longer believe in god. The point is simple, so what! No matter how many authority figures you find to back up your point of view, I can find just as many, if not more authority figures, who will back up my point of view.
The central difference between you and me is your heavy and irrational reliance on the authority figure as provider of evidence (truth in your language). If god, prophet, saint, preacher, minister, priest, rabbi, or someone with a pair of testicles says it’s true, you and your crowd will elbow each other out of the way grasping for the given enlightenment.
Science considers useless all evidence provided by authority figures who provide no data for their opinions. Isaac Newton believed in god. Albert Einstein believed in god. Both men also recognized they had no evidence for god. Data is derived from highly structured observations and controlled experiments. Inferences can be drawn from these data if the inferences are logical extensions of these data and confined to known principles of physics. Did your Dr. Hugh Ross, astrophysicist and PhD show you incontrovertible evidence for the existence of god? Is the evidence provided by Ross subject to interpretation? Is it possible to “doctor” his evidence? Is the evidence subject to independent verification? If Dr. Ross, astrophysicist, says it’s true, then does that mean it’s absolutely and without reservation true? Are Dr. Ross’ inferences confined to the known laws of physics. If so, please tell me what are the physics of god and the supernatural?
Authority figures always try to speak for reality. Reality, nature, speaks for itself. We humans have the intellectual capability, if we choose to use it, to understand nature’s arcane language. If we choose to ignore nature, we do so at our peril. Why? Because nature does not require the existence of humans, but we humans require the existence of nature. The natural world predates human existence and nature will continue long after we naked apes have exited nature’s stage. If we continue to pursue supernatural folly's perpetuated by foolish authority figures who continue to to confuse and delude us with their smoke and mirror magic, we will exit nature’s stage early. Conversely, we humans may survive if we wake up and decide to create and blend a philosophy (and by extension a psychology) which mirrors the actual behavior of the natural world. We can join and become part of the evolutionary spiral of nature.
Mr. Enderle, the universe is not stationary, frozen in time, unchanging.The universe does not mirror your static ideas of god and heaven. The universe is dynamic, in motion, evolving. One way or the other, nature will forever put to rest your reactionary attempts to control and halt nature’s onward motion!
PS. Merry Winter Solstice and Happy New Year!
The central difference between you and me is your heavy and irrational reliance on the authority figure as provider of evidence (truth in your language). If god, prophet, saint, preacher, minister, priest, rabbi, or someone with a pair of testicles says it’s true, you and your crowd will elbow each other out of the way grasping for the given enlightenment.
Science considers useless all evidence provided by authority figures who provide no data for their opinions. Isaac Newton believed in god. Albert Einstein believed in god. Both men also recognized they had no evidence for god. Data is derived from highly structured observations and controlled experiments. Inferences can be drawn from these data if the inferences are logical extensions of these data and confined to known principles of physics. Did your Dr. Hugh Ross, astrophysicist and PhD show you incontrovertible evidence for the existence of god? Is the evidence provided by Ross subject to interpretation? Is it possible to “doctor” his evidence? Is the evidence subject to independent verification? If Dr. Ross, astrophysicist, says it’s true, then does that mean it’s absolutely and without reservation true? Are Dr. Ross’ inferences confined to the known laws of physics. If so, please tell me what are the physics of god and the supernatural?
Authority figures always try to speak for reality. Reality, nature, speaks for itself. We humans have the intellectual capability, if we choose to use it, to understand nature’s arcane language. If we choose to ignore nature, we do so at our peril. Why? Because nature does not require the existence of humans, but we humans require the existence of nature. The natural world predates human existence and nature will continue long after we naked apes have exited nature’s stage. If we continue to pursue supernatural folly's perpetuated by foolish authority figures who continue to to confuse and delude us with their smoke and mirror magic, we will exit nature’s stage early. Conversely, we humans may survive if we wake up and decide to create and blend a philosophy (and by extension a psychology) which mirrors the actual behavior of the natural world. We can join and become part of the evolutionary spiral of nature.
Mr. Enderle, the universe is not stationary, frozen in time, unchanging.The universe does not mirror your static ideas of god and heaven. The universe is dynamic, in motion, evolving. One way or the other, nature will forever put to rest your reactionary attempts to control and halt nature’s onward motion!
PS. Merry Winter Solstice and Happy New Year!
Monday, November 20, 2000
The Hysterical Rush to Deregulate
Why did the television networks make so many mistakes calling the election? Let’s go back a few years in history. In 1986 then President Reagan ordered an overhaul of Federal Communication Commission rules. The big networks were testifying before congress that they wanted more freedom to decide the content of their programming and to make other cost cutting changes. One of the first rules to go was the “equal time amendment” which called for all sides of a political position to be aired. Another cost cutting measure was to pool network resources when reporting national elections. In 1989 all the networks contracted with the Voter News Service (VNS) to do their exit polling. The subscription fee for all the major networks was a paltry $17 million saving each network millions of dollars.
Prior to election day and based upon carefully constructed statistical models of the voting population, VNS identifed a representative sample of precincts within a voting population. On election day VNS stations trained exit pollers in front of the representative precinct to ask voters about their choices. In Palm Beach County, Florida, for example, 45 precincts had exit pollers. Precinct data are later compared to the actual on going vote counts to make sure the information from the two sources of vote data are consistent with each other. Based on these initial exit data from Palm Beach County and elsewhere in Florida, Gore was winning by a large enough margin in Democratic strongholds so that the networks felt comfortable in calling Florida for Gore. Then VNS noticed in Palm Beach these exit data were inconsistent with the on going voter count. VNS then recommended to the networks that Florida was “too close to call.” At this point VNS brought on line some statistical adjustments taking into account their discovery that the voters were B.S.’ing the exit pollers. When the BS factor was applied to other precincts, VNS declared Bush the winner in Florida. Then VNS discovered the voters were confused by the butterfly ballot and were not BS’ing the exit pollers. The voters thought they voted for Gore and reported truthfully to the exit pollers but were instead voting for Buchanan. Again VNS reversed itself and declared Florida was “too close to call.”
As of this writing who will be President of the United States has not been decided. Whoever becomes President, will preside over a country so noisily and loudly divided that it will become impossible over the next two years to produce any meaningful legislation that will help the broad masses of middle class and working class people. On the other hand, the fat cats already have their lawyers and accountants on retainer geared up to take advantage of the coming rule changes and rule deletions which will quietly coast through a bought and paid for government.
In the hysterical rush to deregulate American society, America has been reduced to a poker game where there are no betting limits. In such a poker game, it does not matter how many aces the middle and working class have in their hands, because the fat cat at the end of the table will always bet and raise them out of the game.
November 2000
Prior to election day and based upon carefully constructed statistical models of the voting population, VNS identifed a representative sample of precincts within a voting population. On election day VNS stations trained exit pollers in front of the representative precinct to ask voters about their choices. In Palm Beach County, Florida, for example, 45 precincts had exit pollers. Precinct data are later compared to the actual on going vote counts to make sure the information from the two sources of vote data are consistent with each other. Based on these initial exit data from Palm Beach County and elsewhere in Florida, Gore was winning by a large enough margin in Democratic strongholds so that the networks felt comfortable in calling Florida for Gore. Then VNS noticed in Palm Beach these exit data were inconsistent with the on going voter count. VNS then recommended to the networks that Florida was “too close to call.” At this point VNS brought on line some statistical adjustments taking into account their discovery that the voters were B.S.’ing the exit pollers. When the BS factor was applied to other precincts, VNS declared Bush the winner in Florida. Then VNS discovered the voters were confused by the butterfly ballot and were not BS’ing the exit pollers. The voters thought they voted for Gore and reported truthfully to the exit pollers but were instead voting for Buchanan. Again VNS reversed itself and declared Florida was “too close to call.”
As of this writing who will be President of the United States has not been decided. Whoever becomes President, will preside over a country so noisily and loudly divided that it will become impossible over the next two years to produce any meaningful legislation that will help the broad masses of middle class and working class people. On the other hand, the fat cats already have their lawyers and accountants on retainer geared up to take advantage of the coming rule changes and rule deletions which will quietly coast through a bought and paid for government.
In the hysterical rush to deregulate American society, America has been reduced to a poker game where there are no betting limits. In such a poker game, it does not matter how many aces the middle and working class have in their hands, because the fat cat at the end of the table will always bet and raise them out of the game.
November 2000
Friday, October 27, 2000
Creationism
In a letter to the local newspaper dated 8/18/00 I wrote, “Mr. Enderle makes the common mistake of confusing a scientific theory with an opinion. All scientific theories are based on experimental evidence and highly structured observations (emphasis added). Scientific theories are founded on observable and reproducible evidence and therefore scientific theories are “factual.” The sun does not move across the sky but rather the Earth rotates on its axis. This is a factual statement based on the Copernicus-Galileo-Kepler-Newton “theory” of planetary motion....In terms of biological evolution Charles Darwin and many scientific workers over the past 141 years have amassed a mountain of experimental evidence and structured observation (emphasis added) to show that life changes over time flowing from one kind into another continuously.
Mr. Enderle, please read the following words carefully: The Bible puts forth an opinion about how life began on earth. The Bible’s opinion is not a scientific theory. The Bible’s opinion is not based on independent observations and reproducible evidence. These observations and evidences are commonly known as facts. In court case after court case around the nation, the courts have found the Bible is not a factual source for scientific evidence. The Bible is not factual because it does not meet the test for factual statements. Rather the Bible asserts its opinion and demands that you accept or reject its unsubstantiated opinion. If you reject its unsubstantiated opinion, then you are threatened with infinite damnation in hell (which by -the-way is also a Biblical opinion). The Bible has nothing scientifically meaningful to say about how life began and changes over time on earth.
In addition, Mr. Enderle, you take scientific evidence and misinterpret it, distort it, misrepresent it, or selectively use it to put forth your alien opinion about nature and the natural world. This is not theory construction. This is the epitome of dishonesty. If you were a working scientist, you would be drummed out of the discipline never allowed to practice science forthwith! When you say more and more scientist are supporting creationism, that is a whopping lie. When you say no transition species have been found, that is a whopping lie. If you had bothered to read Darwin’s “Origin of Species” you would know Darwin did not believe in the concept of “species.” If you had bothered to read Niles Eldredge’s scientifically constructed theory in his book, “The Evolution of Punctuated Equilibria” you would know transition species are not necessary. When you say scientist believe the universe existed forever, that is another whopping lie. When you say it is impossible for DNA to code by chance, not only is that a whopping lie, but it clearly demonstrates your willful ignorance of genetics. In your Orwellian-Christian world, lies, distortions, and dishonesties are statements of fact.
As an alien from the planet Jesus, please explain, here on earth, why factually ninety-nine percent of Gorilla genes and factually ninety-eight percent of chimpanzee genes are identical to human genes. Guess who your distant relatives are, Mr. Enderle?
Mr. Enderle, please read the following words carefully: The Bible puts forth an opinion about how life began on earth. The Bible’s opinion is not a scientific theory. The Bible’s opinion is not based on independent observations and reproducible evidence. These observations and evidences are commonly known as facts. In court case after court case around the nation, the courts have found the Bible is not a factual source for scientific evidence. The Bible is not factual because it does not meet the test for factual statements. Rather the Bible asserts its opinion and demands that you accept or reject its unsubstantiated opinion. If you reject its unsubstantiated opinion, then you are threatened with infinite damnation in hell (which by -the-way is also a Biblical opinion). The Bible has nothing scientifically meaningful to say about how life began and changes over time on earth.
In addition, Mr. Enderle, you take scientific evidence and misinterpret it, distort it, misrepresent it, or selectively use it to put forth your alien opinion about nature and the natural world. This is not theory construction. This is the epitome of dishonesty. If you were a working scientist, you would be drummed out of the discipline never allowed to practice science forthwith! When you say more and more scientist are supporting creationism, that is a whopping lie. When you say no transition species have been found, that is a whopping lie. If you had bothered to read Darwin’s “Origin of Species” you would know Darwin did not believe in the concept of “species.” If you had bothered to read Niles Eldredge’s scientifically constructed theory in his book, “The Evolution of Punctuated Equilibria” you would know transition species are not necessary. When you say scientist believe the universe existed forever, that is another whopping lie. When you say it is impossible for DNA to code by chance, not only is that a whopping lie, but it clearly demonstrates your willful ignorance of genetics. In your Orwellian-Christian world, lies, distortions, and dishonesties are statements of fact.
As an alien from the planet Jesus, please explain, here on earth, why factually ninety-nine percent of Gorilla genes and factually ninety-eight percent of chimpanzee genes are identical to human genes. Guess who your distant relatives are, Mr. Enderle?
Friday, September 29, 2000
Cults
Question: What does Stand Fast Ministries, Calvary Chapel, Maranatha World Ministries, and the Promise Keepers all have in common? Answer: All are cults! That’s right, cults! There are many ways to decide whether a religious grouping is a cult. One way is to simply ask how they ordain their ministers. Most reputable religions require formal seminary and theological training in an accredited university. Cults ordain their ministers directly. Another way to figure out if you are looking down the gun barrel of a cult is to see how the cult views the role of women in society. Most cults view women as subservient to men. To determine how your cult views the role of women, have your cult leader take the “Lot Test.”
Lot, the nephew of Abraham, was an Old Testament character who lived in the city of Sodom with his wife and two daughters. The New Testament holds Lot in great esteem as evidenced by the passage in 2 Peter (2:6-8) where Lot is seen as a righteous man deserving his place in heaven. What makes Lot such a righteous man? God sends a couple of angels to visit Lot. When the lusty Sodomites hear about the angels, they gather in front of Lots house demanding Lot send out the angels. Instead, Lot offers his virgin daughters to be gang raped by the crowd. Hold on, it gets worse!
Lot and his family manage to escape from Sodom, but Lot’s wife, disobeying Lot’s orders, looks back on God’s destruction of Sodom. As punishment for her insolence, Lot’s wife is turned into a pillar of salt. Later, Lot and his two daughters hide out in a cave in the mountains above Zoar. One night, the older daughter decides to get Lot drunk so she can have sex with him because she wants to “...preserve seed of our father” (apparently she doesn't understand she already has half of Lot’s genes).The next night, the younger daughter does the same. Both daughters get pregnant , and Lot never knows he had sex with his daughters because he was drunk (Gen. 19:1-38). Lot is rewarded with a window seat in heaven. Why is this Bible story the basis of the Lot Test?” Because this entire Bible story is HORSE HOCKEY!
For centuries women all over the world have know that if Timothy gets a snoot full, little brother Timothy is not getting resurrected! Only traditional men living in a traditional society, with traditional family values, where women are seen as so much property, would find truth and value in the horror story of Lot. No daughter would sleep with her father, (ugh!), and no father in his right mind would sleep with his daughter, no matter how drunk he got! Which brings me to Jay Grant’s withered little column in the local newspaper two weeks ago.
Look into your black magic box and see if you can find the ancient Greek or Hebrew word for gigolo. I think the word is synonymous with holy man. If a woman has serial sex partners, she is a sinner and a whore. But if a man has serial sex partners, or sleeps with his daughters, according to your righteous Bible, he sits at the right hand side of God. Pull down your veil, Jay Grant, your hypocrisy is showing!
Lot, the nephew of Abraham, was an Old Testament character who lived in the city of Sodom with his wife and two daughters. The New Testament holds Lot in great esteem as evidenced by the passage in 2 Peter (2:6-8) where Lot is seen as a righteous man deserving his place in heaven. What makes Lot such a righteous man? God sends a couple of angels to visit Lot. When the lusty Sodomites hear about the angels, they gather in front of Lots house demanding Lot send out the angels. Instead, Lot offers his virgin daughters to be gang raped by the crowd. Hold on, it gets worse!
Lot and his family manage to escape from Sodom, but Lot’s wife, disobeying Lot’s orders, looks back on God’s destruction of Sodom. As punishment for her insolence, Lot’s wife is turned into a pillar of salt. Later, Lot and his two daughters hide out in a cave in the mountains above Zoar. One night, the older daughter decides to get Lot drunk so she can have sex with him because she wants to “...preserve seed of our father” (apparently she doesn't understand she already has half of Lot’s genes).The next night, the younger daughter does the same. Both daughters get pregnant , and Lot never knows he had sex with his daughters because he was drunk (Gen. 19:1-38). Lot is rewarded with a window seat in heaven. Why is this Bible story the basis of the Lot Test?” Because this entire Bible story is HORSE HOCKEY!
For centuries women all over the world have know that if Timothy gets a snoot full, little brother Timothy is not getting resurrected! Only traditional men living in a traditional society, with traditional family values, where women are seen as so much property, would find truth and value in the horror story of Lot. No daughter would sleep with her father, (ugh!), and no father in his right mind would sleep with his daughter, no matter how drunk he got! Which brings me to Jay Grant’s withered little column in the local newspaper two weeks ago.
Look into your black magic box and see if you can find the ancient Greek or Hebrew word for gigolo. I think the word is synonymous with holy man. If a woman has serial sex partners, she is a sinner and a whore. But if a man has serial sex partners, or sleeps with his daughters, according to your righteous Bible, he sits at the right hand side of God. Pull down your veil, Jay Grant, your hypocrisy is showing!
Friday, September 15, 2000
Religious Magic
Mr. Jay Grant’s regular column in the local newspaper (Lifting the Veil) is aptly named for Mr. Grant skillfully uses the veil to bring drama to his act. Like a magician Grant keeps a veil over his show until, presto, the veil is quickly removed revealing the trick to a wildly applauding and surprised audience. But, Mr. Grant, there is no such thing as magic, only smoke and mirrors, misdirection, ignorance, and slight of hand.
Mr. Grant reveals his misdirection and intellectual dishonesty by resorting to the old debating trick of the “straw man argument.” This trick, skillfully used by Mr. Grant, gives him wiggle room to duck difficult questions and, at the same time, places his opponent on the defensive. For example, Grant talks about issues never brought up such as Jesus as a door and Jesus as a shepherd, but ignores why the “absolute truth” of his Bible tells us the earth does not rotate or revolve, or why the Bible tells us that the cause of gross morphological characteristics is what the parents were looking at at the moment of conception. Grant never explains how a mountain can fill a spherical earth. When Jesus says drink from me because I am the waters of life, does that mean Jesus is a glass of water? DUH!
For his next trick, Mr. Grant, reaches up with his deeply sun burnt hand, twists his oily mustache, and drops the veil again. A drum roll begins and Grant says the magic words GOINA and KANAPH. Suddenly a flash of light, a boom from the bass drum, the veil is removed and the Bible no longer says the earth is flat! Even wilder applause from the three remaining members of the audience!
Mr. Grant, today only dusty scholars speak and interpret ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew as they think it was spoken 2500 years ago. Scholars attempt to speak and understand these dead languages according to modern reconstructions. These modern reconstructions are at best approximations and not certainties. How well would you fare in China 2000 years ago if you attempted today to learn ancient Chinese by only reading Confucius in the original? Would any Chinese understand you if you suddenly got into a time machine and found yourself in China 2000 years ago? Of course not. No one knows with any certainty what the magic words GOINA and KANAPH mean. Beside, why didn’t the Bible simply say “extreme distance” rather than four corners. Seems like a major stretch to me! Is everything in the Bible metaphor and simile? Who will tell us when the Bible is speaking in symbols and when it speaks plainly? Who will unravel the symbolism of the Bible? How can we tell if the spin on Biblical symbolism is correct? Will it be you, Jay Grant?
The goal of a good magician is to entertain. But Mr. Grant’s magic is not entertaining at all. There is a mean spirit to his tricks. The largest veil in Mr. Grant’s act is the veil that goes unnoticed: the stage curtain. Behind that curtain, where Mr. Grant does not want the audience to go, is where he keeps his Black Magic. In a dark corner behind the curtain Mr. Grant keeps hidden away in his steamer trunk the Black Magic of Homophobia, Anti-Semetism, and Know-Nothing ism.
Jay Grant tells us, “I applaud Mr. Enderle and Mr. Graney for having the courage to put themselves on the firing line....they... understand there’s a culture war going on to endorse the Lord....” It was the Falangist Pat Buchanan, that intellectual apologist for the Inquisition, who coined the phrase “culture war.” Does Jay Grant criticize Mr. Graneys’s anti-Semitism? No! Does Jay Grant oppose the homophobia and just plain ignorance of Anahita Marquetant (my list of statesmen, scholars, scientists, and philosophers illustrated it was possible to believe in God(s) without being a Christian, a subtlety that totally escaped A. Marquetant). No! Does Jay Grant endorse the ramblings of Mr. Enderle, a man who has run out of ideas and now repeatedly quotes himself from his previous letters. A man who would rather preach than think. No! Why? Because Jay Grant uses his Black Magic to fan the flames of community hatred, intolerance, and ignorance. Out of hatred, intolerance, and ignorance comes fear. In a flash of light and a puff of smoke Jay Grant appears to the trembling crowd, black cape swirling about scattering harsh light. Fleetingly, a supple crimson pike appears and disappears. Grant, offering protection and revelation, loudly announces “You must believe in me first, for it is only then I will take you to Jesus!’ What sense can a community like Laguna Beach make of the snake-oil salesmen carrying a Bible in one hand and lynch rope in the other preaching from a pulpit of sun bleached bones?
Two last points. You are right, Jay Grant, the Bible is the best selling book in history. A book that no one reads, practices, or understands (thank God!). Second, you criticize me in your withered little column for writing lengthy “diatribes” in the Coastline (and indirectly criticize the Coastline for giving me half a page) but ignore the lengthy hate filled diatribes of your apostles, Graney, Enderle, and Marguetant. What can we make of this obvious hypocrisy. Could it be, Jay Grant, you are suffering from a deep seated case of Column Envy?
Mr. Grant reveals his misdirection and intellectual dishonesty by resorting to the old debating trick of the “straw man argument.” This trick, skillfully used by Mr. Grant, gives him wiggle room to duck difficult questions and, at the same time, places his opponent on the defensive. For example, Grant talks about issues never brought up such as Jesus as a door and Jesus as a shepherd, but ignores why the “absolute truth” of his Bible tells us the earth does not rotate or revolve, or why the Bible tells us that the cause of gross morphological characteristics is what the parents were looking at at the moment of conception. Grant never explains how a mountain can fill a spherical earth. When Jesus says drink from me because I am the waters of life, does that mean Jesus is a glass of water? DUH!
For his next trick, Mr. Grant, reaches up with his deeply sun burnt hand, twists his oily mustache, and drops the veil again. A drum roll begins and Grant says the magic words GOINA and KANAPH. Suddenly a flash of light, a boom from the bass drum, the veil is removed and the Bible no longer says the earth is flat! Even wilder applause from the three remaining members of the audience!
Mr. Grant, today only dusty scholars speak and interpret ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew as they think it was spoken 2500 years ago. Scholars attempt to speak and understand these dead languages according to modern reconstructions. These modern reconstructions are at best approximations and not certainties. How well would you fare in China 2000 years ago if you attempted today to learn ancient Chinese by only reading Confucius in the original? Would any Chinese understand you if you suddenly got into a time machine and found yourself in China 2000 years ago? Of course not. No one knows with any certainty what the magic words GOINA and KANAPH mean. Beside, why didn’t the Bible simply say “extreme distance” rather than four corners. Seems like a major stretch to me! Is everything in the Bible metaphor and simile? Who will tell us when the Bible is speaking in symbols and when it speaks plainly? Who will unravel the symbolism of the Bible? How can we tell if the spin on Biblical symbolism is correct? Will it be you, Jay Grant?
The goal of a good magician is to entertain. But Mr. Grant’s magic is not entertaining at all. There is a mean spirit to his tricks. The largest veil in Mr. Grant’s act is the veil that goes unnoticed: the stage curtain. Behind that curtain, where Mr. Grant does not want the audience to go, is where he keeps his Black Magic. In a dark corner behind the curtain Mr. Grant keeps hidden away in his steamer trunk the Black Magic of Homophobia, Anti-Semetism, and Know-Nothing ism.
Jay Grant tells us, “I applaud Mr. Enderle and Mr. Graney for having the courage to put themselves on the firing line....they... understand there’s a culture war going on to endorse the Lord....” It was the Falangist Pat Buchanan, that intellectual apologist for the Inquisition, who coined the phrase “culture war.” Does Jay Grant criticize Mr. Graneys’s anti-Semitism? No! Does Jay Grant oppose the homophobia and just plain ignorance of Anahita Marquetant (my list of statesmen, scholars, scientists, and philosophers illustrated it was possible to believe in God(s) without being a Christian, a subtlety that totally escaped A. Marquetant). No! Does Jay Grant endorse the ramblings of Mr. Enderle, a man who has run out of ideas and now repeatedly quotes himself from his previous letters. A man who would rather preach than think. No! Why? Because Jay Grant uses his Black Magic to fan the flames of community hatred, intolerance, and ignorance. Out of hatred, intolerance, and ignorance comes fear. In a flash of light and a puff of smoke Jay Grant appears to the trembling crowd, black cape swirling about scattering harsh light. Fleetingly, a supple crimson pike appears and disappears. Grant, offering protection and revelation, loudly announces “You must believe in me first, for it is only then I will take you to Jesus!’ What sense can a community like Laguna Beach make of the snake-oil salesmen carrying a Bible in one hand and lynch rope in the other preaching from a pulpit of sun bleached bones?
Two last points. You are right, Jay Grant, the Bible is the best selling book in history. A book that no one reads, practices, or understands (thank God!). Second, you criticize me in your withered little column for writing lengthy “diatribes” in the Coastline (and indirectly criticize the Coastline for giving me half a page) but ignore the lengthy hate filled diatribes of your apostles, Graney, Enderle, and Marguetant. What can we make of this obvious hypocrisy. Could it be, Jay Grant, you are suffering from a deep seated case of Column Envy?
Friday, September 1, 2000
Biblical Literalist
More than 2500 years ago in ancient Greece Aristotle invented three laws for thinking clearly. Aristotle termed these laws “Logic.” Aristotle invented logic because he wanted to open a shorter pathway to discovering the “truth”. One of these laws is commonly known as the Law of the Excluded Middle. The Law of the Excluded Middle says if two statements (statement “A” and statement “B”) contradict each other then either “A” is correct or “B” is correct. Logic requires that both “A” and “B” cannot be correct. But there is a third possibility: both statement “A” and statement “B” can be incorrect!
Lets put Aristotle’s Law of the Excluded Middle to the test. Before 1492 many educated people argued and debated that the earth was flat. The debate sizzled over whether the earth was flat like a pizza box (to use a modern analogy) with four corners or was the earth flat and round like a pizza pie. Did the earth have four corners or was the earth round? The argument raged for centuries until Columbus proved that the earth was neither square and flat nor round and flat but rather the earth was a sphere. Both statements, “A” and “B,” were incorrect.
What does the Bible say about the shape of the earth? According to Is.11:12, “And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.”
In the Bible, according to Dan.2:35, “Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. This could only be possible on a flat, disc-shaped earth and not on a spherical earth because “a great mountain” that fills a spherical earth will simply increase the overall diameter of the earth with no noticeable change in topography.
The Book of Daniel continues with (Dan 4:11) : “The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth. Only on a flat earth would this be possible since you cannot see over the horizon of a round earth.
In Mt.4:5-8, “the devil taketh him (Jesus) up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them.” In Lk.4:5 the story is repeated: “and the devil, taking him (Jesus) up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.” It seems Jesus, 2000 years ago, surveyed before him a flat earth!
Finally, in the book of Revelation (7:1), the Bible tells us: “And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.”
Mr. Enderle, above I offer more evidence, straight from the horses mouth, showing why the Bible is not the bastion of all encompassing truth. On the contrary, the Bible is replete with errors, contradictions, and false logic. You tell us the Bible is not a scientific journal, but you will use the Bible to tell our teachers how to teach biology, astronomy and cosmology. You tell us the truth does not have to make sense because “...God is far beyond anything we can imagine or understand.” But in the next paragraph you tell us that Jesus is God’s gift to mankind. Unless you have God like understanding, how do you know? You could not possible get it from the Bible because it is full of errors, contradictions, and false logic. So, how do you know, Mr. Enderle?
With finger wagging, you say every doctor, lawyer, businessman, scientist, professor, judge, and philosopher who studied the Bible came away “...one hundred percent...Christians”. Does your list include Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, Benedict Spinoza Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg, Max Planck, Isaac Asimov, Richard Feynman and Stephen Hawking? None of these folks were/are Christians but all of them in one form or another studied the holy books some of which the Council of Nicene in 325 proclaimed to be the Bible. Does your list include the tens of thousands of philosophers and clergymen who speak for the 5 billion people on earth (80%) who are not Christians?
You arrogantly state, Mr. Enderle, “I didn’t see the need to belittle (me) about the... various verses because I made the same kinds of errors....’ I submit, Mr. Enderle, you will not explain the verses because as a True Believer you are not capable of explaining their literal meaning without being forced to put a spin on what the verses are saying literally. In other words, you will have to interpret the Bible. Interpretation, as you well know, is dangerous to your frame of reference because interpretation leads inexorably to relativism. True Believers (including you Mr. Graney), because they are absolutist , when faced with any evidence which contradicts their comfortable faith based prejudices withdraw into complete obscurantism. One cannot judge a person by what that person thinks of himself and one cannot judge the Bible by what the True Believers say it says!
Any literal interpretation of the Bible requires a rejection of logic, reason and three million years of constantly refined human observations of nature. Biblical literalist like Mr. Enderle and his pal Mr. Graney demand that every word written in the Bible is the “Truth” requiring, as human beings, the suspension of logic and thought. They tell us we must turn our backs on our capacity to reason and explain, to use our large brains to understand our world, as it really is, and not according to the preconceptions of ancient superstitious observers. It is our ability to think that constitutes our soul and gives us heart; it is reason that elevates us. Instead, at the dawn of the 21st century, the Biblical literalist, Mr. Enderle and his pal Mr. Graney, want us to transform ourselves into their image of the perfect man: emotional, irrational, and unthinking living organisms reacting to their environment according to a cluster of genetically programmed and unalterable instincts like termites in an termite colony . The Biblical literalist want us to be governed by faith and faith alone. If you simply believe, they tell us, you need never think again. Personally, I would rather celebrate life with the heart and soul of human being instead of reacting to life with the genetic programming of a termite.
Lets put Aristotle’s Law of the Excluded Middle to the test. Before 1492 many educated people argued and debated that the earth was flat. The debate sizzled over whether the earth was flat like a pizza box (to use a modern analogy) with four corners or was the earth flat and round like a pizza pie. Did the earth have four corners or was the earth round? The argument raged for centuries until Columbus proved that the earth was neither square and flat nor round and flat but rather the earth was a sphere. Both statements, “A” and “B,” were incorrect.
What does the Bible say about the shape of the earth? According to Is.11:12, “And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.”
In the Bible, according to Dan.2:35, “Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. This could only be possible on a flat, disc-shaped earth and not on a spherical earth because “a great mountain” that fills a spherical earth will simply increase the overall diameter of the earth with no noticeable change in topography.
The Book of Daniel continues with (Dan 4:11) : “The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth. Only on a flat earth would this be possible since you cannot see over the horizon of a round earth.
In Mt.4:5-8, “the devil taketh him (Jesus) up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them.” In Lk.4:5 the story is repeated: “and the devil, taking him (Jesus) up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.” It seems Jesus, 2000 years ago, surveyed before him a flat earth!
Finally, in the book of Revelation (7:1), the Bible tells us: “And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.”
Mr. Enderle, above I offer more evidence, straight from the horses mouth, showing why the Bible is not the bastion of all encompassing truth. On the contrary, the Bible is replete with errors, contradictions, and false logic. You tell us the Bible is not a scientific journal, but you will use the Bible to tell our teachers how to teach biology, astronomy and cosmology. You tell us the truth does not have to make sense because “...God is far beyond anything we can imagine or understand.” But in the next paragraph you tell us that Jesus is God’s gift to mankind. Unless you have God like understanding, how do you know? You could not possible get it from the Bible because it is full of errors, contradictions, and false logic. So, how do you know, Mr. Enderle?
With finger wagging, you say every doctor, lawyer, businessman, scientist, professor, judge, and philosopher who studied the Bible came away “...one hundred percent...Christians”. Does your list include Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, Benedict Spinoza Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg, Max Planck, Isaac Asimov, Richard Feynman and Stephen Hawking? None of these folks were/are Christians but all of them in one form or another studied the holy books some of which the Council of Nicene in 325 proclaimed to be the Bible. Does your list include the tens of thousands of philosophers and clergymen who speak for the 5 billion people on earth (80%) who are not Christians?
You arrogantly state, Mr. Enderle, “I didn’t see the need to belittle (me) about the... various verses because I made the same kinds of errors....’ I submit, Mr. Enderle, you will not explain the verses because as a True Believer you are not capable of explaining their literal meaning without being forced to put a spin on what the verses are saying literally. In other words, you will have to interpret the Bible. Interpretation, as you well know, is dangerous to your frame of reference because interpretation leads inexorably to relativism. True Believers (including you Mr. Graney), because they are absolutist , when faced with any evidence which contradicts their comfortable faith based prejudices withdraw into complete obscurantism. One cannot judge a person by what that person thinks of himself and one cannot judge the Bible by what the True Believers say it says!
Any literal interpretation of the Bible requires a rejection of logic, reason and three million years of constantly refined human observations of nature. Biblical literalist like Mr. Enderle and his pal Mr. Graney demand that every word written in the Bible is the “Truth” requiring, as human beings, the suspension of logic and thought. They tell us we must turn our backs on our capacity to reason and explain, to use our large brains to understand our world, as it really is, and not according to the preconceptions of ancient superstitious observers. It is our ability to think that constitutes our soul and gives us heart; it is reason that elevates us. Instead, at the dawn of the 21st century, the Biblical literalist, Mr. Enderle and his pal Mr. Graney, want us to transform ourselves into their image of the perfect man: emotional, irrational, and unthinking living organisms reacting to their environment according to a cluster of genetically programmed and unalterable instincts like termites in an termite colony . The Biblical literalist want us to be governed by faith and faith alone. If you simply believe, they tell us, you need never think again. Personally, I would rather celebrate life with the heart and soul of human being instead of reacting to life with the genetic programming of a termite.
Wednesday, August 16, 2000
The Bible
Most folks never take the time to read the Bible but rely, without question, on the interpretations provided by their preachers every Sunday morning. The few who do take the time to read the Bible do so with awe and reverence . Then there are a few folks who actually study the Bible critically with the intention of discovering if the Bible is really the source of all “Truths.”
Mr. Al Enderle’s letter to the editor published in the local newspaper (8/11/2000) gives the impression he reads the Bible with reverential awe. According to Mr. Enderle, the Bible is chock-a-block full of truths on how to live a highly moral and sane life, one filled with love and compassion because “...God loves us all and wants what is best for us....” Moreover, I assume, Mr. Enderle has faith that a careful reading of the Bible will answer such thorny scientific and social questions such as: Where did man come from?; What does the universe look like?; What is the basis of our differences and how can we become one with our community and God? These are very noble questions. But are the answers found in the Bible so nobly elevated?
While discussing the possible scientific evidence for the genetic basis for homosexual behavior, Mr. Enderle makes the common mistake of confusing a scientific theory with an opinion. All scientific theories are based on experimental evidence and highly structured observations. Scientific theories are founded on observable and reproducible evidence and therefore scientific theories are “factual.” The sun does not move across the sky but rather the Earth rotates on its axis. This is a factual statement based on the Copernicus-Galileo-Kepler-Newton “theory” of planetary motion. What does the Bible have to say about planetary motion? According to Joshua 10:12, God makes the sun stand still in the sky so that Joshua can get all his killing done before dark. Moreover, according to 1 Sam.2:8, 1 Chr.16:30; Job 9:6, 38:4-6; Ps.96:10, Psalms 19:4-5, Is.13:10 104:5, Is.13:10, Mic.6:2, the earth is stable and does not move. If so, according to the Bible, the Earth must not spin on its axis or revolve about the sun. Four hundred years ago the Catholic Church used these Biblical passages to sanction and forbid anyone who advocated the Copernican heresy. Finally, in 1986 Pope John Paul II admitted the Church was wrong and apologized to the world.
In terms of biological evolution Charles Darwin and many scientific workers over the past 141 years have amassed a mountain of experimental evidence and structured observation to show that life changes over time flowing from one kind into another continuously. What does the Bible have to say about how animals change? According to Gen.30:37-39 , Jacob displays his (and God's) knowledge of biology by having goats copulate while looking at streaked rods. The result is streaked baby goats. It would seem the author of Genesis (God?) believed that genetic characteristics of the offspring are determined by what the parents see at the moment of conception. There are those in some Protestant denominations who are willing to make the Catholic mistake again.
Mr. Enderle informs us, “God defines sin.... and “God has given us guidelines....when we choose his ways, our lives take on a dimension beyond our wildest dreams!” Lets take a close look at God’s ways: In Ex.20:5, 34:7, God punishes the children for the sins of their fathers, (unto the third and fourth generations). Then there are God’s instructions for buying a slave.(Ex.21:2), and instructions for selling your daughter (Ex.21:7), Next, children who strike their parents are to be killed (Ex.21:15) . It's OK to beat a slave as long as he lives a day or two "for he is his money." (Ex.21:20-21) , then you must kill those who worship another god (Ex.22:20) . If you make God angry, he will kill you with his own sword (Ex.22:24) , and sabbath breakers must be killed (Ex.31:14-15, 35:2 ). God tells every man to slay "his brother, companion, neighbor" (Ex.32:27) , baby girls are twice as dirty as baby boys
(Lev.12:1-8), and homosexuality is an abomination to God (Lev.18:22) . Then the bible instructs if you have sex with a slave woman, you must then scourge her (Lev.19:20) , children who curse their parents, adulterers, and homosexuals must be killed (Lev.20:9-12) , woman with "familiar spirits" must be stoned to death (Lev.20:27) , the unchaste daughters of priests must be burnt to death (Lev.21:9) , handicapped people must not approach the altar (Lev.21:16-23) , cursers and blasphemers must be stoned to death (Lev.24:16, 24), and finally, some more of God's instructions for buying slaves (Lev.25:45-46). You are correct, Mr. Enderle, wildest dreams indeed!
Mr. Enderle teaches us, “Those of us who have children know that you don’t have to teach them how to lie, cheat and steal but you do have to teach them not to.” It seems according to your unscientific theory, Mr. Enderle, children are born with the instincts (a genetically programed behavior which cannot be altered by learning) to lie, cheat and steal. If you are right, Mr. Enderle, then I pray you’d better get the instincts of our kids reinforced right away by reading the Bible !
Mr. Al Enderle’s letter to the editor published in the local newspaper (8/11/2000) gives the impression he reads the Bible with reverential awe. According to Mr. Enderle, the Bible is chock-a-block full of truths on how to live a highly moral and sane life, one filled with love and compassion because “...God loves us all and wants what is best for us....” Moreover, I assume, Mr. Enderle has faith that a careful reading of the Bible will answer such thorny scientific and social questions such as: Where did man come from?; What does the universe look like?; What is the basis of our differences and how can we become one with our community and God? These are very noble questions. But are the answers found in the Bible so nobly elevated?
While discussing the possible scientific evidence for the genetic basis for homosexual behavior, Mr. Enderle makes the common mistake of confusing a scientific theory with an opinion. All scientific theories are based on experimental evidence and highly structured observations. Scientific theories are founded on observable and reproducible evidence and therefore scientific theories are “factual.” The sun does not move across the sky but rather the Earth rotates on its axis. This is a factual statement based on the Copernicus-Galileo-Kepler-Newton “theory” of planetary motion. What does the Bible have to say about planetary motion? According to Joshua 10:12, God makes the sun stand still in the sky so that Joshua can get all his killing done before dark. Moreover, according to 1 Sam.2:8, 1 Chr.16:30; Job 9:6, 38:4-6; Ps.96:10, Psalms 19:4-5, Is.13:10 104:5, Is.13:10, Mic.6:2, the earth is stable and does not move. If so, according to the Bible, the Earth must not spin on its axis or revolve about the sun. Four hundred years ago the Catholic Church used these Biblical passages to sanction and forbid anyone who advocated the Copernican heresy. Finally, in 1986 Pope John Paul II admitted the Church was wrong and apologized to the world.
In terms of biological evolution Charles Darwin and many scientific workers over the past 141 years have amassed a mountain of experimental evidence and structured observation to show that life changes over time flowing from one kind into another continuously. What does the Bible have to say about how animals change? According to Gen.30:37-39 , Jacob displays his (and God's) knowledge of biology by having goats copulate while looking at streaked rods. The result is streaked baby goats. It would seem the author of Genesis (God?) believed that genetic characteristics of the offspring are determined by what the parents see at the moment of conception. There are those in some Protestant denominations who are willing to make the Catholic mistake again.
Mr. Enderle informs us, “God defines sin.... and “God has given us guidelines....when we choose his ways, our lives take on a dimension beyond our wildest dreams!” Lets take a close look at God’s ways: In Ex.20:5, 34:7, God punishes the children for the sins of their fathers, (unto the third and fourth generations). Then there are God’s instructions for buying a slave.(Ex.21:2), and instructions for selling your daughter (Ex.21:7), Next, children who strike their parents are to be killed (Ex.21:15) . It's OK to beat a slave as long as he lives a day or two "for he is his money." (Ex.21:20-21) , then you must kill those who worship another god (Ex.22:20) . If you make God angry, he will kill you with his own sword (Ex.22:24) , and sabbath breakers must be killed (Ex.31:14-15, 35:2 ). God tells every man to slay "his brother, companion, neighbor" (Ex.32:27) , baby girls are twice as dirty as baby boys
(Lev.12:1-8), and homosexuality is an abomination to God (Lev.18:22) . Then the bible instructs if you have sex with a slave woman, you must then scourge her (Lev.19:20) , children who curse their parents, adulterers, and homosexuals must be killed (Lev.20:9-12) , woman with "familiar spirits" must be stoned to death (Lev.20:27) , the unchaste daughters of priests must be burnt to death (Lev.21:9) , handicapped people must not approach the altar (Lev.21:16-23) , cursers and blasphemers must be stoned to death (Lev.24:16, 24), and finally, some more of God's instructions for buying slaves (Lev.25:45-46). You are correct, Mr. Enderle, wildest dreams indeed!
Mr. Enderle teaches us, “Those of us who have children know that you don’t have to teach them how to lie, cheat and steal but you do have to teach them not to.” It seems according to your unscientific theory, Mr. Enderle, children are born with the instincts (a genetically programed behavior which cannot be altered by learning) to lie, cheat and steal. If you are right, Mr. Enderle, then I pray you’d better get the instincts of our kids reinforced right away by reading the Bible !
Saturday, January 1, 2000
Times Arrow
In essence, when philosophers debate the nature of the universe, their arguments boil down to whether the universe is dynamic, static, or a combination of each. In other words, does the universe change? Does the universe remain the same? Do some things in the universe stay the same while others change?
A thousand years ago philosophers argued that the universe was mostly static with highly localized places, here and there, where things were changing. Yes it was true that people were born, they lived, and they grew old and died. But that dynamic was changeless. Change in the midst of changelessness. Common sense said look around at the mountains and the seas; do they become something else? The Bible taught the world that all existence was created out of God’s whole cloth in six days and has not changed since creation itself.
After the scientific revolution began in the 1500’s, it became clear that the opposite appeared to be true. The English scientist Isaac Newton, building on scientific work from the previous 150 years explained that motion was about changing position, location. But according to Newton, motion was more than that. It is only when motion changes that we notice motion. If motion changes speed, either speeding up or slowing down, it becomes noticeable. If motion changes direction, you notice it. In other words, if you accelerate, you notice the acceleration. If you do not accelerate, but you are still moving along at a constant speed in a straight line, you do not notice your motion. We only notice motion when motion changes and change requires time. Motion and time are inseparable because time is embedded both in the motion and in the change in motion. Thus motion and time cannot exist without the other. From Newton forward the big questions facing the deep thinkers of the day were: Which form of motion dominates the universe, constant motion or acceleration? Is it possible to accelerate and not notice it? If it is possible to accelerate and not notice it, how can we tell the difference between constant motion and acceleration? Since we cannot notice constant motion, does constant motion even exist? For the same reason, does motionlessness exist? In the midst of all this debate, some thinkers divided the universe into the dynamic physical and the static spiritual. In the physical universe change is normal and it is really about motion, and motion is about time. In the spiritual universe everything is changeless, timeless, and eternal. Accordingly, the great philosophical debates over the long centuries are really about time.
Despite our cultural and national differences, everyone on earth has time in common. Time dominates our lives. We live a certain amount of time then we die. Does the Arrow of Time continue flying forward in some new form after death or does it fall to the ground? Is there a beginning and an end to time? Eternity is another way of saying time has stopped. Can the Arrow of Time fly in reverse? Can the Arrow of Time change its speed? Can we travel backward in time? Can we travel forward into the future?
Addressing the last two questions, Albert Einstein said no and yes. Around 1900 Einstein decided to take a closer look at Newton’s ideas about time. Newton assumed that time was in constant motion. Time moved at a constant tick-tick-tick never slowing down or speeding up. Tick-tick-tick forever and ever. Einstein thought that time may actually accelerate. We cannot travel to the past because the potential exists for the time traveler to murder a grandparent and thereby destroy the time experiment before it began. That is a paradox that cannot be resolved. Einstein formulated the Twins Paradox which he did resolve: identical twins agree between themselves that one twin will make a journey into space in a high-speed rocket, flying at nearly the speed of light, while the other remains on Earth. After seven years of exploring the cosmos, the traveling twin will return home to discover she has aged less than her identical twin who has aged 60 years! Time travel to the future was possible! For Einstein, time was not absolute as Newton believed, but relative to the speed the observer was traveling. Laboratory experimentation and the observed behavior of cosmic rays confirmed that the consistent tick-tick-tick of time slows down as speed increases until time slows to a crawl as you near the speed of light.
Although it may not be possible to physically travel back in time, it is possible to observe the past from a safe distance. As astronomers look deeper into the distant reaches of our universe, they are also looking back in time. Telescopes are actually time machines that look into the past. Two hundred years ago another paradox came to light. Olbert’s Paradox stated that there is an inconsistency between the observation that the night sky is dark and the observation that there are more stars than grains of sand on all of earth’s beaches. If the universe is infinitely old, it was reasoned, star light from so many stars should bathe our night sky in a glare of light brighter than daylight. Olbert resolved the paradox logically by showing that the universe is not infinitely old and therefore the light moving from more distant stars has not had enough time to reach earth. The best observational data today tells us the universe is about 13.8 billion years old and the universe is expanding in all directions. Not only is the universe expanding in all directions but the expansion is accelerating. Extrapolating backward in time to the distant past, the universe was a much smaller place than it is today. Modern cosmology seems to have answered some of the big questions of philosophy. Neither constant motion nor motionlessness exists. Everything in the universe is accelerating all the time even if that acceleration is not noticed. More profoundly, change is the normal state of the entire universe.
Everything is changing all of the time everywhere in the universe including here in the United States of America. So the question is what kind of change do we want? Who should benefit from change? Who should sacrifice for change? Which direction should that change go? How can we influence change?
This blog site is my small attempt to influence the Arrow of Time. If I can nudge the Arrow, accelerate the Arrow, into another direction, a direction that leads to real peace instead of perpetual war, real freedom as opposed to the constitutional fraud most of the world lives under, and needs satisfied instead of poverty generalized, great! The problem though is the Arrow of Time is far too big for one person to change its direction. If, on the other hand, many, many hands nudge it, the Arrow of Time will accelerate away from injustice, war, exploitation, and hate and in the direction of socialism.
December 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
