Category: Random


God can not exist.

God can not exist.

All of existence is contained in a super-dimensional field which is lethal to all Gods. This field – known as the Deity Obliteration Field – is undetectable to humans and any instrument humans have ever devised. It cannot be seen, felt or detected in any way and it is lethal to any God of any kind and Gods are the only conceivable beings that could posses the ability to perceive this field. It is especially lethal to any Gods that have the property of omnipotence or omniscience. Nothing – including Gods – can exist without this field – it is the prime requirement for anything at all to have the property of existing.

By definition, the moment a God starts to exist, its existence is summarily ended due to the Deity Obliteration Field.

Unless one can prove that the ODF does not exist, no God can exist by definition. If one is able to prove that the ODF does not exist, that same proof will be applied to the claim of any God existing thereby automatically proving that that God does not exist.

It therefore follows that either the existence of the ODF can be proven or it can’t be proven but it in either case no God can exist.

God does not exist.

So… I got some mail. It’s probably spam. I can’t really tell. But seriously, check this out:

From: Calculated Energy

I have unprinted book. The book is special from all book on earth.
The book depends on nature and calculated energy. You,atom,electron,green light,earth,sun, the solar system,galaxy,the univers,the cosmo… are calculated energy. Calculated by the energy calculator. You are calculated to be the mind of earth. The book is written amharic. Will you help me to publish the book ?

Yeah, so, what to say about that. An unpublished, special book, written in/about/for/by ‘amharic’? And it’s about something… something… *drool*.

And that is all I have to say about that.

An often used argument in favour of Christianity is that without God one isn’t able to be moral, that morals come from God. A great many religious people have made that argument or have asked the question (how can you be moral without God) and insist that the basis of morality is religion or at least the deity of that religion. Of course, Christians insist their God is the basis of morality. Muslims insist it’s their God. Jews insist it’s theirs.

The Bible is filled with many do’s and don’ts but probably the most famous list is the ten commandments. The second list of ten things the almighty creator of the universe wants you to do (or not do) since the first list got broken by Moses during a tanty he threw upon seeing his people worshipping a golden effigy of the offspring of a cow. What most people – most Christians even – don’t know is that there are actually 613 commandments in the Bible. Hasidic Jews follow all of these laws strictly, Christians follow none of these laws unless it suits them. The law condemning homosexuality for example, is hauled out by tattooed bigots when it’s handy while completely disregarding the law right next to it against tattoos.

What’s quite obvious when you read these ‘laws’ is that they are wholly inadequate for any kind of decent moral system. Especially a modern one. There are no laws against slavery; in fact, there are laws on how to properly operate as a slaver. There are no laws against child abuse. The laws around rape include instructions on how much a rapist should pay the father of the victim.

Clearly these ‘laws’ are a terrible basis for any kind of civilised community.

For an example of a set of statements that do constitute a code for decency and civility one does not have to look far to find something created by humanity that is vastly superior to anything any religion has ever come up with.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a document that is the very embodiment of everything that is right and moral. It says all of the things that religious codes would have said if the deity of that religion actually existed and wasn’t a psychotic mass-murdering tyrant. It is quite telling that the greatest objection to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights come from Islamic countries who insist they are governed by a ‘religion of peace’ while subjugating women and partaking in some ludicrously barbaric traditions and application of law.

If a loving actually God existed, The Declaration of Human Rights would have been it’s code of conduct. That the Declaration of Human Rights exists and was created by human cooperation is proof that no such God has ever existed.

A couple of stand-out passages from the declaration:

Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

In only a few short sentences humanity proves its self superior to any deity ever previously imagined.

Read the full declaration here: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ and the Wikipedia page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

It’s my birthday and my awesome wife managed to – by some arcane means, a miracle even – acquire an original Nichola Romney painting. It’s totally fucking awesome and I love it!

Behold the pure, unadulterated awesome that is my very own work of heathen art:

Saligia II - Nichola Romney

Saligia II by Nichola Romney

It’s titled “Saligia II” and its beautiful. If you’d like to extract some meaning out of it, start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saligia

From the artist:

S A L I G I A – latin representation of the seven deadly sins. Color representation here, red-sin, gold-glory, black-corruption. The Catholic/Christian church, holds itself out to be the ‘universal/ultimate/absolute’ church of God. Do people ever ask how this widespread belief became so accepted?

Researching religion & its heritage is a fascinating subject, learning of the church’s fallacious origins, its violent and oppressive history, and it’s deployment of ‘The Crusades’ (their armies), in enforcing ‘their’ religion as being the ‘true’ word of god, gives insight into how the ‘prominence’ of the church came about. The Crusades, massacred, tortured, raped and oppressed millions, all in the name of ‘God’, over a span of several hundred years.

I have to take this opportunity to thank both my wife and Nichola Romney who conspired to get me this epic birthday present. I love it. Heathen art is my favourite kind!

I’ve got a bit of a conundrum. Well, OK, maybe it isn’t. Whatever.

The issue is this: some time ago I linked to a Christian site (http://www.christian-faith.com) in one of my posts and specifically to a page on the site about Christian ‘testimonies’. The post is titled ‘Finding God‘ and the context for the linking is this paragraph:

So a personal god then, by definition, intervenes in the real world where humans exist and he might do so through miracles, by answering prayers and by communicating with people. I’ve been to Christian ‘revival’ meetings (Rhema specifically) where ‘the holy spirit’ was claimed to have ‘touched’ people, to the point where they fell over and lay on the floor twitching (there is a rather amusing post in that for another time). And there is the plethora of ‘testimonies‘ for various miracles and healing that a god is alleged to have caused.

Now, the issue is that one Mr. Michael Fackerell – apparently the owner of http://www.christian-faith.com – has emailed me twice asking me to remove the links to his site (I’ve only linked to the testimonies part). I find this somewhat confusing for a number of reasons…

Christian ‘testimonies’ are, after all, for the purpose of showing that the Christian deity exists and ‘does things’. They are purportedly eye-witness account by Christians about how the creator of the universe personally intervened in their lives to make stuff happen. As far as I understand, eye-witness accounts of things are used to convince people of the truth of something… and for little else. In this context these ‘testimonies’ provide a feedback loop to Christians to reinforce their delusion and presumably to convince those people who doubt the existence or efficacy of the Christian deity… of the existence and efficacy of the aforementioned deity. I think it will be pretty difficult to make a case for Christian ‘testimonies’ existing for any other purpose than: to be used to convince people – Christian on not – that this deity exists and does stuff.

Why then, would one want to remove a potential audience from these accounts? I would think that – considering this command directly from the lips of the god-man Jesus himself:

28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

… that you’d want as many links as possible to the page with ‘testimonies’ about the greatness of the creator of the universe so that you can get as many people from as many places converted as possible. No? Strange.

I mean, I’d be the first to admit that this site and these posts are pretty unkind to Christians and their ridiculous delusions but still, why attempt to remove any opportunity to gather more sheeple? You’d think that gathering more sheeple would sort of be a priority… but then again the world is littered with examples of the specific disobedience of the explicit wishes and commandments of that particular almighty creator of the universe by its alleged believers.

Perhaps it’s my complete lack of religiosity that makes it so hard for me to understand. Perhaps it is my bullshit filter. Who can say.

The second reason of course is that I’m doing the site a page rank favour by linking to it. Contextually. Perhaps Mr. Fackerell just doesn’t understand how the internet works?

Which brings me to the conundrum. Should I acquiesce (to late for that perhaps?) to his request – I will be the first to admit that it’s a very polite request – and take the time to go edit an old post (and now this one) to remove links to the man’s site for reasons I fail to comprehend or do I just ignore the requests and hope he goes away and continue to provide him the fantastic benefit of page rank and free traffic?

It’s for his own good, really.

When an honest man discovers he is mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest.

Religion: the thing that makes honest people dishonest.

Thought for the day

Don’t ask what the meaning of life is.

You define it.

Oh, hi!

Hello my lovelies. Having taken a several-month hiatus from posting I think I’m about ready to get back into it.

Between a pretty scary amount of work I have been (and still are) swamped with at the office, it’s been difficult to focus on blogging or anything else at all. Having lost all respect for Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers, Matt Dilahunty and the atheist/skeptical community in general not so long ago has also put a massive dent in my motivation. The whole ‘elevator gate’, Freethought Blogs and Atheism+ thing completely disillusioned me with the atheist/skeptical community. It’s a sad thing; things seemed to be going so well…

I think I’m over it now. I’ve accepted that most people, including a great many ‘rational’ atheists are self serving fucktards and I should be a bit more careful about who I hand my respect to. So I’ll just do that then.

Anyway, new year, new start. I’ve just come back from an epic holiday with my wife, refreshed and ready to rock. I’ll see how things go when I get back to work but right now, this very minute, I am in the mood for writing. Hopefully it stays with me and I get back into a regular posting routine.

Be totally awesome good people of the internets, we’ll talk soon.

Happy 50k views to me!

Happy 30k views to me!

Happy 50k views to me!

Happy 50k views to me! Happy 50k views to me! Happy 50k views to meeeeee eeeeeee. Happy 50k views to me!

Milestone.

Took too long but to be fair, I haven’t been posting much (read: at all).

Be awesome.

Random update writing.

I’ve been remiss in posting and I know that. I’m taking a bit of a break from the godless stuff for a while. This dumbfuckery with/from Freethought Blogs and Thundrerf00t have put me off. I’m surprised how much it’s affected me considering how I’ve essentially got nothing to do with the ‘community’.

I am ambivalent about Thunderf00t releasing info from a private mailing list that he was legitimately added. I’m disappointed by what was released. Maybe disgusted. I don’t know.

That Matt Dillahunty is chiming in as well disappoints me. I’m fucking over this shit. I’ve un-followed a bunch of people who’s opinions I used to enjoy. I’ve stopped reading blogs I previously read… religiously. I’m not watching the video’s I used to.

I’m a bit disillusioned about the atheist/skeptical community at the moment. Perhaps it was overdue; I probably had unreasonably high expectations of people to begin with.

As it turns out, everybody is the same. Most people are assholes, even godless liberals. The only thing this ongoing drama has taught me is this: be more sceptical of everybody – they are probably worse people than you think.

I’ll post again when some religionut pisses me off enough or if some awesome science inspires me.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 125 other followers

%d bloggers like this: