Pedantic Moment: Where Do We Live?
The other morning I was watching a report on the local Twin Cities' morning news about the expected traffic and travel levels for the Memorial Day Weekend. They had a video montage, way too short, looping over and over. I noticed something. This local morning news program, which serves the Twin Cities metro area, was showing traffic video from Chicago.
Why Chicago? Where do they think we live?
Being a skeptic who wishes to get others to become better critical thinkers can be a frustrating hobby. As one of my show ID sounders states, it's like constantly pushing the rock of reason up the hill of paranormal. So, being a skeptic trying to dispel the notions of unscientific thinking is rather like a game of whack-a-mole, there always more nonsense to deal with. Often it's the same old nonsense popping up again and again.
It gets rather discouraging.
But, every once in a while, something happens that indicates that skeptics are having an effect. For instance, on a recent edition of the Mike and Mike Sports Talk show on ESPN radio, one of the Mikes talked about a concept he had just learned: Occam's Razor. I was impressed that he described it properly. His guest co-host hadn't heard of the very effective skeptic's tool and neither, I suspect, had a large portion of Mike and Mike's rather sizable audience.
I think we skeptics can count that as at least making a dent.
It gets rather discouraging.
But, every once in a while, something happens that indicates that skeptics are having an effect. For instance, on a recent edition of the Mike and Mike Sports Talk show on ESPN radio, one of the Mikes talked about a concept he had just learned: Occam's Razor. I was impressed that he described it properly. His guest co-host hadn't heard of the very effective skeptic's tool and neither, I suspect, had a large portion of Mike and Mike's rather sizable audience.
I think we skeptics can count that as at least making a dent.
It's Not True: This Is Not A Kid's Drawing
 |
| My daddy also drew this. |
I spotted this on a clickbait site that was meant to illicit laughs from children drawing adults doing things the children didn't understand. There were about a dozen images and four or five of them were like the one above: Drawn by an adult.
When I suggested as much on Facebook, some people commented that their grandchildren can draw that well. Sure. OK, theirs are child prodigies. However, the rest of the mere mortal children of the world just don't draw like this. The face is too well proportioned and the mouth with its surrounding facial hair is too properly placed. The eyes and nose are perfectly sized and placed.
Children do not tend to have sketchy lines. They usually draw their lines more directly. And they also don't write in all caps.
It's my considered and somewhat expert (I am an artist) opinion that this drawing was done by an adult attempting to my it look as though it was drawn by a child.
At least the Rs aren't backward.
When I suggested as much on Facebook, some people commented that their grandchildren can draw that well. Sure. OK, theirs are child prodigies. However, the rest of the mere mortal children of the world just don't draw like this. The face is too well proportioned and the mouth with its surrounding facial hair is too properly placed. The eyes and nose are perfectly sized and placed.
Children do not tend to have sketchy lines. They usually draw their lines more directly. And they also don't write in all caps.
It's my considered and somewhat expert (I am an artist) opinion that this drawing was done by an adult attempting to my it look as though it was drawn by a child.
At least the Rs aren't backward.
Dennis Prager Wrong About Judaeo/Christian Values
I think Prager is a decent, intelligent, and thoughtful man. I've
heard him talk and have watched a few of the videos his Prager
University produces. I sometimes find myself agreeing with them.
Probably because they agree with my personal biases.
However, I think he fails with his video asking whether humans are more valuable than animals or not. His contention is that secular moral values value humans less than the morals held by those with Judaeo/Christian values. He's trying to say Judaeo/Christian values are more humanist than humanist values, because they come from God.
He uses Nazis and abolitionists as his prime examples. Yes, he also uses the Commies and there he has a stronger point. Prager argues the Nazi's secular values led to their devaluing human life and to the Holocaust. And that abolitionists' Judaeo/Christian values led to their opposing slavery.
First, the Nazis. "Gott mit uns" ("God with us") was emblazoned on the uniforms of the German soldiers. Perhaps not Judaeo given the Nazi attitude toward Jews, but certainly Christian. The Commies in the USSR arose in largely Christian populated countries didn't keep Christian sentiments as part of their soldiers' uniforms. And Hitler had made statements about the Christian values of the Nazi party. I think I'll take Hitler at his word.
Second, I'll give Prager the fact that the abolitionist movement was largely Judaeo/Christian in its values, but the values of the slave-holding states were also largely Judaeo/Christian. Those fighting for State's rights (and, really, so that the wealthy could keep their slaves) could point to chapter and verse in the Bible, the users guide for Judaeo/Christian values, to demonstrate that God sanctioned and laid down rules on the keeping of slaves. Christian Apologists would point to some of the inferences made in the New Testament that appear to be anti-slavery, but I'm unaware of any specific verse condemning the institution of slavery.
In that, the slave-holders had a stronger case that God wanted them to have slaves. They could quote chapter and verse. I would argue the abolitionist movement had an element of humanism in their values, which, in part, led to their opposing the institution of slavery.
Prager also brings up PETA and abortion, which I don't address here. I'm not sure how I'd refute those points, but when he brings up Nazis and slavery, I think his argument fails.
There is another video Prager made on how murder isn't wrong unless there are Judaeo/Christian values. I mentioned video refutations of that video: One by Michael Shermer and one using Christopher Hitchens' arguments. It may not the same video I challenged, but many of the same themes are in both.
Let's Call Them UFBs
The term blobsquatch was coined to describe the blurry photos, films, and videos of bigfoot offered as evidence of the large cryptid's existence. Well, flying saucers also have the same kind of crappy evidence, so I figured we ought to call them UFBs - Unidentified Flying Blobs.
One of the more recent videos to surface of UFBs comes from a Oklahoma local TV news weather report. The weather reporter is discussing what can be see in a video of a oncoming storm. He doesn't mention the two UFBs that can clearly be seen.
Do you know why he doesn't mention them? Because they were bugs calling across the windshield of the vehicle of the videographer who took the storm footage. Duh!
Movie Recommendation (Music Video Edition): Going Mobile - Simon Townshend (2012)However, I think he fails with his video asking whether humans are more valuable than animals or not. His contention is that secular moral values value humans less than the morals held by those with Judaeo/Christian values. He's trying to say Judaeo/Christian values are more humanist than humanist values, because they come from God.
He uses Nazis and abolitionists as his prime examples. Yes, he also uses the Commies and there he has a stronger point. Prager argues the Nazi's secular values led to their devaluing human life and to the Holocaust. And that abolitionists' Judaeo/Christian values led to their opposing slavery.
First, the Nazis. "Gott mit uns" ("God with us") was emblazoned on the uniforms of the German soldiers. Perhaps not Judaeo given the Nazi attitude toward Jews, but certainly Christian. The Commies in the USSR arose in largely Christian populated countries didn't keep Christian sentiments as part of their soldiers' uniforms. And Hitler had made statements about the Christian values of the Nazi party. I think I'll take Hitler at his word.
Second, I'll give Prager the fact that the abolitionist movement was largely Judaeo/Christian in its values, but the values of the slave-holding states were also largely Judaeo/Christian. Those fighting for State's rights (and, really, so that the wealthy could keep their slaves) could point to chapter and verse in the Bible, the users guide for Judaeo/Christian values, to demonstrate that God sanctioned and laid down rules on the keeping of slaves. Christian Apologists would point to some of the inferences made in the New Testament that appear to be anti-slavery, but I'm unaware of any specific verse condemning the institution of slavery.
In that, the slave-holders had a stronger case that God wanted them to have slaves. They could quote chapter and verse. I would argue the abolitionist movement had an element of humanism in their values, which, in part, led to their opposing the institution of slavery.
Prager also brings up PETA and abortion, which I don't address here. I'm not sure how I'd refute those points, but when he brings up Nazis and slavery, I think his argument fails.
There is another video Prager made on how murder isn't wrong unless there are Judaeo/Christian values. I mentioned video refutations of that video: One by Michael Shermer and one using Christopher Hitchens' arguments. It may not the same video I challenged, but many of the same themes are in both.
Let's Call Them UFBs
One of the more recent videos to surface of UFBs comes from a Oklahoma local TV news weather report. The weather reporter is discussing what can be see in a video of a oncoming storm. He doesn't mention the two UFBs that can clearly be seen.
Do you know why he doesn't mention them? Because they were bugs calling across the windshield of the vehicle of the videographer who took the storm footage. Duh!
It's a faithful and very tight version of the song. Simon's vocals are up to the task and maybe even better than what his famous brother would have been able to do if he would ever play the song live, which, apparently, was something he refused to do.
This version rocks!
Dimland Radio opening theme song: 'Ram' by The Yoleus
First ad break bumpers: 'Boy About Town' by The Jam & 'Spring Collection' by The Vapors
First ad break bumpers: 'Boy About Town' by The Jam & 'Spring Collection' by The Vapors
Second ad break bumpers: 'Undertow' by Suzanne Vega & 'From The Air' by Laurie Anderson
Closing song: 'Angler's Treble Hook' by $5 Fiddle
That's it! See you next Saturday night for Dimland Radio 11 Central, midnight Eastern on www.ztalkradio.com you can also download my show from the z talk show archives page. You can email your questions and comments to drdim@dimland.com
No comments:
Post a Comment