Eating less means people consume less food!

The new issue of Skeptical Inquirer reprints Stephen Barrett’s “Analysis of Kevin Trudeau’s ‘Natural Cures’ Infomercial”. It’s like MST3K for skeptics. Stephen just wrote down most of the things I used to sit there yelling at Trudeau on 47 screens on Sunday mornings when I was working at Fox. Good times, those were.

I thought I’d link to it again because a) “Kevin Trudeau” is the number two search term used to find my website (second only to “nautical star tattoos” — and kids, bad idea = getting the new trendy symbol marked on you, because: do you know how long trends last? now, do you know how long tattoos last? compare your answers here…), and b) I still feel irresponsible for having access to a television station’s copy of this bullshit without so much as “misplacing” it when I quit. I feel a little bit better to know that nobody watched anything that station aired except for The 700 Club and American Idol. But somebody managed to get the book out of Walgreens, and I still feel compelled to write at least 47 letters of complaint. Maybe not until I acquire a typewriter and become at least 5% more curmudgeonly. I mean, I’m already curmudgeonly, but not so much that it overcomes my affinity for doing absolutely nothing…

One day I hope to become at least as curmudgeonly (er, pseudo-curmudgeonly) as Ted L. Nancy, Lazlo Toth (Don Novello) or these guys. So far, I have only one cat. I’m aiming to collect at least 27 more.

P.S.

Curmudgeonly.

I swear on the bible that Bart Sibrel is loony.

Just got through listening to Bart Sibrel (remember that moan hoax fucktard that Buzz Aldrin punched?) vs. Phil Plait and Michael Shermer (as if there’s any contest) from yesterday’s Dave Glover Show on 97.1 FM St. Louis. The recording is here.

Yes, Bart Sibrel is a notorious asshat, and his lunacy grows tiresome quickly (if you know who he is, you’ve already heard everything he has to say eleventy-seven times), but hearing Phil and Michael have to hold their tongues and stifle their laughter (not always entirely successfully) while he’s still midsentence making his accusations of conspiracy, and false analogies was delightful. This “debate” is highly recommended by me. Phil’s follow-up post is here.

Personally, I’m not entirely convinced that even Bart believes that the moon landing was a hoax. The lack of smartitude that would be necessary to buy his worthless arguments is truly mind-boggling. If I wasn’t so busy wanting to punch the guy myself, I’d feel rather sorry for him.

They’d better start coming up with excuses NOW

I was just reading another crackpot article about the Mayan Long Count Calendar. Pointless to link it — just the same old bullshit. I’m only posting this entry to say that I cannot wait until the end of December 2012, when absolutely nothing of cosmic significance will happen, to see what kind of garbage the loons will come up with to explain why the world is still around. Cannot fucking wait. It’ll be like X-Day (July 5th, 1998 — the day the Church of the Subgenius claimed as the end of the world), except not a joke (and therefore, infinitely more hilarious). Probably along the lines of all those goofs the Jehovah’s Witnesses have made. They’ll just push the date forward a few years, until the next major planetary alignment, and then spend 2013 reinterpreting Mayan relief sculptures to back them up… Or maybe they’ll admit that they were wrong, and I won’t have to hear their crap any more. Yeah. Right.

References, please

It’s just too hard to be properly amused by the claims of kooks when they don’t include proper references to the texts they’re blowing way the hell out of proportion or misinterpreting. I know that half of the time they can’t provide references because they’re just making the shit up from scratch (or they’re communicating with demons or with extraterrestrials) (okay, that’s exactly the same thing), but the rest of the time, citations in correct ASA format, plz.

New rule

I will no longer engage those whose opinions are based entirely on faith in debate about those opinions. I’m afraid that one of these days my head will explode. I’ll supply or lead to information where I can, when someone might actually be interested in real actual truly true facts of truth. But that’s it. Faith is irrational. How is science supposed to compete with that! Facts that just exist on their own!? Amazing!

(Real actual quote, well, er… paraphrase that I encountered recently: “If one so much as suggests that [insert batshit insane claim here] is true without proof that can only be supplied by [insert Evil organization that is covering it up and will therefore never supply that proof], accusations fly of paranoia.”

Yeah, you are indeed being a little bit fucking loony there. How the hell do you argue with crap like this! Where to even begin!? You can’t get proof, but that’s okay, you’re right anyway!? Guh? You’re admitting that you’re full of shit, and that being full of shit is essential to your cause!? And that everyone else is wrongfully accusing you of paranoia because they don’t believe you anyway, despite the fact that you’re admitting that you do not now, and will never have proof? This is where greymatter starts leaking from my ears.)

As far as I can remember, I’ve been a skeptic. I therefore do not have any insight into how one might escape from lunacy. But experience teaches me that no amount of logic can convince someone who is completely dedicated to believing something, no matter how irrational. So no more wasting my time. Ugh.

This leaves me with a problem. How the hell do I escape from conversations initiated by someone else, while defending the honor of Critical Thinking? Won’t it look like complete and utter crap must be true, if I refuse to come up with an argument against it?

And how in the hell do I get people to quit comparing me to a Vulcan. Damn it, I can’t help it if they’re illogical. And it’s just not in my nature to sit there and let them be highly illogical in my vicinity.

Unless I’ve been drinking. If I’ve been drinking, I will gladly participate in some nutty nutjobbery. I’ll be mocking the other participants in my head, but still. It’s an entertaining stretch of the imagination. Damn, the imaginations of some of these kooks make me feel so inferior. Stretched so far that they’re in danger of bursting!

(Let’s see if I hold myself to all of this. Some of these people are just so maddening. I’m not sure if I mean that in the sense that it makes me angry, or the sense that it makes me crazy.)

Maybe instead of instant gratification…

…NASA actually wants to wait for the dust to clear, and to have some time to analyze data before releasing results. You fucking loon!

I am so satisfied. Look’s like Hoagland’s blog is starting out, at least, to be all that I hoped for. Regularly updated psychoceramics. A laugh and a half, on a more regular basis. Hopefully someone else will catch onto this stuff and become active in debunking it. I don’t have nearly enough knowledge of astronomy to do so, but geez, even I know obvious complete and utter crap when I see it. Then again, I’m really not sure why anyone bothers with this guy at all anymore. He’s such a freakin’ loon… I can’t even convince myself 100% that he’s not joking…

(P.S. Hoagland brings that “dirty snowball” crap up yet again. Read this for additional bullshit, and read this for a little bit of sanity.)

(And P.S. — XMM-Newton detects water on Tempel 1)

I couldn’t resist…

Bush’s Subliminal 9/11 Backdrop?, taken from Alex Jones’ Infowars mailing list:

This one has even got me “creeped out.” I feel like I need new foil for my hat, but it just seems too clear to be a coincidence.

Look at this picture of Jr.’s speech and tell me what you see:

Oh noes!

Then ask yourself, why are those two flags folded in such an unusual manner?

This is what I see: Two towers, one on each side of Bush. AND, if you think of the blue field of each flag as the top of a “9” (with the red stripe at the bottom right hand corner of the blue field as the bottom of the “9”) and each red stripe to the right of the field as “1”s – they clearly say “9/11.”

As Jr. himself once said, “here’s no need to get subliminable about this . . .”

Here is my response:

What a fucking joke!

I’d believe him if he claimed that demolition of the economy is an ‘inside job’

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And ‘Inside Job’

A former chief economist in the Labor Department during President Bush’s first term now believes the official story about the collapse of the WTC is ‘bogus,’ saying it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7.

I don’t know why people want to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. I’m sure that the reasons are many and varied. But this guy exemplifies one theory that’s come up a number of times:

Reynolds, now a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University, also believes it’s ‘next to impossible’ that 19 Arab Terrorists alone outfoxed the mighty U.S. military, adding the scientific conclusions about the WTC collapse may hold the key to the entire mysterious plot behind 9/11.

It’s pretty scary when you think about it, that a few guys with boxcutters could have done what they did, and done it so easily. But it’s not a very involved scheme, and hijacking an airplane is probably at the top of the list of “most unoriginal terrorist plots”. But it’s on that list for a reason. It’s not terribly complicated, very little equipment to gather, no mucking about trying to buy black market uranium and such. And unless your terrorist buddies can’t keep a secret, it’s a secret that’s probably pretty easy to keep. So what’s so hard to believe? What was stopping them? What’s stopping them now? Not a whole hell of a lot, apart from a few inconveniences at the airport (okay, maybe it’s at least marginally harder to hijack a plane these days, but I wouldn’t know, I haven’t tried).

So let’s not think about how easy it was, and how easy it might still be for someone motivated enough. Too stressful. Who can live, thinking thoughts like that all day. Let’s cling to our belief that no one can outfox the Americans. If anyone could have done this, it had to have been through a highly involved “mysterious plot” that reached to the very top of the United States chain of command. Let’s strengthen those beliefs by nitpicking the quantitative data given to us, and despite that we are not qualified to do so, and have no fucking idea what we’re talking about, let’s assume that we are correct in doing so and that the engineers are just plain wrong (hell, that they’re actively lying to us), because it supports the conclusion that we are committed to believing in no matter what they say, anyway.

Well, I hope it makes life easier. at least it’s a more interesting story. It needed some spicing up. The real one is kinda… meh.

I shouldn’t need to point out that this latest conspiracy article that’s circulating and being used as yet another log to fuel the fires of lunacy is based on the beliefs of a goddamn economist. Er, yeah. Those Bush economists don’t even have the economy figured out, let alone the intricacies of structural engineering. And this guy doesn’t even have anything to add, he just says “yeah, I kinda sorta think that those conspiracy guys have a point, but since I don’t really understand what any of these people are saying, I’m just going to parrot the guys I choose to side with”. No inside information or anything. Boring. Oh, but he must know what he’s talking about. He has a tenuous connection to the White House!

Humbug!