Don’t Like: This Asshat’s Logic on “Why Athiests’ Arguments Do Not Work”

April 2, 2009

First off he never really addresses atheist’s arguments and just makes hilarious statements and conclusions instead. But first, a qualifier!

1) I am somewhat at odds with logic. It’s is an incredibly useful tool of construction/deconstruction and often provides the crux of philosophical theory. But logic itself is not, and has never been, the definitive system for “answers,” philosophical or otherwise. The basic scientific principal of “correlation does not mean cause” prevents it so, and yet most logic depends on that being true. While it may seem that “science” as we know it was invented in the 17th-18th century, really the basic tenants have always been routed in the pillars of observation and appropriation. There’s a timelessness to those qualities, just as their is a timelessness to logic, but they are interdependent on one another and have always been. More so, in the age of increasing scientific propriety, observation, data collection, and technology, we have a legitimate ability to gain actual substantial answers to long theoretical questions and problems. With that, logic has become the currency of the intellectual disaffected and the occasional dead weight of lunacy.(1)

Enter this asshat.

There’s a lot of general stupidity out there with which I have absolutely no problem. I generally like to single out the most amusing or most outrageous in some kind of personal way. So like those, this guy is special (assuming he’s serious. Which I think is true. More on that later). But this seems to think he is the god of logic. But so often the problem with logic is that YOU define the variables and if you define them wrong you can go of an logic bender that leads you to a stunningly crap-tastic conclusion. So let’s go on a journey.

First off, there is his claim that Atheists don’t believe in god, because they can’t see god. He compares this to the fact that we can’t see air, but we know it’s there.  Sigh.  The obvious problem is that we can see air. You use a thing called a “microscope” (well a powerful version of one) or other scientific instruments with which we can look at and analyze the molecules that make up this “air” thing you speak of.  Even better, he then uses the comparative example of “not being able to see your own brain, yet it exists.” Well tell you what, I’ll go grab my dad’s Vietnam era machete and give a good slice across your forehead, grab a piece of your brain and show it to you before you die. Because you’re sitting and talking to a camera, yes, even you have a brain (of course this implies your sliced brain would still have visual functioning capability). See we have TANGIBLE ways of actually seeing these invisible examples you speak of. The atheist argument is dependent on the fact we currently have NO TANGIBLE ways of seeing god. (2)

The next part is equally awesome. Saying that proposition of God’s existence inherently begins as a 50/50 chance is a total falsehood.  Just because there are two possible answers, does not mean there is an equal chance of those answers being correct. It’s like saying there’s a fifty/five chance I’ll be hit by a falling lime green Boeing jet today. The odds are actually dependent on, you know, the probability of said event occurring, not the number of a possible outcomes. It is one of the most basic pillars of logic and one of the first things you learn on the subject: An either/or result does not facilitate either/or logic.

Which then brings him to the “51%” thing where he goes from his already incorrect 50/50 probility of god existing to the the long-pause-inclusive “but. there. is. evidence!… of him, existing!” deduction is high comedy. Needless to say said evidence isn’t presented and instead we’re just treated “we exist” followed by a statement which implies 100% of god existing by saying “And if he didn’t exist there would be nothing.” Just awesome. It becomes evident he has no idea where he is in his logistical timeline and is pretty much winging. Then sequeways with a sort of nice equivalent of saying science can’t prove anything “because it’s logic.” Which is oh so failsafe.

The also also best part comes right after that with “the four most evil people in history of human history” (nice repeat) were atheists… followed by the hilarious DOUBLE eyebrow raise (a kind of awesome you get me? you GET me? ATHEISTS ARE EVIL, eh?). Followed by the prefect double hand open of obviousness.

Just Killer.

The also also also best part is his other videos are even more hilarious, offensive, and culturally charged (the one on sex hurting the vagina being okay in particular), but this one highlights his logistical failures much more acutely.

Psychologically speaking, his arguments are oddly solipsistic. He is taking special care to deny almost any other singular influence on his opinions. Most like to reference and support, his logic is instead a wholly insular enterprise. It is an increasingly common behavior on the internet and something I find to be a result of 1) a disconnected society and 2) bad learning habits. But that’s all conjecture. The dude is funny to watch.

There’s a lot of belief that this guy is playing a character and these segments are a joke. Who knows? The problem is that it doesn’t pass my gut test. I look at him and it reads real even if his statements are ludicrious (a good deal of Christians seem to be just as offended by his nonsense giving them a bad name). He’s just too good the personality type. He’s simply too good at playing the self assured, withdrawn, intellectual type who is probably a libertarian, thinks no one is as smart as he is, and dismays that society does not live up to his standards. Which makes me sad… I’m going to hope he really is playing a character.

It should be said there scientific arguments/theories for god’s existence (the big bang, etc) that are at least somewhat interesting. It’s all deeply theoretical and miles away from having scientific legitimacy, but it’s still interesting and enjoy reading about it. And no, I’m not talking about intelligent design. Any scientific theory that is built on “we haven’t figured this shit out yet, so it must be god” is about as faulty in logic/science/basic life skills as you can get.

For those  questioning my motives, as everyone tends to do, I really don’t have a stake in the answer. I might believe in God, but I lean sort of atheist. I’m not sure. I just know that I care about the methods we use to come up with “answers”, because often the methods inform the answers themselves.


1- This statement however does ignore the problems created by conflicting data and the mass amounts of misinformation.

2- There are some interesting theories, which I address a bit at the end above.


Like: The Geek Heirarchy

March 5, 2009

Warning. Do not try to read this. Click on link below.



What is the most wonderful thing about the Geek heirarchy? It’s unflagging accuracy. There isn’t a single thing I can find wrong with it in the way of discourse. It’s a wonderful achievement in the annals of fanboy and geek semantics. It also belittles your potential interests! Either way. Just great stuff.

It’s also completely hilarious.

Props go to K. for alerting me to this many moons ago.

and remember, we’re official: YAY!

Don’t Like: The Reoccurring Dream Where I Travel Back In Time To My 7th Grade Self

January 26, 2009

People wish they could go back in time, well… all the time.

It’s a neat concept right? You could go back to the dinosaurs! Or, um, go back and beat up that kid who tormented you. Or do… stuff. Well, it’s totally neat right?

Yeah, except that it totally sucks.

I’ve been having a reoccurring dream where I travel back in time to 7th grade. Not so bad one would assume, but instead of “physically” doing so, it’s just my 26 year old mind going back into my 14 year old body.

Do you remember 7th grade? Waking up at 6 am, going to school, being with immature 7th graders, having normal self-esteem issues, studying very basic subjects like PRE-alegbra, and a lot of these subjects you understand on a conceptual level WAYYYY better now, but you’re stuck in 7th grade still having them be presented in cookie cutter terms. Also your music sucks, you look awkward, and you’re not able to try out for the basketball team because you have cancer stitches in your back (and probably wouldn’t have made it anyway). Also you have to read way less good books than you did in 6th grade and will in 8th grade for some reason.

Well, imagine doing it all again.

To tell the truth I actually liked 7th grade, but I was generally a sort of agreeable fellow and I was becoming friends with my bff, so that’s nice. Plus at the time you are so completely unaware of the tedium and relative lack of importance of all that you do, but nonetheless it is that important “character building” stuff that helps make us who we are. But I already am who I’d be so I just wouldn’t have the patience… Especially getting up that early.

So began the difficult process of telling my parents I’m from the future. It is a difficult process, but if there is anyone in the world who will believe you, no matter how ridiculous, it’s your parents. The problem comes with everyone else. How do you convince a school to take you out of classes for something radically advanced? I’d write a heckuva a lot better, but would I show all that calculus I can’t remember? Tell them about large super-collider that was built? Start trying to remember little predictions to prove things for people even though I hardly remember anything date specific? Next year the spice girls become popular! What can you do to convince the world? Do you even try to tell people in the first place? Or do you keep it a secret?

This tangentially brings up the BIG issues in the dream. Imagine knowing the future for the next 12 years or so. What would you do? Do you go out with different people? With your confidence of your mid-twenties do you change your entire demeanor? Do you bet on sports? Does that change the outcome? Do you seek out the person you fall in love with later in life? Do you kill that pedophile who creates the backstreet boys and N’Sync? Does doing so sever the precursor to the neo-alt-rock movement that was pretty awesome? Does doing any of this alter the course of history so that you really WOULDN’T know how live goes after a certain point?

Then there’s the big ones. Do you tell people about 9/11? Morally of course, it’s the right thing, but is it really the right thing? We’re talking about but it’s something that shaped EVERYTHING about our modern society. It’s now modern americana, it’s like if the japanese never attacked pearl harbor. For all it’s horror, it’s something that transforms a national consciousness. What are we like without that? Are we better off?

What do you do?

Amazingly fucked up.

I need some water.

Like: That I Got Free Coffee Today!

September 19, 2008

All because I knew the answer to a trivia question: what planet is closest to the sun?
The answer is Mercury!

I asked the guy if he had given away a lot of cups of coffee this morning and he shook his head sadly. “everyone keeps saying earth, I even had to put up an A, B, C”

I looked to my right, there was even “A. Venus. B. Earth. C. Mercury”

I looked back at him, “yeah…” is all he said.

But oh well, sorry humanity, i gots free coffee!