This wasn't particularly well thought out or anything, but I went into this short Photoshop project with the intention of creating an entry for a Cracked magazine photoplasty contest "What if famous personages of history were born in the wrong era?" or something to that effect. When I finished it, I realized that there was no specific single historic personage represented beyond the fact that the original painting used was created by Jules Brunet, famous French combatant on the side of the Bakufu forces in the Boshin War of 1868-9. In my photoplasty, he is the field "photographer" of an out-of-time event that wasn't supposed to happen in Japan (well, arguably, ever!) until 1945.
So, without further ado, here is my photoplasty of Japan's premature atomic solution to the Restoration war. The question remains: who in Japan could have invented the bomb in the mid-19th century? But let's not overthink this.
Tennessee Terakoya [テネシー の 寺子屋]
Monday, July 8, 2013
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Open Your Eyes to the Reality, Chick Fil-A. Marriage is a Right for Gay as Well as Straight
Today is August 1, 2012, and I recently learned it is also
something called Chick Fil-A Appreciation Day.
There isn’t a franchise anywhere near where I’m sitting, but even if there
were, I wouldn’t. Since Chick Fil-A as an organization has gone so far as to
endorse an exclusionary political stance, i.e., standing against gay marriage
rights, I wish to exercise my free rights not to allow any of my money to
support such a consciously ignorant and hateful affiliation. I mean, it isn’t like
traditional man-woman marriage is a perfect institution or anything. And what
about all those studies that have shown homosexuality is genetically
predetermined (or a result of particular embryological conditions)? What about
all those upstanding test case children of gay parents? I’d say the evidence
for your stance against gay marriage is slowly being swept away by the
verifiable evidence that gay marriage is not monstrous and it does not warp
children or turn otherwise straight people into raving queens or dykes. (Forgive
me for not posting links to studies here, but I plead “pain from broken finger”
as an excuse to keep this short! Google them; they’re out there!)
My "orange" wig to show support for the gay community. Also notice the purple reflection. That's for empathy. You know, that "Do Unto Others" bit that's so important in interpersonal relationships! |
Back to today. Over on Facebook, there is a concurrent
observance called Open your Eyes, Minds and Hearts Day,
in which everyone is asked to wear purple or orange to show support for the gay
community in the face of Chick Fil-A’s
ineffectual attempts at cowardly bitch-slapping. Wear orange if you’re
straight and purple if you’re gay, or wear both to show your empathy (or for
all y’all pansexuals out there). In honor of this event, I colored my signature
green wig orange, and in some pix I also added purple to the reflection in the
mirror to show empathy. I may identify as a straight person, but I believe in
appreciating beauty in all its forms and presentations. I’d gladly wear Spock’s
IDIC and endeavor to personify it.
Oh yeah, if you want to be really snarky, go to Chick Fil-A
and just order water, and be sure to cite Proverbs 25:21 when you do! Voting with your wallets indeed!
One last though before my finger is totally immobile: if you
are married, think of all the perks and benefits you or your spouse enjoy in
the legal and financial realms. Think of custody rights, insurance, survivor
benefits, all sorts of stuff. Now imagine all those rights are denied to you
and/or your spouse arbitrarily. Put yourself in the place of a gay couple and
truly understand how they are being discriminated against.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
My Alien Abduction Terror: A Study in PTSD
I'm WAAAAAATCHING YOOOOUUUUU!!!!! Hehe hehehe...NOT! |
Some of you have read about my horrific experience 22 years ago, wherein I shook hands with Death via a violent home invasion and rape. But
it might interest you to know that the aftermath included something that seems
unrelated but must truly be directly influenced by the trauma. In short, I
spent a week hiding out at my grandmother’s house in Florida, sleeping in her
guest bedroom where I had slept many times before. Only this time, I was
visited with visions of grey aliens every night. I could not sleep for fear
of waking up in the grip of several jabbering aliens with needles and
restraints. If you think I’m exaggerating, I might, at this late date, be
inclined to agree. But at the time, it was a dark obsession; every time the
lights went out, I saw aliens.
The disconnect might join up for you if you realize that my
mother had given me her copy of Whitley Strieber’s Communion to read shortly
before this. Mom was always into paranormal, magical and other weird stuff. She
even had a tarot deck and a Ouija board. I don’t think she ever used the Ouija
board though; it sits in my garage…somewhere. The infusion of a breathless,
emotional account of Strieber’s abduction experiences wormed their way
into my ravaged, stressed-out post-trauma brain and lodged in my dreams. As a
result, I slept with abduction anxiety for a week or so. If I were more credulous, I
would have affixed great significance to the fact that I heard my father’s
voice in my head so loudly it caused me to roll violently out of bed, only to
see him pulling out of the driveway early one morning during my stay at Grandma’s
house. Surely, the sensitivity of the traumatized brain is amazing, or I experienced telepathy .
These and other experiences have led me to believe that
humans indeed possess capabilities that might be deemed paranormal, but I would
not go as far as calling them supernatural. By definition, anything that
happens in the natural world is “natural.” Thus, I keep my mind open to the
possibility of paranormal phenomena. But many times, the most obvious
explanation is the right one. If you’re ever traumatized like I was, I don’t
recommend reading Whitley Strieber books, ok?
Monday, June 11, 2012
You’re HOT, Birthday Girl! Love, Mom.
A pretty watercolor flowery image |
In a few minutes, I’ll be officially a year older than I was
a few minutes ago. Happens every year, you know. This year I’ve racked up big
number 47, and most of my family has tended to forget my birthday. I don’t
particularly mind this, because it is a mixed blessing to turn 47, after all.
But I think of the alternative and decide it’s overall a good thing. My mother
remembered me, and she sent me a card in the mail. I opened it today, a pretty,
decorative card with the Greeting Card Co. sentiment. So I read along, and it
slowly gets just a slight bit weird, like maybe she’s lost her mind or closed
her eyes and picked a card at random. This particular card begins:
“Ever since we became family,
I’ve been impressed by you.”
OK, I can see that. After all, I came out on the end of
forceps looking like a miniature of Frankenstein’s monster. That’d impress
anyone, really. The language is a little strange, as if I became family
sometime after the Frankenstein delivery. But, to continue, it goes on:
“You know who you are
And you show it proudly.
You follow your dreams and work hard to make them
Come true…”
All this is under the nice, generic, “happy birthday
daughter” rubric, so I’m hangin’ with that. After a stanza or two more of this,
I turn the page to the greeting card punch line:
“You’re an incredible woman,
And I’m happy to have you in my life.
Happy Birthday
With Love.”
Now I feel like this is a card meant for a lover or a wife
or something. Don’t get me wrong; I love my mother, and I’m happy to have her
in my life, but I can’t picture the phrase, “You’re an incredible woman” coming
out of her mouth. That’s something a lover says to his hot babe or something,
or God forbid, something a very drunken suitor says at the bar when it’s
nearing 2 a.m. and you’re the only possible pickup target left at last call.
But hey, Mom sent a $30 check too, so I’m willing to go with
the whole “incredible woman” thing. Maybe she’s trying to make me forget I’m middle-aged
or something. Thanks, Mom! I love you too!
Friday, April 27, 2012
Carl Sagan's Alien Moon Base and Vintage UFO Sensationalism: Frank Edwards Tells His Tales
As an undirected, wandering student, I used to really enjoy
fantastic tales that purported to be real. So, the old, battered 1960’s
paperbacks by Frank Edwards, a sort of Art Bell for the 1960’s. His books were
collections of short tales of mysterious disappearances, unexplained phenomena,
UFO’s…you know, all the stuff that conspiracy theorists think are absolutely
true but are being systematically covered up to prevent the people from knowing
what’s really going on.
Oddly, I never really caught the “true believer” bug of the
conspiracy theorist, but I always enjoyed the titillation of the breathless
narrative that made everything SEEM like it must be a genuine occurrence of the
extraordinary. As a child, I wished that aliens would land in my front yard and
take me with them. I dreamed of working side-by-side with Mr. Spock as a sort
of junior science officer. And somehow, in the misty past of the 1960’s, it
seemed that the edge of the unknown was important government business. After
all, the whole decade was dedicated to reaching the Moon.
This morning I found a youtube video from those
fuzzy-outline days, a series of slides overlaying a radio presentation by that
very same Frank Edwards, “Flying Saucers, Serious Business.” I have the
paperback here—somewhere. I read it years ago in a fit of bedside dreaminess.
I was interested to find, right around the 34 minute mark, a
reference to Carl Sagan, who Edwards claimed was the “advisor on
extraterrestrial life to the military.” Well, I didn’t see that on his other
online biographies! Here, Edwards notes
Sagan’s speculation that we have probably already been visited by beings from
other worlds. But wait! He also says these aliens (the imagined probable ones
that are out there somewhere) could have bases on the dark side of the Moon. It
seems there was a common belief in the early 1960’s that we might have already
been beaten to the Moon by space aliens, and that we might have to be prepared
to fight for our lunar territory. How fascinating to see such popular rumor and
how it arises! Edwarrds tells it all in that matter-of-fact vintage reporter
style.
Of course, now that we’ve seen the other side of the Moon, that
speculation has to be thrown out. Only the woo types who believe we have never
set foot on the Moon can hold on to it now. That’s why it’s “woo.” For those of
you out there who want to see the dark side of the Moon, here’s footage!
So far, no alien moonbase.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Presuppositional Apologetics Can Eat My Shorts
My graphic depiction of the disconnect between Bible literalists and the scientific worldview. Images from Wikimedia Commons, public domain license. |
I admit I have not been very regular in writing on this
blog. I made the cardinal mistake of assuming I should have something real to
talk about, with real substance behind it, before I delved into the business of
putting the idea into words. Lately, I decided that, if I wait for that kind of
inspiration, I probably wouldn’t write another word for months. So I took a bit
of advice from this helpful article
and decided to just pick something that irritates me. Unfortunately, it still
took me 2 days to put together the whole post (mainly because of visiting
relatives and annoying constant interruptions-yeah, I’m making excuses!)
If you’ve seen my Twitter profile, you’ll read that I
identify myself as an “apathetic agnostic,” which is lazy-speak for “I’m not
religious, and I don’t really care about the fine points of religion.” Somehow
that doesn’t ring completely true though, when I decide my favorite podcast of
the week is Seth Andrews’ The Thinking Atheist , which explores the human side
and the social realities of being atheist in a predominantly Christian society
(middle America). The fine points of the atheist vs. Christian worldview often
escape me, but I found my interest growing when I realized how intrusive
religious dogma was becoming, extending now to children’s classrooms here in
Tennessee, where the so-called “Monkey Bill” has opened the door to allowing
degreed scientists (who should know better) to spread misinformation and lies
to the open minds who will lead the next generation. That way lies the new Dark
Ages, and that is what really scares me. But on to Presuppositional
Apologetics, which I consider to be somewhat of a dishonest parlor game, rather
than an honest attempt to prove God’s existence.
Few things irritate me more than blatantly ignorant
assertions that refuse to allow dissension or even a peep outside the narrow
world of the proponent. The field of Presuppositional Apologetics has got to be
the single most annoying and closed-minded mind trick that literalist
Christians have come up with thus far to redefine reality. Proponents Eric
Hovind (son of “Maximum Security Kent” Hovind) and his bulldog Sye ten Bruggencate
have been making the rounds of atheist talk shows online lately, spreading the
massive headache that cuts off all possibility of rational communication.
I blame tenBruggencate in particular for ruining my
enjoyment of DPR Jones’ The Magic Sandwich Show and Seth Andrews’ The Thinking
Atheist podcasts with his willful refusal to allow arguments based on fact and
reason. In fact, I think the succinct and peremptory response of the folks at
the Fundamentally Flawed podcast had the right idea. I don’t even think Sye got 30 seconds in, because he refused at the outset to
abandon his insistence that the Bible must be taken as the basis of all
knowledge before he would even begin to allow an exchange. No neutral ground
here…
That’s the real problem with this dishonest philosophical
framework known as Presuppositional Apologetics. The very premise it dictates,
that the Bible is the source of all knowledge and nothing can be known without
“presupposing” its integral part in reality, then anyone attempting to argue
for a reality without reliance on literal Biblical inerrancy cannot even begin to set
forth an argument. It is basically “ Bible Blinkers ,” disallowing any
worldviews that do not take the Bible as canonical reality at the outset. Who
can argue with someone who will not listen even to your first utterance?
So, like Jim, Alex and Kat at Fundamentally Flawed, it seems
wise to say “Bye-bye Sye” and simply focus on using reason and testable
evidence to prove the existence of reality that makes a literalist Biblical
approach less and less probable simply by accretion of proof that contradicts
Young Earth Creationism and other small-minded outgrowths of the unfortunate
phenomenon of Christian literalism. What ever happened to an acceptance of
Bible stories as allegorical tales? The literalists are shooting themselves in
the foot when they assert that a thousands-year-old book can tell us scientific
truths about our modern world. It is backward-thinking and poses a danger to
the younger generations who will carry the human race into the future.
I am no debater, nor am I a theologian or philosopher, so I cannot speak to
the finer points of this doctrine of presuppositional apologetics, but I’ve
seen it play out in conversation, and it is not pretty. My scientific training
causes me to cry out in disgust of the blatant disregard for the testable
nature of reality as it is observed in the natural world.
It is the very worst of closed minds
championing a lost cause, hanging on to a crumbling world view simply on the
power of wishful thinking. If you want the best ammunition against a
presuppositionalist, I highly recommend this counter-apologetic from C0nc0rdance,
another of the regulars on the biweekly Magic Sandwich Show. In a way,
this clear-thinking answer to the frustrating deafness of Sye ten Bruggencate
vindicates the efforts of DPR Jones and the rest of the MSS crew, who were
obviously massively put off and somewhat taken by surprise by Sye’s refusal to
engage in adult discussion from a neutral ground. Now that the beast of Presuppositional Apologetics has lost its shock value, we can see that it has
no real substance, and it can now join the ranks of dishonest arguments that only hurt the
cause of Christianity.
I mean, really. Why don’t mainstream Christians denounce
these nutcases? Their aggressive, bullying tactics only make the whole of
Christendom look bad. At least Richard Dawkins and the Archbishop of Canterbury
had a civil, polite and decorous conversation, each retaining respect for the
other through polite disagreement. Even William Lane Craig’s “I win because I
say so” arguments follow the rules of debate. Eric and Sye belong in time-out
on the kindergarten playground. Their methods are evasive and dishonest. Is
this sort of con game what Christians want to represent their world view?
Some frustrating and/or amusing encounters between atheists
and presuppositionalists Hovind and tenBruggencate, along with some postgame
analysis :
The Magic Sandwich Show (Sye, Eric Hovind , Thunderf00t ,
DPRJones , AronRa , C0nc0rdance )
The Thinking Atheist podcast w/DPR Jones and Sye
Grappling Ignorance (with lots of links to other videos
dealing with Presuppositional idiocy)
PZ Myers Talks to Sye as if to a 6-year-old child
Saturday, March 31, 2012
News Flash: Creationism Proven Correct! Richard Dawkins Discovered to Be God (from the AFN* News Service: 4/1/2012)
In a shocking new discovery, researchers at the Human Genome Project discovered an unusual artifact hidden deep within a recently parsed set of genetic data. Unlikely as it seems, we have to consider the possibility that a particular coded sequence of base pairs in a sample taken from a Mrs. Fiona Lostmyhandbag of the tiny Scottish village of Nothindhuin may have a pointed message. We must also consider that this may be undeniable evidence of an intelligent creator. The only catch is that the intelligent designer is none other than Oxford evolutionary biologist Professor Richard Dawkins.
The transformed data sequence here shows an unmistakable imprimatur: (apologies to dnai.org for hijacking its chromosome closeup graphic)
The chances of such a complex coded message appearing by natural selection and random mutation are infinitesimal; so scientists have had no choice but to declare that Richard Dawkins is most likely God, the long-sought intelligent designer of the human race. When asked for comment, Dr. William Lane Craig said, “See, I told you so,” before promptly calling Professor Dawkins to congratulate him on his promotion.
Dr. Dawkins was asked to comment on his newfound status as Creator and Ultimate Deity. His reply was simply, “That’s bullshit.”
Critics of the “Dawkins is God” movement have countered with a claim that Dawkins may only be the creator of Mrs. Fiona Lostmyhandbag and no one else. Mrs. Lostmyhandbag was sequestered with the officials of the British Railways Lost and Found and could not be reached for comment, although her dog, a Chihuahua named Charles Darwin, had much to say on the matter.
*AFN: April Fool’s Network :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)