Even Stranger Bedfellows

Among the aborted short stories still drifting in the back of my mind was a piece about the…I don’t know exactly who he was supposed to be exactly. The Son of Perdition maybe. Like a lot of my fiction, there was going to be a punchline.

In this case it was a meeting of…whatever they are…world’s Luciferians. Illuminati maybe. The 1% of the 1%. A big party in a canyon where those who couldn’t get in were throwing themselves into pits of spikes and fire while the big dogs arrived in their armored humvees. The Antichrist was supposed to be speaking but somehow this other guy wound up taking his place. Complete with a human sacrifice, this was supposed to be the big end of religion as we know it.

But as I was piecing together the flow and plot in my head, it occurred to me: the tops guys are evil, right? They enjoy inflicting pain. So, what better way to end the story than a speech:

“…so here it is, folks. The moment you’ve been waiting for…

“6,000 more years of Abrahamic fundamentalism!”

The crowd laughed assuming he was kidding.

“No, really. I mean look at you, with your Beamers…your portfolios…and the rest of your bullshit. It’s what you deserve. You haven’t learned a goddam thing…”

Anyway, it would continue this way with some fun zingers {that seemed hilarious to me at the time in my state of surreptitiously drugged by government in order to cover up mass spying for insider trading at CIA and NSA}. It would end with him grabbing the proposed sacrifice and riding off on a motorcycle with the yuppies and billionaires all frantically calling on their cellphones trying to figure out why and how they had just been screwed out of decades of secret planning to reshape the world in their image.

I don’t recall precisely why I didn’t write that one up, but I do vaguely recall all hell breaking lose in terms of noise and distractions and I chose to concentrate on some other fiction instead.

Last night, I watched The Unbelievers. A documentary about the push by zoologist Richard Dawkins and physicist Lawrence Krauss attempting to bring atheists, secularists, and agnostics out of the closet.

I agree with them on several things. The idea that people have to lie about their religious beliefs in order to get elected, for example. That science should be getting a lot more backing, financial and political for another. It is also quite problematic that religion is so often used as an excuse to exclude, murder, or otherwise infringe on the rights of others.

However, I cannot help but notice a few other things and in light of current events, I think I may have to part ways on those. In fact, it may be the collusion with some of the people they claim superiority to in terms of morality that I take issue with for starters.

First, Krauss was put on President Obama’s science advisory board in 2008. I think we recall the first, or at least the first in recent memory, swearing in event that included mention of non-believers. It did appear that atheists might earn some respect. Since then we have, for example, Hillary, the likely shoe-in in 2016, stating that her favorite book is The Bible.

Next, there was the mystery of Christopher Hitchens’ support of the invasion of Iraq. Not really a mystery since Hitch explained his position as being in support of women’s rights. As he saw it, Islam stood in the way of progress. The film goes further into this explaining that the Middle East was the center of reason and science such as it was and it was wiped out by the rise of Islam.

In addition, we have the current situation of supporting and fighting nearly every single party in Syria and Iraq at the same time. Sides switch by the minute, and it starts to seem as though there is almost no rhyme nor reason to it at all.

I suggest that there is. The point is not the points being mentioned by the MSM at all. The point is that when it comes to really big moves, you need the backing of multiple powerful groups at once. In this case, the military industrial complex, who doesn’t care who it blows up so long as someone puts in an order for more, along with the Religious Right, who wants to evangelize the Middle East into a Christian region, and the Big Atheists who think a few less sky fairy followers will make for better world sometime in the future.

I’ve written, tweeted, spoken, etc. at length about my distaste for the former two groups. No need to repeat that. The bone to pick here is with those who agree with Dawkins and Krauss, and I am being a little unfair since as far as I know neither has come out and said publically that they agree with Hitchens on conversion via bomb.

But I think that’s the point. These powerful lobbies have struck a deal. Think about that for a minute. Sleep on it. Doesn’t it make sense?

Now, why do I have a problem with scientists taking this stance?

First, because they claim that they may hold better answers. Instead, they have come up with the very same answers that those they claim to despise have. It’s shameful. The best they can do to fight world hunger is to reduce demand for it and let Monsanto become a monopoly? The best that they have come up with for climate change is to reduce population?

It gets worse. A large portion of the world’s population needs to believe in something. I say that from a scientific perspective. The effects of placebos are a statistical, empirical, and therefore scientifically provable fact. Yet, it has not been explained by science exactly how it is that nothing {yeah, I’m poking at Krauss here} can result in healing disease.

Does it always work? No. Does it work often enough to be statistically significant? Apparently so.

New York Times, “Placebos Prove So Powerful Even Experts Are Surprised; New Studies Explore the Brain’s Triumph Over Reality,” Sandra Blakeslee, 13 October 1998:

nytimes.com/1998/10/13/science/placebos-prove-so-powerful-even-experts-are-surprised-new-studies-explore-brain.html

This same thing is what gets some people to survive natural disaster over others. Note that it was most often the people who do not take to cannibalism who ultimately survive situations in which others find it necessary. How? It’s not yet explained by science. It’s a evolutionary survival advantage and it is both unexplained and, it seems, disrespected by some top scientists due to its association with religion.

That is bias.

Without explaining that and offering up an alternative, and coupled with mass murder, science–as represented by some of these top folks–is throwing its hands up. If things are going to get very, very bad before they get better, people need better than this.

Now, let’s look closer at the logic and the long view, suspending for the moment the fact that these purveyors of reason are looking at death for a solution.

The implied argument is that Muslims are savage, uncivilized, and unreasonable. And yet:

Telegraph UK, “CIA ‘tortured al-Qaeda suspects close to the point of death by drowning them in water-filled baths’ :Exclusive: As the US Senate prepares to release a report documenting US torture programme after 9/11, Telegraph reveals new details about the scope of CIA excesses,” Peter Foster, 7 September 2014:

And yet:

Google search: military rape epidemic

And yet:

Google image search: drone damage

Who’s uncivilized? What makes, given the fact that privileged white men can sit in relative safety, separated from the rest of humanity as all manner of horrors are unleashed on the world at their behest, the West, the US, the UK, the EU, or any of the rest of world “more civilized”?

It’s a lie. And these men claim to love the truth and hate lies.

Ultimately, this is a pointless post. These kinds of scientists will claim that it’s because they didn’t have enough funding, because of the Religious Right, because of a lack of understanding on the part of the layman, or whatever else they want to blame.

“If only everyone thought the way I do.” So much for evolution. Apparently, they know who should live and who should die. They know better than the rest of us.

“If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.” If you can’t beat ’em, you suck.

Human.Epic.Fail.

I close with a link to a recent post by a former supporter of Dawkins’ who pulled her support over some of the things he’s said, positions he has supported. I suggest again: white man out of touch with reality. *

NeonTommy, “Unfollow Richard Dawkins,” Carrie Poppy, 23 September 2014:

neontommy.com/news/2014/09/unfollow-richard-dawkins

And a suggestion that the answer is right in front of us. How do we get there?

Not this way.

* Either that or the Pope is mindcontrolling him, lol.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

No comments yet.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s