Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Neo video games: mind controlled or mind control? - National Worldview and Science | Examiner.com

Mariano has posted an interesting article on mind controlled video games. I think he raises some valid points. I think that is a human mind can be read and manipulate a computer, I see no reason why it can't go the other way to some degree. Given the technology companies like Google are working one like Google's Glass, there is some evidence that things are going to be going this direction more and more..Some film-makers have created a short-film about how such technology would eventually look like. I would like  to point out that like all technology, this doesn't have to be evil or used nefariously. It can be used to help people and move us forward...provided we don't do with it as done at the end of the film.

Read Mariano's article here:

Neo video games: mind controlled or mind control? - National Worldview and Science | Examiner.com

And watch the short film I referenced here:


If you would like to know more about Google Glass check out this link and videos.
Project Glass: what you need to know




Enhanced by Zemanta

First Known Use Of OMG In Letter To Winston Churchill (PHOTO)

So when Solomon wrote that there was nothing new under the sun, he had a point. It turns out that "O.M.G."  was first recorded in correspondence almost 100 years ago in a letter to Winston Churchill from Lord Fisher back in 1917! I thought that it was only used in late twentieth century with people  passing notes in junior high school. Who knew?



First Known Use Of OMG In Letter To Winston Churchill (PHOTO)
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, August 6, 2012

Video Game Dating Advice [Pic]



Video Game Dating Advice [Pic]

Crip Walking on Heaux: Serena Williams' Gold Medal Dance Criticized

I should not be surprised given that our culture is brimming with racism, but Serena Williams has come under some tense criticism because when she won gold, she danced in victory and joy. Some people seem to think the dance was inappropriate. I just don't see why they would think that. It's an urban dance and comes from the culture she is a part of - and me too. It's insulting to call it or think of it as demeaning.




Crip Walking on Heaux: Serena Williams' Gold Medal Dance Criticized

Sunday, August 5, 2012

FacePalm of the Day - God and Thunderstorms

Today Debunking Christianity has not produced not one but two blog posts that must honestly result in FacePalms. Bot written by the usual suspects who never seem to disappoint for truly cringe-worthy arguments. The first one is by John Loftus and the second by Harry McCall. Both try to disprove the existence of God by attempting to show illogic and inconsistency in what Christians believe about God couched in theodicy. John Loftus wrote the following: 

Yesterday a thunderstorm got us. You've seen them approaching. You know their effects. I was thinking as one approached what God had to do with it. No really, what did God have to do with it? At what point did he decide when to send it?

Good question. I'd argue from the time God spoke the universe into existence, God knew when this particular storm was coming, where it went, and how long it would last. I'd argue this because of  God's omniscience. - which Loftus concedes that is a characteristic that describes God. 

Did he violate any known natural laws to do so? Did he make it rain here because of anything we had done or not done? Matthew 5:45 has Jesus, supposedly the Son of a creator God saying, "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."





Why would God need to violate natural laws in order for this storm to be created? There is no reason to conclude that or that the storm is a consequence of anything that particular people have said or done. The passage that Loftus quotes is taken completely out of context. Jesus was not talking about rain in terms of natural disasters but in terns of the sun and rain in the ways that benefits people.



 43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[i] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? - Matthew 5:43-47

I wonder why Loftus didn't use more appropriate words of Jesus....you know something that actually talks about why people suffer?

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” - Luke 13:1-5

With the rise of meteorology and of modern science how are we to understand this verse?

I don't think that Loftus understands the verse. 

We know what the ancients thought. They thought God literally makes these things happen. Well does he? Then God must continually intervene in the natural order of the world, to send the rain here rather than there. Does he do this? Then the world is full of miracles on a daily basis. If that's the case then we couldn't do any science at all, including predicting the weather.

Since when could we accurately  predict the weather? We can't - let alone control it.

Since we can do science then God doesn't intervene in the natural order of the world.

That is a seriously flawed conclusion based on nothing.  I think there is no way you can demonstrate that God never intervenes in the natural order no matter how often you assert it.

The very basis of science is predicated on a non-miraculous world order. Since science is possible a miracle working God doesn't exist. Scientists do not detect miracles in the natural world simply because they do not take place. This world looks exactly like one without a God in it. And if there is no miracle working God in our world now, then why should scientists think there was ever a miracle working God who created it? This goes for modern medicine too. The very fact that we can do medicine is predicated on the non-miraculous workings of the human body.

I would need to point out that the first of the greatest scientific minds of the modern world - Newton, Faraday, Copernicus, and many others -  would disagree. They believed that the reason that science works is because the universe was conceived by a mind that wants us to be able to discover the universe - God.



Christians have but one lame excuse. They try to save their faith from refutation by relegating God's activity in the world to merely creating the initial laws of nature.

I wouldn't make that argument. It is truly flawed. Why must it be God intervenes in nature moment-by-moment or not at all? The Bible does not give us the room for either flawed conclusion. God intervenes when God chooses to intervene. We have all heard stories of tornadoes inexplicably changing course, or whole neighborhoods being flattened in a natural disaster except for a single home.

This, however, is a deistic god not the Omni-God of Christianity, the one we read about in a canonized set of writings by ancient superstitious pre-scientific agency detectors. Such a God would have been rejected by Jesus himself, as this and many others passages in the Bible say. God is continually active in the world, the Bible says over and over. So doesn't this show us Jesus didn't know anything about science because like other ancient human beings he was a child of his times? I think so, most emphatically.

I think that Loftus makes the mistake that if a person accepts the idea that there can be miracles, then they must reject science. I see no reason at all that conclusion follows and he can't show that it does. Yes, the God revealed in the Bible is not deistic, however God is not said to be constantly fine-tuning everything moment-by-moment. 

Was Jesus a Man of Science?


Harry McCall wrote the following.

 John’s post got me thinking about my lake experience last month. While out water skiing, I noticed that when I cut my slalom ski, the spray behind my ski was making a rainbow in the noonday sun. So I decided to have some fun with God as based on his covenant with Noah. According to Genesis 9, God uses all rainbows throughout the world like a string tied around his figure to remind him: “Hey, you don’t need to use water again to destroy humanity!” (How quickly God keeps forgetting about the million he destroyed)!

God said, “This is the sign of the covenant which I am making between Me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all successive generations; set My bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth. “It shall come about, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow will be seen in the cloud, and I will remember My covenant, which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and never again shall the water become a flood to destroy all flesh. “When the bow is in the cloud, then I will look upon it, to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.” And God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth.” (Genesis 9: 12-17)



Compare what Loftus says the promise God made is and compare it with what Genesis says the promise is.

As I cut my ski, talking to myself I said, “God, show me your covenant with Noah.” God did!

As I cut a second time, sending up a spray rainbow, “I said, “God, show me your covenant with Satan.” God did!

Third cut spray, “I said, “Satan, show me your covenant with God.” Satan did!

Fourth cut spray, “I said, “Buddha, show me your covenant with Noah.” Buddha did!

Fifth cut spray, I said, “Show me a sign you don’t exist and the Bible is a lie via a rainbow. Damn, God does answer prayers, as he did!


This is a real stupid analogy because Noah didn't ask for the physical confirmation of the Covenant,. God did this.

More to the point, when it comes to the thousands killed in a tsunami, what difference does it make (apologetically) to the person (be it a Bible Believer or not) dying in a flood if the promise / covenant with Noah was about a worldwide flood? Rainbow or not, their asses are drowned!



There is a big difference. There will never  be another world-wide flood that will wipe out all life on land. God promised. 

Finally, if science wants to know about Global Warming flooding the major coastal cities . . . Screw it! Just look at the rainbow!



I haven't seen a single computer model anywhere that shows that Global Climate Change will lead to a flood covering the whole earth. Even if all the polar ice caps melt, there will still be dry land in some places on the earth. 

Thank you God!

 As well we should!
 
Debunking Christianity: Having Some Good Biblical Fun With God


Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, August 4, 2012

Elaine Brown: New Age Racism - YouTube




Elaine Brown: New Age Racism - YouTube

Did Jesus Resurrect from the Dead? (Gary Habermas vs Antony Flew) - YouTube


Did Jesus Resurrect from the Dead? (Gary Habermas vs Antony Flew) - YouTube
Enhanced by Zemanta

The Advantage of Being Awestruck - by @Jason_Silva on Vimeo

Hubble Ultra Deep Field is an image of a small...
Hubble Ultra Deep Field is an image of a small region of space in the constellation Fornax (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I found the following video very interesting.The argument is that because of humanity's ability to be inspired by our very existence and the universe around us, we are able to grow technologically and scientifically and driven to learn more as a species. By and large I agree, but I don't think that evolution can adequately explain this trait. I observe this quality more prominently in children and less in adults. Here is the video.
 
The Biological Advantage of Being Awestruck - by @Jason_Silva from Jason Silva on Vimeo.

Here is the notes given with the video on Vimeo

This video was created by @Jason_Silva and shot and edited with my friends at Bravo Media, and is non-commercial and for educational and inspirational purposes only. Full credits and clip attributions can be found below. This video was inspired by three big ideas:
1) The ideas of psychologist Nicholas Humphrey who has written of "THE BIOLOGICAL ADVANTAGE OF BEING AWESTRUCK". Basically, our ability to awe was biologically selected for by evolution because it imbues our lives with sense of cosmic significance that has resulted in a species that works harder not just to survive but to flourish and thrive...
"Humphrey refers to consciousness as a magic show that you stage for yourself inside your head, which lights up the world and makes you feel special and transcendent... this magical theater provides a reason to live, a love of occupying the present moment, and a desire to sustain it into the future, that over time has proved stronger than anything else, and accounts for humanity’s swift and triumphant success--
Humphrey says “being enchanted by the magic of experience, rather than being just an aid to survival, provides an essential incentive to survive.”
"We relish just being here. We feel “the yen to confirm and renew, in small ways or large, our own occupancy of the present moment, to go deeper, to extend it, to revel in being there, and when we have the skill, to celebrate it in words..”
Our desire to understand brings exquisite pleasure... and feeds our exploratory voyage, our scientific inquiry, our technological development, and even our poetic self-regard..

I would argue that this what drives science. But how did it get there? And not everyone has these feelings and desires in equal measure. I think those who love arts, science, and engineering the most have the strongest case. It truly is another way humanity expresses itself. 

2) The Stanford study that found that AWE is clinically good for you, expanding perception of time, increasing compassion and empathy and promoting well being:

I think that it's this benefit is why we find the inquisitive nature and traits being discussed ingrained in Children. They are like sponges for information. We all should never forget what it's like to have your mind blown by learning something that impresses you. What I love is that you never have to give that up just because you grow up. What I love about musicians, artists, scientists, and engineers is that they never do.

3) Ross Andersen's rapturous meditation on the ontological awakening of our psyches provided by the Hubble Space Telescope: "At first glancing the Deep FIELD “one might mistake it for gemstones scattered across black velvet, but a closer look reveals that each smudge of light, 2,600 in all, is a galaxy dense with billions of star-fired worlds, pinwheeling in deep time. … To that point, astronomy had imaged objects only four billion light years away, and poorly at that. Here a telescope reached 11 and a half billion light years into space and delivered an image legible to the layman: an unprecedented expansion of human vision."

I agree.
**Music by John Murphy - "Kaneda's Death Pt 2" from Sunshine Soundtrack
itunes.apple.com/us/album/sunshine-music-from-motion/id297702863
**Featuring Stock Footage from Shutterstock
Still images courtesy of THE IMAGINARY FOUNDATION - imaginaryfoundation.com/
And clips from Knate Myers' "ISS at Night" featuring NASA imagesvimeo.com/45878034
Camera: Liam O' Sullivan
Edited by Jess Betz and Jason Silva
Shot and edited at BRAVO MEDIA - bravomediainc.com/

I think a far more interesting question is where does this trait go in so many adults? I think society bludgeons  most of it out of us when we are told to stop asking questions and to stop dreaming - in other words: school. One thing I've noticed is that many anti-theists will agree that the ability to be awed is an integral part of being human that we can recognize beauty. They say that we have no need of God in order to enjoy beauty or to be blown away by the universe. Yet they also argue that no one's life has transcendent value. How can you be amazed and awed by your existence and yet deny that there is anything of purpose or transcendent value (i.e. created). For example, here is Christopher Hitchens making the same argument against Douglas Wilson as the above video.


Awe is important for what it means to be a human being - all seem to agree but the question of how it got into us seems to be ignored. Does anyone think that an eagle or a vulture has an emotional response as it flies over the Grand Canyon?  Or is a bird impressed by it's own ability to fly? But can a person be impressed or emotionally touched by his/her own athletic ability, or by his/her poetry or any talent for that matter? Have you ever said or done something so brilliant that it shocked you that it came out of you or through you? That is why people create art and study science and make machines to solve problems.



The Biological Advantage of Being Awestruck - by @Jason_Silva on Vimeo
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, July 31, 2012

FacePalms and FacePlants

I've been thinking about the series of blog posts I have been using on my blog. Some might wonder why I post them. Sometimes there are arguments you come across that just make you shake your head in dismay due to their utter lack of logic and sense.

"FacePalm" means "(sometimes also face-palm or face palm) is the physical gesture of placing one's hand flat across one's face or lowering one's face into one's hand or hands. The gesture is found in many cultures as a display of frustration, embarrassment,[1] shock, or surprise.[2]" Source


"FacePlant" is a similar idea. It is used to described a failed attempt at something, I tend to use it as a strong description for a failed argument than a facepalm. It's not just a failure it's an epic failure.
Enhanced by Zemanta