History

Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars links to and comments on an essay by Elizabeth Castelli on the history of Christian persecution, real and imagined. It’s interesting how many Christians argue that they are being persecuted, even as they are engaged in persecution themselves. Which reminds me again of Robby Berry’s classic “Life in Our Anti-Christian America." Hume's Ghost (2008-04-29): It reminds me of white supremacists complaining about being persecuted by blacks.One of the most pathetic things that has always struck me when listening to white supremacists speak is their sense of being persecuted by an oppressive minority and/or the forces of liberalism. It is difficult to make sense of the assertion that white males in the USA are disadvantaged unless you consider that supremacists are 1)scapegoating an Other they are prejudiced against for perceived societal failings and 2)that their definition of being persecuted amounts to not being allowed to persecute others.Another group that shares the same persecution complex is that of the religious right. More specifically, the dominionist or Christian nationalist elements of the religious right which similarly consider the failures of society to stem from an oppressive minority and also feels that not being allowed to enforce religious orthodoxy on others amounts to being persecuted. I suspect, however, that it is easier to see the bigotry underlying the persecution complex of the white supremacists than it is from the Christian supremacists, for the obvious reason that we've as a nation already rejected the ideology of white supremacism.For example, if one were to hear someone say the following, it would be fairly obvious that the person making the statement is a bigot:You can be any race you want and PROUD of it... except white. I watch tv and flip around and you've got networks for gays, for women, for Spanish speakers ... There's even BET a network just for blacks. Obviously, the owners of the network are black and are proud of it, but if the owners were white and tried to create a White Entertainment Television channel all Hell would break loose. Is that really that different than this comment agreeing with Ron Paul's view that Christmas is under siege?You can be ANY faith you want and PROUD of it... except Christian. I walk around one of the largest malls in California, during the holidays, festive colors everywhere, and what is directly in the center of the mall? A massive menorah. Obviously, the owners are Jewish and expressing their faith. Were the owners Christian and tried to do the same with a crucifix, Hell would've broken loose. ...

Matthew LaClair has an op-ed piece in today’s Los Angeles Times in which he talks about his evangelizing history teacher and the biased textbook used in his class. James Q. Wilson defends his textbook in a companion L.A. Times op-ed; the bulk of his defense is that the later edition of his book fixes the problems LaClair complains about. UPDATE (June 29, 2008): The July/August 2008 issue of the Skeptical Inquirer comments on this controversy. It seems that the later edition of the book is not yet available for schools and contains most, if not all, of the same misrepresentations and problems that LaClair complained about. Wilson, through his dishonest op-ed, has thrown away his credibility.

I agree with Orac at Respectful Insolence, contra bioethicist Arthur Caplan, that “Expelled”’s argument that Darwinism was a contributing cause of (the main cause of?) the Holocaust doesn’t constitute Holocaust denial. Historical Comments Eamon Knight (2008-04-24): Yeah. "Expelled" abuses the Holocaust in a despicable way, but to call that "Holocaust Denial" is an abuse of that term.

Robert F. Scott and Ernest Shackelton’s Antarctic campsite cabins at Cape Evans on Ross Island have been sitting there since 1913 and 1908, respectively, and are still intact and remarkably well preserved. The Fogonazos blog has the photos. (Via The Agitator.)

Tom Gilson closed the comments at his Thinking Christian blog post about P.Z. Myers calling in to the presenter line on an “Expelled” event conference bridge, preventing me from posting this comment: The claims of “Expelled” about individuals who have allegedly been persecuted are bogus–Gonzales was denied tenure because he wasn’t publishing research, Sternberg wasn’t persecuted at all, and Crocker simply didn’t have her contract renewed (and deservedly so–she was both a bad teacher and was making horrible creationist arguments, as has been documented with her PowerPoint slides online). On the other hand, Chris Comer really was removed from her position as Director of Science at the Texas Education Agency for simply sending out an email announcing that Barbara Forrest was giving a talk about “Creationism’s Trojan Horse.” The ID advocates have no case of persecution that approaches that in severity.He also deleted a link that Norman Doering included in a comment, and banned Norman from his blog. Norman’s comment was this: ...

Pat Boone writes a column in which he imagines a conversation between himself and Thomas Jefferson, in which he completely misrepresents Jefferson’s views and quite a few facts. Ed Brayton supplies a critique. (You can find the link to Boone’s column there.) Historical Comments olvlzl (2008-03-05): Pat Boone writes fan fiction. Look at his history, his entire career was based on covers, stealing the work of superior black artists and white washing them. It's just more of the same for the zit meds huckster. Anthony McCarthy, who someday will stop reminding people that he used to be covered by olvlzl ...

Last night while looking for something else, I came across my copy of the September 1996 issue of Internet Underground, a short-lived glossy magazine promoting interesting things on the Internet. This issue featured an article I wrote for them about skepticism on the Internet, which I present for your enjoyment below. If I had to update it today, I’d need to add information about blogs (like Science Blogs), podcasts, and various online forums that have come into existence in the last eleven and a half years or so (including IIDB, its offshoots like Freethought Forum and Heathen Hangout, and skeptical forums like those of the James Randi Educational Foundation and Richard Dawkins), but everything I described below is still around, despite some name and domain changes (I’ve updated the links) and diminishing significance of Usenet. I’m not sure how I missed the Skeptics Dictionary or Snopes.com, which were both around at the time. You can see a PDF of the article in its original format here. 403 Forbidden: Skeptics Seek the Cold Hard Truth By Jim LippardThe Internet is a place where world views collide. Christianity meets atheist, conventional wisdom meets conspiracy theory, fringe belief meets orthodox science. While most Usenet newsgroups promote particular views and are populated mostly by their purveyors, the critics make up the majority on sci.skeptic. These critics who refer to themselves as “skeptics” have only a tenuous connection to the skepticism of the ancient Greeks, such as Pyrrho, who denied the possibility of knowledge of any kind. Instead, they tend to hold that while knowledge is quite possible, it must be grounded in scientific inquiry and rational investigation. Doubt is valued as a means to reliable knowledge rather than an end in itself. Skeptics often share an interest in the unusual, bizarre, and the seemingly impossible with the denizens of newsgroups such as alt.paranormal, alt.astrology, alt.alien.visitors, and alt.forteana.misc. There are plenty of fans of The X-Files to be found among skeptics. Where skeptics differ from “believers” is with regard to what are acceptable standards of evidence and what constitutes reasonable methods of investigation. A commonly touted skeptical aphorism is “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” and testimonials, feelings and handwaving are not considered extraordinary enough to carry the weight. ...

Christopher Hitchens gets right to the point with his piece on Hanukkah: …to celebrate Hanukkah is to celebrate not just the triumph of tribal Jewish backwardness but also the accidental birth of Judaism’s bastard child in the shape of Christianity. You might think that masochism could do no more. Except that it always can. Without the precedents of Orthodox Judaism and Roman Christianity, on which it is based and from which it is borrowed, there would be no Islam, either. Every Jew who honors the Hanukkah holiday because it gives his child an excuse to mingle the dreidel with the Christmas tree and the sleigh (neither of these absurd symbols having the least thing to do with Palestine two millenniums past) is celebrating the making of a series of rods for his own back. And this is not just a disaster for the Jews. When the fanatics of Palestine won that victory, and when Judaism repudiated Athens for Jerusalem, the development of the whole of humanity was terribly retarded.A similar point is made, in a more tactful way, in Jennifer Michael Hecht’s excellent book, Doubt: A History, which she also told on the New York Times’ blog last December. She tells the story of how the events that led to the celebration of Hanukkah were a triumph of religious dogmatism and zealotry over secularism. She recommends lighting an extra candle in the memory of Miriam, the Hellenized Jewish woman who thought sacrifice was superstition and was “punished” for striking the temple altar with her sandal, yelling “Wolf, wolf, you have squandered the riches of Israel!” ...

In 1901, Bible college students at Charles Fox Parham’s Bethel Bible School in Topeka, Kansas prayed to be baptized by the Holy Spirit. At a New Year’s Eve service that year, as Parham preached, Agnes Ozman began to speak in tongues, and Pentecostalism was born. William J. Seymour, a one-eyed black minister, attended Parham’s college in Houston, Texas, though he had to sit in another room across the hall and listen in, due to Texas race laws of the time. Seymour moved to Los Angeles, where he sparked the Azusa Street Revival in 1906. Today there are over 400 million Pentecostals in the world, and it is the world’s fastest-growing religious sect. The Mormons are lightweights by comparison, having only reached 13 million followers worldwide after nearly twice as long an existence. In Guatemala, Pentecostals have built a 12,000 seat church; in Lagos, one church supposedly has 2 million followers; and South Korea is home to five of the world’s ten largest megachurches. What makes Pentecostalism successful? It’s not intellectual argument. Pentecostalism is what The Economist’s recent special report on “The new wars of religion” refers to as a “hot” religion. It’s not particularly concerned about doctrinal details (which is not to say it doesn’t have them), but about religious experience and personal interaction and participation. The Yoido Full Gospel Church, the largest megachurch in South Korea, has 830,000 members (one in 20 Seoul residents is a member), holds seven Sunday services each of which has 12,000 people in the main auditorium and 20,000 watching on television in chapels in neighboring buildings. While you wait (and you will wait, especially if you want to attend one of the two services led by founder David Cho), you can listen to choirs sing, and sing along with the help of karaoke-style captions on TV screens. Translation is supplied to provide the services in English, Japanese, Chinese, Spanish, French, Indonesian, Malay, and Arabic. The Yoido church, like many U.S. megachurches, works by organizing around many small groups. For Yoido, these are “home cells” of around a dozen people that meet in people’s homes. Yoido has 68,000 female deacons and half as many male deacons, who may make 35 visits a week to parishioners. There’s little hierarchy, and an emphasis on evangelizing, sending out missionaries, and producing more and more “home cells.” And it’s a methodology that appears to be winning the religious competition. An earlier Economist story (from 2005, pay content) on the business practices of U.S. megachurches, likewise observed that they function by providing a diverse variety of services to lots of small niches, with groups for hikers, skateboarders, mountain bikers, book readers, and so forth, creating many small communities out of which a larger one is formed. The lesson I take from this for the nonreligious is that a diversity of groups that cooperate with each other on common causes is far more likely to grow and have influence than individual groups that take a hard line on admissions requirements and require conformity to a narrow notion of what it is to be a freethinker or a skeptic, such as an adherence to scientism or atheism. The late Clark Adams of the Internet Infidels and Las Vegas Freethought Society was a strong proponent of cooperation between a broad set of secular groups as a way of strengthening their influence and being able to create organizations like the Secular Coalition for America. He was also a supporter of groups that engaged in social activities rather than intellectual navel-gazing, and promoted his views with humor and popular culture references more than with step-by-step argument. If you’ve thought about starting a secular, freethought, or skeptical group around some interest of your own that’s not currently served by an existing group, go for it. Meetup.com is a great way to get started or to find an existing group–you can find atheist groups, agnostic groups, deism groups, ex-Christian groups, Discordian groups, humanist groups, secular humanist groups, brights groups, skeptics’ groups, separation of church and state groups, and many more. ...

From metafilter: When Ron Paul email spam started hitting inboxes in late October, UAB Computer Forensics Director Gary Warner published findings on the spam’s textual patterns and the illicit botnet used to spread it – findings which were picked up by media outlets and tech websites like Salon, Ars Technica, and Wired Magazine’s “Threat Level” blog, the latter in a set of followup posts by writer Sarah Stirland: 1, 2, 3. The Ron Paul fan response was swift and decisive: clearly the botnet was the work of anti-Ron Paul hackers trying to discredit his campaign, and Rudy Giuliani had paid Stirland (and not UAB Computer Forensics) to do a smear piece – as claimed by a YouTube video pointing to posts on RudyGiulianiForum.com. Thus proving, once again, that the Ron Paul campaign’s greatest liability is not so much his far-right conspiracy-driven antifederal libertarianism, but rather the spittle-flecked anger of his own noisiest supporters.There are definitely a lot of nuts among Ron Paul’s supporters. Meanwhile, he raised $3.8 million yesterday (apparently a number revised downward from $4.3 million) in the largest one-day online political fundraiser ever. Intrade currently shows Paul as the third most likely GOP nominee, after Giuliani and Romney. A few other Ron Paul-related blog posts that I realize I’ve neglected to mention here, from Dispatches from the Culture Wars: “Is Ron Paul a Dominionist?" Argues that Paul appears to have much in common with some theocrats. “Sandefur on Ron Paul” Doubts that Paul is a dominionist, but suggests he might be a Thomas DiLorenzo-style neo-confederate who thinks we don’t even need a federal government (in which case he wouldn’t really be the supporter of the Constitution that he seems to be) and that the U.S. Civil War wasn’t about slavery (which is pernicious nonsense). I also just came across this story, which says that Paul would like to see the U.S. Constitution amended to remove the subject of abortion from the purview of the courts, which is yet more anti-constitutional insanity. ...