Friday Night Guitar To Rule Your Face

One of my favourite guitarists



studio version here for those not into improvisation and expansion on theme.

The Parable of the Pawnbroker

This story comes via a poster named wiploc over at talkrational.

I was a pawnbroker. This is a true story. This guy came into my store, drew a chain out of his right-side pocket, and said, "How much will you give me for this fine gold necklace?" I figured, because he said it that way, that he was lying, that it was a fake necklace. I don't like being lied to, and this guy had already given me enough, by my standards, to justify my disbelief.

But I didn't tell him so. I politely looked at his necklace. It was fake. I pointed out to him the chintzy clasp, totally unlike what would be on a necklace of value. But he still insisted that it was real; so I cut the chain with a file, ready to test it with acid. But I didn't need the acid: the inside was brown, not even gold in color.

The guy dropped the chain in his left pocket. He drew another chain out of his right pocket, and said, "This one's the real thing." This one's the real thing? That was like admitting he'd known all along that the first one was fake.

I showed him that this one didn't say, "14K," like real gold would. It said, "14KEP," meaning it was electroplate. It wasn't even pretending to be real. But the guy still insisted it was real. So I cut it with my file, and showed him it was another fake.

Can you guess what he did then? He dropped it into his left pocket, pulled a third chain from his right, and told me that this one was real. I was happy to file this one too, ruin it, so he couldn't try to fool anyone else.

He pulled out a fourth chain. He said it was real. I showed him that it wasn't.

He pulled out a fifth chain. He said it was real. I showed him that it wasn't.

He pulled out a sixth chain. He said it was real. I showed him that it wasn't.

He pulled out a seventh chain. He said it was real. I showed him that it wasn't.

He pulled out an eighth chain. He told me that this one was real. Here's the thing: I had I detected a pattern. Two patterns.

First pattern: When this guy said a chain was real, that didn't carry any weight. His apparent sincerity was an act or a pathology, not an indication of actual truthfulness. His saying something was legitimate didn't make it legitimate, didn't even increase the likelihood that it was legitimate.

Second pattern: This guy's chains were fake. I had yet to examine his eighth chain, but I already believed it was fake.

I was willing to be surprised; if the chain turned out to be real, I would have accepted that. But I believed it was fake. And that was a justified belief, reasonable in the circumstances.


This story is analogous with my experience with Christianity. Somebody will tell me that the ontological argument is solid gold proof of the existence of Jehovah. I point out that it is patently absurd, and he pulls out another argument.

He doesn't blush or backpedal. He makes no apology for having indiscriminately swallowed a lie and repeated it as a truth. He doesn't tell his friends, "Hey, don't be using thiss argument anymore." No, he just tells me that the modal argument for necessary greatness is absolute proof of god's existence. When I point out that this argument is no stronger than its opposite, the modal argument for the nonexistence of necessary greatness, what does he do? Is he taken aback? Does he say he'd better rethink whether his god really exists? Of course not. He pulls out another argument, and says, with all the sincerity of a seller of fake chains, "This one's the real thing."

For decades I have examined these arguments, tested them, found them to be not merely false but transparently false. They say "14KEP" right on them. They are not such as would fool anyone but those desperate to believe.

I see the pattern. I believe that the next theist argument will also be false. And my belief is justified. It is just as well founded as my belief about that eighth chain.


Now it's certainly possible that I haven't heard all the arguments. And it is theoretically possible that one of those that I've never been exposed to is legitimate. But I don't think that's the case. Here's why: If the theists had a good argument, they would present it. The only reason they use bad arguments is that they don't have any good ones.

They not only want to believe, they want to win other people to their beliefs. For those purposes, good arguments would work well---but bad arguments work only poorly. So I feel justified in believing that, if they had good arguments, they would use them.

But they don't use them. They use only bad arguments. The arguments of Christians then, are good justification for believing that Christianity is indefensible. The arguments of Christians justify atheism.

Using nothing but the books themselves for evidence, if we were to assert that Tolkien's great work, The Lord of The Rings, was an actual account of historical events, somebody would believe it to be truth. And the apologists would explain that Balrogs, Dwarves, Elves and Hobbits once roamed the earth, and an enchanted ring made its wearer invisible to all.

Stories, myths, fables, legends, lore, song, dance, poetry..
These are some of the ways humanity learned and passed down information through the millenia. Then humanity became literate, and able to read for themselves, and not rely on somebody else's interpretation of texts. They could reference other sources and discern what was true, what was false, and what was allegory.

Big claims demand big evidence. A book written by man about a god is no more evidence for a god, than another other book written by man, is evidence for Hobbits. Plus, the book about Hobbits is a much better work of fiction, with plenty of moralistic messages, and nobody demanding that it is an historical account of anything.

$2.00 Deluxe Hugs, Tax Included

Time Lapse Tilt Shift

Scenes from a rooftop from Paul Johannessen on Vimeo.

I like the tilt shift effect in photography. It fools the eye with focus and makes it seem like you're looking at miniature. Paul Johannessen does a great job here.

Betty Bowers Explains Traditional Marriage to Everyone Else

America's Best Christian takes time to explain to less informed Christians the curious details of the Lord's concept of marriage.

Tip of the hat to Lionel.

Darwin Award Candidates

Heck, why not? I love pointing out the inanity of humanity ...especially, Sean Hannity.
And to prove that I'm not going to show favouritism, I'm gonna start with a story close to home.
The two candidates decided that it was a good idea to jump aboard a small, 11 foot/3 metre, plywood boat, with a 2 H.P. outboard motor, no life jackets, one oar, and venture out into the North Atlantic, in late May...... at NIGHT! AT THE FOGGIEST PLACE ON THE PLANET!1!

Alex Day, who fishes for crab from Portugal Cove, found the overturned boat on Monday. He said it was only 11 feet long and five feet wide (3.35 by 1.5 metres).

"It was only a little pond boat," Day told CBC News on Tuesday.

"Not what you'd call a fishing boat. Just plywood. [It] was just built with staples, with a staple gun or something," he said. "It didn't seem like a hardy, strong outfit at all."

If only we lived in an age where people could easily learn some boating information.