My responses to Michael Shermer

[drfrank]

Hmm... nothing to do with the fact that the British flag was generally the Union flag and that was white, red and blue - I always thought the USA flag was red, white and blue because that was the colours of lag material the first USA flag makers had to hand...

That's almost as fun as the fact that the American national anthem is set to the tune of an old English drinking song

 

[articulett]

Evidence, please?

Most people don't kill, start wars, rape, plunder, etc. However those who do such things tend to have one thing in common. Religion? (maybe)--but I'd say those who do the most egregious acts tend to have one particular genetic trait---a Y chromosome.

No matter how you define morality--those who epitomize it in my world are all atheists. And they save animals, fight for civil liberties, donate to charities and refrain from inflicting cruelty upon others just because of the way such behavior makes them feel--it's their natural inclination. Are religious people who behave similarly doing so to get heaven bonus points or to avoid everlasting torment. This doesn't seem particularly moral from my perspective.

 

[articulett]

Dropping back to the "It makes sense to assume such and such" thread, but leaving Santa out of it:

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Pascal's wager yet: a logical argument for belief in God (but not a proof of Her existence). It goes like this: if there is a God, and you believe and go to Heaven, the consequences are infinitely good.
If there is a God and you disbelieve and go to Hell, the consequences are infinitely bad.
If there is no God, the consequences are inconsequential whether you believe or not.
Therefore the greatest balance of risk and reward comes from believing. If you are wrong, it costs you nothing.

And Pascal didn't live in a world where he could see very many different versions of god (gods) and hells. I think only 144,000 people get to Jehovah Witness heaven--should one believe in that god so as not to end up in Jehovah witness hell. Different religions attribute different blind faith beliefs for heaven worthiness. And if Marshall Applewhite was correct, you already missed the spaceship.

 

[Jesus Baby Daddy]

Wow Diamond, did somebody pee in your Cheerios this morning?
To me your response just screams the typical anti-American, anti-Bush world view. Totally overreacting to a brief statement, that shouldn't invoke so much negativity. Hey, I understand not agreeing, but your acting like a total jerk. Face it dude, the JREF, Shermer, Randi, most of the people who post here, live in the U.S. And so he was writing to the "core" audience. Was it a slight? No. Was it an insult? No. Did he overlook the larger group of people? Sure did.
Sounds to me like you just have a bug up your a** about anything that is targeted for Americans, or possibly anyone but you. Get over it dude.
And you might want to see somebody about your inferiority complex.


"That's almost as fun as the fact that the American national anthem is set to the tune of an old English drinking song " Nearly all Americans LOVE the Brits, we're proud of that fact. I like the fact that when I hear the national anthem I usually have a beer in my hand. Or maybe that's because the only time I hear it is at sporting events.

 

[gypsynuke]

Why should Shermer write about Denmark or Afghanistan if he lives in the US? Should he make assumptions and assertions about a nation he knows nothing about in order to appear more PC? I'm not even sure that would be PC.

 

[jj]

Well, since Shermer made it pretty clear he was talking about America, I can't really figure out what the OP is so peeved about, myself. Yes, other world politicians also recognize religion, do we need to mention Mr. Berlusconi, for instance, or perhaps any of the middle eastern governments?

So read as I may, I can't see what Diamond is so peeved about.

 

[aggle-rithm]

That's almost as fun as the fact that the American national anthem is set to the tune of an old English drinking song

Yes. And one that is very difficult to sing. Most people (at sporting events, etc.) don't even try. There is a concerted effort to change the national anthem to "America, the Beautiful".

Speaking of music, I am faced with the same type of cultural bias all the time that Diamond is spouting off about. As a listener and composer of serious music (what the Neanderthals inaccurately refer to as "classical"), I am constantly bombarded with references to music that assumes that all of it is of the popular variety. The common question, "What's your favorite song?" reveals the depth of this bias, since only a small percentage of serious compositions are songs, while the figure is closer to 100% in popular music.

It irks me no end, but you don't hear me bitching about it.

Wait. I'm doing it right now, aren't I?

Never mind.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Frankly, I wouldn't get angry for reading a British writer, on a British website, talk about the way Parliament was run or what rights Brits. I certainly wouldn't call him a "dumbass."

Oh, I would! Here I am, reading an article, thinking it's about REAL issues in a REAL country, but then realize I'm just wasting my time reading about some place where they can't even speak American properly! Who cares if there's a Spotted Dick shortage, or a scurvy epidemic raging through the hedgehog population, or some other such nonsense! And what's this about the "Labor" party? Obviously a made-up name! And what the hell is a "scone", and why does it taste like cardboard?!?


(See, Diamond, THAT's the proper way to rant!)

 

[Diamond]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Ok, lets rename it the james randi international educational foundation.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Michael Shermer has taken time out to write a commentary for the jrief, (grief). America is most probably closest to his heart (being an American). How dare he just speak for Americans.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Diamond, I've lost all hope in the skeptic wiki (sorry for all contributers). Not just because of this (re: dumbass) but because of your childish attitude to wikipedia. You child.[/FONT]

Thank you very much. You may not know this, but I am not the SkepticWiki and the SkepticWiki is not me.

In the same way, America is not the world and the world is not America.

You conflate my beliefs about Wikipedia (which have more currency than you'd believe) with whether or not the Skepticwiki is to be supported. Shame on you, but not on me.

Michael Shermer chose to write an entire sermon (that's what it was) from the JREF pulpit to only one part of the JREF audience without mentioning or addressing anyone else. I've met the guy, he's smart.

It does not mean that his sermon from the JREF pulpit was appropriate to the occasion.

 

[DrMatt]

Shermer volunteered. He's usually not as interesting a read as Randi, but hey, this was all quite unexpected to many of us. The subgenius must have slack!

Oh, and "Sermon" isn't quite it. It's a "This I Believe" radio essay. For comparison, see Penn's essay, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5015557

 

[Diamond]

Wow Diamond, did somebody pee in your Cheerios this morning?
To me your response just screams the typical anti-American, anti-Bush world view.

Amazing. You misunderstood what I said, and you managed to stretch this to a supposition that to dislike America is to dislike Bush. What flexible strawmen you can build!

Nearly all Americans LOVE the Brits, we're proud of that fact.

Actually you don't. Unless representing them as evil all of the time represents a form of love I am unaware of.

 

[Diamond]

Why should Shermer write about Denmark or Afghanistan if he lives in the US? Should he make assumptions and assertions about a nation he knows nothing about in order to appear more PC? I'm not even sure that would be PC.

Who said anything about political correctness? I didn't.

Let's go back to what Shermer did say:

I am sick and tired of politicians, and just about everyone else, kowtowing to the religious right’s hypersensitivities and politically correct “tolerance” for diversities of belief—as long as one believes in God—any God will do, except the God who promises virgins in the next life to pilots who fly planes into buildings. Those of us who do not believe in god have had enough of this rhetoric. This is America. We are supposed to be good and do the right thing, not because it will make us rich, get us saved, or reward us in the next life, but because people have value in and of themselves, and because it will make us all better off, individually and collectively. It says so, right there in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights—products of a secular eighteenth-century Enlightenment movement.

Stirring stuff, makes me want to sing the Star Spangled Banner and wave the flag.

It's just that...I'm not in America. I don't have a written constitution to restrain my government, I don't have a Bill of Rights that means anything. I don't live in a state that guarantees freedom of speech or that separates Church from State (quite the reverse, in fact).

What does Shermer say? I might as well not exist. Shermer could have mentioned the cause of freedom for religious intolerance that the Danes are currently undergoing. Maybe they don't exist either.

I assumed that the JREF was an international organization with an international perspective. Clearly I was wrong.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Who said anything about political correctness? I didn't.

Let's go back to what Shermer did say:



Stirring stuff, makes me want to sing the Star Spangled Banner and wave the flag.

It's just that...I'm not in America. I don't have a written constitution to restrain my government, I don't have a Bill of Rights that means anything. I don't live in a state that guarantees freedom of speech or that separates Church from State (quite the reverse, in fact).

What does Shermer say? I might as well not exist. Shermer could have mentioned the cause of freedom for religious intolerance that the Danes are currently undergoing. Maybe they don't exist either.

I assumed that the JREF was an international organization with an international perspective. Clearly I was wrong.

Diamond, perhaps I need to point out the abundtantly obvious. You are not his audience. His audience is quite clearly American. For more international Shermer action, consult his other books. Not everything has to include you.

 

[skepticdoc]

Cuba, USA and the Spanish-American War

Not really. The campain the free cuba from the spanish was lauched from the US.

What is your source? You are showing complete ignorance about the Spanish-American War.

There were no Nations or territories left to conquer under in 1898 to start building an American Empire. The USS Maine had a fire from spontaneous combustion of oily rags in the engine room, and they accused the Spanish of torpedoing it. The Spanish Navy was ill equipped, all of their torpedoes leaked, none exploded, most of the American casualties were from Yellow fever.

Go somewhere else to sell your liberator propaganda!

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

...
I assumed that the JREF was an international organization with an international perspective. Clearly I was wrong.

Why are you extrapolating an op-ed piece onto the whole of the organization?

 

[jj]

I assumed that the JREF was an international organization with an international perspective. Clearly I was wrong.

I think you're looking for something to fight about at this point.

 

[opqdan]

How is it possible for so many intelligent posters to completely miss the point of what I wrote?

I didn't criticize the US Constitution or the Separation of Church and State - quite the opposite.

I criticized the fact that Shermer appeared to be speaking entirely to Americans without regard for other countries. I sarcastically alluded that this sort of Americacentric crap is the kind of thing that is associated with poor white trash.

He could have written "Brits what is it with the bad teeth. Can't ya afford dentists?" and it wouldn't have been any more offensive.

What has Shermer said about Church/State Separation in other countries including the UK?

The actual formula is [latex]\sqrt{f*** all}[/latex]

The simple fact is that Shermer lives and votes in the United States. He has no say on what happens in others. Not that we shouldn't care what happens in other countries (we should) or that we should not try to get other country's policies changed (we should), but domestic policy trumps foriegn policy everytime.

If he went after the lack of separation of church and state in other nations, he would recieve tons of responses along the lines of "fix your own country first, idiot." That is exactly what he is doing here.

Maybe it was slightly out of place as many readers are located outside of the US, but you must remember that the JREF is an American institution (by that I mean on US soil and subject to US policy).

As a skeptic, I lose a little bit of "faith" in the whole movement whenever I see a (I assume) knowledgeable skeptic resort to writing/speaking like you did, with the ad hominem attacks and complete lack of respect for other points of view. Please stop, I know that you are better than this.

 

[Ian Osborne]

Diamond, perhaps I need to point out the abundtantly obvious. You are not his audience. His audience is quite clearly American.

That's kinda Diamond's point. And with a few tweaks, it all could've been avoided:

Here in America, I am sick and tired of politicians, and just about everyone else, kowtowing to the religious right’s hypersensitivities and politically correct “tolerance” for diversities of belief—as long as one believes in God—any God will do, except the God who promises virgins in the next life to pilots who fly planes into buildings. Those of us who do not believe in god have had enough of this rhetoric. In America, we are supposed to be good and do the right thing, not because it will make us rich, get us saved, or reward us in the next life, but because people have value in and of themselves, and because it will make us all better off, individually and collectively. It says so, right there in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights—products of a secular eighteenth-century Enlightenment movement.

Still an American talking from an American perspective, but without assuming his entire audience is also American.

Once again, though, 'Dumbass' was far too strong.

 

[Jesus Baby Daddy]

Amazing. You misunderstood what I said, and you managed to stretch this to a supposition that to dislike America is to dislike Bush. What flexible strawmen you can build!

Nah, Nope. I thunk me own thoughts. Living in this here trailor park unemployed gave me a lot of time to think of why you might be so against the fact that Mr Shermer wrote a brief blog, that didnt' include you. Yes the Bush thing is pretty much a given, so I just threw it in there. Quite frankly I can't think of anybody outside of the Saudi Royal Family that loves Bush, so I figure its pretty safe to assume a hater like yourself doesn't as well. If you love him then I apologize, but I sure as heck don't love him.
Strawmen?? (give me a min, I have to go look up what that is...OK, done) How the heck is that a strawman?
I think your just trying to deflect the fact you came off as rude for your overraction.
Look dude, face the facts. You were acting like a turd, and were called out on it.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

That's kinda Diamond's point. And with a few tweaks, it all could've been avoided:



Still an American talking from an American perspective, but without assuming his entire audience is also American.

Once again, though, 'Dumbass' was far too strong.

With respect, I must disagree. Diamond's point is that Dr. Shermer has somehow slighted him unforgivably by addressing Americans. This is silly.