Hard Truth? More Like Delusional Fantasy

update: oops, edit, I hate bad grammar!


Tim Pawlenty, who seems to take on the persona of a less crazy wing-nut Republican candidate than say Santorum or Palin, is still not above parroting delusional leftist boogey many myths about the Obama administration:

Pawlenty: Obama's Central Planning Fail - Townhall Finance: "“I’m willing to tell Americans the hard truth,” says Pawlenty. “And I believe Americans are ready to hear it. But the truth about our economy isn’t hard at all. Markets work. Barack Obama’s central planning doesn’t.... It’s not the American way.”"

Central planning? Really?! What central planning? Is it becoming obligatory of  Republicans to cast aspersions that Obama is somehow leading the country towards a Soviet style statist socialist future? Just exactly how is Obama instituting anything to do with "central planning" any more than Bush did. This idea is absurd on the face of it.  

Exhibit One on Why "Evolutionary Psychology" is Bullshit

You probably already heard about this, whoever you are..

Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women? | Psychology Today
It is very interesting to note that, even though black women are objectively less physically attractive than other women, black women (and men)subjectively consider themselves to be far more physically attractive than others.

Can you believe that? This clown, Satoshi Kanazawa, who has a Ph.D. in something, gets research grants, and writes books and articles as a "scientist", actually takes himself seriously with this bullshit "black women are objectively (OBJECTIVELY!!!???) less physically attractive than other women...".  REALLY?


Really?  Well I got news for you pal, Mr. Kanazawa (sorry, no "Dr." for you).  This white boy has seen some hot looking beautiful black women in my time. At first I didn't notice.  When I was a young boy I was gazing at the hottie blond white girls on television and the serendipitously obtained and absconded Playboy mags, and then I started chasing after girls that resembled that standard of beauty.  Mainly because that is who I came in contact with in my social environment, because I am "white".  And that is who the dominant culture, the white controlled mass media, white-boy peers, and the socio-cultural milieu of which I was immersed told me was physically attractive.  


Gosh, do you think that maybe there is some socio-cultural construction of what is considered physically attractive? Do ya think, Mr. Scientist?


In fact, I have noticed that as I have interacted with more and more peoples of phenotypic variability in this world, and attempted to purge myself of the racist brainwashing that we are all subjected to in this society, that suddenly I became more and more aware that physical attractiveness is evident across that phenotypic variation (that's real scientist talk for so-called "races").


Anywhooo, for my dear readers who who like to read a more serious and scientific debunking of this bullshit, which has information on Kanazawa's faulty research methods and premises, you can start here, here, and here, at It's Only a Theory.  And I am sure there is more out there, post in the comment to clue me in.


Oh yeah, one more thing, I hear there is some data and studies out there that concludes Japanese men are much less physically attractive.....

Possible Last Post Before the End

Before the end begins tommorow, May 21st 2011.  I just want to say what a fool I have been.

And in case the end doesn't come in the next five months, I should credit the New York Times for this photo.  Please don't sue me.  I have nothing.

Really? Archaeologists Find 'Gay Caveman' Near Prague

Jeez Luise! Sometimes I think there are so-called science reporters out there who just like to write stupid shit to piss off archaeologists.  Hat tip to my blogging friend Dale at Faith in Honest Doubt for linking to this article at Time who employ these dumb-shit know-nothings about archaeology/anthropology reporters.

Archaeologists Find 'Gay Caveman' Near Prague: Remains Outed by Typical 'Female' Burial - TIME NewsFeed

So what is my problem?  "Caveman" that is my frickin problem!    Yes, in popular ignorant discourse "caveman" came into common usage many years ago because SOME Paleolithic aged remains were found in caves. Yet not all, nor even most Paleolithic aged archeological sites have been found in caves. So why "caveman"?  

That aside, the Upper Paleolithic ended about 12 thousand years ago. So this find is placed chronologically firmly in the European Neolithic, when people had long domesticated crops and animals, and lived a settled life in villages.  So, these people were not even close to what was ignorantly stereotyped as "cavemen".  Is it really so hard for a Time magazine writer to get some of this basic stuff right?  After all, its all on Wikipedia as I have linked to here, and a quick glance at those pages reveals that those articles are fairly accurate.

And then there is the assumption that this alleged "caveman" was "gay".  I would bet a thousand dollars that the researchers responsible for this find didn't use that term.   But the dumb-ass Time reporter thought he would go ahead and run with his assumptions.  A more accurate interpretation is that the individual in question would better described as "transgender" rather than gay or homosexual. 

Europe's allegedly "Largest Gay New Service" at least gets it right in describing the deceased individual as transgendered, which is probably how the researchers described the significance of the find.


Its probably good to keep in mind that it is our modern day conception that homosexual behavior leads to the pigeonholing people into a "gay" identity. Yet we know that historically (Greek) and ethnologically (New Guinea tribe, read about them as an undergrad and forgot their name) that homosexual behavior doesn't necessarily translate into an exclusive "gay" identity. 

Newt Gingrich talks faith — And a lot of Bullshit

Now compared to the likes of Sarah Palin and G.W. Bush, Newt Gingrich is not a stupid man.  I think he knows that a lot of what he says is total bullshit.  And even more, he knows just what to say to appeal to the know nothing righty idiots who now dominate the Republican party.  Consier this gem of steaming bullshit:

Newt Gingrich talks faith — (And a lot of bullshit) POLITICO.com:

"'I have two grandchildren — Maggie is 11, Robert is 9,' Gingrich said at Cornerstone Church here. 'I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.'"

As for myself, I sure would like to see how this would play out, a secular atheist country dominated by a radical Islamist theocracy.  At least some righty idiots are somewhat coherent in their rants against the threat of Islamist Jihadis in warning that they will persecute the liberals and atheists. But not Newt, he just throws contradictory bullshit and hopes it will stick.  Unfortunately I fear much of it does.

Hat tip from the Atheist Ethicist for this.

Throwing the Birthers a Bone

In my efforts to make a sincere effort to understand where Tea Party people are coming from, I signed up for a log-in to the Tea Party Nation web site. You see, unless you sign up, then they don't want you reading about what they are thinking and saying to themselves. At least that's what I am guessing. So now I receive multiple emails daily with links to the rantings of Tea Party activists. I thought I might do some public service, or just have some grist for my mill, and post and comment on some of this stuff. The most regular author is Judson Phillips who gained recent acclaim as an admirer of the Founding Father's practice of limiting voting rights to property owners. This is what he has to say about the Obama's birth origins (you can try the link for yourself, but it probably won't work):

Obama has been itching for a fight with the conservative Supreme Court members knowing they will not fight back publicly. Perhaps they won’t, but if John Roberts had the backbone, he could make Obama’s life really interesting.
To start with, he could grant cert (permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, for the non-lawyers) on one of the Obama birth certificate cases. Preferably Orly Taitz’s case.
I, for one, believe that the evidence available, such as it is, makes it more likely than not that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii. Whether he lost his citizenship when he was adopted by a foreign national and moved to a foreign country is a different story. Obama has spent millions to keep his birth certificate private. Now, Hawaii’s governor Neil Abercrombie has stepped into it, first vowing to release the birth certificate, then saying it could not be located and finally saying Hawaii law prohibited the release of the document. 

So I guess Phillips wants to throw the Birthers a bone to keep them in the fold, but does not want to personally concede to their total nuttiness. Never mind the fact that if you are born within the United States, nothing like moving to another country or being adopted by a foreign national is going to cause you to lose your citizenship. Now I am so charitable, that I even checked into Snopes.com to look into this claim that Obama has spent millions to keep some version of his birth certificate private. Couldn't find any reference to it. All I know is I have seen a scan of his birth certificate that looks alot like the one I have used to obtain a passport, but it says "Barack Obama" and is from the state of Hawaii.

Obama could of course release the document. He has spent millions of dollars, in true liberal fashion by using other people’s money, to keep that birth certificate out of sight.
Why?
I happen to subscribe to the theory that there is something on that birth certificate that destroys the myth of Barack Obama. Myth destroyed, he simply fades away.

Gosh, I wonder what myth he could be destroyed? That he's is a secret Muslim? A Socialist? Of course for the latter, is just plain to see from his pro-corporate kiss ass policies, and these yahoos can't even break out of that delusion.

One more thing, be very careful when watching the State of the Union address. The following link was posted in the comments to the aforementioned article.

http://www.pennypresslv.com/Obama%27s_Use_of_Hidden_Hypnosis_techniques_in_His_Speeches.pdf

Stupid Shit People Say on the Internet I

From the comment section of a Fox News Article:

"any parent who has a problem with their kid saying the pledge of alligiance deserves to be deported. even if they don't believe in God, the point of that pledge is to acknowledge their appreciation for their own freedom. what a bunch of selfish brats, probably never spent a second thinking about the price that was paid so they can "have their rights""

And there is a lot more where that came from.


I wonder if the commenter knows that the Supreme Court ruled that it cannot be compulsory to say the pledge of allegiance in school?  The test case concerned Jehovah's Witnesses who believe that one should only pledge allegiance to God, and not to any idol of any state or country.  I wonder if they consider that maybe those permission slips are for religious minorities who believe something like this?


Many liberals actually have no problem with the pledge of allegiance.  I on the other hand do.  The emphasis on the pledge of allegiance is a distratction from what really ailes this country, like poverty, unemployment, and lack of opportunity.  It is used to promote wars that are actually doing harm to working peoples' interests here in the United States, and represses dissent.