Archive for the ‘creationism’ Category

This is better than a blog. This is like a shopping list for a philologist: it shows you what a person uses, what are their needs, and what they like, and what they don’t and so on.

The bonus is, it has the author’s own meta-commentary which allows a curious anthropologist a unique glimpse into the life of an angry middle-class white anglophone theist. As usual, it starts with a persecution complex and quickly degenerates from there:

Amazon’s CEO, being an anti-Christian bigot, allows me and other Christians to be repeatedly harassed by Amazon’s community moderators and other anti-Christians, including allowing them to repeatedly leave fake reviews on Christian books.

I believe the terminus technicus for this kind of whining is “aw, world’s smallest violin!”.

1. The stuff he is interested in that isn’t media includes:

a. A knife with which he doesn’t seem to be happy:

I really hate these dumb laws forbidding automatic knives which are causing the market to be flooded with junk like this. It’s hard on the fingers to open and feels crumby and clumsy when it sets open rubbing against the metal below the knife. How is it it’s legal to own and shoot a gun in self defense, but not a knife? Someone please get rid of these dumb anti-self-defense government laws, it’s sickening.

Uh-huh, what does he need an automatic knife for?  Is this a countryside thing, where you could need an automatic knife for some bizarre countryside things which I would have no idea of?

Somehow, I believe, epistemological scepticism is in order.

b. A bicycle cover. When he starts ranting, though, the rant has very little to do with bicycles at all:

Note: this review would have shown up a day earlier but once again the amazon community moderators decided to harass me for my religion and delete without notification. So much for the “We’re trying to be the most customer centric” lie. The moron amazon moderators, who are massively evil liberal morons refrained from harassing me by interfering with my reviews for me being a fundamentalist Christian, using arbitrary reasons like, “WE couldn’t tell if you liked it or not”(…)

Halfway through I started wondering if he would ever get to the actual bicycle cover part at all, but alas. He didn’t. The happy end:

How can amazon be the most customer centric if they approve of stalking Christians? . I hope this review satisfies their arbitrary length requirements, you evil bigots. You are begging to be sued.

Aw, sweet! I wonder whether he consulted his internet lawyer yet.

c. An electric turkey fryer and roaster. This review totally freaked me out, because, well. If this guy suddenly disappears from the internets and later, a Darwin award will be given to a angry middle-class white anglophone theist? We will so know who it was.

I mean, seriously. I hope he never actually never does anything stupid like breathing in CO2 to prove his point, because:



Yeah, coming out of our mouths all right. But in? In is a completely different story :( I gathered that he considers Wikipedia a huge liberal conspiracy, but for what it’s worth:

Toxicity and its effects increase with the concentration of CO2, here given in volume percent of CO2 in the air:

  • At about 8% it causes headache, sweating, dim vision, tremor and loss of consciousness after exposure for between five and ten minutes.
  • Yeah, so. Hopefully, the guy isn’t actually dumb enough to try to prove anything to anybody :\

    d. A ceramic tower heater:

    1) The LCD on the heater is an ugly mentally disturbing green.

    Ah, an interesting colour.

    2. As for the media:

    a. Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America’s Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years

    The “fundamentalism” in the title of the second book is misleading though since there is nothing wrong with having beliefs and the opposite of fundamentalism is arbitrariness or ignorance. Also everyone has beliefs that they won’t change on, why pick on that? Further, the fundamentalists this book attacks aren’t fundamentlists, but Arbitrarians I call them, since they have beliefs based on their feelings. But knowing that, that second book has much good info.

    “The opposite (sic!) of fundamentalism is arbitrariness or ignorance”? Huh? I must be new to the whole synonym/antonym thing, then. And beliefs based on feelings? I’m sorry, this offends my Vulcan logic.

    Otherwise, guys, this is so hilarious!

    b. Inside the Assassination Records Review Board: The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK (Volume 1)

    Besides being an incredible breakthrough work, it’s yet more evidence of how corrupt our government is. It just never ends.

    Hah. There is another thing that just never ends. Heeee.

    What sick idiots from Hell.

    It’s quite fascinating to see how he conflates categories here for the effect of creating omgosh! the most potent insult ever! They are idiots! But they’re also sick!

    IN HELL!1111111111!!!!111

    c. He also writes scathing reviews of Windows OSs, which after brief skimming I concluded to be mostly on topic. However, the day when I actually stoop as low as to read computer programmme rants on Amazon will be the day I give up the internets forever.

    I hoped someone would recommend to him Ubuntu, though.

    I know, I know. It’s unethical.

    d. His review of Racing Toward Armageddon: The Three Great Religions and the Plot to End the World contains, well, among other things, his predictably misogynistic views on abortion:

    An obvious flaw with this is that fundamentalists are known for trying to save babies not abort them with a red cow and nukes. And according to a few psychos fundamentalists are like Hitler because they try to get everyone to have more babies (yes that’s isanely backwards and stupid). SO, even in twisted people like that realize fundamentalist Christians aren’t trying to kill everyone off, but trying to increase the world’s population (like ever heard of “be fruitful and multiply”? one of the most common phrases in North America, kinda hard to miss), so the authoer must be severely blind.

    Ouch. I think his sources about “most common phrases in North America” might be a bit biased.

    Multiple Bible quotations follow. Then:

    Clearly Baigent and Ian are so stupid, they can’t understand plain speech, and in their abhorrence of justice, can’t believe that God would actually punish wrong doing.

    This is sort of adorable, like a stupid puppy running into a snowdrift or a tiny kitten trying to eat the woolen decoration on my hat and then vomiting all over the room.

    e. He enjoyed Jeff Sharlett’s The Family, which I found extremely hilarious, and which also makes one wonder about the degree of development of his reading comprehension skills.

    f.  His review of Biblical Numerology: A Basic Study of the Use of Numbers in the Bible made me giggle, a bit:

    Excellent Objective Scholarly Work

    is followed by:

    This is a thorough and very readable book and the other rightly defends the perfection of Scripture, God’s word, which has changed the world for the better by those who use it for good and even by those who use it for mere personal gain.

    Yeah. Yet again, a really not very bright Biblical literalist proves that to a Biblical literalist “objective” = “agrees with all my preconceptions, prejudices, and bigotry”.

    (Also: using Biblical dates/numbers for actually counting anything, worse yet, trying to date historical events, or possible historical events, must be, like, the dumbest thing ever. EVER!)

    There are 20 pages of this stuff. I must do important things now, though.


    1. An interesting article about creationists and history revisionism

    (Historian! You can halp, too!)

    It seems Dawkins’ metaphor about history-deniers wasn’t so far-fetched after all.

    (via the Evolution Blog)



    (I mean, statistics! You never know when you’ll be able to pwn somebody using the statistics)

    (The statistics you’ve been hoarding for ages on a separate delicious account)


    The Catholic Church has for years now bragged about its acceptance of science and the theory of evolution, citing the Galileo Affair and Giordano Bruno Affair as minor glitches in the otherwise perfectly working Improbability Drive Biblical Interpretation Machine.

    However, with the appearance of Pope Palpatine, the Mighty Conqueror of Children’s Literature it became clear for many that the Catholic honeymoon with science could not last much longer.

    Or could it?

    I followed the rabbit and several other  commenters from PZ’s post until I got here, to a post about a conference about the lie that is evolution, allegedly in response to Pope Palpatine’s desperate plea for “both sides to be heard”. From the above Headline Bistro post, which makes a great deal out of the fact that the conference will take place in Rome, which is so close to Vatican, which must mean it’s all the pope’s fault (at least, until you notice that it’s hosted by a private university with 3 (three) faculties that was opened only 13 years ago(1)) — anyway from the post it’s clear that the organisers of the conference are suffering from a fairly transparent case of 1) jolly appropriation, 2) lack of any  reading comprehension skills whatsoever.

    Anyway, this is from the conference’s press release:

    The 150th anniversary of Darwin’s “Origin of the Species” in November 2009 will be the occasion for a unique conference at Pope Pius V University in Rome presenting a scientific refutation of evolution theory. According to Russian sedimentologist Alexander Lalamov, “Everything contained in Darwin’s Origin of Species depends upon rocks forming slowly over enormous periods of time. The November conference demonstrates with empirical data that such geological time is not available for evolution.” Recently returned from a ground-breaking geological conference in Kazan, sedimentologist Guy Berthault will present the findings of several sedimentological studies conducted and published in Russia.

    Which leads us to two conclusions:

    1. Ouch, that hurt.

    2. Wow, creationism must sure be robust is Russia(3).

    Anyway, I will be on the lookout for the presentations as they might appear online, and meanwhile(4), one look at the list of contributors, especially at the speaker number six, provides us with surprisingly valuable insights:

    Maciej Giertych, Impact of Research on Race Formation and Mutations on the Theory of Evolution

    Maciej Giertych, Impact of Research on Race Formation and Mutations on the Theory of Evolution

    Maciej Giertych, Impact of Research on Race Formation and Mutations on the Theory of Evolution

    Ahahahahaha, a part of my distinguished readership will surely exclaim smugly. Ahahahahahaha, indeed, for a large part of my distinguished readership will know very very well who Maciej Giertych is!

    A short bio for newbies!

    1. name: Maciej Giertych
    2. nationality: Polish(5)
    3. family: married with clones children
    4. skills: Advanced Scumbuggery +10,  Lying for Jesus +20, Racism +100 000 000, Misogyny +100 000 000 (the article I linked to is, um, grossly exaggerated, but: facts! In English! So), Anti-Semitism +100 000 000, Batshit +1 000 000 000
    5. profession: while I’d gladly say that he’s a professional Liar for Jesus, I’m afraid I have to come clean about him being a Polish Member of the European Parliament(6).

    Yes. He really really is.

    In Poland, he’s mostly famous for being a laughingstock, and saying the following things:

    1) Legends about dragons are proof that humans and dinosaurs roamed the earth at the same time,

    2) Neanderthals are not extinct, but live among us still(7).

    This all means that locally he’s to be considered  a creationist of about Ray Comfort’s notoriety.

    And when I say “notoriety”, I mean “stupidity”.

    You can read about his views in the Polish Wiki here, but not in the English one. I wonder why? Were his USian fanboys concerned that that would make him look unhinged and racist and obnoxious? Could not be! Such a pity, really, when major national news outlets have whole articles dedicated to mocking all sorts of his ridiculus or disgusting claims.

    He also likes to praise general Franco for slaughtering the commies. Or, you know, the democratic opposition. But then, any opposition to Franco is by definition a commie opposition, which in turn makes is worthy of slaughtering QED.

    So, what does Giertych write in the abstract of his doubtlessly magnificent talk?

    Throughout Europe evolution is taught in schools as a biological fact.

    Gee, I wonder why?

    The main evidence for this presented in school textbooks is based on the assertion that formation of races is an example of a small step in evolution. This is profoundly wrong. Races form as a consequence of genetic drift, selection and isolation. Genetic drift results from the accidental loss of some genetic variation in small populations due to inbreeding.

    Is this just racist gibberish nonsense or a sophisticated reasoning that  bravely sets out to prove that it’s OK to have sex with your sister, because Adam and Eve, QED? You decide!

    Selection depends on the elimination from a population of all forms not adapted to the particular environment. With this elimination also some gene variants (alleles) get lost. For natural races to be identifiable they have to remain isolated from the main body of the population. The same is true in breeding, where the breeder reproduces the race formation procedure only applying selection pressures of his own choice. Macroevolution requires increase of genetic variants, thus race formation which depends on their reduction is a process in the opposite direction, comparable to extinctions.

    In short, typical creationist drivel about mutations and loss of information with  the extra topping of racist nomenclature. Meh.

    Positive mutations, as a mechanism leading to new functions or organs, are an undemonstrated postulate. We can demonstrate many neutral and negative mutations, but no positive ones.

    Where by “we”, he means “lying disgusting toads that live under very very thick rocks”. As it happens, even a non-specialist such as myself can easily recall at least one recent experiment, in which we could observe, witness with our very own eyes bacteria evolving to eat citrate as well as glucose. Which, I hasten to add, was a very positive development — for the bacteria, anyway; one could imagine, the citrate was rather unimpressed. I am of course talking about the famous Lenski experiment. You can read more about it on Wikipedia or anywhere(8) else, and I really do encourage you to do so, because it really is a very interesting and elegant experiment, and it can easily be understood by a person that doesn’t know anything beyond high school lever biology. I know I don’t!

    The claim that the appearance of resistance to man-made chemicals (herbicides, fungicides, antibiotics etc) is evidence of positive mutations is questioned on the ground that it belongs to the multitude of defense mechanisms (like healing or acquiring immunity) which defend the existing life functions of an organism without creating new ones.

    What we can read above, ladies, gentlemen and poo-flinging monkeys, is a standard denialist discourse tactic, among professional linguists known as “meaningless drivel”.

    In short: the pope is not going creationist just yet, and the kooks aren’t even trying that hard(9). Let’s focus on the condoms for the time-being!

    Also, what’s much more chilling is what you can find on Catholic websites regarding the conference:

    After all the hoopla in academia some months ago with the 150 anniversary of the publishing of Darwin’s Origin of the Species, this is welcome news.  The organizers were interviewed by Zenit News Agency.  Here is part of what they had to say: “Results of recent empirical research published by scientific academies refutes the basic principles of the geological time-scale. It reduces the age of rocks and therefore the fossils in them.

    It’s like the pope is the last thing that keeps many Catholics from unleashing their batshit upon the world. And what if the next pope will be a blithering creationist dimwit(11)? Shudder with me, ladies, gentlemen, and poo-flinging monkeys, shudder with me!

    (Also, Cthulhu is speaking Czech! Look at this bit of very compelling evidence — just click on the picture — from Google!)

    (Also, Karel Čapek! I almost forgot about Čapek!)

    (I am the queen of all links, after all!)

    ETA: typos fixed.

    (1) I’s a big deal that the university is private, because in Europe it is statistically very probable that a serious university will not be private(2).

    (2) Unless you are in the UK.

    (3) Which in turn leads me to “SO WHY DON’T I SPEAK RUSSIAN AGAIN???”, but I digress.

    (4) The abstracts, however, are available here, and, oh my.

    (5) The possibility of exchanging him for some oil for the mutual benefit of Poland and Saudi Arabia is, I am told, being looked into at the moment by both countries’ governments.

    (6) I now realize this should have been written in sparkly text. Please imagine there is sparkly text in this text where there is none.

    (7) It was, as far as I remember, rather unclear whether he proposed  that the neanderthals were Jews or simply POC. Either way, he should DIAF.

    (8) Although the recap at Conservapaedia should be most entertaining.

    (9) They could try at least renting lecture rooms from La Sapienza or something(10).

    (10) Heh heh heh.

    (11) I am a bad, bad person, because before shuddering I actually thought “LOL @ creationist pope!”


    My book-sniffing skills turned out to be awesome after all(1)! I haven’t got the time today, so I’ve only read about 60 pages so far, but! Awesome!

    I liked: the stuff about ultra-violet and primroses, and how Dawkins emphasises that creationism has a lot to do with complete and utter ignorance.

    2. The “poor expats who can’t get used to live in their cruelly culturally different host country” meme is as robust as ever, but what about the ex-expats? I’m concerned!

    This is because I spent 30 minutes being lost, because I forgot that “the first floor” means actually “second floor”. Or at least it would, if I were still in Japan.

    Note to self: first floor is second, the real first floor is zero. Must concentrate moar.


    3. I have discovered the most ridiculous meme ever. How could I miss it before, I asked myself today, looking stupidly at pictures that will remain undisclosed for a couple of days, as I will be collecting evidence in the library.

    Hint: fish and funny hats are involved.

    Also, chariots.

    (Well, a bit(2))

    4. Apparently Claude Levi-Strauss died.

    I… I have to say, I can’t really be upset, because until today I was sure he had died already.

    So, in a way, when I went online, my worst fears were confirmed :( Thank you for fun times with Tristes Tropiques, Claude, and inspiring one of my favourite profs when he was young.

    5. I have to confess: I’ve been having the urge to look for moar vaccine-deniers on the intertubes all the time lately(3). I’ll start posting when my hands will stop obeying me and continue typing on their own even when I sleep. SLEEEEP!

    6. For all internet troll aficionados, a tragic news indeed: Tom Estes, the voluble pastor of the Hard Truth fame (?), seems to have deleted himself from the interwebs. I, for one, will be inconsolable for weeks to come, and I haven’t even broken the news to Dan yet :\ The last googlable post (a bit stale).  Google Cache to the rescue: he flounced ’cause “I’m no longer all that intrigued by Pharytales, or Helga’s Battle-ax, or the NotSoFreeThinker, and I think the reason for the that is because they are so repetitive in nature.  Basically what they do everyday is criticize rational Christians, and for a while it made me angry, then I found it amusing, but now it’s just tired.”

    Tom also warns his faithful readers that he’s got two other blogs here and here. Stay tuned! Once an attention whore, always an attention whore.

    (You can also follow his rants on Twitter:

    NY Times’ Dowd is a super feminist, UNLESS it’s Obama is the one excluding women, than it’s okay. #tcot

    I laughed!)

    Anyway, RIP, Hard Truth!


    (1) Throw some ink at me. I could probably tell which genre it came from.

    (2) The other bit is that I like the word “chariot”. Chariot!

    (3) Shooting fish in a barrel much? And yet!

    I don’t really remember where I heard it first, and I’m too lazy to google(1), but there’s a meme on the internets that tells you that in five clicks you can always get to (insert thing). Let’s say we can get from non-crazy part of the internets to the completely crazy part in under five clicks. Will that be possible? Here we go!

    1. Click! My post about deconversion and proselytizing in atheism.

    2. Click! Sarah’s post about the same.

    3. Click! Sarah’s insane commenter who babbles about consciousness being a lot like soul, and about humans being a lot like god, because they can plan stuff, and  Ingo Swann, the psychic; anomalous mental phenomena; and sceptics who plug their ears(2) and stuff.

    Be patient, grasshoppers and other  dear and cherished hexapod friends! Soon we will be getting there!

    (Where by there, I mean to the HEART OF DARKNESS(3))

    4. Ladies, Gentlemen, and poo-flinging monkeys(4), we’ve reached our destination here! Equilibrium found!

    As an hors d’oevre I’d recommend this deliciously insane post about Life, the Universe and Homosexuality(5), which starts with an earthquake, quickly derails to paedophilia, and than goes right back to homosexuality in a neat swirling set of smooth eloquent segues.

    Then, you can take a long and delightful look at Gideon’s sidebar, full of New World Order conspiracy theorising, really easily debunkable creationist videos, and this delectable gem:

    my comment policy (trolls take note!)

    My comment policy is no censorship allowed. You can say whatever you like, and, being a good Christian, I’ll listen and turn the other cheek, even if you’re a nasty-wasty little SOB!

    However, while I’m turning my cheek, it’s entirely possible I’ll reverently bring my foot up and smash you right in the beets! Then, I’ll bring my knee up into your contorted face and spread your nose all over it, followed by a left hook into your sneering mouth! For the coup de gras, I’ll rip your head off and SKULL-FUCK you, then do the same to your mother!

    May the Lord bless…


    I am very tempted to model my own comment policy after his. Discuss?

    (1) Fact: I will die if I can’t get my hands on The Greatest Show on Earth finallyyyyyyyyyy. However, sniffing at books in Mainz has so far been inconclusive D: D: D:


    (2) Are your ears plugged yet, fellow sceptics? Be sure to plug your ears before the winter comes for real, together with gales, snowstorms and psychic invasions!

    (3) For those of you with more delicate nervous constitutions, there’s always The Unspeakable Vault (OF DOOM).

    (4) Such as myself.

    (5) The answer to this post is 42, which is what everyone should write, should an opportunity to comment arise. *CACKLE*

    1. Via a Camels with Hammers commenter:

    John’s Scalzi’s trip to the Creation Pseumuseum + photos. The post includes delightful scatological imagery, such as this:

    The guy who built the temple, satisfied that it truly represents his beloved load of horseshit in the best possible light, then opens the temple to the public, to attract not only the already-established horseshit enthusiasts, but possibly to entice new people to come and gaze on the horseshit, and to, well, who knows, admire its moundyness, or the way it piles just so, to nod in appreciation of the rationalizations for its excellence or to clap in delight and take pictures when an escaping swell of methane causes the load of horseshit to sigh a moist and pungent sigh.

    Yes, please. I might have to pick up his books one day, after all.

    Also, creationist commenters and their typically overblown dramatics:

    274. John Scalzi on 13 Nov 2007 at 9:43 pm

    “Re: the Ark and Dinosaurs isn’t big a deal when you realize that the DInosaurs didn’t have to be full grown to be on the Ark.”

    I’m sorry, I’m getting the giggles again, here.

    275. Joe on 13 Nov 2007 at 9:54 pm
    John, to think, my mom told me I wasn’t funny. I guess she was wrong. Put a gun to my head and tell me to renounced Christianity or you’d shoot me…Pull the trigger because I am not doing that. It isn’t because I am me, I don’t like being shot at, it’s because I fear God, not man.

    Heh heh. The evil Scalzi, shooting poor persecuted creationists in the head again. Which makes a little sense, after all, since it’s not like they use them all that much anyway. I bet he also had Christian-baby-porridge for breakfast!

    (Commenter number 300 also claims that Scalzi is so mean, because he’s just like Ann Coulter, heh heh. Heh heh!)

    (A few comments down, Joe also proudly announces that he 1) never met Pascal, 2) gambling’s not for him. I’d think TROLL TROLL TROLL, only Poe’s law)

    Also, I’d like to maybe repeatedly emphasise that there are 101 photos. With captions. Go, now!

    2. A truly bizarre article about the oppression of women in fundamentalist regimes. On the one hand, it raises several important points, on the other:

    The use of women’s naked bodies to market commercial products in the West is merely another application of the idea that women are commodities. Anyone who visits the redlight district in Amsterdam can see for himself how wretched prostitutes, completely naked, are lined up behind glass windows so that passers-by can inspect their charms before agreeing on the price. Isn’t that a modern-day slave market, where women’s bodies are on sale to anyone willing to pay?

    Yeah, right. Because being oppressed by men with political and religious power is just like deciding to be a sex-worker.

    I’m not saying everything is legal and perfect in the blessed land of socialism and sexual permissiveness, and that there’s no human trafficking and that sort of stuff. It’s just that apples and oranges, dude.

    What’s also quite disturbing is how women/feminists/activists who are supposedly against the sex industry and pornography for the sake of the women always end up blaming the sex-workers anyway, and not maybe suggesting the logical solution, which would be “so let’s convince people that paying for sex is uncool or something“. Because, seriously, demand and supply, dudes!

    3. My Randroid special this week: how the Market (blessed be His name) works when nobody’s looking.

    4. Twitter novel. The Japanese, of course, have been there first.

    5. WTF is wrong with this dictionary? It should come with trigger warnings D:

    6. Concordat Watch‘s got stuff on the creepiest of concordats out there. Like the one in Dominican Republic:

    Back in 1954 the dictator, Trujillo, concluded a concordat with the Vatican which is still in force. On 11 July 2006 representatives of the Dominican Republic’s more than 1,600 Protestant churches filed an appeal against this concordat with the Dominican Supreme Court (SCJ). They claimed that it is unconstitutional. However, over two years later on 22 October 2008 the Supreme Court upheld the concordat. In its ruling it states that although the State assumes the obligation to teach the Catholic religion and moral education in elementary and secondary public schools, in no way prohibits that education by another religion in their establishments, nor has evidence been contributed that demonstrates that this has been prevented by virtue of what is agreed to in the Concordat.

    No to mention the outrageous one in Cote d’Ivoire.

    7. I’m reading MerodachBaladan‘s kudurru! Posts about Assyrian/Biblical propaganda coming soon, yay!

    8. ALSO, I CAN HAS A LEXICAL LIST ZOMD. (They look like that, but mine is smaller and much harder on the eyes. Ow!)

    Not very, I hope, because we need a swift and clean solution to the bad science journalism problem. Personally, I am willing to take one for the team and eat Russel Goldman*.

    Yesterday PZ Myers steamrolled a pro-creationist** article about the Ardi fossil discovery. Because I was rather certain that Rusell Goldman, the author of this vile piece of, er, something, clearly must have done something similar before, or at least described the antics of intrepid Briton otters, I and my trusty Google-fu skills braved the dark enemy fortress, and here’s what we got:

    1. First, nothing really scary, typical political stuff. A bit biased towards Republicans, I’d say.

    2. Next is the article about depression in Utah that I think I’ve read before. However, when you reread you notice all sorts of things. Like, how many cliches do you see in this paragraph:

    Take Wendy, a 40-year-old teacher and mother of three from Utah County. To all appearances, she led the perfect life. Just as she was expected to, she went from high school cheerleader to Mormon missionary to wife and mother.


    3. And by the third article, we hit the jackpot. It relates the Gates fiasco, when a black scholar was arrested in his own house, because the police thought he was mean to them*** (or him, I don’t really remember). Goldman inserts the following commentary between other people’s opinions:

    Some observers questioned whether the president should have so strongly backed Gates, a longtime friend, over the police who arrested him without fully knowing exactly what took place between the professor and Cambridge Police Sgt. James Crowley.

    “Some observers” LOL. This is stuff you can’t even get away with at the Wikipedia, but, apparently, with which ABC has no problems at all.

    ALso, translation from batshit to English: I AM NOT RACIST NOT AT ALL BUT THOSE BROWN FOLKS THEY JUST (…).

    He then quotes statistics saying how POC feel about their interactions with the police, but not statistics that would show that the police tends to really actually be unfair towards the POC. Because, duh, why write about those pesky facts, when you can show another minority group to be oversensitive and overreacting?


    4. He also did the story about Sullenberger and his uber-competent emergency landing, but there’s no way you can fuck up that story****.

    5. Finally, the gem I was saving for the end: the creationist-fellatioing piece of drivel wasn’t the first time Goldman was caught being incompetent, this time by religious people here.

    Oops, it turns out he’s an equal opportunity hack, and not even an honest to god fundamentalist.

    (Note: I’m not trying to turn it into a witch hunt. However, if you epically fuck up once, chances are this wasn’t your first fuck up.

    And it wasn’t.

    Think statistically!)

    * How hard can it be? It’s like eating a human-sizes piece of sushi, really. NOM NOM NOM.

    ** It’s more than just pro, really. It’s like fellating and arse-licking at the same time.


    **** There actually is. I could easily think of at least three. I just don’t want to harsh your squee.