Competent sources tell me...

I have been called to task over statements I made earlier concerning tomorrow’s rapture. I was confronted with the accusation that I should find a “competent” source for my statement that “At 6PM Pacific time a great earthquake will announce the start of the rapture”. Since this accusation obviously uses a meaning for the word “competent” that I am unfamiliar with I felt compelled to respond.

But as I began penning my devastating response I was given new information about what will really happen on Saturday. It turns out that Saturday may actually be judgment day, and that it will:

“Herald the coming of The Thousand Years of Nagging and Needling. When Our Lord of Infinite Guilt Trips finally defeats the evil False Prophet of Cutting People Slack” -- R. Wyrick, Prophet of the New Millennium

Instead of an earthquake just before supper, morning’s first coffee will be greeted with a rumbling of discontent. The rumbling will condense into a whine of human voices. Words will become discernable…then phrases:

"Oooh, that sweater is gross,"

"Are you really wearing that?"

“You really should be doing more with your life”

“If you didn’t dress like a schlep you would meet a nice girl”

“He could lose a few pounds”

“OMG, willya look at those shoes”

Perhaps we can defy prophesy. Perhaps we can speak out for acceptance so that the voices of judgment day are not the only ones heard in everyone’s ears. Maybe we can take someone’s hands, look in their eyes, and dispel any sense the judgmental voices carry in their words. Just maybe we can try and clear off the preconditions from a couple precious feelings of love, and know unconditional love for a few moments.


Or maybe you should just get with the program and call up that ex who broke your heart to let them know that there are as many flaws in their personality as there are colors in the rainbow.

It’s Judgment Day: Feel the Rainbow!

Mega-Shark vs. Giant Octopus

Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum

Most people will look at Saturday’s failed rapture and feel a sense of smug satisfaction in accurately dismissing Harold Camping’s latest destructive fiction. The legion of detractors will come from every direction. An unfortunate number will be confident that the precision of their own eschatology eclipses that of Camping. A larger number will simply have dismissed Camping’s claims because he is not prominent in the order of theological authority which prioritizes their system of belief. Too few will enter the tent through the flap marked “it just sounded batshit crazy”. A lucky few doubters will stumble in wondering what the tent is for, and hoping there are refreshments.

"The wound of peace is surety,
Surety secure; but modest doubt is call'd
The beacon of the wise, the tent that searches
To the bottom of the worst." —Shakespeare Troilus and Cressida Act II Scene II

I can only hope I have the intestinal fortitude to duck out of the “batshit crazy” line and dance in, perhaps ass first, with the doubting few. Unfortunately the claims of end times are so ridiculous that it is enormously hard to doubt anything about their fallacy. The idea that rapture could occur on Saturday is buried under so many layers of batshit crazy irrational thoughts that I cannot think of where to begin digging. I only scratch the surface when I deride Camping’s numerology. In order to imaginer Camping had a slight chance of getting it correct I would have to believe that “it” had some probability of occurring at all. In this case the “it” is itself entangled in a theology encrusted with iron and bronze-age warts. Each layer of incredulity makes it geometrically harder to preserve doubt concerning Saturday.

"There is no lady of more softer bowels,
More spongy to suck in the sense of fear,
More ready to cry out 'Who knows what follows?'" .—Shakespeare Troilus and Cressida Act II Scene II

This sounds like certainty, but it is not. I am human. I am flesh and blood. I am constrained by the resolution with which I can actionably distinguish between certainty and miniscule doubt. It is so infinitesimally probable that a rapture event will occur on Saturday that I am unable to rationally foster recognizable doubt concerning it.

“Just think of the tragedy of teaching children not to doubt.” – Clarence Darrow

Doubt is, however, such a enviable quality of thought that it is worth ritualistically feigning it in the face of absurd possibilities. I usually reserve this ritual for those times when I watch very bad low-budget science fiction movies. I have a DVD of “Mega-Shark vs. Giant Octopus” in my collection. There is a scene in this movie where the hundred-foot-long-just-freed-from-its-icy-prison-prehistoric Mega-Shark leaps thousands of feet into the air to bite a jumbo jet in half. Every time I see this scene I ignore the ham-handed excuse for cgi, and think: “cool”. The plane biting scene has nothing to do with the “plot” progression of the movie, so I cannot blame my enjoyment of the scene on being blinded by context. I suspend disbelief. In this case I may be using the psychological equivalent of futuristic cryogenic storage facilities with steaming pipes, flashing blue lights, scantily clad death-ray-armed ninja guards, and tanker trucks of liquid nitrogen; but I am suspending belief. Perhaps I can do the same for Saturday’s rapture.

Mega-Shark vs Plane

Besides it’s obvious (and suspect) entertainment value doubt is an important part of reason. How sure are we of anything? What can we know, and what value is it in making particular decisions? What part of my understanding is critical in minimizing specific doubts? Do I believe, or am I just afraid of doubting?

“Doubt is not a pleasant condition but certainty is an absurd one.”– Voltaire

Though I may be essentially certain of things like gravity and Sunday’s sunrise most of my life is a patchwork of doubt. Much of that doubt I would like to reduce. Most of my words are spoken into a featureless void where simple echoes give substance to the dark. If I could reduce that doubt to near certainty I would begin to treasure what doubt I could retain. I might even playact fantastical situations where the doubt became manifest.

If the Mega-Shark of the apocalypse is arriving this Saturday, all I can say is:

“Bite Me!”

The calm before the calm

Rapture rapidly approaches, and there is no apparent quickening towards Saturday’s judgment. I am left wondering if this is the stillness before the storm, or the stillness before the continued stillness. This stillness must be truly portentous as it is not very still stillness. Things are happening everywhere on a variety of timescales. It is almost as if existence and time are continuing towards a particular destination, and then will continue through that destination towards other more distant ones.

Should we pay more attention to the postulated events of Saturday than to other more distant end times? Of course we should! Even if rapture does not happen this Saturday there will be other dates to prepare for. Don’t forget that 12-21-12 is just around the corner. If rapture doesn’t get us maybe the Mayan gods will.

Would it hurt you to believe?

"But at least learn your inability to believe, since reason brings you to this, and yet you cannot believe. Endeavour, then, to convince yourself, not by increase of proofs of God, but by the abatement of your passions." -- B. Pascal (from Pensees III:233 translated by Trotter)

One of the most common reasons I am given for why I should believe in a (usually Christian) god is best summed up in Pascal’s wager. The summarizing progresses through a detailed description of a finite two position wager based on equitable risk, and then blows all this to pieces by introducing infinite reward and risk. A typical progression would be as follows:

1. If you were forced to bet on a fair coin toss, but were allowed to wager whatever you wanted, you would wager half your money on heads, and half on tails.
2. If heads paid out 100 to one you would wager more on heads.
3. f you did not lose you money if it came up tails you would bet more on heads.
4. If you did not win anything if the coin-toss came up tails you would bet everything on heads.
5. Even if the coin toss was not fair it would make sense to bet everything on heads.
6. Even if there was only the slightest chance of winning it would not make sense to bet on tails.

The proponent then points out that the ratio of any finite reward compared to the infinite eternal rewards of heaven are essentially zero. They then usually point out that the ratio of any finite loss compared to the infinite eternal torments of hell is also essentially zero.

One can visualize the argument as a matrix like this:

	No god (High probability)	God (Low probability)
Believe in God	Essentially zero harm	Infinite payout (good)
Remain unbelieving	Essentially zero payout	Infinite harm (bad)

The reason why I am personally confronted by this proposal is: 1) That I insist that there is “almost certainly no god”, which suggests to way too many people that there is some exploitable probability that there is one, and 2) for some reason many true believers (especially the boorish ones) tend to think they are the first people to ever explain Pascal’s wager to me.

Pascal himself described it in his pensees (233) thusly:

"You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. "That is very fine. Yes, I must wager; but I may perhaps wager too much." Let us see. Since there is an equal risk of gain and of loss, if you had only to gain two lives, instead of one, you might still wager. But if there were three lives to gain, you would have to play (since you are under the necessity of playing), and you would be imprudent, when you are forced to play, not to chance your life to gain three at a game where there is an equal risk of loss and gain. But there is an eternity of life and happiness. And this being so, if there were an infinity of chances, of which one only would be for you, you would still be right in wagering one to win two, and you would act stupidly, being obliged to play, by refusing to stake one life against three at a game in which out of an infinity of chances there is one for you, if there were an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain. But there is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. It is all divided; where-ever the infinite is and there is not an infinity of chances of loss against that of gain, there is no time to hesitate, you must give all. And thus, when one is forced to play, he must renounce reason to preserve his life, rather than risk it for infinite gain, as likely to happen as the loss of nothingness." -- Blaise Pascal (translated by Trotter)

Blaise Pascal’s (June 19, 1623 – August 19, 1662) decision matrix was more complex than the one simple-minded-boorish true-believers of today present as their argument. Most importantly outspoken atheists in the early 1600s were treated quite poorly. The year Blaise turned 10 was the year that pope Urban VIII (Who began his reign as pope the year Blaise was born) brought Galileo to Rome to submit to the inquisition. Blaise wrote the wager in his Pensees while the wars that marked the adolescence of the reformation divided Europe. Blaise was a Roman Catholic who would die not long after King Charles of England was beheaded at the end of a largely puritan uprising. The matrix for Pascal reveals that his choice was more a matter of degree, and looked much like this:

	No god	God
Believe in God	Reasonable treatment while alive.  Zero chance of anything when dead. (good)	Reasonable treatment while alive.  Even better treatment when dead. (very good)
Disbelieve	Very poor treatment while alive.   Zero chance of anything when dead. (bad)	Very poor treatment while alive.  Very poor treatment when dead. (very bad)

Most modern fundamentalist Christians (which, if not an oxi-moron, is some other kind of moron) in the United States would like the reality of their wager to be more like Pascal’s. There are significant movements afoot to erode the separation of church and state. There are significant numbers of American Christians who would also like to codify discriminatory economic policies (like hiring, pricing, citizenship, and access). In a famous, and often repeated, quote President George W Bush suggested that Atheists were not complete citizens.

Blaise was a true true-beleiver. He gave away most of what he owned, and moved into a minimalist religious living situation. He often wore a castigation belt (a metal belt with inward pointed spikes designed to castigate the wearer for their sins). His self torture and self deprivations left him in a state of almost continual sickness that lead to his early (age 39) death.

"Sickness is the natural state of Christians." -- Blaise Pascal

Blaise was willing to do anything to cash in on his wager. The infinite risk ratio is obviously undefined in a risk-benefit analysis. The actionable information gleaned from Pascal’s wager is at best trivial, and more often damaging. What cannot be justified if we postulate some infinite reward even if it has a very small probability?

Some of my regular readers are surely wondering why I have not championed the use of limits to show that an infinitely great payout with an infinitely small probability could yield a finite payout. Any finite payout could then be compared to any other finite payout; even those with finite risk and benefit. I did not do this because there is no accepted way of analyzing the partial risk and partial benefit of partial religious belief.  To be worthy, according to many sources, beleif is an all-or-nothing proposal. There is no way, therefore, of defining the effect of increased belief as the limit of absolute belief is approached.

Pascal produced his wager just a few decades before another religious nutcase (Newton) would create a great method of analyzing limits (the Calculus).

What of today’s Christian? What are they willing to give up for their wager?  Do they need a car…or even shoes? Where is their castigation belt? If there is any possibility that the May 21st date is correct shouldn’t they be preparing? Have they found a way of justifying a partial buy-in to Pascal’s wager, or do they see it as simply a cute way of arguing with atheists?

Heaven is prime

The number of days left before rapture can be counted on one hand with fingers left as spares. I for one think pause should be taken to reflect on what this coming rapture date means. Before you know it the date will be history, and our perception of the events of 21 May 2011 will be clouded by certainty.

Certainty is the special province of history, theology, mathematics (some mathematics), and (as is made all too clear from the current rapture date) fools. It is almost impossible to pry loose from the mind the idea that certain events are destined to happen. Everything in history, without exception, occurred at some time. Just before the events took place they were just about to take place. In many cases there were clues that the events were about to take place. Sometimes, in hindsight, the clues appear unmistakable.

What are the clues presented for Saturday’s rapture event? My favorite is that (5X10X17)^2 = 850X850 = 722,500. I like this clue because there is certainty in it. Any reasonable method used to analyze this clue yields the same results; the square of 850 is 722,500. I also like it because by mixing certainty and absurdity one yields a product that is certainly absurd.

Mathematical certainty can be mixed with absurdity for positive results. I am reminded of an iconic story involving two notable mathematicians. Godfrey Hardy had traveled by taxi to a hospital to visit his friend Srinivasa Ramanujan. Hardy recalls the conversation dipping into mundane numbers as he sought to provide emotional support for his sick friend:

“I had ridden in taxi cab number 1729 and remarked that the number seemed to me rather a dull one, and that I hoped it was not an unfavorable omen. ‘No,’ he replied, ‘it is a very interesting number; it is the smallest number expressible as the sum of two cubes in two different ways’”

                       1729 = 1³ + 12³ = 9³ + 10³

Ignoring Srinivasa’s slight oversight(in not specifying positive cubes) Godfrey must have been especially pleased at this display of mental acuity because it signified that his friend was not so sick that his thinking was muddled. Of all the conversations about numbers these two must have had over the years this simple exchange became legendary? It is certainly not because adding cubes is all that important. It is because friendship is.

1729 has become known as the “taxicab number”. Numbers that can be expressed as the sum of two cubes in to different ways are collectively known as “taxicab numbers”. If one does not specify positive cubes the smallest positive taxicab number is 91.

                      91 = 6³ + (−5)³ = 4³ + 3³

There is no elegant dance of integer coitus that yields 722,500, but I should trudge through the “reasoning” used to produce it. The number 5 means atonement, 10 means completeness, and 17 means heaven. Since these numbers have some meanings they are multiplied together to get 850, which should then be squared because squaring things is nice. I have a difficult time squaring Mr. Camping’s number meanings with what I have always thought numbers meant.

I thought one used numbers in a sentence this way:

“One needs two five-bushel loads of crap to fill the ten-bushel bin with crap.”

But I must admit Harold’s (Harold Camping) meanings can be used to make sense:

“With enough atonement-crap one can really fill up with complete-crap”

May 22

Judgment day is about two weeks away. I have never been more ready to convert to Evangelical Christianity. Believe me when I tell you that a world-wide rapture event will dissolve all doubts I have as an atheist, and I will come to believe in whatever I should have been believing in to begin with. Of course the particulars of what I should believe even if a rapture event occurs are a bit murky around the details.

Some of the folks who advertise the end of the world state that they know this is the time since the world was created in 11,013 BC. Some other folks have told me that the earth was created on October 9th in 4,004 BC. Who is correct? I guess we will know on May 22nd. Who will have egg on their faces: the not-so-young earth creationists, or the adolescent-earth creationists?

But the rapture event should be undeniably spectacular!

At 6PM Pacific time a great earthquake will announce the start of the rapture. I'm not sure how the 6PM Pacific time was discovered by studying the bible. Israel, which is bible ground zero, is 10 hours behind Pacific time, so it will be May 22nd in Israel. This confuses me because if the intense studying of the bible does categorically state that judgment day is May 21st I would think they would at least mean May 21st in Israel How would the bible even denote pacific time as the entire continent of North America was unknown to the biblical people at the time they were writing down all the end-times prophesy stuff.

I am supposed to realize that I will be out of luck in terms of avoiding hell because in Revelations 3:7 it says:

 “These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth” – KJB Rev3:7

And this is supposed to mean that I am SOL with respect to avoiding hell if I do not convert in the next two weeks. May 22nd is too late.

Apparently one must believe in a god before he presents the evidence which he is fully capable of presenting at any time. After he presents the evidence it is not a test to believe, so believing becomes worthless.

Of course the missing evidence of a loving god who will start torturing you in a couple of weeks if you do not start believing right now is just the divine miraculous evidence. Billboards and Internet sites are OK. If you see a billboard advertising the end of the world and decide that is enough evidence to convert you are golden. If you hold out for godly earthquakes and miracles then you are going to hell.

The earthquake is supposed to be the biggest ever known. I would guess that at a 10+ on the Richter scale.

Then people will bodily be taken up to heaven. Apparently planes will fall from the sky. For years Fundamentalist Christians have insisted that on all commercial flights the FAA required a non-Christian co-pilot so the plane could be landed safely after rapture. I suppose the highways will be a mess. Luckily May 21st is a Saturday or the afternoon commute could be a nightmare.

What of May 22nd? Without evidence of a rapture will thousands of disheartened Christians suddenly wish to give up on god? I doubt it. This is the wondrous thing about Pascal's wager. The rewards of heaven are so great, and the risks of hell so terrible, that they swamp any consideration of apostasy.  No rapture..so what. No god...so what. Just the slimmest possibility that there is a heaven and hell is enough to justify unwavering belief.

Even some who know that there is almost certainly no god will hold out for that certainty.

On May 22nd we will know for certain that there has been no rapture. What difference will this make?

And they're off!

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” -- Hamlet; Act III, Scene 2

Sometime during the state of the union speech an official 2012 presidential campaign starter’s pistol was fired. Its reverberating ‘pop’ was quickly drowned out by the furious republican shuffle to stage a response to the president’s constitutionally-mandated speech. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) gave the official response for the Republican Party where he listed ‘logic-lite’ talking points for the upcoming political battles. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) gave an official Teabagger response which did much the same as Ryan’s speech only with way more hairspray and medication. Since Bachmann is ‘examining’ a bid for the white house other potential candidates had to speak up to prevent being eclipsed by Michele’s notoriety. One such candidate was Mitt Romney. Mitt’s response was a lot like Michelle’s only hair gel was substituted for the spray.

One thing that should be too obvious for any candidate to need mention is that they have god on their side. This superfluous fact will be alluded to with increasing fervor over the coming year. The last presidential election witnessed a staggering number of front-runner candidates for republican nomination who either proudly boasted of believing in young earth creationism (YEC), or refused to fully elaborate. I think we are in for some transcendently idiotic statements this coming year. Republican candidates will outdo themselves in courting the ill-educated alcohol-muddled “Joe-six-pack” voting bloc they think will carry them to their party’s nomination. Somewhere in the deserts of the American mindset headless illegal-immigrant zombies are stumbling towards the nation’s brains to eat its constitution. And everyone knows all zombies are atheists.

Since I think belief in YEC is a sign of mind-numbing foolishness I have a hard time not using it as a de-facto test for office. Most candidates’ speeches are littered with the words “I believe”. We are somehow supposed to take into account what they believe when choosing someone to vote for; unless what they believe is utter foolishness. Many candidates will be detailing their personal religious beliefs in such a way as to communicate similarity to the largest possible voting bloc. The American atheist will be pushed from view as candidates struggle to insist the populist nature of their religiosity.

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom” – Mitt Romney 2007

I have often said that, confronted with the proselytizing efforts of a bomb or gun, my conversion to the religion of the trigger-wielding missionary would be swift and doubt-free. But the big guns of any religion should not be aimed by mere mortals. Where does god weigh in? How does god weigh in? Some of the more secular-adapted religious folks maintain that one can see evidence of god’s preference only in hindsight; look at the outcome and know what god wanted. I think this coming year we will see widely advertised evidence of god’s preferences long before any outcomes are certain. One of the ways that god has spoken to his chosen people is through prophesy. One of the ways one can tell whom god has chosen is by listening for who got the best prophesy.

One popular prophesy here in Utah is called the “White Horse Prophesy” (WHP). The WHP states:

“When the Constitution of the United States hangs, as it were, upon a single thread, they [American citizens] will have to call for the 'Mormon' Elders to save it from utter destruction; and they will step forth and do it.”

Who will get the WHP nod this year; Huntsman or Romney?

Despite the fact that this would appear to be empty bragging on the part of the Mormon Church it is taken very seriously by quite a few people. One reason for this is that the statement was not simply transcribed from a proclamation of Joseph Smith (Founder of the Mormon Church) but reiterated by Brigham Young (Founder of the Mormon settlement in Utah) and John Taylor (An official prophet of the Mormon Church). When god repeats himself the chosen people listen.

The WHP is a significant motivator for the true believers. It can serve as a justification for otherwise morally questionable activity. Prophet John Taylor’s version of the WHP delineates the lines of righteousness:

“When the people shall have torn to shreds the Constitution of the United States the Elders of Israel will be found holding it up to the nations of the earth and proclaiming liberty and equal rights to all men" -- John Taylor, JD 21:8, August 31, 1879.

What will be done to “the people” who have torn the constitution to shreds is a bit vague. There are multiple mentions over the intervening century-and-change of measures that go beyond voting. The exact ways that one can identify “the people” and what to do are mostly left up to the individual.

"The first casualty when war comes, is truth" -- Hiram W. Johnson (R-CA) 1917

Though there are certainly true believers who will be stocking up on explosives and ammunition I think most of them will be hiding in the dark places under rocks where they feel most at home. There will be a greater proportion of believers who will be willing to simply deceive and cheat the sub-moral “people” to achieve their divine goal. Through the use of prophesy aggressive behaviors are justified. In the case of the WHP the behavior is seen as defense against an evil that god has tipped them off about.

Despite the fact that Xtians control all portions of the US government, and weigh heavily in most economic activities, many Xtians feel like they are under attack. Somehow atheists and Muslims are attacking everything good. The WHP resonates with those feelings of persecution. The biggest problem with mapping those feelings of persecution to action is the disappointing lack of substantial evidence of the persecution. Lack of evidence, however, can be fixed.

In November of 2007 Mitt Romney loudly decried the use of “push polls” aimed at discrediting his candidacy on the basis of his Mormon faith:

“I think the attempts to attack me on the basis of my faith are un-American” -- Romney 2007

 On November 16th the Romney campaign registered an official complaint with the New Hampshire attorney general’s office. Their preliminary report was published on January 3rd 2008. The NHAG found that the polls were conducted by ‘Western Wats’; a company based in Orem Utah. Provo-Orem is the home to Brigham Young University, which accounts for most of what Provo-Orem is. BYU is Romney’s alma mater and also of great importance to Ron Lindorf who founded Western Wats. Many employees at Western Wats were campaign contributors to Romney’s 2007 campaign.

Accusations that Romney’s 2007 campaign had push polled itself to raise sympathy were published before the January 2008 report (which came less than a month before the Republican nomination had been decided). These were firmly denied by all parties involved. Who really did the push polling? According to the Romney campaign we may never know. Perhaps the push pollers were just disgruntled atheists?

Atheism will be on the front lines in the coming election whether atheists do anything or not.

Two More Years!

It is apparently common knowledge that the world is going to end on December 21st 2012.  What will you wear?

There is admittedly some controversy surrounding this prophesy.  I have also been told that Jesus will return and initiate rapture on the 21st of May 2011, and that the total end of time will take place on the 21st of October 2011.

There are now only

Till the END of the WORLD!