Spread of Flat Earther Nonsense Shows We Are In A Period Of Intellectual Regression

Flat Earth buffs meet for a 'seminar' in Fort Collins. They believe they've aced reality and know more than the 'academic elites'. They are totally bonkers wrong.

Let's concede that the pace of modern scientific advance has been breathtaking. Some have noted that more new knowledge has been generated since 1997 than in the previous 400 years- up to and including 1997-  which is probably an understatement. Scientific journals and papers have proliferated at such a rate that most specialists barely have the time (or energy) to keep up with their own niche area, far less the entire discipline.

One estimate is that  1.8 million articles  are published each year, in about 28,000 journals. This elicits the question: who actually reads those papers?  According to one 2007 study, half of academic papers are read only by their authors and journal editors. This is nothing short of astounding but makes sense if one gets inside what research scientists actually do, which is to narrow their focus almost exclusively to their specific specialty areas  In addition, specialty areas themselves can be reduced to sub specialties, for example solar physics has a sub-discipline of solar flare magneto-hydrodynamics, another of solar flare predictions. Perhaps the former comprises 5 percent of solar physics and the latter 2 percent. Take the overlap between them and you may only find 50 solar physicists.

If the situation is practically untenable for regular scientists to keep pace with scientific knowledge, imagine what it must be like for most laymen, who may not even have been exposed to a high school biology or physics course.  At some point the burden of trying to keep pace with new knowledge - even produced in popular literature- may be too much for them, so they just give up. They either opt to blank out, or - as often the case- deny a given tenet or scientific principle or even an entire theory (e.g. general relativity).

This notion isn't new or remarkable. As far back as 1970, author Alvin Toffler - in his book, 'Future Shock' - observed (p. 326) that "one response to high speed change is outright denial".  Adding: "The Denier's strategy is to block out unwelcome reality".    Like the "disaster victim whose face registers total disbelief , the Denier too cannot accept the evidence of his senses. Thus he concludes things really are the same and all evidences of change are merely superficial."

This memetic basis, I believe, applies as much to the climate change or evolution denier as it now does to the new breed: the regressive flat Earther who denies the Earth's sphericity.  While the climate change denier rejects the cumulative evidence of the past several decades showing CO2 buildup connected to a rapidly warming Earth, the flat Earther rejects the evidence of the past two thousand years.  The first astronomical credit for deducing a spherical Earth is generally awarded to Eratosthenes (276 - 194 B.C.) who used basic trigonometry (based on the shadow length at Alexandria) to estimate the Earth's circumference within 5 to 15 % of its actual value.

According to a Denver Post front page story yesterday, the flat Earth bunch is making a return here in Colorado with regular meetings in Fort Collins. According to the Post:

"Every Tuesday at 6 p.m., three dozen Coloradans from every corner of the state assemble in the windowless back room of a small Fort Collins coffee shop. They have met 16 times since March, most nights talking through the ins and outs of their shared faith until the owners kick them out at closing.

They have no leaders, no formal hierarchy and no enforced ideology, save a common quest for answers to questions about the stars. Their membership has slowly swelled in the past three years, though persecution and widespread public derision keep them mostly underground. Many use pseudonyms, or only give first names.

“They just do not want to talk about it for fear of reprisals or ridicule from co-workers,” says John Vnuk, the group’s founder who lives in Fort Collins."


Well, of course, they shouldn't fear "reprisals" - because there is no place in a civilized society for any physical attacks on such people who hold archaic beliefs.  However, they can't expect to be immune from harsh criticism, provided it is scientifically based and not so much in the ad hominem regime.

What is more difficult to believe is this codswallop (ibid.):

"He is at the epicenter of a budding movement, one that’s coming for your books, movies, God and mind. They’re thousands strong — perhaps one in every 500 — and have proponents at the highest levels of science, sports, journalism and arts.

They call themselves Flat Earthers. Because they believe Earth — the blue, majestic, spinning orb of life — is as flat as a table."

If true, this would represent a monumental intellectual reversal on a par perhaps, with returning medicine to the age of using leeches to "bleed bad humors" out of sick people.  Say, as opposed to delivering antibiotics or using other interventions.    But it would play into Toffler's observation of a significant population no longer able to keep up with modern science.

Indeed, it is doubtful any of these flat Earthers have even heard of the specialized science of geodesy - i.e. as defined from Wikipedia:

"Geodesy, also called geodetics, is the scientific discipline that deals with the measurement and representation of the Earth, its gravitational field and geodynamic phenomena (polar motion, Earth tides, and crustal motion) in three-dimensional time-varying space."

In other words, this highly technical science is devoted to the precise measurement of the Earth's shape using specialized satellites and advanced techniques. Most of these have been published in a superb monograph featuring a chapter on geodesy by the late Heinrich K. Eichhorn who used to be the chairman of the Dept. Of Astronomy at the University of South Florida.



Eichhorn's chapter is a masterpiece and shows in detail what must be done to arrive at the "geoid". Will the flat Earthers read it? I doubt it because they likely lack the math background to grasp its most basic principles, such as satellite orbits. Do they even believe that satellites exist? One wonders.

Vnuk goes on to chirp:

"Some will accept it, some won’t. But love it or hate it, you can’t ignore Flat Earth.”

Uh, yes we can! Other than as a historical curiosity that eventually humans got savvy enough - in their methods and knowledge- to out grow. It is tragic that this now represents a regression to more primitive times, but again it fits in with Alvin Toffler's take on those who can't accept rapid scientific change. They are "future shocked".

Vnuk claims the Fort Collins group "touts itself as the first community of Flat Earthers in the United States. Sister groups have since spawned in Boston, New York, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Chicago."

Which leads me to think many of those joining just want to be controversial and contrarian. They probably couldn't explain any "scientific" basis for rejecting sphericity if they had to.

One thing these folks must admit is the Moon is plainly visible in the sky and it IS spherical, e.g.

And no, they can't argue the image is still "flat like a pancake" because the phenomenon of astronomical nutation allows us to see over the top of the Moon's pole in a spherical context.

In addition, they probably can't even grasp that if indeed the Earth was flat as they claim, and in a mutual orbit with a spherical Moon, the orbit would soon become unstable. Indeed, we would not observe the regularity of Earth tides which in large measure arise on account of the differential gravitation effect of the Moon on the spherical Earth - with greater attraction at the near point than the far one, e.g.


Here, the Moon exerts a pull of force F1 on the near point (call it A on the Earth). By the same token, point B on the opposite side from A would be pulled nearer to the Moon than the water above it, thereby inducing a high tide at point B as well. In other words, two separate pulls resulting in two high tides at locations A  and B. This model also allows the prediction (average) for the time between two tides at 12 hrs. 25 mins.    Close inspection of (b)  would show tide raising forces were greatest at the intermediate points.  That is, between the Moon’s nadir and zenith positions.

Incredibly, the flat Earthers even have "donation boxes" staked out to try to collect money for bill boards, e.g.


Talk about a total waste!    But to further try to give ballast to this nonsense the Post quotes a guy named Bob Knodel, who supposedly was an "engineer" for 35 years. What kind they don't say. Maybe a sanitary engineer? According to Knodel:

"There’s so much evidence once you set aside your preprogrammed learning and begin to look at things objectively with a critical eye says you learn soon that what we’re taught is mainly propaganda.”

Seriously? A satellite geodetic survey is propaganda? How about flying great circle routes,   say to get  from New York City to Hong Kong. e. g.
or has Knodel never done that?


Why take that particular route? Well, because for a spherical geometry it is the shortest route between two points - so it saves fuel and time!  If he had the time (and math background) I'd even show him how to calculate the distance between two locations on Earth - say Barbados to Bristol, England, using spherical trigonometry, e.g.

cos(dist.)= sin (lat1) sin (lat2) + cos (lat1) cos (lat2) cos (long1 - long2)

In this case, Barbados latitude is 13 deg N., Bristol's is 51 deg 26' N. Bristol's longitude is   2 deg 35' W. Barbados' longitude is 59 deg 30'  W.

This is all one needs to use the spherical triangle formula to arrive at the distance (taking into account the circumference value of 24,901 mi.).

Knodel "runs the popular YouTube channel Globebusters," which has nearly 2 million views across more than 135 videos.   So it appears he is at least knowledgeable about spreading mind viruses- especially among those whose brains have already been colonized by fake news.

Knodel goes on:

“I’ve researched conspiracies for a long time. I’ve looked very critically at NASA. Why is it that the astronauts have conflicting stories about the sky? Is it bright with stars, or a deep velvet black?”


Well, maestro, because different astronauts (and even the same)  making orbits at different times will experience variable illumination and also (timed to the period of satellite orbits) "daylight" and "night" - e.g. once they pass the day-night terminator. Hence, in the latter condition they will see the sky as "velvet black" and indeed populated with stars, and at other times with brighter background, e.g. in 'daylight' conditions of the orbit. There are no 'conflicting stories' unless one reads conflicting stories into the accounts and is unable to parse correctly what is being said.

The most amusing part of the Post account:

“How are we Flat Earthers supposed to explain to our friends the solar eclipse in August?” asked one attendee. The room fell silent. “We’ll have to do more research and get back to you on that.”

Ah yes, "do more research and get back on that".   Meanwhile, the solar eclipse is easily explained by appeal to shadow geometry applied to the assorted spherical bodies involved: Sun, Earth and Moon, e.g.


Indeed, the path of the shadow cone (umbra-penumbra) itself depends directly on the Earth being a spherical - not flat- body.

Anyway, after the flat Earthers return to the drawing table I can hardly wait to see what their 'research' coughs up.   It's bound to be awesome. Heck, maybe they can even put it on a billboard. (If it will fit!)

DOE Defiance of Trump Witch Hunt Shows Charles Blow Is Correct: That Resistance Is Needed

The news yesterday that at least one federal agency, the Department of Energy (DOE),  is resisting pressure from the Trumpists is music to the ears of many. As most may recall, the Trump team had issued orders to the brain trust at DOE to name all those who attended any meetings about climate change. However, those at the agency (mainly scientists) have now declared 'No way!' and they will not cooperate, given this is an obvious witch hunt - analogous to when Hitler's goons demanded the names of all sources who had been spreading "lies" about the Fuhrer to the non-German media in the 1930s.

As ABC's Brian Ross reported last night:

"At the Department of Energy tonight, fears by employees and scientists had spread that they would be targets of witch hunt by a new President who has repeatedly insisted climate change is a scam. Concerns came to a head when the Trump team sent a list of 74 questions to the Department of Energy.  In particular question 27:

Can you provide us a list of all Department of Energy Employees or contractors who have attended any interagency Working Group meeting on the Social Cost of Carbon?"

But now they have refused to comply, the first act of many of multiple resistance which will be needed by courageous citizens under a fascist Trumpista regime. Anthony Reardon, President of the National Treasury Employees Union, gave the reasons in a segment for the same news piece:

"They are scared about the ability to carry out their duties, their work, their research, with integrity. But also with independence."

This is indeed critical, because without independence research teams become merely rubber stampers for whoever is in power.

As Ross at ABC further reported, "In a show of defiance the DOE  responded to the letter and questions: ''We received significant feedback from our workforce  We will be forthcoming with all publicly available information. We will not be providing individual names...' "


This is because individual names are not part of publicly available information. Hence, the Trumpists are not entitled to it and all they really merit is what the DOE is prepared to give, publicly available material.  This also comes as the asshole- in - waiting announced as head of the DOE none other than Reeptardo Rick Perry, e.g.
 
This is the ignorant yokel who in a 2011 Reepo debate could not recall the name of the DOE, which was one of the federal agencies he wanted to eliminate. Process that for a bit!

All of which shows that Trump and team of abominables is merely out to troll decent and rational citizens, and why - more than ever- the Hamilton elector movement must succeed in preventing these degenerates from reaching power. Especially in the wake of Trump's own attack on the intelligence agencies who now - by any register - ought to be willing themselves to take him down.


To put it another way: putting Rick Perry in as Secretary of the Department of Energy is like putting Bozo the Clown in charge of the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.    To firm up that analogy, the ignorant dope Perry who couldn't even remember the name of the DOE in 2011, will now take over an office held by....wait for it!....a nuclear physicist!

Despite this, the Trump team and its paid hacks continues to spread offal and false information, like one dimwit bloviating from Trump Tower a few days ago that: "There used to be an overwhelming science that the world was flat". Actually attempting to analogize flat earthers to global warming scientists in a clueless display of astounding ignorance as well as low IQ.

In fact, as far back as 240 B.C. it was known by the much more enlightened Greek astronomers, in particular Eratosthenes, that the Earth was spherical, not flat. This was opposed to the primitive flat Earth perceptions (NOT science!)  embraced by the sheep herder tribes of Judea, many of whom scribbled down their Bronze Age myths in the Bible.


This is all very relevant now as we can expect to hear, as Trumpistas take office, more and more lies try to justify jettisoning existing climate science. But it also alerts us of the need to resist.

NY Times columnist Charles Blow hit the nail on its head in his recent piece that we are obligated as citizens to defy a Trump presidency. Granted, 62 million odd knuckle draggers and imps voted this turd into power but that doesn't mean we have to respect it, or kowtow to their insane impulsive choice. As Blow writes:

"It is not the job of the defiant to conform to a future president who makes them completely uncomfortable. The burden of unity lies with Trump, not his detractors."

Bingo!

“Just wait and see.” “Give him a chance.” But what if what you’ve already seen is so beyond the pale that it’s irrevocable? What if Trump has already squandered more chances than most of us will ever have?

What if Trump has shown himself beyond doubt and with absolute certainty to be a demagogue and bigot and xenophobe and has given space and voice to concordant voices in the country and in his emerging Legion of Doom cabinet? In that reality, resistance isn’t about mindless obstruction by people blinded by the pain of ideological defeat or people gorging on sour grapes. To the contrary, resistance then is an act of radical, even revolutionary, patriotism. Resistance isn’t about damaging the country, but protecting it.

Blow is also spot on when he writes:

"Furthermore, the emergence of Donald Trump as a political figure has threatened to kill many of the ideals that we hold dear: decency and decorum, inclusion and empathy, truth and facts themselves.

Trump and his agents of idiocracy are now engaged in an all-out crusade to exaggerate the scope of his victory, rewrite racial history, justify their vendettas and hostilities and erase the very distinction between true and false.

At a fiery exchange during a panel at Harvard, Hillary Clinton’s communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, rightly accused the Trump campaign of emboldening “white supremacists and white nationalists.”

The Trump campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway , tried to defend this idiocracy but what would you expect. This harridan is a member of it.  As Blow pointed out, truth and facts are now under major assault, i.e.  "everybody has a way of interpreting them to be the truth or not true.”

He continued, quoting Conway: “There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore of facts.”  And Blow added:

"Folks, Dimwit-ism is a disease easily spread and denigrators of the absolutism of truth are its vectors.This is why resistance isn’t only principled, but essential and even existential. We are not in an ordinary postelection period of national unity and rapprochement. We are facing the potential abrogation of fundamental American ideals. We stand at the precipice, staring into an abyss that grows darker by the day."

Already, at a meeting this week of climate scientists in San Francisco there is outrage at what is happening. How Trump and his band of appointed assholes are clearly ready to dismantle all progress on global warming research leaving us all for the high jump.  The scenes last night on ABC showed the scientists with signs "Stand up for science!" and shouting "Stand up, fight back!"

This is advice we all need to heed as we lurch ever nearer to zero hour and being hurled back decades in critical climate science and other work. It means we also have to be prepared to resist as the climate scientists and columnist Charles Blow have admonished us to do and forge a consistent and unified means of obstruction. This means never accepting Trump or his administration as our own, and fighting in whatever form we can,  every step of the way. Especially by refusing to swallow the media rot that tries to normalize this swine or that we must now "all come together". No, absolutely not! And we have to hope - if the Hamilton elector movement fails - the Dems grow some balls too (especially Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi) and refuse all enticements to "bipartisanship".  Recall former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) famously said, "Bipartisanship is another name for date rape."

We must be every bit as obstructionist and uncompromising as the Repukes and their followers were after Obama was elected.  Sorry, folks, this is now the Divided States 0f America and it cannot now be otherwise!

See also:

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/richard-eskow/70295/by-picking-tillerson-and-perry-trump-s-pretty-much-just-trolling-us-now

Pastor Mike's Education (I)

Once more Pastor Mike (aka my youngest brother Mike) is at it again with his diatribes against atheists, especially moi. However, he insists at his website, that he “welcomes” everyone, including non-believers. But I want to do here is to examine critically some more of his claims. Let us look at them in turn.

In is open letter to atheists, now on his forum, he writes:

I would LOVE to have an 'open discussion topic' board on this site , but would have to 'screen' ALL submissions (as I now do with my "Guest Book " , for fear of the 'radicals' posting their tirades (after all , I can't sit by my computer 24/7 'screening' posts ), as opposed to staying on topic - with MUTUAL RESPECT , as well as respecting my ' ground rules' of no profanity , blasphemy , personal attacks , etc . I do not think that is 'asking too much .

This is pure bunk. In fact, in my first and only “submission” to his guest book, I appended a column I’d written for a local newspaper entitled “The Savior Template”. The article explored the background and history of God-Man mythologies, such as Mithras and Horus – and noted that since these predated Christianity, the Jesus story was most likely plagiarized (by Christian scribes) from the earlier ones.

One day after my addition, “Pastor Mike” posted a rejoinder comment, saying he at first considered removing it, then decided against it. He wanted everyone to “see first hand the hold Satan had on his brother”.

A day later the article was removed and a fulminating additional comment from him materialized, to the effect he was not about to permit the “demons of deception” to have their way. So, in truth and in fact,. he wants no part of any open discussion. He is then, a coward, and not even as brave as another such I-net character who calls himself “Pastor Jim”. At least this Pastor has the nerve to post e-mails sent to him. See:

http://www.truechristian.com/favoriteemails.html


Pastor Mike then rambles on:

Some atheists think they've taken a heroic stand, but could it be that they really don't want to face up to the possibility that God is indeed there? I hope you'll be intellectually honest enough to consider what I have to say and see if it makes sense.

This is bare bollocks. In fact, atheists don’t interpret their position as a “stand” – heroic or otherwise- but rather a natural outcome of decades of parsing through what “evidence” is on offer from their religious, god-believing brethren At the end of the day, then, they conclude (mostly on the basis of a lack of efficacy) there is no deity that conforms to omni attributes: “all-knowing”, “all-powerful” etc.

Now, given that most god-believers have not defined what "God" is, far less put forth any necessary or sufficient conditions for it s existence (contingent on the definition) then the atheist is at liberty to say that any given believer’s "reasonable grounds" are no more compelling than my reasonable grounds for asserting that alien experiments are being conducted at Area 51, or that a 22-dimensional essence is at the root of cosmic evolution.

Another example: Many god-believers describe themselves as deists. This means they interpret the divinity as some kind of "watchmaker" who completes his cosmic fancy work then abandons the cosmos to its own devices, unfolding. The point? It clearly radically diverges from the God of Pastor Mike - which is judgmental and personally involved at multiple levels with humans, or so we are informed. The problem? How to reconcile via standardized definition, or attributes, that the “God” claimed by either deist, Catholic or fundagelical is the SAME entity?

A first start toward rational inquiry is therefore for Pastor Mike to say how and in what ways his "God" diverges from say the typical deist’s, or Einstein’s (“Spinoza’s God”) or Sir Fred Hoyle's. Then one can perhaps start getting somewhere, as opposed to forever being faced with generic "God" statements or arguments, which end up being meaningless because no clear distinctions can be made.

What I’m saying is that before one can assert one has "reasonable grounds" for accepting a proposition or claim he must understand that that claim means, or the underlying entity. A first step to understanding, is to define it. (Preferably in 50 words ors less) A second step is to articulate necessary and sufficient conditions for its existence.

Here's a start: Every manjack agrees "intelligence" is a necessary condition for a deity. (A condition such that its absence means the entity cannot exist). Now, what are some sufficient conditions? (Those conditions by their presence mean the entity MUST exist)

Let us return to the irrrepressible Pastor Mike:

No one who has prejudged an issue can be convinced of anything contrary to what he wants to believe. There are still those who insist the earth is flat and no one can convince them otherwise, no matter what the evidence. There are always folks, no matter if religious or atheistic, who stubbornly believe what they prefer, no matter if reason and fact show otherwise. Someone like this has the unspoken philosophy: Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is already made up. Ask yourself: Am I open-minded or narrow minded? Am I willing to change my mind if I can be shown atheism doesn't make sense?

Again, the good Pastor has it all wrong. No one is “prejudging” anything to do with this issue. If anything is being “prejudged” it is the absence of compelling singular and standardized definitions for the claimed entity. If none of these mesh, or there are numerous contradictions (say between the deist’s God and the fundie’s) what are we (atheists) to think? Well, if you can’t even agree on your own basic definition, why should we even take the claim seriously? It is somewhat like two drunks in the throes of delirium tremens, each arguing about a giant spider coming after them. “Joe” asserts it’s eight feet high and has a pair of red horns, while “Jack” asserts its ten feet high and with mandibles as big thick as telephone poles.

What is the casual, rational passerby to make of their claims? Well, that they are both delusional.

Using the “earth is flat” as the basis for an argument – especially to defend an approach to an invisible entity that can’t even be measured, is just plain daft and egregious. Yes, uh…..we KNOW the Earth is not flat because from the time of Aristotle it was concluded the Earth was a sphere, based on the shape of its shadow projected on the Moon during a lunar eclipse. Later, Eratosthenes actually managed to compute the Earth’s diameter to be 13,400 kilometers – from which its circumference could be found.

What my brother is asserting or proposing, is that there is a perfect analogy between what was done (by measurement) to conclude the Earth’s sphericity, to the existence of an entity that can’t be remotely measured. Thus, he is guilty of false analogy.

Thus, asserting that “there are still those who insist the Earth is flat and no one can convince them otherwise” is NOT the same as saying that a reasonable, rational man is not convinced by an empty claim for an invisible entity that can’t even be measured the way the Earth can for “flatness”. Chalk and cheese. Oh, and an entity that can’t even be given a uniform, standardized definition.

It is hilarious that he uses the example of someone who says “don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up” – when he hasn’t even provided any base facts! ALl he gives are sundry dozens of biblical quotations, which do not qualify as facts. Indeed, as biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman notes (“Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why”) it is essentially impossible to obtain one consistent narrative between all the synoptic gospels – because competing interests, or scribes had different agendas at different times, resulting in numerous serious mistranslations, retranslations and plain script butchery to force a perception.

What we need from the likes of Pastor Mike are prima facie, independent facts of the world that unequivocally point to a deity. Without the need to cite endless bible bunkum.

The true narrow-mindedness inheres with him, for not being able to parse or consider more than one narrow, anthropomorphized version of a deity. At least my good Christian friend John (yes I do have them) has embraced the nuance of the Sociinian deity – since he now recognizes an “omni” attribute one is a fantasy.

Let’s explore this in more detail to see why.

In reply to my contention this “infinite” deity is useless and impotent, one commentator on the AARP message forum (“Life After Death”) retorted:

Are you sure you want the Almighty to be stepping in and interfering in our affairs every time we're about to screw it up? A little reflection might indicate that perhaps that might not be such a good thing

However, he misses the whole point. It isn’t that we are asking for active intervention, but rather PASSIVE, minimalist response to pleas and prayers from its own followers. Is that asking too much? No one expects the omnipotent thingie to come out and take care of everything. And certainly not to take "marching orders" from an itty bitty atheist It could turn into brainless protoplasm if it so desired.

But how about just minimal passive manifestation to protect innocents that never did him anything and are praying, begging for deliverance? Is that a huge stretch?

Those two young girls killed by a crazed lone gunman at the New Life Church a month ago in Colorado Springs were pleading for mercy, where was Pastor Mike’s great God to deliver it? All they got was mortally-wounding lead shots (one in the chest, the other in the back) for their trouble. Was it expecting too much we at least ask Pastor Mike’s great God to cause the gun to misfire? Or the safety to freeze? Not to actually cause the killer to disintegrate, mind you, but …you know….a little minimal passive mischief here and there to stop what it had to know would cause hurt, and yes, lack of faith to many.

And how about all those six million Jews gassed horribly - packed by the hundreds in 200 square meter rooms, naked and assaulted in the most vile and abhorrent way. Too much to at least ask Pastor Mike’s God to make the gas chambers fizzle out? Or the Zyklon B not to work for once? Or render all Zyklon B useless? Or ...;.how about simply causing the Jews to have insight into what would befall them so they could at least fight back as opposed to going like lambs to the slaughter?

THIS is where the bear sits with his buckwheat, and where the chip-on-his shoulder “pastor” – who has the nerve to compare unbelievers to flat-Earthers can make his stand. Give a defensible argument to support even minimal inaction!

Re: the analogy to human parents and “allowing a kid to screw up” – one needs to be more discriminating here. Yeah, parents ought to let a kid grow and learn. Thus, if little Joey keeps goofing off in school,. he’ll eventually learn the hard way he may have to flip burgers for most of his life.

BUT - if little Joey is playing with a loaded .44 Magnum (from daddy's drawer) and little sister Suzie is playing with her Barbie nearby, it would be a useless excuse for a parent, indeed, who didn't step in and take the gun away! What exactly would a parent prove by standing by like some imbecile while Johnnie took the safety off and commenced play firing?

This is all I am expecting the deity of the god-mongers like Pastor Mike to do, by analogy. At least ACT like a decent human parent would in a comparative situation. If it won't, why should we respect it? What makes it useful to retain as a concept or belief meme in the absence of efficacy? Why the hell should we put it anywhere the near the same epistemological level of a spherical Earth obtained by geometrical measurement?

In the end, all of Pastor Mike’s complaints are basically frivolous, useless, and to no avail, unless he can elucidate necessary and sufficient conditions for the operations, existence of whatever god he proclaims or posit. If he can't he’s merely wasting time retorting or posting more codswallop about the “atheist cult”.

What we have then, is a pastor who is actually a premier example of a cultist like Jim Jones of Jonestown. Never let his flock think (censor every bit of knowledge passed between them), never question and always find some bunkum in his “good book” to advance his agenda.

Is Pastor Mike another Rev. Jim Jones? I don’t know – but in the next instalment, I will examine closely more of his claims about atheists (from the same tract on his website), with a view toward exposing what they say about him.

For those who want to see the details of how all Pastor Mike's claims of biblical truth are shattered, please go to:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury