Victorious Free Fire Zone

We’ve been searching all day, but there’s no news we can blog about. Even the creationist websites are ghastly. As we’ve remarked before, this is actually good news, because they aren’t doing anything that gets them any publicity — but it’s not good for blogging about them.

At this point, it’s like they’re trying to sell the 500th sequel to an old fantasy story, but nobody cares. Would you be interested in watching the show if Batman didn’t have anything to do but write tickets for overtime parking? That’s what it’s like when we visit the Discoveroids and the other outfits.

So for today, it’s up to us to entertain ourselves. Therefore, we’re declaring another Intellectual Free-Fire Zone. As with all our free-fire zones, we’re open for the discussion of pretty much anything — science, politics, economics, whatever — as long as it’s tasteful and interesting. Banter, babble, bicker, bluster, blubber, blather, blab, blurt, burble, boast — say what you will. But avoid flame-wars and beware of the profanity filters.

Hey, for something to get you started, look at this at PhysOrg: Why universal basic income costs far less than you think. Let’s see if you can figure out why it’s incredibly goofy.

Okay, we now throw open the comments to you, dear reader. Have at it.

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

29 responses to “Victorious Free Fire Zone

  1. What about the claim that some nearby galaxies, satellites of the Milky Way or Andromeda, are extremely old, like 13 billion years old? I’m not sure what this tells us about cosmology, whether it’s well substantiated.

  2. Just a voice in the Canadian wilderness

    Ouch, that’s gotta sting. I’ll just leave this here

  3. Aretha Franklin is gone. AIG has a new author who named himself after a rock opera who couldn’t tell bear scat from wild honey.. Creationism is still wacky. You can’t shovel enough poop overboard to keep the ark afloat. Primates still did not cross the ocean trenches to Australia until mankind. And Hambo still looks like he was ‘et by a coyote and crapp/d off a cliff.

  4. “Would you be interested in watching the show if Batman didn’t have anything to do but write tickets for overtime parking?”
    Wrong question afaIc, because I lost my interest in everything related to Batman the first time I read a Batman comic. That must have been 45 years ago.

    “Let’s see if you can figure out why it’s incredibly goofy.”
    Because it’s far outside the conservative box you’ve locked yourself into. So I’m not going to even try, even if the economic theory behind it is quite solid for a change – unless Reaganistic woo you voted for in the 1980’s and Donald the Clown fortunately is too incompetent to reintroduce.

  5. Unlike.

  6. As usual when there is lack of creacrap news I consulted the trusty site And lo and behold! There has been a major event! The 8th Creationist Creationist Congress!

    “Op het Achtste Europese Creationistische Congres in Zweden ….”
    “At the Eighth European Creationist Congress in Sweden ….”

    I just had to google it. Prepare for some ultra-professional presentation.

    Even the prominent American creacrapper Paul Nelson was there, so I’m a bit amazed there hasn’t been any publicity.
    That Dutch creacrap article from the first link talks about Werner Gitt, who does have a website – in English, so if our dear SC is bored he might take a look.

    Alas I don’t have the time today to translate a lot, but I enjoy sharing this gem:

    “Gitt zette een aantal stellingen, die hij natuurwetten aangaande informatie noemt (NWI) neer, waar ik er hier een aantal uitpik:
    [NWI 2] Informatie is een niet-materiële fundamentele entiteit. Niet-materieel staat in tegenstelling tot materieel, omdat informatie niet stoffelijk is. Al kan ze worden uitgedrukt in materie, ze gaat de materie te boven. Voorbeeld: je kan met krijt een boodschap op het bord schrijven, maar als je het krijt wegveegt en opvangt heb je alleen maar krijt en geen boodschap meer!”

    “Gitt postulated several theorems he calls natural laws regarding information:
    [NWI 2] Information is a non-material fundamental entity. Non-material is the opposite of material, because information is not tangible (probably better material, as “materieel” and “stoffelijk” are synonyms in Dutch – MNb). Even if she can be expressed in matter, she transcends matter. Example: you can write a message on a blackboard with chalk, but if you wipe and collect the chalk you only have chalk, while the message is gone.”

    This guy is/was (he’s retired) a German expert on information technology.

    So I did learn something useful already: our neighbuors at the East have enjoyed creacrap activity since 1979.

    Basically they are the German equivalent of ICR; according to the German wikisite somewhat less absolute (whatever that means).

  7. What’s wrong with you people?

    Don’t you realise that the whole world became ‘goofy’ three days ago, and the foundations of both science and religion were rendered null and void by Dr. Braterman’s historically validated sighting of a unicorn?

    Humanity will need years to digest all the implications of this paradigm-shattering discovery!

  8. And of course by the “Law of Irrational Belief Transcends All Evidence”, any spurious made up claim always transcends reason and evidence, no matter how convincing the latter two! Otherwise, the Perpetually Perplexed would have to face reality, and you cannot even imagine just how frightening that would be for them! It would be *so* unfair to them as well.

  9. I’m waiting for Paul to tell us the unicorn died for our sins and then rose from the dead three days later.

    C’mon! Give me something I can really get behind, here!

  10. @ ChrisS: The ineffable mysteries of the Great Unicorn are revealed only to the pure of heart and righteous of spirit.

    To achieve these prerequisites, you need to follow the arduous path of a worshipper at the Megalonyx Monastery and Spiritual Supermarket™.

    We are now taking bookings for the Autumn 2018 intake of Truth Seekers. Fees (non-refundable) are very reasonable, considering that after initiation you will have no further need of worldly goods.

  11. Hallelujah !

  12. @Megalonyx

    Sounds intriguing. I never derived much spiritual sustenance from Answers in Cabbages, and their weird, puritanical attitude towards sex was, frankly, a bit of a drag.

  13. New topic: The peppered moth as an example of evolution

    A recent paper sutdies one aspect of the example, whether birds distingush the camouflage of the moths Darwin’s moths

    The example is laid out in some detail in this recent book
    Menno Schilthuizen
    Darwin Come to Town: Hw the Urban Jungle Drives Evolution
    Picador, 2018

  14. How am I supposed to think about peppered moths when there is such outrageous blasphemy as this afoot:
    Elon Musk accused of stealing farting unicorn image

  15. Michael Fugate

    When creationists whine…

    The Bible itself is not offensive, it is the intolerance of the people holding it that is. But Laurie has an honorary doctorate from Biola – are you impressed?

    “What Is the Bible?
    The Bible is a book of history, science, poetry, and human behavior. Most importantly, it is a love story that reveals the heart of God through the person of His Son, Jesus Christ.”

    But the history and science is all wrong.

  16. Nobody is going to defend the PhysOrg piece? We’re going to give our view of it anyway, albeit a short version.

    Let’s suppose the government embraces the dream of the social scientists, and, with no enforcement mechanism at all, sends everyone a magic check every month for an amount sufficient to ensure basic sustenance. No bureaucracy, no forms to fill out. Hurray! Universal happiness! Who could object? Why? What could possibly go wrong?

    Okay, here it comes. As soon as the first month’s check is received, millions of workers — perhaps tens of millions — probably including most farm workers, will quit their jobs and live off the magic check. Hey — why work?

    Then what? Then the crops won’t be picked. Food shortages will appear. Prices will skyrocket. Riots are inevitable. Then the farmers will offer more money to get their workers back. Assume that works, and food then gets to the markets. It’ll be more expensive, of course, because of higher labor costs. More riots. Protests. Demands that the magic check be increased to cover the “unfair” costs imposed by “greedy” farmers.

    Simple, right? So the social scientists recommend that the magic check should be increased — and it is. You know what’s going to happen. The whole thing will repeat itself. There’s no end to it. And why? Because all the social scientists in the world can’t change reality.

  17. You have a guess about what would happen. I have a guess that you are wrong. Because there are many people who have inherited much more than the “magic check” supplies, and don’t exhibit the behavior that you predict. Or do they? If I am wrong about that, then we ought to insure that nobody inherits more than a token amount.
    Do you have evidence for your guess?

  18. Michael Fugate

    Then we should get rid of inherited wealth, no?
    Look at all the rich kid losers we have in public positions – people who wouldn’t be there if their parents weren’t wealthy.

  19. Mark Germano

    It’s refreshing to see in black and white the American right’s true view of the US working class and immigrant population.

    For a composite view of the importance of the rich keeping their inheritance and a clear disdain for the American middle and working class, Chuck Grassley (R – Iowa) sums it up quite nicely:

    “I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing,” Grassley (R-Iowa) told the Des Moines Register, “as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”

    Now, if you don’t mind, I’m going to get drunk with some ladies and see “Incredibles 2.”

  20. I think that Grasley should propose a tax on women!

  21. Michael Fugate

    What’s comic is that Grassley has been living off taxpayer dollars since he was 26. He is now 84. 60 years of government handouts.

  22. Mark Germano

    I bet he’s going to use the dickens out of that socialist, government provided medical insurance, too.

  23. The notion that people massively refuse to work if there is ‘free money’ to be had, has been debunked in all countries with a decent social safety net, which is most of north/west Europe. Easy though it may be here to remain on the public teat, people highly prefer useful work.

  24. throw open the comments
    bloody scotch

  25. @Draken:
    People may not “massively refuse to work” if “free money” is available, but you have to admit it is a bit of a disincentive, even though many would prefer performing useful work. The big question is, “Who’s going to pay for it? Where will the money come from?”

    If the money question can be solved, there may be some benefits for society. If people won’t have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, they will have the opportunity to create art, write poetry, volunteer in community service, etc. But this only works if enough people retain the drive to do more than just exist.

  26. By the way, Curmie, the government sending “everyone a magic check every month” is not too far off from what your favorite president is doing — offering farmers $12 billion to compensate for the effects of his trade wars.

    He’s buying votes, pure and simple.

  27. Michael Fugate

    So why do rich people work when they obviously don’t need to?

  28. See Prosperity Gospel.
    People are rich because they are the favored of God.
    Don’t bother to make sense of it. I think that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is involved, too.
    Evidence isn’t. You know the usual.

  29. RSG, indeed! The GOP used to claim fiscal responsibility, while accusing the Dems of tax-and-spend. Trump’s GOP is now no-tax-and-spend. It looks like next year’s deficit will exceed a trillion and we are not far away from debt burden equaling GDP.