5 Bits of Woo I Wish Were True and 5 I’m Glad Aren’t True

The Top 5 Bits of Woo I Wish Were True:

5. Santa Claus – When I was a kid my parents told me that on Christmas Eve a jolly old man in a red suit would come down our chimney and leave me toys that his magical elves made me at the North Pole. How cool would that be?! And now as an adult, I’m thinking that Christmas could be a whole lot more fun if Santa did my shopping for me.

4. Free Energy – There’s always somebody pimping their perpetual motion machine, telling you they’ve got the solution to the energy crisis, but unfortunately they’re either con artists, deluded, or breaking the laws of thermodynamics. Alas! I guess I’ll just have to keep paying the heating bill and filling up that pesky gas tank.

3. The Afterlife – It would be so comforting to know that my loved ones are living on after they’ve passed away, and to know that I would be meeting them again soon. Also, since I became an atheist, I’ve started getting really bad anxiety every time I get in a car. I desperately don’t want to die, because I know this is the only life I get. If I knew that there was an afterlife I would be a lot more relaxed about taking risks, and I certainly wouldn’t be such an annoying back seat driver!

2. UFOs – Imagine if aliens actually visited Earth? Hopefully they wouldn’t be of the anal-probing variety…but it would surely be the highlight of my life to encounter a being from another solar system. I highly doubt the possibility of humans achieving inter-stellar travel in my lifetime, so to have a creature that’s seen the universe from a completely different perspective come to us would be…just…wow.

1. The Power of Prayer – If I thought I could relieve someone’s pain or bring world peace or solve complicated problems by appealing to a higher power, you’d better believe I would be down on my knees every second of every day.

The Top 5 Bits of Woo I’m Glad Aren’t True:

5. Psychic Powers – It creeps me out to imagine a world where certain people could read your thoughts and see your future. My thoughts are private, and I choose what I share with people. To not have the ability to own my most personal feelings would suck. And I have no desire to see my future. That would take the adventure out of life! Althought I wouldn’t mind winning the occasional lottery…

4. 9/11 and Moon Landing Conspiracy Theories – These ideas sicken me because they assume that the government is able to dupe people on a massive scale, and that they are in no way accountable to the people they represent. Politicians have their problems and often do crooked things, but they don’t have nearly the amount of control over the population as these two theories would require if they were true. Plus, humans have been on another freaking world! How jaded do you have to be to deny that???

3. Ghosts – I like the idea of an afterlife, but if I had to spend it walking up and down stairs, making howling noises, and causing loopy psychics to feel cold, I’d rather just be dead.

2. The Dangers of Vaccines – Vaccines save lives, and have helped nearly eliminate certain painful childhood illnesses. Yet there are certain people who, for whatever reason, have decided to ignore the evidence and blame vaccines for everything that’s wrong in the world. I think they should take a stroll through an old graveyard and count the number of babies burried there.

1. Hell – Eternal torment…what a brilliant idea thought up by authority figures to keep their people in line. Nobody should be punished eternally for any mistake they made on Earth. It’s a horrible thing to threaten someone with. Thankfully it doesn’t exist…unfortunately some people genuinely live in fear of fire and brimstone. Sad.

Advertisements

13 Responses to “5 Bits of Woo I Wish Were True and 5 I’m Glad Aren’t True”


  1. 1 porno4pyrrho October 3, 2009 at 12:00 am

    Of the five you wished were true have you ever looked into the Disclosure Project? These people are anything but crazy kooks. Unless you consider people from the FAA, NASA, the NSA, the US army and air force, the DIA, CIA, a five-star Admiral and Former Head of the British Ministry of Defense (plus many many more who are all ready to testify before congress) to be woowoos, or whatever derogatory term we’re using for respectable people that may have witnessed things you haven’t, in which case don’t bother and instead just toe the line and keep repeating Fermi’s paradox as your argument to refute such claims.

  2. 2 linzeebinzee October 3, 2009 at 12:46 am

    I just had a look at the Disclosure Project website…it appears to be a bunch of UFO believers who want the government to disclose information that the government might not even have. Eyewitness testimony is not evidence, and it looks like that’s all they have. I don’t know why their credentials make them more qualified to comment on UFO sightings. I’m sure they’re all smart people, but that doesn’t necessarily make them less susceptible to deception or error. I’m sure they experienced something that they don’t have an explanation for, but that doesn’t mean that the explanation is aliens.

    This is from their site:

    PROJECT DESCRIPTION

    A CALL ON U.S. CONGRESS FOR HEARINGS & LEGISLATION

    [1] To hold open, secrecy-free hearings on the UFO/Extraterrestrial presence on and around Earth.

    [2] To hold open hearings on advanced energy and propulsion systems that, when publicly released, will provide solutions to global environmental challenges.

    [3] To enact legislation which will ban all space-based weapons.

    [4] To enact comprehensive legislation to research, develop and explore space peacefully and cooperatively with all cultures on Earth and in space.

    1 – Before demanding that congress hold hearings about extraterrestrials they should provide actual evidence that there is an ET presence.

    2 – Same comment as number 1.

    3 – I don’t know anything about space-based weapons…I thought there were international laws banning weapons in space though…not sure about that though…no idea what they’re talking about here.

    4 – I agree we should explore space…but we don’t know that there are other cultures in space yet

    I only had a quick look at the website, so maybe you could point out the parts where they provide evidence for ETs? And I mean apart from eyewitness testimonies.

    I didn’t know what Fermi’s paradox was so I looked it up. The supposed paradox is that there’s theoretically an abundance of life in the universe, so why haven’t we encountered it yet? There’s a bunch of reasons given on the wikipedia page that show why it’s not necessarily a paradox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#Explaining_the_paradox_theoretically

  3. 3 Pyrrho October 4, 2009 at 4:20 am

    You’re right, it is an argument from authority which as we well know is fallacious. I hope I didn’t convey any notion that I BELIEVED them; I don’t believe anything. I do rank things in terms of probability though–this being of the highest magnitude in regards to alien contact that I’ve come across. Nothing more than that.
    I’m not sure that I’m impressed with your poisoning of the well technique in calling all things “Woo” in which you don’t believe (hate that word). Also, conflating Santa Claus and 9/11 as “Woo” isn’t a great idea if you wish to nail the Wooists (is that what scientism calls them?). The same goes for lumping two conspiracy theories into one as you’ve done with 911 and the moon landing. One theory is far more absurd than the other and, in the conpiracy theorists’ eyes, you’ve either strengthened the more absurd theory or fraudulently attempted to weaken the more reasonable one.
    Your argument for 911 appears to be that you just don’t want to believe it. That’s wishful thinking and not a sound argument. And again, you, in confusing the two theories, draw a conclusion that has nothing to do with one of them. But, in any event, ask yourself, can the government dupe the masses? Of course they can and, it would seem, they regularly do. Gulf of Tonkin incident is just one example, WMDs in Iraq is another. For me, the official story is just incredibly difficult to regard as fact. Coincidence piles upon coincidence to the point that it would seem irrational to believe it. Admittedly there are far more kooky theories out there (holograms and such) but there are far more likely ones as well. Of course, that doesn’t make them fact. It just makes them more probable in theory. In all good conscience I can’t accept the coincidence theorists’ official narrative–had it been a film, I would have been disgusted that they didn’t make it more plausible.
    I’ve bored myself. Also, remember, you’re not arguing with a particularly intelligent person when discussing things with me but I might be good practice for future debates with proper smartie pantses. 😉

  4. 4 linzeebinzee October 5, 2009 at 8:21 pm

    From what I’ve seen, there’s the same amount of evidence for Santa Claus as there is for a 9/11 inside job or for a faked moon landing, so that’s why I see no problem with lumping them all together.

    And I wasn’t making any arguments against any of the things on the list – just saying why I’m glad they aren’t true (or why I wish they were true).

    Yes, the government can dupe the masses, but that’s not evidence of a conspiracy – neither are coincidences.

    _______
    Metro posted this comment on the wrong thread, so I’m just going to paste it over here:

    Re. the conspiracy theorists. I despise them for making us all part of the conspiracy. Because the options are that a) you’re part of it or b) you’re too stupid to see what’s right in front of you! Can’t you understand what’s happening!!!! It was an INSIDE JOB!!

    Sorry, got ahead of myself a bit there

    When confronted with conspiracy theorists I begin by carefully probing the roots of the belief. When they get to the part about how the White House hushed something up I ask:
    “That’s the same White House that couldn’t keep the secret that Nixon recorded his purportedly private office conversations, right?”

    After a pause, they’ll go on (and they always will).

    Then I follow up with:
    “That’s the same White House that couldn’t keep the Iran-Contra deal under wraps?”
    Usually, given the level of awareness and historicity of a conspiracy nut, I have to explain what Iran-Contra was.

    But they bravely take up the thread again, because nothing is so single-minded as a conspiracy theorist.
    Sorry–Make that “g” a “p”.

    Then I ask:
    “Hang on … is that the same White House that couldn’t keep it under wraps when a president got a blowjob at the office?”

    About this time they’ve realized I don’t buy it.

  5. 5 Pyrrho October 5, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    WHy is it that people think that just because a group of people couldn’t keep something hushed up means that they can never do it? If they were successful previously you wouldn’t know about it. It’s that simple and yes, if you think there’s no such thing as conspiracies you’re a dumbass sheep. Did not the catholic church conspire to weed out the heretics? Conspiracy is basic primate behaviour. To suggest that 911 is equal to santa claus shows you really haven’t looked at shit but instead, in your new found ‘enlightened’ state follow dickweeds like dwakins and randi who, had they looked at evidence presented by hundreds of independent researchers, from physicists to pilots and on and on (and not the lame-brain arseholery of “Popular Mechanics”–who owns that?) would, if they were intellectually honest, state there really is something to it. If coincidence piles on top of coincidence to the degree that 911 it no longer remains a coincidence; it becomes a probability that something’s amiss.
    Instead of ridiculing without basis, try actually looking into it. What’ve you seen? Loose Change? You never really go into what you’ve ‘seen’ from which you’ve made the decision that it’s equally absurd as Santa Claus. You just state it and think it becomes fact. Nuh. Game doesn’t work that way. I suggest to you that you’re as blinkered now as you were when you were a Christian. You’ve just changed one dogma for another. Enlightened you are not.
    http://www.physics911.net
    http://www.st911.org/
    http://www.william911.com/
    I can give you plenty more if you’re interested in actually trying to dissect this stuff… or, instead of believing everything you’re told, at least look for yourself. Though I have no doubt you’ll simply reply with “Oh, I’ve heard that before, there’s no evidence for that,” when clearly there is but you’ll be totally unwilling to divest yourself of the time to actually research it. Like Randi and his claims about the dog that sensed when his owner was leaving work for home being crap based on the video he viewed, you haven’t even LOOKED. Surely you’re not a charlatan passing yourself off as ENLIGHTENED.
    Now, go get your shock troops from dwakins (yeah, dwakins) to do your arguing for ya.
    And, as for the eyewitness argument, well, I’m just gunna post something about that on my own blog as that’s one of the most moronic arguments I know of. Even Dwakins himself relies on eyewitness testimony and so do you.

  6. 6 linzeebinzee October 6, 2009 at 11:56 am

    WHy is it that people think that just because a group of people couldn’t keep something hushed up means that they can never do it?

    It’s simply the observation that if the president can’t even keep a blow job hushed up (which involved only two people), then it’s unlikely that a conspiracy involving thousands of people could remain under wraps for so long. It doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen.

    If they were successful previously you wouldn’t know about it.

    The thing about conspiracy theorists is that the fact that evidence doesn’t exist only convinces them further that they’re right. They demand that the evidence is released to the public, but never consider that perhaps this evidence that they’re so sure exists actually doesn’t.

    It’s that simple and yes, if you think there’s no such thing as conspiracies you’re a dumbass sheep. Did not the catholic church conspire to weed out the heretics?

    I know that there’s such thing as conspiracies. For example, Al Quaeda conspired to attack the US on September 11, 2001.

    Conspiracy is basic primate behaviour.

    Is it? How do you know this?

    To suggest that 911 is equal to santa claus shows you really haven’t looked at shit but instead, in your new found ‘enlightened’ state follow dickweeds like dwakins and randi who, had they looked at evidence presented by hundreds of independent researchers, from physicists to pilots and on and on (and not the lame-brain arseholery of “Popular Mechanics”–who owns that?) would, if they were intellectually honest, state there really is something to it. If coincidence piles on top of coincidence to the degree that 911 it no longer remains a coincidence; it becomes a probability that something’s amiss.

    Here’s what I know: The official 9/11 story makes sense and is well supported by evidence. I have seen no reason to not believe it. I’m guessing the coincidences you’re talking about are things that don’t fit the official story? Well that day was a clusterfuck, of course there are going to be anomalies.

    All I see from the 9/11 truthers are “this doesn’t fit, therefore the official story is a lie”. But they don’t propose a plausible alternative. I would like them to say what they actually think happened that day and then show all of the evidence backing up their version of events rather than just looking for any anomaly and saying “that’s weird, therefore it was an inside job”.

    Instead of ridiculing without basis, try actually looking into it. What’ve you seen? Loose Change? You never really go into what you’ve ’seen’ from which you’ve made the decision that it’s equally absurd as Santa Claus.

    I didn’t mean it’s equally absurd as Santa Claus, I meant that it’s equally supported by evidence.

    What do you want me to do, list everything I’ve seen and then compare it to your list and whoever’s seen more things wins? Yeah I’ve seen Loose Change and a bunch of videos and websites put out by conspiracy theorists, including the ones you posted here, and I’ve also seen a lot of these claims debunked. Examples:

    -Steel couldn’t have melted at that temperature: It didn’t have to, it was just weakened enough that the weight of the floors above where the plane hit couldn’t be supported by those columns anymore. I’ve seen demonstrations where they burn jet fuel under a steel column and it collapses under weights after a short time without having melted. There was also that bridge collapse in Oakland in 2007 where a tanker truck crashed and set fire and then weakended the steel girders enough that the freeway came down.

    -A missile it the Pentagon: There was a ton of airplane debris, video of an airplane hitting, and where did that plane go if it didn’t crash into the Pentagon?

    I won’t keep posting examples because I don’t even know if what I’m posting are things that you believe, and this is a conversation between you and me so I’m just arguing against random claims.

    You just state it and think it becomes fact. Nuh. Game doesn’t work that way. I suggest to you that you’re as blinkered now as you were when you were a Christian. You’ve just changed one dogma for another. Enlightened you are not.
    http://www.physics911.net
    http://www.st911.org/
    http://www.william911.com/
    I can give you plenty more if you’re interested in actually trying to dissect this stuff… or, instead of believing everything you’re told, at least look for yourself.

    I don’t endeavor to just claim I know the truth and brush off anything that challenges my beliefs, that’s what I did when I was a Christian. I am saying that so far, nothing that I’ve seen the “truthers” claim have been convincing to me.

    By posting those websites I’m not sure if you want me to do a point by point examination of all of that? I just don’t have that kind of time. I have looked at them and don’t see much new. I’ve actually seen some of these guys in documentaries…there was one, I can’t remember what it was called, the science of 9/11 or something…I think it was on National Geographic HD, and they had on a bunch of the bigwig truthers. But since this conversation is between you and I, how about if you give me your argument for what you think happened on 9/11 and why (rather than just pointing me to a bunch of websites), and we can go from there. Maybe you’ll convince me!

    I could give you a bunch of websites too, but that would just be stupid, thrusting links on each other.

    Though I have no doubt you’ll simply reply with “Oh, I’ve heard that before, there’s no evidence for that,” when clearly there is but you’ll be totally unwilling to divest yourself of the time to actually research it.

    I know my responses aren’t going to be satisfying to you unless I say “I’ve been wrong all this time, 9/11 was a homegrown conspiracy”. I’m not going to spend all of my time researching 9/11 claims, but I do have an interest in conspiracy theories and I have spent a good chunk of time watching experiments done to test what happened on 9/11 and reading debates between truthers and skeptics. I just feel like no matter what I tell you I’ve done or read or seen you’re going to say that I’m being ignorant and avoiding the evidence, or you’re going to say that the people conducting the experiments are controlled by the conspirators (like you seem to think Popular Mechanics is). This is why I think that we should just go back and forth here. You present your arguments in your words for a conspiracy and I’ll respond. I promise to keep an open mind.

    Like Randi and his claims about the dog that sensed when his owner was leaving work for home being crap based on the video he viewed, you haven’t even LOOKED. Surely you’re not a charlatan passing yourself off as ENLIGHTENED.

    Like I said, nothing is going to convince you that I have looked, so lets just have a conversation between us, and you can show me point by point why you believe the conspiracy theory.

    Now, go get your shock troops from dwakins (yeah, dwakins) to do your arguing for ya.

    I’ll argue for myself.

    And, as for the eyewitness argument, well, I’m just gunna post something about that on my own blog as that’s one of the most moronic arguments I know of. Even Dwakins himself relies on eyewitness testimony and so do you.

    When someone tells me that they saw Bob at the store buying flowers for his wife, then I’ll believe eyewitness testimony. But when someone tells me that aliens have visited Earth I’ll need a helluva lot more. The more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence will have to be.

  7. 7 foresightyourctpsychic October 7, 2009 at 11:59 pm

    Hi there

    Don’t want to flame you or argue with you.

    Just thought it might be a bit more comfortable for you to know that most people who are actively psychic don’t go around reading the minds of random people…

    It’s rude. And unpleasant,too, for that matter(most people don’t put their party manners on their thoughts, you know)

    So that’d be something you don’t need to worry about.

    As for knowing the future, that can be useful in the light of the effects of Free Will. But that’s another story

    Peace
    Catherine

  8. 8 linzeebinzee October 16, 2009 at 12:03 pm

    Hi Catherine, so do you claim to be a psychic? Would you be able to read my mind if I gave you permission?

  9. 9 Pyrrho October 17, 2009 at 2:35 am

    I’ll do it instead.

    K, nope. I’m not getting anything. Damn.

    Hang on, that may well be accurate!

  10. 10 foresightyourctpsychic October 17, 2009 at 10:28 pm

    Hi, dear.

    Don’t claim to be a psychic. I am one. And that’s not just based on my opinion, but also by the experience of folks who consult me(including a number of charming folks who were skeptics before we worked together).

    As to reading your mind if you gave permission, I’m not sure you’re really understanding what I was saying in the previous post. It’s not much fun to read minds, permission or no.Most folks’ minds are not edited for visitors, because folks aren’t prepared for them. In effect, reading someone’s mind can easily be like checking in the little containers in the back of their fridges…

    No offense to your mind in particular,but I wouldn’t want to read it, like most folks minds(I think private should be private)

    There are quite a number of other ways to work psychicly that aren’t as intrusive and personal,and I tend to use such methods.

    Now, if you like, you can certainly take the fact that I prefer not to read your mind as an indicator that I’m not psychic.That’s o.k. -I’ve got nothing to prove. I’ll just keep helping people where I can.

    I just wrote because I thought you might like to know there’s some very good reasons why you don’t have to worry about someone reading your mind…

    Peace

    Catherine

  11. 11 linzeebinzee October 23, 2009 at 3:30 pm

    Catherine, trust me, I’m not worried about anyone reading my mind. Telepathy, psychics, fortune-telling, etc. It’s all fairy tales to me. I was asking if you would read my mind (or do whatever it is you do) so that maybe you could convince me that you are psychic.

  12. 12 foresightyourctpsychic October 25, 2009 at 11:14 pm

    Then I guess I’m unsure why something you don’t believe exists would “creep you out.” Seems like pretty strong emotion for something you’re so sure of.

    But that, of course, is your business.

    Catherine

  13. 13 EnlightningLinZ October 25, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    I was saying it would creep me out if it were true.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 49 other followers

AtheistBlogroll5
Free counters!

%d bloggers like this: