Lucifer

I was listening to a song (see the end of this post) and it got me thinking.

Lucifer, apart from being a saint which I just learned about, is commonly tied with Satan, the Devil, also known as the Prince of Darkness.

Although the latter does raise questions as who the King of Darkness the better question is why would you tie a name that means "Bringer of Light" with someone who people consider to be the "Prince of Darkness"?

Light is commonly used in Western culture at least (So I don't know about the use in other cultures, so sue me) as a representation of the "forces of good", and as a bringer of truth and also knowledge (The Enlightenment anyone?). So why the name "Lucifer" for a being that is supposed to spread lies and make us dumb?

I'm sorry but it's illogical, unless it's supposed to be the other way around.

Based on some modern day social controversies, such as evolution vs. creationism, or stem cell research, it appears that there are far more religious proponents on the side that would slow down, or even stop, humanity from learning new things, new enlightenments.

It does seem that religion wants to keep us in darkness, make us live in a world of superstition and monsters, to keep us down and hold us back.

Perhaps then the name is apt, for the enemy of someone who wants to keep us in darkness would be one that brings us light.

----------------
Now playing: Gregorian - Ave Satani (The Omen)
via FoxyTunes

Crackergate

In case you don't know, it's finished.

On July 24, 2008 at 2:00 PM most likely PZ time, PZ Myers reported that he went through with his claim and desecrated a (blessed?) Eucharist, a Koran and a copy of The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.

I guess it is really over. I've been wondering if it should be called "crackergate" and a Google search shows that others have used it.

I think the -gate suffix is so overused (cross reference Iguanagate) that I think that it should only be used when something stupid comes out of it.

PZ reported recently that Michael Edmonton, of "Beware the Believers" video fame created this:



So I think that enough stupidity has come out of this to call it "crackergate".

However I would like to express my outrage.

How dare PZ desecrate a copy of The God Delusion?

That's like desecrating a copy of the Koran, or, or, or a Eucharist.

I mean how could he, what does he think he is a fundie? A joker?

I hope he dies horribly.

Gavin Menzies Books Are Not "History"

Neither are they historical, completely factual, a fair representation of reality, a viable hypothesis regarding the discovery of the New World, etc. etc. etc.

So I don't understand why Dymocks thinks that it is.

Ok, so Angus & Roberston consider him to be a "non-fiction" writer.

I don't like seeing such drivel sharing the same section as other history books.

There is a whole section of criticism just on his 1421 "hypothesis" (gotta love Wikipedia citing sources). And now he claims that China started the Renaissance.

Honestly, from what I understand of his stuff, it's just another form of "the Ancient Egyptians couldn't have built the pyramids".

Dymocks, either create a "pseudohistory" section, or put them into the "fiction" section where they belong. Or maybe into the "New Age" section (Why couldn't the History sction be next to the New Age rather then Spirituality?).

Just as long as I don't have to start guessing the accuracy of the other history books in the section.