The Skeptic Samurai

How to change a fundie's mind?

2011-03-09T11:06:00.000-08:00

A majority of the religious debates that I get in to are usually between evangelical Christians and such. Most of the time, they are completely unwilling to change their mind about their beliefs. Which makes debating the facts and evidence behind their beliefs completely irrelevant to them.

So, what I think would be a better approach is to debate the root of the problem: the individual him/herself. They are usually closed-minded and unlikely to change. Bring this up with them and describe how this may be harmful to others and themselves.

"New Atheist" movement

2011-01-19T13:11:00.000-08:00

I just read this article online talking about new atheism clubs being started in high schools across the country and got to thinking why this is. A majority of new atheists in this movement are primarily in the 18-25 range of age. This is the age of college students and primarily, those individuals moving out of their parent's houses in order to live on their own and start making their own life decisions. In my opinion, no other age group seems logical.

Once someone reaches the teenage years, they become pissy and rebellious. If this happens to lead to atheism, then great. However, once someone grows up to the 18-25 age group, most move out and start living on their own. So they have no more reason to be rebellious. Why would they remain atheists then? This should prove that atheism is not a fad or something that will fade. It is an idea that, once accepted, remains with you forever.

The college student age group seems the most "new atheist" potential because they are learning who they are and how to live their lives. This leads to all sorts of experimentation, and not just sexual as most people would imply from this, but also experimentation in religion. Personally, that is where I first raised questions about religion. Although, I started earlier in freshman or sophomore year of high school. Experimentation and progress is a good thing.

Let's Discuss Utopia

2010-11-15T11:58:00.000-08:00

What is it? How close are we? What needs to be done to get there?

The purpose of life for most everyone would be seeking happiness and I think the same goes for all of society. Believe it or not, I think we're closer to utopia than people realize.

Utopia is the ideal, perfect society of the future that we all strive for, but what makes up a Utopian society? I think it would comprise of these few things: (1)complete and total freedom, (2)no economy, (3)no crime, (4)no discrimination, and (5)no countries (world 'government'). {(6)Suggestions?}

(1)Complete freedom would include the ability to do literally anything you wanted, even kill a person. *Gasp* "How is that Utopian?" you might be asking yourself. Well, I believe with future cloning technology and whatever other techniques we may develop that I couldn't possibly imagine, murder wouldn't be an issue...or at least death wouldn't. You could be reborn exactly how you were before you died. This could be done by the use of 'cyberbrains' (yourself in the body and mind of a robot), but perhaps there are biological ways of accomplishing this as well.

(2)No economy would mean everything you might ever want is free. No more money and no more buying and selling. I think with 3d printing tech we can eventually print out whatever we want whether it be, a chair, food, a car, another 3d printer, or anything. The only thing limiting this is the amount of matter we have available, but the Earth is a big place and it's very small compared to just about everything else in the universe.

(3)No crime seems like it might contradict complete freedom. If you have the freedom to kill, rape, and steal, then how do you stop crime? The trick would be to make criminal behavior no longer a crime or to fix everyone's psychology in some way so that criminal tendencies don't exist. This seems a bit inhumane, though, to alter the way people think. However, what's the alternative? Put the person in jail for the rest of their life where they'll live with other disturbed individuals, or take them to a psychologist to permanently fix whatever is wrong and send them back into the real world? Technology and advances in psychology should allow us to literally wipe out extreme behavior (and I don't mean wipe your very humanity away or whatever makes you who you are as an individual). The other suggestion I made, "make criminal behavior no longer a crime" is in reference to above when I stated we could clone someone if they were killed, so murder wouldn't even be a crime anymore.

(4)No discrimination falls under the same category as no crime. Either the psychology of discriminatory people will need to be changed or everyone in society will evolve over time to be more acceptable towards all people, much the way our morality has evolved.

(5)No countries would lie somewhat in the complete freedom and no discrimination area as well. The world could not be separated because this would contradict the no discrimination aspect. The government system wouldn't be like anything today because we would literally have no or very few issues to solve. There wouldn't be a need for politics in a place where nothing needs to be debated.

So, you must be wondering now why I think we're closer to Utopia than most people probably think. Well, mostly due to technology and machines, we don't hardly have to do any farming, mining, or anything by our own backbreaking work anymore. With continuously more powerful computing power each year, eventually we'll have reliable robotics. 3D Printing isn't a very difficult technology, either. So, I think within my lifetime, maybe when I'm 80 or something, we may just reach a point where Utopia is a real possibility.

P.S. I realize there may be a hell of a lot more involved in creating a Utopian society, but the majority of issues can be solved by advances in technology.

Why I Hate Online Job Applications

2010-08-30T15:53:00.001-07:00

You know when you're doing an application online, or just about anywhere, they make you do a sort of personality test? I wonder if anyone ever tells the truth on those things. Of course the employer is going to be looking for a happy, go-lucky, leader-type and if you told the truth then you'd never get a job. I think it's a little discriminatory in a way for introverts like myself.

Introverts are naturally inclined to shy away from any social situation and remain alone. It's not that we hate people, but that we prefer to be by ourselves. This is greatly misunderstood by almost everyone that isn't introverted. They don't even seem to understand the concept of always wanting to be alone.
Anyways, this is hurtful in the world of business because in order to work in this environment you need to be able to attend meetings, speak publicly, work with many other people, and talk talk talk.

So, my point is...job application questions need to be fixed or at least recognition of the introvert vs. extrovert-society problem exists.

Capitalism: Side-effects may include greed, pollution, and crimes against humanity

2010-07-28T10:14:00.000-07:00

Capitalism is a failure. There are plenty of disasters across the world that could have been prevented or their after effects could have been greatly relieved but thanks to greedy corporations and the capitalist ideology, these disasters occur and are never fixed.

Capitalism definition:
An economic system based on a free market, open competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means of production. Capitalism encourages private investment and business, compared to a government-controlled economy. Investors in these private companies (i.e. shareholders) also own the firms and are known as capitalists.

The main issue that I have with the Capitalist system is the 'profit motive' system of running things. If your main objective is profit, then ethics and humane actions are less important. Some examples would include global climate change, New Orleans & Katrina, West Virginia mining explosion, the BP oil spill, Bhopal chemical disaster, etc. To the corporation, there is no benefit or reward in fixing these disasters. In the capitalist system, when you spend money to fix something like this, your stock prices go down and you lose business and profit. In other words, you are either punished for helping people or rewarded for doing nothing. I have nothing against small businesses and the process of making profit, but it's when a business commits a terrible crime to humanity or the environment and does nothing for the sole purpose of keeping profit and income coming into the company. That peeves me off.

Dear Hollywood

2010-07-27T21:19:00.000-07:00

Stop pumping out the same generic action, romance, cartoon, horror flicks. I understand it is good business to pump out as many movies as possible so more people will want to come to the theaters, but at least learn a lesson from the countless, brilliant movies that have ever been made. Brilliant movies are long, epic, have many brain bending twists, fantastic visuals/actors/aesthetics.

You are in the business of story telling and I'm somewhat sick of seeing unoriginal stories. However, I must say, Inception was great work. That is the kind of movie I ask of you. I want to see more originality, thought, and brain power involved in the process. To help you out, I shall list a few story ideas that I have come up with over the past couple months.

1. In the future, advancing technology has allowed us to create a spaceship that should allow us to live for vast amounts of time in the void of space. Unfortunately, due to war, global warming, and whatever other issues, the world meets apocalypse and almost all life is wiped from the face of the Earth. Many more years into the future, a somewhat more primitive race of humans discover the spaceship buried under sand or ice or what have you. The Earth is slowly recovering but not quickly enough for what's left of the human race. So, a group of people prepare the ship for launch. I'd call it an Ark of sorts.

2. A man learns he has cancer and has only a few days left to live. Plans the most
elaborate and fantastic death or suicide so he will be remembered forever.

3. The internet gains consciousness and becomes a super powerful god-like entity.

4. A student researcher working for a very well respected physicist is responsible for doing some kind of project, but skips it to go to a party or some other nonsense. It turns out that the project he was supposed to work on would finally determine how the Big Bang of the early Universe was triggered. Due to the strict nature of the physicist, the student decides to lie and states "God" was the conclusion of his research (which never took place). In order to defend himself, the student takes his 'research' to the local news station. Point: it causes a domino affect and a whole ass load of trouble for the respected physicist. But it all works out in the end and leave the audience guessing as to how the Big Bang evidence turns out.

I'd write the scripts or books myself but I'm not necessarily a writer. Get to it Hollywood! I've already given you a good start.

Centrifuge Spaceship...not as great as I thought

2010-06-29T10:24:00.000-07:00

So, lately I've been fascinated with the idea of a spaceship creating artificial gravity using centrifugal force.

If you don't know what a centrifuge is:

After thinking about the concept used in space as a sort of artificial gravity, I've concluded that it may only work completely if you are just sitting there. If you start to walk in a certain direction then you will get different results. I've drawn up some images to explain it:

There is also the issue with jumping. If you jump, it may appear to you that you are moving backwards but in reality the ground beneath you is moving forward without you. Also, if you were to jump then what exactly is keeping you from the zero gravity affects of space? Would you not just float there and perhaps never return to the ground?

So my conclusion is that my high expectations for centrifuge as a type of artificial gravity were wrong. It's a little depressing to think 'back to the drawing board' but that's how it works. My wonderful imagined spaceship is no longer valid :(

Formality

2010-06-24T16:09:00.000-07:00

Whenever you go to a job interview or a business party, a wedding or a funeral, graduation, etc. it is usually required that you wear formal clothes (i.e. a suit and tie). Well, I think that's bull. I know it's supposed to mean "you mean business" and that you're "serious/respectful" about the event, but why do we need to dress a certain way to show this? Just being there, wherever it is, should show that you "mean business." Whatever you wear or don't wear and people don't approve of it, that just seems like discrimination in my eyes. Who gives a frack if you're white or black skinned? Who gives a frack if you wear a suit or blue jeans?

The reality of it is that formal wear is just a tradition and in my opinion conformity. And when I think of conformity, I think of bowing down to another person and getting raped because they supposedly have more power than you. Well F*@& that, nobody should have more 'power' over me or more reason to control me in any way...not even the president. Now, if I did something illegal like kill a person, then sure. I have forfeited my rights and others may have some 'control' over my life at this point. But I haven't killed anyone and I don't want to conform to formal wear and get a nice raping by a CEO, the president, or a priest.

'The World is Perfect' Argument

2010-05-26T18:01:00.001-07:00

If it were not for very many many factors about Earth and the Solar System, we would not exist. I have heard time and time again that this is a valid argument as to why god is real (1st question). However, this logic is very much flawed.

The Earth is situated in the Solar System in what is called the "Goldilocks Zone." If we were very much closer or further from the sun, life could not exist due to the extreme temperatures. We would have either been burnt up like Mercury or frozen like Mars.

The Moon is also a very important aspect as to why life exists. Long ago during the formation of the planets, a planet sized object smashed into the Earth causing excessive debris to fall off the Earth and into orbit. The debris would eventually, because of the affects of gravity in space, clump together and form the moon. If we did not have the moon then we would not have such powerful tides to stir up the minerals and organic molecules in the oceans. Without the moon, life may not have thrived as well as it has.

Jupiter: if it did not exist, we would have been bombarded with thousands of asteroids from the outer rims of the solar system. Jupiter's gravity is so powerful that it acts as a sort of bodyguard for the small inner planets like Earth. Anything that gets in too close is eventually sucked up by Jupiter, thus saving our sorry asses from annihilation.

Anyways...the point is there are many things that contribute to us existing. However, the only thing this PROVES is that we exist and that's what it takes for us to exist. It in no way whatsoever implies the need for a creator. You may say it is coincidence, but I say it's probability. There are trillions of stars, many with a multitude of planets. The probability is actually fairly good that another planet will have all of the same benefits that the Earth does for life survival. If these people looked into astronomy a little better rather than jumping to conclusions, they would understand what they were talking about and maybe not further delude poor questioning minds.

If I were to build a spaceship...

2010-05-25T21:25:00.000-07:00

I like watching science tv shows as well as sci fi and both tend to discuss the problems and necessities of space travel. The main issues are creating a living condition similar to that of Earth (i.e. gravity, atmosphere, etc.) I'd like to take some time to explain the concepts behind solving these problems and exactly what is necessary in building a spaceship.

First of all, one of my favorites, the usage of artificial gravity through centrifugal force. When you put a spin on something it creates g-forces, such as those carnival rides that spin really fast and make you stick to the walls while also forcing your stomach contents upwards. If you put one of those spinning carnival rides in space, then you would be able to walk on the walls almost exactly as you would walk normally on Earth. The reason they don't work that way on Earth is because of the added gravity that already exists from Earth. However, in space, you don't have that gravity.
Honestly, when I watch or read something about NASA's difficulties with the 'space adaptation syndrome,' I always wonder why they don't immediately start experimenting with artificial gravity. It would certainly solve many health issues.

Second, there is no atmosphere in space to protect us from deadly radiation. The Earth protects us from this deadly radiation with its atmosphere and magnetic field. If you've ever seen the 'Northern Lights', they are a good example of proving this radiation's power. I believe in a spaceship, we would need to create our own artificial magnetic field. I'm certainly no scientist and I haven't heard much research being done into this issue, so I'll just use this paragraph to promote some people to START WORKING ON IT, please. I assume you would just need some pretty powerful magnets and some kind of electromagnet layout throughout the ship.

Third, there's the issue of thrust. The rocket boosters we're currently using to get off the planet are very inefficient for long distance traveling. Japan is currently working on a project called Ikaros which is essentially a giant solar wind sail boat powered by the sun's 'wind.' This method seems fairly cheap to build and simple in nature but I'm not so certain about it's maneuverability or speed. There's also ion engines but they are still being worked on in labs and I'm not certain they can be put to any practical uses anytime soon. I suspect that our future spaceships will most likely have several different forms of thrust. Perhaps we would use sails to build up speed and set sail for long voyages and then when we arrive at our destination we would use some combination of ion or rocket engines.

Fourth, there's the issue of resources such as food, water, and oxygen. If we were to build a spaceship and take it on very long voyages to far off planets, then we would need to restock every so often by mining and collecting water and other materials from planets/asteroids and we would need a very efficient method of recycling everything we use. I'm sure with our similar future issues right here on Earth related to this matter, that we will perfect our recycling habits and technologies so I'm not incredibly worried about this issue. This problem is not only important for future space flight, but for our own home world. There will most certainly be plenty of people working on it, I'm sure.

Fifth, there's the issue of shielding. The tiniest of rocks in space can cause enormous damage to a ship. Everything is usually going much faster in space, so a tiny pebble going several hundred miles per hour can be an issue. We're currently working on materials much stronger than steel that should do the trick. One of these materials that I know of is carbon nanotubes. They are essentially carbon molecules wrapped into a cylindrical shape, creating a very tight and tough structure. As the technology for developing these nanotubes develops, we should be able to mass produce the material and create the necessary amount to cover our ships.

And that's just about it. There's probably some other various minor problems that face the engineers working on these things, but these are the five biggest issues to overcome first and it seems, so far, we have solutions. It's only a matter of time until soon we will be going 'to infinity and beyond.'

We Have Created Life.

2010-05-20T17:13:00.000-07:00

Scientists create artificial life in laboratory

We've really done it. We have done what only our imagined gods could do, create life. Possibly one of the most ancient of science fiction possibilities, the creation of life, and we've done it. This holds practical purposes for our situation today of course, but what I'm most impressed with is the fact of it. With this artificial life, we have real substantial proof that the creation of life is a scientific endeavor and not one of religions.

The only thing we really need to prove at this point is how to create life using only natural processes. I believe there was an experiment done in the past proving you could create very basic building blocks for life, but a completely new life form has not been done yet. This artificial life should help us in understanding how life is made and hopefully within the next few years we will create a life form through natural processes. When that day comes, I hope religious institutions finally die out.

Stupid

2010-05-19T22:06:00.000-07:00

My opinion of everyone besides myself and a select few that have proven themselves to me is pretty much the same. That is...everyone is mildly retarded. I'm not sure if I even feel sorry or bad for calling everyone retarded either. I mean, you deserve it...maybe you'll learn from it. Most likely you won't but it can't hurt to try at least one more time.

Society tries to make it seem like it's okay to be kind of dumb as if it makes you a 'special person' literally speaking and the suggested kind. Imagine you're in grade school and you say something stupid in front of class and your fellow classmates start to giggle. Should the teacher tell the class to stop giggling and that it's rude? I think not. How else would you learn not to say stupid things the next time around (i.e. learn something) and then know when to mock others for being stupid. Being made fun of is a sort of teaching method. There could probably be some kind of scientific experiment I could come up with to test this but I don't have the resources for that...but if YOU could, be my guest :) Unless they've already tested it, then I guess nevermind. Okay, I'm starting to ramble so that raps up this post. Peace!

Edit:
One more thought...I wonder if it can be proven that the ones picked on and teased the most in school end up as the most intelligent.

Discrimination

2010-05-13T22:39:00.000-07:00

America has gone through quite a lot in terms of discrimination and equal rights. However, it's not quite there yet. I suppose it is fairly recent that women and African American's were allowed to vote, but to me it seems so pathetic that it's taking us so long and we're still not even there yet.

"Treat others as you would like to be treated." It's the most basic moral principle and yet no body knows what it means or how important it is. We're still in the process of developing our society and ever so slowly the progressive types have improved conditions for many people throughout this country. However, there's always people (usually conservatives/republicans/whatever-you-want-to-call-yourselves) that discriminate.

Well you know what? I disapprove of YOU. How would you feel if I just shouted constantly that you should leave my country and that you don't belong here because this country belongs to "better" people than you. Think about the result of your actions from the other perspective. If you've ever said a hateful comment about a certain stereotype then you should honestly be ashamed of yourself.

We still have discrimination issues with race, gender, religion (or lack-of), sexuality, age, national origin, etc.
Women still don't make as much money in the workplace as men.
African Americans may receive "extra" attention in gaining jobs but that's just as discriminatory.
There has never been an atheist president and very few in any political office.
The debate continues over whether Homosexuals 'deserve' the right to be married.

Everyone should already know not to discriminate, but somehow, I fear, the discrimination may be increasing. And if it continues, then I hope I have enough time to pack up and get of this country before it blows up in your faces.

Modern Evolution on the Human Race

2010-05-05T08:43:00.000-07:00

I'm somewhat afraid that our species is damned to return to the dark ages. In our modern world, it is possible for the dumbest and most parent-incapable people to have many children and survive for quite awhile, as shown in the movie Idiocracy:

Our society has grown so powerful with the help of technology that the basic survival needs are covered fairly well for everyone, even homeless schizophrenics, so the idea of what drives most evolution (the strongest/most capable will survive) no longer applies. What drives it now is who can pump out the most babies and get more of your DNA out there. From what we've experienced, poorer, less intelligible, less capable families are the ones that have the most children. Thus, the future of our species is essentially these lower class individuals.

I'm not trying to be discriminatory towards all lower class people. Although, I think that's what it sounds like anyways. The fact is, lower class is lower class. The advancement of society and technology does not depend on lower class. It depends on the smartest and greatest people.

Perhaps in the future our species will be split between those that are intelligent and control things, and those that aren't and make the most babies. If it does end up this way, then I hope the smart ones at least perfect cloning technology or an artificial womb. Otherwise, we're all doomed. :(

Why I disagree with Steven Hawking - Aliens

2010-05-03T11:05:00.000-07:00

If you've noticed, there's a new show on Discovery called "Into the Universe with Steven Hawking." In one of the episodes Hawking discusses his opinion on alien lifeforms in the universe and if intelligent aliens were to visit Earth.

Hawking believes that the aliens to visit Earth would only be interested in our planet/sun for it's resources and most likely will declare war on us. The only way, he thinks, aliens would travel great distances is in vast armies of ships, traveling from planet to planet, collecting whatever resources and sucking it dry.

Steven Hawking is certainly a smart guy, but I don't buy it. An armada of ships traveling great distances does not seem very logical to me.

1.) It would take a lot more resources to supply than a single ship.

2.) It is possible to create artificial world-ships. If you've played Halo then you know what I'm talking about. If you put a spin on something in space, you can create a sort of artificial gravity, which would allow you to do just about anything we can do from Earth. Which would make the need to suck a planet dry, unnecessary.

3.) I find it unlikely that the only determinable source of energy for vast space travels would be a star. Yes, stars are powerful, but what's even more power is making your own star. With fusion reactor technology being worked on right now on Earth, I think aliens should be able to develop and perfect the technology. It would essentially be the same as creating your own star. Remember Dr. Oc's power generator thing in Spider Man 2? That's essentially what I'm talking about.

4.) We've noticed how societies develop through evolution. By being nice to your neighbor and helping them out, you both survive a little better than you would going it alone. So, why not do the same for intergalactic societies? By working together with humans, the aliens could learn about our world and the possible microscopic dangers that might affect them (as in War of the Worlds) if they were to visit. We could teach each other the things we've discovered about the universe and conquer it, as well as possible multiverse travel. The benefits of working together seem to be greater than war.

In my opinion, Hawking is stuck with the idea that aliens would be somewhat like us today. Since the birth of this country we've been in war after war with seemingly no end. Perhaps other life forms would do the same, but I'd think by the time they're exploring the universe, they will have finally learned the basics of moral behavior (unlike our poor species). I'm sorry Mr. Hawking, but I think SETI should keep at it a little longer.

Freedom and the Media

2010-04-21T14:57:00.000-07:00

Awhile back, in my post "Who To Trust", I explained how we determine who gives us information. A majority of the time, if the person is influential and convincing, even without any real evidence or proof for a claim, most people will believe them. For example:

That got me into thinking that maybe the best way to know who's intelligent, is to test how they determine who to trust. I might sound a little cocky or something, but I think it's true. If you can't figure out who is telling you the truth, then you can't be very intelligent.

So, with knowledge of how to control the less intelligible people, someone could easily gain presidency simply by being very influential and aspiring. If I was a very influential and aspiring person, believe me, I'd probably be able to pull it off. This might just be a great weakness to Democracy. Sure, we all have our own voice, but how do we know our voice is not just a repeat of something we heard on tv.

There must be some way around this issue, but either way I look at it doesn't seem very pleasant. We could either limit who gets to vote, or limit what is said on tv. Either one would be a direct obstacle towards freedom, which is what this country is all about, supposedly. But if the programming on tv is capable of making up our minds for us, then is that really freedom either? Honestly, I think the whole system should probably be reworked, but that would require the creation of a new country. Maybe when I'm a millionaire and buy my own island I'll get to work on that. Lol

Do you know what "IT" is?

2010-04-09T13:11:00.000-07:00

If you've heard of "the game" (Haha you lost it) then you'll know how this works.

Basically, just say that you know what "IT" is and you win. "IT" is not really anything at all. And if someone tries to imply that "IT" really is something real then say to them "I don't think you really know what IT is...are you sure you know what IT is?"

Have aliens visited Earth?

2010-04-04T13:15:00.000-07:00

I was just watching this video and it got me thinking...

These kinds of videos are very convincing. Although, I don't particularly buy it for a few reasons. For one, I think the people that believe in extraterrestrial's visiting Earth are simply so hopeful that this is true that they may stretch the truth or simply be purposefully ignorant.

Many of the clips in the above video could very well just be satellites passing by, a glare on the lens, or even a computer generated fake. The truth is we've never seen an extremely detailed and reliable photo/video of any such extraterrestrial craft and to think a small blurry dot floating across the screen is proof is just not enough.

I admit some of the clips are quite miraculous and I would very much like to know if we have E.T. watching us from the moon, but as far as we've experienced and learned so far, such life and intelligence is rare in the universe. Not to mention traveling several light years in a craft of some sort is virtually impossible.

Although, I have hopes that somewhere out there a planet has sustained a life form smart and powerful enough to create warp drives or inter-dimensional worm holes or whatever and has decided to help us out a little on our evolutionary path. I can only hope though, and like praying, it doesn't do shit :(

My 'Pessimistic' Prediciton of the Future

2010-04-04T08:28:00.000-07:00

Well I just made a post like this a few days ago, and I got to thinking that there are a lot of bad things that could kill us in the future. I'm going to try and list as many of them as I can and when they might take affect.

10-50 years from now:
-War with Iraq blows up into WWIII / Crusade War II
-War with North Korea (Nuclear Apocalypse)
-Global Climate Change starts to really take affect and cause major natural disasters
-Glen Beck's followers form a cult and try to take over the world. (It's possible)
-Illegal Mexicans become majority of population, middle-class virtually wiped out.
-Large corporations take over the world and we become their peasants. (Oh wait this is already true)
-390 meter wide asteroid Apophis hits the Earth causing debris to black out the sky all over the world. (predicted around 2036)
-We're well overdue for a Yellowstone eruption and with recent quakes it may be sooner than we think. It would obliterate most of North America.

50-100 years from now:
-Oil runs out in its entirety. A majority of people fall to the dark ages (if we don't switch power sources)
-Advances in robotics replaces workforce with robots. No jobs for anyone.
-Human overpopulation will cause every city to be much like the overpopulated cities of China and Japan.
-The world's atmosphere will be so polluted that the natural wilderness will have a hard time surviving.
-Mass extinctions all over the world mostly in part to human civilization.

100-500 years from now:
-Earth becoming a global desert.
-Probably send the planet into a similar state just after the dinosaurs were wiped out.

1000+ years from now:
-Insects are the few creatures still thriving. Eventual evolve to dominate the world.
-Signs of human civilization slowly being wiped off the face of the Earth.

This was just for fun. Most likely a majority of this will never happen, but only if we really try to make it not happen, especially the global warming issues. Or we can just sit around, let it happen, and pray for Jesus to save us.

Who To Trust

2010-03-26T19:10:00.001-07:00

I'm not a politician, theoretical physicist, astronomer, etc. I do not claim to be an expert on anything at all really. I know some things, but a majority of what I know is what people have told me. Whether those things are true or not, I can't really know for sure because I did not take the time to do the research. So, how do people know what they are told is true?

A big part of it has to do with who you trust. For example, if Richard Dawkins announced that he has done research in the evolution of humans and states that they are very close descendants of some ancient primate species, I would believe him because he is an expert in that particular field. Also, the fact that many other scientists have come to the same conclusion. Although, I don't particularly believe him on the basis of him being popular and showing up on TV occasionally. The point is that people with power are the people we trust and this should not be the way we base trust.

Now, for a negative example, let's say Glenn Beck makes an announcement that humans are not descendants of primates but actually created by god a few thousand years ago. I would not believe him for a number of reasons. He is not an expert in this field. He has no evidence to show. He does not have experts coming to the same conclusion. So why do people end up believing in him? He's on TV. Therefore, he has power/popularity.

Typically people of greater power than you or people that have a following are the people that are trusted (i.e. the president, radio hosts, your parents). Even if these people have done no research at all, they are trusted because of their greater power over you. You think of yourself as inferior and less knowledgeable compared to these people.

This is, what I believe, one of the greatest weaknesses that mankind possesses. We do not have the ability to learn everything individually. So, we must divide up the work and trust that those people doing a certain thing are doing it truthfully. Doctors go through school and do the work in order to help people medically. IT professionals study computers and programming languages in order to use and help people use computers, etc. In some cases, however, people are influenced to believe things that are not true because they have been told by a so called "expert" in a particular field that it is true, or in the Glenn Beck case, we might already have a positive opinion of the individual and might thus believe a majority of what he says. We cannot individually do all the research ourselves, so we must trust them.

However, what we can do is learn how to trust and who to trust.

They should earn our trust if:
If someone has done valid research into something.
If someone's research complies with someone else's similar conclusions.
If someone has proved themselves in the past in the same field of work.

They should not earn our trust if:
If someone has a large following of people.
If someone speaks fluently and with good vocabulary.
If someone shows off their power.
If someone is influential.
If someone makes a claim in a field of work they have not previously researched.

These are all just things to understand when someone tries to tell you some "truth" they think they have found. You don't have to believe me because, like I said, I'm no expert but I have done a bit of thinking in the matter and have read a few things related to this. So, believe me if you want to, but really it's up to you whether you want to trust me or not...perhaps, then proving my point.

Individuality And The Power Struggle

2010-02-18T16:16:00.000-08:00

Ever since the start of high school I've noticed something about individuality...no one has it. I went to a catholic grade school where everyone was required to wear strict uniforms, walk in straight lines from here to there, follow strict schedules, etc. This whole system was designed to suppress us. Of course growing up in this environment and having no knowledge of anything outside of this subservience system, I was surprised when I arrived at high school.

I went to a public high school which means no uniforms and more relaxed guidelines. That's not to say that high school didn't also have it's own strict schedules and rules, but it was something new that I hadn't experienced before. I saw so many different people and they expressed themselves with the clothes they wore and they seemed so much more "out there." Over the course of the next four years in high school I worked my way towards finding who I was and what I was really interested in. I had never been interested in music during grade school because I was literally afraid of expressing myself. In high school, however, I felt more freedom to express myself and be whatever I wanted to be.

I began exploring the world of music. I began (as all do) by listening to the radio. However, I did something more after that that a majority of people don't bother with...I researched into different music that wasn't just on the radio. I used my individuality to think for myself and decide for myself what I found interesting to listen to. Now I sit here a good five or six years later listening to 1970s progressive rock from Italy while everyone else is still listening to Linkin Park or Green Day on our local radio stations.

I suppose the whole point of this is to teach you a lesson on what is true freedom and perhaps happiness. If not happiness, then at least what is right and what should be. Freedom is individuality and individuality is making your own choices and expressing yourself and how you are different from others. If you take pride in calling yourself average, then you are directly calling yourself a servant to others that may create what is average. We are all just animals on this rock in space (yes, humans are animals too) and we need to stop this power struggle. The average man gives into whatever the high power puts on his television/radio/newspaper/school/everything-everywhere and doesn't bother to peek outside of this artificial reality. So, please, if you enjoy something, don't settle with what is given to you. Go find more or make more yourself.

Why PC > Consoles

2010-02-10T14:32:00.001-08:00

My Prediction of the Future

2010-01-21T14:21:00.001-08:00

I'm trying to think of a good way to organize this and I think I'll just make a list according to years into the future:

10 years:
-"Smart" power lines - allowing for a more efficient electricity grid.
-The beginnings of a networked highway system - allowing automatic-driving cars
-Increased Solar/Wind/Nuclear power...maybe Fusion Power?
-More online usage, perhaps increasing independent thinking
-Possible religious war in Iraq (may lead to more atheism). North Korea could be involved.

20 years:
-More efficient networked highway/road system
-Fusion Power more likely possiblity
-Global government in the making, perhaps online voting type system. I don't suspect there will be a single "world leader."
-Possible religious war
-First stable/livable Moon or Mars base

50 years:
-Perfect network of roads. All cars everywhere drive themselves
-Robots almost completely replace all human workforce in factories, etc.
-With almost all jobs replaced by robots, mostly unemployed people - I suspect there will be more high-end NASA researching, Artists, Corporate Biz. Stupid people unable to compete against robots will either be aided by the government or die out if the republicans have their way.
-More cyborgs (half-human/half-machine)
-Cyborg discrimination
-Hopefully religions are left with crazy nutjobs preaching in the alleyways

100 years:
-Wars and discrimination don't exist
-Advanced space exploration with Mars and the Moon being settled on.
-Possible human exploration of other far off gas giants and their moons (Probably not settled though).
-Evidence of life found on Mars or Jupiter's moon Io
-Fusion Power is a reality and widely used
-Possible virtual worlds where people actually live inside the computer via cyber brains

I'll probably add more possibilities and 200 years, 300 years, etc. later.

The Future of The Human Mind

2009-12-14T13:04:00.000-08:00

Edit: I've done more research into this and it's not likely we'll be making cyberbrains very soon as I originally thought. Also, computer technology does not necessarily double "every year." It's more like 18 months.

"The Blue Brain Project is the first comprehensive attempt to reverse-engineer the mammalian brain, in order to understand brain function and dysfunction through detailed simulations." -Blue Brain Project

With computer technology doubling its capabilities every year, we will actually soon be able to simulate a human brain with a computer. This is incredible! We would be able to upload our minds into a computer system. And my guess is that computer technology will continue to double, so eventually cyber brains may become even more powerful than the biological brain.

Artificial Brain Ten Years Away From Reality

There are so many advantages to this, however, I know someone out there is thinking this is a horrible, immoral thing. Would a computer capable of thinking exactly as a human be equivalent to a living thing? And what about human emotions and sensations. Surely you wouldn't want to abandon your ability to taste and feel...

Well, considering these processes are all done with your mind then it's reasonable to assume you would still be able to taste and feel with a computer simulation. However, it wouldn't be real. So the real problem is a cyber brains capability of determining fact from fiction. Also, there's an issue with hacking and the possibility of having your mind literally taken control of. These may be large set backs but there's always a solution and I believe the profits outweigh the costs.

All of these concepts are well described in the Ghost In The Shell anime series and the sequel SAC: 2nd Gig.

The Matrix Trilogy also addresses this possibility of artificial brains in some ways with the programs such as the Oracle and the Architect that pretty much think and act exactly as people do.

I personally look forward to the day I can upload my brain into a computer and acquire immortality, superior intellect, and greater understanding. We'll finally be able to cheat death.

Reality and What is Outside of It

2009-12-10T18:16:00.001-08:00

As an atheist and a naturalist, I believe that the only things that can be confirmed to exist are what we can see and provide evidence for in our universe. However, an argument I often hear is that "god" lies outside of our universe and is thus incapable of being proved because it is impossible to provide evidence for it.

This is actually a fairly good defense for those that believe in some sort of higher power. Although this is not a very logical belief, considering that nothing can be proved outside the boundaries of our reality, then it leaves everything to your imagination. According to this logic, it would be okay to believe that outside our universe there are unicorns and fairies.

It may be possible that there are multiple "universes" (the multiverse theory). And if there was a multiverse then it may be possible that it goes on for infinity. In that case...unicorns and anything imaginable would eventually exist. It's a pretty incredible thought to try to conceive fully.

If a multiverse didn't go on for infinity, then it would have to have some beginning. But then, how would it be created? Why would it be created?
These are the same kind of questions we've asked about our single universe and have for the most part answered how until a point.

Also, if our universe or a multiverse truly did not have anything at all before its existance, then how would absolutely nothing become something. Maybe because outside the universe anything is possible and there it is possible for nothing to become something.

So I think there are at least two answers to this problem.
1. Everything goes on for infinity, the universe, the multiverse, maybe even multiple multiverses, and so on.
OR..
2. Nothing can create something in the void outside of reality.

Either way, this does not prove a god's creation because a god is not nothing and thus must have a beginning as well.

Google is better than god

2009-11-26T08:16:00.001-08:00

I thought about calling this Google is god, but actually Google is probably better. For one, they're both pretty similar, all-knowing and very powerful. But with god you have to think about Google before 1996 (Its year of creation) because although they are very similar, god does not exist and neither did Google at this time. (I wonder if you explained Google to the people in 1995 if they would think of it as a godly machine...)

What makes Google better though? It exists...and we can use it effectively. It also does not demand we follow certain rules like we can use no other search-engine and we cannot worship false search-engines. And when Google gets angry at how the world is, it doesn't "bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish." -Genesis 6:17

So, I think Google > God

Men are animals

2009-11-11T13:27:00.000-08:00

How life began is still unknown, but my guess is that (abiogenesis) through the mixture of organic materials and the addition of energy, eventually the first building blocks for life were created. Bacteria evolved into multi-celled tissues, like planaria and jellyfish. Those creatures evolved into fish, etc. The opportunity for land-living was open for those desperate to escape their predators and eventually land-based creatures evolved. Etc. Etc.

The dinosaurs died out and mammals dominated. Apes evolved and one species would evolve larger brains than the others. They weren't alone at first though. Homo Erectus lived along side the early Homo Sapiens for a time until eventually only one would go one. It's believed that Erectus died out due to a less capable vocal tract and was therefore less capable of communication. So due to the Homo Sapien brain size, ability of communication, and overall adaptability, we survived long enough to get to where we are today.

A lot of people do not understand this completely, or they're in complete denial, or they simply don't care about their origins. I'm greatly ashamed of our society and government for allowing this to happen. At what point did our world change from intellectuals trying to learn the mysteries of the universe (as in the renaissance) into a bunch of couch-potato morons that only care about what Miley Cyrus did last week. I admit, I like sitting on my ass watching tv and playing games all day, but these things are meant to distract us from what is truly important, THOUGHT.

People don't think anymore. I don't know if they forgot how to think or if they just don't bother to think anymore, but I'm horribly disappointed. I'm not sure exactly what needs to be changed or what needs to be done, but I'm making this a warning to everyone that if you don't start thinking and using your brains in a logical and reasonable way then the human race is going to return to the stone age and maybe even worse. Read a book, write a book, play a song, paint a picture, sew a quilt, for the love of (your) god do something requiring thought or imagination.

Global Warming

2009-08-18T21:45:00.000-07:00

I thought this issue was fairly well-known and accepted by now, but apparently I was wrong. It has come to my attention that quite a few people still don't accept global warming as a real threat. The only reasoning behind this is their hatred towards Al Gore and dangerous infatuation with the Fox News Network. This is absurd...why would you not accept the facts because one well-known guy that you don't like is talking about it. This is a sign of major closed-mindedness. For those of you that don't really understand what global warming is or how it happens, here's a short clip from National Geographic explaining the issue.

I know many people would also argue that global warming isn't caused by humans because we wouldn't make a big enough effect, but it is proven that CO2 levels are WAYY higher than they have ever been in the history of the Earth.

And doesn't it seem kind of suspicious that the levels of CO2 would magically rise dramatically at the beginning of the industrial revolution? Nothing in nature happens magically with no cause and the people that dispute the issue and say "humans didn't do it" have no other explanation for this dramatic rise in CO2.

I say, forget about the politics and who's saying what. Look at the facts for YOURSELF and come to your own conclusion. Stop letting other people think for you. Think for your non-existant-god damned selves.

Religion

2009-08-09T21:28:00.000-07:00

Most people that know me know about my views on religion. I am an atheist, which means I do not believe in a god, afterlife, or anything that has no evidence of it's existance. That doesn't mean, however, that I don't believe in anything at all. I do believe in rational thought, doing to others as you would have them do unto you, and always acting to benefit our species.

There are a million different aspects about the religious debate, so I'll just go over a couple things. First of all, the burden of proof relies on the person with the religious belief. As an atheist, it is pretty much impossible for me to prove god's nonexistance or anything's nonexistance for that matter. You can't prove something's nonexistance if there is nothing in existance to prove it. In other words, it is impossible to disprove.

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
This analogy is known as Russell's Teapot.

In other words, it means that if there is an assertion with no evidence but also no way to disprove it, and a society is grown up to accept the assertion with absolute certainty and taught it every Sunday since birth, then it becomes an imagined "truth" among the people. However, people like me are created when we start thinking about it and realize there is such a thing as atheism. There's a few other arguments in atheism related to this as well: Pink Unicorn, Flying Spaghetti Monster

And that's why I call myself the "SKEPTIC" Samurai. That's all I have to say about religion for today, but I'm sure I will post further arguments into the subject later. So with that, may god not bless you.

The Media

2009-08-08T22:55:00.000-07:00

In my last post, I mentioned a little bit about how the media works. Well today I feel like finishing my statement. First off, watch this video briefly explaining the issue:

If you couldn't figure it out by watching the video, I'll explain it a little better.
The media: the means of communication, as radio and television, newspapers, and magazines, that reach or influence people widely. The media is a way that large corporations get their message out to millions of people, mostly through advertising.
The issue that arises is "are these messages always good"? Television, the king of the media world, is the most effective way of communicating a message.

When watching TV, you are focused almost in a hypnotized state of being so that you are able to take in as much info from the TV as you can. Corporations use this capability to unconsciously control your mind and take your money and basically your lives. Not only can products be sold through advertising but ideas and opinions are sold (sometimes through news networks as well *cough* FOX *cough*).

Take, for example, a McDonald's commercial...the psychological tricks that are included in Mickie D commercials are overwhelming. The use of the color red (the most appealing color to the eye) is used constantly. Close-up shots of delicious looking burgers and other food is used to entice your taste buds. And Ronald McDonald himself...before McDonald's who would ever associate burgers with clowns? The use of a clown as their mascot is to create a feeling of "joy" and "happiness" to further entice future customers.

However, in reality, the burgers and food at McDonald's are nothing what they appear to be on the commercials and are not a whole lot different than Burger King or Jack N' The Box. But it wouldn't matter much what the actual food was like because if you can trick someone into wanting whatever crap you have to sell, then people will buy it.

The same thing is used with Fox News. Flashy animations and controversial title screens provoke your senses and entice you to buy their ideas and beliefs. It doesn't really matter what they say...it's how they say it. The following documentary explains the tricks that Fox uses:

Outfoxed Part 1

My point to this whole post is to just make everyone aware of the issue and be on the lookout the next time you watch Tv or read a magazine because most likely you'll be able to find some kind of trick used to grab your attention and take over your mind. So, look out and Peace out.

So It Begins...

2009-08-07T19:12:00.000-07:00

Hello fellow Earthlings...
I have not actually made a successful blog before, so this may be interesting. I suppose I should start by introducing myself. The name is Matthew, aka The Skeptic Samurai. I am known mostly for my interest in death metal music, geekdom, and atheism.

I have very strong opinions on music. If you truly want to enjoy music, then you must go out and find a particular kind of music that you alone enjoy. I have a deep hatred towards radio stations and the music they choose to play.

The music industry seems very unfair to the art of music. Only the select few bands that are chosen by recording industries may create albums recorded in a professional studio and go on tours. So, therefore the only bands you ever actually hear about are the ones chosen by the recording companies.

If you respect the art of music then you will not restrict yourself to the select few bands of the recording industry. Everyone should look into bands in your local community and local bands from all over the world. There are millions of bands created all over the world and many of them never get the chance to sell albums and go on tour all over the world. Although, in this new age we have the power to do so with the Interwebz! That is how I find most of my music, over the internet. I've discovered many bands from all over the world that I never knew existed until I took a real interest in music.

There are millions of bands in the world and there is no reason why you should listen to all the same music that the radio stations play over and over and over and over and over again. I've noticed something strange since I've stopped listening to the radio...I still manage to recognize all the most popular songs. I hear them on Tv, in movies, and when I'm with friends all the time. And even though I hate this music, somehow I'm still stuck listening to it constantly. Which brings me to another point...how the media works. But I'll get to that another day.
Anywho, that's my two cents on the music industry and a little bit on the media. Hopefully you learned something, so Peace out.