'All for ourselves and nothing for other people' seems in every age of the world to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind. -Adam Smith "All the 'truth' in the world adds up to one big lie." Bob Dylan "Idealism precedes experience, cynicism follows it." Anon

Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts

December 7, 2011

Red Cross emergency mission to Indian reservation exposes Canadian apartheid

Chain The Dogma    December 7, 2011

Red Cross emergency mission to Indian reservation exposes Canadian apartheid

PM Harper's prohibition propaganda of fear ignores children living in poverty

by Perry Bulwer



I have previously written on this blog about how Canada's Christian fundamentalist Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, is an ideologue who insists on implementing public policy based on political dogma rather than scientific evidence. His insistence on not only perpetuating but expanding the disastrous war on drugs  is a glaring example of that.

Evidence from around the world conclusively demonstrates that the prohibition of drugs has been one of the most perverse, deadly, costly and ineffective public policies ever.  All the myths, lies and propaganda propping up prohibition have been exposed  and scientific evidence proves that decriminalization and/or legalization of all drugs achieves the goal of harm reduction prohibition sought but failed to achieve for the past 70 or 80 years. The only country to abandon prohibition policies so far is Portugal, where all drugs were decriminalized 10 years ago, but based on the results more countries are certain to follow. In Portugal, where drug addiction is now treated as a public health issue rather than a criminal issue, drug use by youth is steadily declining, drug related deaths are down as are rates of communicable disease.  When decriminalization was first proposed most Portuguese were opposed to it, but now with such obvious benefits no one is clamouring for the bad old days of prohibition.

Watch the opening statement in this debate for an excellent overview of the failed drug war

Janus Forum - Should the US Legalize Drugs? from Brown University on Vimeo.



Recently, Prime Minister Harper publicly reiterated his refusal to allow scientific evidence to inform his drug policies when responding to reporter's questions in Vancouver, ironically, at the reopening of Science World. Four former mayors of Vancouver had just endorsed a call by a new coalition of experts in British Columbia demanding the end of cannabis prohibition, which the current mayor later also endorsed.

A new coalition of B.C. health, academic and law enforcement experts is calling for the legalization and regulation of marijuana, saying existing laws only drive the billion-dollar industry underground and fuel gang violence.

Stop the Violence B.C., which comprises dozens of police officials, doctors, university professors, legal experts and more, released a report today titled Breaking the Silence, which aims to show that marijuana prohibition, while well intentioned, has been ineffective — and, in fact, has adverse effects.

All of those professional experts, and many others around the world, have examined the available evidence and come to the only reasonable conclusion possible: prohibition is a drastic failure that makes things worse, not better. But none of those expert opinions or their overwhelming evidence can move an ideologue like Harper. When asked if he would ever consider legalizing and regulating cannabis he responded:

“That won’t happen under our government. We’re strongly opposed to the legalization of drugs. Obviously, we’re very concerned about the spread of drugs in the country and the damage it is doing to our kids.”

[Update April 4, 2012:  the link above where that quote came from is now dead. It was on the Vancouver Sun website, but the article has disappeared. I found another report of that event at this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/11/26/marijuana-laws-legalization-canada-stephen-harper_n_1114388.html   The quote above is slightly different in this report: "No, it will not happen under our government," Harper said. “We're very concerned about the spread of drugs in the country and the damage it's doing and as you know we have legislation before the House [of Commons] to crack down."  This issue of link rot, or dead links, is a big problem for bloggers who rely on linking to sources, which is one reason I have archived entire news articles on my other blog.]

First, Harper makes it very clear that he is not interested in science, even though he made that statement at a ceremony for an educational science center. He is definite about it. Nothing could change his mind. Ending prohibition will not happen under Harper's government no matter what the evidence shows. That is the epitome of political dogma, though I have no doubt that it is partly informed by Harper's religious dogma  as a practising member of the evangelical Christian and Missionary Alliance. After all, fundamentalists are not concerned about evidence and facts.

Second, the demagoguery in Harper's statement not only discounts facts and evidence, but it also deceptively gives the impression that he is concerned about the welfare of children. Children are a favourite subject for political fear-mongers because they can imply that anyone who opposes them is endangering children. However, the reality about drugs and children is that the myths, lies and repercussions of prohibition present greater dangers to children and teens than drugs themselves. Canadian children can access cannabis and other illegal drugs easier than legal but deadly drugs such as prescription medication, alcohol and tobacco because those are strictly regulated. Legalizing and regulating drugs now prohibited would both reduce the spread of drugs and protect children, as the Portuguese have found. Furthermore, there simply is no evidence that there is a crisis of drug use spreading across the country and damaging children. Harper just made that up. The real national crisis causing untold damage to hundreds of thousands of Canadian children is not prohibited drug use, but poverty and the hopelessness it creates.

If Prime Minister Harper was truly concerned for the welfare of children he would be proactively doing everything in his power to ensure that no Canadian child lives in poverty. But he is not, even though protecting the most vulnerable citizens should be one of the basic functions of government.  As I wrote in a previous post, on his official website  Harper shows more concern for stray cats than children living in poverty. Oddly, I could not find a search function on that site. I easily found references to protecting cats, but I could find nothing about protecting children through poverty reduction and housing programs. In one of the richest countries in the world hundreds of thousands of children still live in dire poverty without basic necessities of life, and our Christian Prime Minister never says a word about it. Perhaps he misunderstands the scripture that says "suffer the little children".

It has been more than 20 years since the House of Commons unanimously resolved to end child poverty by 2000, but a national advocacy group says it's shocked by how little progress has been made.
While the economy has more than doubled in size since that 1989 resolution, the incomes of Canada's poorest families have stagnated, Campaign 2000 says in its 20th annual report card on child and family poverty released Wednesday.

"Every year I am shocked by the lack of progress made in poverty eradication," said Laurel Rothman, national co-ordinator of Campaign 2000. "The gap between rich and poor families has continued to widen, and low-income and average-income families are left struggling to keep up."
The group says 639,000 children still live in poverty in Canada — one in every 10 children. Among aboriginal children, the rate is one in four. [emphasis added]

I do not think anyone aware of Canadian history is surprised that aboriginal children suffer from poverty at higher levels than other children. There has been two hundred years of colonial, institutional, and governmental racism in Canada, epitomized by the Indian Act  under which the Indian reserve system was set up. South Africa frequently looked to that system as an example for their own segregation policies and apartheid system,and when criticized government officials would use the Canadian experience to justify state racism and discrimination.  [Note: CBC has removed the article at that last link from their archive. It reported that South African officials visited Canada to learn from the Indian Reservation system how to implement apartheid. This article in the archive makes a similar argument: http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/politics/international-politics/canada-and-the-fight-against-apartheid/apartheid-in-canada-babb-to-visit-peguis-indian-reserve.html

Now, 20 years after South Africa abandoned its segregation program, apartheid in relation to Canada is back in the news.

TORONTO, Nov. 30, 2011 /CNW/ - As the UN climate summit gets underway in Durban, South Africa, a group of anti-apartheid activists and African non-governmental organizations are calling on Canada to restore its reputation as a leader on global issues, which has been tarnished by Canada's active promotion of the tar sands. A full-page ad in the Globe and Mail compares the Canada that was one of the first western countries to impose sanctions against the apartheid regime in South Africa in 1986 with the Canada's failure to date to respond to global warming, which will have serious social and environmental impacts. The text of the ad reads:
"Canada, you were once considered a leader on global issues like human rights and environmental protection. Today you're home to polluting tar sands oil, speeding the dangerous effects of climate change. For us in Africa, climate change is a life and death issue. By dramatically increasing Canada's global warming pollution, tar sands mining and drilling makes the problem worse, and exposes millions of Africans to more devastating drought and famine today and in the years to come. It's time to draw the line. We call on Canada to change course and be a leader in clean energy and to support international action to reduce global warming pollution."

They are right to criticize the Harper government's regressive environmental policy, which ignores facts and evidence, just like its drug and crime policies. But I find it a bit dismaying that those anti-apartheid activists seem to be unaware that a kind of apartheid still exists in Canada,  though to be fair, saving the environment is perhaps more important than saving humans since without a livable environment there will be no humans to save. Yes, Canada did eventually oppose South African apartheid, but did so while continuing its own discrimination policies under the Indian Act, which essentially makes First Nation peoples wards of the federal government. The Indian Act is apartheid legislation in part because it is the means by which the Canadian government segregated the original inhabitants by pushing them onto small reserves after most of their traditional lands were expropriated, while at the same time attempting to assimilate them into settler culture through oppressive laws and institutions that denied many their basic human rights.

At the same time environmentalists were rightfully trying to shame Canada for endangering the planet environmentally, a Red Cross emergency mission to an Indian reservation  may have been an even greater international embarrassment for the Harper government by exposing the deplorable effects of Canadian apartheid today. It has been common knowledge in Canada for many decades, at least to those who cared to look, that conditions such as infrastructure and services on many First Nations reserves are sub-standard compared to the rest of Canadian society. Under the Indian Act, the responsibility for providing those things on reserves falls to the federal government, whereas it is provinces and municipalities who provide them for everyone else. However, while provinces and municipalities have legislation and codes that ensure minimum standards for infrastructure and services, the federal government has no similar legislation to protect those living on reserves, only policies that can be changed at the whim of fickle, dogmatic or demagogic politicians.

Here is how a United Nations Special Rapporteur described the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people in Canada in a 2004 report. The summary of that report lists many of the effects of Canadian apartheid on First Nations people:

Economic, social and human indicators of well-being, quality of life and development are consistently lower among Aboriginal people than other Canadians. Poverty, infant mortality, unemployment, morbidity, suicide, criminal detention, children on welfare, women victims of abuse, child prostitution, are all much higher among Aboriginal people than in any other sector of Canadian society, whereas educational attainment, health standards, housing conditions, family income, access to economic opportunity and to social services are generally lower. Canada has taken up the challenge to close this gap.
Ever since early colonial settlement, Canada’s indigenous peoples were progressively dispossessed of their lands, resources and culture, a process that led them into destitution, deprivation and dependency, which in turn generated an assertive and, occasionally, militant social movement in defence of their rights, restitution of their lands and resources and struggle for equal opportunity and self-determination.
Aboriginal peoples claim their rights to the land and its natural resources, as well as respect for their distinct cultural identities, lifestyles and social organization. Current negotiated land claims agreements between Canada and Aboriginal peoples aim at certainty and predictability and involve the release of Aboriginal rights in exchange for specific compensation packages, a situation that has led in several instances to legal controversy and occasional confrontation. Obtaining guaranteed free access to traditional land-based subsistence activities such as forestry, hunting and fishing remains a principal objective of Aboriginal peoples to fully enjoy their human rights. So does the elimination of discrimination and racism of which they are still frequently the victims. In some cases, taking advantage of development possibilities, Aboriginal people have established thriving business enterprises. Much more needs to be done to provide such opportunities to all Aboriginal communities in the country in order to raise employment and income levels.

The date of that UN report, 2004, is important in this context. A year later, in November 2005, then Prime Minister, Paul Martin (Liberal) met with the premiers and First Nations leaders in Kelowna, B.C. The result became known as the Kelowna Accord,  which would have allotted $5 billion towards ending some of the gross inequities faced by aboriginal peoples as identified by the United Nations. However, just days later, Martin's minority government fell, an election was called, and Stephen Harper's Conservative party took over. Harper walked away from the agreements signed in Kelowna, choosing instead to ignore the problems, until forced to face the facts of dire poverty and homelessness on many reserves by one brave band Chief, Theresa Spence, who declared an emergency in her community of Attawapiskat after years of government neglect. That declared emergency, by the way, was ignored by the federal government until the Red Cross and the media became involved. But the government's immediate, patronising response was to blame the victims,  offer unworkable suggestions for emergency shelter  and send in an accountant, rather than expedite an emergency response to protect the lives, including infants and children, of those living in frozen squalor  in one of the richest countries in the world.

After reneging on the Kelowna Accord and being in power for six years, what has Prime Minister Stephen Harper done to alleviate these long-standing problems and disparities his government has legal obligations to ameliorate, both nationally and internationally? Nothing but maintain the deplorable status quo. Here is what the Auditor General of Canada wrote recently, in a June 2011 report:

Lack of clarity about service levels. Most of the services provided to communities throughout Canada are the responsibility of provincial and municipal governments, but this is not the case on reserves. Under the Constitution Act, 1867, the federal government has exclusive authority to legislate on matters pertaining to “Indians, and Lands reserved for Indians.” INAC has been the main federal organization exercising this authority. While the federal government has funded the delivery of many programs and services, it has not clearly defined the type and level of services it supports.
Mainly through INAC, the federal government supports many services on reserves that are normally provided by provincial and municipal governments off reserves. It is not always evident whether the federal government is committed to providing services on reserves of the same range and quality as those provided to other communities across Canada. In some cases, the Department’s documents refer to services that are reasonably comparable to those of the provinces. But comparability is often poorly defined and may not include, for instance, the level and range of services to be provided. [emphasis added]

Prime Minister Harper's failure to make any progress towards dealing with the inequities faced by the First Nations peoples actually makes things worse for them. Lower levels and qualities of service than other citizens receive means that those on reserves slip further and further behind, which the current emergency has made all too clear. But there is another way Harper has made things worse. Speaking in the House of Commons, Harper callously suggested that it was the people of Attawapiskat and their band leaders who were to blame for the crisis of poverty, homelessness and sub-standard housing. If there was an undertone of racism in Harper's comments (they were definitely patronising), his ineffective response to the crisis could be seen as overt racism.  After all, it is difficult to imagine Harper offering unworkable suggestions and sending only government observers and an accountant to a non-reserve community that has declared a life threatening emergency. Moreover, the subtle racism in Harper's speech and actions is reflected by many citizens across Canada, considering the comment sections of online newspapers, which are filled these days with utter ignorance and blatant racist attitudes towards the first peoples. With such attitudes openly expressed by politicians and the public, it is understandable why the Assembly of First Nations just passed a resolution asking the United Nations to have a 'special rapporteur' to once again investigate whether the government is fulfilling its legal obligations towards indigenous people.

The optics are not good for Canada, which is slowly losing its progressive reputation  under the dogmatic, backward looking, conservative government of Stephen Harper. It is an international embarrassment that twenty years after the government of South Africa ended its apartheid program, Canada still has its reserve system that inspired that apartheid. The fact that this current crisis exposing Canadian apartheid is happening in the community of Attawapiskat is extremely ironic considering that there is a De Beers  diamond mine just 90 kilometres away. Reminiscent of South African apartheid wherein the state enabled exploitation of indigenous peoples by corporations, De Beers has so far extracted about half of the estimated $1 billion worth of diamonds the mine is expected to yield. The company has pledged just $30 million, or three percent, of that total yield to the original inhabitants of the land the mine is on.

Perhaps it is time for the world community to pressure Canada into ending its colonial policies  and apartheid system under the Indian Act, just like it did to end South African apartheid.

RELATED ARTICLES ON THIS BLOG:


Canadian Indian residential schools designed to assimilate natives traumatized individuals and generations


Aboriginal Teen May Be Charged with Assaulting RCMP Officer With Her Face 


Faith, Evidence and the Immoral Drug War

A modest proposal to end homelessness in Canada

Canada's Christian fundamentalist Prime Minister tells millions of poor no need to protest

Asbestos, Abortion and the Canadian Prime Minister's cats

The Order of British Columbia is Out of Order

July 21, 2011

Faith, Evidence and the Immoral Drug War

Chain The Dogma      July 21, 2011


Faith, Evidence and the Immoral Drug War

Religion and Politics - Two Sides of the Same Con

By Perry Bulwer



The slang term I use in my subtitle, which plays on the word coin, is derived from the term 'confidence trick' and refers to the intentional deception of people after gaining their confidence, usually in relation to a financial fraud. Not all confidence artists are swindlers out for monetary gain, however. Politicians and religious believers also use confidence tricks to exploit others. Confidence artists, or fraudsters, exploit various human characteristics such as greed, credulity and naïveté, and emotions such as compassion and fear, to trick their targets into trusting them. Politicians do the same by using ideology, propaganda and demagoguery to misinform and mislead their constituents. Believers do it by using religious dogma to exploit the gullibility, superstitions and fears of adults, or the innocence, ignorance and inexperience of children.

Many aspects of both religion and politics are aptly described as con jobs. Here is how the New Testament describes religious faith in Hebrews 11:1, first in the King James Version and then in the Common English Bible: “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” and “Faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see”. Choose any translation you want, they basically all say the same thing. But it is illogical to claim that the act of believing some thing exists is actually evidence of that thing, that merely having faith or hoping for something to be true is proof of its reality. Faith is not substance or reality, it is merely a belief or a feeling that is not based on evidence. Faith is simply wishful thinking, which sounds nice and harmless, but it can turn deadly when acted upon, as in the case of faith healing parents who allow their children to die  tortuous deaths without any medical intervention. Their confidence in the authority of the Bible has tricked them into killing their own children through neglect.

Children also suffer from the religious confidence trick of indoctrination. There is a reason most religious evangelism focuses on children.  They are easy targets for spiritual fraud because they already have confidence in authority figures such as their parents and religious teachers. It is easy to exploit their credulity and naïveté to trick them into believing in faith-based fantasies rather than evidence-based reality. But the con doesn't stop with just convincing little children that God or gods are real, or that they will live forever in paradise if they just believe, otherwise most children would eventually out grow their belief in imaginary religious figures and places, just like they out grow their belief in Santa and his toy factory at the North Pole.

No sane parent continues to push the Santa story on a child that has grown to reject that particular myth because of common sense and observable evidence, so that belief is easily discarded at a certain stage of childhood. The myths of religion, on the other hand, are constantly reinforced throughout childhood and adolescence with dogma that prevents critical thinking and disables a child's ability to discern the difference between reality and fantasy. By the time a child subjected to such indoctrination reaches adulthood it is extremely difficult to escape the imposed religious worldview. For example, any child convinced to accept the religious fantasy of creationism over the scientific reality of evolution is a victim of a con job of the highest order as it can infect their worldview throughout their life. Nothing could be more childish than to believe that the Biblical creation myth, and other events in Genesis such as the flood and Noah's ark, were literal events that happened exactly as described. Yet many adults who were indoctrinated with creationist lies as children retain that childish belief contrary to the advice in I Corinthians 13:11 to “put away childish things”. The childish thing in that example of creationism is holding a belief or an opinion on an issue when there is no evidence to support that view and all the evidence supports the opposite position.

That sounds a lot like how many politicians work. Political campaign promises are a common example of a con job. Everyone knows how it works. A politician makes an election promise, often with no intention of keeping it, that helps gain the confidence of voters, but once elected the promise is not kept. That is a confidence trick, a con job that everyone can recognize as such and yet voters continue to get taken in by such lies. There are many examples of confidence tricks, or con jobs, in the political realm. The Iraq war waged on the basis of weapons of mass destruction that did not exist is one recent example. But it is the far more disastrous global 'war on drugs'  that I want to focus on here, given the recent report of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, comprised of mostly former heads of state and other world leaders.

The Commission's report is just the latest of many that concludes the prohibition of some drugs has been a complete failure “... with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world.” It has not been a war on drugs, but a war on citizens, often fought along racial lines particularly in the United States. The commissioners, like many others before them, recommend the legalization of cannabis and other prohibited drugs. Whether or not those high profile individuals can help bring the insanity and injustice to an end remains to be seen, especially given the fact that most of them failed to do anything about it when they were in office and had more power to effect change. Ending prohibition will not be easy as long as political leaders like President Obama and Prime Minister Harper continue to base their drug policies on ideology rather than scientific evidence.

President Obama promised in his presidential campaign  that his administration would not prosecute medical cannabis patients and providers in states that have legalized it, yet that is exactly what he is doing today. He gained the confidence of large numbers of voters interested in the issue of medical cannabis by deliberately lying about his intentions. He could have easily kept that promise and taken one small, progressive step towards ending the disastrous war on drugs, but he didn't, which is why I think it was a deliberate campaign lie. After all, the prohibition of cannabis was originally premised on, and is perpetuated by, deliberate lies and propaganda. In fact, the prohibition of some drugs, but not the most dangerous ones that cause the most harms to individuals and socities, is a con job on an international scale, started and led primarily by the United States.

The evidence for the efficacy and safety of cannabis as medicine  is overwhelming.  Yet, under Obama the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) continues to not just ignore that evidence, but to declare without any evidence of its own, that cannabis has no accepted medical use.  If that is true, then on what basis have 16 state legislatures legalized medical cannabis? The DEA's lies are absolutely absurd and easy to disprove.

Cannabis has been used as medicine for thousands of years.  There are thousands of scientific research studies showing the effectiveness of cannabis for a wide range of health problems. Cannabis was even listed in the U.S. Pharmacopeia from 1850 until 1942 and used as commonly as aspirin, another useful drug derived from a plant but more toxic than cannabis.

In 2009, the American Medical Association reversed its opinion (an opinion informed not by science but by political propaganda) that cannabis had no medicinal application, and called for more research. Ironically, the AMA's original position on cannabis was that it has a great deal of therapeutic value for a variety of ailments, and in the 1930s the organization argued against prohibiting it in the first place because it considered cannabis a potential wonder drug, which it is. That call for more research has so far gone unheeded, except for a few exceptions, even though the American College of Physicians has called for the same thing.  The National Cancer Institute,  part of the U.S. Department of Health, refers to cannabis as alternative medicine and admits it has been used as medicine for thousands of years, though the political climate requires it to refer only to potential benefits of cannabis for cancer patients. If you ask the multitudes of cancer patients who use cannabis whether the relief they derive from it is a real benefit or merely potential, I am quite sure I know how they will reply.

In 1997, the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to review the scientific evidence of the health benefits and risks of cannabis. The IOM's report  emphasized evidence-based medicine as opposed to ideology-based medicine, and concluded that cannabis has therapeutic value for pain relief, control of nausea and appetite stimulation. In fact, the U.S. government still grows and supplies cannabis to a handful of medicinal users under an investigative program that was cancelled in 1992.

Furthermore, the new pharmaceutical drug, Sativex,  is derived directly from the cannabis plant, unlike other pharmaceutical cannabinoid analog drugs that are solely synthetic. Sativex has undergone vigorous regulatory testing successfully and is approved for sale in several countries, including Canada, for various medical conditions including multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, and cancer. More countries are testing it, including the U.S., where the first large scale trial for cancer patients had positive results and the next development phase is underway. Finally, the evidence from Portugal  puts the lie to all claims that the legalization or decriminalization of all drugs will increase drug use and harms to individuals and society. After ten years of one of the sanest drug policies in the world, the evidence shows the opposite is true.

So, on what basis has Obama approved the DEA's latest attacks against desperately ill people for whom cannabis is the most effective and safest drug they could use, and one which they could produce on their own very easily and cheaply? It is certainly not on the basis of any credible evidence. Does Obama really believe the DEA's propaganda that cannabis has no accepted medical use, or is he merely playing politics with people's lives? As Dr. Igor Grant, director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at UC San Diego, said: "It's always a danger if the government acts on certain kinds of persuasions or beliefs rather than evidence."  Obama's ally in this immoral war against sick people, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, also seems to prefer ideological propaganda over scientific evidence. He has proven that by his government's efforts to shut down North America's only medical center where drug addicts can legally inject illegal drugs.

All of the evidence proves that Vancouver's INSITE  effectively saves the lives of individuals and improves the community, yet Harper has used the courts to try and shut it down. When the case recently reached the Supreme Court of Canada, British Columbia's lawyers presented the justices with stacks of scientific evidence demonstrating that INSITE was effective public policy.  What evidence did the government's lawyers present to the court to counter that? None, because there is none. Incredibly, the government's argument relied solely on a jurisdictional issue.  In other words, federal government lawyers argued on the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments. They admitted to the Supreme Court justices that there was no credible evidence that the program does not work, but insisted that the province of British Columbia had no jurisdiction in this matter because it is a criminal law issue falling under federal jurisdiction, and not a public health issue which is governed by the provinces.

Just a week after that Global Commission recommended ending the failed drug war, the Canadian government pledged $5 million to keep fighting it in the Americas. Prime Minister Harper does not care much for scientific evidence,  not wanting the facts to get in the way of his religious ideology. I say religious rather than conservative ideology because the prohibition of drugs, particularly cannabis, is not a conservative position.  As Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico and candidate for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination who supports legalization of cannabis, recently wrote:

William F. Buckley and Milton Friedman, two of the most respected conservative intellectuals of the late 20th century, were among the drug war's high-profile critics. These great thinkers did not argue that recreational drug use should be celebrated -- far from it! Instead, they argued that the prohibition of drugs was causing far greater harm to society than drug abuse itself. And they were right.

So, if Harper's drug policies are not based on scientific evidence or on conservative values, what could they possibly be based on other than his religious ideology. (I will have much more to say about Harper's religious affiliation in future posts.)  Harper had the gall to recently crow that "Conservative values are Canadian values. Canadian values are conservative values.” Nothing could be further from the truth. He bases that hubris on his recent election victory that finally gave him a majority in the House of Commons. However, the majority of Canadians, around 60 percent, did not vote for Harper or his Conservative party. Only 40 percent of Canadians support Harper, yet over 50 percent support the legalization of cannabis, showing just how out of touch with reality Harper is.  That latter number would be much higher but for decades of prohibition propaganda that deliberately obscures the facts.

As part of Harper's tough-on-crime agenda, also based on ideology rather than evidence (e.g. spending billions on new prisons when the crime rate has fallen to lowest level since 1973),  he plans to impose mandatory minimum sentences for various crimes, including small-scale cannabis cultivation. The U.S. experiment with mandatory minimum sentences has been a failure, especially for drug cases, and is being discontinued in many states. Yet despite that strong evidence from the U.S. that such sentences are ineffectual and a massive waste of money, Harper seems to think they will work in Canada. Harper's rejection of evidence in favour of ideology has many international observers bewildered.

Continuing to prohibit some drugs that have proven health benefits, but not others that are far more dangerous, and imprisoning users based purely on ideology rather than on evidence of harm caused to individuals and society is immoral. As Sam Harris recently wrote: “The fact that we pointlessly ruin the lives of nonviolent drug users by incarcerating them, at enormous expense, constitutes one of the great moral failures of our time.” And it is not just jailing harmless people that is immoral. Hundreds of millions of people around the world suffer needlessly from great pain simply because of hyperbolic drug war propaganda and policies that prevent them from accessing a common, cheap drug that could free them from their misery. The Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, thinks that the war on drugs is a conservative value and a Canadian value, but it is neither. It is an inhumane, immoral injustice and a complete failure.

******
I wonder what those who dishonestly hold to the dogma that Cannabis has no scientifically confirmed medical benefits would say to the father and son in the following video?

Dad gives two year old son battling with Brain cancer Medical Marijuana





"Marijuana Moms"  A group of moms in California, where medical pot is legal with a prescription, have declared that marijuana makes them better parents and partners.


International Law and the Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health Care: Using Safe Injection Facilities to Control and Prevent Epidemics


Canada's Christian fundamentalist Prime Minister tells millions of poor no need to protest


A modest proposal to end homelessness in Canada


Asbestos, Abortion and the Canadian Prime Minister's cats

February 11, 2011

Video demonstration of how Christian fundamentalists indoctrinate children with anti-science creationist lies

Chain The Dogma


by Perry Bulwer


Ken Ham, the Christian evangelical behind the anti-science website Answers in Gensis and the Creation Museum  now wants Kentucky state funds to create a theme park based on Noah's ark.

Watch this video for an example of how Ken Ham and his ilk indoctrinate children with Bible lies:

http://www.youtube.com/v/eLeQkuTGSOs&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3




Now contrast that method of unthinking learning by rote with the following critical thinking method. Watch this series of videos for an example how a real scientist teaches the facts of evolution to children:

https://www.youtube.com/v/jHoxZF3ZgTo&rel=0&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3




http://www.youtube.com/v/xGyh1Qsw-Ak&rel=0&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3




https://www.youtube.com/v/YT1vXXMsYak&rel=0&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3


https://www.youtube.com/v/_igTWNidwnk&rel=0&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3




http://www.youtube.com/v/qm-0Z0ceezQ&rel=0&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3


https://www.youtube.com/v/pxlPVSAnWOo&rel=0&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3




RELATED ARTICLES:

Louisiana student fighting legislation allowing creationism in science classes challenges deluded congresswoman to debate

Atheist student shunned by entire community including his parents for opposing prayer at graduation ceremony

Teen tells hearing Louisiana Science Education Act is embarrassing, students deserve to be taught proper science

American Muslim Imams join clergy movement to accept evolution and ban creationist teaching in science classes

Hundreds of fundamentalist religious schools in US use public funds to indoctrinate students with anti-science and bigotry

Creationists continue attempts to undermine teaching of evolution in Texas and Louisiana with anti-science dogma

Louisiana school board wants believers to teach creationism in science classes, thinks it will solve discipline problem

US conservative lawmakers increase attempts to legislate promotion of creationism in public schools

Biology teacher in Illinois public high school caught promoting creationism to discredit evolution

The dangers of creationism in education

Creationists weaken U.S. education system, only a quarter of high school students adequately taught evolutionary biology

Teaching evolution in science classrooms under attack in the US and UK by anti-science creationists

Ohio school district payed nearly a million dollars to fire science teacher who taught creationism

UK government insists it will not accept free school proposals from groups pushing creationist agenda over science

UK education reforms open door for untrained teachers in faith schools to indoctrinate children with creationism

Respecting a Child's Point of View

Corporal Punishment, the Abuse of Authority and the Rights of Children

Creationists weaken U.S. education system, only a quarter of high school students adequately taught evolutionary biology

Ohio school district payed nearly a million dollars to fire science teacher who taught creationism

Hearing for Ohio science teacher sacked for evangelizing and teaching anti-science shows great divide in U.S. society

Teacher Accused of Branding Kid With Cross

Ex-superintendent: Science teacher should have avoided religion

Who is the Real Anti-Christian: the Atheist or the Fundamentalist Christian?

The dangers of creationism in education

Religious indoctrination thrives in B.C. private schools because education ministry does not vet textbooks or courses

Atheist group files complaint with B.C. Ministry of Education over Christian school teaching creationism in science class

Bob Jones University science textbook for home schoolers ignores science and critical thinking

Virginia school board votes to return Ten Commandments to classrooms despite Supreme Court ruling it is unconstitutional

Nebraska education administrators get mixed messages from lawyers on legality of promoting religion in schools

Vacation Liberty School uses Christian fundamentalism to politically indoctrinate children

Federal Court of Appeal asked to stop California college proselytizing and imposing religion on students

Advocacy group battles illegal Christian fundamentalist proselytizing in U.S. public schools

Fundamentalist Christian 'punk' band uses deception to evangelize and indoctrinate in U.S. schools

Radical Christian extremists aim to undermine public education by targeting high school kids for indoctrination into fundamentalist worldview

Christian fundamentalist boot-camp for kids indoctrinates them to fight 'bloody' religious war

Child Evangelism Fellowship complains it is banned from converting children in public housing project

Catholic parents upset that teen son was peer-pressured into baptism in Baptist church while on school trip

European Court of Human Rights rules crucifixes in Italian schools violates children's religious freedom to believe or not

Parental rights vs children's rights: debating the role of religious institutions in Irish education system

Church of England's proselytising plans will target children for recruitment and indoctrination

Quebec bans teaching a belief, a dogma or the practice of a specific religion in government subsidized daycares



February 7, 2011

Blind men and an elephant: a duet by Natalie Merchant and PZ Myers

Chain The Dogma   -   February 7, 2011

Blind men and an elephant: a duet by Natalie Merchant and PZ Myers

by Perry Bulwer


Today I posted an article to my archive of news articles on religion and child abuse on how creationism is weakening the U.S. education system  The article is written by PZ Myers, the author of the popular Pharyngula science blog.

It reminded me of my own experience in the Canadian education system, which failed to properly educate me on the reality of evolution. That neglect endangered me because without that scientific foundation, I was easily led astray by religious fundamentalists. That's an over-simplification, of course, as there were other cultural and social factors involved in making me susceptible to a religious world-view. However, I am convinced that had I been properly taught accurate information about evolution and related scientific realities such as geography and the age of the earth, starting in elementary school, I would have been better able as a teenager to fend off the ravenous religious wolves who encircled me.  In my previous post on this blog I provide a few more details about that experience and how I was recruited into an evangelical, apocalyptic cult when I was 16. I plan to elaborate more on that in the book I'm working on.  see:  Who is the Real Anti-Christian: the Atheist or the Fundamentalist Christian?

Myers article on creationism in the classroom also reminded me of another article by him in which he retells the parable of the blind men and the elephant. That in turn reminded me of a song on the same subject by Natalie Merchant in her most recent album, Leave Your Sleep.  I've copied below both Merchant's lyrics [update: they lyrics are verbatim from the poem by John Godfry Saxe] and Myers article, which in case you were wondering, constitutes the duet in my blog title.


Here's a link to Natalie's official site where you can listen to all the songs on that album, including "The Blind Men and the Elephant" at: http://www.nataliemerchant.com/l/leave-your-sleep/the-blind-men-and-the-elephant

Lyrics at:
 http://www.nataliemerchant.com/r/leave-your-sleep/lyrics/the-blind-men-and-the-elephant

The Blind Men and the Elephant

John Godfry Saxe (1816 – 1887)


It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
“'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: ”E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

Moral

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

***************************


Elephants' Wings

by PZ Myers at: http://hermiene.net/essays-trans/elephants_wings.html

Once upon a time, four blind men were walking in the forest, and they bumped into an elephant.

Moe was in front, and found himself holding the trunk. "It has a tentacle," he said. "I think we have found a giant squid!"

Larry bumped into the side of the elephant. "It's a wall," he said, "A big, bristly wall."

Curly, at the back, touched the tail. "It's nothing to worry about, nothing but a piece of rope dangling in the trail."

Eagletosh saw the interruption as an opportunity to sit in the shade beneath a tree and relax. "It is my considered opinion," he said, "that whatever it is has feathers. Beautiful iridescent feathers of many hues."

The first three, being of a scientifical bent, quickly collaborated and changed places, and confirmed each other's observations; they agreed that each had been correct in the results of their investigations, except that there wasn't a hint of feathers anywhere about, but clearly their interpretations required correction and more data. So they explored further, reporting to each other what they were finding, in order to establish a more complete picture of the obstacle in the path.

"Tracing the tentacle back, I find that it is attached to a large head with eyes, fan-shaped ears, and a mouth bearing tusks. It is not a squid, alas, but seems to be a large mammal of some sort," said Moe.

"Quite right, Moe — I have found four thick limbs. Definitely a large tetrapod," said Larry.

Curly seems distressed. "It's a bit complicated and delicate back here, guys, but I have probed an interesting orifice. Since this is a children's story, I will defer on reporting the details."

Eagletosh yawns and stretches in the shade of a tree. "It has wings, large wings, that it may ascend into the heavens and inspire humanity. There could be no purpose to such an animal without an ability to loft a metaphor and give us something to which we might aspire."

The other three ignore the idling philosopher, because exciting things are happening with their elephant!

"I can feel its trunk grasping the vegetation, uprooting it, and stuffing it into its mouth! It's prehensile! Amazing!", said Moe.

Larry presses his ear against the animal's flank. "I can hear rumbling noises as its digestive system processes the food! It's very loud and large."

There is a squishy plop from the back end. "Oh, no," says Curly, "I can smell that, and I think I should go take a bath."

"You are all completely missing the beauty of its unfurled wings," sneers Eagletosh, "While you tinker with pedestrian trivialities and muck about in earthy debasement, I contemplate the transcendant qualities of this noble creature. 'Tis an angel made manifest, a symbol of the deeper meaning of life."

"No wings, knucklehead, and no feathers, either," says Moe.

"Philistine," says Eagletosh. "Perhaps they are invisible, or tucked inside clever hidden pockets on the flank of the elephant, or better yet, I suspect they are quantum. You can't prove they aren't quantum."

The investigations continue, in meticulous detail by the three, and in ever broader strokes of metaphorical speculation by the one. Many years later, they have accomplished much.

Moe has studied the elephant and its behavior for years, figuring out how to communicate with it and other members of the herd, working out their diet, their diseases and health, and how to get them to work alongside people. He has profited, using elephants as heavy labor in construction work, and he has also used them, unfortunately, in war. He has not figured out how to use them as an air force, however…but he is a master of elephant biology and industry.

Larry studied the elephant, but has also used his knowledge of the animal to study the other beasts in the region: giraffes and hippos and lions and even people. He is an expert in comparative anatomy and physiology, and also has come up with an interesting theory to explain the similarities and differences between these animals. He is a famous scholar of the living world.

Curly's experiences lead him to explore the environment of the elephant, from the dung beetles that scurry after them to the leafy branches they strip from the trees. He learns how the elephant is dependent on its surroundings, and how its actions change the forest and the plains. He becomes an ecologist and conservationist, and works to protect the herds and the other elements of the biome.

Eagletosh writes books. Very influential books. Soon, many of the people who have never encountered an elephant are convinced that they all have wings. Those who have seen photos are at least persuaded that elephants have quantum wings, which just happened to be vibrating invisibly when the picture was snapped. He convinces many people that the true virtue of the elephant lies in its splendid wings — to the point that anyone who disagrees and claims that they are only terrestrial animals is betraying the beauty of the elephant.

Exasperated, Larry takes a break from writing technical treatises about mammalian anatomy, and writes a book for the lay public, The Elephant Has No Wings. While quite popular, the Eagletoshians are outraged. How dare he denigrate the volant proboscidian? Does he think it a mere mechanical mammal, mired in mud, never soaring among the stars? Has he no appreciation for the scholarship of the experts in elephant wings? Doesn't he realize that he can't possibly disprove the existence of wings on elephants, especially when they can be tucked so neatly into the quantum? (The question of how the original prophets of wingedness came by their information never seems to come up, or is never considered very deeply.) It was offensive to cripple the poor elephants, rendering them earthbound.

When that book was quickly followed by Moe's The Elephant Walks and Curly's Land of the Elephant, the elephant wing scholars were in a panic — they were being attacked by experts in elephants, who seemed to know far more about elephants than they did! Fortunately, the scientists knew little about elephant's wings — surprising, that — and the public was steeped in favorable certainty that elephants, far away, were flapping gallantly through the sky. They also had the benefit of vast sums of money. Wealth was rarely associated with competence in matters elephantine, and tycoons were pouring cash into efforts to reconcile the virtuous wingedness of elephants with the uncomfortable reality of anatomy. Even a few scientists who ought to know better were swayed over to the side of the winged; to their credit, it was rarely because of profit, but more because they were sentimentally attached to the idea of wings. They couldn't deny the evidence, however, and were usually observed to squirm as they invoked the mystic power of the quantum, or of fleeting, invisible wings that only appeared when no one was looking.

And there the battle stands, an ongoing argument between the blind who struggle to explore the world as it is around them, and the blind who prefer to conjure phantoms in the spaces within their skulls. I have to disappoint you, because I have no ending and no resolution, only a question.

Where do you find meaning and joy and richness and beauty, O Reader? In elephants, or elephants' wings?

October 25, 2010

Quantum intentions and prayers to deities: two sides of the same supernatural coin

Chain The Dogma    July 19, 2010


Quantum intentions and prayers to deities: two sides of the same supernatural coin


by Perry Bulwer


Following my previous post on the BP environmental catastrophe and DreamHealer, the quantum quack who thinks that the collective, focused intentions of his followers will plug the hole and stop the oil gusher, I became aware of other supernatural wishful thinkers who similarly think that prayers, visualizations, intentions, thoughts, energy, light, love, etc., are what's needed to stop the oil. Here is a sample of some of the silliness I came across during the month of June.

On June 6 DreamHealer sent out another email in a series imploring his followers to focus their intentions on the gulf:

Let's optimize an extremely difficult situation in the Gulf. Change emotions of blame, fear and anger into healing intentions of light and love toward the recovery of our beautiful planet.

Visualize all of the healing energy in the Universe being pulled into the Gulf of Mexico. Saturate the waters with the healing energy of light and life.

Visualize your healing intentions rippling outward in all directions. Send streams of laser light to clean the water for sea-life to flourish again.

Remember the power of your own healing thoughts, as focused intention activates your thoughts. Assist in closing and healing Mother Earth's wound. Create a critical mass as we all send our healing intentions.

It didn't take long for Deepak Chopra to add his quantum nonsense to the mix. Thanks to PZ Meyers, the mind behind Pharyngula, who received an email from Evolutionary Leaders, a Chopra cult foundation, we get a glimpse at not only how these people think (or don't think) but also at how the words "intention" and "prayer" have become interchangeable to supernaturalists. Here's their email, without PZ's commentary, which you can read on his site at that link above:

Are you tired of sitting around while our environment is being destroyed?

Do you feel helpless, angry or powerless to make a difference as you watch millions of gallons of oil pouring into the Gulf every day with no end in sight and thousands losing their lives and their livelihoods?

Join The Gulf Call to Sacred Action!

The Evolutionary Leaders: In Service to Conscious Evolution have joined together to be a loud and important voice for all who feel powerless.

The People Need You ~ The Gulf Needs You

We begin by setting our collective intention. Join Deepak Chopra to set our powerful vision and participate in a worldwide Intention Experiment with renowned author and scientist Lynne McTaggart. Explore how our collective intention, our voice and our commitment can impact the cleanup of the oil spill. And then we will be graced by Jean Houston who will share with us why this time matters and why we matter.

Our collective prayers and thoughts have the power to cause a profound shift on the planet. Pray with some of the most powerful spiritual thought leaders -- Reverend Michael Bernard Beckwith, Joan Borysenko, James O'Dea and more. Together we discover that we have the power to change the world.

Open up and connect to the deeper heart of our planet where we hear our individual and collective call to action. Together with sacred activists Barbara Marx Hubbard, Gregg Braden, and Andrew Harvey, we will take back our power and move into powerful action that will forever change our lives and the lives of generations to come.

It is all just meaningless nonsense. In case you've forgotten, here is some of the craziness Chopra peddles:

Here is some of what Chopra, a former endocrinologist in Boston hospitals, believes and teaches.

That a person is a field of vibrating energy, information and intelligence connected to the entire cosmos.

That this view is substantiated by Ayruvedic medicine of ancient India as well as theories of quantum physics.

That all organs of the body are built up from a specific sequence of vibrations, and that when organs are sick they are vibrating improperly.

That certain herbs and aromas, when applied, can help restore proper vibrations to malfunctioning liver, heart, stomach, etc.

That certain gems and crystals can rejuvenate human skin.

That good thoughts can heal the body and reverse the aging process.

That people can levitate and that he, while sitting and meditating, has flown a distance of four feet.

That one can know God at seven different levels corresponding to physical and psychological reactions in the brain, and that miracles, including visits by angels and reincarnated relatives, occur when a person leaves the material level of existence and intersects a "transitional" level called the "quantum domain."

Chopra and DreamHealer ought to get along great, so I find it a bit curious that neither mentions the other since they both claim to be conducting scientific experiments on the power of intention, with DreamHealer going as far as claiming, on the basis of one flawed experiment, that "our intentions can change the physiology of others". Maybe DreamHealer wants to emulate Chopra's successful cult on his own terms.

Not to be out done by quantum kooks, or mere "mortals" who are actually attempting real-world solutions to the disaster, Christian politicians just had to get their two cents worth of supernaturalism into the act, blurring the already fuzzy line between church and state. On June 20, CNN reported that Louisiana lawmakers propose prayer to stop oil disaster:

While cleanup crews and technical teams continue efforts to stop crude gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana lawmakers are proposing a different approach: prayer.

State senators designated Sunday as a day for citizens to ask for God's help dealing with the oil disaster.

"Thus far efforts made by mortals to try to solve the crisis have been to no avail," state Sen. Robert Adley said in a statement released after last week's unanimous vote for the day of prayer. "It is clearly time for a miracle for us."

The resolution names Sunday as a statewide day of prayer in Louisiana and calls on people of all religions throughout the Gulf Coast "to pray for an end to this environmental emergency, sparing us all from the destruction of both culture and livelihood."

And on June 27, the New York Times reported:

The wall between church and state came a-tumbling down on Sunday, as elected leaders from the five states on the Gulf of Mexico issued proclamations declaring it to be a day of prayer. Although days of prayer are not uncommon here — Governor Riley declared one asking for rain to relieve a drought a few years ago — these proclamations conveyed the sense that at this late date, salvation from the spill all but requires divine intervention.

In the two months since the deadly Deepwater Horizon explosion began a ceaseless leak of oil into the gulf, damaging the ecosystem and disrupting the economy, the efforts by mortals to stem the flow have failed. Robots and golf balls and even the massive capping dome all seem small in retrospect.

So, then, a supplementary method was attempted: coordinated prayer.

In Texas, Gov. Rick Perry encouraged Texans to ask God “for his merciful intervention and healing in this time of crisis.” In Mississippi, Gov. Haley Barbour declared that prayer “allows us an opportunity to reflect and to seek guidance, strength, comfort and inspiration from Almighty God.” In Louisiana, Gov. Bobby Jindal invoked the word “whereas” a dozen times — as well as the state bird, the brown pelican — but made no direct mention of God. In Florida, Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp asked people to pray that God “would guide and direct our civil leaders and provide them with wisdom and divinely inspired solutions.”

As I mentioned, the words "intention" and "prayer" have become interchangeable. The "coordinated prayer" referred to in that NYT article, is what people who believe in prayers do. They want as many people as possible to pray for the same thing, and even at the same time, if possible, and to continue praying. I guess their god is hard of hearing. But that is really no different than what those who believe in intentions do. They also want as many people as possible focusing their coordinated intentions. Collective prayers, collective intentions. Two sides of the same coin.

Another good example of that blurring of the distinction between intentions and prayers comes courtesy of Masaru Emoto, the Japanese 'scientist' who appeared in the film What The Bleep Do We Know?, promoting his belief in the supernatural properties of water. The Colorado newspaper, Post Independent, published a letter to the editor which included an email message from Emoto:

Yesterday we received a letter from Dr. Masaru Emoto, who many of you will recognize as the scientist from Japan who has done research and publications about the characteristics of water. Among other things, his research reveals that water physically responds to emotions.

Right now, most of us have the predominantly angry emotion when we consider what is happening in the Gulf. And while certainly we are justified in that emotion, we may be of greater assistance to our planet and its life forms, if we sincerely, powerfully and humbly pray the prayer that Dr. Emoto himself has proposed.

“I send the energy of love and gratitude to the water and all the living creatures in the Gulf of Mexico and its surroundings. To the whales, dolphins, pelicans, fish, shellfish, plankton, coral, algae, and all living creatures . . . I am sorry. Please forgive us. Thank you. I love you. “

We are passing this request to people who we believe might be willing to participate in this prayer, to set an intention of love and healing that is so large, so overwhelming that we can perform a miracle in the Gulf of Mexico.

We are not powerless. We are powerful. Our united energy, speaking this prayer daily ... multiple times daily ... can literally shift the balance of destruction that is happening. We don't have to know how, we just have to recognize that the power of love is greater than any power active in the Universe today.

Please join us in often repeating this healing prayer of Dr. Emoto's. And feel free to copy and send it around the planet. Let's take charge, and do our own clean up!

There is one way in which the quantum believers and the religious believers differ regarding the oil spill. The quantum believers do not appear to assign supernatural causes to the oil spill, at least not that I could find. Religious believers, on the other hand, are quick to claim that the oil spill is predicted in the book of Revelation, and that God, for various reasons, caused the oil spill as a punishment. For example, here's what the Christian conspiracy website, The World's Prophecy, has to say about it:

Is the oil spill in the bible? Yes it is:

Before you continue reading the verse below where it predicts the oil spill, keep in mind that the Book of Revelations are full of symbolism. One example would be the great whore “Babylon” is definitely not talking about an actual “whore” or “prostitute”. The beast in Revelation 13 is not exactly talking about an actual monster, but a representation of a man with the “number” 666. So when the oil spill in the verse below talks about an angel pouring it out, do not just swallow it in a dumb way interpreting the angel as BP. As you already know, it is not only BP that has the oil spill problem, but also Chevron. The “angel” is only used as symbolism.

Revelation 16:3

The second angel poured out his bowl into the sea, and it became blood like that of a dead man; and every living thing in the sea died.

From Yahoo! Answers:

What color is the blood of a died man?
I’m doing a little research and I want to know what the color the blood of a died man has. sense it rots would it be black?

The colour of oxygenated blood is shiny red but after the death of a person oxygen supply will be stopped resulting de oxygenation of blood causing the colour changed to darker red and later on it will turn into brown and then black because of the absence of oxygen and due to decay.

So, there it is in black and white, or I should say, black and brown. Oil looks like a dead man's blood, so the Bible predicted the gulf oil spill. And not just the book of Revelation, but the book of Genesis too! The wing-nuts at World Net Daily are circulating a video that claims the gulf oil spill is a fulfillment of a prophecy in Genesis related to Israel:

Is there a spiritual, biblical connection to the BP oil catastrophe?

A new video on YouTube is suggesting a possible link to the disaster due to America's recent treatment of Israel, and at least one well-known Bible analyst, Hal Lindsey, thinks there's a valid correlation.

The video was produced and posted today by Carl Gallups of the Hickory Hammock Baptist Church in Milton, Fla.

"April the 19th, Israel celebrates its independence in 2010," Gallups says in narration on the video. "On April the 19th, Fox News reports that the U.S. will no longer automatically support Israel in the United Nations. The next day, on April the 20th, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explodes. Coincidence? Or the hand and judgment of God?"

The minister cites an ancient promise God made to Abraham, the patriarch of the 12 tribes of Israel, one tribe of which is Judah, from which the Jews derive their name.

In the Book of Genesis, God told him, "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse ... ."

...

Referring to Israel as a "prophetic signpost," Gallups said, "It seems to me we're turning our back on Israel, and that's a very dangerous biblical or spiritual place to be."

Gallups is not alone with the sentiment America could be under a curse from God.

"I believe this is evidence that when you turn your back on Israel, especially when you've been a supporter, you're gonna see judgments come from God," said Hal Lindsey, author of "The Late Great Planet Earth."

So, some Christians believe that coordinated prayers are required to implore God to intervene and stop the oil, while other Christians believe the Bible predicted the oil spill, which obviously means the oil spill is God's will, intended as punishment for the wicked people he created. Still other Christians believe God caused the oil spill specifically to punish one wicked nation. What's a God supposed to do?


**************************************************************

The Montreal Gazette  -  October 15, 2010

Desperate people blinded by online pseudo-science

By PEGGY CURRAN, The Gazette


MONTREAL - Joe Schwarcz is sick to death of coffee enemas, macrobiotic diets, Laetrile tablets, raw juices, megavitamins, salt-water cures and urine infusions.

The director of McGill University's Office of Science and Society, Schwarcz has had it up to the eyeballs with distance healers who claim they can treat what ails you by studying a photograph or looking at the whites of your eyes.

"When you are desperate, you will clutch at anything," Schwarcz says of cancer patients who find themselves "at the mercy of quacks and charlatans."

"Desperate people will do anything. So they wind up not just desperate but destitute as well, because these 'cures' don't come cheaply."

Schwarcz, known simply as "Dr. Joe" to the many Montrealers who read his Gazette column and follow his radio show on CJAD, says there's been an explosion in pseudo-science in recent years, as the snake oil salesmen of old give way to the mountebanks of cyberspace.

"There is such a proliferation of nonsense, aided and abetted by the Internet. There is so much quackery out there."

Schwarcz has been asked to be host of the Lorne Trottier Public Science Symposium at McGill, where this year's theme is Confronting Pseudo-science: A Call to Action -a fitting choice for someone who sees his mandate as "making sense out of nonsense."

The two-day forum, which is open to the public, takes place Monday and Tuesday at the Centre Mont Royal. Monday's panellists will be Ben Goldacre, the author of Bad Science and a columnist for the British newspaper the Guardian; Michael Shermer, the editor of Skeptic magazine; and David Gorski, a surgical oncologist in Detroit who has spent the last decade trying to decipher and dispense information about online remedies.

Closing things off Tuesday will be James Randi, also known as The Amazing Randi, a magician and escape artist who now devotes his time to unmasking faith healers and demystifying so-called paranormal events.

Schwarcz will offer a preview today at the Redpath Museum, where he'll discuss the growth of quackery as part of the Freaky Friday lecture series.

As someone who spends a lot of time monitoring cases of suspect science, Schwarcz is troubled by the deluge of email proclaiming that doctors at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore have found a cure for cancer (they haven't) or the influence of New Age gurus like Deepak Chopra and Adam Dreamhealer, who are "beguiling people" while "laughing all the way to the bank," Schwarcz says.

Increasingly, he believes it is important for consumers to do a little critical thinking - to read the fine print, become scientifically savvy and show a little healthy skepticism when faced with promises of miracle cures and dietary supplements that contain nothing more than water and sea salt.

Schwarcz has no time for purveyors of alternative medicines who try to brand scientists as hidebound.

"When scientists start raising eyebrows at such mindless twaddle, the pseudo-science champions unleash their usual attacks, claiming that scientists are closed-minded and can only think in terms of limited paradigms. Nonsense," Schwarcz says.

"Science will embrace new ideas when there is sufficient evidence. But if evidence shows that an idea is not tenable, it should be tossed onto the pseudo-scientific junk heap."

This article was found at:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/health/Blinded+online+pseudo+science/3674891/story.html


RELATED ARTICLES ON THIS BLOG:


Quakes, Quacks and Kidnappers: Baptists, Scientologists, DreamHealer and Bad Consequences of Good Intentions


Wishful Thinking Won't Stop The Oil Gusher But Nuking It Would