Gorilla baptism

In Christianity, baptism is the act of immersion in water which cleanses and purifies the soul and admits one as a full member of the church. Baptism entitles one to all of the privileges and responsibilities of a full member of the church.

Why then were 20 “baby gorillas” baptized? These 20 little gorillas join 65 others who have been baptized and named in Rwanda in the past four years. I am sure that the church is thrilled to have Apes in it’s ranks. Who came up with an idea like this in the first place?

I tried to find a response to this by the Christian church, but I can find nothing. All I have to formulate my response is the atheists view of how why it makes no sense to baptize an ape. Baptism is intricately tied up with the idea of original sin and is a ritual which supposedly purifies the soul.

The argument that baptizing the gorilla statues raises the awareness of this endangered species’ plight and is therefore a positive means of conservation is utterly absurd. What are we going to do next? Baptize a few Tumbling Creek Cavesnails? Thats right, cavesnails are endangered too, maybe we can save a few by bringing them into the church!

It would have been far more productive for the Rwandan government to donate their budget for this farce to the IUCN instead. This organization actually makes a difference by developing conservation science, managing field projects all over the world, and bringing together players from different domains and sectors to develop and implement policy, laws and best practice.

And what makes the Rwandan government think these gorillas want to be Christians anyway?

Interesting Friday news

I’m trying to keep my gray matter fit and have found the following interesting articles on the interwebs this afternoon;

• The Phoenix Mars Lander has found possible evidence of ice on Mars. I think we should wait for evidence before declaring that it is water ice though, as this Associated Press journalist did “they must have been frozen water“.
• The sixth severed foot which washed ashore in Canada this week has been found to be a hoax. All hoaxes are reprehensible, disrespectful wastes of time.

Enjoy

This is your last chance

I have a colleague who is a Protestant and she has made a bit of a name for herself within our office for cornering people and giving them all the glorious details about the “Rapture”. Today it was my turn. I was sitting quietly at my desk when she came downstairs for a cup of coffee. It was early morning and the office was still quiet and she decided that it was high time that she saved my damned soul.

According to Ms. Protestant when the rapture comes there will be murder and rape (we live in South Africa so I think it’s already well under way). Well, that sounds like pretty standard end-of-the-world stuff to me, I was expecting something more impressive like Fire and Brimstone.

“uh-huh” was pretty much my only answer, I was hoping she would just go away.

Apparently when the four horsemen of the apocalypse come, we will all have skin growing on our teeth. Ok, now we are starting to sound like the director is getting serious. Then came the line I will never forget;

“I know this all sounds very scientific” she says.

That’s right, SCIENTIFIC!

I think the tea coming out of my nose must have expressed my thoughts on the matter and had I not been gagging I would have told her exactly why the “Rapture” is not scientific.

When I got home tonight and started reading through the news sites I like to frequent I found a second reference to the “Rapture”. A coincidence or a sign from Jesus telling me to repent and save my heathen soul?

Probably just a coincidence.

What I found tonight is this website allowing the saved to e-mail (pronounced “spam”) their “lost” friends and family in the event of the “Rapture”. That’s right, just when you finish waving your fond goodbyes to the millions of Christians whose bodies are defying the LAW OF GRAVITY by floating into the sky to meet Jesus, your inbox will be filled with their one last hope to save your damned soul from the flames.

I just have one question for Ms. Protestant;

When the Rapture comes, can I have your car?

What is a “skeptic”?

I would like to point you to this blog post by Steven Novella of the New England Skeptical Society and The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe.

The great team at the skeptic’s guide are my inspiration and I can only hope that one day I too will be as butt-kickingly skeptical as they are.

Well, I’d like to agree…

Thanks to DailyWTF for this article.

This is obviously a claim which is going to cause a lot of controversy. I do not think that there is a single religious person on the planet who will not take offense at a statement like this.

In 2003 Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett proposed renaming atheists and skeptics “brights”. This caused a huge uproar and a great deal of public outcry. The religious section of society took offense at what they perceived to be discrimination. The proponents of the “brights” name change claimed that the name implied a questioning attitude towards life and was not intended to label skeptics and atheists as smarter then believers. However this explanation never got off the ground, many of the potential “brights” were also unhappy with the concept and it was sidelined. There is a group of people who refer to themselves as “brights”, but they are in the minority. Most atheists simply do not believe that they are smarter than believers simply because they do not have religious convictions.

I will ask the simplest questions about Lynn’s findings;

1. Who wrote it? Richard Lynn seems to have made a career out of controversy. One of his proposals is that there are racial and gender differences in IQ and he proposes that “incompetent” cultures are phased out. For more on Lynn’s career please read this Wikipedia article.

2. Where is it published? The article I was forwarded is published on the Times Higher Education website, which provides information to University Professionals. The research will be published in the journal Intelligence.

3. Who is the intended audience? From number 2 above it is obvious that this work is aimed at the intellectual elite. Good old boys who can give themselves a pat on the back after having their greatness re-affirmed.

I think it extremely irresponsible for Lynn to stereotype people in such a negative way. I would like to agree that I am an atheist because I am more intelligent than believers, but I simply cannot feel comfortable discriminating against people in such a blatant way.

Thank you Lynn, but No thank you!