Hipsters repaint bike lanes in brush off to Hasids - Brooklyn, NY

flick 'em? Where's that tin of gloss? (8)
And my lewd cat (3,4)
Margarine got the Shogun (6)
There? At it again, de nada (11)

Cryptified.

Scripture?

Oh God its 'the mosque' thread all over again ...:)

"Detroit has, historically, been one of the more violent cities in the U.S.,"

Just ask the ultimate circumciser, Rabbi Chop =>

Sorry the phrase 'capital of religiosity' was a little throw away, I was making the point that 'even in the very religious state of Texas we find . . . .'

Although saying that . . Texas is amongst the states with the most conservative evangelical Protestants - all the bible belt states have a very high religious observance rate - I think Carolina or Mississippi might have the very highest rates.

It is a mix of politics and religion - one feeding the other in a vicious circle of hypocrisy. Someone is buying all that porn.

I also singled Texas out as it's the battleground for the creationist movement.

Actually Kansas and Nebraska are far bigger battlegrounds

Cheers I will have a look at the link and dig out my list (most dangerous cities) to check sources.

Also, check the measure. Aggregate vs. certain type of crime.

It is a mix of politics and religion - one feeding the other in a vicious circle of hypocrisy. Someone is buying all that porn.

Agreed, in fact I would go as far as to say that the overwhelming majority of problems with religion manifest themselves when religion steps outside it's remit (insane epistemology, incantations and private consolation :P ) and becomes 'political' (or more simply put - takes on a role of governance in other people affairs - even those who do not subscribe to the bizarre knowledge claims of that religion).

Actually Kansas and Nebraska are far bigger battlegrounds

The reason Texas is important is that it has a massive influence on what makes it into the school curriculum, one of the reasons it is being targeted - it's 24 million population is only bettered by California (somewhere where I think creationism would have a poorer chance of being inserted into the education system). Once the publishers of school books have started the presses rolling for what Texas has ruled needed to be included it becomes a financial disincentive to modify those book for the rest of the US.

Also, check the measure. Aggregate vs. certain type of crime.

I'll do better than that I have emailed the author to check his sources and hopefully look at them directly.

More cool news from the brilliant world of religion:

Sunday 13 December 2009

Uganda is likely to pass a law within months that will make homosexuality a capital offence, punishable by death, joining 37 other countries in the continent where American evangelical Christian groups are increasingly spreading bigotry.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/13/death-penalty-uganda-homosexuals

religion rocks!
http://www.religionrocks.me.uk/

Assuming these people aren't cycling naked, couldn't they just ... I dunno, look away?

But how are they meant to know they have to look away without having looked at them?

Little disappointed that this thread has only got to six pages in as many days, with religion and AGW to argue about.

I've prayed to Richard Dawkins and the IPCC, so hopefully they'll intervene and talk to Ramon through his television.

'capital of religiosity'

repped for saying religiosity

More cool news from the brilliant world of religion:

Sunday 13 December 2009

Uganda is likely to pass a law within months that will make homosexuality a capital offence, punishable by death, joining 37 other countries in the continent where American evangelical Christian groups are increasingly spreading bigotry.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/13/death-penalty-uganda-homosexuals

Uganda's got a very very strange relationship towards homosexuality. I'll go and scan some copies of the red top newspapers (red pepper being the most comedic / salacious). There's that clear undertow of repressed homosexuality in the media which echoes the Sun's "ALL PAEDOS MUST DIE / ALMOST LEGAL PAGE THREE" approach. *'Vicar uses boys bottom like a woodpecker' *etc. The more 'out' clubs were the hangouts for civil servants, glitterati and the less Nigerian Celebrity types.

But it's not HIV transmission / lifestyle that brings up the issue. Museveni is simply using it as a way of appeasing some more religious factions and tribes to ensure they don't complain about his attempt to circumvent statute about his re-election.

One of my fellow workers today confessed that she believes the Jews "had it (holocaust) coming" because they killer her God. I was a tad shocked.

fixed.
Sabbath is a Saturday - Sunday Friday to Sundown Saturday. They (catholics I think) moved the week one day so that the 7th day was Sunday to please the pagans or something like that.

It happens to be in the gospels. Apparently going to check on the grave of the original hipster (i.e. Jesus, not the one playing bowling though) during the sabbath was not kosher, so our hipster friend had to wait for Sunday to emerge from the crypt and expose himself to the faithful. Hence christians celebrate on a Sunday to remember the 'great escape from the netherworld'.

One of my fellow workers today confessed that she believes the Jews "had it (holocaust) coming" because they killer her God. I was a tad shocked.

I hope you beat her to death with a burning cross. Or sent her to the Hard Rock Cafe in Kampala, I'm not sure which fate is worse.

Hi Dammit, in case you're still reading, here is a list of common "climate skeptic" arguments and rebuttals. Worth running your doubts through there before coming to any definitive conclusions.

More generally, my acceptance of AGW has come by looking at who is arguing on either side of the debate: scientists working in the relevant field - or - established contrarians (mostly IT consultants who are also libertarians, for some reason. I have no explanation for this purely anecdotal observation) and former oil industry hacks, none of whom have never published anything related to climate science. Not forgetting talking heads in the media who make a virtue of their ignorance.

Then I look at this pattern and think *what does this remind me of? *I compare it to the creationism "debate", which is fuelled by a media keen to show "balance" by presenting "both sides of an argument" and enjoy giving press to the underdog. In each case, one side involves scientists who work hard to research a subject, and another side who wait for the scientists to publish something before making superficial criticisms, without offering any properly thought through alternative.

Or I think about whether the cigarettes I smoke really cause lung cancer, and wonder what the groups and individuals that used to "astroturf" for Big Tobacco are doing today (lobbying on behalf of the oil industry, in prominent positions in the "climate skeptic" movement, in case you were wondering).

Finally, on a related note, I try a thought experiment. If this is a huge, global conspiracy, who benefits? In every case where we can plausibly suspect a conspiracy, we see vested interests with some form of political power distorting the scientific or judicial record.

Who has an interest in seeing AGW proven? Well, everybody, if your definition of "everybody" is a few publically-funded scientists and people working in the renewables and nuclear industries (who don't seem likely to form a coalition of sufficient strength to run a global conspiracy, given their historical mutual antipathy).

And who has an interest in seeing AGW disproven? Well, nobody, if your definition of "nobody" is just about every person on the planet, in both developed and developing nations, who produce vast amounts of CO2 to sustain their lifestyle (whether comfortable or subsistence) and the companies who provide energy and goods to sustain these lifestyles, and the governments who rule by popular decree over these people and wish to prevent them from openly revolting against a standard of living which, to them, is unacceptably low.

Then I think about that.

Pleasing the last of my arguments has been better argued here and (much, much better) here.

And here's Ben Goldacre, doing my entire post more succinctly and better (with even more links!!)

The simple fact is that fossil fuels are running out. So surely, the sooner we become less dependent the better.

The simple fact is that fossil fuels are running out. So surely, the sooner we become less dependent the better.

A valid point.

Something that climate change denyers habitually and rather stupidly ignore is that every action proposed by climate change campaigners carries a number of other virtuous benefits for society. There is absolutely no justifiable reason to try and dissuade people from taking these actions but they carry on undeterred.

Nothing more stupid than cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Except riding brakless at night in the rain with no lights carrying a child.

I could accept that there was no climate change but surely the vast losses of the planet's lungs (the amazon) must have a huge effect, no?

Or am I being a simpleton?

I could accept that there was no climate change but surely the vast losses of the planet's lungs (the amazon) must have a huge effect, no?

Or am I being a simpleton?

Climate change denyers most common argument is that we are witnessing a natural cycle. I guess our ancestors also must have engaged in unprecendented amounts of land clearance and logging. Odd then that they have few qualms that the obvious end result of such actions is that we got kicked back to the pre-stoneage with absolutely no preservation of cultural history. It kind of clashes with their mantra that we should all carry on as before and all will be well but I'm sure they can hackney some justification for this disparity in their position.

I know it was ages ago, I lose patience with the intellectually challenging threads (I can't stand dissent, I'm like Stalin and most PE teachers in that respect) ... but i just wanted to point out, TSK, that my argument in favour of societies having a day without economic activity was in no way justified on religious grounds ... rather, I was pointing out that a lot of 'good' habits of humanity associated with religion are in fact, like I think Tynan mentioned somewhere more recently, not actually religious, just humanistic, compassionate, communal.

If that happens to have co-opted by Christians, so what? The same goes for Yule tide. I still celebrate it, even though Christians have tried to make it about their religion which I happen find abhorrent.

I think that an enforced day of rest is actually a positive thing. I don't think that for any religious reason, but for a very practical one.

Tynan you say that people should be able to choose their day off, and this is very true, in an ideal world everyone would be able to choose their days off.

By making Sunday (or any other day) an enforced day of rest, for as many people as possible (obviously nurses, firefighters etc can't), you allow people to have the same day off as other people. If it wasn't for this, in a large family you would almost never be able to have a day off together, as rather than having more choice, you have less choice, as companies will force you to work when they want.

I now am lucky to work in an office job, and obviously have the same days off every week, but when I worked in a shop I had to work when the told me, I couldn't be sure of having the same days off as my family/friends.

I have lived in Germany for various short periods of time, and there Sundays really are a day of rest, almost every shop is shut, only bakeries, newsagents, petrol stations, etc. are open, and even then at heavily reduced hours. It does take some getting used to, but once you get used to buying food for more than one day, and going shopping on your other day off, it's actually quite easy to deal with.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/dec/16/bbc-africa-have-your-say?CMP=AFCYAH

On the BBC news website "should homosexuals face execution ?

Premoderated posts included one from Chris, Guildford, posted at 8.59am, which attracted 51 recommendations of support. He wrote: "Totally agree. Ought to be imposed in the UK too, asap. Bring back some respectable family values. Why do we have to suffer 'gay pride' festivals? Would I be allowed to organise a 'straight pride' festival? No, thought as much!! If homosexuality is natural, as we are forced to believe, how can they sustain the species? I suggest all gays are put on a remote island somewhere and left for a generation - after which, theoretically there should be none left!"

And this one . . .

"Bravo to the Ugandans for this wise decision, a bright step in eliminating this menace from your society. We hope other African nations will also follow your bold step."

Appeasing religious factions in search of votes is just great, it nearly always ends in something brilliant.

"I suggest all gays are put on a remote island somewhere and left for a generation - after which, theoretically there should be none left!"

Top marks for logic there, too. People do only survive for one generation.