The source of the noise

A common theme in Skeptophilia is that people in general need to learn some scientific terminology.

Not only is science cool, and thus learning about it a worthy goal in and of itself; but knowing how science works, and some of the field's vocabulary, will keep you from being duped.  As we've seen over and over, the world is full of folks who either through ignorance or outright duplicity misrepresent what scientists are doing -- and without adequate mental firepower, you're gonna fall for their nonsense every time.

As an example, this weekend, a story started popping up all over that claimed that we'd finally received a good candidate for an alien signal from an extrasolar planet.  This immediately caught my eye -- it is one of my dearest wishes that we have incontrovertible evidence of alien intelligence before I die.  I'd be perfectly satisfied if it comes in the form of some kind of radio signal, but if an actual alien spacecraft landed in my back yard, that would also be acceptable, at least until they started vaporizing my dogs with laser pistols.

So my reaction was one of cautious enthusiasm.  Cautious, because I suspected that if this had actually happened, it would be all over the news, not just surfacing in the form of links on Twitter and Facebook.  But the stories all made the same claim.  Here's an excerpt from the version that appeared on UFO Blogger:

Astronomers have picked up a mystery "noise" which they believe could be coming from an Earth-like planet in the outer space [sic]. After analyzing the strange signals emitting from the object, scientiscientistssts [sic] are certain that a habitable planet exists some 22 light years away, a report said. 

In 2010, scientists had dismissed the mystery noise or signals as stellar bursts but after the latest research it was clear that an Earth-like planet, or Gliese 581d, has conditions which could support life, and is likely to be a rocky world, twice the size of Earth.

Okay, given the typos and grammar, it's not exactly the most credible of reports.  But all of the links I saw agreed; an extrasolar planet called Gliese 581d, 22 light years from Earth, had been reported as the source of a strange, unexplained noise.  The planet was bigger than Earth, but in the "Goldilocks Zone" -- the "just right" region around its star where water would be in liquid form, and therefore a place where life something like what we have here could evolve.

So immediately I started picturing Star Trek-style aliens, complete with fake rubber alien noses and bad accents.  Then I thought of the amazing final scene in Star Trek: First Contact, which is clearly the best movie the franchise ever produced, wherein Zefram Cochrane shakes hands with a Vulcan for the first time.  And before you know it, I had myself worked up into a lather about the possibilities.

Then I thought, "Calm down, dude.  Verify your sources."  So I typed "noise Gliese 581d" into a Google search to see if I could find out where this information had come from.  Clearly it was all similar enough that it had some kind of common origin, and it wasn't wacky enough to have come from The Weekly World News.  And after five minutes' search, I found the press release in Phys.org that had caused the stir -- the origin of the "noise."

And I put "noise" in quotation marks for a good reason, as you'll see.  The press release was a blurb summarizing a paper in Science by Anglada-Escudé and Tuomi called "Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581."  Here's the relevant passage:

A report published in Science has dismissed claims made last year that the first super-Earth planet discovered in the habitable zone of a distant star was 'stellar activity masquerading as planets.' The researchers are confident the planet named GJ 581d, identified in 2009 orbiting the star Gliese 581, does exist, and that last year's claim was triggered by inadequate analysis of the data.

The planet candidate was spotted using a spectrometer which measures the 'wobble', small changes in the wavelength of light emitted by a star, caused as a planet orbits it. In 2014 researchers revisiting the data said that the 'planet' was actually just noise in the data caused by starspots. The possible existence of the planet was widely dismissed without further questioning. 

But now researchers from Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) and University of Hertfordshire have questioned the methods used to challenge the planet's existence. The statistical technique used in the 2014 research to account for stellar activity is simply inadequate for identifying small planets like GJ 581d.

Note the use of the word "noise" twice.  This, apparently, is the source of the story of an alien noise coming from Gliese 581d.

Scientists use the word "noise" differently from the rest of us.  To a scientist, "noise" is scatter in the data, background junk, that might obscure something real and measurable (the "signal").  If you have enough noise, the signal becomes impossible to detect, so reducing the noise in a data set is critical.  A high "signal-to-noise ratio" is what you're after; lots of signal, little noise.  So when the astrophysicists re-analyzed the data from 2009 that had been rejected last year as supporting an Earth-like extrasolar planet around Gliese 581, they found a way of reducing the noise in the data, and were able to confirm that the planet did, actually, exist.

What they did not find was some kind of unexplained noise coming from Gliese 581d.  The noise was the scatter in the data, not some Klingon sending an insulting message at the Earth such as "Hab SoSlI' Quch" ("Your mother has a smooth forehead").

Not that I'm happy to report this, mind you.  No one would be more thrilled than me if we had received an alien communiqué, even if it contained an insult.  But unfortunately, the stories about mysterious and unexplained alien noises turn out to be unmysterious and completely explainable ignorance of bloggers regarding the use of scientific vocabulary.

So we keep waiting.  Given the number of extrasolar planets the astronomers are discovering, I'm still optimistic that one day, we'll find the aliens.  Or maybe they'll find us.  Either way, it'd be amazing, because, after all, Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam ("Today is a good day to die").

Solution to the Census-Taker puzzle...

A few days ago, I posted a puzzle, and challenged my readers to try to solve it.  I've had several requests for the solution, so here it is.  (If you're still working on it, read no further!  It's always more fun to work something out yourself than to have someone simply tell you the answer.)

Here's the puzzle:

A census taker goes to a man's house, and asks for the ages of the man's three daughters. 

The man says, "The product of their ages is 36." 

The census taker says, "That's not enough information to figure it out." 

The man says, "Okay. The sum of their ages is equal to the house number across the street." 

The census taker looks out of the window at the house across the street, and says, "That's still not enough information to figure it out." 

The man says, "Okay. My oldest daughter has red hair." 

The census taker says thank you and writes down the ages of the three daughters. 

How old are they?

Clue #1 -- that the product of the three girls' ages is equal to 36 -- gives us eight possible combinations of ages:

1, 1, 36
1, 2, 18
1, 3, 12
1, 4, 9
1, 6, 6
2, 3, 6
2, 2, 9
3, 3, 4

So the census taker is quite right that this is insufficient information.

The second clue is that the sum of their ages is equal to the house number across the street.  So let's see what the house number could be:

1 + 1 + 36 = 38
1 + 2 + 18  = 21
1 + 3 + 12 = 16
1 + 4 + 9 = 14
1 + 6 + 6 = 13
2 + 3 + 6 = 11
2 + 2 + 9 = 13
3 + 3 + 4 = 10

The census taker looks at the house number through the window, and still can't figure it out.  This is the key to the puzzle.  

Suppose the house number had been 21.  Then looking at the house number would have been sufficient information for solving it; the children would be 1, 2, and 18.  The only way that looking at the house number would be insufficient is if there were two triplets that added to the same thing -- which is only true for 1, 6, and 6, and 2, 2, and 9, both which add to 13.

The third clue is that the oldest daughter has red hair.  In the first of our remaining possibilities, 1, 6, and 6, there is no oldest daughter -- the eldest children are twins.  Therefore the daughters are 2, 2, and 9.

I hope you enjoyed this puzzle -- I think it's one of the cleverest ones I've ever seen!

Melting ice and picking cherries

I don't usually like to post multiple times on the same topic only a few days apart, lest I be seen as constantly ringing the changes on the same idea, but sometimes circumstances demand that I do.

Last week I wrote a piece about the discovery that climate change denier Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon had financial ties to the petroleum industry and the Koch brothers that he had not disclosed in his academic papers, an omission that clearly contravenes standards of scientific ethics.  Although Dr. Soon's transgressions surprised no one, it was worth noting from the standpoint of doing what the deniers themselves demand, that is, "following the money."

Shortly thereafter we had Senator James Inhofe telling a bunch of his fellow senators that because it was cold outside, climate change wasn't occurring.  He demonstrated his entire knowledge of climatology by holding up a snowball, thus simultaneously proving that your skull can be filled with cobwebs and dead insects, and you can still get elected to public office.

But what brings this topic back to my attention is the release of information from the National Snow and Ice Data Center that shows that the Arctic Sea ice is already thinning rapidly (it's March, folks) and is set to go into a melt this year that climatologists are calling "catastrophic."

Here's how the trend was described by science blogger Robert Marston Fanney:

(T)he March 4 measure finds NSIDC values sliding below previous records for the date set just 8 years ago. 

Ever since Monday, extent values have been falling by an average rate of 10,000 square kilometers each day. A steady progression of warm air fronts through the Barents coupled with well above average temperatures in the Bering and near Alaska region have generated heat pressure along the ice edge and well into the Central Arctic. 

As of today, we have extreme temperature departures in the range of +20 degrees Celsius above average in the Barents northward through to the polar zone. From the Bering through Alaska and into the Southern Beaufort near the Mackenzie Delta departures are in the range of +5 to +20 C above average. 

These two hot spots, together with another warm pool over Greenland have shoved the Arctic, as a whole, into the +2 C range. A rather high departure that is only forecast to worsen in the GFS model summary over the coming days. 

The added warmth, wind, and waves in these ice edge regions drove these extent losses and now, as of Wednesday, values had fallen to 14,383,000 square kilometers. By comparison the previous record low for the day in 2006 was 14,411,000 square kilometers, so the new record is 28,000 square kilometers lower. An area approximately the size of the State of Maryland. 2011 now comes in as third lowest for the day at 14,451,000 square kilometers or 68,000 square kilometers above the 2015 value.

I don't want to quote anything further from Fanney's post, because it deserves to be read in its entirety (please go to the link I posted above to read it), but you get the picture.  Record high temperatures for the Arctic, including many regions above the freezing point of water -- and we haven't even hit the Vernal Equinox yet.

Sea ice coverage in 1980 (bottom) and 2012 (top), as observed by passive microwave sensors on NASA’s Nimbus-7 satellite and by the Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS) from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP). Multi-year ice is shown in bright white, while average sea ice cover is shown in light blue to milky white. The data shows the ice cover for the period of 1 November through 31 January in their respective years. [image courtesy of NASA and the Wikimedia Commons]

The frightening part of all of this is that once you start opening up gaps in the ice sheet, there's a risk of a positive feedback effect.  Open water absorbs heat from insolation far better than snow and ice do.  This will accelerate the warming, opening up further gaps, and so on.  Storing vast amounts of heat in the Arctic Ocean will also affect the weather; the Northeastern deep-freeze this winter, and the repeated snowstorms that slammed the mid-Atlantic states and New England, were caused by a meander in the Polar Jet Stream that brought a blob of Arctic air far south of where it should have been, this time of year.  So Inhofe's snowball is actually consistent with climate models -- not that I expect him to have the intelligence to understand that.

In fact, the whole climate-denier mindset depends on three things; confirmation bias, the power of money, and a sly ability to cherry-pick your facts.  This last one is particularly insidious; that game involves publicizing like hell any specific data points that seem to support your claim, and not mentioning anything else.

You have to wonder how the deniers would explain away the latest from the NSIDC.  My guess is that what we'll hear from them is the following:

*sound of crickets chirping*

It puts me in mind of a quote from linguist Alice Kober:  "Facts are slippery things.  Almost anything can be proved with them, if they are selected correctly."

Sick unto death

New from the Dangerous Nonsense department: there's a new alternative-medicine model out of Germany that claims that viruses and bacteria aren't the cause of infectious diseases.

The website linked above, which was sent to me by a loyal reader of Skeptophilia, had me muttering imprecations under my breath pretty much right from the first line.  The author, Caroline Markolin, starts with a line from the famous 19th century biologist Rudolf Virchow: "If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat -- diseased tissue -- rather than being the cause of diseased tissue."

Virchow was a brilliant pathologist and cellular biologist, but being good at some things doesn't mean you can't be dead wrong about others.  And the article conveniently fails to mention that Virchow not only disbelieved that pathogens caused diseases, he was also an ardent anti-evolutionist who considered Darwin an "ignoramus."

Be that as it may, we then are treated to quite a confection of nonsense.  Colds and flu, we're told, are actually the same thing, and are both caused by stress, not by viruses:

The common cold is linked to a "stink conflict", which can be experienced in real terms but also figuratively as "This situation stinks!" or "I've had it!". During the conflict-active phase the nasal membrane lining widens through ulceration, which is usually not noticed. In the healing phase, however, when the nasal tissue is being repaired, the nasal membrane swells up. A runny nose (healing always occurs in a fluid environment), headaches, tiredness, an elevated temperature or fever are all typical signs of a vagotonic healing process. If the cold symptoms are more severe, then this is commonly called the "flu". The claim, however, that "influenza" viruses are the culprits, has yet to be proven.

Nor has this claim, of course.  The "germ theory of disease" has over a hundred years of hard data supporting it.  This theory (if I can dignify it by that name) has a few vague generalities, a couple of ten-dollar words like "vagotonic," a photograph of a woman blowing her nose, so q.e.d., apparently.

We then find out that the "Spanish" flu of 1918-1919, that killed between 50 and 100 million people (hard numbers are difficult to come by, since the epidemic occurred during World War I, and many deaths in rural or isolated places went unrecorded), was not caused by a virus, it was caused by "stress."  People were under "territorial fear conflicts" and "death fright conflicts," and sickened from those; the acute, and frequently deadly, symptoms occurred when the body was trying to heal itself and the lung tumors caused by "stress" decomposed.

[image courtesy of the Wikimedia Commons]

Oh, and tuberculosis and AIDS aren't caused by pathogens, either.

And don't take antibiotics.  Ever.  Because they cause cancer.  Lung cancer, Markolin tells us, isn't caused by smoking; to hell with the research, which includes a study that demonstrated that 2/3 of the people who smoke will eventually die from conditions associated with tobacco use.  Cancer is caused by "shock," she says.  In a statement that should be an odds-on favorite for the Circular Logic Award of 2015, she states, "We have to bear in mind that every diagnosis shock can potentially cause... cancer," implying that the diagnosis of cancer is what caused the cancer to appear.

But how was the cancer there to diagnose if the diagnosis caused the cancer, you may ask?  To which I respond: stress vagotonic death fight conflicts.  And fear.  Stop asking questions, because you're going to stress me out and give me a cold.

Oh, and viruses, "if they existed," would "assist in the reconstruction of... tissues."  Because evolution, for some reason.  Microbes are our friends; all disease is caused by emotional conflict.

Makes you wonder, doesn't it, how plants get infectious diseases.  Maybe my tomato plants didn't get late blight last year, maybe they were just feeling lonely and unappreciated.

But I'm certain that Markolin would have some sort of bullshit response to this, too.  Probably that humans with all of their ugly unnatural habits are causing the plants to stress out, and so the tomatoes are picking up on our conflicted quantum vibrational states and becoming sick themselves.

Nothing whatsoever to do with pathogens.  Just like colds, flu, AIDS, tuberculosis, and the bubonic plague.

The difficulty here is that there is a germ of truth (rimshot) to what she's saying.  The mind does have a role in health; stress does cause physical manifestations, probably mediated by the hormone cortisol.  But this is a far cry from saying that all disease is caused by stress, and that pathogens have nothing to do with it.

The problem with all of this is not that a crackpot has a website.  Many crackpots do.  It seems to be a favorite hobby of theirs, in fact.  The problem is that naïve people will fall for this, and fail to seek out proper medical care for curable conditions.  So it's homeopathy all over again; a claim that is entirely unsupported by research and evidence, and only believable if you fall for some hand-waving foolishness that the students in my Introductory Biology classes could debunk without even breaking a sweat.  That hasn't stopped the story, however, from being picked up by Spirit Science, so it's popping up all over woo-woo alt-med websites just in the last few days.  (If you go to the Spirit Science article, don't read the comments.  Really.  I mean it.  It will result in your spending the rest of the day curled up in a corner, whimpering softly.  If you ignore this advice, allow me to say simply that, yes, there are people in the world who are this stupid.  And they vote.)

So the caveat emptor principle applies here, of course.  People should be smart enough not to believe appealing nonsense about preventing the flu by becoming less stressed.  But I still feel some sympathy with the folks who are ignorant, or desperate, enough to fall for something like this, and who will suffer the consequences of that ignorance.

And as far as Markolin and her idiotic theory, I'm about done with it.  The whole thing is stressing me out, and we can't have that.

Piecing together the puzzle

I'm curious about where the human drive to solve puzzles comes from.

It's a cool thing, don't get me wrong.  But you have to wonder why it's something so many of us share.  We are driven to know things, even things that don't seem to serve any particular purpose in our lives.  The process is what's compelling; many times, the answer itself is trivial, once you find it.  But still we're pushed onward by an almost physical craving to figure stuff out.

Every few weeks I devote a day in my Critical Thinking classes to solving divergent thinking puzzles.  My rationale is that puzzle-solving is like mental calisthenics; if you want to grow your muscles, you exercise, and if you want to sharpen your intellect, you make it work.  I tell the students at the outset that they're not graded and that I don't care if they don't get to all of them by the end of the period.  You'd think that this would be license for high school students to blow it off, to spend the period chatting, but I find that this activity is one of the ones for which I almost never have to work hard to keep them engaged, despite more than once hearing kids saying things like, "This is making my brain hurt."

Here's a sample -- one of the most elegant puzzles I've ever seen:

A census taker goes to a man's house, and asks for the ages of the man's three daughters. 

The man says, "The product of their ages is 36." 

The census taker says, "That's not enough information to figure it out." 

The man says, "Okay.  The sum of their ages is equal to the house number across the street." 

The census taker looks out of the window at the house across the street, and says, "That's still not enough information to figure it out." 

The man says, "Okay.  My oldest daughter has red hair." 

The census taker says thank you and writes down the ages of the three daughters. 

How old are they?

And yes, I just re-read this, and I didn't leave anything out.  It's solvable from what I've given you.  Give it a try!

This drive to figure things out, even things with no immediate application, reaches its apogee in two fields that are near and dear to me: science and linguistics.  In science, it takes the form of pure research, which, as a scientist friend of mine put it, is "trying to make sense of one cubic centimeter of the universe."  To be sure, a lot of pure research results in applications afterwards, but that's not usually why scientists pursue such knowledge.  The thrill of pursuit, and the satisfaction of knowing, are motivations in and of themselves.

In linguistics, it has to do with deepening our understanding of how humans communicate, with figuring out the connections between different modes of communication, and with deciphering the languages of our ancestors.  It's this last one that spurred me to write this post; just yesterday, I finished reading the phenomenal book The Riddle of the Labyrinth by Margalit Fox, which is the story of how three people set out, one after the other, to crack the code of Linear B.

Linear B was a writing system used in Crete 4,500 years ago, and for which neither the sound values of the characters, nor the language they encoded, was known.  This is the most difficult possible problem for a linguist; in fact, most of the time, such scripts (of which there are a handful of other examples) remain closed doors permanently.  If you neither know what sounds the letters represent, nor what language was spoken by the people who wrote them, how could you ever decipher it?

One of the Linear B tablets found at Knossos by Arthur Evans [image courtesy of the Wikimedia Commons]

I'd known about this amazing triumph of human perseverance and intelligence ever since I read John Chadwick's The Decipherment of Linear B when I was in college.  I was blown away by the difficulty of the task these people undertook, and their doggedness in pursuing the quest to its end.  Chadwick's book is fascinating, but Fox's is a triumph; and you're left with the dual sense of admiration at minds that could pierce such a puzzle, and wonderment at why they felt so driven.

Because once the Linear B scripts were decoded, the tablets and inscriptions turned out to be...

... inventories.  Lists of how many jugs of olive oil and bottles of wine they had, how many arrows and spears, how many horses and cattle and sheep.  No wisdom of the ancients; no gripping sagas of heroes doing heroic things; no new insights into history.

But none of that mattered.  Because of the form that the inscriptions took, Arthur Evans, Alice Kober, and Michael Ventris realized pretty quickly that this was the sort of thing that the Linear B tablets were about.  The scholars who deciphered this mysterious script weren't after a solution because they thought the inscriptions said something profound or worth knowing; they devoted their lives to the puzzle because it was one cubic centimeter of the universe that no one had yet made sense of.

That they succeeded is a testimony to this peculiar drive we have to understand the world around us, even when it seems to fall under the heading of "who cares?"  We need to know, we humans.  Wherever that urge comes from, it becomes an almost physical craving.  All three of the people whose work cracked the code were united by one trait; a desperate desire to figure things out.  Only one, in fact, had a particularly good formal background in linguistics.  The other two were an architect and a wealthy amateur historian and archaeologist.  Training wasn't the issue.  What allowed them to succeed was persistence, and methodical minds that refused to admit that a solution was out of reach.

The story is fascinating, and by turns tragic and inspirational, but by the time I was done reading it I was left with my original question; why are we driven to know stuff that seems to have no practical application whatsoever?  I completely understood how Evans, Kober, and Ventris felt, and in their place I no doubt would have felt the same way, but I'm still at a loss to explain why.  It's one of those mysterious filigrees of the human mind, which perhaps is selected for because curiosity and inquisitiveness have high survival value in the big picture, even if they sometimes push us to spend our lives bringing light to some little dark cul-de-sac of human knowledge that no one outside of the field cares, or will even hear, about.

But as the brilliant geneticist Barbara McClintock, whose decades-long persistence in solving the mystery of transposable elements ("jumping genes") eventually resulted in a Nobel Prize, put it:  "It is a tremendous joy, the whole process of finding the answer.  Just pure joy."

Welcome to the persecution party!

It's a minor mystery to me why some groups seem to enjoy appearing persecuted.

Maybe they think it's some kind of bizarre pseudo-syllogism:

• Highly moral people often find that others reject their views.
• Having your views rejected is the same as being oppressed.
• Lots of people reject my views.
• I feel oppressed by this.
• Therefore I must be highly moral.  q.e.d.

Just in the last couple of days, we've had three examples from the fanatical evangelical wing of American Christianity wherein we learn that Christians in general are a persecuted minority, because, apparently, comprising 78% of the American citizenry and nearly 100% of the people who hold public office puts Christians in danger of imminent eradication.

Let's start with Franklin Graham, who's shown himself more than once to be an angry little man unworthy of the stature conferred upon him by his name.  His father, evangelist Billy Graham, was and is a thoughtful and moral man who participated actively in the Civil Rights Movement and worked against human rights abuses in the Eastern Bloc and apartheid-era South Africa.   So even though I disagree with his theology, I've always had a grudging admiration for him as a human being. 

Franklin, though, seems like a schmuck.  Not to put too fine a point on it.

In an interview with Gordon Robertson, son of noted wingnut Pat Robertson, Franklin Graham went on and on about the upcoming "storm of persecution" that Christians are facing in the United States.  He said:

We’re going to see persecution, I believe, in this country because our president is very sympathetic to Islam and the reason I say that, Gordon, is because his father was a Muslim, gave him a Muslim name, Barack Hussein Obama.  His mother married another Muslim man, they moved to Indonesia, he went to Indonesian schools.  So, growing up his frame of reference and his influence as a young man was Islam.  It wasn’t Christianity, it was Islam. 

There are Muslims that have access to him in the White House.  Our foreign policy has a lot of influence now, from Muslims. We see the Prime Minister of Israel being snubbed by the President and by the White House and by the Democrats and it’s because of the influence of Islam.  They hate Israel and they hate Christians, and so the storm is coming, I believe, Gordon.

What makes this even more ridiculous is that when Graham was asked last month by (of all people) Bill O'Reilly if he could name some of the Muslims who are influencing the president, he couldn't come up with a single name.  Not one.

Oh, but "he knows they're there."  That's enough, apparently, to make it a fact.

Next on the persecution hit parade we have radio talk show personalities Mat Staver and Matt Barber, who were offering their opinions on the Washington state florist who was sued because she refused to sell flowers to a gay couple who were getting married.  The florist, Barronelle Stutzman, has become something of a hero amongst the ultra-religious for her actions.  She said, "You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for thirty pieces of silver.  That is something I will not do."

Apparently in these people's eyes selling someone out to be tortured and executed is exactly the same as selling someone flowers.

But Staver and Barber, of the radio show Faith and Freedom, seem to have no problem accepting Stutzman's rather inflated opinion of the importance of her actions in the grand scheme of things.  Barber went even further than Stutzman, and issued the following dire warning:

If, God forbid ... the Supreme Court somehow defines and manufactures a constitutional so-called right to sodomy-based marriage this summer, in June, if they do that then the floodgates will be open.  There will be Christian persecution widespread across the United States and the so-called gay marriage agenda will be the sledgehammer used to crush the church and to crush religious liberty and the crush individual Christians, their finances, to ruin them.  That's what this agenda was always about and that's what we will see if the Supreme Court goes the wrong way in June.

Righty-o.  Apparently a few people finally being able to have public and official recognition of their committed relationships will lead to wild hordes of out-of-control gays running around smashing Christians with sledgehammers.

But even that is sensible as compared to what Gordon Klingenschmitt came up with.  Klingenschmitt is a member of the Colorado House of Representatives, winning in 2014 by a 70-30 margin of the popular vote even though he appears to have been doing sit-ups underneath parked cars.  Klingenschmitt decided to weigh in on last month's murder in North Carolina of three young Muslims:

An American atheist has killed three Muslims in North Carolina because they were like Christians.  This man obviously had something against people of faith, whether they're Muslim or Christian, and the three young Muslims were sadly found shot in their homes on Tuesday.  Well, the murderer allegedly of these three young Muslim students is an atheist man named Craig Stephen Hicks, who is not just a person who doesn't believe in Islam, but he is so radically atheist that he was arrested on suspicion of three counts of first-degree murder.  Hicks is reportedly a vocal supporter of United Atheists of America, and according to his Facebook page, was a fan of television shows like The Atheist Experience, and also the Southern Poverty Law Center.  Here's a radical left-wing atheist who is going around killing people of faith.  He's posted a number of anti-religious images and messages on his Facebook page.  One of the images he posted said, and I quote, "Why radical Christians and radical Muslims are opposed to each other's influence when they agree about so many ideological issues."  So he killed the Muslims because they think like Christians.  

Wow.  Where do I start?

First, Hicks was not arrested because "he is so radically atheist," he was arrested because he almost certainly murdered three people.  It seems unlikely that he did so solely because the three were Muslim; his ex-wife, Cynthia Hurley, described Hicks as an angry and confrontational man who once watched a movie that involved a man going on a shooting rampage and found it "hilarious."

"He had no compassion at all," Hurley said about Hicks.

So Hicks was an atheist who didn't like Muslims, but he was also a violent man who is very likely to be mentally unbalanced.  He'd had repeated angry exchanges with his three victims over parking spaces, and it's thought that this might have actually been what set him off.

But Klingenschmitt doesn't like things complicated.  In a bizarre screed that should win the 2015 Pretzel Logic Award, Klingenschmitt has Hicks thinking, "Wow, these Muslims, they think just like Christians!  And Christians deserve to be killed, because that's what I found out from the Southern Poverty Law Center!  I think I'll go kill them right now."

Which may have edged out James Inhofe's Senator-with-a-Snowball act as the single stupidest thing an elected official has said so far this year.

So there you have it.  Between Obama and his invisible Muslim advisors, and crazed gays forcing florists to sell gay men flowers at sledgehammer-point, to people killing Muslims because they're so much like Christians, I give you: the evangelical pity-party talking points of the day.

Which brings me back to my original question of why this worldview is so appealing.  Is it because people are more likely to rally around the cause if they feel threatened?  It seems the only logical explanation to me.  Because by any other standard of rational discourse, these people are sounding increasingly like they've lost their minds.

Vote Tsipras for Antichrist!

As President Obama approaches the end of his second and final term, and has not taken away all of our guns, caused the downfall of America, turned us over to the Muslims, made us submit to the Mark of the Beast, or ushered in the End Times, it looks like we'll have to cast about to find out who will be the next candidate for being the Antichrist.  I mean, Obama has had a good six and a half years to bring forth the Beast With Seven Heads and the Scarlet Whore Of Babylon, and what do I see around me?  Same old, same old.

It's kind of disappointing, really.

I'm happy to say, though, that the ultra-religious wingnuts have a new focus for ranting.  Since Obama has proved himself woefully inadequate in the apocalypse department, it's nice that we have someone waiting in the wings.  His name is Alexios Tsipras, and he's the newly-elected Prime Minister of Greece.

Alexios Tsipras [image courtesy of the Wikimedia Commons]

Admire the impressive new features of this latest incarnation of the Minion Of The Evil One:

• He is a self-proclaimed atheist, and instead of taking his oath of office in god's name, he "took it in his own name" (as the wingnuts are putting it; actually, he took a civil oath rather than a religious one).
• He is young and charismatic.
• He has already met with the Pope to discuss a peace deal for the Middle East.
• He is a Greek man of Jewish descent.
• He was born on July 28, 1974, which that year fell on the Tisha B’Av (9th of Av) on the Jewish calendar.  This is the day on which many Jewish calamities occurred, including the destruction of first and second temples and the eviction of Jews from England in the year 1290 and from Spain in 1492.

Says Terry James, over at Rapture Ready:

There has surfaced, in my view at least, an archetype of the leader to come who will be the first beast of Revelation 13.  This generation is not yet in the Tribulation, but is experiencing precursors to that last seven years that makes us know that a time of unprecedented troubles is just ahead.  Likewise, a leader has arisen from the area of the reviving Roman Empire, one whose emergence makes the observant Bible prophecy student suspect ever more assuredly that Antichrist is waiting in the shadows of the immediate future. 

Any such leader rising suddenly and dramatically out of the very nucleus of what was ancient Rome justifiably raises the eyebrows of Bible prophecy students.  The visible, physical reactions of those who have put him on his pedestal are quite interesting… glassy eyes filled with tears of joy, as they looked worshipfully at the man on whom they are hanging their hopes.  As a matter of fact, the slogan for [Tsipras's] campaign was “Hope is coming!” 

I think we are looking at an archetype of the man whose name will add up to six hundred, three score and six.

The problem is, Tsipras is hardly the first person who has been a contender for being the Antichrist.  Just in my lifetime, we've had:

• Pope John Paul I
• Pope John Paul II
• Pope Benedict XVI
• Pope Francis I
• Ayatollah Khomeini
• President Clinton
• Muammar Qaddafi
• King Juan Carlos of Spain
• Javier Solana (former Secretary General of both NATO and of the EU) 
• Prince Charles of England (who would be kind of a derpy Antichrist, if you ask me)
• Hafez al-Assad (former dictator of Syria)
• Mikhail Gorbachev
• Ronald Reagan

No, I'm not kidding about Reagan.  There were nutjobs during Reagan's presidency who seriously suggested he might be the Antichrist, mostly because each of the parts of his full name, Ronald Wilson Reagan, had six letters.  (Get it?  666?  Get it?)

And do you know what all of these guys have in common?  They were not the Antichrist.

The End Times crowd has had an exactly zero batting average, thus far.  And if you go back in history, you find that ever since apocalyptic prophecies became all the rage back in the 4th century, people have been going through conniptions trying to figure out (1) when it all was going to happen, and (2) the identities of the major players.  Yes, I know that "no one knows the hour," and all that sort of thing, but that hasn't slowed them down any.  They've also pointed their fingers at every single Pope since the Reformation, Charlemagne, Napoleon Bonaparte, Ivan the Terrible, Oliver Cromwell, Hitler, Mussolini, and Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, the last-mentioned having the honor of being the only female Antichrist I'm aware of.

And still they've been wrong every time.

So I'm worried that Prime Minister Tsipras isn't going to be it, either.  Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of waiting.  Things have been a bit boring around here lately, so a good apocalypse could be kind of entertaining.  The Book of Revelation, which I've read in its entirety perhaps three or four times, has always seemed to me to be the product of a bad acid trip, and the events described therein certainly would be more fun than the boring litany of corrupt politicians and know-it-all talking heads who seem to make up most of the news, lately.

So I say: bring it on, Prime Minister Tsipras.  Let's see your guns, dude.  We've been disappointed about a thousand times already; don't make me add your name to the above list.