A rapturous WTF?

Friend of the blog, Ben, emailed me this WTF?

...think we’ve got the winner for this years WTF award – either that or damnedest clever con ever. Who’d have thunk – using their own credulousness against them?

He is referring to You've Been Left Behind. A Document storage and "Rapture" triggered email messaging system.

Here's the service they provide:

We have set up a system to send documents by the email, to the addresses you provide, 6 days after the "Rapture" of the Church. This occurs when 3 of our 5 team members scattered around the U.S fail to log in over a 3 day period. Another 3 days are given to fail safe any false triggering of the system.

We give you 150mb of encrypted storage that can be sent to 12 possible email addresses, in Box #1. You up load any documents and choose which documents go to who. You can edit these documents at any time and change the addresses they will be sent to as needed. Box #1 is for your personal private letters to your closest lost friends and relatives.

We give you another 100mb. of unencrypted storage that can be sent to up to 50 email addresses, in Box #2. You can edit the documents and the addresses any time. Box #2 is for more generic documents to lost family & friends.

The cost is $40 for the first year. Re-subscription will be reduced as the number of subscribers increases. Tell your friends about You've Been left behind.

I don't like their system, given they won't be around to ensure it has actually worked.

I helpfully sent them this email in order to point this out:

Hi,

I've found a potential flaw in your rapture system. Given you won't be around either, how can you be sure your automatic email system has actually worked? Computers crash after all. And who knows what kind of mayhem will ensue post rapture?

I propose you get someone on your team who will definitely be left behind, to ensure the emails are sent. I would be more than happy to be that person.

Let me know if you are interested and we can discuss my salary and rapture bonus etc, (and how can I access all the confidential information you have gathered?).

Regards,

Theo

I'll let you know if I get a reply to my proposal...

Of course, these guys are not the only ones looking forward to the rapture. Try the "Rapture Fund". (Sounds an awful lot like George Constanza's Human Fund...):

The Rapture Will indicates that, in the event of the Rapture, a significant portion of the testator's estate is to be given to Rapture Fund--a fund dedicated to promoting the Gospel both now (using charitable contributions made by donors during their lifetimes) and during the Tribulation (using assets donated by those who have signed the Rapture Will).

You've got nothing to lose. If the Rapture occurs during your lifetime, your estate will create a legacy of evangelism during the Tribulation, adding souls to the Kingdom of Heaven while you're celebrating with Jesus Christ. If the Rapture doesn't occur during your lifetime, then the provisions of the Rapture Will never go into effect.

I'm betting on that last one...

_________________
Update - here's the reply:

Sorry Theo That won't be needed. :-(

Oh well.

Spooked911 moon landings not faked after all! But there is a secret moon base!

Readers of this blog may remember a few posts I did in 2006 on 9-11 conspiracy nut "Spooked911". Well, I thought I'd check up on him. One other "proof" he offers, that 9-11 was faked and is a government conspiracy, is based around his "challenge" to prove it's possible to fly a Boeing 767 into a building with no prior flight training in one. From the anti-conspiracy blog Screw Loose Change:

1) Obtain the Microsoft Flight Simulator Software and install it.

2) Learn to fly a Cessna 172 prop plane (if you already are a pilot, you can skip this).

3) Download and install the Boeing 767 plug-in, and take-off from Boston Logan airport.

4) Navigate to Manhattan as fast and efficiently as possible, then accelerate to 540 mph-- and on your FIRST ATTEMPT, fly perfectly through the middle of lower Manhattan, where the WTC used to be.

5) Let me know if you succeed.

If you DO succeed, also try a run taking off from Washington Dulles with a Boeing 757, going west for an hour, then turn around, and navigate to the Pentagon and try the "Hani Hanjour maneuver" (a 270 degree turn at 500 mph, then level off and approach the Pentagon on a flat approach, only a few feet off the ground.

Yet more ingenious WTF? logic from Spooked911. As per usual, he is an inspiration. I decided it is fair game to apply his reasoning to the faked Apollo moon landings (again). I couldn't believe it. I managed to land on the moon!

This was my first attempt too. Imagine how good I'd be if I trained for all the years the astronauts had. So contrary to my first experiment on landing on the moon, I've now realised it is possible to land on the moon. After all, a computer simulation is just like real life!

I then discovered there is a secret base on the moon! There is a cover-up after all! The beings that set it up must be alien; they were gibbering at me in some form of "alienease".

As far as the base goes - bloody goofy aliens. How the hell is anyone going to live in that? There's no furniture or anything!

I did manage to communicate in the end however, though it was still mostly pointless gibbering:

I also discovered that although the astronauts claim to have driven on the moon, I couldn't navigate my way over or around even the smallest crater in this tank.

Perhaps the aliens were controlling my mind and making me crash? After all, I wasn't wearing my ice cream container...

So good

The Great Tantra Challenge

I wish someone would knock up an English translation, but you still get the gist of it. Hilarious.

Here's the story:

On 3 March 2008, in a popular TV show, Sanal Edamaruku, the president of Rationalist International, challenged India's most "powerful" tantrik (black magician) to demonstrate his powers on him. That was the beginning of an unprecedented experiment. After all his chanting of mantra (magic words) and ceremonies of tantra failed, the tantrik decided to kill Sanal Edamaruku with the "ultimate destruction ceremony" on live TV. Sanal Edamaruku agreed and sat in the altar of the black magic ritual. India TV observed skyrocketing viewership rates.

Everything started, when Uma Bharati (former chief minister of the state of Madhya Pradesh) accused her political opponents in a public statement of using tantrik powers to inflict damage upon her. In fact, within a few days, the unlucky lady had lost her favorite uncle, hit the door of her car against her head and found her legs covered with wounds and blisters. India TV, one of India's major Hindi channels with national outreach, invited Sanal Edamaruku for a discussion on "Tantrik power versus Science". Pandit Surinder Sharma, who claims to be the tantrik of top politicians and is well known from his TV shows, represented the other side. During the discussion, the tantrik showed a small human shape of wheat flour dough, laid a thread around it like a noose and tightened it. He claimed that he was able to kill any person he wanted within three minutes by using black magic. Sanal challenged him to try and kill him.

The tantrik tried. He chanted his mantras (magic words): "Om lingalingalinalinga, kilikili…." But his efforts did not show any impact on Sanal – not after three minutes, and not after five. The time was extended and extended again. The original discussion program should have ended here, but the "breaking news" of the ongoing great tantra challenge was overrunning all program schedules.

Part 1 - Not much happens - find it on youtube if you want to watch it.

Part 2

Now the tantrik changed his technique. He started sprinkling water on Sanal and brandishing a knife in front of him. Sometimes he moved the blade all over his body. Sanal did not flinch. Then he touched Sanal's head with his hand, rubbing and rumpling up his hair, pressing his forehead, laying his hand over his eyes, pressing his fingers against his temples. When he pressed harder and harder, Sanal reminded him that he was supposed to use black magic only, not forceful attacks to bring him down. The tantrik took a new run: water, knife, fingers, mantras. But Sanal kept looking very healthy and even amused. After nearly two hours, the anchor declared the tantrik's failure.

The tantrik, unwilling to admit defeat, tried the excuse [see special pleading] that a very strong god whom Sanal might be worshipping obviously protected him. "No, I am an atheist," said Sanal Edamaruku. Finally, the disgraced tantrik tried to save his face by claiming that there was a never-failing special black magic for ultimate destruction, which could, however, only been done at night. Bad luck again, he did not get away with this, but was challenged to prove his claim this very night in another "breaking news" live program.

Part 3

During the next three hours, India TV ran announcements for The Great Tantra Challenge that called several hundred million people to their TV sets. The encounter took place under the open night sky. The tantrik and his two assistants were kindling a fire and staring into the flames. Sanal was in good humour. Once the ultimate magic was invoked, there wouldn't be any way back, the tantrik warned. Within two minutes, Sanal would get crazy, and one minute later he would scream in pain and die. Didn't he want to save his life before it was too late? Sanal laughed, and the countdown begun. The tantriks chanted their "Om lingalingalingalinga, kilikilikili…." followed by ever changing cascades of strange words and sounds. The speed increased hysterically. They threw all kinds of magic ingredients into the flames that produced changing colours, crackling and fizzling sounds and white smoke.

While chanting, the tantrik came close to Sanal, moved his hands in front of him and touched him, but was called back by the anchor. After the earlier covert attempts of the tantrik to use force against Sanal, he was warned to keep distance and avoid touching Sanal. But the tantrik "forgot" this rule again and again. Now the tantrik wrote Sanal's name on a sheet of paper, tore it into small pieces, dipped them into a pot with boiling butter oil and threw them dramatically into the flames. Nothing happened. Singing and singing, he sprinkled water on Sanal, mopped a bunch of peacock feathers over his head, threw mustard seed into the fire and other outlandish things more. Sanal smiled, nothing happened, and time was running out. Only seven more minutes before midnight, the tantrik decided to use his ultimate weapon: the clod of wheat flour dough. He kneaded it and powdered it with mysterious ingredients, then asked Sanal to touch it. Sanal did so, and the grand magic finale begun. The tantrik pierced blunt nails on the dough, then cut it wildly with a knife and threw them into the fire. That moment, Sanal should have broken down. But he did not. He laughed. Forty more seconds, counted the anchor, twenty, ten, five… it's over!

Millions of people must have uttered a sigh of relief in front their TVs. Sanal was very much alive. Tantra power had miserably failed. Tantriks are creating such a scaring atmosphere that even people, who know that black magic has no base, can just break down out of fear, commented a scientist during the program. It needs enormous courage and confidence to challenge them by actually putting one's life at risk, he said. By doing so, Sanal Edamaruku has broken the spell, and has taken away much of the fear of those who witnessed his triumph.

In this night, one of the most dangerous and wide spread superstitions in India suffered a severe blow.
_______________________
All I can say is WTF? - do people actually believe this...?

Words worth espousing - Beclown

I only believe it is cromulent to accept a new word in the English language if there is no equivalent word that expresses the same meaning as well. New words such as beclown embiggen our language. From the Urban Dictionary, beclown means:

To make a complete idiot of oneself in public. To behave or speak in such a way, or to make a comment or express an opinion that is so profoundly witless, senseless and obtuse, that you have forever after defined yourself as a person of comical value only. Never to be taken seriously again. Of worth only as an object of ridicule and derision.

Just as to befoul yourself is to make yourself foul, to beclown yourself is to turn yourself into a clown. Beclown is therefore perfectly cromulent. One example given by the Urban Dictionary:

Former Reagan staffer Doug Bandow has also beclowned himself by claiming that the Bali terrorist bombing was in response to Australia's Iraq involvement. Even though the Bali bombing was before the Iraq war.

The only equivalent phrase I can think that arguably captures such stupidity is to hoist oneself by one's own petard. (The origin of this is from Shakespeare and means to blow oneself up - a petard was a medieval explosive, and the etymology of petard is from the Latin word pedere; which means to "break wind".) I think beclown captures incidences such as the example above better, has greater currency and a more obvious intuitive meaning.

In this day and age of "Web 2.0" there are numerous examples of people beclowning themselves. The more recent example that has come to my attention was the expulsion of the biologist and blogger P. Z. Myers from the movie Expelled, which he was in. The real irony and beclowning comes with the premise of the movie, which claims "scientists" who believe in intelligent design are being "expelled" from academia; their rights to free speech and free thinking shut down. You can read about the beclowning and subsequent hole digging, in more than enough detail, in the Wikipedia entry on Expelled the movie.

For other examples of beclowning, see this post on a mathematical moron and, of course, Miss (Teen) South Carolina.

(One other thing worth drawing a link to is that a serious beclowning event, more often than not, involves some kind of WTF? statement or claim.)

If I'm ever out of ideas for posts...

I can always turn to Scientology for a WTF? fallacy. This one comes via email from Humbug! reader and mate Ben:

WTF?

According to the Church of Scientology, ‘evil psychiatrists’ are responsible for Adolf Hitler, have a master plan for world domination, September 11, ethnic cleansing in the Balkans and just about everything else bad that’s happened in the world.

It’s almost comical except that they have an entire museum dedicated to this cr-p!

Check this out

WARNING: do NOT shake hands with this woman

Crow calls for limit on loo paper

Singer Sheryl Crow has said a ban on using too much toilet paper should be introduced to help the environment.

Crow has suggested using "only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required".

The 45-year-old, who made the comments on her website, has just toured the US on a biodiesel-powered bus to raise awareness about climate change.

She teamed up with environmental activist Laurie David for the shows.

"I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming," Crow wrote.

"Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. "I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting."

Pinhead Educationista moonlights as clueless LAME commentator

According to Judith Wheeldon, a former Principal of two private schools (not both at once, one presumes - although two at once could be inferred from her biographical note at the end of this article).

The minister's report cites research showing that "quality teachers make a significant difference to improved student outcomes". We knew that. What we still do not know is how the minister plans to ensure every Australian child has a quality teacher. Paying some teachers more will not give every child a better teacher. Higher salaries for all teachers would.

Hmmm... take your pick - there are so many fallacies in the passage above that it is difficult to separate one from the other. I will take the coward's way out, and designate this passage an exemplar of the WTF? fallacy. That is, an utterance so rich with multifaceted and self-evident stupidities that it takes the breath away.

(Note that the Humbloggers have coined the term "educationistas" for self-important educators who wish to bend education systems, teachers and schools to their will.)

UFO cause by global warming! WTF?

Initially, when I read the following:

Officials are mystified after a mysterious metallic object crashed through the roof of a New Jersey home, although one expert said it could be a meteorite…

The object is the size of a golf ball but weighs as much as a can of soup, according to AP.

"I saw it's a UFO," said one neighbour.

Another believed it was connected to "some kind of global warming thing."

I thought that the most appropriate fallacy would be False Cause; Correlation Error, as the second neighbour attributed the UFO (the first neighbour is right, at this time it is an Unidentified Falling Object) to global warming. However, the False Cause; Correlation Error requires the erroneous belief that there is a causal link between phenomena to be apparent. The only thing apparent in this case is that the claim that a UFO is caused by global warming is simply moronic. It puts the "M" in stupid. Hence my classification of the above claim as a WTF? Fallacy instead.
____________
Via: Tim Blair

Source: Mysterious object crashes into New Jersey home - news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca - 5 Jan 2007

Examples of the WTF? Fallacy

The advocate puts forward a claim that is comprehensively and self-evidently flawed - a claim that is beyond flawed - it borders on the insane.

• A rapturous WTF?
• Spooked911 moon landings not faked after all! But there is a secret moon base!
• So good
• If I'm ever out of ideas for posts...
• Pinhead Educationista moonlights as clueless LAME commentator
• UFO caused by global warming! WTF?
• Have you ever paid money for one of these?
• Mad Madonna the comedian
• Pig becomes even more "wonderful, magical animal"
• WTF? Fallacy of the year
• WTF? Fallacy and Scientology
• Just what we need on the East Coast, more sharks…
• Is There a Case for Creating a WTF? Fallacy?

The advocate's claim is so error ridden that one would not actually know where to begin in trying to analyse it. (Moreover, one would have to take a leave of absence for a year or so in order to do so.) The WTF?* Fallacy is only to be invoked when the claim under consideration is so lacking in any rational basis that one is left speechless with perverse admiration - how could anyone, in their right mind make such an astonishingly stupid assertion? The only possible response is those three little words, muttered in hushed and awed tones: "What the F....?

Though similar in nature to Simple-Minded Certitude, the WTF? Fallacy is more extreme. WTF?ers ought to have seen the absurdity of their claim for themselves. There is simply no point in engaging with a WTF?er, as meaningful interaction will be nigh on impossible. Our advice is to completely avoid any interaction. If you must engage in social intercourse, a supercilious attitude is best, and moreover, such an attitude is completely justified. Heap nothing but scorn and derision upon the advocate.

A clue for spotting WTF?ers is that initially one would naturally assume that the deluded one was putting forth an absurdist joke. To which your natural response might be: "Good one mate... Hahahaha... That's a hilarious suggestion."

But there will be no reciprocal jovial response from the WTF?er, merely a blank stare. A blank stare which should be met with raised eyebrows, and a comment such as: "Please tell me you're not serious?"

The WTF?er of course will continue to stare blankly... no data can ever enter that tinfoil-covered case-hardened skull.

You should avoid drooling when your mouth reflexively drops open at this point (A shorthand way of describing your state at this moment of realisation is "gobsmacked". Take a step backward (for reasons of personal safety - at this point you realise you are not dealing with a rational human being after all), turn on your heel, shake your head, beat a safe retreat, and mutter: "What the Fuh...?"
___________________-
* We are aware that there may be other interpretations of WTF?, however as far as we're concerned it stands for "What the Fuh…?"

WTF? Fallacy of the year

If there's a stronger case than this for creating the WTF? Fallacy, then I'd like to hear of it. This has been getting much attention from bloggers of late. Supposedly this "experiment" demonstrates that a jet-fuelled fire couldn't have caused the world trade centre towers to collapse.

Spooked911, the poster, though an ingenious experimentalist, is not quite so proficient WRT the scientific report genre (though he claims he's a molecular biologist!). I'll help him out by using his text but following a format loosely based on what I get 12 year olds to do:

Aim

I set up the following experiment using steel rabbit fencing as the steel structure supporting a heavy cement block. If kerosene/jet fuel/hydrocarbon fires can indeed cause steel structures to collapse, it should be quite simple to show this in an experiment-- right?

Hypothesis

That a fairly flimsy steel structure will not distort and bend and collapse very easily from a simple hydrocarbon fire.

Method

1. Note, this fencing is easily bendable, has no significant rigidity, and was not reinforced in any way.
2. The fencing was bent into an outer square and an inner rectangle (the core)…
   
3. Then I damaged the "columns" by cutting them with wire cutters.
   
4. Just inside where the gash was made in the outer wall, I placed a cup of kerosene (jet fuel), and there was newspaper around the bottom on the structure.
   
5. Then I put a heavy cement block on top, weighing about 15 pounds.
   
6. I don't think the wire structure would hold more than three of these blocks, so the "safety factor" was not particularly high.
   
7. Then I tipped over the cup and lit the kerosene.

Results

Then fire burned for about twenty minutes, and toward the end, I put my foot on the structure to see if it would extra weight. It still did. The structure held up fine after the fire died…. After the fire was hot, the "columns" were not hot at all… [see picture - he can touch it].

Discussion and Conclusion

In a second experiment, I used the same wire fence and block set up, but increased the amount of "airplane damage", added in newspaper all around the inside of the structure, and soaked everything thoroughly with kerosene. In this expt, the fire was more intense and lasted significantly longer, but... the structure held up just fine.

What I conclude is that a fairly flimsy steel structure does not distort and bend and collapse very easily from a simple hydrocarbon fire. And thus, it is not clear why the much stronger steel columns in the WTC towers weakened so much from fires that the towers underwent global collapse.

Spooked911 - Response to criticism

It's a simple model to shed light on a complex system. Scientists do this sort of thing all the time. It's their bread and butter. I did not draw any elaborate conclusions. I did not say this proved anything. Moreover, I invited people to try their own experiment, and as far as I can tell, no one has. I think it's sad that this has become the subject of such ridicule. Moreover, note I said nothing political here, nothing about Bush. It's just an experiment that I thought was interesting and worth sharing. I am indeed a biomedical scientist-- a molecular biologist, not an engineer. But I have friend who is an engineer who thought what I did was cool.

You sure your "friend" isn't your mum (that's "mom" for you "seppos")? He goes on to defend himself against accusations that he is a "crankpot" [the spawn of Mr Crank and Miss Crackpot!]:

…what's funny to me is how they point to this experiment as primary evidence that I'm a kook or crankpot-- but not to posts where I say the 2nd hit videos were faked, no plane hit the WTC. Why does THIS post amuse them so? It is just because it is easy to look at the pictures as opposed to, say, reading and thinking critically?

I fell off my chair when I read that.

Overall Grade* = C-

Update - see how I "prove" the moon landings were faked using similar experimental techniques.

Update 2 - I didn't know it at the time (as I hadn't thought of it yet), but Spooked911 gives us an excellent example of the GIGO fallacy. He makes this conclusion based on his garbage experiment:

What I conclude is that a fairly flimsy steel structure does not distort and bend and collapse very easily from a simple hydrocarbon fire. And thus, it is not clear why the much stronger steel columns in the WTC towers weakened so much from fires that the towers underwent global collapse.
____________
*I'm hardly going to fail him am I! I'd like to avoid his irate and "eccentric" parents.

Tagged - Conspiracy Theory, 9-11, Fallacy, Skepticism.