Amazingly (or perhaps not) quite a number of people actually believed it without even checking further; one comments that the pope granted the Onion’s journalist an exclusive audience. Even when one hates nonsense of religion with the force I do, it pays to apply skepticism especially when faced with such a juicy story like this that appears to justify our negative feelings.

Jose Alvarez and James Randi spoofed almost the entire TV network of Australia with a thinly veiled pretense based on an invented mystic. People at the network’s news gathering offices were so gullible that they failed to check basic facts such as the existence of the faked US radio station! (Not surprisingly, Penn & Teller played a small part in concocting the apparition). See here http://skepdic.com/carlos.html for the story.

Note that while Alverez never intended to deceive people, merely prove that divine visions and demonic possesions are easily absorbed by the masses, he amply demonstrated that once a hoax enters the psyche, it is a lot harder to remove even when clear evidence to the contrary is presented.

On a larger scale, much the same is true of religion. The only difference is no one can test to see if its all a hoax; even when to the (slightly) trained mind, it’s blindingly obvious.

As this site features a number of devout skeptics it’s a pleasure to join the bustle and enjoy stories of Steven Green’s embarrasment and miserable failures. I hope that some day, the same poetic justice will be meted on the Peter Vardys of this world for those that place faith before fact are truly the world’s enemies.

Wonder why Christopher didn’t come clean straight away? Stating that his PhD was “from Cambridge in ecstasy and altered states of consciousness” sounds more impressive, I suppose.

Not exactly honest these Christians, are they? Not exactly liars, but not exactly honest either.

I guess if you spend your whole life deceiving yourself (about the creator of the universe really loving you, about there being no plausible alternative to the gospel versions of the beginning of Xianity, etc etc), you don’t think twice about deceiving other people.

It’s always interested me how people get PhDs or (doctorates in theology) in widely disputed (and unprovable) histories. It’s high time we woke up to the threat posed by this sort of stupidity and told the idiots where to stick their unprovable theories: Anthony Browne writes in today’s Times newspaper on the British naivety regarding the threat we face in Islam and Carl Sagan (in Demon Haunted World) applies much the same arguments to credulous nature of the US. Today, nearly half the US population believes in a creator god and throws science and reason to the wind while embracing the simple, yet fatally flawed, solutions of ID in much the same was as they accept the veracity of alien abduction without question.

Jesus is coming (back), the idiots tell us. He’s been coming for a bloody long time and he still hasn’t got here; I got sick of waiting a long time ago. My understanding is that when Jesus is said to have referred to the day of judgement, he was alluding to the 1st century; and yet, 1900 years later, we’re all still here. Now I don’t have “experts” like Colin Dye to fall back upon, only my own research so I’m open to correction. But that is what a proper scientist and free-thinker does!

When I formulate a hypothesis, I share it with my peers and try to shoot it down or offer proofs for it. I don’t criticise people for proving me wrong, I accept the correction and re-formulate the idea based on the newly gained knowledge. Some years ago, I wrote a complex article on a computing issue that I thought I understood well and made a basic error that I should have spotted. As I was considered a guru on the subject, my editor published the result to rapturous screams of “Oi! That’s wrong!” In the next available issue, I had to make a rather red-faced admission that I was indeed in error. I continued to write, only in future, I was rather more careful to check my facts.

Religion, conversely, does not allow itself to be critically examined because its practioners know all too well that it cannot stand any serious investigation. Had a similar mistake been made by a even a minor preacher, I doubt anyone would have the guts to contradict them. Even today, to disagree with religious ideas is punishable by death in parts of the world.

Just occasionally, religions do admit to mistakes, but not without pressure and good reason. Pope JP2 apologised for the inquistion and the association Pope Pious had with the Nazis during WWII, but cynics have argued that the old sod was simply so scared that Jesus might show up again for the turn of the 2nd millenium he was just covering his bases.

I am currently checking the veracity of a horrifying story I read only last night about the Catholic church forgiving children for seducing preists. Yes, you did read that correctly. It’s been claimed (and I need to check this) that the Catholics have forgiven CHILDREN for tempting priests into seducing them; in effect, letting the paedophiles off the hook. I truly hope this vile story turns out to be a falsehood and I’m keeping an open mind, but what if it is true? Either way, it will certainly make for an interesting passage in my book.

Tom, I would be interested to read Chris’s Thesis; even though I couldn’t find it publshed anywhere, doesn’t mean it does not exist. Google Scholar doesn’t list it as being cited anywhere and quite what ecstasy has to do with the NT is anyone’s guess. My own books are never cited in academia, only on the web but since they are not theoretical, that’s hardly surprising.

Peyote, hashish or even perhaps raw cocaine but I was of the opinion (perhaps wrongly) that ecstasy was a 20th Century invention. (I note that the Spanish catholics taxed the use of cocoa leaves as a source of income for the church in the 17th Century. Another beautiful example of the double-standards the Christians are historically known for; can you imagine it now? “Pope arrested: charged with being drug baron!”)

The Kensington Temple is an interesting place. I listened to Colin Dye waffle on for a while on Possessing the land; the promised land. He’s really quite frightening the way he justifies how “God” was pissed off with a bunch of people (the Cananites, Hitites, (ites, mites, shites, etc. [OK, OK, I added “shites”]) that he allegedly created in his own image) so he tells another bunch of pople (who record the events) to go and flush them out. This isn’t the only event like this in the bible, but it’s still used today to justify murdering innocent people who occupy the “promised” lands.

Dye also claims that (around 5-7 mins in) “Jesus is coming” (he doesn’t say when) and that the enemies are the evil things operating through us. Glad we cleared that up then: I’m not evil, Colin, I’m just possessed by unseen powers.

This is different from the preachings of radical muslim clerics, HOW? (That’s a rhetorical question, Chris).