I was reading Friendly Atheist this morning, and found out that the DNC is preparing to start their convention (coronation ceremony?) with an interfaith religious service. (Link to the post) They invited representatives of several religions to speak, but explicitly denied access to any atheists, agnostics, pagans, spiritualists, or humanists.…
Here is the simple goal for those participating in Naked Bike Ride: Protest our dependency on oil and celebrate the power and individuality of our bodies. In America, most people tend to have a warped attitude toward bicycles. They see bicycles as toys and amusements, not as incredibly efficient and serious modes of transportation. More than anything else, Naked Bike Ride is an attempt to change this attitude and to get people to choose bicycles rather than gas guzzling motor vehicles, whenever possible.
This combination was pure marketing genius. If 1,000 people had assembled in the middle of St. Louis to promote alternative sustainable methods of transportation, the media wouldn’t have given a rat’s ass. Because these organizers promised to wrap this serious message about bicycle riding in a package of nudity, however, the media was there in droves. Here’s an video interview of two of the organizers.
Now, what kind of nudity did those curious media types actually see when they got to the assembly prior to the bicycle ride? Well, they saw some of this:
As well as some of this:
The evening could also have been accurately called Slogans Painted on Partially Naked People on Bikes Night, but that would have been unwieldy.
This use of nakedness to promote the message that we desperately need to start using sustainable transportation methods has been successfully executed in numerous other cities. Tonight, the event came to my home town. 
I decided to both participate in a minimally naked way …
Tonight I watched “It’s Bad For Ya,” George Carlin’s final nationally televised performance. The entire show is available on YouTube (Below is Part I of VII). The show was broadcast live on March 1, 2008, only a few months prior to Carlin’s death (due to a heart attack, on June…
What happens when the executive branch is allowed to operate in secrecy and without constraint? This was answered in 1976, by the United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, chaired by Senator Frank Church: The natural tendency of Government is toward abuse of…
I’ve been following the reviews of the Ben Stein “Expelled” movie since it was first shown. Many of them properly criticize it for its many inherent cinematic flaws. Others angrily take it to task for its clear violations of sense or sensibility. There is also ExpelledExposed.com, the not-mentioning of which I get chided for every time I post about this movie.
Then there are some who applaud it for “speaking the truth” and “opening conversations”. On my second post about this movie, I asked people to send me links to any non-negative review coming from sources outside of the Discovery Institute (Answers in Genesis, EvolutionNews.org, etc). I suspect that there is now an effort afoot to produce as many positive reviews as there are negative ones, in order to keep things “fair and balanced” online.
After the initial spate of bad reviews by reputable critics, various Christian columnists have been lauding it for exposing the religious suppression of the “Scientific Theory of Intelligent Design” and especially the efforts of reviewers (and scientists, and “W” appointed conservative judges) to associate this “scientific theory” with the openly religious (and mostly equivalent) ideas of Creationism. Bad intellectuals, bad experts.
But, what is this Scientific Theory? Well, an idea has to have 3 elements to qualify as a scientific theory :