Search This Blog

Friday, February 27, 2009

Mac Wars

Some people might tend to think that I am of the mind that getting rid of religion will get rid of war. This is simply not the case, as I realize that the reasons for war are deeply rooted in human psychology and are not simply all caused by religion. Sadly, after religion is gone, there will still be things such as nationalism and limited resources to fight over. I do think that not all hope is lost and we are simply doomed to fight each other forever though, s I think that many of the source have both common causes and common remedies, such as expanding the scope of who we see as a member of our ‘tribe’.


Let me tell you though what I think will be the next great, post religious war. I believe that the next great war will be between Mac and PC users. Well actually, as Mac might be construed as a religion, this might instead be the last great religious war. At any rate, In the year circa 3428, at the command of the 11th clone of the supreme leader Steve Jobs, Mac users will engage in ‘OS Jihad’ in which they will attempt to bring new meaning to the words ‘Mac world’ though an orgy of violence against all those that still use a PC. They, despite there numerical disadvantage, believing themselves to the smartest, hippest and most creative people in the world by virtue of owning Mac, will rise up and declare that all infidels that do not convert to Mac-ism and follow the prophet Jobs will be killed!


I am joking about all of this of course, but I wrote this after watching a documentary called “Macheads” which confirmed my belief that some people have a religious like devotion to Mac and their leader, Apple CEO Steve Jobs. There is one part of his Mac world documentary where they talk with a sense of foreboding and trepidation that is Mac goes under, they might have to one day use a PC!!! Oh, the horror!!! “We would have went into the dark ages if apple went away” is a quote from one woman. Really?! The dark ages?! You don’t say! After watching it, I wanted to take clips from the documentary and juxtapose it with clips from a video on how a cult works. The parallels at points were scary.


As I have stated before in a video, I have no ill-will against Mac. I do not own one because I simply do not have the money to buy one with the sort of power that I want. Nearest I can tell, Mac is a very stable platform, but you are stuck mostly with the hardware you get (IE you cannot just go out and get a new video card, except on the most expensive models) and most people seem seduced mainly by the granny-ware. Personally, having experience with audio, video, photo and 3D modeling and compositing, I am not exactly someone who needs iMovie to do all my thinking for me. The reality with software is that most of it that is worth a shit actually requires something of an effort to learn, regardless of the system you are running it on. 99.999999% of all easy to use software lacks any significant robustness. Also, I hear the point that, allegedly, all creative professionals use a Mac. However, when I look at what the industry leading software is, it is things which are cross compatible (like Photoshop) or even a couple of things that are PC only. My point is I fail to see the true substance behind all the hype, but boy do they cost a lot.

Monday, February 23, 2009

TAG is still a failure.... Sorry!

I just watched Matt Dillahunty’s debate with Matt Slick over his version of the TAG (Transcendental argument) on the Atheist Experience. While I think that Dillahunty did a much better job then the last time, when a different host debated slick, he still failed to get at the most effective and simple refutation of TAG which is to point out that the argument is circular. TAG claims that there are logical laws which are absolutes, that those absolutes are mind dependent, and then that because “our minds disagree” we cannot be the source of those absolutes, so there must be an absolute and perfect mind behind reality. The problem here is that in a hypothetical universe without minds, either these laws would not exist, and thus not be absolutes or they would exist, making them non-mental. If these laws are mental then the absolute nature of these laws is contingent on there being an absolute mind, which is what the argument attempts to conclude. Ergo, it is circular. It simply amazes me how many theists parrot this argument mindlessly none the less.

Let me also state that Matt Slick is a whinny bitch. I actually could not make it thought all 5 pars of the video without having to turn it off for wanting fly to Idaho and smack him upside the head.

The debate can be found here:

Another atheist experience channel

The official Atheist Experience website

Matt Slick’s version of TAG

Tuesday, February 10, 2009


I have jumped on yet another bandwagon

Friday, February 6, 2009

Renewed Motivations

I have been struggling to gather motivation to write a book on the subject of atheism. As of late I simply have not felt like doing much productive. That was till this morning when I went on YouTube and watched a video someone had sent me as an “Epic Fail!” candidate by a user named Since33AD with a link on the side to the conservapedia article on atheism. Needless to say, the article was so full of bull shit that I feel a new breath of life come into my desire to write my book. Needless to say, the conservapedia article was nothing more then a totally bias and heavy handed bit of atheist bashing filled with the usual tripe.