Posts Tagged ‘Jesus’

REPOST: Martian Jesus

January 13, 2011

A recently released picture of the Martian surface has ignited some controversy in the most widely circulated newspaper in the UK (“Has Jesus Christ Been Spotted On Mars?”). The question mark in the headline apparently means they’re not quite sure if there was an alteration of the Martian surface in order to make it sort of kind of look like Jesus:

Jesus had 3 visible boobs.

Jesus had 3 visible boobs.

Some possible explanations:

  1. After his resurrection, Jesus flew around the solar system to preach at organisms on other worlds. He couldn’t find any, so he decided to make a self-portrait on the surface of the planet to which humans would probably first travel. It was too much work, and Jesus gave up after a few years.
  2. Jesus was really a giant Martian buried underground, and when he punched his way out of his burial-place (like Uma Thurman in Kill Bill 2), he left behind an outline of a vaguely human-ish figure on the Martian surface.
  3. Intelligent life on Mars which has since gone extinct heard about Jesus on Earth by being very quiet and listening in on the Middle East region 2000 years ago and then just decided to alter the surface of their planet to make it look kind of like a human, just for the fuck of it.
  4. Mars is a big planet on which erosion happens. There are no oceans on the surface, so that leaves a lot of possibilities for geological features which might kind of sort of look like a human. Since we’ve evolved in a way to recognize faces, it is not surprising that we would sometimes mistakenly perceive a face. There’s even a name for this phenomenon.

I wonder which is the most likely.

If it really were a face, then it should look that way from all angles. For example, here is a rotated picture of a human face which is still easy to identify as a human face:


Even though this is not how we normally see other humans, it is still easily recognizable as a face. And here’s a rotated shot of the same photo of the Martian surface:

Unless you’re already looking for Jesus here, you won’t see it. You have to want to see it. That should have given pause to whichever Daily Telegraph editor OK’d this story. On the other hand, ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue…

Advertisements

Jesus gets an IQ test

December 23, 2010

The Annals of Improbable Research (the people who do the Ig Nobel Awards) were apparently browsing the Angelfire archives and stumbled across this guy who has calculated Jesus’ IQ, and it’s 300! Or maybe 450. It’s somewhere between those two, and this Bob person gives his calculations a little more wiggle room by qualifying them as “within this author’s ability to reasonably measure.”

And it’s a good thing Bob made sure he limited his Jesus IQ test to what’s within reason. You wouldn’t want irresponsible people to measure Jesus’ IQ in an unreasonable way. Sure, maybe there’s no evidence Jesus even knew how to read or write and maybe all of the main historical data on Jesus was second or third hand hearsay written by mostly anonymous sources who use a lot of mythical elements in their contradicting accounts of Jesus, but it’s important to stay within the bounds of reason, for example by claiming he had an IQ of around 400.

Hungarian Jesus

April 25, 2010

So Jesus is still making the paredolia rounds. To briefly recap, lately we’ve seen Jesus in a frying pan, a ceiling, a toiletIndian food, a moth, a cloudnaan bread, a hospital, a coconutcat’s furgum, a barbecue cover, a banana, a curtain, and the surface of Mars. Now he’s showing up on Google Earth which proves that Google really is supernatural. Here’s a screen shot:

That settles it. Jesus is Hungarian and owned by Google.

Jesus wore pants, not a dress!

February 16, 2010

This is my new favorite preacher. I’m pretty sure he’s the same guy as the one who was screaming about world leaders sitting down to piss. But here he’s getting all Taliban-y about women showing any skin at all is a horrible sin:

Where is your pot of gold?

January 18, 2010

Here is some interactive Jesus pareidolia.

More Jesus pareidolia

January 12, 2010

Jesus is appearing on naan bread now. I’m very excited about this because there is a bit more detail in this one than in this one or this one and definitely more than this one.

But it still looks more like Al Jourgensen than whatever Jesus might have looked like. Observe:

I am seeing a pattern here. As the level of detail of the object of religious pareidolia increases, resemblance to Al Jourgensen approaches, but never quite reaches, 1. For example here you can actually see stubble in Jesus. And as usual, one of the eyes is all fucked up, but you can at least see a full facial outline without any missing splotches.

Jesus is balding

December 26, 2009

At least he is if you look at this completely compelling photographic evidence:

He doesn’t even seem to have a top of a head, either. And his eyes are all out of whack.

This can’t be Jesus. It must be Jesus’ twin brother with fetal alcohol syndrome. But it’s probably Al Jourgensen from Ministry:

Does this mean that Al Jourgensen is Jesus’ brother with fetal alcohol syndrome? Or that Jesus really did build his hotrod? The questions never end.

Really though, if an all-powerful deity’s going to communicate with us through images on fruit, couldn’t it do better than an unconvincing outline? Couldn’t it use more than one color? Why pussyfoot around with these vaguely humanish face-like splotches in curtains and fruit? What, bringing someone back from the dead 2000 years ago was no problem, but now it can’t even seem to provide better evidence than could be made by some pimply-faced kid at Kinko’s? I’m just saying, if this God thing has been slacking off this badly, maybe you people should reconsider this whole worshipping it concept in the first place. It’s clearly losing its touch for miracles.

Arguments atheists shouldn’t use

November 27, 2009

With all the “new atheist” brouhaha, there’s bound to be a few kids who are new to freethought making bad arguments, messing up our lawns, and otherwise making the rest of us cranky. When believers encounter nonbelievers like this, they might understandably take such bad arguments and lack of concern for lawn care to be characteristic of atheists, which would only then serve to reinforce their faith. So here are some quality control tips for the kiddies.

Bad argument: “Genesis has two different accounts of the creation of the universe. Since they’re different, both can’t be true. The existence of the two stories is a biblical contradiction, and a divinely inspired work cannot contradict itself. Therefore the Bible can’t have been divinely inspired.”

Why it’s dumb: It is implausible that the holy text of the ancient Jews would for centuries include two contradictory accounts for no reason, with no explanaion, and without anyone noticing. It’s right there in the first few pages. The contradictory passages must be there for some deeper reason other than serving as some kind of AP report of what God did when he created the Universe. Most believers will immediately respond that the second story is an interpretation of one of the days of the first.

What you should say: This point is really only helpful to bring up against people like Ken Ham and his friends at Answers in Genesis who insist that they don’t interpret the Bible, and that they simply read God’s Word as is. Self-professed biblical literalists, in other words. It’s all well and good to try to understand the Bible literally, but when confronted with the contradictory creation accounts they will invariably give a response very much like what I just said above. But the problem with that is that it’s not actually in the text. Nowhere in Genesis does it actually say that one account is an extrapolation of the other. The two stories are simply mentioned one after the other. A more sophisticated believer can interpret what they like, but a literalist would have to admit that they are using their own human reason in order to come to an understanding of the text, and not simply the text itself. And the human reason they would use to do such is a product of the Fall – a point made constantly in Ken Ham’s creationist “museum.”

Bad argument: “Religion is a disease.”

Why it’s dumb: This meme came from an essay by Richard Dawkins called Viruses of the Mind. It compares the way that viruses and memes infect hosts for their own benefit and not that of the host. But Dawkins goes to great lengths to make the point that viruses aren’t necessarily always bad things. Most of the time they are neutral. This and other caveats and intricacies are areas where Dawkins is great at explaining, and they’re lost when you just tell someone that their beliefs are a cancer which must be destroyed.

What you should say: Simply point out that the best predictor of one’s religious convictions happens to be their geographical location. This should give believers pause. Why doesn’t God transcend geographical boundaries? Why does religion, like language, appear to have evolved from the bottom-up by cultural means instead of given to us by a deity from the top-down?

Bad argument: Jesus condoned slavery, and even the beating of slaves in Luke 12:47

And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

Jesus also made this strange and barbaric request in Luke 19:27

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Why it’s dumb: Read it in context. These are parables.

What you should say: Sure, they’re parables meant to teach a lesson. It’s just that the lessons here are very immoral because they promote a Might Makes Right mentality commonly found within authoritarian systems such as Christianity. To be fair, Jesus wasn’t just swinging around a sword, screaming like a maniac while (if) he was saying what he said in Matthew 10:34

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

, but the point to make is that he didn’t have to actually have a sword to be immoral in this instance. That is all for now.

No wonder they grow up to be such nuts

October 8, 2009

… when Christian kids are watching stuff like this:

Creepy.

Reminds me of this:

What do you see?

October 8, 2009

Here:

And here:

Do you still not see it? Really? It’s right there, plain as day! Maybe if it’s outlined, that will help:

You still don’t see it?

Yeah, me neither.

This is supposed to be another one of Jesus’ wacky tricks. First he was carving himself onto the Martian surface, and now he’s appearing in a Bishopville, SC preacher’s curtains. That Jesus, always messing with us in ways that just happen to look exactly like crazy people acting crazily.

“Something told me to look in the kitchen and I sat and I looked in the kitchen. I looked at the window, and that’s when I see this image focused on my curtain.”

-Barbara Brame, deranged minister

“Something” told her to look into the kitchen? Maybe it was… SATAN! Well, why not?

See, usually when people say that they hear voices telling them to do something and they see patterns where none exist, we call that schizophrenia. But all you have to do is throw Jesus or Mohammed in there somewhere, and suddenly you go from being a mental institution’s newest inpatient to being soft “news.” Brame will continue to be a pillar of the community there in Bishopville.

Martian Jesus

September 4, 2009

A recently released picture of the Martian surface has ignited some controversy in the most widely circulated newspaper in the UK (“Has Jesus Christ Been Spotted On Mars?”). The question mark in the headline apparently means they’re not quite sure if there was an alteration of the Martian surface in order to make it sort of kind of look like Jesus:

Jesus had 3 visible boobs.

Jesus had 3 visible boobs.

Some possible explanations:

  1. After his resurrection, Jesus flew around the solar system to preach at organisms on other worlds. He couldn’t find any, so he decided to make a self-portrait on the surface of the planet to which humans would probably first travel. It was too much work, and Jesus gave up after a few years.
  2. Jesus was really a giant Martian buried underground, and when he punched his way out of his burial-place (like Uma Thurman in Kill Bill 2), he left behind an outline of a vaguely human-ish figure on the Martian surface.
  3. Intelligent life on Mars which has since gone extinct heard about Jesus on Earth by being very quiet and listening in on the Middle East region 2000 years ago and then just decided to alter the surface of their planet to make it look kind of like a human, just for the fuck of it.
  4. Mars is a big planet on which erosion happens. There are no oceans on the surface, so that leaves a lot of possibilities for geological features which might kind of sort of look like a human. Since we’ve evolved in a way to recognize faces, it is not surprising that we would sometimes mistakenly perceive a face. There’s even a name for this phenomenon.

I wonder which is the most likely.

If it really were a face, then it should look that way from all angles. For example, here is a rotated picture of a human face which is still easy to identify as a human face:


Even though this is not how we normally see other humans, it is still easily recognizable as a face. And here’s a rotated shot of the same photo of the Martian surface:

Unless you’re already looking for Jesus here, you won’t see it. You have to want to see it. That should have given pause to whichever Daily Telegraph editor OK’d this story. On the other hand, ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue ad revenue…