Looks like a bunch of homeopathy supporters have got sick of not being taken seriously on the internet, and decided that the best way to gain the respect of the wider community is to spam wikipedia until the service is overloaded. I’m not sure whether the intent is just a DoS, or if they think people will just get so tired of reverting their edits that they just roll over and let them have their say. Either way, it’s a stupid plan; the absolute most they’ll achieve is that the pages they target will be locked until they themselves get bored and go away.
In any case, I wonder if the irony of the whole idea is lost on them? Surely the homeopathic way to do this would be to have one person say, very very quietly, what they want on the page, while in the same room as someone who knows someone who knows someone who knows someone who knows someone who is a Wikipedia user.
Hat tip to @xtaldave for the link.
From the Telegraph, about the Large Hadron Collider (emphasis mine, for the good bit):
Such is the angst that the American Nobel prize winning physicist Frank Wilczek of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has even had death threats, said Prof Brian Cox of Manchester University, adding: “Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat.”
’nuff said.
The problem with throwing around phrases like epic fail for trivial things like incorrectly rating fruit, getting roman numerals wrong right on a watch, or falling out of your exercise-wheel, and with getting irate about someone incorrectly identifying a harvestman as an insect or a spider or both, is that it leaves you very little room to express your even greater incredulity when you see something like this.
I’m going to assume that no-one needs me to point out the obvious flaw with that?
Wow. Just… wow.
I don’t know where to begin.
A few days ago, a student at the University of Central Florida attended mass at his Church. During communion, when the wafer was placed into his mouth, instead of eating it, he took it and walked out. Catholics went nuts; even after he gave it back, the Catholic League (more on them in a moment,) said
We don’t know 100% what Mr. Cooks motivation was. However, if anything were to qualify as a hate crime, to us this seems like this might be it.
We just expect the University to take this seriously. To send a message to not just Mr. Cook but the whole community that this kind of really complete sacrilege will not be tolerated.
Overreacting much? Actually, that kind of sacrilege will be tolerated, especially in America, where freedom of religion (and from religious persecution) is guaranteed by the constitution. Of course, the fanatics don’t quite see it that way, and the poor kid has been getting death threats. Because that’s what turning the other cheek means in America.
Oh, and just so we’re clear: stealing a cracker is a hate crime, but sending death threats? Oh, that’s perfectly acceptable, rational behaviour. If you don’t like the person. And if he’s stolen your magic lunch.
Enter PZ Myers, who, as usual, wrote about it the way it is, in a piece entitled It’s a Frackin’ Cracker. As usual, he pulled no punches in describing the mob as what they are: well… a mob. He also offered to desecrate a communion wafer, if anyone would send him one. Cue a rapid switch of target on the part of the Catholic League; they’re now engaged in a full-on offensive on PZ. Not for anything he’s done, but for something he said he’d do. To a cracker. Apparently conspiracy to wound a biscuit is a cardinal sin if you’re an insane Catholic — and Bill Donohue, the leader of the Catholic League, certainly counts.
So — to get to the point — the Catholic League are trying to stir up a good ol’ fashioned witch hunt, and are inundating PZ with hate mail and death threats, and his employer with demands that he be fired. This is, to be frank, unacceptable. All PZ has done is exercise his right to freedom of expression, and he’s being targeted by a hate campaign. So what to do? Start up a support campaign, that’s what.
PZ is asking that people write a short note of support to President Robert Bruininks of his University — the University of Minnesota, Morris — and I second his request. PZ is one of the more outspoken voices of reason on the internet, and it would be a shame if he were made to suffer unduly for something as simple as expressing his opinion. If you’re a rational person, even if you’re religious, and don’t agree with PZ, please consider writing a note in support of his right to express himself without fear of being victimised.
I already have. Here’s what I wrote:
Dear Sir,
I’d like to take this chance to add a note to the probably hundreds you’ve already received in support of PZ. He’s a great writer, a great educator, and a credit to your institution.
It’s true that he’s outspoken, and that he pulls no punches in expressing his opinions. That is not a crime, and if Bill Donohue and his supporters restrained themselves to responding in kind then there would be no problem. The fact that they have not, that they have resorted to a campaign of mass harassment, of death threats, and trying to cost PZ his job – in short, a campaign of terrorism – merely underlines why it is so important that we have people like PZ who are unafraid to call these people out on their hypocrisy, and to criticise their unacceptable behaviour in public.
I hope that the incoherent screaming of the mob will not prejudice you against PZ in any way, and that he will be allowed to continue to bring credit to your institution amongst free-thinkers and rationalists across the globe.
Sincerely,
Will Goring,
Reading,
United Kingdom.
Apparently, in Sweden, people are granted the human right to be invited to any birthday party they want. Bureaucracy ftw!
Joking asside, this is a symptom of something we’re seeing more and more; this pervasive idea that people have the right not to be offended. Yes, it’s pretty harsh not to be invited to a party that everyone else is going to, but that doesn’t mean you have the right to go. You have the right to call the kid a jerk for not inviting you, and you have the right to reciprocally not invite him to your party, but that’s it. It’s his party and it’s his right to decide who’s invited. It’s a pretty stupid, trivial example, but it’s just a symptom of the same sort of thinking that leads people to think they have a right not to have their beliefs challenged or their stupidity ridiculed. It’s a dangerous trend, because often one person’s “right” not to be offended is indirect opposition to someone else’s actual rights. In this case it’s the right of a child to not invite people he doesn’t like into his house, which is important enough, but in more extereme case, it might be someone’s freedom of speech or of expression that’s being suppressed to keep people from being put out, and I don’t care how you dress it; freedom of speech is more important than anyone’s sensibilities.
I just couldn’t believe it when I read it; two men have been caught chipping fragments from the Heel Stone at Stonehenge. The BBC refers to them as both vandals and “souvenir hunters,” and, while I suspect it’s technically true, I can’t help feeling that the second term lends an undeserved air of legitimacy to what they did. Let’s be clear about this; there is no excuse for their actions. They thought it was acceptable behaviour to damage a beloved and fascinating national treasure, which belongs to us all, in order to claim exclusive ownership of a tiny fragment of it. They’re scum, pure and simple.
… or er something.
Suddenly I feel a lot better about myself again. I mean, I might have underestimated the diversity of an important order of mammals, but at least I can tell the difference between a cat and an orange. This guy is either stupid enough that he can’t or stupid enough to think scientists can’t. I’m not sure which would be worse.
In any case, PZ says everything that needs to be said.
Both Phil and Ed have linked to this story:
After the Sunday service in Westminster Chapel, where worshippers were exhorted to wage “the culture war” in the World War II spirit of Sir Winston Churchill, cabbie James McLean delivered his verdict on Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.
“Evolution is a lie, and it’s being taught in schools as fact, and it’s leading our kids in the wrong direction,” said McLean, chatting outside the chapel. “But now people like Ken Ham are tearing evolution to pieces.”
They seem to think it’s funny, and I guess I can see why; they’ve been living with this level of idiocy for a long time. Personally, I find it depressing whenever it rears its head on this side of the Atlantic.
Hat tip to Mike the Mad Biologist for the spot. (Do follow that link, to read about Mike’s ideas for an FMT.)
Update: Yes, I know it’s actually correct. I’ve been told a few hundred times (well, five) in the comments already. You don’t need to add your voice to the echo chamber if that’s all you have to say.
Merriam-Webster have announced ‘w00t’ as their word of the year this year. I first saw this on the Metro this morning, but when I got to work and Googled it, I found it reported pretty much everywhere. Unfortunately on their web-site the Metro coverage has taken on a somewhat tounge-in-cheek tone and been placed in their “weird” section. The paper publication had a much more endearingly earnest and bewildered tone about it.
I’m really not sure I entirely approve of the choice. I mean w00t is not a word, it’s a misspelling of an exclamation of joy. It’s really not that distinct from making “booya” your word of the year. The whole thing smacks of an attempt by Miriam Webster to show that they’re ‘down’ with the way ‘the kids’ are making use of language today, and prove that they’re still relevant in a world where kids take pride in not being able to write a real English sentence. Obviously, as a gamer (and an online wit!) I’ve been known to use 1337-speak on occasion, but I’m not under the impression that I’m part of some avant-garde linguistic revolution; the whole thing is a convoluted online joke born out of the normal teenagers’ desire to communicate without their parents knowing what they’re saying. It’s not a “new way of using language,” it’s a modern take on that ridiculous pig-latin thing that most kids learn to talk in at the age of six, and we, as adults, should not be dignifying it with a place in the dictionary; ixnay on the eetlay-peaksay.
Anyway, who says ‘w00t’ anymore? Surely they should have gone for ‘FTW!’