Sabbath School 29/10/11 - Fiction

In our local Adventist churches, there is always a story told for the children before the main sermon every Sabbath. Usually, these take the form of morality tales that reinforce simple values like kindness and honesty, or retell Bible stories in the form of modern allegories. Occasionally, though, you'll get the miracle stories. Many are innocent enough - "answered prayers" wierd coincidences that are attributed to God and such, but sometimes there'll be truly fantastical ones, which tend for some reason to always be the ones set in rural Africa. The one we ahd last week was one of the former type. It was about a couple of kids who were lost in the bush when they came across a lion. One of them remembers that their mother had told them that they should sing if ever they're cornered by a lion, so they start singing one of the well known hymns and the lion leaves them be. A short while later, some villagers who'd been looking for them arrive at the scene. They remark that they'd been led there when they heard a multitude of voices singing, the implication being that angels had joined the kids and scared the lion away.

"Well, it's just a story," some might say. What's wrong with that? Well, I have no problem with stories. I do have a problem, however, when they're being peddled to children in order to reinforce superstition. We can almost be certain that no such event has ever happened, but a child has no way of knowing that. To a child, everything you tell them is true. Every word is laden with vivid fact and they find it hard to tell what is true, what is allegory and what is pure imagination. Fairy tales also deliver to kids the same type of feeling, one of wonder at things which are not 100% true. Unlike fairytales, however, stories told in a religious setting are reinforced and never revealed outright to be simply imagination conveying a message. In the same breath, children are also told similarly fantastic stories from the Bible, which they are told are 100% infallible truth. Such stories wind up being a tool for crushing minds to better take in religious indoctrination - the child grows up with a stunted ability to tell the difference between fact and fiction, ripe for inculcating with all sorts of superstition, stories of miracles and the like.

Tomorrow, I will talk about the admissibility of stories as evidence, with particular attention paid to miracle stories.

***

Avenged Sevenfold - Fiction

The death-knell for institutionalised homophobia in Zimbabwe?

In a recent interview with the BBC, Morgan Tsvangirai, Prime Minister of Zimbabwe expressed his wish to see gay rights protected in the a new constitution, a message completely different from views he expressed a year ago, when he supported President Robert Mugabe's sentiment that gays were "worse than pigs and dogs". There has been some speculation as to the reasons for this dramatic change of heart, with some saying it is to "appease his Western masters" and similar allegations. Without a doubt the incumbent is going to try to use this to sway people's vote come the next election, but at least its a step in the right direction. Hopefully, if he's really serious about this and doesn't go changing his mind later down the line and the memory of the suffering of previous years will be enough to override peoples' prejudices, we may see the basic right to love legally protected in Zimbabwe come the next election.

Still, the very fact that taking this liberal stance may jeopardise Tsvangirai's position in the upcoming elections is unacceptable. I've heard it expressed by people that the reason Mugabe has retained power for so long is that God placed him there because of his strong homophobic stance, so that legislation protecting gay rights could not be passed in Zimbabwe. So what this means basically is that God, in all his mercy would rather see thousands brutally assaulted and killed and millions more suffering under the yoke of oppression than allow gays the rights to live their lives in peace and without fear of legally backed hatred. Not only is that morally reprehensible, it is despicable, and no loving god would ever do such a thing.

But of course, God is simply people's projection of such people's own psyche, possessing their prejudices, and such moral paradoxes are the simple proof of this fact. If people could look beyond such dogma, superstition and close-mindedness and base their morality on a common respect and compassion for their fellow man the world would be a much sweeter place for all.

Why I Am an Atheist

Got round to penning my story in response to PZ Myers' call to submit our reasons for being atheists. A more detailed account is still in the works. I haven't blogged much about my brush - oh, hell it was a goddamn scrub-down - with von Danikenism and it occurs to me that I should. Consider a series examining the Ancient Astronaut hypothesis in the works.

---

Growing up in Zimbabwe presented many challenges. Calling anyone "middle class" was a joke - you were either filthy rich, struggled to make ends meet or were so poor words could not begin to describe it. My family was part of that second group - we lived comfortably, but only just. I'm an ex-fourth generation Seventh-day Adventist, which, considering that Adventism has been in Zimbabwe for about four generations is really something. One thing I can truly thank my parents for is that they never compromised on my education. My brothers and I always went to private school, even if it meant we had to cut back on a few luxuries to do so. I was also always very inquisitive, very much a nerd and had a deep love for science that my mother encouraged. I read a lot of books, particularly about physics, astronomy and dinosaurs so questions were inevitable. I was an introspective child, though, so I tended to keep those questions to myself and try to figure things out on my own.

At twelve I was baptised into the church. I think this was the turning point at which I began to come to terms with reality, because it forced me to examine what I believed and why I believed it, where previously I could just drift along and pretend there was no conflict between my faith and my aspirations to be a scientist. It wasn't an easy journey, but less than eight months later, I came to the conclusion that God as envisioned by any Earthly religion does not exist. I still thought a higher being of some kind was possible, and so became somewhat of an agnostic.

The biggest problem I had at this stage of my life was that I had nothing concrete to fill the gap my faith left behind. One practical upshot of my country and my family's financial state was that I had no access to the solid facts I needed - I had no access to the internet and what little I did know came from the now too vague books I could access from the kids' section of the library. I was growing ever more hungry for knowledge, and would gobble up any little morsel I could get, regardless of quality. In time, this led me to a brush with pseudoscience no better than the faith I had recently forsaken.

Rifling through some old books at my grandmother's house, I found a bunch by a certain fellow called Erich von Daniken. They had the words "stars" and "space" in them , so reading was a no-brainer. What I read had me instantly hooked. Soon, I was proclaiming to all my friends how aliens had visited us in ages past and imparted us with intelligence. I was rattling off every single piece of "evidence" E vD presented - the Piri Reis map, the Ica stones, the Nasca lines, Puma Punku - with the utmost confidence that I'd finally found the truth. E vD did an excellent job of pretending to have that which I had been looking for all along - good, solid facts. His book "Miracles of the Gods" also fit in with the pseudo-mystical approach I had taken, and this led into a brief but retrospectively embarrassing flirtation with the Law of Attraction.

It was this phase, in which I wholeheartedly accepted such nonsense as is contained in "The Secret" and "What the Bleep Do We Know" that led to me taking another deep look at my beliefs. I noticed that all my "positive thinking" and meditating on the things I desired was getting me nowhere, and I started really thinking about how this actually worked. I realised that all this talk of "qantum-this" and "quantum-that" was simply a different term for the magic I used to believe in when I was still Christian. It did not take long for the rest of my belief in the supernatural to disappear, and eventually any concession of the possibility of the existence of a deity went down the drain as well.

I remember the first time I ever referred to myself as an atheist. I had just moved to a new school in Botswana. We were in a class Guidance and Counselling session and the counsellor asked me what religion I belonged to. Right there and then, I realised - much as I had once reviled those who were so "close-minded" as to outright deny the existence of a god, I had become one of them. With newfound conviction in my voice, I proudly answered, "I'm atheist." This was early in 2009, and I was 16, going on 17.

Perhaps not very oddly enough, I still lent some credence to Erich von Daniken's hypotheses. I would think to myself, "Okay, maybe he got the metaphysics wrong, but some of his facts must be right." I was also very critical of vocal atheists, even once writing a letter bashing Richard Dawkins over his hope that creating a cross between a human and chimp would end religion to the South African edition of Popular Mechanics. The Internet changed both these things, however. The Skeptic's Dictionary in particular demolished von Daniken's hypotheses, while reading of all the abuses to freedom that religion continues to perpetrate underscored the importance of activism to me.

I take a pragmatic view of the circuitous route I took to becoming rational: if it weren't for it I wouldn't be who I am today. I wouldn't have experienced first hand how harmful and limiting believing in lies can be, and wouldn't be so passionate about eliminating them. It's not my lack of belief in gods that I count as my most important trait, though. I value being a rationalist because I choose to think, a skeptic because I choose to question, a humanist because I have compassion for my fellow man and have an unbridled love for the cosmos that drives me to achieve my dream of becoming an astrophysicist. It is from this dream that I draw the deepest meaning for my life: that of discovery, and questing to understand the universe we live in.

Jabu M

Botswana

The Laws of Creatodynamics

I'm not a very consistent blogger now, am I? I actually have quite a few ideas floating around my head, but hey, I'm a lazy bastard and just couldn't be arsed to commit them to words. Guess I'll never make it big in the bloggosphere, then.

Anyway, inspired by PZ Myers' recent commentary on the latest bit of brain poop to drop out of the Hovindverse, I give you the Laws of Creatodynamics, expressing the interplay between intelligence and stupidity in the Creatoverse (adapted from the real laws of thermodynamics).

• Zeroth Law: When two individuals are as stupid as a third individual, they are as stupid as each other. (E.g. Eric Hovind is as stupid as Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron is as stupid as Ray Comfort, therefore Eric Hovind is as stupid as Kirk Cameron).

• First Law: Intelligence can never be created, but is perpetually being destroyed. Similarly, Stupidity can never be destroyed but is perpetually being created. The reason for this situation is that as the Creationist movement is being assailed by ever increasing amounts of fact it is being driven to greater levels of absurdity to rationalise its position. The simple upshot of this is that Creationism is fast heading for the Stupidity Singularity, the point at which there is absolutely no intelligence left and pure, undiluted stupidity is all that remains. No one knows what will happen when this point is reached. Perhaps the movement will simply implode, leaving the rest of humanity to mop up and discard whatever is left of it. Perhaps the concentration of raw stupidity will strain the fabric of the universe, birth a god of unbridled stupidity in the immaterium while tearing reality a new asshole in the process.

• Second Law: Intelligence cannot move from a stupider body to a more intelligent body.Makes sense, doesn't it? And it's also an observable effect: creationism has never produced anything of value to the scientific world, and it never will. Somewhat confusingly, the converse is also true: intelligence cannot move from a more intelligent body to a stupider body. Take a look at creationism in the 1900s and creationism today. There is practically no difference whatsoever between them. Pretty much the same arguments are still being used, no matter how often they have been addressed and debunked. The creationist movement learns nothing from the ever changing, ever expanding world of scientific knowledge. It only just keeps getting worse.

• Third Law: Absolute zero intelligence is attainable. Take a look at what Hovind says again. 'Nuff said.

Sabbath School 24/09/11 - An alternative interpretation of Matthew 24:24

As I was entering church this past Saturday (late as usual), someone was reading Matthew 24:24. I was immediately struck by a new interpretation of it I haven't heard before, and I'm wondering if any serious theologian/pastor has shat it out before. Matthew 24:24 reads:

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

And this got me thinking: the false prophets aren't literally prophets. The signs and wonders are things we're already taking for granted every day: the healing of diseases, increased longevity, technology. I mean, we all know the cause of disease is demonic - the only force outside of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ that can cast out demons is the master of those demonic powers themselves. Only the devil can extend the life of a human being beyond the three score years and ten our Heavenly Father hath allotted us, and the only thing outside of prayer that can allow instantaneous communication? Surely you agree with me - it has to be demonic. Those pictures you see on the television? Demons. You are inviting demonic forces into your house the moment you turn on that infernal device.

The coup de grace of the demonic deception is yet to come (for what prophet of doom worth his salt doesn't make up his own predictions?), in the form of a cure for cancer, HIV and all other of ailments God has poured out as a curse upon the sinners, satanic agents and homos (especially the homos) of this world, brought forth by the ritual demonic sacrifice of unborn children known as embryonic stem cell research and, worst of all (cue dramatic organ music), evolution.

The point of all of this will be to divert the sight of the world from the Lord and get them trusting in their own devices and their new god science. Undoubtedly, science is the greatest force driving skepticism and atheism today and has been driven from its very foundation by a diabolical agenda. You have been warned: do not partake of the forbidden fruits of science, lest you be deceived and pulled into its web as well.

And that also means my favourite reason for rejecting claims of gods, holy books and the supernatural - that science has done just fine without them and gone a long way towards disproving them - is all part of the satanic ploy...

---

P.S. - My official Back to Blogging post is coming later today or possibly tomorrow.

What do Al Qaeda and William Lane Craig have in common?

The same justification for religiously sanctioned evil actions.

Over the weekend I read WLC's post justifying the genocide of the Canaanites recorded in the Old Testament. He says:

Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

And

So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites? Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement. Not the children, for they inherit eternal life.

Then the death of Osama bin Laden prompted me to read a little of his history, and I read this on Wikipedia:

It was after this bombing that al-Qaeda was reported to have developed its justification for the killing of innocent people. According to a fatwa issued by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, the killing of someone standing near the enemy is justified because any innocent bystander will find their proper reward in death, going to Jannah (Paradise) if they were good Muslims and to Jahannam (hell) if they were bad or non-believers.^[81] The fatwa was issued to al-Qaeda members but not the general public.

Sounds nigh-on identical, doesn't it? In his article, Craig also attempts to differentiate his philosophy from that of the Jihadists. Frankly, I don't see how the supposed reason for the genocide (maintaining purity) and that of the Jihadis differ. Aren't they also "protecting" their religion from contamination and apostacy? And I don't buy the whole "our god loves everyone" schtick. The god depicted in the Old Testament is definitely partisan, favoring his worshippers over everyone else. The whole love angle came far later with Christianity, which interjected it from pagan sources.

Reading Hercolubus

As I said earlier, I've been reading Hercolubus or Red Planet by V.M. Rabolu. I'd have finished it in less than an hour had I tried but I just had to take a long break to avoid bursting my sides with laughter. The book is just full of the most ludicrous and absurd New Agey and anti-science woo-woo man has ever seen. Or I've ever seen. I've kept my interaction with stupidity to a minimum since I became a skeptic.

Rabolu obviously has(or had - he's dead) something against "those we falsely call scientists" - and it shows: he has absolutely no scientific knowledge whatsoever. Take the section "Nuclear Tests And The Ocean". He talks about the sea being in contact with "the fire within the Earth" and causing cyclones and earthquakes. The consequence of this will be the Earth sinking into its ocean. How a planet sinks into its own ocean is beyond me. Maybe he's a flat-earther too? Somehow, getting cooked isn't the worst consequence of the boiling of the oceans, but darkness and planes not being able to fly is. Yah. And the sea is also apparently a living organism that breathes and contaminates our air.



Rabolu's description of the consequences of undersea nuclear testing (which was banned in 1996, by the way) sounds like he learnt it from The Simpsons... you know, the three eyed fish, laser vision squirrels and tentacled trees that live in Springfield? Apparently, something like that is happening in our own oceans. And Rabolu's sea monsters can't be destroyed by mere bullets. They "developed from atomic energy", therefore they are "atomic".

The real laughbucket of the book is the section on extraterrestrials. He apparently thinks sci-fi movies are in fact polemic documentaries produced by the despicable North Americans. He obviously knows better of course - he's actually been to Venus and Mars.



For some reason, the picture of physical perfection the Venusians possess sounds a lot like miniature versions of Hitler's Aryan race - blonde hair and blue eyes, only 1.3-1.4 metres tall. Rabolu's description of ET life contains some of the oddest, most useless details, from belts that flash like lighthouses to the fact that they grow trees on their house roofs. He also seems to think fish are not meat - take this quote about the Venusians' dietary habits:

From there, they go to machines, where the fish are pulverised and more natural vitamins are added [as opposed to artificial ones?]. This is another of their foods. The same is done with vegetables. No one eats any kind of meat there.

After this graphic description of the fishes' evisceration, we are told they do not eat meat of any kind? Lol.

The Venusians can also control weather with their thoughts. I'm wondering - everyone has different tastes of the weather, so how do they sort each other out? Do they take turns?

I guess what is meant to be the most important part of the book is the esoterica on death and astral projection that comes at the end. That's where the mantras come in, and Rabolu instructs us on how we can do what he can too, and see Mars and Venus and the alien spaceships and the Red Planet itself. The cornerstone of his projection techniques are the mantras: La Ra S and Fa Ra On. I'm a bit surprised there were no drugs involved.


I did not at all take Hercolubus seriously - it's very difficult to, many may agree. Especially when I'm rhyming like I'm under an apple tree. The sad thing is that some people buy this stuff - obviously very rich people too, who are financing the whole free book thing (small wonder they don't ask for peoples' money like others of their ilk - they've already snagged some pretty big fish). In a few years, the whole 2012 catastrophism thing will have blown over and its sheep will have moved on to whatever new woo will be fashionable at the time. Unfortunately, the damage will already have been done and some well-meaning, philanthropical soul will already have had his money blown on some stupid piece of stupidity instead of giving their money to real world causes. I hope someone investigates the Alcione organisation, which is perpetuating all this nonsense and exposes them for the frauds they really are.

EDIT: You can still order the book for free from www.hercolubus.tv.

What's So Funny Indeed - Part 2

Two days ago, I wrote about this article in a blog post titled "What's So Funny Indeed", in which I talked about the importace of evidence. The author of the article chose to close with a statement I feel deserves to be adressed. The statement went thus:

There is a common thread to these stories, it seems to me; and others like them. That thread is that the acknowledgment of the God of heaven is considered so sensible that disbelief, doubt, and infidelity are contrasted as practically comical.

It should therefore not surprise anyone that disbelief is labeled by the psalmist as foolish. What is not funny, however, is that foolishness, almost by definition, is quite misleading; and when we choose to engage in it (as regards disbelief in God)--as is our God-given right--we are misled into ironically believing, of all things, that this is actually a sign of intelligent reasoning.

If it weren’t for the immediate consequences of disobedience and the eternal consequences of disbelief, it would all perhaps be funny.

I get this banality a lot from Christian friends and occassional correspondences on the 'net, typically with a quote of Proverbs 14:12:

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

As I interpret it, I think this argument posits that human reasoning is imperfect, therefore it cannot be used to obtain a clear picture of reality, the supernatural and so on. But, I'll ask, if not rationality, then what? Are we supposed to take it all on faith?

Most Christians, when I ask them say that I am required to take what they say by faith. The argument that we are simply supposed to take the bible's teachings by faith is fraught with much peril, though. It teakes for granted that Christianity is the only religion and that the person to whom it is being made is Christian. Well, Christianity is only one among many religions, and each of them requires the same of its adherents: faith. There is not a single argument in favour of Christianity that does not apply to or has not found use in any of the other religions in the world, particularly the major religions which virtually have armies of people all working towards making their religion more palatable to others.

When I point out the similarity of Christianity with other religions, people tend try to persuade me to return to the religion I was born into. Return to the truth you were raised in, they say. This seems like a very good argument to most, who tend to have no knowledge of any other religion or viewpoint, having been sheltered and nursed exclusively within the faith. These people tend to overlook anther thing: if this argument ought to work with me, won't it work for and similarly apply to members of other religions? How, then, if we are to remain with the belief we were raised in, do they expect to woo others to their own religion? Once again, this is an argument that, if valid, applies equally to all religions.

Our reason may not be perfect, but in the face of all these conflicting religions spouting the same claims it's the best thing we've got. I see no real worth in this argument, save perhaps as something the faithful tell each other to comfort themselves.

What's So Funny Indeed

Just read this blog article on the Adventist Today site, home of a "progressive Adventist" publication, talking about some funny stuff in the Bible. The author states that his favorite "funny" Bible stories is the story of Job. I quite agree with him. The story of Job is quite hilarious:

And we agree on which part's the funniest:

After questioning God's decisions, Job is asked by God where he was while God conducted His Creative activities. It was as if God was saying, "You've got a lot of nerve, young man, questioning my wisdom and sovereignty. Do you know who you're talking to? But, tell you what...I'll answer your questions, if you will answer mine." You gotta love a God like that, don't you?

He kills Job's kids, destroys his possessions and gives him herpes all over and still has the fortitude to waggle his finger at Job. Yeah, really great guy, this God dude.

But there's another point to be had here:

Another favorite of course would have to be the story of Elijah actually taunting and teasing the prophets of Baal and their god(s). This taunting was hilarious; remember... "maybe your god is sleeping"? How funny is that?! Elijah was totally confident that the prophets of Baal were praying to... absolutely nobody, and that he, on the other hand, was praying to the true and living God--who would reward his cockiness, no less. I mean, he wanted water everywhere. He was actually "showing off" (as my mother would say); and then God Himself showed off, rewarding Elijah's faith while simultaneously shaming the heathens. What a sense of humor!

So in this story, Elijah was an atheist - an a-baal-ist - and challenged the prophets of Baal with providing evidence for the presence of their god. So, if this fellow asked for evidence from the prophets of Baal, is it unreasonable for us atheists who do not believe not only in Baal but all other gods, Yahweh/Jehovah included, to ask for evidence of them?

It's also a valid question to wonder why Yahweh used to perform such signs and wonders as this but no longer does. Thousands of miracles are written about in the bible and each is depicted as flamboyant and unambiguously a supernatural act. Why is it that such displays no longer occur? Why is it that the "miracles" of today are either unverifiable or can just as easily (and more credibly) be explained as placebo effects or natural occurrences that are not well understood, or even simply as chance occurrences that when viewed through the blinkers of faith seem miraculous?

The gauntlet has been thrown down on many occasions, not least of which is James Randi's Million Dollar Challenge, which covers any supernatural occurrence. No one has yet produced conclusive proof and successfully claimed the prize. Whenever people place their health "in the hands of God", it tends to end badly and most Christians submit themselves to proper medical treatment. Is this a sign that they are not fully convinced of their god's healing powers?

We could organise a challenge like this. We could have, maybe, two cancer patients in the early stages of illness, one receiving medical treatment and the other the fervent prayers of his family, friends, church community, hell, even the whole world and see who gets better. But such a challenge would be unethical in much the same way as those who deny their children medical treatment behave unethically. And their track record is evidence enough to dispel any supernatural notions.

Sabbath School 06/02/11 - The Devil ain't no telepath

I learnt something fascinating at Sabbath School yesterday: Satan cannot read our minds! Ain't that just wonderful! Now, I was prepared to ignore this particular bit of childish fantasizing, but I really could not pass on the whopper that followed. Want to know how to thwart him? Don't say your thoughts out loud. Yeah, that's right. If you do, he can then us his knowledge against you and place corresponding temptations in your path.

And here I am thinking, are these real, fully grown adults saying these things? I mean, this is the kind of thing you'd expect to hear from kids, sort of like "don't say 'boogeyman' three times while you're in bed or else he'll appear underneath it"! I've found myself noticing these things a lot of late and I tend to get this "like, seriously?" smile on my face when I do. People then tend to think it's because I have something to say but when they ask me I politely decline and say "no, it's nothing." I'm beginning to feel that this, coupled with the fact that I barely say more than ten words from the time I enter the church gates to the time I leave has got them thinking I am a very odd person indeed.

Well, this is what religion really is, a system of childish beliefs held by people who've somehow failed to grow up(in a bad way - not growing up is good in certain circumstances), throw off the shackles of reckless fantasy and embrace the cold, hard truth of reality and make something good out of it.

On a sadder note, oner of the church elders is currently in a critical condition in hospital. He's an ex-alcoholic and his godless past is finally catching up with him. Now, just a few weeks ago everyone had been praising God for his miraculous recovery and saying how marvelous He'd been in answering their prayers (the elder had been in hospital for quite a while before that).

Now, I am not going to use this as an opportunity to gloat - I am not some heartless, evil demon. But I do wish to deliver a lesson through this. Put simply: sometimes people get better. Sometimes they don't. It's the way of life - no hocus-pocus magic men in the sky necessary.

I am definitely hoping the old man gets beter. He's a genial, soft-spoken fellow and I have developed quite a soft spot for him. I haven't a shadow of a doubt that hands of flesh and blood are doing their best to keep him with us, and I hope they succeed. All we can do in addition to this is to let him know that we are behind him and hoping for his recovery. In fact, this is where I think prayer makes a difference, in lending the person and their family support in their trying hour - no magic involved. And let's also not belittle the advances in science that actually give him a shot at survival he would not have had mere decades ago.

P.S. - About a week ago I reported that 2011 is the Seventh-Day Adventist Year of Revival and Reformation. Well, as it turns out, the theme isn't just for this year, but the next five years (couldn't find any links - I heard it at church yesterday).

EDIT(7/2/11 - 22:35) - I've just learnt that the elder I spoke about has passed away. They'll probably never read this, but his family has my deepest sympathies.

Weird and Wonderful Woo from All Around The World

We Africans have some very odd beliefs:

For some reason the primeval MWUETSI was popped into the bottom of a lake along with a horn of Ngona oil. This is amazingly fertile stuff and soon the lake was full of aquatic life. But MWUETSI complained bitterly. Not only were living conditions far too damp, he had gone right off raw fish suppers.

But placed against some Middle-Eastern beliefs...:

In the beginning, YAHWEH created the Heavens and the Earth. It only took him six days with no hired help. He also found the time to include incontrovertible evidence of a Big Bang, presumably to annoy future cosmologists...

...they really don't look so bad, do they?