There will be a wrap-up of the atheist symbol discussion tomorrow—I'll put up a post with the most popular options and invite people to defend them—but until then, savor this amusing artwork.
(No, it's not a serious contender, it's just funny!)
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
It is surely harmful to souls to make it a heresy to believe what is proved.
[Galileo Galilei, "The Authority of Scripture in Philosophical Controversies"]
Recent Posts
- Things to do when you're godless
- Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
- How can we not?
- List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- I'm having bad acid flashbacks, man
- That sneaky, nasty blasphemy law
- Rise up, Texans!
- Nice euphemism
- Dutch poll needs a little help
- But he doesn't know my mom
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Kamaka on Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
- Maarten Boudry on It isn't an exclusionary filter, it's a standard of quality
- a_ray_in_dilbert_space on List of science blogs, with an asterisk
- Kamaka on Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
- Carlie on Nothing will stop the never-ending thread! Nothing!
- Jimmy-boy on A reasonable deconversion
- a_ray_in_dilbert_space on Is brain damage a prerequisite for joining the Republican party?
- Kel, OM on Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
- El Guerrero del Interfaz on I'm home!
- John Morales on Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be
Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
Other Information
« It's all over except for the final whimper | Main | This could backfire on Pawlenty »
I like it!
Category: Godlessness • Humor
Posted on: November 2, 2006 9:23 AM, by PZ Myers
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/24902
Comments
Posted by: J-Dog | November 2, 2006 9:38 AM
It SHOULD be a serious contender!
This is great! It gets the point accross, and it's memorable... what more do you want?
This even has the "stigmata"! (For all you hell-bound raised Protestants, Muslims and Jews, "stigmata" is the Latin / Catholic terminology for holes-in-the-hands.)
I ain't afraid of no holy ghost!
Posted by: dorkafork | November 2, 2006 9:40 AM
Presented without comment.
Posted by: dorkafork | November 2, 2006 9:42 AM
That link has sound, BTW.
Posted by: 99 bottles | November 2, 2006 9:50 AM
This should be a serious contender. The other logos too closely resemble variants of the crucifix. Unless the point of the logo is merely to be secret sign communicating between atheists.
Posted by: 99 bottles | November 2, 2006 9:56 AM
GODBUSTERS
If there's someone strange in your neighborhood
Who ya gonna call (godbusters)
If it's someone weird an they don't think good
Who ya gonna call (ghostbusters)
I ain't afraid a no god
I ain't afraid a no god
If you're hearin things runnin' thru your head
Who can you call (godbusters)
An' invisible god, watch you sleep in bed
Oh who ya gonna call (godbusters)
I ain't afraid a no god
I ain't afraid a no god
Who ya gonna call (godbusters)
If you're all alone don't let god pwn
An call (godbusters)
I ain't afraid a no god
I hear he likes the girls
I ain't afraid a no god
Who you gonna call (godbusters)
Mm...if you've had a dose
Of a freaky god baby
You better call godbusters
Bustin' makes me feel good
I ain't afraid a no gods
Don't get caught wanking oh no...godbuster
When he comes through your door
Unless you've just got some more
I think you better call godbusters
Ooh... who you gonna call (godbusters)
Who you gonna call (godbusters)
Ah, I think you better call (godbusters)
Posted by: 99 bottles | November 2, 2006 10:02 AM
Also check out this link, with rubber stamps to cross God off our currency.
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/11/01/tiny_rubber_stamp_re.html
Posted by: George | November 2, 2006 10:09 AM
I hope someone in Hollywood is reading this blog. We need Godbusters, the movie. PZ could be creative consultant. The Godbusters could bust up baptisms, post atheist theses averywhere, and do all sorts of mischief.
Posted by: Paul | November 2, 2006 10:35 AM
OT:
Richard Dawkins, in an interview on MPR for its Midmorning program, just casually mentioned the Flying Spaghetti Monster...
Posted by: Dianne | November 2, 2006 11:13 AM
It's so good I hate to criticize, but...as a serious candidate, it would have the disadvantage of making it look like we thought there were two options: atheism and Christianity. Atheists don't believe in the Islamic, Jewish, Hindi, Buddhist, Taoist, Shinto, ancient Greek, etc gods either. (Sorry to be a party pooper...other than that quibble it's great.)
Posted by: RavenT | November 2, 2006 11:31 AM
Off-topic, sorry! But we need help fast, there's a *lot* of expertise and experience here, and an open thread probably won't occur until tomorrow.
The sun bear reproductive project is culminating (yay!), and in crunching the data, the PI has asked me an Excel question (below) that I'm unable to answer. We'd very much appreciate any suggestions you may have.
Posted by: WilCo | November 2, 2006 12:05 PM
Doesn't anyone remember the sage attitude of the Chink in Even Cowgirls Get the Blues? (Whew, I found the quote even though I don't have the book at hand.)
Posted by: evolvealready | November 2, 2006 12:06 PM
Sorry if this has already been posted or discussed, but below is the link to Arlington Cememtery symbols. Scroll down to see the atheist emblem.
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/funeral_information/authorized_emblems.html
Posted by: Casper | November 2, 2006 12:13 PM
The regular Ghostbuster's logo is pretty good: Wikipedia:Ghostbusters
One ghost is as good as another to us godless, it might as well be Casper or a cartoon ghost.
Posted by: Karl | November 2, 2006 12:57 PM
I want to try again to get a reaction to my proposal for a motto. How about
"sententia licens" ?
Would any of you Latin experts tell me whether that translates to "free thought" or not.
Posted by: WilCo | November 2, 2006 12:58 PM
evolvealready:
That's the American Atheists symbol:
http://www.atheists.org/visitors.center/logo.html
It was mentioned by PZ in the parent story. It's remarkable that it's included in the authorized emblems.
Posted by: CCP | November 2, 2006 1:08 PM
RavenT:
my advice: forget about doing serious (or even decent) figures with Excel.
Get SigmaPlot--it'll do anything (though occasionally you have to fake it out)
Posted by: C.W | November 2, 2006 1:16 PM
"Recognizing the new atomic era, ..."
Sorry, but that's just horrible. IMHO it feels as fresh and timeless as a Jetson episode;-)
Posted by: WilCo | November 2, 2006 1:46 PM
C. W.: Yeah, I agree. Although at some point it will seem fun just because it seems retro.
Posted by: bfy | November 2, 2006 3:03 PM
at the risk of seeming humourless, I really don't find this funny. I don't believe Christ was divine, but he was a real person who was tortured to death on a cross. There's not a lot of humour in that.
Posted by: Paul D | November 2, 2006 3:17 PM
I don't believe Christ was divine, but he was a real person who was tortured to death on a cross.
There are many who would dispute that. The story of Christ has been mythologized to the point of apocrypha.
Posted by: RavenT | November 2, 2006 3:37 PM
thanks, CCP! from all the feelers I put out on this, SigmaPlot seems unanimously to be the way to go, and so I'll get a license/copy.
Posted by: 99 bottles | November 2, 2006 4:03 PM
to bfy (and others):
The basic outlines of the case against the existence of a man named Jesus are best given by Earl Doherty, at:
http://pages.ca.inter.net/%7Eoblio/jhcjp.htm
Every atheist should have this link at her fingertips. And they should point people to books by GA Wells, too.
Posted by: bfy | November 2, 2006 4:48 PM
fair enough, i didn't know his existence was in dispute so thanks for the links. I have been so upset by the behaviour of the Bush Administration with respect to torture, that I am perhaps over-sensitive.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | November 2, 2006 5:08 PM
Do I need another Tattoo.......
Posted by: minusRusty | November 2, 2006 5:42 PM
PZ, when you do the post tomorrow, try to include both Affinity figures so people can get a sense of the variations available.
Thx.
Posted by: Gene Goldring | November 2, 2006 7:56 PM
Is there another one of these for Mohammad? That would be a riot.
Posted by: J. J. Ramsey | November 2, 2006 8:12 PM
And how do you judge the quality of Doherty's work? By the fact that he comes to conclusions that you like. I have not been impressed with his rigor, and neither have the bulk of "laudably heretical" or outright agnostic/atheist biblical scholars. I even managed to catch a pretty big flaw:
http://iidb.org/vbb/showpost.php?p=3514637&postcount=239
As a biblical scholar, Doherty is a very good rhetoretician. Like a creationist, he is very good at convincing laymen who don't have the background or the time to check his claims. If you really want a book that should be at every atheist's fingertips, Robin Lane Fox's The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible is a far better choice. It's not perfect, but it's from an actual classical historian, and pretty much plays fair with the facts instead of being a hack polemic.
Posted by: Kayla | November 2, 2006 8:40 PM
I think the American Atheists symbol is a bit silly looking (look! It's 90% of an atom!). But an atom does make sense for a philosophy based on scientific, rational thought. And it's easier to draw than a crossed-out Jesus ;).
Posted by: Monado | November 2, 2006 10:17 PM
99 bottles, I think you'll be interested in this article, in which Robert M. Price looks at the historicity of the Buddha, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad. He pretty much beats the idea to death in his book, Deconstructing Jesus, but this article gives the gist of his thoughts.
Posted by: raindogzilla | November 2, 2006 11:26 PM
There's this one.
Posted by: J. J. Ramsey | November 2, 2006 11:33 PM
I looked at the article by Price and it's a bit weasely, IMHO. For example, take this:
A serious problem with this so-called parallel is that anointing bodies was a common practice in the region.
This is even more weasely. Osiris was dismembered, and Isis and Nephthys aren't trying just to anoint him, but to put him back together again so that Isis can revive her husband by her magic.
Jesus didn't escape Pilate's wrath; he just purportedly survived it. By contrast, Apollonius teleported out of Domitian's courtroom--where he had been acquited--and then showed himself to his disciples.
It's a cute trick. The gross differences in plot and themes are hidden, while the superficial similarities are phrased just so to make them look significant.
This is really dishonest:
Price asks "If any one of these versions represented the facts, how could the others ever have arisen in the first place?" as if it had no good answer. Yet the canonical Gospels already show attempts to make Pilate relatively sympathetic, as a man caught between a rock and a hard place, probably in order to show Christianity as not anti-Roman, and the Gospel of Peter takes this a step further and acquits Pilate (who is still mentioned in the text) and blames Herod. The Talmud is not only several centuries later, but its account of Jesus reads like a mocking parody of the Gospel accounts--which points to it being a distorted derivative of them--and the dating to Jannaeus' day is likely to do a conflation of Jesus of Nazareth with the Jesus in Sanhedrin 107b.
What's left is a Jewish apocalyptic prophet from Nazareth who got crucified by Pilate and exaggerated by his followers. If Price wants to argue that Jesus is a pagan copycat, he should offer more than strained parallels.
Sorry for the comment not being more directly related to the blog post, but I get tired of atheists complaining about the fashionable nonsense of theists while peddling fashionable nonsense of their own.
Posted by: GodfreyTemple | November 3, 2006 12:58 AM
I would like to re-iterate from the previous thread, that in searching for a symbol we should look for something that is inclusive, established, serious, and as free of negative baggage as possible.
One that communicates an acceptable meaning to atheists as well as projects an understandable and approachable message to non-atheists while not painting an easy-target to distract rhetorical opponents from whatever matter is at hand.
For what it's worth, I've gone so far as to prepare the Affinity (original version) for use on items at Cafe Press for my own use because I would like to wear it.
It is already imbued with a sense of age and permanence, is not overly science-centered or focused on a negation of any particular sect or belief, and plays host to a number of positive associations and no negative ones that I can identify.
Atheists are not new. Not hostile. Enlightened by science, not enthralled by it. Not a rebellious fad. Not frivolous. And not presenting an easy target for theists to hang insults upon.
We are diverse but are united by an Affinity for reason and evidence in a complex and infinite universe.
Posted by: GodfreyTemple | November 3, 2006 12:59 AM
This is all fashionable nonsense ^^^
;)
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 3, 2006 1:38 AM
Imagine
puffy clouds in a blue sky in a cartoon thought bubble.
If we wanted to get too literal with the iconography, precede the thought bubble with a winged harp and halo inside a slashed circle, next to flames and a pitchfork inside a slashed circle.
"Imagine" by John Lennon is my cel phone ringtone.
Posted by: Graculus | November 3, 2006 9:34 AM
Would any of you Latin experts tell me whether that translates to "free thought" or not.
More like "permitted opinion".
cogitatio libera
Posted by: minusRusty | November 3, 2006 2:09 PM
GodfreyTemple: "For what it's worth, I've gone so far as to prepare the Affinity (original version) for use on items at Cafe Press for my own use because I would like to wear it."
So which is the "original version", GT? The one with the "calligraphic" infinity (the one you linked to above), or the one with the equal-width line?
Personally, I like the calligraphic version, but I think so long as the character is integrated, whatever the font, it can be used as an atheist symbol.
Another question I have, though (Yo! PZ!!), is this supposed to be strictly an atheist symbol?
Posted by: Joel Sax | November 3, 2006 2:52 PM
Why don't you call the major networks and tell 'em you're a liberal, too. Maybe you can save the Republicans.
Posted by: GodfreyTemple | November 3, 2006 7:18 PM
The original version was the one with the uniform-width infinity. I got industrious last night and updated all my pieces to the new version (calligraphic/integrated infinity) though may have missed one or two.
Upon reflection, I have to agree that the more integrated calligraphic effect really finishes the symbol and solidifies a more Alchemical, Ancient or Timeless look.
Thank you for the suggestion.
Posted by: minusRusty | November 4, 2006 2:01 AM
GT: "Upon reflection, I have to agree that the more integrated calligraphic effect really finishes the symbol and solidifies a more Alchemical, Ancient or Timeless look.
"Thank you for the suggestion."
I agree, and no problem! It's definitely got my vote!
Posted by: Paul | November 4, 2006 4:46 AM
You must be, like, really scared of the coming theocracy.
(Explanatory note for US citizens: that was sarcasm.)
Posted by: truth machine | November 4, 2006 7:33 AM
I don't believe Christ was divine, but he was a real person who was tortured to death on a cross.
Not bloody likely.
There's not a lot of humour in that.
The humor isn't about torture. Are you really that dumb?
Posted by: Doug | November 5, 2006 2:37 AM
truth machine,
why do you get so upset when talking about Christ? Why do you think the poster was 'really that dumb'? If it's 'not bloodly likely', why would you even be concerned that 'the humor isn't about torture'? If it never happened then there's no reason to justfiy what the humor is even about.
Consider changing your name from 'truth machine' to 'blinded by emotion machine'.... it really seems more fitting.
Posted by: Bilbo | November 6, 2006 7:49 PM
Hi, I just noticed your motto...the one ending in "godless liberal." Sigh...I'm a liberal who believes in God, and is watching our country being taken over by fascists, because they can get people to vote for them by making them afraid of people like you. Thanks for giving our real enemies a scapegoat. (That was sarcasm).