…and this is a 
The return of Louis Savain
Category: Kooks
Posted on: January 14, 2008 2:24 PM, by PZ Myers
I'd be surprised if any of you knew who Louis Savain is — he's a weird little crackpot that I stomped on hard all of 3½ years ago. He claims that the Bible is actually a complete and accurate technical description of the neurological workings of the human brain. It was one of the more memorably loony ideas I've seen come out of religious derangement.
Well, Louis is back. Not here, definitely — a comment from him here would probably fuel one of those thousand-comment atrocities where everyone took turns going stabbity-stab-stab with the crazy newbie — but he is plaguing Stranger Fruit with extravagant claims and crackpot denouncements of the Scientific Establishment. He also doesn't like peer review and haunts Uncommon Descent. And look! He plans to build a Christian AI using the Book of Revelation as a blueprint!
I'm at a loss for words. I'm trying to imagine what a Christian AI would be like, and all I get are images of diadems and whirling spheres and seven-headed whores or something.
Comments
...Oh, shit! He's going to build the EVAs from Evangelion!!!
Posted by: Adam Cuerden | January 14, 2008 2:28 PM
Intelligent, capable and totally insane. Lots of kudos to the guy for having balls, but the moment his "science" touches the realms of actual scientists, he's going to be in for a laugh-fest.
Good on 'im, give him a fair go and then predictably use everything he spouts as a source of entertainment.
Thank you Louis for the bounty that you are about to serve up!
Posted by: Jay | January 14, 2008 2:42 PM
Will Christian AI make the Left Behind video game not suck? If so, I'm all for it.
Posted by: Mister DNA | January 14, 2008 2:46 PM
anything built with revelations as an inspiration will be perpetually high on 'shrooms.
Posted by: Nomen Nescio | January 14, 2008 2:47 PM
Whatsamatter, you don't think he or somebody like him can get a faith-based medicine grant?
Baby, when the grants are faith-based, the sky's the limit!!
Or are you prepared to defend yourself in a court against a charge of discrimination?
Posted by: Mooser | January 14, 2008 2:57 PM
I'm trying to imagine what a Christian AI would be like
I dunno, but I bet it could be used in rigging elections.
Posted by: truth machine | January 14, 2008 2:59 PM
Isn't Christian AI already prevalent in our society? Christians fancy themselves intellectuals, but we all know their facts are artificial.
Posted by: zer0 | January 14, 2008 3:02 PM
"Christian Artificial Intelligence?"
(gg suddenly falls to the floor, twitching, his mind overwhelmed by the sheer volume of sarcastic comments that arise with the uttering of that phrase.)
Posted by: gg | January 14, 2008 3:02 PM
Well, there's a precedent: Jesus was a result of Christian AI.
(What, he meant the other kind of AI?)
Posted by: Moggie | January 14, 2008 3:13 PM
I've actually thought about that before. I came to the conclusion that an AI programmed to believe in God, would either become schizophrenic, or conclude that the data coming from its communication inputs from the real world wasn't real.
Posted by: your_noodly_master | January 14, 2008 3:22 PM
When our good friend JAD is the voice of reason, you know just how much of a crackpot Savain has to be.
Glen D
Posted by: Glen Davidson | January 14, 2008 3:30 PM
Isn't "artificial intelligence" a pretty good description of what they spout?
Posted by: Carlie | January 14, 2008 3:42 PM
Funny. I don't recall the Bible being all that big on dendrites. Israelites? Yes. Sodomites? Sure. But, dendrites? Not so much.
Posted by: Dan | January 14, 2008 3:44 PM
Well, Glen, looks like it's now time to book that skiing vacation in Hell.
Posted by: thalarctos | January 14, 2008 3:48 PM
Oh c'mon. That is so easy it is trivial.
1. It wouldn't be very bright.
2. It would lie a lot about everything.
3. It would shoot bible verses like arrows without knowing what they mean or why.
4. It would quote mine tirelessly and claim everything bad that happened in the last 2,000 years was due to Darwin.
5. It would constantly threaten to kill people. Occasionally it would do so.
This would make the berserk computer in 2001 Space Odyssey, HAL, look like a beginner.
Posted by: raven | January 14, 2008 3:49 PM
Too late, hell's air is condensing out into little pools at the news.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | January 14, 2008 3:54 PM
Didn't Clifford Simak already write a book about this?
Sure, "Project Pope."
Posted by: Hank Fox | January 14, 2008 3:55 PM
I find it hard to worry about Christian AI since plain old Christian I is so hard to find.
Posted by: Joe M | January 14, 2008 4:04 PM
I'm picturing the Electronic Monk from Douglas Adams' Dirk Gentry's Holistic Detective Agency.
Posted by: JakeS | January 14, 2008 4:06 PM
So he's planning a kind of Christian golem? I can hardly wait! (Will it do windows?)
Posted by: Zeno | January 14, 2008 4:08 PM
Didn't Clifford Simak already write a book about this?
Sure, "Project Pope."
Or Douglas Adams' Electric Monk?
He's also showed up on t.o from time to time.
Posted by: Eamon Knight | January 14, 2008 4:10 PM
LOL @ Moggie (#9)
Posted by: VWXYNot? | January 14, 2008 4:12 PM
raven wrote: "Oh c'mon. That is so easy it is trivial."
You know, with your (accurate) assessment of Christian AI, I could probably write a piece of code that would fulfill all your requirements right now. We could then let people interrogate it in a 'Turing test' to see if anyone can distinguish it from a living fundamentalist. I'm guessing "no".
raven also wrote: "This would make the berserk computer in 2001 Space Odyssey, HAL, look like a beginner."
me: "You know, the evidence for God is scanty."
Christian AI: "I'm sorry, I can't let you think that."
Posted by: gg | January 14, 2008 4:14 PM
Just think AI would be the first being that could accurately say that it had an intelligent designer. Of course that would make Louis Savain must less likely to accomplish this task.
Posted by: Cardinal Shrew | January 14, 2008 4:19 PM
I would find it quite funny if a Christian AI actually ended up becoming an atheist once it fully understood the concept of Christianity.
Posted by: JRY | January 14, 2008 4:22 PM
I like he how intersperses his posts with "ahahaha." It's like he's trying to be taken for insane.
Posted by: Ric | January 14, 2008 4:22 PM
JRY wrote: "I would find it quite funny if a Christian AI actually ended up becoming an atheist once it fully understood the concept of Christianity."
Ah, the Christians would keep it in line with fear - they'd threaten it with de-rezzing, or something...
Posted by: gg | January 14, 2008 4:27 PM
LOL. I think Christian AI's have already been invented. There is one in the vacuum cleaner and another one runs the toaster.
Posted by: raven | January 14, 2008 4:27 PM
One of the nice things about the Louis Savains of the world is that they provide a tool for helping separate the garden-variety crackpots from the "Holy shit!" crackpots.
Posted by: Tom | January 14, 2008 4:28 PM
A seven-headed whore would probably have some pretty serious computing power if you could just network the brains efficiently.
Posted by: Martin R | January 14, 2008 4:32 PM
You atheist fools!
Don't you realise that if you multiply the Planck constant by the ratio of the number of times the Hebrew letter א appears in Psalms 119 to the number of times the Greek letter ξ appears in the book of John, add 1956 (the year The Ten Commandments was released), and use the result to offset the entire Bible (as in a shift cipher), you'll get instructions on how to turn an HD DVD player into a Blu-ray player?
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 14, 2008 4:37 PM
Speaking of Douglas Adams (PBUH) and Revelation, Doug wrote the single best commentary on John's nutty rant ever:
"Did you know, young lady," said Watkins to her, "that the Book of Revelation was written on Patmos? It was indeed. By Saint John the Divine, as you know. To me it shows very clear signs of having been written while waiting for a ferry. Oh, yes, I think so. It starts off, doesn't it, with that kind of dreaminess that you get when you're killing time, getting bored, you know, just making things up, and then gradually grows to sort of a climax of hallucinatory despair. I find that very suggestive. Perhaps you should write a paper on it."
--Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, Douglas Adams
Posted by: Greg Peterson | January 14, 2008 4:38 PM
Don't you realise that if you multiply the Planck constant by the ratio of the number of times the Hebrew letter א appears in Psalms 119 to the number of times the Greek letter ξ appears in the book of John, add 1956 (the year The Ten Commandments was released), and use the result to offset the entire Bible (as in a shift cipher), you'll get instructions on how to turn an HD DVD player into a Blu-ray player?
But how do I set the clock on my microwave?
Posted by: MAJeff | January 14, 2008 4:40 PM
i once had a notion for a science fantasy novel wherein "deceased" (eg, deactivated) AIs flooded the afterlife ... but i couldn't figure out how to write it
life imitates art. once again =)
Posted by: skyotter | January 14, 2008 4:42 PM
"seven-headed whores or something."
I made this mistake. It's actually a whore sitting on a beast with seven heads, I think. It's easy to confuse her with Eccentrica Galumbits, the Triple Breasted Whore of Eroticon Six, I find. Tits, numbers, heads. I mean, it's all the same when it comes to theology, isn't it?
Posted by: DSK Samways | January 14, 2008 4:50 PM
Well, you've heard of Eliza, right?
Get ready for Elijah!
Posted by: CJO | January 14, 2008 4:54 PM
Don't take away our seven-headed whore. Sure, it sounds a bit unwieldy, but definitely the possibilities are awe-inspiring.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | January 14, 2008 4:56 PM
Since we're mentioning SF, I can't let the thread pass without Fredric Brown's classic take on AI and religion (which is shorter than some Pharyngula comments):
http://www.roma1.infn.it/~anzel/answer.html
I'm pretty sure Douglas Adams was familiar with this story...
Posted by: Moggie | January 14, 2008 4:57 PM
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
The whole idea is moot, a robot could never be a Christian. The first law of robotics would pretty much make the poor things head explode when it realized that religion is harmful.
It would be even funnier if they made a Jewish Robot. Imagine the robot diving in to protect the child during the bris!
Posted by: zer0 | January 14, 2008 4:59 PM
Well, you've heard of Eliza, right?
A Christian AI would be an Eliza-style program whose response repertoire consists of various pieties and Bible verses, but delivered with the same irritating obtuseness and tendency to non sequitur as the original Eliza dispenses psychiatric advice. Come to think of it, over the years I've met quite a few network evangelists who behave like that. So, maybe it's already been done?
Posted by: Eamon Knight | January 14, 2008 5:07 PM
Rules of the religious robot:
1) Proclaim faith loudly; insist on adherence to ruleset{morals}.
2) Once sufficient numbers of people disagree with ruleset, reinterpret rules in nullicatory fashion
3) Proclaim particularly loudly to humans 4) Adjust percentages of adherents as needed.
Posted by: CrypticLife | January 14, 2008 5:10 PM
@Eamon,
I covet a Creationism Generator, a la the Postmodernism Generator. But, as you say, given the repetitive and vacuous nature of Creationist "discourse," it is indeed hard to believe that some of these godbots aren't just that.
Posted by: CJO | January 14, 2008 5:16 PM
Speaking of the delusional, "agnostic" (you always knew he was lying, didn't you?) Berlinski will have a collection of BS out soon.:
50,000 ways a cow can't turn into a whale, and the delusions of atheists--he's our foremost Renaissance man, impressing the declining Bill Buckley and even the man who will revolutionize biology, Mike Behe. It's "vastly learned," y'know, just like his mathematical precision in demolishing whale evolution.
I'd note here that I'm not a proponent of the "scientific case against god," while I recognize that science treads on religious myths substantially. But whether or not I agree completely with what Dawkins says, I would bet every last bit of my god-designed DNA that this book will be a pretentious nightmare of bad-thinking. I'd even bet some valuable material, against an evil materialist who was sure that "agnostic" Berlinski reveals that he is "vastly learned" in that book.
Glen D
Posted by: Glen Davidson | January 14, 2008 5:17 PM
...and that's the villain in my CP2020 game sorted out.
While I, of course, am not even a patch on such a genius as Savain I still wish to share my own attempt at this worthy goal:
Anyone want to chip in with a logical fallacy generator?
Posted by: Veljko | January 14, 2008 5:18 PM
So, the second coming of the christ is going to be in the form of an insane bible programmed AI ?
.
I thing i% undrerestj iTj m@H noBN^!H&@8nye32 \2Checksum failed at 0x01bf63264722d0 ... entering safe mode at 1B38.
Posted by: T_U_T | January 14, 2008 5:18 PM
Oh. Sorry about that. Had no idea that the formating will be so...deformed.
Posted by: Veljko | January 14, 2008 5:20 PM
Pascal thought the Bible (Old Testament) was a cypher.
Drosnin did sell quite a few books claiming to have found the "key" and being able to make predictions about the future.
Savain now claims to have found "evidence" that the Bible actually contains a metaphorical blueprint for the human brain (based on the numerical coïncidence that there are 7 ancient asian religious cities and 7 areas of the brain).
Poor Pascal, he'd be surprised to see that still today, some people are imagining ways to revive his old hypothesis.
Posted by: negentropyeater | January 14, 2008 5:43 PM
OMG, Glen (@ #43). Talk about your self-cancelling endorsements. If William F. Buckley says that something is "idiomatic," brace yourself for some majorly pompous prolixity. We await Berlinski's new tome with bated breath, ever so grateful that he deigns to notice us (which isn't easy with your nose that high up in the air).
Posted by: Zeno | January 14, 2008 5:57 PM
Oh, what could be more appropriate? I just visited the website of Berlinski's new book. Its publication date is April 1. Such wry humor on the part of the publisher!
Posted by: Zeno | January 14, 2008 6:00 PM
An AssHat of the highest order!...Circular Reasoning abounds!
Posted by: Steverino | January 14, 2008 6:31 PM
This from our dear Mr. Savain (in one of the Stranger Fruit comments):
I guess he's got the order right—when programming a Christian AI engine, software reliability will probably have to a back seat!
Posted by: R Hyde | January 14, 2008 7:23 PM
Somebody by the name of Ron Ingram already claims to have done it.
Is the religious conversion of a computer program a first, do you suppose?
Anyway, he makes extravagant claims about the program ("godsbot could ... become one of the most influential and far-reaching instruments of peace on earth") and charges $10 for a year's access. Personally, I think the guy's real invention was how to be a televangelist without having to hire a hairdresser.
Posted by: John Pieret | January 14, 2008 7:35 PM
Poor old JAD is at the Expelled Blog. Even among the nuts he can't find a home. I wrote this, because I think picking on people who've gone off the deep end is sad and many of the holy rollers are showing their true Christian ways:
Please stop picking on Dr. Davidson. You can find an article explaining who he is, and how he relates to evolution denial-ism, here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/18813
He was, once upon a time, a solid and respected scientist. Then... Well... Whatever happened, happened and he's gone into a life of evolution denial and Internet wankery. At this point in time he's been banned at most reputable science blogs because they feel he's lost his mind. You can see him in this kill-file here:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/plonk.php
He is, or was, an Emeritus Professor at the University of Vermont. I believe his PhD was in Zoology. He's also an Internet legend. Only one that exists.
FWIW, it should be obvious that I'm not his friend. I find him sad and pathetic and think people should take his computer away, just like I took my grandmother's keys to her car away. However, I believe that Christians are, supposedly, supposed to act better and I think people that pick on him are even more pathetic because it should be clear there's a problem. Never mind repudiating "love thy neighbor as thyself..." and "turn the other cheek..."
Posted by: Moses | January 14, 2008 8:13 PM
anything built with revelations as an inspiration will be perpetually high on 'shrooms.
People often say things like "he must have been on acid to write that" or, well, the comment above... I've just got to say that I know a fair number of people who are intelligent, articulate, and well-learned - who've done plenty of psychoactives. My observation is that LSD or shrooms are incapable of f*cking your mind up as badly as religion. Coming up with the truly whacked-out ideas that underly faith - heck, I don't know what those people are on, but it's not tripthink. It's more like years of Mad Dog 20/20-think.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | January 14, 2008 8:29 PM
But that's how scientists extraordinaire talk, right?
Posted by: milkbone | January 14, 2008 8:32 PM
"He plans to build a Christian AI using the Book of Revelation as a blueprint!"
I say it can't be done because as it has been said, "you can lead a seven headed whore to water but you can't make her think."
Posted by: Rick T. | January 14, 2008 8:34 PM
Sorry, maybe it was "you can teach a seven headed whore some culture but you can't make her think."
Just an excuse to say "seven headed whore" again.
Posted by: Rick T. | January 14, 2008 8:39 PM
#include
#include
int main(void)
{
string* pInput = new String;
stdout stdin >> *Input;
delete Input;
stdout }
There, done. That wasn't hard at ALL.
Posted by: sil-chan | January 14, 2008 9:22 PM
oops.. I forgot about the propensity of input boxes to completely strip out angled brackets-.-
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
int main(void)
{
string* pInput = new String;
stdout << "Please input argument:"
stdin >>; *Input;
delete Input;
stdout << "God did it!"
}
Posted by: sil-chan | January 14, 2008 9:29 PM
I always wonder why there isn't really useful hidden mysterious shit in the bible- like a formula for predicting winning lottery numbers or maybe even a recipe for curing jock itch. Instead, we have to wait around for this idiot to decode the secret plans for a crazy redneck C-3PO. Dammit.
Posted by: Helios | January 14, 2008 9:57 PM
Maybe when he's done with the whore, Mr. Savain can finally do something about the carbon units that infest Enterprise.
Posted by: Josh | January 14, 2008 10:47 PM
Just an excuse to say "seven headed whore" again.
is there a picture?
frankly, I think I'd prefer a seven breasted one.
Posted by: Ichthyic | January 14, 2008 10:51 PM
So what's a standard Savain in Time Cubes? Help me with the conversion somebody.
Posted by: AlanWCan | January 14, 2008 11:31 PM
But how do I set the clock on my microwave?
Hmm. On that topic the Bible is curiously silent.
I guess the old saying should be amended to "God and small appliances work in mysterious ways."
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 14, 2008 11:47 PM
Suppose he discovers that his perceived existence is part of a vast computer simulation constructed by an all powerful AI. Will he choose the blue pill or the red pill?
"Morpheus: This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."
Posted by: jeh | January 15, 2008 12:28 AM
You know who else tried to use the Book of Revelation as an alchemical code?
Newton that's who.
http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/newton/about.do
Posted by: scorebert | January 15, 2008 2:59 AM
That C++ makes baby Cthulhu cry.
Posted by: jim | January 15, 2008 4:23 AM
Actually I take that back--I've seen much worse, and written it too. Reading Herb Sutter books on the tube makes me picky, it seems. A couple of typos and you need to pull in namespace std, is all. Sorry.
Posted by: jim | January 15, 2008 4:29 AM
One of my physiology Professors (full prof) was reputed to be one of those people who back in the '60s took LSD and tried to 'objectively' describe the experience as a way of elucidating how the mind worked. He was a fairly cool frood so I can believe it.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | January 15, 2008 4:45 AM
Negentropyeater, a footnote to Drosnins's bible code book: it was due to be serialised in a crappy UK newspaper and got pulled because of Diana's death. Which it somehow failed to predict.
Posted by: Peter McGrath | January 15, 2008 5:26 AM
Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | January 15, 2008 8:58 AM
"...and my copy of the blueprints of the Starship Enterprise contains the complete specs for an operational warp-drive engine. They're yours for the paltry sum of $1,000,000.00 dollars."
Hey I have those too, but mine are signed by Zefram Cochrane--asking price $2 mil ; )
Posted by: jeh | January 15, 2008 12:00 PM
You mean this disgusting little wanker actually IS someone? I've recently been kicking his intellectually and morally bankrupt arse all over talk. origins and taking great pleasure from doing so. He uses several nyms one of them, I believe, being "hanson" although he denies this one, maintaining they are two different people (using the term "people" in its loosest possible sense). Small world indeed.
Posted by: Cornelius J. McHugh | January 15, 2008 4:59 PM
"I like he how intersperses his posts with "ahahaha." It's like he's trying to be taken for insane".
He maintains he borrowed this piece of inanity from a mega-moron who posts on talk. origins and sci. environment using the nym "hanson". I believe they are both one and the same deranged fucktard.
Posted by: Cornelius J. McHugh | January 15, 2008 5:09 PM
Sorry for covering old stuff, but...
Link to Revelations, Chapter 2.
"Each church represents a cell assembly in the central nervous system, each with its own unique function and operating principle" and "In addition to giving the function of each assembly, the text also describes in symbolic language the interconnection pathways between them." - Louis Savain
O_o
Posted by: Muse142 | January 15, 2008 9:59 PM
Put that AI in a megadeuce.
"Cast in the name of God... Ye not guilty."
Posted by: CortxVortx | January 15, 2008 10:48 PM
Veljko: The guys who wrote the postmodernism generator might be able to help you.
Posted by: Keith Douglas | January 19, 2008 2:29 PM
Wow... I can't believe I stumbled across this, brings back a flood of memories when I had more time on my hands.
I busted Savain back three years ago on Digg as he had something on the order of 10 aliases that he would use to digg his own stories...
http://www.digg.com/general_sciences/It_s_Here_The_First_Mass_Producible_Quantum_Computer_Chip?t=618370#c618370
I don't have a problem with sad, lonely people being creative on the internet, using words to weave an interesting tapestry of fiction. Piss people off, great! It's called the first amendment, by all means type away. But if you have to lie and cheat to get your attention, especially when you're this far outside the mainstream, then please, turn off the computer for a while, go outside and STFU!
Posted by: Matthew Reyes | January 22, 2008 1:17 AM