…and this is a 
This is Ali, a six month old baby in Southern Russia.
It's a miracle! Every Monday and Thursday, fresh quotations from the Quran 'magically' appear on his legs, belly, or arms when he's home alone with his mommy and daddy, and then the pilgrims show up in the thousands to give the happy family lots and lots of attention. I simply can't imagine how red marks might appear on the delicate skin of a young baby while under the care of doting, attentive parents, or why anyone might cheat and fake a miracle…can you? The only possible explanation is that the omnipotent, omniscient master of the entire cosmos occasionally gets bored overseeing the fusion of hydrogen in stars, and just has to come down to visit Ali and dickishly inflame small regions of his epidermis. I can understand that; if I had the power to end a wasteful war in the Kizlyar region, I'm sure I'd just use it to torment babies instead. But hey, I'm an atheist. What's God's excuse?
As testimony to the importance of this miracle, the site has not one, but two online polls. Journalists are going all out on this story, I can tell!
Do you believe in miracles?
Yes 64%
I'm open to the possibility 21%
No 15%
Do you consider yourself religious?
Yes 70%
No 30%
Watch out, though. God is plainly a bit bored right now — he might take a break from getting fancy with rashes on babies and instead start doing something more appropriate to his vast power and glory…like playing games with internet polls.
Nah, who am I kidding? Nothing could be more fun for God than abusing babies! That never gets old!
Comments
Posted by: Ol'Greg
|
October 23, 2009 11:13 AM
Wow this is really disturbing. I wonder how they're irritating the skin. Seems like possible child abuse to me.
Posted by: Victor
|
October 23, 2009 11:16 AM
It is child abuse. As soon as we can find this "God" character, we need to lock him up before he strikes again. Seriously, though, these people are hideous.
Posted by: skylyre
|
October 23, 2009 11:18 AM
Hm. I was thinking an allergic reaction of some kind. They could put the irritant on a thin pen like object and then "write" on the baby?
However they're doing it, because I'm sure they are, shame on these "parents".
Posted by: InfuriatedSciTeacher
|
October 23, 2009 11:19 AM
Sick, sick parents who don't deserve to have children since they see fit to abuse this one.
Each of those AOL polls has ~30K respondants... wonder how much we can move them?
Posted by: Michelle R | October 23, 2009 11:19 AM
...My first reaction was "Where are the fucking child services?!" and theirs is "PRAISE ALLAH!!!!!!"
Sigh. We're the ones who lack morality?
Posted by: Zifnab
|
October 23, 2009 11:22 AM
Do you consider yourself a sucker?
Yes
No
Not Sure
Can you make that check out to "Cash"?
Yes
No
Do you take major credit cards?
Posted by: Abdul Alhazred
|
October 23, 2009 11:22 AM
Stigmata -- Not just for Catholics.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 23, 2009 11:23 AM
It is child abuse. As soon as we can find this "God" character, we need to lock him up before he strikes again
Shit, I'd settle for putting Bernard Cardinal Law in jail.
Posted by: SEF
|
October 23, 2009 11:25 AM
Russia's social services must be even worse than the UK's! Or perhaps they don't have any at all. Since this child abuse is in the news, they can hardly pretend not to know about it.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
October 23, 2009 11:25 AM
But in our genomes, baby Jesus wrote in evolutionary evidence.
Which text (Meyer assures us that DNA amounts to text) are we to believe?
Probably different gods, when you really think about it.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Alyson Miers
|
October 23, 2009 11:26 AM
I'd be slightly more impressed with the verses if they glowed in the dark. Perhaps someone could hold baby Ali under a UV light?
But in all seriousness, Ali's parents could test their family's miracle and prove that they're not scratching the verses into the baby's hide by simply letting someone else take care of him for a week. If they leave him with someone who just doesn't give a toss either way about scripture appearing in inappropriate places, and the verses still appear on Monday and Thursday, then they just might have a little miracle on their hands. He'll still need to be examined by a doctor or five, though. Histology samples will need to be made available to pathologists for investigation. Just to show all us skeptics exactly how wrong we are.
If they leave him with a Christian caretaker and suddenly find Bible verses on his soft little skin, I call shenanigans.
Posted by: raven | October 23, 2009 11:28 AM
A Tesla coil will do that. Remember Freshwater, the teacher in Ohio who used to brand kids with a cross?
There is a lot of irritation around the letters. Whatever god is using, it isn't subtle or particularly limited. Maybe light heat or some chemical.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 23, 2009 11:30 AM
God's handwriting rather sucks. It seems to be done very slowly and very carefully, not with a calligrapher's graceful swings…
He's probably in his first year of learning to write in Arabic.
Posted by: RickR
|
October 23, 2009 11:34 AM
Disgusting. That's just... wow.
Posted by: Ramel | October 23, 2009 11:35 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dermatographic_urticaria
Posted by: Brownian, OM
|
October 23, 2009 11:35 AM
Dawkins vs. Hewitt, take two.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/idiotiddidit#5116d
|
October 23, 2009 11:35 AM
One good thing could come out of this, at least in the US. If this story is widely reported, it will cause massive cognitive dissonance for many people. "Hey, what the hell? This baby can't be Muslim! His skin is far too white."
Posted by: dNorrisM | October 23, 2009 11:37 AM
Years ago I was tempted* to use a UV excimer laser to "sunburn" people with, say 666.
*Disclaimer: doing so would be a completely unacceptable violation of my ethical standard, but as a thought experiment it would be fun.
Posted by: Wes | October 23, 2009 11:38 AM
That's disturbing. I really hope that the Russian equivalent of Child Services investigates these parents.
Posted by: ButchKitties | October 23, 2009 11:38 AM
This is looks to be more Ashley Todd than Allah. At least Ashley had the decency to carve into her own skin, and not some innocent baby's.
Posted by: Insightful Ape
|
October 23, 2009 11:39 AM
This is evil. Are the parents cashing in on the "miracle"?
Posted by: dNorrisM | October 23, 2009 11:39 AM
Remotely, that is, from blocks away.
Posted by: James Sweet | October 23, 2009 11:42 AM
Wow. After seeing this, I think now I do believe in miracles after all. I mean, I simply cannot see a natural explanation for the gullibility of these people. Such astounding credulity could only be the result of supernatural interference, i.e. a miracle.
Posted by: truthspeaker
|
October 23, 2009 11:43 AM
I'm sure the people who flock to see this baby view God as a metaphor for transcendence. Right, Karen Armstrong?
Posted by: Hank Fox
|
October 23, 2009 11:46 AM
As a journalist, I'm really annoyed that the account is written as straight news. The lazy "reporter" acts as if he doesn't have an intelligent, analytical bone in his body.
Posted by: Michael N. | October 23, 2009 11:48 AM
It's an etch-a-sketch baby...just don't shake to erase.
Posted by: Alyson Miers
|
October 23, 2009 11:51 AM
ButchKitties @20, thank you! I already posted the link on my Facebook page with a note that the markings look just like the "B" that woman scratched on her face, but I was blanking on her surname. It totally looks like what Ashley Todd did to herself. The parents are probably just dragging something pointy over the baby's skin. Which is child abuse and if the Russian social services don't have the juice to intervene (I somehow suspect that social services in this area are weak, if they exist at all), then we can only hope those parents get bored with the charade before long.
Posted by: Amber
|
October 23, 2009 11:57 AM
This really makes my heart ache.
Posted by: The Chemist | October 23, 2009 11:59 AM
It looks like the work of a marker! Damn.
It also looks like intensely human handwriting- not the sort of calligraphic script with sharp points I expect from a miracle. Why wouldn't the script be smaller, the most significant verses wouldn't fit on the leg at that size. I guess God knew it wouldn't photograph as well. Oh wait! Maybe it's because it's a fucking obvious magic marker!
*MEGAFACEPALM*
Do people even try anymore?
Posted by: Stan | October 23, 2009 12:04 PM
What an odd coincidence that the bi-weekly miracles happen to match up with the approximate time it would take for a minor skin irritation to dissipate... It's amazing, I tell you, how obviously god's intelligent and undeniable design manifests itself, isn't it?
--
Stan
Posted by: Yarcofin | October 23, 2009 12:08 PM
Why is it that only babies of muslim families get writing from Allah on them? Why don't Christians find the face of Ganesha in their toast too? Seems that all the gods are really playing favourites. You would think that if they were going to show miracles to anyone, it would be non-believers.
Posted by: kopd
|
October 23, 2009 12:16 PM
@Yarcofin
Believers would tell you that their deity tries to show us miracles all the time but we're too closed-minded to see them. I mean, how often do you really look at your toast to see if it has any supernatural beings emblazoned on it? And do you make sure to look for all of them? Since I was 10 I've made a habit of looking for paradolia when I'm bored. It's so easy to find anything you want anywhere at all that I've always been amazed that people could take it seriously.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 23, 2009 12:16 PM
I've woken up with the reverse image of a quarter on my face before.
No one came to me thinking it was a sign that I would be able to grant them financial luck.
I feel so disappointed.
Posted by: Hank Fox
|
October 23, 2009 12:17 PM
Pfah! This is primitive Islamic crap.
The God of CHRISTIAN babies opens a Skype window on the skin of their backs. You see God's message on the screen, and you type your response by pressing on the baby's toes in the correct sequence.
Originally, they came with a Voice feature, but God discovered users -- the babies' parents -- were disconcerted with where the sound came out.
Posted by: Drew | October 23, 2009 12:18 PM
I just hope the doesn't inspire wacko Christian parents to start scratching bible verses into their babies for fame & fortune.
Posted by: Brian Jordan | October 23, 2009 12:18 PM
Baby branding apart, the poll's not going well - only 17% not believing in miracles despite 32% not religious. The paper is more sceptical than its readers, because it says
and maybe even cynical . No, they wouldn't stop updating if it's moving the wrong way, would they?Posted by: Harvey | October 23, 2009 12:21 PM
This is an obvious example of dermatographia, a fairly common peculiarity of some infants. Simply dragging a slightly sharp object (like a fingernail) over the skin causes a raised welt, which persists for minutes to hours. Most infants who have this phenomenon outgrow it. Although it is not particularly painful, nor does "writing" on the skin usually produce long-term problems, doing this to create a "miracle" certainly seems to qualify as child abuse and, incidentally, abuse of all the local "believers" who are travelling to see the "miracle".
Posted by: T. Bruce McNeely
|
October 23, 2009 12:22 PM
Check the link at #15. I'm willing to bet that's the answer. The welts look just like it. This means, of course, that someone is using the baby to commit a hoax.
How do I know? I was a primary care MD for 5 years and saw dermatographism a lot. It's quite common. I also had it myself when I was a teen.
Fortunately, it looks worse than it feels. I just had a mild itch that I could ignore.
Posted by: Stan | October 23, 2009 12:29 PM
@ #37 & #38 (& #15, apparently):
Don't you see? This proves it is even more miraculous! Clearly no infant could so perfectly scratch the Sacred Text into its own skin! It must be Allah!
--
Stan
Posted by: Brownian, OM
|
October 23, 2009 12:34 PM
Even when I was devout, I always thought that was weak. I mean, my eternal soul is on the line here, and Mr. My Love For You Is So Great I Had To Create One More Of You Whom I Called My Son Just So He Could Experience What Millions of You Have Done To You Every Single Day And I Could Lord It Over You For Eternity is playing Hide-And-Seek?
Fuck. That. Noise. Call me when you grow the fuck up, YHWH.
At least this Allah character knows how to produce unambiguous miracles.
Posted by: Brownian, OM
|
October 23, 2009 12:40 PM
This is fascinating. How come nobody told me some babies are natural Etch-A-Sketches? Do the marks erase when you shake 'em?
Posted by: Rorschach | October 23, 2009 12:46 PM
Dermatographism or manual physical irritation somehow...the dermatographism is usually not so marked on the legs tho, more on the shoulders and chest.Which makes the manual irritation more likely.
Posted by: gadfly47
|
October 23, 2009 12:49 PM
Do you believe in miracles?
Yes 61%
I'm open to the possibility 22%
No 17%
Are you religious
Yes 68%
No 32%
The numbers aren't moving very fast on this.
Posted by: theBlakKat | October 23, 2009 12:49 PM
This poll-jacking attempt might be a little much for even you, PZ. I mean, this is AOL. It's a religious/general nut job hold out.
Posted by: SEF
|
October 23, 2009 12:51 PM
I'm another person whose skin behaves like that - along with all my other allergy problems. It burns. The touching object doesn't even have to be sharp.
And no, Brownian (#41), shaking definitely doesn't help - it just makes the victim more ill, even when they're quite large, and can be fatal for babies. (There have already been far too many cases in the news where people have killed babies by shaking them. Don't encourage the stupid people to join in with the nasty people already engaged in such dangerous behaviours.)
Posted by: Raynfala
|
October 23, 2009 12:54 PM
I seriously hope that if it should turn out to be dermatographism, that the infant doesn't have it for the same reason I did. I spontaneously "contracted" dermatographism once about 12 years ago... the dermatologist couldn't explain why it manifested.
Turns out I had Hodgkin's lymphoma, Stage II, and my skin condition was one of many side-effects. Lo and behold, once the tumor was eradicted, my condition went away.
Posted by: Nebula99
|
October 23, 2009 12:56 PM
I voted in both those polls, but the questions are lame. It should be:
Do you think the child protection people need to be called in and arrest these parents for writing on their kid?
-No, it's a miracle
-Yes, this is mistreatment
-The child protection people should arrest Allah
Posted by: Die Anyway
|
October 23, 2009 12:57 PM
I'd like to see a poll taken with the people standing in line at Lourdes:
1. Do you believe God performs miracle healings at Lourdes? Yes/No
2. Do you believe Alah miraculously writes words on this baby's legs? Yes/No
The answers would be telling.
Eat well, stay fit, Die Anyway
Posted by: FastLane | October 23, 2009 1:04 PM
We need to get a 'pilgrim' to sneak a hidden camera into that babie's room or something. I really wish there were a feasible way of catching these fuckers at it.
Posted by: Brownian, OM
|
October 23, 2009 1:08 PM
SEF, are you serious? Anybody dumb enough to take encouragement from anything I write is probably already dead or in jail. As Zappa says, "I wrote a song about dental floss but did anyone's teeth get cleaner?"
If it makes you feel better though:
Folks, Shaken Baby Syndrome is serious, and can result in permanent damage or death to your baby. Don't shake your baby for any reason, whether you think they're Etch-A-Sketches, filled with unmixed paint, are actually maraca-like instruments, or they just won't stop crying. For more information, please visit the National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome. Thank you.
Posted by: Tom | October 23, 2009 1:11 PM
I think it's funny that half of the people who aren't religious don't balk at miracles.
"No, I'm not religious, but magic from the sky? That's cool."
Posted by: Paul
|
October 23, 2009 1:34 PM
"No, I'm not religious, but magic from the sky? That's cool."
It's not surprising. Over the last decade or so there has been a large movement of people you would consider religious, but they consider themselves "spiritual not religious". In the ones I've met, it's normally a younger person in a rebellious phase where they want the feeling that they're in charge and answer only to their BFF God so they don't need to cop to any of the bad that can come through organized religion. Religion is bad, but God is good so to speak. It helps cut through some of the cognitive dissonance that would otherwise result by considering God in relation to real-world effects of religion and God-belief instead of just formulating their own connection to God as something separate from what everyone else experiences.
Posted by: mikmik | October 23, 2009 1:53 PM
At least the fuckers with the helium balloon had a kid that could be honest - so far.
Posted by: Die Anyway
|
October 23, 2009 1:55 PM
Tom @51 and Paul @52,
Don't you just hate having a biblically associated name? The only saving grace for me (also a Thomas) is that it's the "doubting" apostle. And, the Gospel of Thomas is way cooler than the ones that were actually selected for the bible. I am just so glad I wasn't named Christian. I'd have been to the judge for a name change long ago.
Eat well, stay fit, Die Anyway
Posted by: Gregory Greenwood
|
October 23, 2009 1:57 PM
This is not so much 'lying for Jebus' as 'child abuse for Allah'. Just goes to show that there is not much to choose between religions; they are all repugnant means to control the gullible and harm the innocent.
Anyone who would harm another human being, especially their own child, to prop up their delsuional woo is a pathetic excuse for a person. These 'parents' do not deserve children.
Now just wait for the indignant Xians to turn up and say;
"You wouldn't dare say that about musli . . . oh, never mind."
Posted by: bpilgrim | October 23, 2009 2:02 PM
god being omnipotent and all, s/he/it can give any amount of attention to the stigmata, while having an infinite amount remaining to attend to the hydrogen fusing and all, dontcha know.
Posted by: bpilgrim
|
October 23, 2009 2:07 PM
god being omnipotent and all, s/he/it can devote any amount of attention to the stigmatat, and still have an infinite amount left to attend to the hydrogen fusing and all, dontcha know.
Posted by: bpilgrim
|
October 23, 2009 2:13 PM
Sorry - my browser seemed to say the first attempt at posting failed.
Posted by: bc23.5 | October 23, 2009 2:26 PM
From the original link,
Is anyone else having a hard time trying to conjure up an image of Child Protective Services in this war torn area? I imagine it's not very good (meaning non-existent) like the deity they claim put writing on their child.
If they were xtians, do you think they would still be advertising these "miracles?"
Posted by: Draken
|
October 23, 2009 2:35 PM
I was thinking the same thing, BC23-5. These 'social services' would have to turn up with Kalashnikovs and bulletproof vests, in an armoured combat vehicle for fear of causing an uproar.
Much more likely they don't give a shit about what happens to the baby of some muslim insurgent.
Posted by: MrFire
|
October 23, 2009 2:40 PM
Die Anyway @54;
Well, I got Luke, so I'm doubly miserable by that reckoning.
Hell, triply miserable: I grew up in the 80s, nicely clipping the tail end of the Star Wars craze. What were my parents thinking? At least my father didn't get his way and call me Thaddeus. Fuck!
Posted by: ereador
|
October 23, 2009 2:44 PM
@#10: But in our genomes, baby Jesus wrote in evolutionary evidence.
He jacked up a few of my genes, clearly. What happened, was he distracted or something? Oh wait, he's omniscient-y; he meant for me to have some difficulties. Chronic pain is good for me, and I can't play the saxophone. I'm good, now.
Posted by: Brutal Gourmet | October 23, 2009 2:57 PM
@Die Anyway, #54
Hell, I was named Thomas Christian (last name). When my father was upset with my behavior, he would say, "I did not name you Thomas Heathen!". I can't tell you how badly that backfired on him when I eventually replied, "It would have been more accurate!"
Posted by: ema | October 23, 2009 3:28 PM
Reason one billion and three why religion and reality (in particular, the medical kind) just don't mix--the poor baby's mother admits he's in distress and the believers, you know, celebrate:
Ali's parents told reporters at first they thought it was in fact a birthmark or a skin irritation but doctors couldn't explain it. The lettering appears on different parts of his body and shortly before a new set is about to appear, his parents say, the boy's temperature spikes to about 105 degrees.
"It's impossible to hold him, he cries, lifts that part of the body [where the verse appears], his temperature goes up to 40 degrees [Celsius], and he doesn't sleep all night," his mother told reporters.
"From a medical point of view, I can't explain it in any way," said local nurse Saida Rasulova.
To add to the mystery, Rasulova says baby Ali was born with cerebral palsy and an ischaemic heart condition (reduced blood supply to the heart muscle) but says he's now healthy.
Posted by: Lauren Ipsum | October 23, 2009 3:36 PM
Maybe the parents should call up GoldenPalace.com and see if they'll subsidize some advertising on the kid's legs. Golden Palace bought the Virgin Mary Grilled Cheese, the Dorito shaped like the Pope's hat, Suri Cruise's bronzed poop, and Bill Shatner's kidney stone, so clearly they're into religious iconography, and they've already paid a woman ten grand to tattoo their domain name on her forehead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenPalace.com#Bids_at_Internet_auctions
Posted by: JimNorth | October 23, 2009 3:36 PM
I was named for James, the older brother of Jesus.
Posted by: MavSyntax | October 23, 2009 3:44 PM
There is a big HEALTH risk to the baby here; there are hundreds/thousands people visiting him weakly. All those people bring pathogens in their body that his immune system has not had time to build antibodies to.
What would happen to the poor chap if he got hit with multiple pathogens in a short space of time?
*Anyone reading this blog speak Russian? Perhaps you can search for the child services of Russia's website and report this to them with our concerns?
Posted by: daveau
|
October 23, 2009 3:45 PM
I know several people named Jesus. (Hay-soos)
Posted by: Jafafa Hots | October 23, 2009 4:36 PM
on the bright side, this could make a good episode of House.
Posted by: Dianne
|
October 23, 2009 4:48 PM
The baby looks plump and apart from the writing well cared for. He is clean, well dressed, and has a toy to play with. In short, his parents are not people who are just out to torture a baby. That almost makes it worse: They're doing something horrendous to their child because they think that their god demands it. (Assuming it is the parents and not some other caretaker perpetuating this hoax.) This isn't a case of bad people using religion as an excuse: it's a case of religion directly inspiring an evil act.
Posted by: Moggie
|
October 23, 2009 5:04 PM
#29:
It's a shame the parents don't have twins. Lo! those who hide aught of the Scripture [continued on next baby]
Posted by: Brownian, OM
|
October 23, 2009 5:13 PM
I had those sorts of read-along-with-the-record books when I was a child.
"This is the story of Allah and Muhammad, His Prophet. You can read along with me on your baby. You will know it is time to turn to the other twin when you hear the child cry like this...Let's begin now."
Posted by: Alex | October 23, 2009 5:32 PM
Judging from the ladybird toy, this also points towards that inordinate fondness for beetles.
Posted by: Zetetic
|
October 23, 2009 5:43 PM
Since the writing fades away, according to the article, at least we can conclude that the child actually isn't being branded. (Sorry PZ but I have to respectfully disagree with you there.)
It could be a marker, as was earlier suggested, but a more likely explanation IMHO (based only on what I've read so far) would be to just press hard with a thumbnail, to leave temporary marks on the child.
It's simple, it's temporary, and no one can provide evidence that you were using some sort of tool if they search you. All you would need is a fingernail/thumbnail (the thumbnail would probably be the easiest) and a moment alone with the baby... then "Praise Alla! It's another miracle!".
Posted by: Crewvy
|
October 23, 2009 6:17 PM
Child abuse pure and simple.
Is there no depth to which the religious will sink ?
Scum like this should be sterilised and have this child removed to a safe environment.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | October 23, 2009 7:20 PM
See comments 59 and 60.
Posted by: Russ Painter | October 23, 2009 7:53 PM
Dermographia
Posted by: foxfire | October 23, 2009 11:25 PM
Zetetic @ #74:
I don't think you are quite grocking the situation, Zetetic.
This is a child. A baby. Not to be used as a tool for political or monetary purposes. It is a baby - one of us. It is a helpless, beautiful little person that holds our future in its potential. It is not to be used to scam others. It should be taught to treat others as it would wish to be treated. It deserves to have the chance to learn and develop it's mind; presented with alternatives that it can choose, not have chosen for it.
I have to stop now, before I get too pissed off from this situation to maintain rationality. A qualification first: when I refer to the baby by the pronoun "it", that is because I do not know it's sex. If I did, then it would be replaced by "he" or "she".
A baby is NOT an it, to be exploited. A baby is our future as a species. Given the situation on this fair earth of ours, we better understand that indiscriminate differences between a real child and a blastocyst are not rational.
But what do I know. I'm just an atheist
Posted by: Allienne Goddard | October 24, 2009 12:50 AM
Or maybe the parents are scamming the faithful to pay for the child's serious health problems. If so, I say go for it.
Posted by: Zetetic
|
October 24, 2009 1:17 AM
foxfire said:
Actually I understand it quite well, thank you very much. Rather it's you that seem to have read far more into my comments than what I actually posted. Please go back and read what I typed again.You'll see that nowhere in my comments did I say that I approved of such actions. Neither did I try to play it down or try justify it. If you read more carefully you'll see that I only confined my comments to the method by which the marks were probably made. Obviously if the marks disappear without any sign in a few days then the child could not have been branded. Also using ink is easy to detect on the skin. Such acts are frequently justified as miracles by claiming that there were no tools present to make the marks. My observation was that tools aren't necessary to create the marks that are described in the article.
Coming up with a bad explanation, that doesn't fit the evidence, only makes the believers feel more confident in the claim of a "miracle" (especially if the accusation comes from an atheistic blog). In other words bad explanations only encourage more such acts by helping to entrench the believers.
Obviously this faked miracle qualifies as exploiting the baby, even if one makes the assumption that no lasting harm was done. Personally, I'm sure that at the very least that this faked "miracle" is uncomfortable (possibly painful) for the baby. For example when the article stated...
This could easily be explained by the baby getting upset or crying over being marked, assuming that the particular claim about the baby's temperature is true at all.But, I saw no need to further repeat what everyone else was already typing, on a blog which the parents almost certainly will not read. Therefore, I kept my comments to how such a "miracle" would be most likely caused.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the reasons why people believe such "pious frauds" (and why some skeptics have trouble debunking them) is that most people tend to greatly overestimate how difficult it is to produce such a miracle. Most "miracles" usually have very simple explanations, so simple that people tend to not think of them and instead jump to more complicated (and less plausible) explanations. My point was to provide a reasonable explanation for how it could be done without detection or tools that could be found, nothing more.
If more people understood how easy it is to fake such things, then fewer people will believe them. If fewer people believe them, then fewer people will commit such an act in the first place. Therefore, explaining how it was probably done, so that the info could be passed on to others, is IMO more important that just venting anonymously (and uselessly) about my outrage over the act itself.
As am I, but perhaps in the future you might want to be more careful reading others' posts, to make sure that they actually did say what you think they said.Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
October 24, 2009 1:46 AM
wtf do blastocysts have to do with anything
Posted by: Rrr | October 24, 2009 2:34 AM
foxfire:
Well, in this case a good indicator is the boy's name, Ali.
Maybe you ought to have stopped a little sooner?
Are you quite sure about that?
Posted by: Rey Fox
|
October 24, 2009 3:17 AM
"Lo! those who hide aught of the Scripture [continued on next baby]"
This Baby Intentionally Left Blank
Posted by: Tim_Danaher
|
October 24, 2009 8:45 AM
Münchausen's Syndrome by Proxy. Should have been the first thing to enter that idiot reporter's head.
Posted by: Knockgoats
|
October 24, 2009 9:40 AM
Münchausen's Syndrome by Proxy. Should have been the first thing to enter that idiot reporter's head. - Tim_Danaher
I dunno. There have been recent cases of pediatricians in the UK over-diagnosing this, apparently for the publicity. Kind of Münchausen's Syndrome by Proxy, by Proxy.
Posted by: Parlemort | October 24, 2009 12:34 PM
Haha! Bravo! You just became my favorite blog.
Posted by: RickR
|
October 24, 2009 12:46 PM
OK, I've already expressed by outrage and disgust over this situation, but this-
"Lo! those who hide aught of the Scripture [continued on next baby]"
-made me spew coffee all over my monitor.
Posted by: Tim_Danaher
|
October 24, 2009 1:09 PM
Arf arf arf.
Posted by: various animal | October 24, 2009 5:29 PM
Praise Allah!
After seeing this I burnt my bible and am using mass email pushes to try to convert all my former bible friend here in America. Surely this miracle will help them see the right way to heaven.
Posted by: foxfire | October 24, 2009 7:02 PM
@ Zetetic #80:
My apology to you Zetetic and I did misunderstand your post. I tend to overreact when I see children being mistreated, particularly when religion is involved. I thought you meant that there was no pain or permanent damage being done to the child.
@ strange gods before me #81:
In my convoluted thinking, it had something to do with how all the anti-abortion troops manage to hide out whenever a child is being abused in the name of religion.If not that, then I have no idea what was going through my mind at the time.
Sorry also, to anyone else annoyed by my blathering - next time I see something PZ posts that brings out some kind of irrational rage in me, I'll take Rrs's advice (#82: stop a little sooner).
Posted by: Gyeong Hwa Pak | October 24, 2009 9:19 PM
I'll have to agree with #44 on this. It's AOL. You ain't gonna win PZ as that is a safe-haven for right-winged loons.
Posted by: Aaron | October 25, 2009 12:43 AM
Dermatographic urticaria?
Posted by: Zetetic
|
October 25, 2009 2:51 AM
@ foxfire:
It's OK, no hard feelings. It seemed pretty clear to me that the story had effected you and that you had misinterpreted my earlier post.
Just glad to have cleared that up.
:-)
Posted by: Tom | October 26, 2009 11:38 AM
DieAnyway @54, having a "Biblical" name hasn't made any difference either way to me. Besides, if I had to choose, I'd go with the "peeping" variety rather than the "doubting" kind. Lady Godiva FTW!
Posted by: Taybah | October 31, 2009 4:59 AM
dnt think that his parents r abusing him. Its a sign Dajjal is arriving. All of you r ignorant coz u rnt muslim. u wudnt understand. its a sign that the anti-christ dajjal is coming and this wworld is ending. im actually crying as i type this.