(July 9, 2015 at 12:46 pm)Stimbo Wrote: The problem essentially is that apologists don't want less extraordinary explanations. In fact, the more extraordinary the better - after all, however ridiculous it sounds, the writers wouldn't include it if it weren't true, surely? It's so embarrassing, it must be true. I mean, we'd have evidence that didn't hurt the story if we could, so the fact we're even mentioning it is testament to our honesty... right? It's the same shit, exploiting this loophole in human gullibility, that's allowed everyone from Joseph Smith and his magic hat to L Ron Hubbard and his alien ghosts to turn ordinary people into ATMs. Or worse.
We actually had a member a few years ago trying to sell the Bethlehem star as a real astronomical event, before and despite some of us attempting to set her straight. Basically the story elements are: the birth of a baby; peripatetic astrologers; a miraculous planetary alignment not witnessed by anyone else on the planet. Guess which part she selected as the most plausible?
There is a certain amount of one up man ship with belief. The more ridiculous the thing they believe the more devout they are.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
