Predictable.

Beautiful? “We behold the face of nature bright with gladness… we do not see or we forget that the birds which are idly singing round us mostly live on insects or seeds, and are thus constantly destroying life…” Casrles Darwin

“I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ (parasitic wasps]) with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars.” Charles Darwin. Do these people mean the designer, omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent, creator, Jehovah, or the lord god that gave that gave us viruses, deadly bacteria, genetic diseases, parasites, , volcanos, earthquakes, blindness, cancers, floods, droughts, starvation, meteorites, death from lightning strikes, pestilence, holy wars, tidal waves, asbestos, infant mortality, trachoma, life threatening radioactive elements, solar flares, malaria, smallpox, despots, dictators, slavery, mass extinctions, ice ages, trachoma, hare lips, cleft palates, animal sacrifices, infant genital mutilation, mental illness depression, bilharzia and anxiety, autism, Parkinson’s disease, Hansons disease, hernias, the appendix, compacted wisdom teeth, acne, dementia and complete morons?

“The God of the bible is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, slavery condoning, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully”. Richard Dawkins

Atheists do not say there is no god. They say that there is absolutely zero evidence to justify the claim. If God exists, why does he behave like a narcissistic absentee landlord with a flair for blood rituals and dietary restrictions? The Abrahamic deity, revered across continents, seems less like a cosmic architect and more like a Bronze Age tribal chieftain with anger management issues. Yet billions genuflect before him daily. Religious faith is often praised as a virtue. But what other domain celebrates belief without evidence? Would you board a plane built by someone who “just felt” the wings would hold? Would you trust a surgeon who prays instead of sterilizing instruments? Richard Dawkins famously called faith “a process of non-thinking.” Yet society elevates it above reason, as if ignorance were a badge of honour. Why is faith exempt from the scrutiny we apply to every other claim? Religion thrives not because it is true, but because it is comforting. It offers immortality, cosmic justice, and a celestial surveillance system that rewards obedience. Freud called religion “a universal obsessional neurosis.” Is it any wonder that belief correlates strongly with existential insecurity? Consider: If you were guaranteed eternal life through science, would you still need God? Or is belief merely a coping mechanism dressed in sacred robes? The Bible commands love, yet sanctions genocide (see Deuteronomy 20:16). It preaches humility yet demands worship. It forbids murder yet glorifies divine slaughter. If morality comes from God, why does it resemble the ethics of a medieval warlord? Sam Harris argues that morality predates religion and is better served by reason and empathy than by scripture. So why do we outsource ethics to ancient texts? Enter the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Church of the SubGenius, and the Invisible Pink Unicorn parody religions that expose the absurdity of faith by mimicking its structure. Ethan Quillen’s “The Satirical Sacred” explores how these mock faiths challenge religious privilege and reveal the arbitrary nature of belief. Ask yourself: If a belief system is indistinguishable from parody, should it be taken seriously? Religion is not benign. It fuels sectarian violence, suppresses scientific progress, and enforces archaic social norms. From the Crusades to anti-vaccine movements, faith has often been a force of regression. Shouldn’t beliefs be judged by their consequences? Religion persists not because it is rational, but because it is ritualized, institutionalized, and incentivized. It is a cultural fossil revered, untouchable, and absurd. The atheist does not merely reject God; he rejects the intellectual laziness that sustains Him. Do you believe because it is true, or because you were told to? And if the answer is the latter, what else might you be wrong about?

I see. The philosophical view that truth, knowledge, ethical values, and norms are not absolute or universal, but instead depend on the specific framework, culture, historical period, or observer perspective holding them. If right and wrong are purely relative to a culture or individual, there is no logical basis to condemn atrocities, human rights abuses, or oppression (such as slavery or torture) committed by others who hold different cultural norms. So radical Islam is just as moral as pacifism? Slavery as in the Old Testament is just fine?

'I do not believe in leprechauns, pixies, ghosts, werewolves, jujus, angels, Tooth Faeries, Odin, Thor, Zeus, Ra, Brahma, Athena, Hera, Poseidon, Yahweh, Allah, or the Trinity, demons, devils, Astrology, the Tarot, Satan. For the same reason in every case: there is not the tiniest shred of 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐨𝐟 empirical, 𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥, 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥, 𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 any 𝐆𝐨𝐝 and the burden of proof rests with those who wish to believe. Even given no evidence for specific gods, we could make a case for some unspecified “intelligent designer” or “prime mover” or begetter of “something rather than nothing”? By far the most appealing version of this argument is the biological one - living things do present a powerful illusion of design. But that is the very version that Darwin destroyed. Any theist who appeals to “design” of living creatures simply betrays his ignorance of biology. Go away and read a book. And any theist who appeals to biblical “evidence” betrays ignorance of biblical scholarship. The burden of proof rests with those who wish to believe. Even given no evidence for specific gods, could ‘his ignorance of modern scholarship. Go away and read another book. As for the cosmological argument, whose God goes under names such as Prime Mover or First cause, again no evidence. Because physicists are closing in, with spell-binding results. Even if there remain unanswered questions - where do the fundamental laws and constants of physics come from? Obviously, that cannot help to postulate a designer whose existence poses bigger questions than he purports to solve. If science fails, our best hope is to build a better science. The answer will lie neither in theology nor - its exact equivalent - reading tea leaves. In any case, it is a fatuously illogical jump from deistic Unmoved Mover to Christian Trinity, with the Son being tortured and murdered because the Father, for all his omniscience and omnipotence, could not think of a better way to forgive “sin”. Equally unconvincing are those who believe because it comforts them (why should truth be consoling?) or because it “feels right”. The wife of a former UK prime minister may stand for the” feels right” brigade. She based her belief on “an understanding of something that her head cannot explain but my heart knows to be true.” She aspired to become a judge! My’lud, I cannot provide the evidence you require. My head cannot explain why, but my heart knows it to be true. Why is religion immune to the critical standards we apply not just in our courts of law, but in every other life?’ Richard Dawkins

Both sociopathic pieces of shit.

This is a Trump supporter.

“Musk cane from some wealth, got himself some skills through education, and had some even better skills at getting people to give him money, and chose wisely which companies to buy himself into. He actually created and advanced technologies in those areas. He is trash because he plays the “self-made man” bullshit while building his empire with government grants, tax breaks, contracts, and other peoples’ investment while pushing right wing fascism to give himself even more money and control as the richest man on earth. Trump is a fail-upwards sad excuse for a money launder Temu wannabe gangster who never did an original thing in his life. He rose on tax dodges, skipping paying all kinds of bills, bankruptcy, fraud, stealing from charity, bribes, hush money, and those are just his financial crimes. Domestic abuse, paedophilia, rape, adultery, and probably more we do not know about. They are both shitty human beings. And yes, capitalism is out of control, and the wealthy that control it.”

Author not known.

Critics and first-time smellers often describe the odor as resembling sewage, rotten eggs, raw onions, garlic, old gym socks, or hot garbage. Fans, however, may perceive subtle sweet or floral undertones.

The essential qualities of a good typeface balance visual beauty with practical function. This is just plain ugly and makes Comic sans look elegant. Using this crud is as acceptable as attending a funeral dressed as a clown.

Comic sans (originally designed for a comic dog character) is an awful typeface. It is constantly misused in serious settings such business contracts, medical notices, and legal documents. In the UK many schools use it. It is as appropriate as wearing a clown costume to a funeral. Using it makes any professional design look childish, sloppy, or amateurish There is very little peer-reviewed scientific evidence that Comic Sans inherently improves reading performance for students with dyslexia.

Britain does not need to fear a Russian invasion. It needs to wake up to the one that has already happened in our politics, our economy, and our national soul.

‘For years, British politicians warned that “the Russians are coming.” The phrase conjured images of spies, hackers, and shadowy figures manipulating Western democracies from afar. But the truth is starker: they are not coming they are already here. The influence of Putin’s Russia has seeped deep into British political life, reshaping the nation’s direction through propaganda, financial infiltration, and the nurturing of divisive political figures. The evidence is all around us in the rise of Nigel Farage, Reform, the toxicity of Brexit, and the slow, deliberate decline of Britain’s economic and democratic strength. The seeds were planted long before the referendum. When UKIP and later the Brexit Party now Reform UK surged to prominence, their rhetoric carried echoes of Russian disinformation: anti-EU, anti-immigrant, anti-establishment. Each slogan was designed to pit neighbour against neighbour, region against region, and Britain against its own interests. Russia’s playbook has always been about destabilisation, and few events have destabilised Britain more than Brexit. Nigel Farage, feted by Russian state media as a “man of the people” and given disproportionate airtime by RT (Russia Today), became the perfect vehicle. His populism masked a geopolitically convenient mission: to weaken the European Union and fracture Western unity. Nathan Gill, Farage’s close ally and UKIP MEP, echoed the same anti-Brussels line, parroting narratives that dovetailed neatly with Kremlin talking points. The push for Brexit was not simply a domestic rebellion it was a geopolitical victory for Moscow. By removing Britain from the EU, Putin achieved through propaganda what decades of espionage never could: a divided, isolated Britain, struggling to find its footing in a global economy that has moved on without it. The results are plain to see. The UK’s economy is shrinking relative to its peers. Public services are starved of funds. Inflation and interest rates squeeze households while infrastructure crumbles. Britain, once a pillar of European stability, is now plagued by instability of its own making. And who benefits? Russia watching gleefully as one of NATO’s key members turns inward, distracted by culture wars and internal strife. The links between Russian money and the British right are no longer mere conspiracy. Under Boris Johnson, the Tory Party accepted millions in donations from individuals with ties to the Russian elite even as intelligence agencies warned of growing Kremlin interference. Johnson himself shelved the long-delayed “Russia Report,” which detailed how deeply Moscow had infiltrated British political and financial systems. Instead of confronting the threat, he and his allies downplayed it while their media surrogates, The Daily Mail, branded anyone who raised concerns as “Remoaners” or “traitors.” Meanwhile, Nigel Farage continues to parrot lines that have been written in the Kremlin press office. His public sympathy for Putin’s “understandable” invasion of Ukraine, his criticism of NATO expansion, and his insistence that the West “provoked” Russia reveal the depth of his alignment with Moscow’s worldview. Farage and his Reform movement are the tools in a decades-long campaign through direct command, and through shared goals: dismantle trust in democracy, erode Western alliances, and replace reasoned politics with perpetual anger. Farage as a fascist knows his next move is to gain power through the ballot box. Following that, the dismantling of the democratic system and replacement with his authoritarian regime. The Russians are not coming. They have already won their quiet war not with tanks or troops, but with propaganda, money, and manipulation, and the active participation of Farage and his secret army of Fascists. Their victory is visible every time a politician like Farage blames Britain’s struggles on migrants instead of oligarchic corruption, every time the Daily Mail echoes disinformation, and every time the government prioritises division over unity.’

Reminds me of Trump.

Trump knowledge

During an October 2026 campaign rally in Ohio, he stated, “I know more about everything than anybody in this room, anybody anywhere in the world,” though he briefly considered that a local housewife might know more about business than him. The Military & ISIS: Claimed to know more about the military and ISIS than military generals. Taxes & The Tax Code: Claimed to understand the tax code and tax laws better than anyone who has ever run for president. Lawsuits: Declared himself “the king” regarding lawsuits and legal matters. [ Infrastructure & Renewable Energy: Asserted he knows more about infrastructure and renewables than any human being on Earth Drones & Technology: Stated, “I know more about drones than anybody,” alongside claims about tech and safety systems Grass & Golf Courses: Claimed in 2025 that he knows “more about grass than any human being” due to owning golf courses globally Other Subjects: Additional topics have included Facebook, polls, the “other side” of politics, steelworkers, campaign finance/contributions, and the word “apprentice”.

You can watch a compilation of these statements via the ‘Nobody Knows More’ Than Trump About Anything: A Supercut on Youtube.

Trump may be the most knowing man on the planet. Trump knowledge. During an October 2026 campaign rally in Ohio, he stated, “I know more about everything than anybody in this room, anybody anywhere in the world,” though he briefly considered that a local housewife might know more about business than him. The Military & ISIS: Claimed to know more about the military and ISIS than military generals. Taxes & The Tax Code: Claimed to understand the tax code and tax laws better than anyone who has ever run for president. Lawsuits: Declared himself “the king” regarding lawsuits and legal matters. [ Infrastructure & Renewable Energy: Asserted he knows more about infrastructure and renewables than any human being on Earth Drones & Technology: Stated, “I know more about drones than anybody,” alongside claims about tech and safety systems. Grass & Golf Courses: Claimed in 2025 that he knows “more about grass than any human being” due to owning golf courses globally. Other Subjects: Additional topics have included Facebook, polls, the “other side” of politics, steelworkers, campaign finance/contributions, and the word “apprentice”.

You can watch a compilation of these statements via the ‘Nobody Knows More’ Than Trump About Anything:

Well said.

You may like this. “From a distance, Portrait of Edmond de Belamy, which has just sold at Christie’s in New York for $432,000 (£337,000), looks almost plausible. Up close, however, the paintwork becomes a grid of mechanical-looking dots, the man’s face a golden blur with black holes for eyes. Look into those eyes. They show no sign of feeling or life. Did a computer make this? The answer is yes. The first artwork generated by AI to be sold at Christie’s, its impressive price would seem to suggest that in future we will get computers to make art for us. Robot van Gogh will harmlessly cut its ear off and robot Picasso will be a genius, minus the misogyny. Is this the future AI art visionaries such as the French collective Obvious, which programmed this “painter” by getting it to compare its own work with 15,000 pre-20th century portraits, have in mind? Or are they just, God forbid, making a fast buck from gullible art collectors? Because believing the algorithm that knocked this up to be in any meaningful way an “artist” is like thinking your voice-interaction programme is out to get you. Dream on. Computers would need to replicate human consciousness before they could replicate the funny thing humans do called “art”. Art is a way in which human consciousness expresses itself, and is equally true of the earliest cave art, Rembrandt’s portraits and Duchamp’s urinal. And that is what is missing from Portrait of Edmond Bellamy. Art is a way humans communicate ideas, perceptions and feelings to each other. It has no existence outside the human passion to communicate. So in what meaningful sense can an AI replica of certain physical traits of old master paintings be called art? For a robot to really make art, it would need an autonomous mind that was emotional as well as rational. No AI developer has yet claimed to be anywhere near achieving that and if they ever do, their creation will probably have better things to do than paint portraits – like destroy humanity. Maybe afterwards robots will invent their own kind of art, but it won’t be some poor pastiche of human genius. It will be beyond anything we organics could imagine." guardian ai generated portrait.docx

Trump supporters will not know what an ad hominems attack is. The average American Trump supporter is a gun toting, neoliberal, bear shooting, death penalty supporting, misogynist, who believe that LGBT people should be stoned to death Old Testament style, a white supremacist, anti-vaccine, climate change denying, anti-evolution, anti- science, flat earth believing, pro-life, anti- intellectual, sanctimonious evangelical Christian, Islamophobic bigot. Chem trail obsessive, xenophobic and a racist. Also ignorant, stupid, perverted and possibly demented.