Creationism?

I reject it totally, if by that you mean accepting a literal interpretation of Genesis with its two or three different creation stories. I also reject the literal historicity of just about all the rest of Genesis as well. None of that would surprise very many Christians, including just about everyone in The Vatican these days. To the annoyance of my atheist friends of course I still see God as creator and sustainer of the universe, though I have no idea how this happened/happens or even exactly what it means.

Conspiracy theorists, cultists, fundamentalists, and some politicians…

…share qualities outlined succintly on Conspiracy theorists and free software by Bruce Byfield on WordPress (2 January 2008). As you will see, he is interested in one particular area, but his outline of "symptoms" applies rather widely. In summary:

• An obsession about a single person, corporation, or issue to the exclusion of everything else.
• Extreme paranoia directed at the object of the obsession.
• An either / or mindset: "…Key phrases: ‘There can be no truce with [insert object of obsession here]‘ and ‘Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.’
• An inability to summarize other viewpoints with any accuracy: "Convinced that they are on the right side, the average conspiracy theorist is either unable or unwilling to report other people’s ideas with any accuracy. Instead, they seem to report what they imagine others are saying, or is convenient to believe that others are saying."
• A refusal to modify opinions, even in light of new evidence.
• The use of decontextualized evidence.
• A refusal to consider alternate explanations.

Literary Cricket

There is a text type for English students to examine: cricket writing. There is a fine tradition of it which, some might argue, is often more interesting than the game itself. The Sydney Morning Herald’s Peter Roebuck is in this tradition.