trentmkelly/rationalwiki huggingface dataset:
Fortune cookie

[[File:Fortune cookie-Joyeuses fetes.jpg|right|thumb|170px|If you can read French, you'll notice that's a bit of a crap fortune.<ref group=note>And if you can't read French, it says, "Happy New Year."</ref>]]{{foodnav}}{{cquote|'Funny thing, that,' said Nobby. 'You never get bad fortunes in cookies, ever noticed that? They never say stuff like: "Oh dear, things're going to be really bad." I mean, they're never misfortune cookies.'<br>
Vimes lit a cigar and shook the match to put it out. 'That, Corporal, is because of one of the fundamental driving forces of the universe.'<br>
'What? Like, people who read fortune cookies are the lucky ones?' said Nobby.<br>
'No. Because people who sell fortune cookies want to go on selling them.'|||[[Terry Pratchett]], ''Feet of Clay''}}

A '''fortune cookie''' is a crisp cookie usually made from flour, sugar, vanilla, and sesame seed oil with a "[[Divination|fortune]]" wrapped inside. The exact origin of fortune cookies is unclear, though various immigrant groups in [[California]] claim to have popularized them in the early 20th century, basing their recipe on a traditional [[Japan]]ese cracker.

=="Sacred lots"==
The fortune aspect of the cookie derives from the Japanese practice of {{wpl|O-mikuji}} (御御籤, お神籤, or おみくじ o-mikuji?), which are random fortunes written on strips of paper at [[Shinto]] shrines and Buddhist temples in Japan. The word translates as "sacred lot." The o-mikuji predicts the person's chances of their hopes coming true, of finding a good match, or generally matters of health, fortune, life, etc.

Unlike fortune cookies, O-Mikuji have just as many bad fortunes. When the prediction is bad, it is a custom to fold up the strip of paper and attach it to a pine tree or a wall of metal wires alongside other bad fortunes in the temple or shrine grounds. A purported reason for this custom is a pun on the word for pine tree (松 matsu) and the verb 'to wait' (待つ matsu), the idea being that the bad luck will wait by the tree rather than attach itself to the bearer.

==Fortune selling==
Fortune cookies sell much better when they don't have negative fortunes. They also use a wide variety of vaguely [[Confucius|Confucian]] sounding proverbs, just to add just a pinch of truth to the recipe.<ref>[http://www.fugetsu-do.com/history.htm A History of Fugetsu-Do], www.fugetsu-do.com </ref> Fortune cookies are often considered to be jokes, unlike similar fortune-predicting methods, like [[horoscope]]s.

==In other media==
{{wpl|Fortune (Unix)|Fortune}} is a program present on Unix-like systems that displays a (pseudo)random quote chosen from a database, some like those found on fortune cookies (hence the name).

==Other semi-random forms of divination==
*[[Apophenia]]
*[[Tasseography]]
*[[Horoscope]]
*[[Tarot]]
*[[I Ching]]
*[[Molybdomancy]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{foodbox}}

[[Category:California]]
[[Category:Folklore]]
[[Category:Food woo]]
[[Category:Magic]]

Categories: California, Folklore, Food woo, Magic
Fossil record

{{sources needed}}
{{evolution}}
The '''fossil record''' is the set of all [[fossil]]s - and it just happens to chart the course of [[evolution]] through time. It is one of the most significant pieces of supporting evidence for the idea that evolution is a [[rationalism|rational]] and real explanation for the origin of the diversity of species. In general, the term "fossil record" refers to all fossils that have been excavated, examined and characterized so far by thousands of hardworking scientists and [[Paleontology|paleontologists]] over the last few hundred years. The fossil record is used as evidence for many of things, including for [[common descent]], for mass extinctions, for the [[Cambrian explosion]] and for the fact that the [[Earth]] is considerably older than [[Evidence against a recent creation|6000 years]]. Plus for [[flood geology]].
[[File:Skull evolution.png|center|thumb|920px|Skulls of successive (or near-successive, depending on the source) human evolutionary ancestors]]
At the same time, the fossil record is yet another thing which shows that [[creationism|creationist]] ideas are untenable. Creationists like to claim that there are [[List of transitional forms|no transitional fossils]] (fossils that fill the "gaps" between one species and another) in the fossil record. This is probably because if [[crocoduck | one was presented]] to them, they would point out that there are now two new gaps on either side of it for which no [[missing links  |transitional forms]] exist. Either that, or they are convinced that the fossil record is a hoax. But to scientists working on real research, the fossil record is a vital piece of evidence to study.
[[image:et.jpg|thumb|left|This ludicrous creationist cartoon is [[not even wrong]]. Though the [[retard|overt ableism]] is enough to make any decent person cringe.]]
Due to the relative rarity of fossil formation (with factors such as time, location and pure luck governing what we can find), and the natural destruction of rock that holds fossils, it is unlikely that the fossil record will ever be 100% complete and comprehensive. Creationists don't (or don't want to) understand this, and insist that the absence of a single fossil disproves evolution outright. Scientists and [[palaeontology|palaeontologists]] who do understand how fossilisation works note that we can derive a lot of information from what we do have rather than dwelling on the information that we don't have/haven't found yet.

==See also==
*[[Out-of-place fossils]]

{{Evonav}}
{{keyword|evokey= Fossil&nbsp;record}}

[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Evolution]]
[[Category:Evidence against a recent creation]]

Categories: Geology, Evolution, Evidence against a recent creation
Four-term fallacy

{{logic}}
A '''four-term fallacy''' (also '''''quaternio terminorum''''', '''fallacy of four terms''', and if using [[equivocation]], '''ambiguous middle term''') occurs when a [[syllogism]] uses four or more terms instead of the required three.

The fallacy is a [[formal fallacy]], because the conclusion does not follow even if the premises are correct.

==Form==
A four term fallacy uses (at least) four terms, represented here as letters W, X, Y, and Z. The fallacy (when limited to 4 terms) takes two forms. First, where the premises contain 4 terms:
{{syl
|2=W is X.
|4=Y is Z.
|5=C|6=W is Z.
}}

Second, where a new term is introduced in the conclusion:
{{syl
|2=X is Y.
|4=Y is Z.
|5=C|6=W is X.
}}

In both cases, the conclusion does ''not'' follow, because all of the terms used in the conclusion are ''not'' used in the premises. Compare this to a proper syllogism:
{{syl
|2=X is Y.
|4=Y is Z.
|5=C|6=X is Z.
}}

Here, only three terms (X, Y, and Z) are used, and both terms used in the conclusion are used in the premises.

Often, however, the four term fallacy technically uses only three apparent terms, but the truth of either premise and the conclusion or both premises depends on the alternation of two meanings of one term:
{{syl
|2=X (meaning 1) is Y.
|4=Y is Z.
|5=C|6=X (meaning 2) is Z
}}

Second, where the middle term alternates two meanings ('''ambiguous middle term''' proper):
{{syl
|2=X is Y (meaning 1).
|4=Y (meaning 2) is Z.
|5=C|6=X is Z.
}}

Third, where the predicate alternates two meanings:
{{syl
|2=X is Y.
|4=Y is Z (meaning 1).
|5=C|6=X is Z (meaning 2).
}}

==Examples==
Using the first form:
{{syl
|2=All [[fish]] have fins.
|4=All [[humans]] have hair.
|5=C|6=All fish have hair.
}}

Using the second form:
{{syl
|2= All fish have fins.
|4=All goldfish are fish.
|5=C|6=All humans have fins.
}}

Many [[Argument from first cause|first-cause arguments]] are based on a four-term fallacy:
{{syl
|2=All events have a cause.
|4=Causal chains have to start somewhere.
|5=C|6=[[God]] is the cause!
}}

Wow, that God really came [[Argument from first cause|out of nowhere!]] *ba-dum-tss*

==See also==
*[[Equivocation]], one of the most common four-term fallacies

==External links==
*{{wpa|Fallacy of four terms}}

*[https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Fallacy-of-Four-Terms Fallacy of Four Terms], Logically Fallacious

{{logfal}}

[[Category:Formal fallacies]]

Categories: Formal fallacies
Four Spiritual Laws

{{christianity}}
'''The Four Spiritual Laws''' is an [[evangelism|evangelistic]] [[Christian]] [[tract]] created in 1952 by Bill Bright, founder of [[Campus Crusade for Christ]].<ref>[http://www.campuscrusadeforchrist.com/aboutus/history.htm Campus Crusade for Christ]</ref> The concept is also used by [[The Navigators]].

Bright wrote the booklet as a means to clearly explain the essentials of the Christian [[faith]] concerning [[salvation]] as he saw it. Campus Crusade for Christ claim to have distributed 2.5 ''billion'' copies of the tract.

==The laws==

This is the original version; other variants exist.

#[[God]] loves you and offers a wonderful plan for your life.<ref>({{bible|John|3|16}}, {{bible|John|10|10}})</ref>
#Man is [[sin]]ful and separated from God. Therefore, he cannot know and experience God's love and plan for his life.<ref>({{bible|Romans|3|23}}, {{bible|Romans|6|23}})</ref>
#Jesus Christ is God's only provision for man's sin. Through Him you can know and experience God's love and plan for your life.<ref>({{bible|Romans|5|8}}, {{bible|1 Corinthians|15|3}}-6, {{bible|John|14|6}})</ref>
#We must individually receive Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord; then we can know and experience God's love and plan for our lives.<ref> ({{bible|John|1|12}}, {{bible|Ephesians|2|8}},9, {{bible|John|3|1}}-8, {{bible|Revelation|3|20}})</ref>

==Second place==
For some the rest of the [[Bible]], [[Old Testament]] and [[New Testament]] appear less important than the four laws.

==See also==
*[[Christian fundamentalism]]
*[[Chick tract]]
*[[Personal savior]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Christianity]]

Categories: Christianity
Fourth Amendment

{{constnav}}
On the surface the '''Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution''' seems pretty clear, but when it comes down to it, it can be quite complicated.  The text is pretty short:

{{cquote|The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.}}

Basically if the police are investigating a person they have to obtain a document from a judge that allows them to burst into that person's private property and search through it for evidence (this generally includes wiretaps).  Likewise if the police want to arrest you they have to get permission first.  In order to obtain this document the investigators have to convince a judge that there is "probable cause" that a crime has been committed or that evidence of said crime exists.  If somebody is arrested and put on trial on the basis of evidence illegally obtained such evidence must be excluded from the trial.<ref>{{wpl|Mapp_v._Ohio | Mapp v. Ohio}}, Wikipedia</ref>

==Ifs ands or buts==
Police and criminal procedure is rarely as cut and dry as the [[Bill of Rights (United States)|Bill of Rights]] would seem to suggest; there are many exceptions to the need for warrants.  These include:

* If the officer actually sees you committing a crime he or she may arrest you.
* If you left evidence somewhere outside of your property (including the trash).<ref>{{wpl|Hester_v._United_States | Hester v. United States}}, Wikipedia</ref><ref>{{wpl|California_v._Greenwood | California v. Greenwood}}, Wikipedia</ref>
* If you invited the officers in and let them look around.<ref>{{wpl|Arizona_v._Hicks | Arizona v. Hicks}}, Wikipedia</ref>
* Possible life or death situations (commonly known as "exigent circumstances"), e.g. officers witnessing  gunshots emanating from a building can enter without a search warrant. 
* If you are in the custody of the U.S. Prison Service, the fact that you are in custody is reasonable enough for any search and seizure applied against you.   
* If you are a government employee in certain fields, you may be subject to "suspicion-less" random drug testing.<ref>[http://likethedew.com/2012/06/13/what-does-a-scanner-see/ What Does a Scanner See?]</ref>
* If you are a public school student involved in competitive extracurricular activities, you may be subject to "suspicion-less" random drug testing.

The case law on what does, and doesn't, qualify as "probable cause" could fill several volumes.

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{constitutionbox}}
Fox Business Network

{{media}}

'''Fox News II'''
 The '''Fox Business Network''' is a cable channel dedicated to business and financial market news.<ref>Or, at least, news as it is known to [[Fox News]]</ref>  The impetus for the network's creation was [[Rupert Murdoch]]'s purchase of the <i>[[Wall Street Journal]]</i>.  The network was meant to be a rival to NBC's CNBC. Its two "star" [[pundit]]s were [[Andrew Napolitano]] and [[John Stossel]]. The network initially attracted whopping ''6,300'' viewers per day. Compare CNBC's ''283,000'' per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/business/media/04fox.html Few Viewers for Infancy of Fox Business] (''New York Times'', 2008-01-04)</ref>
To be fair, it does appear to be enjoying a greater degree of success now than it did in the past, having now employed pundits with name recognition like Napolitano, Stossel, and [[Lou Dobbs]] (until he was given the boot). Beforehand, [[Neil Cavuto]] was its only real "star."

It may be inferred that FOX's standards of accuracy and conformance to reality are not highly respected by those who are literally using the information provided to bet their own money.

==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:American media]]
[[Category:Journalism]]
[[Category:Murdochsphere]]
{{stub|media}}

Categories: American media, Journalism, Murdochsphere
Francis Collins

[[File:Francis Collins official photo.jpg|right|thumb|165px|It's Frankie!]]
'''Francis Collins''' {{lived|April 1, 1950}} is an [[United States|American]] physician/geneticist who used to serve as the director of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). He was the head of the US research institute that worked on the [[Human Genome Project]].

Collins has some strange and contradictory views.  For example he is an [[Evangelical Christian]] <ref>http://biologos.org/blog/francis-collins-talks-about-science-medicine-religion-and-gods-action-in-th</ref> and a [[theistic evolution|theistic evolutionist]]<ref>{{wpa|The Language of God}}</ref>,  which surprises skeptics<ref>https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/francis-collins-on-science-and-faith/ In addition to this entry, Jerry Coyne has other blog entries on Collins</ref> who nevertheless acknowledge his scientific expertise. He is also the founder of the supernaturally inclined  "BioLogos Foundation" and served as its director until his appointment as director of NIH.

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://talkreason.org/articles/Theistic.cfm Talkreason on Collin's book ''The Language of God'' ]
*[http://www.nih.gov/about/director/index.htm NIH's Collins bio]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Collins, Francis}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Evolution]]
[[Category:Physicians]]
[[Category:Biologists]]
[[Category:Christians]]
[[Category:Living people]]
{{stub|Christianity|Christianity}}

Categories: Authors, Evolution, Physicians, Biologists, Christians, Living people
Francis Schaeffer

{{christianity}}
'''Francis August Schaeffer''' {{lived|1912|1984}} was an [[American]] [[Evangelical Christianity|Evangelical Christian]] [[theologian]], [[Philosophy|philosopher]], and [[Presbyterian]] pastor. He is most famous for his writings and his establishment of the L'Abri community in [[Switzerland]], as well as for his series of [[dominionism|dominionist]] videos ''How Should We Then Live?'', cited by [[politician]] [[Michele Bachmann]] as formative to her [[worldview]].<ref name="leap">[http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_lizza "Leap of Faith"], ''The New Yorker''</ref> Opposed to theological modernism, Schaeffer promoted a more historic [[Protestant]] [[faith]] and a [[Presupposition|presuppositional]] approach to [[Christian apologetics]], which he believed would answer the questions of the age.<ref name="leap" />  A number of scholars credit Schaeffer's ideas with helping spark the rise of the [[Christian Right]] in the [[United States]]. At one point, he even claimed that the [[Christian evangelism|Christian evangelical]] movement was too [[Marxism|Marxist]]. On another occasion, he warned against "love" because it tempted [[true believer]]s away from the confrontation which he believed necessary.<ref>http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=03-03-023-f</ref>

==Family==
Schaeffer's son Frank Schaeffer {{lived|1952}} has become known for his break with the religious right and criticizes the movement harshly in his book ''Crazy for God''.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/open-letter-to-the-republ_b_172822.html Open Letter to the Republican Traitors (From a Former Republican)], Frank Schaeffer</ref><ref>''Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back'' by Frank Schaeffer (2008) Da Capo Press. ISBN 0306817500.</ref> He also directed [https://letterboxd.com/film/rising-storm/ the 1989 satirical dystopian film ''Rising Storm''], whose setting goes thus 'The year (...) 2099. The United States is ruled by the Reverend Jimmy Joe II, in a dictatorship where big guns and fundamentalist religion are used to keep the masses in control.'

==References==
{{Reflist}}
{{stub|Christianity}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Schaeffer, Francis August}}
[[Category:Christians]]
[[Category:Ministers]]

Categories: Christians, Ministers
Francisco Gil-White

{{conspiracy}}'''Francisco Gil-White''' is an academic who moonlights as an internet [[Conspiracy theory|conspiracy theorist]], writing on a variety of topics on his own website, "Historical and Investigative Research," which does not have a comments section below articles.

Until 2006, Gil-White used to write at conspiracy theory website Emperor's Clothes (which publishes conspiracy theories about [[9/11]], former [[Yugoslavia]] and [[Israel]]) before a falling out with the editor of that website, Jared Israel.

== Climate change ==
Gil-White is a [[global warming denialism|climate change denialist]] who has trotted out the [[PRATT|old chestnut]] that Antarctic ice cores "refute" the theory of anthropogenic climate change, because they show that ''in prehistoric times'', changes in CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations lagged behind global temperature changes. Gil-White seems to regard this as some kind of devastating critique. What he (deliberately?) fails to understand is that, as the climate scientist he quotes says ''in the quotation he quotes'', there are multiple factors behind prehistoric climate changes, and of course this time it really is different because this is the first time a rapidly-growing industrial civilisation has ever existed on earth.<ref>http://www.hirhome.com/climate_change/global_warming02.htm</ref>

He also sneers at [[Al Gore]]'s arguably clumsy and roundabout attempt to respond to the CO<sub>2</sub> lag argument, as if a non-scientist - and a politician at that - coming off badly in a political committee proves anything at all about the scientific theory.

Gil-White also trots out the old "argument from government funding," a variation on the more usual denialist argument, "skeptics cannot get published due to a conspiracy to suppress the truth among all climatology publication venues, so they are forced to sign angry petitions and go on Fox News instead." So, essentially the same implausible conspiracy then, but taking place at the funding approval stage rather than (or in addition to) at the [[peer review]] stage. He fails to explain why sceptical scientists could not simply get bootstrap funding from the likes of the [[Koch Industries|Koch]] brothers (indeed, one climate sceptic famously tried to do this, and ended up changing their mind on climate science on the Kochs' dime). He also claims that climate change sceptics are not "defending" the fossil fuel industries<ref>http://www.hirhome.com/climate_change/global_warming_faq.htm#oil</ref> - but not only are some of them defending them, some of them are actually funded by them!

Other amazing lines of argument include citing climate denier and former Australian Prime Minister [[Tony Abbott]] abolishing the post of science minister to advance the thesis that some scientists reject climate change, and citing the notorious propaganda "documentary" ''[[The Great Global Warming Swindle]]''.

==References==
{{reflist}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Gil-White, Francisco}}
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:Conspiracy theorists]]
[[Category:internet kooks]]

Categories: Living people, Conspiracy theorists, internet kooks
Frank Lewis Marsh

{{crenav}}
'''Frank Lewis Marsh''' (1899-1992) was an [[United States|American]] [[Biology|biologist]], [[Seventh-day Adventism|Seventh-Day Adventist]] and [[creationist]] known for his [[pseudoscientific]] views.<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Frank_Marsh Frank Marsh] on [[CreationWiki]]</ref> Marsh was the founder of the [[Creation Research Society]] and the [[Geoscience Research Institute]].<ref>https://www.andrews.edu/library/car/MarshFL.pdf</ref> He taught at and was posthumously made an emeritus Professor of Biology at Andrews University.<ref>http://christiananswers.net/creation/people/marsh-fl.html</ref> Marsh did actual research in [[biology]] relating to entomology and parasitology and created the modern creationist concept of [[baraminology]].<ref name=papers>[http://www.centerforadventistresearch.org/manuscripts/marsh-frank/ Frank Lewis Marsh Papers] at the Center for Adventist Research.</ref>

His creationist views have been criticised by biologists such as Theodosius Dobzhansky for having no scientific basis.

==Founder of modern creationism==
Being a Seventh-Day Adventist, Marsh was an adamant creationist. While he published papers in [[peer-reviewed]] science journals, he also wrote publications in creationist circles advocating [[baraminology]], which is a hash of [[biblical]] concepts and taxonomy. Baraminology has no scientific basis and does not follow the [[scientific method]]. Marsh also published guides to Adventist Philosophy of Biology and Geology, which re-affirmed the Seventh-Day Adventist take on creationism, and he was also a major contributor to the [[pseudojournal]] ''Creation Research Society Quarterly''.<ref name=papers />

==Selected publications==
===Actual scientific research===
*''Biology of the Ichneumonid Spilocryptus Extrematis Cresson (Hymenoptera)'' (''Annals of the Entomological Society of America'', 1937)
*''Biology of the New Chalcid Parasite Cirrospilus Inimicus Gahan'' (''Annals of the Entomological Society'', 1938)
*''Biology of the Tachinid Winthemia Datanae Tns'' (''Psyche'', 1937)

===Pseudoscience===
*''The Christian and Natural Science'' (1936)
*''The Controversy in Nature between Christ and Satan'' (1962)
*''Creationism to the Front'' (''Lake Union Herald'', 1972)<ref name=papers />

==External links==
*{{wpa|Frank Lewis Marsh}}

==References==
{{reflist}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Marsh, Frank Lewis}}
[[Category:Biologists]]
[[Category:Creationism]]
[[Category:Christians]]
[[Category:Pseudoscience promoters]]

Categories: Biologists, Creationism, Christians, Pseudoscience promoters