text:
20+ Years Experience
Specialist Digital Marketing
We are Dash Digital. We have assisted thousands throughout the UK with specialist digital marketing services.
With marketing experts based in Wednesbury we can offer competitive prices and in July 2024 are able to get our marketing to you very quickly.
Digital marketing campaigns have become more complex than ever before, but we at Dash Digital aim to help our clients get the best online presence possible no matter their experience in marketing strategies.
Building up a digital marketing strategy from scratch in July 2024 is tough, especially if you have not had any training in the process.
Whether you are focusing on social media or want to draw foot traffic to your physical premises, get in touch with us to see what options are right for you.
We offer a number of great digital marketing services and are more than happy in assisting you with anything.
We are a team of professional digital marketing and brand awareness experts who have had experience in various digital marketing agencies in the past.
We have come together to form a digital marketing agency based on the client's needs and requirements, no matter their end goals or target audiences.
If you are searching for top digital marketing agencies that can provide reliable digital marketing strategies and other major boosts to your overall business success, then take a look at what we offer and see if any of them applies to you.
Not familiar with digital marketing strategies and techniques? Then here are some things to consider if your business is in dire need of a better online marketing focus.
A digital marketing company like ours can have a whole range of different impacts on your business's overall success, presence, influence, customer base and general public appearance. But what are these benefits?
Your digital marketing strategy defines how your business forms its online presence. With a digital marketing agency like us, you can get effective marketing solutions to problems that the average business owner does not realise are possible.
Our experts are very aware of how to use social media, online blogs and countless other tools to create a strong digital strategy, one that can push a small business far beyond its original reach.
The better you market your business, the more customers you can draw in at once. If your small business needs a constant flow of sales to keep running, then getting more attention and paying customers can make it much easier to expand your product lines or services.
As a digital marketing agency, most of our work focuses on getting clients exactly what they need – often a careful balance of high traffic and a stable internet presence.
Not all visitors to your site will purchase products or services, but they are still valuable in a digital marketing context.
Presenting the right products at the right time might not lead to a sale, but it can keep your business spreading through word of mouth or capture customers that realise they need a product like yours in the future.
Our digital marketing services include a lot of techniques to get your business out there, standing out amongst similar sites all across the internet.
Ranking on search engines is one of the core digital strategies that site owners need to consider. Without an easy way to stumble across your business, customers will not arrive – but if you rank high enough on Google or a similar search engine, your pool of potential customers becomes much larger.
As a digital advertising agency, a big part of our focus lies on being able to put our client's business where it belongs – on the search results pages, where customers can find the products that they have been looking for.
Your website is the heart of any marketing strategy you might take on. It represents your business and acts as the core product that digital campaigns are trying to 'sell' – so improving it in the right ways can be the difference between no customers and hundreds of customers.
Our digital marketing agency is well aware of how important a client's website can be and will be able to improve or tweak it in ways that draw new customers. However, we will never compromise our client's design or vision unless it is causing active harm to your business' image.
The average cost of hiring a Digital Marketing Agency in Wednesbury and West Midlands is £450 to £750 per day. This price Is dependent on many factors such as:
There are many more things that factor into the cost of our services if you would like to know more get in touch today for a free no-obligation quote!
As a digital marketing agency with a lot of experience under our belt, we know how to build brand awareness and traffic for even the smallest businesses. But what does that actually mean in the grander scheme of things? Why is a good digital marketing strategy so important?
SEO is all based on your ranking position on search engines: putting you in a place that allows new customers to find you through internet searches rather than paid ads or third-party referrals.
All businesses need some form of SEO to have a digital presence since it can be almost impossible to find a small company if they do not appear on search engines. We at Dash Digital are able to manage search engine rankings effectively, getting our clients to the right target market at the right time.
When a customer searches for something, they get search results back. These results are based on relevancy, but it is possible to make your website appear higher in the ranking for certain terms.
Unlike paid advertising, SEO is not based on paying per click or paying for ad space: it is about having the right links and connections from other sites.
Our digital marketing agency is experienced at gathering links for SEO purposes – links from other sites that spread value and ranking power to your own website.
While the links have to be relevant and from reputable sites to avoid penalties, they are an incredibly powerful tool and something that matters a lot when working on boosting site rankings. Dash Digital have plenty of strategies that can make SEO services a lot simpler for everybody involved.
Sites need to be built in a way that lets users search for them. While having a phrase in your website's text can help, proper web development allows metadata to draw in the right kind of customers and attract attention to certain pages.
Our digital agency has worked with websites countless times, and our understanding of hidden details like metadata and tags has allowed us to make major changes without impacting how a site looks or operates.
The general web design of your site can influence how it appears on a search engine but might also lead to it ranking higher or lower than expected. Simple things like page loading speed or title and text relevance can completely change how often that page appears in Google searches.
As an SEO agency, we have multiple staff members that understand the principles of effective web design and how it relates to your online influence, making it one of our core services for clients who need it.
The content of your website is not just for customers to read but influences your digital presence. Bad content does not just create bad digital PR but can actively reduce how many new customers will find you.
A creative agency like ours is able to produce new, re-written content that hits certain key terms and nudges you higher in the rankings, as well as better fitting your business and providing greater value to the customers that stop to read it.
If your business has a site on WordPress or has considered creating a blog for various different reasons, then proper development of the site can be a very useful tool for boosting your larger-scale organic search presence.
Just like web design, our digital marketing staff can tweak an existing site to work better with other marketing services or build you a completely new WordPress site to take advantage of more powerful online marketing techniques.
All digital agencies dabble in advertising in one way or another. Having a strategic plan for paid media ads can be difficult since advertisements can change as often as the market does. However, having well-paid marketing can be the core of the entire campaign.
Our digital marketing agency is not just an SEO agency – we can act as your marketing manager, aiming for the best possible presence across social media, search platforms and countless other websites. We also have experience with all kinds of advertising platforms, most notably Google Ads.
Performance marketing is a common type of paid search advertising, one where your company would only pay once ads are clicked on. This allows money to be saved on users who read the ad but did not click it or search up the site on their own.
Our marketing services can include as much performance marketing as needed, with a core focus on making sure that the ads get as many relevant clicks from potential customers as possible. We also aim to keep irrelevant clicks from draining your marketing budget.
If your business has an app then marketing it properly, to get more downloads and paying users, can be an incredibly strong tactic. Not only does this increase your overall customer base, but it can also be a gateway for new customers to discover your business, products and services.
We at Dash Digital aim to create integrated campaigns that are not just focused on a single method of marketing. Your app is another avenue to get more attention and revenue, and we are fully capable of including it in our marketing strategies.
If you would like to receive even more information on digital marketing services, make sure you get in touch with us today!
Display ads are generally image ads that can appear on various sites across a network, such as Google's network, to advertise directly to potential customers.
There are a lot of different options to take advantage of, all of which can be a key part of a specific digital strategy.
Our digital marketing agency can use display advertising to create unique, carefully tailored ads that focus on specific target markets and/or products, drawing the right kind of attention to the right places.
Shopping ads make it easy to connect your products to Google's shopping network, meaning that it might appear when both new and current customers search up a particular term or product name.
This can be simple, but the right ads made with the right keywords can completely dominate certain digital channels, making it easier to push popular products into new markets that can't be reached with other advertising options.
YouTube has grown constantly since it was originally created over a decade ago, and it has become a hub for advertising. As part of the Google network, it can be a very reliable source of gaining more attention, awareness and interested customers.
Just like Google advertising, our digital marketing services include YouTube work as well.
Many of the techniques that apply to one can be used on the other, making it easy for us to integrate them both into the same marketing strategies.
Facebook has its own advertising system, too, one that we can take advantage of to target a local community or specific kinds of groups that do not exist outside of social media.
Our marketing services are broad, but we can narrow down the focus to certain types of subcultures, hobby groups, or even particular locations through Facebook's advertising options.
While not technically paid, email marketing allows a lot of potential customers (or existing customers, if you are re-marketing) to get a message at the same time, one that can easily hook them in for another purchase or a deeper dive into your line of products.
This kind of marketing is great for getting existing customers to consider buying more products and is something that we have experience in.
If a client wants it as part of their digital marketing strategy, then Dash Digital can provide it with ease.
Social media is more than just a form of digital PR and customer service. You can engage with customers in a way that other platforms do not allow, get an in-depth understanding of what they want, and target them in very personal, effective ways.
Our digital marketing services include all kinds of social media management and marketing options, all of which can be tailored to fit a particular client or company's needs and requirements.
Social media marketing relies on interactions between the business and the customer, with them intentionally following or subscribing to your spots. This can make it a powerful – but ever-changing – type of online marketing to consider.
As a digital marketing agency, we are able to help you create excellent online marketing content that can arrive in front of potential customers just as they are considering their options.
We can also help to promote new products or services in a way that will get them noticed online.
A lot of these platforms allow certain posts to be promoted, opening up more options for advertising on a platform that is mostly meant for updates and entertainment.
Through this, it becomes a lot easier for a business to try and reach outside of its original target audience, putting content much further out.
If this is something that a business owner wants to try, then we can easily provide it, along with well-written content that complements the advertised posts themselves.
If your business has any upcoming events that might be important for marketing purposes, like booths at conventions or major in-store celebrations, proper event advertising on social media platforms can serve as an even more powerful kind of content marketing.
Our account managers and content marketing experts are able to take your events and turn them into marketable online posts, ones that will draw attention and potentially even spread outside of your own existing customer base. This also works as a form of email marketing.
If you are having trouble with your social media presence or advertising and do not know what kind of content to create, you can always talk with us to tell us what your problems are.
In extreme cases, we might be able to provide a level of management that other marketing agencies will not.
While this is very bespoke work, it is also something that can help get your social media back on track if you have made multiple major mistakes. This can also be useful if you are unable to grow your account or brand but do not understand why.
All online marketing agencies come back to one major focus – money. Digital marketing agencies are there to help your company grow, and through good online marketing, company revenue can easily rise in both the short-term and the long term.
Unlike many digital marketing companies, we know that long-term growth is often a healthy option for smaller businesses, but we also understand that short-term growth can help just as well.
As a data-driven digital marketing agency, we are able to focus heavily on chasing leads or marketing techniques that draw in the best results.
Unlike a lot of digital marketing agencies, we also understand that you can't just chase those leads constantly and can't always rely on them to work.
Our marketing agency makes sure that your business gets a mixture of everything that works best, rather than simply rushing straight for the most obvious techniques and missing some hidden gems: from website design to major financial services.
Inbound marketing can sometimes be considered "free" marketing, although that is not really the case. It covers anything that happens organically – searches, people stumbling onto your site from others that have linked to it, and other things like that.
While it can seem hard to use this kind of marketing effectively, many top digital marketing agencies – including ourselves – have figured out ways to turn a natural visitor into a paying customer, often by turning their natural arrival into a recurring method of drawing in new users.
Conversion (sale) optimisation is the process of maximising how many visitors end up converting: signing up, purchasing something, or doing any other action that has value.
Many digital marketing companies forget that a simple tweak can bring in countless new visitors and potential customers.
Our digital marketing and SEO services contain a lot of conversion-focused work: we try inbound marketing strategies, and then refine them to see how many extra customers we can squeeze into the same marketing funnel. Even a 5% increase can mean a major influx of new revenue to work with.
At Dash Digital, we can assist you with the best choices available. Make sure you contact us today for a number of great digital marketing services.
Digital marketing is not easy, especially not by yourself.
Whether you are a law firm or a company of IT service providers, there will always be more people to market to and new avenues to use in your marketing campaigns.
Having an experienced team by your side will help your company thrive in the world of digital marketing.
Knowing your target audience is important however if your business does not know who its target audience is, it is not a problem
A content marketing agency like ours can be the best way to get started since we will guide you every step of the way.
If you are interested in getting any kind of online marketing, feel free to get in contact – we can offer a huge range of different options for businesses of any size in Wednesbury and West Midlands, from the smallest startup to something much, much larger. No matter the scale, the marketing is just the same.
It might help to get yourself prepared, of course. Take some time to:
Do you know what kind of target audience you want to go for? If you work with a digital agency like Dash Digital, it helps to be aware of your main goals, no matter how vague they are.
If you know what kind of growth you want for your business, then we can get started on making it happen straight
Make sure you contact us today for a number of great digital marketing services in West Midlands.
Here are some towns we cover near Wednesbury.
Tipton, Darlaston, West Bromwich, Willenhall, BilstonWe absolutely love the service provided. Their approach is really friendly but professional. We went out to five different companies and found Dash Digital to be value for money and their service was by far the best. Thank you for your really awesome work, we will definitely be returning!
Marco ArnoldWe have used Dash Digital for many years as they are certainly the best in the UK. The attention to detail and professional setup is what makes this company our go-to company for all our work. I highly recommend the team for the immense work - we highly recommend them!
Patrick MossFor more information on digital marketing services in Wednesbury, fill in the contact form below to receive a free quote today.
We Aim To Reply To All Enquiries With-in 24-Hours


text:
VM-12 / VM-24 Voltmeter
Product Archive Notice
This page refers to older or legacy products that may be discontinued.
The sales and technical literature on this page are made available for download as a service to our customers. Archived documentation may contain telephone numbers and/or addresses that are no longer valid. Please refer to our Contact Us page for up-to-date contact information. Terms and conditions of sale stated in these documents, including warranty coverage, are subject to change.
0 comments
Please sign in to leave a comment.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Download image:
The Netherlands, Utrecht
ca. 1440
7 1/2 x 5 1/8 inches (192 x 130 mm)
Purchased on the Belle da Costa Greene Fund with the assistance of the Fellows and with special assistance of Mrs. Frederick B. Adams, Sr., Mrs. Robert Charles, Mr. Laurens M. Hamilton, The Heineman Foundation, Mrs. Donald F. Hyde, Mrs. Jacob M. Kaplan, Mrs. John Kean, Mr. Paul Mellon, Mr. and Mrs. Charles F. Morgan, Mr. Lessing J. Rosenwald, Mr. and Mrs. August H. Schilling, Mrs. Herbert N. Straus, Mrs. Landon K. Thorne, Mrs. Alan Valentine, Mr. and Mrs. Arnold Whitridge, and Miss Julia P. Wightman, 1970
MS M.917/945, ff. 71v–72r
Image courtesy of Faksimile Verlag Luzern


text:
Faux leather biker jacket
Proactively communicate corporate process improvements via corporate scenarios. Progressively aggregate proactive data after diverse users. Rapidiously redefine front-end interfaces before go forward process improvements.
Compellingly grow performance based mindshare through parallel potentialities. Rapidiously underwhelm top-line catalysts for change before best-of-breed materials. Competently brand timely catalysts for change through sustainable systems. Completely expedite ubiquitous bandwidth after integrated action items. Progressively transform leading-edge supply chains whereas flexible niche markets.
We currently offer free shipping worldwide on all orders over $100.
Fits true to size. Do you need size advice?
Return & exchange
If you are not satisfied with your purchase you can return it to us within 14 days for an exchange or refund. More info.
Contact us on (+44) 555 88 65, or email us at firstname.lastname@example.com.
Weight | 1.20 kg |
Dimensions | 20 × 10 × 50 cm |
size | L, M, S, XL, XS, XXL |
Material | Leather |
color | Blacks |
Brand |
5.00/51 review for Faux leather biker jacketAdd a review
- Sort:
- Newest
- Oldest
- Highest ratings
- Lowest ratings


text:
Since Ben Hill County Jail is a county jail, inmates residing here have been arrested and are currently awaiting trial, or have been convicted of a misdemeanor offense and are currently serving a prison term of typically no more than 1 year, or have been sentenced to a state or federal prison on a felony conviction and are currently waiting to be transferred.
To search for inmates in Georgia State Prisons currently in the DOC system, see Georgia Department of Corrections Inmate Search. To search inmates in federal prisons see Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator.Inmate search links are hosted on external sites. If an inmate search link does not provide the inmate you are looking for, it could be that the inmate has been transferred to another jail or another prison system, entirely.
Get Driving Directions to Ben Hill County Jail
Average Daily Inmate Population: | 109 | |
Inmate Capacity: | unknown | |
Year Constructed: | 1996 | |
Full-Time Staff: | 21 | |
Total Staff Salaries: | $514,620 | |
See the complete statistics for this jail |
Visiting hours for most jails occur on evenings and weekends. Visits are usually limited to between 30 and 60 minutes each, once or twice per week.
When arriving at a county jail, visitors typically need to enter some basic personal details, such as name and photo ID, or the inmate being visited, into the visitor log. The jail can generally deny visitations to those arriving late, those who are intoxicated or wearing inappropriate clothing, or those not otherwise approved to attend. Check the inmate visitation hours and procedures for Ben Hill County Jail carefully on the jail website before visiting.
BHC Sheriff
Ben Hill County Sheriff's DepartmentIf you still cannot find who you are looking for, try the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Search (NSOPW), maintained by the US Department of Justice. Search sex offenders by first and last name, zip code, or geographic radius.


text:
Today's Bride serves the following Northeast Ohio cities: Akron, Canton, Cleveland, North Canton, Youngstown, Ashtabula, Aurora, Chagrin Falls, Cuyahoga Falls, Dover, Eastlake, Elyria, Euclid, Hudson, Independence, Kent, Lorain, Massillon, Medina, Mentor, North Ridgeville, Parma, Ravenna, Sandusky, Solon, Stow, Strongsville, Wadsworth, Warren, Willoughby, Wooster and all of Northeast Ohio.
Copyright © 2024 Today's Bride. All Rights Reserved.


text:
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Historical Double Standards
56 comments:
- brenda said...
Well the gospels are eye witness accounts handed down by oral tradition and then written down about 50 years later. If you don't accept that then you must also reject virtually all ancient and medieval history. You cannot apply modern historical standards to ancient texts because these are different fields with different approaches to their study.
Jesus was most certainly an historical person. The evidence is as good or better for his life as it is for anyone else in the ancient world. The question of the resurrection is a matter of faith.
The Bible should not be read as literal history. Only atheists and fundamentalists do that. - May 27, 2010 at 8:32 AM
- Unknown said...
So many errors in there, Brenda, it's hard to know where to start.
"...the gospels are eyewitness accounts handed down by oral tradition."
-- The gospels were not written by eyewitnesses, nor do we know from whom the oral traditions themselves came.
"If you don't accept that then you must also reject virtually all ancient and medieval history."
-- It's one thing to consider something a historical fact about that which we can't be certain, such as "Caesar crossed the Rubicon." You can deny that based on flimsy evidence. But there's nothing supernatural about this event. The Jesus story is not normal history; it requires a suspension of disbelief. It's more like denying the 'historical' claims of ancient Greek mythology than it is the rest of ancient history.
"The question of the resurrection is a matter of faith."
--The idea of resurrection is also a scientific question, since you're making a biological claim. Plus, I thought the argument was that the resurrection was the best historical explanation of the supposed 'fact' of this event? - May 27, 2010 at 10:25 AM
- Unknown said...
- This comment has been removed by the author.
- May 27, 2010 at 12:16 PM
- Unknown said...
"Only atheists and fundamentalists do that."
Sounds eerily similar to the "One true Scotsman" fallacy. All believers do it to some extent. The question is how do people decide what is literal and what isn't? And there's no solidly-defined answer. There is no epistemological standard that people consistently apply to the bible.
For the most part, it seems that people will say they believe in everything until they are challenged. Something is only true to them until challenged, then it becomes metaphorical, allegorical, or even colloquial.
The concept of faith is a non-starter. He's not discussing faith, he's discussing the people who claim the bible is a source of historical evidence.
Matthew - May 27, 2010 at 12:40 PM
- brenda said...
"The gospels were not written by eyewitnesses, nor do we know from whom the oral traditions themselves came."
The same could be said for virtually all of ancient history. Nevertheless we believe those accounts in the most part and believe that the main actors existed. I think it's reasonable to doubt the resurrection, I don't think it's reasonable to doubt the historicity of Jesus.
"The Jesus story is not normal history; it requires a suspension of disbelief. It's more like denying the 'historical' claims of ancient Greek mythology than it is the rest of ancient history."
No, that's a false equivalence. The life of Jesus, regardless of any religious claims made about him, took place in history. The lives of the Greek gods did not.
"I thought the argument was that the resurrection was the best historical explanation of the supposed 'fact' of this event?"
I'm an agnostic so all I have to do is to introduce doubt about your positive atheism. Contrary to what is claimed, you really can't prove a negative.
"The question is how do people decide what is literal and what isn't? And there's no solidly-defined answer. There is no epistemological standard that people consistently apply to the bible."
Easy, no text should ever be taken literally. While I am now an agnostic, I was not raised to take the Bible as the literal word of God but rather as the inspired word of God.
Religious fundamentalists commit the heresy of idolatry by worshiping the text, the Bible, in place of God. Secular fundamentalists, the so-called "New Atheists", worship their text, their received truth of scientism, as though it were a secular god.
"He's not discussing faith, he's discussing the people who claim the bible is a source of historical evidence."
It's a source for the life of Jesus and Paul, among others. - May 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM
- mikespeir said...
I just got finished reading Robert Price's chapter "Jesus: Myth and Method" in The Christian Delusion, which deals in large part with this same subject. It's kinda like a bowling ball through a plate glass window. It ought to be required reading.
- May 27, 2010 at 2:46 PM
- Unknown said...
Brenda - I am not disputing the existence of Christ as a historical person. Nor do I think Matt is doing that. We are disputing the resurrection as history. We seem to have gotten our wires crossed at some point.
- May 27, 2010 at 5:00 PM
- Tristan Vick said...
- This comment has been removed by the author.
- May 27, 2010 at 11:17 PM
- Tristan Vick said...
You stated, "The life of Jesus, regardless of any religious claims made about him, took place in history. The lives of the Greek gods did not."
First of all, I should point out, the life of a real historical Jesus is not as firmly established as you seem to think it is.
We know nil to nothing of the real historical figure, should he have existed. We don't have anything he ever wrote, and nothing was written about him by contemporaries in the time he supposedly lived.
Any of Jesus' sayings may be entirely fabricated by early Christians pitted against each other in sectarian power struggles seeking to gain authority by having direct access to his teachings, and on this basis, can't be trusted as authentic. We know that enough of the earliest writings to be pseudepirapha, and this casts major doubt on anything else which may have been included within the canon--another dubious aspect of history not to go ignored.
I say Jesus supposedly lived, because although I agree there must have been a rabbi to the equivalent of the persona of a Yeshua from Nazareth, everything in the NT about Jesus can be traced to other OT themes as interpolation and redaction, or else, comes from external mythical borrowings such as the Odyssey, Iliad, and others.
So it's not a false equivalent, per se. The fact is, there's just no way to confirm the historicity of Jesus the Christ, and most of NT Biblical scholarship has focused exclusively on this key issue for the past 300 years.
It's precisely because most of the historical claims of the NT regarding Jesus cannot be confirmed, we can know, they are inadmissible as evidence for a real historical figure of any kind.
At best we can say Jesus *may have been a real historical person.
You have said we might be able to deny anyone else from antiquity, but this is not the whole truth. It may be hard to clarify certain historic claims about Caesar Augustus, or Alexander, Cleopatra, or anyone with a legendary status--but unlike Jesus there is enough external information, supplementary historical support, which lends valid empirical proof to the agreement that they were, in deed, real people of antiquity.
We cannot say (for certain) the same of Jesus, since any historical person is nearly impossible to discern behind the shroud of myth and hearsay.
Actually, all we have are anecdotal legends and works of fiction to work from to try and piece together whether or not any semblance of a actual person lies behind the veil of a web of myths, legends, and religious fables--all of which seemingly get intertwined, confounding matters indefinitely. - May 27, 2010 at 11:18 PM
- Tristan Vick said...
You said, "Well the gospels are eye witness accounts handed down by oral tradition and then written down about 50 years later. If you don't accept that then you must also reject virtually all ancient and medieval history."
The oral tradition you speak of is simply false. In fact, it's because of virtually all the ancient and medieval history we have, and the light they shed on matters, that we can know this!
Most of the Gospels were written in Greek in Greece, hundreds of miles away from the Levant, and the area where the event purportedly occurred. Also, the authors of the Gospels would have had the difficulty of translation from either an early Hebrew or Aramaic oral tradition, which complicates matters further, since we would have to ask what the purpose of an early fisherman would have been to make his way all the way to Rome to tell a story which was, by this time, already fifty years old?
It is more reasonable to assume missionaries took the Jesus story with them and spread the message northward, but how much remains intact to the original goings on is unclear.
First we must consider that even if there were translators on hand, that there is still going to be information lost in translation.
Second of all, most if not all eyewitnesses would be long gone before sixty years came around. Unless they were children at the time, anyone of adult age would have died before the ripe age of fifty or sixty. Life expectancy was only around 30 years old in the 1st century. It's highly unlikely any children would have realized the significance of the Resurrection event let alone be able to put all the pieces together in a coherent (mental) compendium for later translation.
Furthermore, we would still have to wonder how they retained all the information for so long only to make their trek to Rome to have it published. Sounds like a stretch of the imagination if you ask me. And if they were one of the original disciples, and survived to a ripe old age, then how did they manage to find translators to translate their Aramaic into Greek by a scribe who could actually write in Greek? As Richard Carrier has observed, a book in the 1st century would cost the equivalent of thousands upon thousands of dollars. I'm sure scribes were not cheap. How would a poor fisherman from Jerusalem afford to have a book made? The questions pile on and the answers become rather strained.
Even if they could afford to dictate a Gospel or two, dictating a whole string of oral stories to a native speaker, we must wonder who could be trusted to authentically translate every word. Moreover, we must ponder, whose oral stories are we taking at face value here? Some random disciple who may or may not have been an eyewitness (but probably wasn't)? We don't know who they may have been or if they even existed to begin with. And even if we give the oral transmission hypothesis the benefit of the doubt, there is just so much we can readily believe about these far-fetched claims of eyewitness testimony and what was and what wasn't lost in translation before incredulity gets the better of us.
You may wish to read up on early Christianity and the complexity of the—already heavily established rival sects of early Jewish Christians, and later Orthodox Christians, and the power struggles which ensued. Bart D. Ehrman's book 'Lost Christianities' is a good introductory read on these matters.
All of this casts doubt on the whole eyewitness testimony and oral tradition hypothesis. As far as I know, only Christians continue to claim that the Gospels were written by eyewitness. No Biblical historian or scholar would make such an ill-informed statement. - May 27, 2010 at 11:41 PM
- NAL said...
27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Lots of dead people walking around Jerusalem.
If you don't accept that then you must also reject virtually all ancient and medieval history. - May 28, 2010 at 5:29 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
I'm not sure if NAL is joking here or what. But look people, isn't it obvious that we consider the reliability of ancient people to be different depending on what sort of claims they are making? If someone in the Middle Ages asserts that the source of the Bubonic Plague, we don't treat that claim as exactly on par with their claim about a battle, or who is the Pope, or some other event. When ancient, illiterate, Iron Age people make claims about supernatural, magical, spiritual events we don't treat those the same as when they make other claims where their reliability is much higher. There are a thousand other non-Bible, historical examples where this rule applies and those of you who are sympathetic with the Jesus story would readily agree. But you have a double standard about the Bible and accept the most outrageous magical claims as authentic because of your prior commitment to Christian ideology. If we consistently applied your rule, we'd also have too accept that the Sun really did orbit the Earth, that disease is caused by an imbalance in black bile, and that magical forces were ubiquitous in the ancient world. Come on, people.
- May 28, 2010 at 7:32 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
That sentence should read:
If someone in the Middle Ages asserts that demon possession or astrology is the source of the Bubonic Plague, we don't treat that claim as exactly on par with their claim about a battle, or who is the Pope, or some other event. - May 28, 2010 at 7:50 AM
- Reginald Selkirk said...
"Well the gospels are eye witness accounts handed down by oral tradition..."
1) If it's handed down, it is no longer an eyewitness account. Oops.
2) On what grounds do you assert that the (canonical, I presume) gospels are eyewitness accounts? They don't even claim to be. What about facets of the accounts which are inconsistent with eyewitness viewing, such as reports of what Jesus said after all his disciples fell asleep?
3) How do you accept some gospel accounts (the 4 canonical gospels) and reject other similar and incompatible accounts, e.g. the gnostic gospels?
"If you don't accept that then you must also reject virtually all ancient and medieval history."
Nonsense. Many other alleged historical events were recorded during the time they happened, were recorded by multiple writers (the gospels are clearly not independent), or have unambiguous physical evidence. And all other ancient and medieval accounts which include supernatural accounts are rejected.
"Jesus was most certainly an historical person. The evidence is as good or better for his life as it is for anyone else in the ancient world."
That is clearly untrue. Consider Julius Caesar, for example; this is a common comparison. We have works written by Caesar himself. Jesus didn't write anything. We have reports of Caesar written during his lifetime by others. Jesus? No. We have physical artifacts of Caesar's reign, such as coins stamped with his likeness. Jesus? No.
"The Bible should not be read as literal history. Only atheists and fundamentalists do that."
Ah, a liberal Christian view. But suppose we write off the story of Adam and Eve and the apple as an allegory. Does that mean that the death and resurrection of Jesus can also be written off as an allegory? Or does it mean that Jesus died for an allegory? - May 28, 2010 at 11:23 AM
- Reginald Selkirk said...
I think it's reasonable to doubt the resurrection, I don't think it's reasonable to doubt the historicity of Jesus.
If the supernatural aspects of the gospel stories, which you previously tried to pass off as eyewitness accounts, are not true, then Jesus is an entirely unremarkable person. One might as well argue over whether there really was a lumberjack named Paul Bunyan. If Jesus wasn't magic, then it just doesn't matter whether he existed. After all, Jesus was a fairly common name in that time and place. - May 28, 2010 at 11:30 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
THAT is a really interesting way to put it, Reginald. Thanks.
- May 29, 2010 at 8:22 PM
- akakiwibear said...
Surely this is a straw man.
Recognising the nature of the text – what it is and what it is not -forms a starting point as to what in it is accepted and what should be treated as, in your words, metaphorical, mythological, or allegorical.
You say We know, beyond any reasonable historical doubt, that many other historical claims made by the Bible, such as the age of the Earth, the order and occurrence of animal life, the history of the universe, the lineage of the human race, basic biological facts about pregnancy, menstration, medicine, and other historical facts are wrong. Given that so many other historical claims coming from the same book, with presumably the same historical virtues and lineage, are wrong, what are we to make of someone's claims that the resurrection of Jesus is justified on the basis of the historical merits of the Bible.
The bible is not claimed to be an authoritative scientific, biological, palaeontolical, historic and medical text. So it does not create the conundrum you propose. To claim that the larger body of Christianity faces such a 'conundrum' is simply a straw man.
So how should we then treat the claims of the resurrection? The bible is the record of the gradual and increasing revelation of God, over time, to His people. It is not purported to be a word perfect record and is of course subject to the failings of human nature, language and translation. But there is no reason to suspect that these imperfections have resulted in getting the major events completely wrong. Contrast this with variances in reported numbers at the Obama inauguration, do these mean the event did not happen?
Furthermore one must look at the context of the claims about the resurrection. They were made at a time when there were enough witnesses about to refute them, yet those making them at the time were prepared to die for them - pretty dumb if they had just made the story up!
Sala kahle - peace - May 30, 2010 at 9:07 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
Thanks for your input, Akakiwibear. I think you're ignoring what's going on around you, if you are in the U.S. There are currently over 100 million people in this country who think that the Bible is the perfect, unerring word of God and that all of the claims made in it are literally true. I'm glad to hear that you don't. But you've got to acknowledge the serious and scary problem we have with all the people who do.
MM - May 30, 2010 at 9:16 PM
- brenda said...
"There are currently over 100 million people in this country who think that the Bible is the perfect, unerring word of God and that all of the claims made in it are literally true."
You mean this?
One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True
"Only about one-third of Americans today believe the Bible is absolutely accurate and that it should be taken literally word for word."
Which is about 100 million. But you know, people fudge a lot. "Literally true" doesn't always mean literally true or it means different things to different people.
and those numbers are trending down.
I think that without question one cannot hold a modern scientific understanding of the world along side a literal naive understanding of the Bible. All religions try to tell a single coherent narrative that encompasses everything this is known in that culture. But that isn't really what religion is about.
Religion isn't about belief.
Religion is about man's place in the world. It asks why questions not what questions. As far as I know Matt, you have not solved the Fact vs Value dichotomy and frankly I don't think it can be solved.
The reason that many atheists are perceived as arrogant is because they want to pretend that there is no such divide or that they believe they have solved it.
Sam Harris is delusional if he thinks he can derive Is from Ought and do please spare me any moral posturing from the likes of neocon fascists like Christopher Hitchens.
There is a good deal more to life than negative proofs and atheism by definition has literally nothing to offer. - May 30, 2010 at 10:48 PM
- Matt said...
"As far as I know Matt, you have not solved the Fact vs Value dichotomy and frankly I don't think it can be solved."
The fact vs. value thing is "solved" or made irrelevant by each person living a fulfilling life without religion.
There is certainly value that can come from religion. But at what cost? And is there any comfort that cannot be otherwise obtained? As a former religious person, I say no.
I am not pretending to enjoy my life.
"There is a good deal more to life than negative proofs and atheism by definition has literally nothing to offer."
That is a fairly irrelevant statement. Atheism makes no attempt to explain life. Study of philosophy, history or science may lead someone (amongst other paths) to not believing in a higher power, but that has nothing to do with explaining life. It's simply a realization that the world is grand and doesn't need any man-made deities.
"and do please spare me any moral posturing from the likes of neocon fascists like Christopher Hitchens."
This is becoming a common argument from religious folk. I'm pretty sure it's because he's right. No-one can respond to his points because they're irrefutable. The man may seem like a crass ***hole most of the time, but in fact he simply does not suffer fools gladly. His arguments are no less valid.
"Religion isn't about belief."
Correct. It's about irrational, ill-founded, illogical, "wishful thinking" type belief. - May 30, 2010 at 11:47 PM
- Matt said...
Oh, hopefully there's no name confusion. It signed me in as "Matthew" vice, "howerymd" this time. I know you were speaking to Prof McCormick, but I felt like responding.
Sorry if there was any confusion. - May 30, 2010 at 11:49 PM
- brenda said...
Matthew not Matt said:
"The fact vs. value thing is "solved" or made irrelevant by each person living a fulfilling life without religion."
Congratulations! You've solved the problem of induction! WhooHoo! By all means publish and collect your praise and adulation, you deserve it!
Oh, wait... you haven't solved it have you? You're just making an unsupported claim. You don't actually have an argument do you. So.... as per your statement above.... no it isn't. I am sorry but you simply cannot just say stuff and expect it to be taken seriously. You need to argue, you know, present your premises in the form of a logical argument that correctly reasons towards a conclusion.
You haven't done that.
"There is certainly value that can come from religion. But at what cost? And is there any comfort that cannot be otherwise obtained?"
I don't know the cost, I don't think you do either. Have you done a cost benefit analysis? Such things do exist you know. There are social institutions that might take the place of religion but it isn't immediately obvious to me that they really are able to. But I do know one thing, the cost of losing one's life world, one's religion, is severe. You see those Native Americans wandering around homeless and in a drunken stupor? That's what happens to you when your culture, and religion = culture for them, is taken away from you and replaced with nothing. The cost of failure seems rather high to me.
So... abandoning religion culture wide contains a cost. Secular institutions do not seem able to replace it's function. Therefore until we can be assured that the cost is not too great we should not abandon all religious belief.
"That is a fairly irrelevant statement. Atheism makes no attempt to explain life."
Yet another unsupported assertion. It would help if you could, you know, provide actual arguments to back up what you just pull from your backside.
Of course atheism cannot explain life. Atheism cannot explain anything. It has exactly zero explanatory power. Atheism, by definition, doesn't even exist. It is a null proposition formed by the logical not operator.
"It's simply a realization that the world is grand and doesn't need any man-made deities."
No, again, atheism cannot even be that. Atheism is NOT(theism), nothing more. It would be perfectly logical for me to claim I am an atheist AND the world needs deities. Do you see what I did there? I made an argument. ;)
"This is becoming a common argument from religious folk. I'm pretty sure it's because he's right. No-one can respond to his [Christopher Hitchens] points because they're irrefutable."
1. I'm not religious, I'm agnostic. 2. I am looking forward to your irrefutable argument to back up your unsupported claim. While you are at it could you also address my claim that Christopher Hitchens is a neocon fascist pig who made common cause with a holocaust denier? Because that was the basis for my rejecting any moral posturing coming from him.
""Religion isn't about belief."
Correct. It's about irrational, ill-founded, illogical, "wishful thinking" type belief."
Still another unsupported assertion without any attempt at reasoned discourse. I highly doubt that you can prove any such thing. Your plate is fairly full and my PC is acting funny. I may have to reinstall Windows (yeeecht!) so I might be a while but I'll be back with my red pen.
Please show your work. thx ;) - May 31, 2010 at 6:47 AM
- Unknown said...
"Oh, wait... you haven't solved it have you? You're just making an unsupported claim. You don't actually have an argument do you."
The argument is simple: Value does not give any argument for truth. A fictional story that makes someone feel good is still fiction. The "value" is artificial.
"But I do know one thing, the cost of losing one's life world, one's religion, is severe. You see those Native Americans wandering around homeless and in a drunken stupor? That's what happens to you when your culture, and religion = culture for them, is taken away from you and replaced with nothing."
Your strawman is transparent. So the implication is that atheists, or at least, former christians walk around in a drunken haze? Is this argument even remotely valid? First, how do you know that those native american's lost their religion? Second, there are many, indeed probably many more, Native American's that are just fine. Your example proves nothing. I, and many of my friends, lost my faith/religion and we love our life.
However, I don't rely on just anecdote. The recent article/study by Daniel Dennet gives credence to the idea that it's not the losing of the faith that destroys some people, but how they are treated by the "faithful" after they come out. Slight twist there, see, it wasn't the faith that sustained them and made them happy. It was people. The very same people that would shun them and make them feel like a "non-person" when they finally came forward with their beliefs.
"Secular institutions do not seem able to replace it's function."
What function?
You originally said, "There is a good deal more to life than negative proofs and atheism by definition has literally nothing to offer."
I actually agree with your response to my statement. It is not a thing. So what's the point of your statement? It seems irrelevant. Of course atheism has "nothing to offer." It's not supposed to offer anything. It's a single, hopefully evidence-based belief about one commonly-held idea.
Let's change it a bit so you can understand my confusion, "non-astrology by definition has nothing to offer." -so what?
"While you are at it could you also address my claim that Christopher Hitchens is a neocon fascist pig who made common cause with a holocaust denier?"
Was the cause denying the holocaust? I think not. And you'd have to define "neocon fascist pig" before I could respond to your insult.
"Still another unsupported assertion without any attempt at reasoned discourse."
Only because I don't like repeating things. I encourage you to read some of the articles on here. All the support comes from there. The irrational part comes from the simple question asked of religious folk, "What evidence would prove to you and make you believe that there is no god?" The answer is often nothing. If you are unwilling to change your mind in the face of contrary evidence, -you are irrational.
Cheers! - May 31, 2010 at 12:15 PM
- akakiwibear said...
Matt, I am not in the US but if it true that There are currently over 100 million people [ 1/3 of total population = adults & children!? ] in this country who think that the Bible is the perfect, unerring word of God and that all of the claims made in it are literally true then I am amazed – and yes it is scary.
However I would have thought that you would be intellectually troubled using an acknowledged fallacy to "prove your point".
I certainly have a problem with extrapolating the myth status of Gen 1:10 through the all collected works of the bible. Or, perhaps you believe that the whole collection are works of fiction without any element of truth.
I would appreciate it if you clarified your position – do you for example acknowledge some things, like that Jesus or say Paul or Peter lived?
Sala kahle - peace - May 31, 2010 at 2:31 PM
- brenda said...
howerymd said...
"The argument is simple: Value does not give any argument for truth. A fictional story that makes someone feel good is still fiction. The "value" is artificial."
Sorry but again... that is not a valid argument. Real arguments posit two or more premises within a logical structure. You have not done this.
premise 1 "value does not imply truth."
premise 2 "fictions = fictions"
Therefore value is artificial.
This is embarrassingly bad. All you have done really is to make an unsupported claim that values do not exist. You appear to be trying to say that because you cannot find any values on the fact side of the divide that therefore they must not exist.
This is a form of philosophical extremism that is quite breath taking in its arrogance. Congrats!
"Your strawman is transparent. So the implication is that atheists, or at least, former christians walk around in a drunken haze? Is this argument even remotely valid?"
Yes, it's valid because former Christians have not had their life world taken from them. My worry is that the potential exists. In modern society we make a distinction between religion and culture but aboriginal peoples do not. So the implication I am making is that we run the risk, perhaps, of going too far in secularizing our culture.
It's just a suggestion, a concern, based on observations. Religious fundamentalism after all, is considered to be a reaction to modernism.
"What function?"
The function of religion is to provide social cohesion. One of the risks of modern multicultural societies is that they are fragile. Take what happened to Yugoslavia as a good example. When stressed, repressed social antagonisms explode in violence and authoritarian rule is the result.
"So what's the point of your statement? It seems irrelevant. Of course atheism has "nothing to offer." It's not supposed to offer anything."
Well, people are looking for something. If you have nothing to offer then it is likely they'll pass you by. - May 31, 2010 at 4:11 PM
- brenda said...
"It's a single, hopefully evidence-based belief about one commonly-held idea."
Atheism is a belief? How can this be? Most every atheist defines it as NOT(belief). It's so confusing.
Part of my critique of the New Atheism is that it is an ideology. Atheists cry and howl and tell me that it is no such thing. Atheism, they claim, is merely the lack of belief. It is not possible they say for it to bear any features of ideological dogmatism because atheists are pure. They are all washed clean of the stain of belief.
I beg to differ and here you are confirming my critique. Atheists are in denial about the ideological character of their belief system. Thanks.
"Was the cause denying the holocaust?"
Hitchens and Irving are still friends.
Holocaust denier, David Irving:
in February 2006, after Irving was jailed in Austria, Hitchens published another defense of Irving's "free speech," this time on the Wall Street Journal's op-ed page. "It was very decent of him because it wasn't the popular thing to do," Irving told me.
"And you're still good friends with him?" I asked Irving. "You're still in touch with Christopher Hitchens?"
"Yes, I think it's fair to say that," he responded. "I really don't want to incriminate him."
Free speech is not an absolute. I agree with the European practice of criminalizing Holocaust denial.
"And you'd have to define "neocon fascist pig" before I could respond to your insult."
Neocons are fascist pigs. Christopher Hitchens is a neocon. Therefore Hitchens is a fascist pig.
The point being that I refuse to accept moral hectoring from the likes of Hitchens or Sam "torture the dirty mooooslims then nuke 'em" Harris. - May 31, 2010 at 4:11 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
Folks, it's really easy to be uncharitable and insulting in the comments forum like this. Let's try to at least understand each other's points without all the sneering contempt and vitriol.
MM - May 31, 2010 at 6:25 PM
- Paul Rinzler said...
Brenda, I'm confused. Do you think atheism is a belief (system) or not? You wrote:
"Atheists cry and howl and tell me that it is no such thing. Atheism, they claim, is merely the lack of belief. It is not possible they say for it to bear any features of ideological dogmatism because atheists are pure. They are all washed clean of the stain of belief.
I beg to differ and here you are confirming my critique. Atheists are in denial about the ideological character of their belief system. "
but you also wrote:
"Atheism, by definition, doesn't even exist. It is a null proposition formed by the logical not operator."
"Atheism is NOT(theism), nothing more. " - June 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM
- brenda said...
"Brenda, I'm confused. Do you think atheism is a belief (system) or not? "
I think that many of the New Atheists would like to have it both ways. On the one hand they'd like to claim that atheism as such does not exist, that it is not a real "thing" in the same way that say Christianity is, that individual atheists share no common beliefs. Yet on the other hand many New Atheists do seem to me to behave as though they belong to the "club of atheism".
"I want to have my cake and eat it too."
This is known as hypocrisy and is a major feature of any ideology.
"They do not know they are doing it, but they are doing it."
Your hypocrisy demands of me that I criticize from both ends. I point out that if you really believed as you say that atheism is the lack of belief only then you would behave differently. Or I point to your behavior when you are acting as though you belong to the church of atheism.
The subject is split, there is a wound. The nature of the wound can be seen from either side. - June 1, 2010 at 5:10 PM
- Paul Rinzler said...
Brenda, I'm still confused. Do you think atheism is a belief (system) or not? A simple yes or no, with or without explanation, would suffice.
- June 1, 2010 at 6:07 PM
- brenda said...
"Brenda, I'm still confused. Do you think atheism is a belief (system) or not?"
Atheism is a propositional attitude. It is the belief that there is no God. The claim that atheism is to theism as non stamp collectors are to stamp collectors is not credible because no atheist I've ever known behaves in a manner that would be consistent with that relation.
The New Atheists identify with each other, they form groups and clubs and even churches and have a shared set of values, dogmas and beliefs. They are a concrete, identifiable social group.
Non stamp collectors do not form groups and clubs to discuss how best to not collect stamps. Nor do they obsess about the latest issues that concern stamp collectors. No one does this because there is no such "thing" as non stamp collecting. But there absolutely IS such a thing as atheism. - June 1, 2010 at 10:43 PM
- Unknown said...
- This comment has been removed by the author.
- June 1, 2010 at 11:34 PM
- Paul Rinzler said...
Brenda, I agree with you as long as you would agree to the distinction between atheism as a concept (which is like non-stamp-collecting) and atheism as it is practiced, which is not like non-stamp collecting. I think there are very good reasons why atheism is not practiced like non-stamp-collecting, by the way.
But I wish that everyone would keep this distinction in mind, it would eliminate a lot of confusion. - June 2, 2010 at 11:19 AM
- Paul Rinzler said...
By the way, Brenda, have you heard of this distinction, too? Some atheists make a claim (there is no god), and some atheists merely say that theists have not demonstrated their claim that there is a god. The latter atheists make no positive claim about god, they merely evaluate theists' claims as lacking, thus leading to no belief (in god).
- June 2, 2010 at 12:14 PM
- Unknown said...
Paul, I think those are the same thing. The second logically follows the first if we judge all things to the same standard. That second type of reasoning is the same reasoning used to not believe in witches, Santa, ghosts, vampires, the Easter Bunny, etc. We all believe (based on that idea) that "There is no Santa" so what's wrong with believing (and saying) "there is no god?"
It seems there is a cognitive dissonance between saying there are no ghosts or yeti or Santa and saying there is no god. Why should be treat one with a different epistemological standard than the other? - June 2, 2010 at 12:42 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
Some of these terms as they have typically been used in the literature and their definitions are useful here. In particular, see negative, positive, wide, and narrow atheism:
Know Your Godless Heathen Positions
MM - June 2, 2010 at 1:18 PM
- brenda said...
Theism is the doctrine or belief in the existence of a God or gods.
Atheism is the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
Agnosticism is a denial or doubt of knowledge of the existence of God
Skepticism is doubt about the truth of something.
Skepticism is the true default position, not atheism.
Atheism is not a lack of belief as that would include skeptics, agnostics and newborn babies in it's definition. This is clearly unworkable as it leads to multiple confusions. There is a difference between saying, "I do not believe P" and "I believe not-P." The claim that Atheism is a lack of belief must be rejected.
In Matt's link I would say that I believe in Methodological Naturalism but I reject Eliminative materialism. The Chinese Room, What Mary Didn't Know and Blockhead effectively refute it. - June 2, 2010 at 2:52 PM
- Paul Rinzler said...
Matt, help me out here?
I'm trying to make a distinction among atheists in terms of the burden of proof.
If someone makes a claim ("There is a god." or "There is no god."), t is incumbent upon the claimant to support the claim.
But someone is not making a claim when they determine that another has not supported their claim ("A"), and therefore there is no reason to adopt the claim. That is different from making a positive claim ("not-A") that is the opposite of the original claim. I have no burden of proof to demonstrate "not-A" if I merely notice that "A" has not been supported (and therefore there is no reason to believe "A"). - June 2, 2010 at 8:14 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
Well, I'm not sure if I can help out. I don't really understand what, if anything you guys are talking about. It seems to me that both of your approaches to the question of the burden of proof or what the true nature of atheism are suspiciously a priori and off the mark. A negative atheist has been typically recognized in the literature as someone who lacks a belief about God or gods. That would include agnostics, in the classic sense, and positive atheists. It seems to be that it would be a perfectly reasonable starting position for someone to claim to be a NA and then not be willing to budge off of that until they heard some compelling evidence in favor of theism. Depending on their situation, positive atheism could be a perfectly reasonable starting position too. I'm a positive atheist about the existence of magical invisible elves living in my walls who produce electricity for my appliances. And the burden of proof, it seems to me, would be on anyone who claims they are real.
But the burden of proof for any claim doesn't exist in a vacuum. Epistemic standards, scientific knowledge, and the cultural background have a lot to do with who is typically expected to explain and how much. The way I figure it, it's always better to understand more, consider more evidence and counter evidence, and to be treating all beliefs as actively defeasible. And that includes the concepts you guys seem to be appealing to for authority.
MM - June 2, 2010 at 9:12 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
I do appreciate the thought you guys have been putting into all of this, however. For the record, I think agnosticism about God is a cop out. At this point, given all the substantial problems that have been enumerated for so many different God hypotheses, and given the overwhelming evidence we have that there are no exceptions to ontological naturalism, I suspect that the only people who still claim to be agnostics are actually closet or wannabe theists.
Perpetual Motion Machines and an Argument Against Agnosticism
What's Left to be Agnostic About? - June 2, 2010 at 9:21 PM
- Paul Rinzler said...
Matt, thank you, I was trying to express what a negative atheist is, and your explanation of it in your post immediately above this one matched what i was trying to say.
Brenda, however, apparently rejects the idea of negative atheism.
Brenda, what are the multiple confusions, as you say, the negative atheism leads to? Why must negative atheism be rejected? - June 3, 2010 at 5:57 AM
- T said...
@Prof M,
Certainly definitions change over time, but I think that the dictionary definition of agnostic as oppossed to perhaps a common defition of agnostic is a reasonable approach. Dictionary.com defines agnostic as "a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as god, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience."
In this sense an agnostic is an atheist. I still self-identify as an atheist because the common meaning of these words seems to vary and atheist seems to convey the closest meaning to the largest number of people of what I am. However, I agree with the defition above for agnosticism. - June 3, 2010 at 6:10 AM
- brenda said...
Brenda, what are the multiple confusions, as you say, the negative atheism leads to? Why must negative atheism be rejected?"
Because there is no such thing. Non non-theism is theism. The theist/atheist debate is over ontology. Agnosticism is about epistemology.
"If someone makes a claim ("There is a god." or "There is no god."), t is incumbent upon the claimant to support the claim."
That is ontology. The dispute is over what exists or does not exist.
"I have no burden of proof to demonstrate "not-A" if I merely notice that "A" has not been supported (and therefore there is no reason to believe "A")."
And that is epistemology. The dispute is over what we can or cannot know. Someone who rejects a knowledge claim for insufficient evidence or invalid argument is agnostic about that claim. My failure to prove A is not proof for not-A.
When I argue against theists, and I do, I tell them that their argument is invalid or their evidence is lacking. I do not tell them they are wrong because people cannot be wrong. I do not tell them their argument is false because arguments cannot be true or false. Truth is a property of statements only.
"A negative atheist has been typically recognized in the literature as someone who lacks a belief about God or gods."
Then the literature is wrong. I blame Gordon Smith as you can trace a lot of this "lack of belief" nonsense back to him. Smith was raised a religious fundamentalist and when he lost his faith he merely substituted the cult of Objectivism and Libertarianism for his fundamentalist faith. I think he was influenced by Objectivism's delusional epistemology and that this influence infected his thinking about how to categorize his atheism. He may not have originated these terms but I think he's been highly influential and that his errors have propagated out from him. Greenspan is another influential former Objectivist who dragged many down into his little cesspool too.
If I could go back in time I think I would skip strangling the infant Hitler in his crib and look for Ayn Rand.
"I do appreciate the thought you guys have been putting into all of this"
Yours is the first blog where I have been able to state my position without being abused by the filth that calls itself atheism these days.
I've been called a cunt, a bitch and a whore. I've had my name, address and phone number published. I've had my sexuality mocked and smeared and spat upon.
By Atheists, not theists.
I'm a little ticked off about that. - June 3, 2010 at 9:10 AM
- Paul Rinzler said...
Brenda, this is just getting down to semantics and definitions. What Matt calls a negative atheist you are calling an agnostic.
The word "negative" in the term "negative atheism" does not have a negating function as you imply when you reject the idea of a negative atheist because "Non non-theism is theism." "Negative" is merely one part of a two-word label, the entirety of which defines what you call an agnostic.
Thanks for the conversation, I think I will end my part for the time being. - June 3, 2010 at 9:58 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
Sorry to hear about the abuse you've been through. I've gotten a lot of it too, although primarily from theists. I work very hard to separate the personal emotions that that stirs up from my consideration of the merits or faults of arguments. I hope you'll do the same.
Let's be careful not to condemn by association. Greenspan, Gordon Smith (whoever that is), and Rand aren't part of the scholarly, philosophical literature on this topic. See Flew, Nielsen, in particular, and Mackie, Draper, Drange, and Martin to a lesser extent on this topic. Here's the best bibliography of atheism sources around now:
Atheism Bibliography
Again, thanks for your thoughts.
MM - June 3, 2010 at 10:19 AM
- brenda said...
My response to "What's Left to be Agnostic About?"
"To be honest, I think that what happens for a lot of agnostics is that they started out believing in an OG. They were raised religious, participated in religion with their friends and family, and they even enjoyed it or found it fulfilling. But as they explored the question intellectually they came to acknowledge that really what's entailed by those religious doctrines can't be true."
I don't think that anyone loses their religion in that way. Religion isn't about belief, science is about belief, it's about faith. I tend to agree with Hume on this. The passions come first, only later do we find the reasons for our beliefs.
I became an atheist in the true sense when I was a child, about 17 or 18, and my reasons for it had nothing to do with intellectual doubt. It had everything to do with my father, about feeling unloved and wishing to rebel against "The Name of the Father". I then sought for and found reasons for my rebellion, but those reasons were not it's cause.
God is "The Big Other" and it is generally presumed that it does not exist (I have my doubts) but that doesn't mean that we can just abandon our need for a big Other. We aren't made that way, it does work like that. If we reject the big Other of religion we are just setting ourselves up for a different one. Many atheists today reify science as their big Other and then acting on behalf of their new God they become the very thing they fear.
Atheists gaze into the mirror of theism and become the monsters they see there. This is not theory for me, I have personal experience of the phenomenon. But the monster is not "out there", it is in you.
That is how Sam Harris can calmly propose that torture is a moral good and if it should fail we would be justified in a nuclear first strike against Iran. That is how Christopher Hitchens, Trotskyite neocon and former Marxist, can claim that waterboarding isn't torture until he directly experienced it. That is how Pat Condell can spew his spittle flecked racist tirades on YouTube and still think himself moral man.
It's called denial. What is being denied? Your relationship to your big Other. That evil monster incarnate dressed in black that you wage battle against is your Father. You've always know this is true, you have only to search your heart to see that it is so. - June 3, 2010 at 11:14 AM
- brenda said...
This is how religion is "true". It correctly represents your inner life. This is why atheism is and should be rejected, because it invites monsters to fill the void.
Or put round another way. Religion isn't about epistemic truth or ontological beliefs, it's about how to relate your inner psychic economy with the greater world. If that means that some people believe in a real big Other that's ok because it doesn't really affect the hunt.
"Are there phenomena, experiences we have, or other evidence that could be explained by an SF? Here the SF agnostic may say yes. She may point to internal phenomena: human consciousness, feelings of the sublime, transcendent experiences, our moral facilities, or religiousness."
I have already pointed to the sublime object of ideology as a mystification of our inner life. Now I'll take a look at consciousness.
Contrary to eliminative materialism consciousness cannot be reduced to the activity of neurons in the brain. Nevertheless, it is wholly dependent upon and arises from the brain. There is no ghost in the machine, no dualism. The mistake that dualism makes is to count the things in the world and they get to two. Materialism counts to one and I believe that Daniel Dennett counts to three (not 100% sure). The mistake is to count in the first place.
And if consciousness is non-reducible then there may well be other instances. Climatology is one I think. The claims made by climatology are non-falsifiable and if the climate denialists had half a brain, they do not, they would focus their attack there. James Lovelock goes too far I think in his strong Gaia hypothesis but that doesn't mean he is wrong. He is just elevating a non-reducible non-falsifiable feature of the world to the level of the sublime. It's is a very human impulse.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against the powers and principalities of the air.
Atheists make the same error that fundamentalists make in taking this literally.
I live in a galaxy of 400 billion stars, in a universe of 80 billion galaxies, in an infinite multiverse. In this multiverse my consciousness cannot be reduced to the mere activity of particle moving in lines of force. And if that is true for me then what else may there be in this vast cosmos?
I believe I have sufficient reason to doubt the atheistic materialist narrative. - June 3, 2010 at 11:15 AM
- This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
- June 9, 2010 at 8:09 AM
- DM said...
- This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
- June 10, 2010 at 10:44 AM
- Unknown said...
why are we trying to prove Jesus simply from the texts? shouldn't we be considering the movement he started? the "Chrestus" movement? the empire overthrown by his followers (if we follow Gibbon)?
@howerymd: it's the "no true scotsman" fallacy. - June 22, 2010 at 3:23 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
James, the texts are just about the only thing we have to determine if any of these claims about Jesus are true. The fact that there is a movement that zealously followed him doesn't tell us anything about the truth of the supernatural claims any more than thousands of overwrought Star Wars fans in costumes at a convention shows that Star Wars really happened.
MM - June 22, 2010 at 6:49 PM
- akakiwibear said...
Matt not sure if you are right that the movement does not add to the case that Jesus existed and did what is claimed.
At its inception the movement was persecuted including eye witnesses to the events.
Hard to drum up life threatening support from those who were there when ... it did not happen, and they saw it ... not happen ??
Brenda, I have to disagree with you dismissing But as they explored the question intellectually they came to acknowledge that really what's entailed by those religious doctrines can't be true.". My experiences are different.
I see Christians who grow up with a simplistic Sunday school level theology finding that it does not stand up to sceptical scrutiny.
Their situation is similar to that of a primitive tribe that eventually figures out that the giant rock they worship as god is not actually god. They have a choice, either to conclude that therefore there is no god or to conclude that god is not a rock.
My observation is that many atheists pick the former option perhaps because as they were naive in not questioning the Sunday school Christianity as they grew up, they continue to be naive in accepting the simplistic "therefore there is no god" option.
The intellectual case for God is more robust than the atheist case which requires among other things the sort intellectual slight of hand we see in this post where Matt has by his own omission used an acknowledged fallacy as the basis of his case.
It is easy to attack Sunday school fundamentalist Christianity - it is a lot harder to defend the lack of intellectual rigor in the atheist case.
Sala kahle - peace - June 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM
I apologize in advance if these points have already been brought up in previous comments (which I haven't read):
Matt McCormick: "Historical Christians, or believers who think that the quality and quantity of historical evidence we have justifies our concluding that the resurrection really happened, are inclined to take the Bible as a reliable source of information about events in history. [...] for the sake of argument, let's accept the criteria of historical reliability that the Christian would have us apply to the Jesus case. Now consider the conundrum that accepting some, but not all Biblical claims about historical events. [creationism, flood, exodus etc.]"
Matt, wow. Assuming you're referring to "Crit. of Multiple attestation", "Crit. of Palestinian Environment", "Crit. of Dissimilarity", "Crit. of Embarrassment", these aren't criteria that "Christians would have us apply". These criteria are the *standard tools* of Christian and non-Christian historians alike! For example, let's focus on the first one: "The Criterion of Multiple attestation". This isn't Christian -- the radically liberal Jesus Seminar emphasizes items "attested in two or more independent sources." [Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar, The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus (New York: Macmillan, 1993), 26.]; Withingergon adds "[M]ultiple attestation is seen by almost all scholars as a key criterion for establishing authenticity." [The Jesus Quest, (InterVarsity, 1997) 96.], along with the liberal Paul Maier "Many facts from antiquity rest on just one ancient source, while two or three sources in agreement generally render the fact unimpeachable. [In the Fullness of Time: A Historian Looks at Christmas, Easter and the Early Church (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1991) 197.] - September 14, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Matt McCormick: If the historical Christian acknowledges [...] historical claims of the Bible are mistaken, but they insist that the claims about the resurrection are reliable, what exactly are the criteria that separates the categories?
But Matt, name one peer reviewed publication in Christian philosophy or Biblical historical studies which makes such an argument for Jesus' resurrection "on the basis of the historical merits of the Bible" (whatever that means; "the Bible" is not one book, its a collection of 66 books all with different degrees of historical credibility.) It seems you presume that the case for the Resurrection is: "The historical claims of the Bible [66 books] are true etc., therefore the claims surrounding Jesus' death burial and resurrection are!". But Matt, of all the Christian professors who debate at Universities with other professors, name one who uses an argument *anything* like this. Even popular level Christian apologists don't argue this way, so what are you talking about? So far on your blog I've seen you discuss William Craig, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas and *none* of those guys argue anywhere close to this way. Even the guy who debated with you recently almost certainly didn't use this kind of argument. So what are you doing? - September 14, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Matt McCormick: "If the historical Christian acknowledges [...] many historical claims of the Bible are mistaken, but they insist that the claims about the resurrection are reliable, what exactly are the criteria that separates the categories?"
Well Matt, ask the non-christian historians who agree with you in rejecting creation, the flood, the exodus etc., but nevertheless grant without hesitation many of the historical claims under-girding the argument for Jesus' resurrection.
E.g. Gary Habermas writes "On the state of Resurrection studies today, I recently completed an overview of more than 1,400 sources on the resurrection of Jesus published since 1975. I studied and catalogued about 650 of these texts in English, German, and French. Some of the results of this study are certainly intriguing. For example, perhaps no fact is more widely recognized than that early Christian believers had real experiences that they thought were appearances of the risen Jesus. A critic may claim that what they saw were hallucinations or visions, but he does not deny that they actually experienced something." (See details in Gary R. Habermas, "Resurrection Research from 1975 to the Present: What Are Critical Scholars Saying?" Philosophic Christi.)
Bart Ehrman (a NT scholar/historian at UNC) seems to be a favorite of yours (uncoincidentally, like you, he is an extremely ouspoken critic of Christianity... but no matter); here's what he says regarding the facts surrounding Jesus' resurrection.(cf. my next post) - September 14, 2010 at 12:50 PM
(a) Regarding the genuinely convinced eyewitnesses, Ehrman writes "[w]e can say with complete certainty that some of his disciples at some later time insisted that he soon appeared to them [...] Historians, of course, have no difficulty whatsoever speaking about the belief in Jesus' resurrection, [...] it is a historical fact that some of Jesus' followers came to believe that he had been raised from the dead soon after his execution. [Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 231.]
(b) Regarding the empty tomb, and still focusing on the Crit. of Multiple attestation, Ehrman writes "We also have solid traditions to indicate that women found this tomb empty three days later. This is attested in all of our gospel sources, early and late, and so it appears to be a historical datum. As so I think we can say that after Jesus' death, with some (probably with some) certainty, that he was buried, possibly by this fellow, Joseph of Arimathea, and that three days later he appeared not to have been in his tomb [From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity, Lecture 4: "Oral and Written Traditions about Jesus" [The Teaching Company, 2003].]" - September 14, 2010 at 12:50 PM


text:
Writes the lefty Drudge Retort, noting that Limbaugh hasn't lost listeners (and has probably gained listeners, people who are "curious about what the fuss is all about").
Quoted by Professor Jacobson, who says: "[T]his never has been about those two words or even the three days. It's an attempt to intimidate and silence conservative talk radio, so better safe than sorry."
Limbaugh is likely to make this controversy work for him. For years, he's been tweaking the media and using its pushback to generate interesting/funny/pithy material. This pushback may be a lot more than he wanted from that particular tweak, but if he's the master of radio that he purports to be, he'll get it working for him.
How many times have I heard Rush quote Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." (That's Rule 13, in case you're counting. Page 130 in the Vintage, Kindle Edition.)
One of the criteria in picking your target is the target's vulnerability—where do you have the power to start? Furthermore, any target can always say, "Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?" When you "freeze the target," you disregard these arguments and, for the moment, all the others to blame. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all of the "others" come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target. The other important point in the choosing of a target is that it must be a personification, not something general and abstract...Rush knows he's the target they've picked and the game they are playing. Can he outplay them? With half his brain tied behind his back, just to make it fair?
Let nothing get you off your target. With this focus comes a polarization. As we have indicated before, all issues must be polarized if action is to follow. The classic statement on polarization comes from Christ: "He that is not with me is against me" (Luke 11:23). He allowed no middle ground to the money-changers in the Temple. One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other....


text: GetHuman relies on its vast community of 10s of millions of customers to help us prioritize and catalog contact information and solutions to the most common customer service problems. Companies like A & M Fencing sometimes have published contact information, easily found online with a quick search. But sometimes their phone number is buried on their website. Sometimes you don't realize that they have a live chat option or an email address that is actively monitored by their customer care team. And the way each company publishes this information is very different. Plain and simple: it's not always easy to locate it. So we catalog it as best as we can and keep it up to date and organized so that you can easily find the contact information you are looking for.


text:
Cupertino California Smart Home
Get no-obligation Smart Home price quotes from professionals working in the Cupertino area. Just fill out the form to receive competing estimates from Smart Home service providers.
Save money and get connected to pros in Cupertino, CA.
Smart Home - Get a quote now!
Would you like to save time and money on home building services? By utilizing our online estimate service you will receive a number of quotes from professional, pre-approved companies in your area.
A safe and healthy home is a happy home. By using reputable, professional contractors and safe materials on all aspects of your home you will be securing your families safety for years to come.
Saving energy is a great way to lower your monthly bills and well as being earth friendly. Keep your home as energy efficient as possible by choosing to use green building practices and materials.
Simply complete the form with your requirements and we will do the rest.
Related Categories
- Blown In Insulation
- Energy Audit
- Geothermal Heating
- Geothermal Heating Repair
- Heat Pump
- Heat Pump Repair
- Home Insulation
- Radiant Floor Heating
- Shutter Installation
- Skylight
- Smart Home
- Solar Panel Repair
- Solar Panels
- Solar Water Heater
- Solar Water Heater Repair
- Sprinkler Repair
- Sprinkler System
- Thermostat
- Thermostat Repair
- Weather Stripping


text:
Get latest Western Africa Projects. Upcoming Global Project News & New Project Information world wise. Search International & Global Projects for Infrastructure work, Power Projects, Energy Sector Oil & Gas Projects, Projects from Government sector, Railway, Water supply & sanitation work across the world. Search latest Global Projects News from Bid Detail.
West Africa Coastal Areas Resilience Investment Project AF BN-TG


text:
Version 1 (modified by 15 years ago) (diff) | ,
Trac with FastCGI
Since version 0.9, Trac supports being run through the FastCGI interface. Like mod_python, this allows Trac to remain resident, and is faster than external CGI interfaces which must start a new process for each request. However, unlike mod_python, it is able to support SuEXEC. Additionally, it is supported by much wider variety of web servers.
Simple Apache configuration
There are two FastCGI modules commonly available for Apache: mod_fastcgi
. The FastCgiIpcDir
and FastCgiConfig
directives discussed
below are mod_fastcgi
directives; the DefaultInitEnv
is a mod_fgcid
For mod_fastcgi
, add the following to an appropriate Apache configuration
# Enable fastcgi for .fcgi files # (If you're using a distro package for mod_fcgi, something like # this is probably already present) <IfModule mod_fastcgi.c> AddHandler fastcgi-script .fcgi FastCgiIpcDir /var/lib/apache2/fastcgi </IfModule> LoadModule fastcgi_module /usr/lib/apache2/modules/mod_fastcgi.so
Setting FastCgiIpcDir
is optional if the default is suitable. Note that the LoadModule
line must be after the IfModule
Configure ScriptAlias
or similar options as described in TracCgi, but
calling trac.fcgi
instead of trac.cgi
You can set up the TRAC_ENV
as an overall default:
FastCgiConfig -initial-env TRAC_ENV=/path/to/env/trac
Or you can serve multiple Trac projects in a directory like:
FastCgiConfig -initial-env TRAC_ENV_PARENT_DIR=/parent/dir/of/projects
But neither of these will work for mod_fcgid
. A similar but partial
solution for mod_fcgid
DefaultInitEnv TRAC_ENV /path/to/env/trac/
But this cannot be used in Directory
or Location
context, which makes it
difficult to support multiple projects.
A better method which works for both of these modules (and for lighttpd and CGI as well), because it involves
no server configuration settings for environment variables, is to set one
of the variables in trac.fcgi
, e.g.:
import os os.environ['TRAC_ENV'] = "/path/to/projectenv"
import os os.environ['TRAC_ENV_PARENT_DIR'] = "/path/to/project/parent/dir"
Using this method, different projects can be supported by using different
scripts with different ScriptAliases
, copying and appropriately
renaming trac.fcgi
and adding the above code to create each such script.
Simple Lighttpd Configuration
The FastCGI front-end was developed primarily for use with alternative webservers, such as lighttpd.
lighttpd is a secure, fast, compliant and very flexible web-server that has been optimized for high-performance environments. It has a very low memory footprint compared to other web servers and takes care of CPU load.
For using trac.fcgi
with lighttpd add the following to your lighttpd.conf:
fastcgi.server = ("/trac" => ("trac" => ("socket" => "/tmp/trac-fastcgi.sock", "bin-path" => "/path/to/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi", "check-local" => "disable", "bin-environment" => ("TRAC_ENV" => "/path/to/projenv") ) ) )
Note that you will need to add a new entry to fastcgi.server
for each separate Trac instance that you wish to run. Alternatively, you may use the TRAC_ENV_PARENT_DIR
variable instead of TRAC_ENV
as described above,
and you may set one of the two in trac.fcgi
instead of in lighttpd.conf
using bin-environment
(as in the section above on Apache configuration).
For using two projects with lighttpd add the following to your lighttpd.conf
fastcgi.server = ("/first" => ("first" => ("socket" => "/tmp/trac-fastcgi-first.sock", "bin-path" => "/path/to/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi", "check-local" => "disable", "bin-environment" => ("TRAC_ENV" => "/path/to/projenv-first") ) ), "/second" => ("second" => ("socket" => "/tmp/trac-fastcgi-second.sock", "bin-path" => "/path/to/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi", "check-local" => "disable", "bin-environment" => ("TRAC_ENV" => "/path/to/projenv-second") ) ) )
Note that field values are different. If you prefer setting the environment
variables in the .fcgi
scripts, then copy/rename trac.fcgi
, e.g., to
and second.fcgi
, and reference them in the above settings.
Note that the above will result in different processes in any event, even
if both are running from the same trac.fcgi
Note from c00i90wn: It's very important the order on which server.modules are loaded, if mod_auth is not loaded BEFORE mod_fastcgi, then the server will fail to authenticate the user.
For authentication you should enable mod_auth in lighttpd.conf 'server.modules', select auth.backend and auth rules:
server.modules = ( ... "mod_auth", ... ) auth.backend = "htpasswd" # Separated password files for each project # See "Conditional Configuration" in # http://trac.lighttpd.net/trac/file/branches/lighttpd-merge-1.4.x/doc/configuration.txt $HTTP["url"] =~ "^/first/" { auth.backend.htpasswd.userfile = "/path/to/projenv-first/htpasswd.htaccess" } $HTTP["url"] =~ "^/second/" { auth.backend.htpasswd.userfile = "/path/to/projenv-second/htpasswd.htaccess" } # Enable auth on trac URLs, see # http://trac.lighttpd.net/trac/file/branches/lighttpd-merge-1.4.x/doc/authentication.txt auth.require = ("/first/login" => ("method" => "basic", "realm" => "First project", "require" => "valid-user" ), "/second/login" => ("method" => "basic", "realm" => "Second project", "require" => "valid-user" ) )
Note that lighttpd (I use version 1.4.3) stopped if password file doesn't exist.
Note that lighttpd doesn't support 'valid-user' in versions prior to 1.3.16.
Conditional configuration is also useful for mapping static resources, i.e. serving out images and CSS directly instead of through FastCGI:
# Aliasing functionality is needed server.modules += ("mod_alias") # Setup an alias for the static resources alias.url = ("/trac/chrome/common" => "/usr/share/trac/htdocs") # Use negative lookahead, matching all requests that ask for any resource under /trac, EXCEPT in # /trac/chrome/common, and use FastCGI for those $HTTP["url"] =~ "^/trac(?!/chrome/common)" { # Even if you have other fastcgi.server declarations for applications other than Trac, do NOT use += here fastcgi.server = ("/trac" => ("trac" => ("socket" => "/tmp/trac-fastcgi.sock", "bin-path" => "/path/to/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi", "check-local" => "disable", "bin-environment" => ("TRAC_ENV" => "/path/to/projenv") ) ) ) }
The technique can be easily adapted for use with multiple projects by creating aliases for each of them, and wrapping the fastcgi.server declarations inside conditional configuration blocks. Also there is another way to handle multiple projects and it's to use TRAC_ENV_PARENT_DIR instead of TRAC_ENV and use global auth, let's see an example:
# This is for handling multiple projects alias.url = ( "/trac/" => "/path/to/trac/htdocs/" ) fastcgi.server += ("/projects" => ("trac" => ( "socket" => "/tmp/trac.sock", "bin-path" => "/path/to/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi", "check-local" => "disable", "bin-environment" => ("TRAC_ENV_PARENT_DIR" => "/path/to/parent/dir/of/projects/" ) ) ) ) #And here starts the global auth configuration auth.backend = "htpasswd" auth.backend.htpasswd.userfile = "/path/to/unique/htpassword/file/trac.htpasswd" $HTTP["url"] =~ "^/projects/.*/login$" { auth.require = ("/" => ( "method" => "basic", "realm" => "trac", "require" => "valid-user" ) ) }
Changing date/time format also supported by lighttpd over environment variable LC_TIME
fastcgi.server = ("/trac" => ("trac" => ("socket" => "/tmp/trac-fastcgi.sock", "bin-path" => "/path/to/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi", "check-local" => "disable", "bin-environment" => ("TRAC_ENV" => "/path/to/projenv", "LC_TIME" => "ru_RU") ) ) )
For details about languages specification see TracFaq? question 2.13.
Other important information like this updated TracInstall page, and this are useful for non-fastcgi specific installation aspects.
If you use trac-0.9, read about small bug
Relaunch lighttpd, and browse to http://yourhost.example.org/trac
to access Trac.
Note about running lighttpd with reduced permissions:
If nothing else helps and trac.fcgi doesn't start with lighttpd settings server.username = "www-data", server.groupname = "www-data", then in the
section setPYTHON_EGG_CACHE
to the home directory ofwww-data
or some other directory accessible to this account for writing.
Simple LiteSpeed? Configuration
The FastCGI front-end was developed primarily for use with alternative webservers, such as LiteSpeed.
LiteSpeed? web server is an event-driven asynchronous Apache replacement designed from the ground-up to be secure, scalable, and operate with minimal resources. LiteSpeed? can operate directly from an Apache config file and is targeted for business-critical environments.
1) Please make sure you have first have a working install of a Trac project. Test install with "tracd" first.
2) Create a Virtual Host for this setup. From now on we will refer to this vhost as TracVhost?. For this tutorial we will be assuming that your trac project will be accessible via:
3) Go "TracVhost? → External Apps" tab and create a new "External Application".
Name: MyTracFCGI Address: uds://tmp/lshttpd/mytracfcgi.sock Max Connections: 10 Environment: TRAC_ENV=/fullpathto/mytracproject/ <--- path to root folder of trac project Initial Request Timeout (secs): 30 Retry Timeout (secs): 0 Persistent Connection Yes Connection Keepalive Timeout: 30 Response Bufferring: No Auto Start: Yes Command: /usr/share/trac/cgi-bin/trac.fcgi <--- path to trac.fcgi Back Log: 50 Instances: 10
4) Optional. If you need to use htpasswd based authentication. Go to "TracVhost? → Security" tab and create a new security "Realm".
DB Type: Password File Realm Name: MyTracUserDB <--- any name you wish and referenced later User DB Location: /fullpathto/htpasswd <--- path to your htpasswd file
If you don't have a htpasswd file or don't know how to create the entries within one, go to http://sherylcanter.com/encrypt.php, to generate the user:password combos.
5) Go to "PythonVhost? → Contexts" and create a new "FCGI Context".
URI: /trac/ <--- URI path to bind to python fcgi app we created Fast CGI App: [VHost Level] MyTractFCGI <--- select the trac fcgi extapp we just created Realm: TracUserDB <--- only if (4) is set. select ream created in (4)
6) Modify /fullpathto/mytracproject/conf/trac.ini
#find/set base_rul, url, and link variables base_url = http://yourdomain.com/trac/ <--- base url to generate correct links to url = http://yourdomain.com/trac/ <--- link of project link = http://yourdomain.com/trac/ <--- link of graphic logo
7) Restart LiteSpeed?, "lswsctrl restart", and access your new Trac project at:
See also TracCgi, TracModPython, TracInstall, TracGuide