Skip to main content

More email hoaxing...

While I'm on the subject of email hoaxes, I thought I'd address another of these pernicious lies that seem to start with a randomly forwarded email. They then come to take on a life of their own where they become "true" because everyone agrees after having read the same email and failed to even take the most basic checks on it.

This time, I'm talking about the persistent lie about the Presidential dollar coins. I've been forwarded this email twice, both times having been disappointed that the sender (same person) failed to fact check, and apparently forgot that I already replied as to the untruth of the email.

The substance of the email claims that, first, the national motto "In God We Trust" has been removed from the new dollar coins, and it is such an outrage that everyone should refuse them if offered. Further, in the conspiracy-mindset of many in this country, they claim that this is yet another strike in the liberal-atheist "war" on all forms of religion, especially the Christian one.

But wait, put down your pitchforks and torches, this is certainly a false alarm. Snopes.com calls false on this one. Even looking at the coins themselves disproves it, but apparently no one in the email chain thought to even look before they passed it on in righteous indignation.

"In God We Trust", along with "E Pluribus Unum" is inscribed on the side of the coin.

Go figure.

If you ever happen to get this email, but sure to respond and correct the well-meaning but overly-zealous sender. They may or may not believe you (a family member, even upon being showed the coin, still thought it was part of the conspiracy because it would "wear off" faster on the side).

Who sits down and writes these stupid, inane emails?

Oh, and by the way, the email also asks which of the presidents on the dollar coins (the ones pictured are all early Presidents, mostly Founding Fathers) put the motto on and is being shamed and insulted by having it removed. The answer is none of them; the motto was not adopted until the 1950's. Ignorance is bliss, until it meets reality.

Comments

  1. It was put on the coin, and put in the Pledge, because of all those dirty UnAmerican Communist Atheists. lolz

    You should make it possible to post comments here using a FB account.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would love to, but I am unaware as to how to make it so...

    ReplyDelete
  3. VomSion: Can you here me now?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

The Hovinds...Still Poking at Straw Men

Kent Hovind, the false "Dr. Dino", and his ilk are at it again. In a new article on his website, Hovind (or whoever authored the piece, perhaps his son) claims that while creationists have no problems using miracles to explain events (a habit that perpetually makes them unfit to do real science), evolutionists criticize them for it, even though, in Hovind's mind, they rely on miracles just as much to explain their "religion" of descent through natural selection. This is, at its core, demonstrably nonsense. He claims that a "miracle" is needed to make stars and planets form out of gas, a supposed violation of Boyle's Law because there was no "outside force" acting on the gas and dust. How about gravity, Dr. Dino? That would certainly explain it, no miracles needed here. This attack is a non-sequitur. The objection has everything to do with astronomy and cosmology and nothing to do with evolution, which is the development of new species o...