Rudd's right-hand woman is one foxy lady - Opinion - theage.com.au
I haven't recommended a Danny Katz column for a while, but this one is quite funny.
Update: I have noticed that, whenever I recommend a Danny Katz column, I seem to get quite a few visits from someone in Melbourne who is Googling his name. Does Mr Katz spend every Thursday searching for comments on his latest column? Not that there would be anything wrong with that, but if it's you, D Katz, just make a comment here, or send me a carton of wine as a reward for saying nice things about your writing. I probably increase your readership by at least 2 or 3!
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
A good point...
This link is to a post by Bryan Appleyard, which leads to his review of a book which claims to take a scientific approach to showing that something like a "soul" exists.
The book may be of interest, but I liked this first comment to the post, as it seems to me quite true:
The book may be of interest, but I liked this first comment to the post, as it seems to me quite true:
One thing that intrigues and baffles me as a non-scientist observing this latest fad in materialist determinism is how enthusiastic, sanguine and comfortable modern "brights" have become with this stuff. Not so long ago, when guys like Sartre ruled the roost, atheistic materialism was supposed to be terrifying and only for the stalwart--remember all that stuff about having the near superhuman courage to stare into the abyss of nothingness? Now everybody seems to be having a big party scorning that scary old free will, and religion is positively terrifying.
More things I didn't know
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Volcano erupts on Red Sea island
Hey, it's quite an extensive list really (the things I don't know), but the fact that there are any volcanoes in the Red Sea could have been included until this story broke.
Having heard the report, I wondered whether anyone had ever speculated that volcanoes in that area might have something to do with some Old Testament stories.
And, of course, Google quickly reveals that someone has suggested it already. (Jeez, don't you hate how it's getting harder and harder to even imagine that you have had an original thought since the internet came along.)
Anyhow, Colin Humphreys has suggested that Mt Sinai was an active volcano at the time Moses was hanging around there. Go have a read of his few pages from Google books (at the last link) and see if it sounds credible. (I suppose we should be asking geologists too, but they might ruin an otherwise plausible idea.)
Hey, it's quite an extensive list really (the things I don't know), but the fact that there are any volcanoes in the Red Sea could have been included until this story broke.
Having heard the report, I wondered whether anyone had ever speculated that volcanoes in that area might have something to do with some Old Testament stories.
And, of course, Google quickly reveals that someone has suggested it already. (Jeez, don't you hate how it's getting harder and harder to even imagine that you have had an original thought since the internet came along.)
Anyhow, Colin Humphreys has suggested that Mt Sinai was an active volcano at the time Moses was hanging around there. Go have a read of his few pages from Google books (at the last link) and see if it sounds credible. (I suppose we should be asking geologists too, but they might ruin an otherwise plausible idea.)
Hitchens on China
Burma's foul regime depends on Beijing.
Christopher Hitchens points out the number of bad regimes that China supports, and it's very many indeed:
Christopher Hitchens points out the number of bad regimes that China supports, and it's very many indeed:
Is there an initiative to save the un-massacred remains of the people of Darfur? It will be met by a Chinese veto. Does anyone care about Robert Mugabe treating his desperate population as if it belonged to him personally? China is always ready to help him out. Are the North Koreans starved and isolated so that a demented playboy can posture with nuclear weapons? Beijing will give the demented playboy a guarantee. How long can Southeast Asia bear the shame and misery of the Burmese junta? As long as the embrace of China persists. The identity of Tibet is being obliterated by the deliberate importation of Chinese settlers. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a man who claims even to know and determine the sex lives of his serfs (by the way, the very essence of totalitarianism), is armed and financed by China.
A fantasy economy
It's amusing to watch the catfight going on at Larvatus Prodeo about whether it is fair enough or not to say something so obvious to common sense like "ideally, it is better for children to have two parents rather than one."
That's "too sweeping" for Mark Bahnisch, who one suspects has never had children. (I would post that over at LP itself, but because I am questioning motivations and his personal experience of life, I suspect I would be in breach of its "be nice, unless it's conservatives" comments policy.)
Mark's problem is he doesn't like marriage as an institution at all, and (despite the thousands of studies showing the better life outcomes for children with two parents, and the fact that marriages last longer than de facto relationships), to start sounding like you might even be heading towards the suggestion that the old fuddy duddy idea of marriage is generally the best way to raise children is just too conservative in principle to contemplate.
But this comment by Mark really caught my eye:
UPDATE: more explanation from a later comment by Mark:
That's "too sweeping" for Mark Bahnisch, who one suspects has never had children. (I would post that over at LP itself, but because I am questioning motivations and his personal experience of life, I suspect I would be in breach of its "be nice, unless it's conservatives" comments policy.)
Mark's problem is he doesn't like marriage as an institution at all, and (despite the thousands of studies showing the better life outcomes for children with two parents, and the fact that marriages last longer than de facto relationships), to start sounding like you might even be heading towards the suggestion that the old fuddy duddy idea of marriage is generally the best way to raise children is just too conservative in principle to contemplate.
But this comment by Mark really caught my eye:
Well, if anyone can ever find better evidence to show why we don't let sociologists run economies and countries, let me know!Btw, personally, I support a guarenteed minimum income and I’m not in the slightest bit troubled by whether people choose to work, or surf, or bring up babies. In a society where the incentives are as strong as they are for most people, most will choose to work. But it doesn’t worry me in the slightest if people don’t, and how they choose to spend their lives.
UPDATE: more explanation from a later comment by Mark:
....the proposal is not for the minimal levels of benefits grudgingly payed now and hedged around with nasty conditions (= “responsibilities”) but rather either through direct income transfer or through a negative income tax for a generous level of income to go to all adults in society as of right. Interestingly, there’s more support for this among libertarians than social democrats these days, though it’s a classic social democratic policy - both in providing equality of opportunity with a big kick along and in refusing the notion that work is a good in and of itself and to be valued no matter what its nature.Colour me skeptical, as maybe the libertarians at Catallaxy think this is a serious idea, but it still sounds very silly to me. It might be able to sold on novelty value to someone like Pauline Hanson, though. I'll email her straight away.In fact, because the entire bureaucracy of surveillance and punishment would be abolished, you could probably have lower taxes and still give everyone 20k a year or whatever. Just imagine - no centrelink, no dole diaries, no… this stuff is inordinately expensive.
More delegation
Rudd vows to charge Iran leader | The Australian
From the report:
Really Kevin, this just makes you sound all the more committed to sending problems off to someone else to solve.
From the report:
In a dramatic lift in diplomatic pressure on a bellicose and defiant Iran, Kevin Rudd has committed a Labor government to take "legal proceedings against President Ahmadinejad on a charge of incitement to genocide".
The Leader of the Opposition said the charge of incitement to genocide "could occur through the International Court of Justice on reference by the UN Security Council" because of Mr Ahmadinejad's public statements.
Oh yes, I can see Ahmadinejad being terrified of this prospect.
Really Kevin, this just makes you sound all the more committed to sending problems off to someone else to solve.
Corrigan's robots take over Brisbane (Port)
Yesterday I took the day off to do something vaguely entertaining with the family for the school holidays. This turned out to be a trip to the Port of Brisbane and the bayside suburbs. The end result: increased admiration for Chris Corrigan.
More astute readers with an interest in wharf productivity may already know this, but I had missed the fact that since the end of 2005, Patrick's Brisbane container terminal has been operating a "world first" automated system. You have to take the Port of Brisbane guided bus tour to understand what is going on ($27 for a family ticket, complete with rather laconic guide) but you can see a bit of how it works and it's pretty fascinating.
Most of the wharf area is fenced off, leaving it alone to 20 or so of the straddle carriers that formerly need people to drive them. The ones at Brisbane instead operate all on their own. Here's a photo to see what I mean (the red things are the straddle carriers):
From the bus, you can see trucks park inside a few bays to collect containers. The driver gets out and the autostrad (for this last little section of its task) comes under the control of a wharfie with a remote control. The container is lowered on the truck, which drives off, while the straddle carrier goes back onto the wharf area and finds its own way back to pick up another container.
Here's some more information about it from Patrick's website:
Ah, you lefties can have your Combets and Julian Burnsides as your heroes. Instead, I'll take someone who had the vision to create a field of giant roaming cargo robots.
More astute readers with an interest in wharf productivity may already know this, but I had missed the fact that since the end of 2005, Patrick's Brisbane container terminal has been operating a "world first" automated system. You have to take the Port of Brisbane guided bus tour to understand what is going on ($27 for a family ticket, complete with rather laconic guide) but you can see a bit of how it works and it's pretty fascinating.
Most of the wharf area is fenced off, leaving it alone to 20 or so of the straddle carriers that formerly need people to drive them. The ones at Brisbane instead operate all on their own. Here's a photo to see what I mean (the red things are the straddle carriers):
From the bus, you can see trucks park inside a few bays to collect containers. The driver gets out and the autostrad (for this last little section of its task) comes under the control of a wharfie with a remote control. The container is lowered on the truck, which drives off, while the straddle carrier goes back onto the wharf area and finds its own way back to pick up another container.
Here's some more information about it from Patrick's website:
According to Forkliftaction.com (a website I am only likely to visit once in my life!):The automated 10-metre high, 65-tonne straddle carriers are fitted with sophisticated motion control and navigation systems which allow them to operate unmanned - moving and stacking containers from the quay, into holding yards, onto vehicles, and back to quay cranes with pin-point accuracy.
Unlike other automated systems, the AutoStrad
moves freely on a 'virtual' computer-generated grid which can be applied to most existing terminal facilities and does not expensive capital works to install in-ground nodes or wires to operate.
Speaking at the official opening, Patrick Managing Director at the time Mr Chris Corrigan said when it was decided to set about trying to automate a fleet of massive 65-tonnes machines - even some involved in the project suspected it was an impossible task.
"Almost a decade later, the result is far beyond our expectations and represents an entirely new approach to terminal design," Mr Corrigan said.
The AutoStrad system was developed by Patrick Technology & Services (PTS), a joint venture between Patrick and Kalmar Industries. PTS claims the AutoStrad system is a world first.So, right from 1996, when the wharfies were fighting to keep their privileges in place, Patrick (and, I assume, Corrigan) were preparing the true way of the future.
Research on the automated straddle project began in 1996 and, in 2001, Kalmar joined PTS as an equity partner. Patrick, as majority shareholder, owns intellectual property rights for most of the on-board technology and all the essential real-time control systems.
Ah, you lefties can have your Combets and Julian Burnsides as your heroes. Instead, I'll take someone who had the vision to create a field of giant roaming cargo robots.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Back to politics
Footy's over, back to politics.
Glen Milne's article in the Australian this morning reports on a speech George Brandis gave, in which he made the point that funding for the arts has grown significantly under the Howard government, not that you would ever know that by listening to artists. (If there is something funny about those figures, we'll hear it from LP soon enough.)
I liked this from the article:
Andrew Bolt on Insiders yesterday made the point that Howard does not seem to be getting much value out of the spending announcements of late (such as increased drought relief). I agree.
Meanwhile, I see Four Corners is having a show about Dr Haneef tonight, with an extended interview with him. Somehow, I have my doubts he will win more public sympathy.
Glen Milne's article in the Australian this morning reports on a speech George Brandis gave, in which he made the point that funding for the arts has grown significantly under the Howard government, not that you would ever know that by listening to artists. (If there is something funny about those figures, we'll hear it from LP soon enough.)
I liked this from the article:
In a speech to the Sydney Film School in July, Keating declared: "It is no secret that the arts are having a very bad time of it in Australia these days; a bad time of it not simply in terms of funding, which is the thing most often discussed, but rather in terms of the milieu for its growth and prosperity."...Newspoll is stick stuck where it's been forever. But if Howard doesn't call the election this week, now that the sport is out of the way, he will suffer from the impression that he is clinging to power. On the other hand, he does need a long campaign to have any hope. What's the longest election campaign in Australian history, I wonder? Is 8 weeks out of the question?
At a recent speech to the National Press Club, Brandis took Keating on, acidly dismissing his Sydney Film School remarks thus: "I suppose if you spend 11 1/2 years in a sulk things would tend to get away from you a bit."
Andrew Bolt on Insiders yesterday made the point that Howard does not seem to be getting much value out of the spending announcements of late (such as increased drought relief). I agree.
Meanwhile, I see Four Corners is having a show about Dr Haneef tonight, with an extended interview with him. Somehow, I have my doubts he will win more public sympathy.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
An inconvenient consultation
Muslim dentist ‘made patient cover her head’ - Times Online
From the story:
From the story:
OK, so how does this work with the Muslim doctors we have in Australia? If they work in our public health system, do they have an issue with seeing Muslim women (of which we have an increasing number) if their head is uncovered?A Muslim dentist insisted that a young woman wear an Islamic headscarf before he would agree to treat her for toothache, the General Dental Council was told yesterday.
The patient, a community nurse, alleges that she reluctantly told Omer Butt, 31, who runs a dental practice in Bury, Greater Manchester, that she was a nonpractising Muslim.
It is alleged that the dentist then told her that he would refuse to register her as an NHS patient if she did not cover her head. She was in so much pain that she agreed to borrow a scarf from a nurse at the clinic.
On placebo treatment
Bad science: Pinning down a remedy for backache | Science | The Guardian
The apparent success of acupuncture for treating back pain this week got a lot of publicity with media reports on a recent study.
The article above indicates that acupuncturists should not to be too excited about this. It appears that "random" needle puncturing (where there were needles inserted, but at random points, rather than the carefully chosen points that proper acupuncture theory would dictate) proved almost as effective as "real" acupuncture.
Yet both "fake" and "real" acupuncture did considerably better than the normal medical approach.
I can't be bothered Googling for the details now, but it is my understanding that acupuncture had come out reasonably well from many carefully controlled trials for certain conditions. Although the esoteric Eastern quasi-mystical theory that is behind it is not something I am ever going to sign up to, I have long had the impression that it is the most credible of the 'alternative' medicines. Simply putting pins in people sometimes seems to work at a much higher rate than other therapies.
Anyhow, the article I've linked at the top goes on to talk about the placebo effect generally. Everyone knows it works, but the problem for Western medicine is that both ethically, and from a point of view of medical litigation risk, its widespread use can't really be contemplated.
This has always seemed quite a pity to me. Maybe doctors can argue that the natural therapies have placebo all to themselves anyway. But the natural therapists don't think they are giving placebo treatment. They won't give a sugar pill any more than a GP will.
Can't there be a category of doctor that is given licence to prescribe any therapy whatsoever without risk of litigation, including alternative therapies and placebo? I mean, don't those who participate in studies like the acupuncture one know and consent to possibly be in the group that is given the placebo? Yet it still works for some of them.
So can't we have doctors that the public knows are permanently licenced to try placebo?
Just a thought.
UPDATE: I should've guessed. Horses have been getting acupuncture too. Oh, but horses don't have a placebo response, says a doctor, so that proves it's not working just by placebo effect on humans too.
Look, horses are the last animals to trust in an trial of anything medical. They would just find it funny to put up with the pain of 50 needles, then prance about as if their sore back is cured, because they know that this doctor will be encouraged, resulting in thousands more humans being pricked every year. I bet they have a chuckle about that.
The apparent success of acupuncture for treating back pain this week got a lot of publicity with media reports on a recent study.
The article above indicates that acupuncturists should not to be too excited about this. It appears that "random" needle puncturing (where there were needles inserted, but at random points, rather than the carefully chosen points that proper acupuncture theory would dictate) proved almost as effective as "real" acupuncture.
Yet both "fake" and "real" acupuncture did considerably better than the normal medical approach.
I can't be bothered Googling for the details now, but it is my understanding that acupuncture had come out reasonably well from many carefully controlled trials for certain conditions. Although the esoteric Eastern quasi-mystical theory that is behind it is not something I am ever going to sign up to, I have long had the impression that it is the most credible of the 'alternative' medicines. Simply putting pins in people sometimes seems to work at a much higher rate than other therapies.
Anyhow, the article I've linked at the top goes on to talk about the placebo effect generally. Everyone knows it works, but the problem for Western medicine is that both ethically, and from a point of view of medical litigation risk, its widespread use can't really be contemplated.
This has always seemed quite a pity to me. Maybe doctors can argue that the natural therapies have placebo all to themselves anyway. But the natural therapists don't think they are giving placebo treatment. They won't give a sugar pill any more than a GP will.
Can't there be a category of doctor that is given licence to prescribe any therapy whatsoever without risk of litigation, including alternative therapies and placebo? I mean, don't those who participate in studies like the acupuncture one know and consent to possibly be in the group that is given the placebo? Yet it still works for some of them.
So can't we have doctors that the public knows are permanently licenced to try placebo?
Just a thought.
UPDATE: I should've guessed. Horses have been getting acupuncture too. Oh, but horses don't have a placebo response, says a doctor, so that proves it's not working just by placebo effect on humans too.
Look, horses are the last animals to trust in an trial of anything medical. They would just find it funny to put up with the pain of 50 needles, then prance about as if their sore back is cured, because they know that this doctor will be encouraged, resulting in thousands more humans being pricked every year. I bet they have a chuckle about that.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
...in which the author seeks to discredit horses, but is in for a surprise
I started out to try to prove horses will be the end of civilisation, but the figures led me somewhere else. Follow the story:
From this site we learn that no one knows how many horses there are in Australia. It's between 900,000 and 1.8 million. However, I assume this is talking about domestic ones. Another site estimates there are 300,000 feral horses. (It also says there are up to 5 million feral donkeys! Who knew that?) Let's just assume 1.5 million horses combined, to be conservative and get round figures.
How much methane does a horse produce? Easily found (more or less) : 18 kg per year.
So let me get my calculator. That's 27,000,000 kg of methane a year.
But remember, methane is much worse than CO2 for warming. It is 21 times worse in fact.
So this leads us to horses making the equivalent of 27,000 tonnes x 21 = 567,000 tonnes of CO2 each and every year.
According to this site, the average car makes 4 tonnes of CO2 a year. So the horse population is making the equivalent greenhouse gases of 142,000 cars every year.
There are two ways of looking at this. If we had no horses in Australia, we could safely run an extra 142,000 cars on the roads with no net increase in CO2 - equivalent gases. But how many cars are there already in Australia? I am surprised to see it is about 10,000,000!
Hardly seems worth doing away with all those horses after all. Damn!
In fact, if one car makes 4 tonnes of CO2 per year, and a horse makes 18 x 21 = 378 kg of CO2 equivalent per year, then every car owner could run instead 10 horses a year (4,000/378).
For the average family of 4, they could give up the car and have two and bit horses each!
No, horses are our salvation, after all. (At least if you ignore the greenhouse contribution of their decaying excrement and the cost of growing and moving tonnes of feed around the country. Also, at least a car doesn't die from an upset tummy (colic) or get a fright every time it sees an inanimate object it doesn't like the look of. This last point was made by Stephen Fry in an interview on Parkinson, if I recall correctly.)
I still think they are stupid.
VITAL UPDATE (in which the author is vindicated by new information) : No, they are evil after all! Their relatively "green" greenhouse gas bottoms might make you think it is better for the planet to own ten horses instead of one car. But it is all a plan to lure humans to death and injury. Here, from the Australian Medical Journal, no less:
No, I've upgraded them from "stupid" to "evil".
Nurse?
From this site we learn that no one knows how many horses there are in Australia. It's between 900,000 and 1.8 million. However, I assume this is talking about domestic ones. Another site estimates there are 300,000 feral horses. (It also says there are up to 5 million feral donkeys! Who knew that?) Let's just assume 1.5 million horses combined, to be conservative and get round figures.
How much methane does a horse produce? Easily found (more or less) : 18 kg per year.
So let me get my calculator. That's 27,000,000 kg of methane a year.
But remember, methane is much worse than CO2 for warming. It is 21 times worse in fact.
So this leads us to horses making the equivalent of 27,000 tonnes x 21 = 567,000 tonnes of CO2 each and every year.
According to this site, the average car makes 4 tonnes of CO2 a year. So the horse population is making the equivalent greenhouse gases of 142,000 cars every year.
There are two ways of looking at this. If we had no horses in Australia, we could safely run an extra 142,000 cars on the roads with no net increase in CO2 - equivalent gases. But how many cars are there already in Australia? I am surprised to see it is about 10,000,000!
Hardly seems worth doing away with all those horses after all. Damn!
In fact, if one car makes 4 tonnes of CO2 per year, and a horse makes 18 x 21 = 378 kg of CO2 equivalent per year, then every car owner could run instead 10 horses a year (4,000/378).
For the average family of 4, they could give up the car and have two and bit horses each!
No, horses are our salvation, after all. (At least if you ignore the greenhouse contribution of their decaying excrement and the cost of growing and moving tonnes of feed around the country. Also, at least a car doesn't die from an upset tummy (colic) or get a fright every time it sees an inanimate object it doesn't like the look of. This last point was made by Stephen Fry in an interview on Parkinson, if I recall correctly.)
I still think they are stupid.
VITAL UPDATE (in which the author is vindicated by new information) : No, they are evil after all! Their relatively "green" greenhouse gas bottoms might make you think it is better for the planet to own ten horses instead of one car. But it is all a plan to lure humans to death and injury. Here, from the Australian Medical Journal, no less:
The risk of injury while horse riding has been estimated as between 1 per 320 to 1 per 1000 hours of riding.4,6 The variation in reported population-based risk of horse-related trauma of between 18.7 injuries per 100 000 to 9.5 injuries per 1000 population per year illustrates the difficulties of accurate data collection and variable inclusion of non-riding injuries.7 Interestingly, the overall risk of injury from horse-related activity has been determined to be greater than that of car racing or riding a motorcycle, and the rate of hospitalisation from falls from a horse equivalent to that from playing rugby.Hehe. I know what horses are thinking. "Get on my back, stupid bipedal feed provider. See how long you last. The earth will be ours! Hahahahahahahaha!"
No, I've upgraded them from "stupid" to "evil".
Nurse?
Lovelock's idea
Scientists propose 'plumbing' method to solve crisis of global warming - Times Online
James Lovelock mentioned this idea while he was in Australia recently, but here it is spelt out in more detail. The New Scientist version of the story spends more time on the skeptic's reaction.
(Short version of the idea: lots and lots of pipes in the ocean that use wave action to pump up nutrient rich water to the surface, leading to more plankton, and more CO2 uptake.)
This idea has been around in a slightly different version since the 1970's at least, as it was featured in Jerry Pournelle's book "A Step Further Out," which is still on my bookshelf. His idea was to use the water sucking tubes to generate electricity too.
In New Scientist last week they had a pretty good article on the proposals for fertilizing the oceans with either iron or urea. Unfortunately, it's not on line for free.
The article did point out that one of the unknown issues of any form of using plankton growth to take up more CO2 is that it is not very clear how much of it ends up at the bottom of the ocean, which is where it really needs to be for long term sequestration.
Still, even if fish eat a lot of the plankton, how much fish poop sinks and how much of it floats? In a post last year, I noted an article that said that krill like to poo at depth, which makes them a (literal) CO2 sink. So who knows. Maybe the concentration should be on fertilizing the southern ocean, which is where I think most of the krill hang out.
Seems to me worthwhile trialling these ideas anyway.
James Lovelock mentioned this idea while he was in Australia recently, but here it is spelt out in more detail. The New Scientist version of the story spends more time on the skeptic's reaction.
(Short version of the idea: lots and lots of pipes in the ocean that use wave action to pump up nutrient rich water to the surface, leading to more plankton, and more CO2 uptake.)
This idea has been around in a slightly different version since the 1970's at least, as it was featured in Jerry Pournelle's book "A Step Further Out," which is still on my bookshelf. His idea was to use the water sucking tubes to generate electricity too.
In New Scientist last week they had a pretty good article on the proposals for fertilizing the oceans with either iron or urea. Unfortunately, it's not on line for free.
The article did point out that one of the unknown issues of any form of using plankton growth to take up more CO2 is that it is not very clear how much of it ends up at the bottom of the ocean, which is where it really needs to be for long term sequestration.
Still, even if fish eat a lot of the plankton, how much fish poop sinks and how much of it floats? In a post last year, I noted an article that said that krill like to poo at depth, which makes them a (literal) CO2 sink. So who knows. Maybe the concentration should be on fertilizing the southern ocean, which is where I think most of the krill hang out.
Seems to me worthwhile trialling these ideas anyway.
Promises promises
Mike Steketee has made many posts critical of the Coalition this year, so it's good to see him making some pretty cutting remarks about Kevin Rudd's propensity to make commitments that he is never likely to be around to see achieved:
Also, journalists have indicated before that Kevin is not personally genuinely liked even within his own parliamentary party, and his refusal to commit to anyone getting the job they currently shadow if they form government will do nothing to alleviate that. It seems a particular insult to Wayne Swan if he won't commit to him being Treasurer. (It's a marriage of convenience for both Swan and Gillard to be seen as so close to Rudd at the moment anyway, as I understand it.)
Update: Rudd has had to come out today and promise Swan, Gillard and Tanner their positions. A bit of a turnaround, and something to do with faction power too, I suspect. I imagine there were a few calls last night about his attitude yesterday.
And he then goes into detail on the other policies "on the never-never." (Funny, I did a shorter version of this Steketee column a few of weeks ago.)The Government is wrong to characterise Rudd as a policy-free zone: he has announced reams of initiatives. It is just that many of them have an elusive quality. Take his promise to ensure that nine out of 10 schoolchildren complete Year 12. It’s a laudable goal, but when would it be delivered? By 2020 is the solemn promise. That is in the fifth term of a Rudd government, unless it is the Gillard or Shorten government by then, or perhaps the Turnbull government after Malcolm’s frustrated ambitions get the better of him and he switches over to the winning side.
Don’t imagine that Labor is not accountable for such a promise: it has set an interim benchmark of 2015 to lift retention rates to 85 per cent. That is only three or four elections away.
Are we getting slightly ahead of ourselves here?
Also, journalists have indicated before that Kevin is not personally genuinely liked even within his own parliamentary party, and his refusal to commit to anyone getting the job they currently shadow if they form government will do nothing to alleviate that. It seems a particular insult to Wayne Swan if he won't commit to him being Treasurer. (It's a marriage of convenience for both Swan and Gillard to be seen as so close to Rudd at the moment anyway, as I understand it.)
Update: Rudd has had to come out today and promise Swan, Gillard and Tanner their positions. A bit of a turnaround, and something to do with faction power too, I suspect. I imagine there were a few calls last night about his attitude yesterday.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Not so long ago
Research team says extraterrestrial impact to blame for Ice Age extinctions
From this report:
From this report:
No one has found a giant crater in the Earth that could attest to such a cataclysmic impact 13,000 years ago, but the research team offers evidence of a comet, two and a half to three miles in diameter, that detonated 30 to 60 miles above the earth, triggering a massive shockwave, firestorms and a subsequent drastic cooling effect across most of North America and northern Europe....
The magnitude of the detonations would have been huge.“A hydrogen bomb is the equivalent of about 100 to 1,000 megatons,” Bunch said. “The detonations we’re talking about would be about 10 million megatons. That’s larger than the simultaneous detonation of all the world’s nuclear bombs past and present.”
That's a lot of energy.
But let's not spend a paltry million dollars a year to help track down dangerous space objects heading our way, hey Peter McGauran. Just keep looking after the horsies with a $110 million plus assistance package.
I still think the horses are faking it for a rest. Go get a real job, horse people.*
* Readers are advised that this blog has an official policy of encouraging irrational dislike of horses.More on gay Iran
The Guardian has two items of interest about sexuality in Iran.
The first story (which on the main page of The Guardian's website is given the very wildly understated heading "Doubts over Iran's no gay claims") explains how Iran in fact has a very high rate of sex change operations. Second only to Thailand apparently:
The second Guardian article is in Comment is Free by the author of an entire book on homosexuality in Arab countries. He makes this interesting point:
The first story (which on the main page of The Guardian's website is given the very wildly understated heading "Doubts over Iran's no gay claims") explains how Iran in fact has a very high rate of sex change operations. Second only to Thailand apparently:
Am I the only one to find it very hard to imagine why Khomeini would be persuaded to be all kind and understanding of transexuals but still want all sodomites to die?Sex changes have been legal since the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, spiritual leader of the 1979 Islamic revolution passed a fatwa authorising them nearly 25 years ago. While homosexuality is considered a sin, transsexuality is categorised as an illness subject to cure.
The government seeks to keep its approval quiet in line with its strait-laced stance on sexuality, but state support has actually increased since Mr Ahmadinejad took office in 2005.
His government has begun providing grants of £2,250 for operations and further funding for hormone therapy. It is also proposing loans of up to £2,750 to allow those undergoing surgery to start their own businesses.
The second Guardian article is in Comment is Free by the author of an entire book on homosexuality in Arab countries. He makes this interesting point:
Of all the Muslim countries, Iran at the moment is probably the most active in persecuting gay people. This probably has less to do with religion than local political and cultural factors.That makes some sense. Political revolutions anywhere have often been been preceded by rumours of self indulgence and sexual decadence in the ruling class, and I suppose if the revolutionaries are Islamic they may concentrate on alleging homosexual decadence more than heterosexual.Janet Afary and Kevin Anderson, authors of Foucault and the Iranian Revolution, argue that this was a reaction - at least in part - to sexual behaviour in the Shah's court. They refer to "a long tradition in nationalist movements of consolidating power through narratives that affirm patriarchy and compulsory heterosexuality, attributing sexual abnormality and immorality to a corrupt ruling elite that is about to be overthrown and/or is complicit with foreign imperialism".
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Not a bad idea
Broadband beyond the grave offers web service for the dead
Could be some new legal cases coming up as to whether electronic instructions can be legally constitute a will.
Also, Pauline Hanson could have used this service for her "if you are seeing this, I am dead" speech.
Being able to posthumously send a bunch of nasty emails to all and sundry has a certain appeal. I don't think there is anyone I actually want to do that to right now; but I like the idea of having the ability to do it.Users of YouDeparted.com can issue posthumous instructions for everything from their funeral to feeding their pet, cancelling bills and magazine subscriptions, organising their will and other financial matters, sending final letters to friends - and foes - and delivering a valedictory video address summing it all up.
All that's required in this life is a computer, some inputting, and a minimum of $9.95 (£4.93) a year. Once a user has died, and it has been confirmed to the site by designated family members or friends, the content is released as he or she instructed.
Could be some new legal cases coming up as to whether electronic instructions can be legally constitute a will.
Also, Pauline Hanson could have used this service for her "if you are seeing this, I am dead" speech.
Wind power skepticism
Ill wind changes Rudd's course towards Gore | Herald Sun
All of this article by Terry McCrann is worth reading, especially if the figures he gives for the amount of power wind is actually generating in Germany is correct:
All of this article by Terry McCrann is worth reading, especially if the figures he gives for the amount of power wind is actually generating in Germany is correct:
On average across the year, the 7600 MW of installed wind capacity produced 1327MW. That's an operational level of 18 per cent of capacity. In rational terms, it's insanity.
Indeed as E.ON Netz notes, installed wind capacity went up 12 per cent in the year but actual wind power fed in to the grid went up just 1.5 per cent. Because of lower "wind availability".
The way you 'solve' this is that 'traditional' power stations with capacities equal to 90 per cent of the installed wind power capacity must be permanently on line to guarantee power supply.
So not only do you have to install six to seven times as much wind capacity as the output you will actually get, but you also have to build 'shadow' coal/gas/nuclear(?) as well.
That's one power station for the cost of 12 or so.
Did I say insanity? Unless you can build big enough batteries to store the power generated when the wind does blow.
Funny I should say that. E.ON has actually pioneered exactly such a battery. It's the size of four shipping containers, uses 'undisclosed' chemicals and can produce all of 1MW for four hours.
So not only do we have to have windmills blanketing the country-side, but millions of 'super-batteries' as well. Plus some new coal stations anyway.
We had them all shot
Ahmadinejad speaks; outrage and controversy follow - CNN.com:
Ahmadinejad in fact has the same "folksy" image as Bjelke- Petersen, the main difference being that (as far as I know) Joh didn't secretly pine for nuclear weapons.
That comment reminded me of Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke Petersen, as I am sure I have read that he had to have someone explain to him what homosexuals did when the issue of law reform for sexual matters came up.When pressed about the harsh treatment of women, homosexuals and academics who challenge Iran's government, Ahmadinejad painted a rosy picture, saying, "Women in Iran enjoy the highest levels of freedom," he said.
He elicited laughter and boos from the audience at Columbia University when he said, "In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country."
Ahmadinejad in fact has the same "folksy" image as Bjelke- Petersen, the main difference being that (as far as I know) Joh didn't secretly pine for nuclear weapons.
Evading the details
Media Watch: Have We Met? (24/09/2007)
People who read Catallaxy know the story that Phillip Adams claimed to have had a "chilling" interview on his radio show with Helen Dale.
This story was dealt with in somewhat peculiar fashion on Media Watch last night, which seemed to want to spend as much time on other issues as pursuing the truth from Adams. The transcript on the Media Watch website (above) does not cover all of what was on the TV version .
Clearly, Adams was being evasive in his semi-retraction on LNL. He admits he did not interview her on that show, but implies an interview, or at least a meeting, did occur elsewhere without specifying when or where.
Oh well, I guess he might be more forthcoming to the ABC complaints people.
People who read Catallaxy know the story that Phillip Adams claimed to have had a "chilling" interview on his radio show with Helen Dale.
This story was dealt with in somewhat peculiar fashion on Media Watch last night, which seemed to want to spend as much time on other issues as pursuing the truth from Adams. The transcript on the Media Watch website (above) does not cover all of what was on the TV version .
Clearly, Adams was being evasive in his semi-retraction on LNL. He admits he did not interview her on that show, but implies an interview, or at least a meeting, did occur elsewhere without specifying when or where.
Oh well, I guess he might be more forthcoming to the ABC complaints people.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Real big of them
Taliban Allows Polio Vaccinations:
UPDATE: I missed a lot of it, but Four Corners last night looked interesting, being all about Afghanistan and the continuing pretty dire way most women are treated there, even when not under Taliban control. Still, there were some optimistic signs of revival of girls' education again, for example.
I still have trouble getting my mind around the concept that the Taliban are happy to kill teachers who dare to educate girls, though.
Thousands of Afghan children have received polio vaccinations after the Taliban movement agreed to allow health workers to operate safely in the south, the United Nations children's fund said. ...
In the past, health workers have been abducted in the region, which has has seen the heaviest fighting between the Taliban and international forces.
UPDATE: I missed a lot of it, but Four Corners last night looked interesting, being all about Afghanistan and the continuing pretty dire way most women are treated there, even when not under Taliban control. Still, there were some optimistic signs of revival of girls' education again, for example.
I still have trouble getting my mind around the concept that the Taliban are happy to kill teachers who dare to educate girls, though.
Irony warning
The Times of India does report widely on domestic violence and the mistreatment of women, but also carries many advertisements for marriage matchmaker services. You would think they might be a bit more careful about how closely these items are placed on the same page (see above.)The paper also picks up a story from the Daily Mirror about railway track suicides in London. It is said that it's a lot of unhappy asian women causing the high numbers in particular areas.
This kind of suicide is really the most inconsiderate type possible, but thinking clearly is not really high on the agenda of those who do it, I suppose.
Making no sense
Tokyo sanctions an extended cull of Taiji dolphins | The Japan Times Online
The Japan Times has taken a very front line position in running articles criticising the annual dolphin slaughter in one part of Japan.
The result: this year's quota increased, and the killing season extended.
Given that the meat has been convincingly shown as unsafe to eat, it is a really bizarre exercise:
The Japan Times has taken a very front line position in running articles criticising the annual dolphin slaughter in one part of Japan.
The result: this year's quota increased, and the killing season extended.
Given that the meat has been convincingly shown as unsafe to eat, it is a really bizarre exercise:
The creatures' meat is even included in school meals, and though the government knows full well it is toxic — up to 87 times the permitted level of methyl mercury was found in a joint Japanese/New Zealand 2005 academic study of samples bought from shops (see JT, Nov.1, 2006) — it seems it will do nothing now, perhaps preferring some scapegoating and deep bowing when awful human afflictions arise in the future. And as for Japan's meek vernacular media, well don't wait for them to raise a stink.
China's social problems, again
In China, 190 children are snatched every day.
It's an interesting article about another unintended consequence of China's one child policy.
It's an interesting article about another unintended consequence of China's one child policy.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The one who really doesn't know when to quit
Rudd's post-birthday slip-ups | NEWS.com.au
Yes, Kevin does have a problem: he doesn't know when to let the issue of his heart operation fade away. The story above shows that he is still using it in an attempt at humour:
My advice: No one sensible actually thought this was a damaging issue, Kevin; or at least it wasn't until you had minders who denied you ever had an operation, and you and your fellow parliamentarians started ludicrously suggesting that it took a Liberal Party private investigator looking at your medical records to discover you had the operation.
Leave it alone. Even by bringing it up in attempts at humour, it reminds people of an episode that has backfired badly.
(Matt Price thinks that "Labor’s contrived and co-ordinated squealing about alleged dirt units, private detectives, slime files and mud-slinging will work." I think he's wrong; it is now too transparently a tactic.)
UPDATE: the Courier Mail now reports that it has seen a sheet alleging a Coalition minister is a closet gay. Shock! Labor or its supporters actually circulate dirt on their opponents? Who'd have thought?
UPDATE 2: now it's said that the gay minister stuff was originally leaked to Laurie Oakes by a Liberal Party figure, as part of internal politic-ing for positions. Funny business, politics.
You know, the first time I ever heard the old one about Keating having an affair with a young guy was from a solidly rusted on Labor supporter and well connected member of her union. Clearly, she had heard it from someone within the Labor movement who sincerely believed it, as she had not immediately dismissed it out of hand.
Rumour mongering follows some bizarre paths in politics, and life generally I suppose.
Yes, Kevin does have a problem: he doesn't know when to let the issue of his heart operation fade away. The story above shows that he is still using it in an attempt at humour:
When asked how he celebrated, Mr Rudd said: "With great sobriety ... well they tell me I've got a problem," referring to revelations this week about a heart operation he had 15 years ago.On the TV news last night, I saw him make a fake clutch at his heart after missing blowing out one of his candles on his cake.
My advice: No one sensible actually thought this was a damaging issue, Kevin; or at least it wasn't until you had minders who denied you ever had an operation, and you and your fellow parliamentarians started ludicrously suggesting that it took a Liberal Party private investigator looking at your medical records to discover you had the operation.
Leave it alone. Even by bringing it up in attempts at humour, it reminds people of an episode that has backfired badly.
(Matt Price thinks that "Labor’s contrived and co-ordinated squealing about alleged dirt units, private detectives, slime files and mud-slinging will work." I think he's wrong; it is now too transparently a tactic.)
UPDATE: the Courier Mail now reports that it has seen a sheet alleging a Coalition minister is a closet gay. Shock! Labor or its supporters actually circulate dirt on their opponents? Who'd have thought?
UPDATE 2: now it's said that the gay minister stuff was originally leaked to Laurie Oakes by a Liberal Party figure, as part of internal politic-ing for positions. Funny business, politics.
You know, the first time I ever heard the old one about Keating having an affair with a young guy was from a solidly rusted on Labor supporter and well connected member of her union. Clearly, she had heard it from someone within the Labor movement who sincerely believed it, as she had not immediately dismissed it out of hand.
Rumour mongering follows some bizarre paths in politics, and life generally I suppose.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Ackroyd's unusual interests
Soul survivor | News | Guardian Unlimited Film
Follow the link to an interesting interview with Dan Ackroyd. I knew he was interested in the paranormal, but not the extent to which he is a true believer.
Follow the link to an interesting interview with Dan Ackroyd. I knew he was interested in the paranormal, but not the extent to which he is a true believer.
Just not very funny
Summer Heights High episode upsets ecstasy death family
Even before this story came out, I had been intending to post about my puzzlement over the (apparent) popularity of Chris Lilley's satirical "Summer Heights High".
The three characters he plays are intensely dislikeable, each in their own way. And yes, we have all seen irritating teen girls, heard smart-arse islander boys, and know that drama teaching may be particularly attractive to a self-absorbed (presumably gay) man; but is there any reason to try to blend these characters into a mockumentary of such length? To me, they are just not interesting enough, and show no sign of development from week to week. The story line of the drama teacher writing songs about the drug overdose girl became so unrealistic that it just became stupid. I don't blame the family of a real drug overdose victim being upset.
At least Kath & Kim is not entirely populated by unpleasant central characters. True, Kim is totally without redeeming features, but I always felt that everyone around her was written to have at least some good in their character.
Summer Heights High strikes me as very similar in tone to the dark Australian "comedy" films to which I have never responded either.
Even before this story came out, I had been intending to post about my puzzlement over the (apparent) popularity of Chris Lilley's satirical "Summer Heights High".
The three characters he plays are intensely dislikeable, each in their own way. And yes, we have all seen irritating teen girls, heard smart-arse islander boys, and know that drama teaching may be particularly attractive to a self-absorbed (presumably gay) man; but is there any reason to try to blend these characters into a mockumentary of such length? To me, they are just not interesting enough, and show no sign of development from week to week. The story line of the drama teacher writing songs about the drug overdose girl became so unrealistic that it just became stupid. I don't blame the family of a real drug overdose victim being upset.
At least Kath & Kim is not entirely populated by unpleasant central characters. True, Kim is totally without redeeming features, but I always felt that everyone around her was written to have at least some good in their character.
Summer Heights High strikes me as very similar in tone to the dark Australian "comedy" films to which I have never responded either.
A good week for the government
This week has seen a very solid momentum swing back towards the government. The highlights:
* the Rudd/Labor humbuggery about "smear campaigns" is, I reckon, finally starting to be revealed clearly as such to the public after yesterday's performance in Parliament. It has irritated me all year that Rudd has been getting away with this: carrying on as if stories clearly created by journalists (such as the issue of the Eumundi farm, or the strip club incident, or the heart operation) were being created by the Liberals; and acting as if it were some revelation that politicians or their staffers seek to background journalists on the past lives of their opponents (as in Gillard.)
Rudd went one lunge for sympathy too far with his questions about the heart operation story yesterday, and it clearly backfired. Have a look at Matt Price's very disdainful comment on this in The Australian this morning. (It was also very clear to anyone who had seen Downer on Lateline the night before that he had not idea of the story until that day.)
Rudd's attempt at a comeback to Costello "not having courage to take on Howard" is clearly a losing argument, especially when you see Costello reacting with glee as if it is water off a duck's back. The re-invigorated Costello is going to have a high profile during the campaign, and provided he and Howard compare their notes very carefully every morning and don't start accidentally contradicting each other, I think their handover approach may work reasonably well.
* As noted in a previous post, a hot culture war issue over lesbians and IVF can't hurt Howard, as it will perhaps persuade any doubtful Hillsong types that the Liberals are (at least marginally) more socially conservative than Labor.
Incidentally, Mark Bahnisch had a post at LP this week in which in response to me, his "buddy", he claimed the IVF lesbian case was a "storm in a teacup". Since then, I've read at least 4 newspaper commentary pieces on it, even one today, and noted the thousands of angry comments to various forms of media. For a sociologist, he seems completely tone deaf to what his society is actually talking about.
* The government's success in striking a deal with one of its strongest aboriginal critics in the Northern Territory is really very significant, and undercuts a lot of the carping criticism by aboriginal rights tragics who prefer ideology over success on the ground. Labor types may doubt The Australian's version of the story, but the story about it on The 7.30 Report was very positive too.
Of course, it is true that aboriginal issues are not a significant vote changer for 95% of Australians, but it is still a positive story.
* For those who read newpapers, there is also this positive comment on John Howard from Alan Greenspan:
Yes, a pretty good week really.
* the Rudd/Labor humbuggery about "smear campaigns" is, I reckon, finally starting to be revealed clearly as such to the public after yesterday's performance in Parliament. It has irritated me all year that Rudd has been getting away with this: carrying on as if stories clearly created by journalists (such as the issue of the Eumundi farm, or the strip club incident, or the heart operation) were being created by the Liberals; and acting as if it were some revelation that politicians or their staffers seek to background journalists on the past lives of their opponents (as in Gillard.)
Rudd went one lunge for sympathy too far with his questions about the heart operation story yesterday, and it clearly backfired. Have a look at Matt Price's very disdainful comment on this in The Australian this morning. (It was also very clear to anyone who had seen Downer on Lateline the night before that he had not idea of the story until that day.)
Rudd's attempt at a comeback to Costello "not having courage to take on Howard" is clearly a losing argument, especially when you see Costello reacting with glee as if it is water off a duck's back. The re-invigorated Costello is going to have a high profile during the campaign, and provided he and Howard compare their notes very carefully every morning and don't start accidentally contradicting each other, I think their handover approach may work reasonably well.
* As noted in a previous post, a hot culture war issue over lesbians and IVF can't hurt Howard, as it will perhaps persuade any doubtful Hillsong types that the Liberals are (at least marginally) more socially conservative than Labor.
Incidentally, Mark Bahnisch had a post at LP this week in which in response to me, his "buddy", he claimed the IVF lesbian case was a "storm in a teacup". Since then, I've read at least 4 newspaper commentary pieces on it, even one today, and noted the thousands of angry comments to various forms of media. For a sociologist, he seems completely tone deaf to what his society is actually talking about.
* The government's success in striking a deal with one of its strongest aboriginal critics in the Northern Territory is really very significant, and undercuts a lot of the carping criticism by aboriginal rights tragics who prefer ideology over success on the ground. Labor types may doubt The Australian's version of the story, but the story about it on The 7.30 Report was very positive too.
Of course, it is true that aboriginal issues are not a significant vote changer for 95% of Australians, but it is still a positive story.
* For those who read newpapers, there is also this positive comment on John Howard from Alan Greenspan:
Expect to see that used politically here soon.In his memoir The Age of Turbulence, for which he was reportedly paid an advance of $US8 million ($9.3 million), Greenspan writes: "Prime Minister John Howard impressed me with his deep interest in the role of technology in American productivity growth. Whereas most heads of government steer clear of such detail, he sought me out on such issues during visits to the US between 1997 and 2005.
"He needed no prodding from me on monetary policy. His government in 1996 had granted full independence to the Reserve Bank of Australia."
Priced by the word, this pat on the head for the Australian leader is worth $US2800, but it's priceless if you're a prime minister in search of accolades from modern American heroes.
Yes, a pretty good week really.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Too good to be true
Sunny Outlook: Can Sunshine Provide All U.S. Electricity?: Scientific American
Maybe I worry too much about small global risks, but one issue with extremely high reliance on solar power is what happens if something disastrous causes the sun to be blocked for months at a time? For example, a supervolcano, a small to medium size asteroid strike, or accidental nuclear war.
It would mean the immediate end of power for months, and surely that would make national recovery all that more difficult. (Presumably, coal or gas fired plants would not last much longer, as such a disaster would cut fuel supply too.)
But I think once they are fuelled up, nuclear plants run pretty much on their own for a few years, don't they?
It would seem to me to be a matter of caution to always keep some nuclear power plants on line for this reason alone, even if solar became as truly ubiquitous as the optimists hope.
Maybe I worry too much about small global risks, but one issue with extremely high reliance on solar power is what happens if something disastrous causes the sun to be blocked for months at a time? For example, a supervolcano, a small to medium size asteroid strike, or accidental nuclear war.
It would mean the immediate end of power for months, and surely that would make national recovery all that more difficult. (Presumably, coal or gas fired plants would not last much longer, as such a disaster would cut fuel supply too.)
But I think once they are fuelled up, nuclear plants run pretty much on their own for a few years, don't they?
It would seem to me to be a matter of caution to always keep some nuclear power plants on line for this reason alone, even if solar became as truly ubiquitous as the optimists hope.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
When surgeons get bored with normal operations...
ScienceDaily: Surgeons Remove Patient's Gall Bladder Through Vagina
This idea of surgeons going in and removing organs via various orifices has been reported before, and research in the field goes on, obviously. The whole idea just makes me feel queasy, and my intuitive reaction is to sceptical about how much better such methods can really be. God knows if I were a woman, there would be no way I would prefer via vagina procedure over a simple incision. (There's a sentence I will probably write only once in my life.)
This idea of surgeons going in and removing organs via various orifices has been reported before, and research in the field goes on, obviously. The whole idea just makes me feel queasy, and my intuitive reaction is to sceptical about how much better such methods can really be. God knows if I were a woman, there would be no way I would prefer via vagina procedure over a simple incision. (There's a sentence I will probably write only once in my life.)
Bringing back the culture wars
The news story about the lesbian couple suing their IVF doctor for providing them with two healthy children instead of one has raised a stunning amount of antagonism from the public. News Ltd had readers' comments on this story yesterday, and although I can't find them now, there seemed to be about one supportive post to every 50 very angry ones.
I note that yesterday's initial report had more detail of the mother's neurotic sounding reaction than today's version linked above. The Daily Telegraph version had this part which was sure to raise eyebrows across the nation:
To illustrate how angry people get about this, on talk back radio this morning I heard a man complaining how he and his ex wife had failed at IVF, how much it had cost them, etc, and then he started crying when he said that he was so angry to hear one of the women on the radio saying that if they won the case they would buy 2 Harleys and travel around Australia. The radio announcers had to interrupt quickly and reassure their listener that the earlier call (which I had missed) was fake. I presume this man heard what was intended to be a satirical call and assumed it was true.
The thing is, it is clear the doctor is admitting a mistake, and I am not entirely sure what his defence is. If the judge actually finds in favour of the women, the public outcry will be huge.
I expect that this case, regardless of its outcome, will make the issue of gay relationship financial rights all the more politically sensitive. These women are, at the very least, unhelpful to that cause.
I would also be curious to know how many of the public are against the idea of lesbians ever making their own children, whether it be by IVF, donor semen, or whatever. I suspect that people may well draw a strong distinction between lesbians who end up with children as a result of a failed heterosexual relationship, and those who have only ever been in lesbian relationships but use artificial methods to conceive. The public may well be more conservative on this than many people think.
I note that yesterday's initial report had more detail of the mother's neurotic sounding reaction than today's version linked above. The Daily Telegraph version had this part which was sure to raise eyebrows across the nation:
People would have been upset if it were a heterosexual couple complaining of the same thing, but add into the mix the fact that it's lesbians, and far from poor ones at that, and you have the ideal circumstances for a real culture war about gays and making children. Lucky John Howard, I think, as a conservative cultural backlash on such issues must surely be easier for him to handle than Labor. (Penny Wong, I am waiting for your comments about this case.)The woman said she enjoyed some aspects of the pregnancy, such as decorating the girls' nursery, but other parts were distressing, including purchasing a pram.
"It was like the last frontier of acceptance to spend hundreds of dollars on a pram," she said.
To illustrate how angry people get about this, on talk back radio this morning I heard a man complaining how he and his ex wife had failed at IVF, how much it had cost them, etc, and then he started crying when he said that he was so angry to hear one of the women on the radio saying that if they won the case they would buy 2 Harleys and travel around Australia. The radio announcers had to interrupt quickly and reassure their listener that the earlier call (which I had missed) was fake. I presume this man heard what was intended to be a satirical call and assumed it was true.
The thing is, it is clear the doctor is admitting a mistake, and I am not entirely sure what his defence is. If the judge actually finds in favour of the women, the public outcry will be huge.
I expect that this case, regardless of its outcome, will make the issue of gay relationship financial rights all the more politically sensitive. These women are, at the very least, unhelpful to that cause.
I would also be curious to know how many of the public are against the idea of lesbians ever making their own children, whether it be by IVF, donor semen, or whatever. I suspect that people may well draw a strong distinction between lesbians who end up with children as a result of a failed heterosexual relationship, and those who have only ever been in lesbian relationships but use artificial methods to conceive. The public may well be more conservative on this than many people think.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Death to apostates
Comment is free: Supporting Islam's apostates
Interesting article. I note with particular interest the quote from the Koran which is a good example of the, ahem, problematic nature of that document.
(Go on, Geoff, hit me with some Armstrong niceness about how unfair I am being.)
Interesting article. I note with particular interest the quote from the Koran which is a good example of the, ahem, problematic nature of that document.
(Go on, Geoff, hit me with some Armstrong niceness about how unfair I am being.)
All year 'round tastelessness
One of the pleasures of spring is that it is asparagus season. Of all the vegetables, asparagus seems to me to be a particularly adult taste: I think it is pretty unusual to find a child who likes it, but one can develop a particular fondness for its subtle flavour later in life.
But this post is really about the pointlessness of importing asparagus. In the last couple of years, all year round imports from Thailand and (I think) Peru mean that asparagus is nearly always available. However, even though it sometimes looks good on the shelf, I have found it to be almost completely tasteless on the couple of occasions I have given it a try.
I just don’t see the point of providing such produce. One of the pleasures of food is enjoying its seasonality. I guess I could see the point if it actually tasted good, but unless I have been unusually unlucky, asparagus is just a vegetable that does not travel well. Who buys it and keeps the market for it alive?
The other thing about this is the waste of energy that is involved. You don’t have to be a Monbiot to think that moving a tasteless vegetable around the globe would have to be perhaps the most worthless use of petroleum (and generator of greenhouse gases) that you can imagine. I suppose the aircraft’s cargo hold may have been coming here anyway, full or empty, but it still irritates me.
Go out and just buy your Australian asparagus in season. (Or for that matter grow your own. My father used to do that and once it is established you can get heaps of spears year after year.)
But this post is really about the pointlessness of importing asparagus. In the last couple of years, all year round imports from Thailand and (I think) Peru mean that asparagus is nearly always available. However, even though it sometimes looks good on the shelf, I have found it to be almost completely tasteless on the couple of occasions I have given it a try.
I just don’t see the point of providing such produce. One of the pleasures of food is enjoying its seasonality. I guess I could see the point if it actually tasted good, but unless I have been unusually unlucky, asparagus is just a vegetable that does not travel well. Who buys it and keeps the market for it alive?
The other thing about this is the waste of energy that is involved. You don’t have to be a Monbiot to think that moving a tasteless vegetable around the globe would have to be perhaps the most worthless use of petroleum (and generator of greenhouse gases) that you can imagine. I suppose the aircraft’s cargo hold may have been coming here anyway, full or empty, but it still irritates me.
Go out and just buy your Australian asparagus in season. (Or for that matter grow your own. My father used to do that and once it is established you can get heaps of spears year after year.)
The trouble with epidemiology
From last weekend's NYT magazine, there's a long and very interesting article on why it seems medicine keeps changing its mind as to what is "good" for our health. It's well worth reading if you have any interest in public (and private) health.
More please
Newspoll boss says gap will close - National - theage.com.au
The most important thing about the latest Newspoll is the Coalition primary vote is back over the magic 40% line, barely. As I have noted before, it may be a 10% gap, but it only takes a 5% swing to put the parties on even pegging again.
Mark Bahnisch has been so overcome with excitement at the prospect of a Labor win that he can't seem to see the downside of anything Kevin does. His commentary is so positive for Labor now that one suspects he hopes for a job out of a new Rudd government.
In this post, he thought Kevin conducting a premature campaign launch last weekend was evidence of Labor "taking control" of the timing of the election. He even seems to think that Rudd routinely ignoring the government benches during Question Time is a good look.
I think most people would see the clear danger in both of these that they can come across as hubris and arrogance.
I also suppose you could not expect Rudd to not try out his Mandarin at APEC, but even then I wonder whether to some in the electorate he looked a little too smugly proud while doing it.
Just to show my even handedness, I will say that Peter Costello on Radio National breakfast came across as all platitudes and little substance today. His talk of having a vision of "inclusiveness" for the marginalised without explaining specific policies to achieve it comes across as just as much blather as what Rudd says at the moment. I am really not sure how he would come across as PM.
The most important thing about the latest Newspoll is the Coalition primary vote is back over the magic 40% line, barely. As I have noted before, it may be a 10% gap, but it only takes a 5% swing to put the parties on even pegging again.
Mark Bahnisch has been so overcome with excitement at the prospect of a Labor win that he can't seem to see the downside of anything Kevin does. His commentary is so positive for Labor now that one suspects he hopes for a job out of a new Rudd government.
In this post, he thought Kevin conducting a premature campaign launch last weekend was evidence of Labor "taking control" of the timing of the election. He even seems to think that Rudd routinely ignoring the government benches during Question Time is a good look.
I think most people would see the clear danger in both of these that they can come across as hubris and arrogance.
I also suppose you could not expect Rudd to not try out his Mandarin at APEC, but even then I wonder whether to some in the electorate he looked a little too smugly proud while doing it.
Just to show my even handedness, I will say that Peter Costello on Radio National breakfast came across as all platitudes and little substance today. His talk of having a vision of "inclusiveness" for the marginalised without explaining specific policies to achieve it comes across as just as much blather as what Rudd says at the moment. I am really not sure how he would come across as PM.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Danish dictionary required
New terrorism case confirms that Denmark is a target - International Herald Tribune
This article talks about concern that Denmark is a particular target for Islamic terrorism, and contains this brilliant quote:
This article talks about concern that Denmark is a particular target for Islamic terrorism, and contains this brilliant quote:
At home, the children of Muslim immigrants complain of job discrimination and integration problems, feeding the disenchantment of the small but growing Muslim population.Yes, I suppose that damned fine democratic institution known as the Taliban is not getting its chance to enforce human rights in Afghanistan because of Denmark and others. A small investment in a dictionary so as to understand what the terms "democracy" and "human rights" mean might come in handy for Imran."In the schools, Danish teachers are always talking about democracy and human rights, but now they see what Denmark is doing in Afghanistan and what they did here with the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad," said Imran Shah, 31, who leads a youth group at a local mosque. "They ask themselves, is this a democracy or are they talking about double standards?"
Twice the harm
Skunk strength has doubled, studies suggest | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
There's always a lot of argument around the issue of the increasing strength of cannabis over the years. It would seem that, in England at least, there is clear evidence that the average strength has doubled in the last 10 years.
I assume something similar would have gone on in Australia too.
It also adds some weight to my scepticism about claims that the additional harmfulness of modern, hydroponic cannabis is due to the fungicides and other chemicals used on it while it is growing.
There's always a lot of argument around the issue of the increasing strength of cannabis over the years. It would seem that, in England at least, there is clear evidence that the average strength has doubled in the last 10 years.
I assume something similar would have gone on in Australia too.
It also adds some weight to my scepticism about claims that the additional harmfulness of modern, hydroponic cannabis is due to the fungicides and other chemicals used on it while it is growing.
Credit where it's due
Workplace Ombudsman proves his mettle - National - theage.com.au
It's surprising to see this reported in The Age, of all papers:
It's surprising to see this reported in The Age, of all papers:
Since March 2006, the Workplace Ombudsman's office has won back $19.4 million in underpayments for 13,700 employees, dealt with 21,000 cases (most of them within three months), taken 73 matters to court, and secured penalties totalling $683,555.
The Government continues to give Mr Wilson more funding to take on more tasks — and he is adding 100 workplace inspectors to the present 220.
But the labour movement now has no idea what to make of this creation of WorkChoices.
Labor's IR spokeswoman Julia Gillard has lashed the Government's "big government industrial relations bureaucracy" and promised to cut its funding. But last week, ACTU Secretary Jeff Lawrence called it a "really important" body, saying it is "not properly resourced".
Go Annabel
Smirks to the left and smirks to the right - Opinion - smh.com.au
Jeez, Annabel Crabb is sure giving Matt Price a real contest in the "wittiest political sketch writer" stakes this year. From this morning's column:
By the way, just how much money does Labor have for TV advertising this year? It seems to be spending a fortune already, yet presumably is holding something back in reserve for the actual campaign.
I also suspect that the line of Rudd, Swan, Gillard et al that they know they haven't won the election yet is starting to look obviously fake when you have a pre-election campaign campaign launch like that one at Penrith. The hubristic appearance of it should, I reckon, hurt Rudd at least a tiny bit, or it would if we lived in any political times that made sense.
Jeez, Annabel Crabb is sure giving Matt Price a real contest in the "wittiest political sketch writer" stakes this year. From this morning's column:
At the Penrith event the Labor leader took the opportunity to indulge his weakness for announcing snappily named organisations that will be hurried into existence should his present confidence about the election result prove well-founded.
This time, it was Skills Australia, "an independent, statutory body responsible for advising government on the future skills needs of the nation."
Skills Australia would join Infrastructure Australia, the Petrol Commissioner, the Ambassador for Older Australians, the Office of Strategic Interventions, and so on: all organisations which would be established under a Ruddocracy to research, adjudicate and conclude upon the problems and challenges facing Australia.
Once upon a time (the curmudgeons among you may be thinking) this was the job we gave to governments. But in the era of New Leadership, such thinking is considered embarrassingly passe.
By the way, just how much money does Labor have for TV advertising this year? It seems to be spending a fortune already, yet presumably is holding something back in reserve for the actual campaign.
I also suspect that the line of Rudd, Swan, Gillard et al that they know they haven't won the election yet is starting to look obviously fake when you have a pre-election campaign campaign launch like that one at Penrith. The hubristic appearance of it should, I reckon, hurt Rudd at least a tiny bit, or it would if we lived in any political times that made sense.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Relevant here too?
Silence on Concussions Raises Risks of Injury - New York Times
I know nothing of American football, but still it is interesting to read from the above article how big of a problem concussion is in the game:
I know nothing of American football, but still it is interesting to read from the above article how big of a problem concussion is in the game:
At least 50 high school or younger football players in more than 20 states since 1997 have been killed or have sustained serious head injuries on the field, according to research by The New York Times.Mind you, they don't explain what a "serious head injury" exactly is. Still:
Anonymous questionnaires that ask specifically about concussions have reported rates among high school football players at about 15 percent each season; when the word concussion is omitted and a description of symptoms is provided instead, close to 50 percent of players say they had one, with 35 percent reporting two or more.It's interesting to note that, apart from death, other ongoing problems can be caused:
Experts said that for every such case there can be hundreds of victims of postconcussion syndrome, leaving youngsters depressed, irritable and unable to concentrate, and they sometimes miss school for weeks or perform poorly on tests. Ben Mangan of Lewisburg, Ohio, still has mood swings and cognitive problems deriving from at least one major concussion in 2002.I wonder how seriously concussion is dealt with in official rugby league circles, and whether any famous players with depression believe (or are told) it may have been caused by it.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
The argument for taking geo-engineering seriously
TCS Daily - Geoengineering Is the Future; Here's Why
I found this paragraph the most surprising:
I found this paragraph the most surprising:
Unfortunately, there aren't good, easy alternatives for replacing coal anytime soon. The fastest-growing non-fossil fuels -- wind and solar power -- are expected to climb an average of 10.5 percent annually. But by 2030 this will represent only about 1 percent of global energy demand. Renewables such as hydropower, wind, and biofuels face similar challenges. They just aren't capable of providing the energy, in a dependable manner and on a large enough scale, to meet base load generation demands. Nuclear is the one option that can make a difference. But just to hold its current 20 percent share of the U.S. energy market, dozens of new plants will have to be built in the next two decades.
Friday, September 14, 2007
To Truther or not to Truther, that is the question
Comment is free: 9/11 - the big cover-up?
Gay greenie and general lefty pest Peter Thatchell writes a Comment is Free article (above) in which he says he is not into conspiracy at all, but:
As Bugs would say, what a maroon.
Gay greenie and general lefty pest Peter Thatchell writes a Comment is Free article (above) in which he says he is not into conspiracy at all, but:
There are dozens of 9/11 "truth" websites and campaign groups. I cannot vouch for the veracity or credibility of any of them. But what I can say is that as well as making plenty of seemingly outrageous claims; a few of them raise legitimate questions that demand answers.And:
Unlike WTC3, which was badly damaged by falling debris from the Twin Towers but which remained standing, WTC7 suffered minor damage but suddenly collapsed in a neat pile, as happens in a controlled demolition.And:
There are many, many more strange unexplained facts concerning the events of 9/11.Yet, when quite a lot of Guardian readers call him out for claiming not to be a conspiracist, while at the same time saying that the conspiracists are onto something, he gets all indignant:
I am very surprised and disappointed by the way some of the posts on this list have seriously misrepresented what I wrote in the article above.So, to Tatchell's mind, suggesting (as he clearly did) that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition and stating that there are other (completely un-specified) "strange unexplained facts" about 9/11 is not part of a "wild unfounded conspiracy" theory. Just reasonable, ordinary,run of the mill conspiracy theory then, I suppose.
They have used the insinuation of "conspiracy theorist" (which I am not and which I reject) as a convenient way to evade serious engagement with the issues I have raised.
What I tried to do in my article is make a clear distinction between wild, unfounded conspiracy theories, and legitimate, credible questioning of the official account...
As Bugs would say, what a maroon.
Cap & trade not so clear cut
An Inconvenient Solution by Nicole Gelinas, City Journal Summer 2007
Here's a good, easy to follow article on carbon cap and trade schemes and the problems inherent with them.
Here's a good, easy to follow article on carbon cap and trade schemes and the problems inherent with them.
Worth a try
The Dilbert Blog: Osama Placebo
Inspired by the new Osama video, Scott Adams has a devious plan for overcoming al Qaeda terrorists:
Inspired by the new Osama video, Scott Adams has a devious plan for overcoming al Qaeda terrorists:
How hard would it be for the CIA to create a fake Osama who looks more real than the real one?
And on it goes. Hey, sounds worth a try to me.I don’t think it would be hard. A Hollywood special effects team could pound one out in a week. Then you just need to get the other intelligence agencies to say the voice is authenticated. Bam.
The first video of the fake Osama could be one of his typical wandering diatribes against capitalism and infidels and blah, blah, blah. Once the public, especially the terrorist cells with no direct contact back to the base cave, start to believe he’s real, you can begin to sprinkle in new topics and nudge the terrorists in whatever direction you like. Remember, there’s no such thing as a story too ridiculous when you’re talking about people who believe suicide is a good way to get laid.
By the third or fourth video, Osama could be telling his followers to tattoo “Al Qaeda” on their foreheads to show their devotion and lack of fear.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Religion, morality, etc
Edge: MORAL PSYCHOLOGY AND THE MISUNDERSTANDING OF RELIGION: A Talk With Jonathan Haidt
This is quite a long article, looking at the origins of morality, religion and and comparing conservatism and secularism. While written by an atheist psychologist, it's quite sympathetic to the positive role that religion can play in society.
It's good reading, but has so much information it's hard to absorb it all into long term memory.
This is quite a long article, looking at the origins of morality, religion and and comparing conservatism and secularism. While written by an atheist psychologist, it's quite sympathetic to the positive role that religion can play in society.
It's good reading, but has so much information it's hard to absorb it all into long term memory.
Bjorn again
‘Feel Good’ vs. ‘Do Good’ on Climate - New York Times
Bjorn Lomborg gets a short but sympathetic hearing from John Tierney in the NYT. Good reading.
The article mentions the roofs being painted white as a significant way to reduce urban heat-island effects. I am surprised that this simple tactic does not get more notice. A previous post that mentioned this in more detail is here.
Bjorn Lomborg gets a short but sympathetic hearing from John Tierney in the NYT. Good reading.
The article mentions the roofs being painted white as a significant way to reduce urban heat-island effects. I am surprised that this simple tactic does not get more notice. A previous post that mentioned this in more detail is here.
Going nuclear
Nuclear dawn | Economist.com
See the link or The Economist's optimistic look at a resurgent nuclear power industry. Happily, pebble beds get a mention too.
See the link or The Economist's optimistic look at a resurgent nuclear power industry. Happily, pebble beds get a mention too.
Back to politics
There's no doubt it's been an interesting week politically, but the amount of analysis, speculation, double guessing, and (especially from the left leaning blogs) somewhat premature dance-on-your-grave, this-is-the-end-of-Howard-and-his-government celebrations and name calling (cabinet is "gutless" for not ousting Howard) is just too much. At Larvatus Prodeo, no one is bothering to call out the lefties on their speculations, which ranged from "Howard will be out by tomorrow" to "all of this has been an evil plot so Howard can prove he is top dog" to "how can we believe he will ever retire even when he says he will?" (That last one is Tim Dunlop's line too, and it's about his silliest suggestion ever - as if Howard can forever hold back the resentment of Costello and his supporters for not honouring what is now a clear public commitment. He will be forced out if he hasn't retired without allowing some lead time for the new PM.)
But how this will affect the current polling: I say it's anyone's guess. I have no idea whether it will make next week's Newspoll go up for the government, or down, or stay the same. It is impossible to tell.
I will say, though, that it seems to me that there is a risk that the retirement announcement might have the curious result that Howard loses his seat, but the government squeaks back in. Somehow, I don't think Howard could really complain too much then; he could just say that his retirement plans have been brought forward, but at the end of the day the best government for Australia got back in.
But how this will affect the current polling: I say it's anyone's guess. I have no idea whether it will make next week's Newspoll go up for the government, or down, or stay the same. It is impossible to tell.
I will say, though, that it seems to me that there is a risk that the retirement announcement might have the curious result that Howard loses his seat, but the government squeaks back in. Somehow, I don't think Howard could really complain too much then; he could just say that his retirement plans have been brought forward, but at the end of the day the best government for Australia got back in.
Back to religion
To doubt God is human, and to hell with convention - Opinion - smh.com.au
I've been meaning to talk about the issue of Mother Teresa and her private feeling that God was not there for her, but haven't had time to put my thoughts together yet.
Meanwhile, this article reprinted in the SMH today from the LA Times is an interesting comment on the matter.
I've been meaning to talk about the issue of Mother Teresa and her private feeling that God was not there for her, but haven't had time to put my thoughts together yet.
Meanwhile, this article reprinted in the SMH today from the LA Times is an interesting comment on the matter.
Anti Tarantino
Is Quentin Tarantino losing the plots? - Times Online
I always thought he was over-rated. Glad to see critical opinion is catching up with me.
I always thought he was over-rated. Glad to see critical opinion is catching up with me.
Oh come on...
Academy to Invite Jon Stewart Back as Oscar Host - New York Times
His hosting of the show wasn't all that successful, I thought. But then again, with Hollywood generally being in the creative and entertainment doldrums for years now, it's a tough gig for anyone.
By the way, I have come to the view that The Colbert Report is consistently funnier than The Daily Show.
His hosting of the show wasn't all that successful, I thought. But then again, with Hollywood generally being in the creative and entertainment doldrums for years now, it's a tough gig for anyone.
By the way, I have come to the view that The Colbert Report is consistently funnier than The Daily Show.
You can always trust The Age...
...to run the loopiest columns from the international press relating to 9/11, as long as they have an anti-American slant:
Remembrance of 9/11 leaves us untouched - Opinion - theage.com.au
An extract:
Remembrance of 9/11 leaves us untouched - Opinion - theage.com.au
An extract:
Nothing has truly pricked America to check out its conscience. Bush to date has not asked for sacrifice and certainly none has been volunteered. The evidence is in our toys and our girths. We continue to drape ourselves in the innocence of the victims of September 11 against the "face of evil", as Bush puts it. Yet we maintain our assault on the world's resources, with no worry as to when mere envy of us around the globe is stirred up into evil in a cave in Afghanistan.Isn't this a bit of a weird juxtaposition? Does he mean that if Americans had fewer cars and were slimmer 10 years ago that bin Laden would have called off the attack? Seems to me a thinly veiled way of suggesting that US really deserved the attack for being greedy.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Keeping it real
Warning: it's all about religion!
Readers interested in the topic have probably already noted that there currently seems to be a backlash underway in England against the Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens anti-religion books. Here's a Comment is Free article by Alex Stein in today's Guardian that takes Hitchens to task. Madeleine Bunting also joined in last week, and in The Times we had John Humphreys explain why, even though he had become an agnostic, the militant atheists really irritate him. Bryan Appleyard had a short, pithy post too.
All of those are worth reading.
The general gist of them is that Dawkins and his followers attack the most unsophisticated, fundamentalist versions of religion, but fail to engage in debates with those who have a more sophisticated understandings of religion. To the extent that he does engage, I think Dawkins claims that what sophisticated theologians propose is not something that has any real meaning anyway.
This does bring up an issue that is a tricky one for those of faith, namely, the contest between realist and non-realist views of religion.
I don't think this is often clearly discussed in the popular press. I believe I first read about the realist/non-realist divide in a book by philosopher/theologian John Hicks in the 1980's. The idea is that the trend which started with historical scepticism of the Bible in the 19th century has been for those sympathetic to religious belief to move from a "realist" understanding of the Gospels (or Bible generally) to a "non-realist" interpretation. That is, the literal truth of matters such as the Virgin Birth, the resurrection of Christ, or even the existence of an afterlife, is believed by non-realists to be unimportant, and the mythological or metaphorical "truth" or utility of matters of faith is seen as the key.
People who hold thoroughly non-realist views can claim to still be people of faith, but it is achieved by re-defining what was previously thought to be undoubtedly real to something which is either not real, or a something in which the literal reality is now considered unimportant. John Hicks has an article on his website which explains this view well.
This is really the crux of the issue for faith in the Christian churches at this time in history, and I do find it a matter of some difficulty personally. Catholics like me, taught in the 1960's, have never had a particularly fundamentalist view of the Old Testament forced on them. So I don't have a problem with a non-realist reading of much of the Old Testament.
When it comes to the New Testament, though, the non-realist attitudes seems to me to have significantly more problems.
My main objection perhaps comes to where non-realism goes so far as to deny something as basic as a belief that there is a supernatural realm, or an afterlife of any variety. At its heart, the teaching of Jesus had the importance of how you live your life on Earth because there will be an accounting for it in an afterlife. (Whether that was an immediate after-death judgement, or one at the end of the world, is rather moot to this point.) But if you start denying that an afterlife has any reality at all, surely you are denying not just "stories" like the Virgin Birth or even the resurrection (which can be seen as, say, rumours that got out of hand,) but something which was clearly fundamentally what the figure at the heart of your religion believed to be a reality about the universe.
On the other hand, it is clear that the founding fathers of Christianity had a fundamentalist understanding of how sin came into the world (via the actions of the first man Adam) and the role that Christ had in fixing the situation.
If you do believe in evolution, one can still (like CS Lewis) believe that there came a point at which the first man did evolve into existence, and did actually undergo a temptation of the kind described in Genesis. But this is a matter difficult for modern people to believe. The concept of how sin or evil originated is thus a difficult one for the Church if you believe thoroughly in evolution, and this also affects one's understanding of Christ.
So, the issue as to where to draw the realist/non-realist line is a tricky one, to say the least.
Should my acknowledgement of the difficulty mean that I should not criticise the likes of Cuppitt and Spong, who try to spread the word that the only way for Christianity to survive is to become completely non-realist? No, I don't think so. I may have trouble with deciding how to resolve the issues, but I think I can still make the call if I think others have gone completely too far into the non-realist camp.
The other matter to always remember that above all of this is the issue of how lives are actually lived. As we all know, fundamentalist faith in ideology of any kind can lead to devastatingly evil acts. The atheist can argue that evolutionary biology is what is behind the moral impulse in humans, and that is why you don't need religion to inform moral reasoning. But what they can't show (at least to my satisfaction) is the reasons why humans should always act as if there is a true universality to the moral law.
In any event, a willingness to act as if there is a universal moral law is, at its heart, more important than the theory on which the moral actions are based.
Readers interested in the topic have probably already noted that there currently seems to be a backlash underway in England against the Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens anti-religion books. Here's a Comment is Free article by Alex Stein in today's Guardian that takes Hitchens to task. Madeleine Bunting also joined in last week, and in The Times we had John Humphreys explain why, even though he had become an agnostic, the militant atheists really irritate him. Bryan Appleyard had a short, pithy post too.
All of those are worth reading.
The general gist of them is that Dawkins and his followers attack the most unsophisticated, fundamentalist versions of religion, but fail to engage in debates with those who have a more sophisticated understandings of religion. To the extent that he does engage, I think Dawkins claims that what sophisticated theologians propose is not something that has any real meaning anyway.
This does bring up an issue that is a tricky one for those of faith, namely, the contest between realist and non-realist views of religion.
I don't think this is often clearly discussed in the popular press. I believe I first read about the realist/non-realist divide in a book by philosopher/theologian John Hicks in the 1980's. The idea is that the trend which started with historical scepticism of the Bible in the 19th century has been for those sympathetic to religious belief to move from a "realist" understanding of the Gospels (or Bible generally) to a "non-realist" interpretation. That is, the literal truth of matters such as the Virgin Birth, the resurrection of Christ, or even the existence of an afterlife, is believed by non-realists to be unimportant, and the mythological or metaphorical "truth" or utility of matters of faith is seen as the key.
People who hold thoroughly non-realist views can claim to still be people of faith, but it is achieved by re-defining what was previously thought to be undoubtedly real to something which is either not real, or a something in which the literal reality is now considered unimportant. John Hicks has an article on his website which explains this view well.
This is really the crux of the issue for faith in the Christian churches at this time in history, and I do find it a matter of some difficulty personally. Catholics like me, taught in the 1960's, have never had a particularly fundamentalist view of the Old Testament forced on them. So I don't have a problem with a non-realist reading of much of the Old Testament.
When it comes to the New Testament, though, the non-realist attitudes seems to me to have significantly more problems.
My main objection perhaps comes to where non-realism goes so far as to deny something as basic as a belief that there is a supernatural realm, or an afterlife of any variety. At its heart, the teaching of Jesus had the importance of how you live your life on Earth because there will be an accounting for it in an afterlife. (Whether that was an immediate after-death judgement, or one at the end of the world, is rather moot to this point.) But if you start denying that an afterlife has any reality at all, surely you are denying not just "stories" like the Virgin Birth or even the resurrection (which can be seen as, say, rumours that got out of hand,) but something which was clearly fundamentally what the figure at the heart of your religion believed to be a reality about the universe.
On the other hand, it is clear that the founding fathers of Christianity had a fundamentalist understanding of how sin came into the world (via the actions of the first man Adam) and the role that Christ had in fixing the situation.
If you do believe in evolution, one can still (like CS Lewis) believe that there came a point at which the first man did evolve into existence, and did actually undergo a temptation of the kind described in Genesis. But this is a matter difficult for modern people to believe. The concept of how sin or evil originated is thus a difficult one for the Church if you believe thoroughly in evolution, and this also affects one's understanding of Christ.
So, the issue as to where to draw the realist/non-realist line is a tricky one, to say the least.
Should my acknowledgement of the difficulty mean that I should not criticise the likes of Cuppitt and Spong, who try to spread the word that the only way for Christianity to survive is to become completely non-realist? No, I don't think so. I may have trouble with deciding how to resolve the issues, but I think I can still make the call if I think others have gone completely too far into the non-realist camp.
The other matter to always remember that above all of this is the issue of how lives are actually lived. As we all know, fundamentalist faith in ideology of any kind can lead to devastatingly evil acts. The atheist can argue that evolutionary biology is what is behind the moral impulse in humans, and that is why you don't need religion to inform moral reasoning. But what they can't show (at least to my satisfaction) is the reasons why humans should always act as if there is a true universality to the moral law.
In any event, a willingness to act as if there is a universal moral law is, at its heart, more important than the theory on which the moral actions are based.
On bin Laden and the relativists
Comment is free: Backing the bombers
This article refers to another one by Martin Amis in which he hits out at those who are semi-apologists for Islamist terrorism.
I like this comment that follows it, on the hypocrisy of much of Europe. (Perhaps it's a little over-stated, but the sentiment seems right):
This article refers to another one by Martin Amis in which he hits out at those who are semi-apologists for Islamist terrorism.
I like this comment that follows it, on the hypocrisy of much of Europe. (Perhaps it's a little over-stated, but the sentiment seems right):
The US has coddled Europeans for 70 years now, which has helped produce a child-like mentality in Europeans, where there's little thought of consequences. So, for example, Europeans can pretend they're champions of human rights, when not a one of them has ever put their lives on the line or made any meaningful sacrifice for some other country's freedom or rights. They can pretend that running a foreign policy based primarily on giving their businesses access to the most horrendous regimes is somehow moral. Freud called this type of thinking 'magical' thinking, characteristic of childhood, when the child has the mother's breast 'magically' appear whenever it cries.
Camus called this European mentality 'Christianity for others, pagansim for oneself.'
When you're a child, you think Jesse James was really cool for robbing banks. When you get older, you realize that real people died in those bank robberies, so he wasn't really that cool at all.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
A propos of nothing..
Comment is free: Nicks nixed
I have no idea why this comment piece appears in the Comment is Free section of The Guardian today. But it a bit surprising to hear that France only stopped using the guillotine in 1977.
I have no idea why this comment piece appears in the Comment is Free section of The Guardian today. But it a bit surprising to hear that France only stopped using the guillotine in 1977.
Silly politics
Capitulation - Possums Pollytics
I just had a quick read of the post above, which goes into a lot of detail about what the Cosby-Textor analysis of the issues revealed.
Howard haters are taking so much joy at the moment at the likely looking defeat of the Liberal government that are not prone to be troubled by the obvious question: why has appearance of Rudd as leader even (apparently) turned several issues from one previously Liberal "owned" ones to Labor "owned" ones?
The difference that Rudd has made to the polling on issues is surely at the heart of the puzzlement of the journalistic commentators. The force of one personality is significant to politics (look at Mark Latham,) but there seems something a little weird about one person being able to convince everyone that his government would be best on a range of issues now.
Any reader who has long disliked Howard need not bother commenting here along the lines of "well, it's just that he has never really been popular", because that is not really addressing my point.
My personal theory is still that Rudd is in league with the Devil, or at the very least using Jedi mind tricks. He will probably look like Yoda when he gets older too. (He already speaks in a funny fashion, with that auto interviewing style.)
I just had a quick read of the post above, which goes into a lot of detail about what the Cosby-Textor analysis of the issues revealed.
Howard haters are taking so much joy at the moment at the likely looking defeat of the Liberal government that are not prone to be troubled by the obvious question: why has appearance of Rudd as leader even (apparently) turned several issues from one previously Liberal "owned" ones to Labor "owned" ones?
The difference that Rudd has made to the polling on issues is surely at the heart of the puzzlement of the journalistic commentators. The force of one personality is significant to politics (look at Mark Latham,) but there seems something a little weird about one person being able to convince everyone that his government would be best on a range of issues now.
Any reader who has long disliked Howard need not bother commenting here along the lines of "well, it's just that he has never really been popular", because that is not really addressing my point.
My personal theory is still that Rudd is in league with the Devil, or at the very least using Jedi mind tricks. He will probably look like Yoda when he gets older too. (He already speaks in a funny fashion, with that auto interviewing style.)
A documentary worth seeing
In the Shadow of the Moon - Rotten Tomatoes
It's about the Apollo program, and has received very good reviews.
It's about the Apollo program, and has received very good reviews.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Getting naked at LHC, and black hole bombs?
I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure I have never seen CERN, or anyone else, mention the possibility of a naked singularity being created at the LHC rather than (or as well as) mini black holes. Yet it would appear that some credible physicist types think it is still an open question.
Here's an extract from the relevant paper, which is from 2002:
Another paper I recently found while trawling the 'net also raises issues I would like to see better explained. This is from someone at Princeton in 2002, and has the cheery title : "Explosive Black hole fission and fusion in large extra dimensions".
The paper seems to be mainly about "explosions" that could be caused by the evaporation process of micro black holes, including those that could be created at the LHC. What remains very unclear to the lay reader is whether the amount of energy involved in this is nothing to worry about, or not. But the paper does end with this curious section:
This mention of a black hole bomb (and by the way there is another type I haven't mentioned yet) is completely unclear as to whether it is talking science fiction stuff centuries away, or something plausible anytime you can start creating mini black holes at an accelerator.
Some clarification is deserved, as with naked singularities.
(Oh, and the fact that micro black holes may be being created in the atmosphere 100 times a year is relevant to this too, I know. But I still worry about the "stationary" black hole or naked singularity as an issue at the LHC, as naturally occurring ones would normally have high velocity. Also, I am sure I have mentioned a paper recently which suggested that micro black holes may be harder to create than we think, even with large extra dimensions. Perhaps they are made by fluke in the atmosphere only very occasionally, causing events like Tungaska or some unaccounted for atomic blast signals detected by satellite? All possibilities should be addressed, I reckon.)
Here's an extract from the relevant paper, which is from 2002:
There is thus no compelling reason to discard the possibility that the collision of charged particles produces a naked singularity, an event which would probably be indistinguishable from ordinary particle production, with the naked singularity (possibly) behaving as an intermediate, highly unstable state. The phenomenology of naked singularities is probably rather different from that of black holes, as they are generally expected to explode in a very sudden event instead of evaporating via the Hawking process (at least in an early stage; see, e.g., [20] and Refs. therein).I thought that naked singularities had been ruled out as a general concept a long time ago. (They are, as I understand it, the heart of the black hole without the cloaking event horizon.) It would seem from the above that no one has a clear idea how they would behave, or how long they would last. It seems to me something that the safety review for the LHC should address.
We should however add that the present literature does not reliably cover the case of such tiny naked singularities and their actual phenomenology is an open question. A naked singularity is basically a failure in the causality structure of space-time mathematically admitted by the field equations of general relativity. Most studies have thus focused on their realization as the (classical) end-point of the gravitational collapse of compact objects (such as dust clouds) and on their stability by employing quantum field theory on the resulting background. However, one might need more than semiclassical tools to investigate both the formation by collison of particles
and the subsequent time evolution [20]. In particular, to our knowledge, no estimate of the life-time of a naked singularity of the sort of interest here is yet available.
Another paper I recently found while trawling the 'net also raises issues I would like to see better explained. This is from someone at Princeton in 2002, and has the cheery title : "Explosive Black hole fission and fusion in large extra dimensions".
The paper seems to be mainly about "explosions" that could be caused by the evaporation process of micro black holes, including those that could be created at the LHC. What remains very unclear to the lay reader is whether the amount of energy involved in this is nothing to worry about, or not. But the paper does end with this curious section:
One cannot avoid considering bomb construction using either fission or fusion ignoring the problems of creating and handling small black holes. A black hole could be prepared close to its critical size ready to fuse and then activated by adding matter and reaching “critical mass”. Timing the fission process is more difficult, since the time for decay is determined by the Hawking radiation which cannot be hurried artificially, but perhaps it is possible to balance the Hawking radiation with incoming radiation until activation. However, these bombs have a big disadvantage, since if one is in possession of small black holes, one could collide them with very similar explosions occurring both in emitted energy and time scale (being a classical process), and since igniting the phase transition seems to be the more complicated process it would probably be disfavoured, and luckily not used for destructive ends.Err, I wish physicists would be clear when they are using terms like "bomb" and "explosion" in papers which are discussing micro black holes whether they are presenting stuff which indicates possible danger.
This mention of a black hole bomb (and by the way there is another type I haven't mentioned yet) is completely unclear as to whether it is talking science fiction stuff centuries away, or something plausible anytime you can start creating mini black holes at an accelerator.
Some clarification is deserved, as with naked singularities.
(Oh, and the fact that micro black holes may be being created in the atmosphere 100 times a year is relevant to this too, I know. But I still worry about the "stationary" black hole or naked singularity as an issue at the LHC, as naturally occurring ones would normally have high velocity. Also, I am sure I have mentioned a paper recently which suggested that micro black holes may be harder to create than we think, even with large extra dimensions. Perhaps they are made by fluke in the atmosphere only very occasionally, causing events like Tungaska or some unaccounted for atomic blast signals detected by satellite? All possibilities should be addressed, I reckon.)
Good point
9/11 theories as factless as those of Bush - Opinion - theage.com.au
Christopher Scanlan makes a good point in his criticism of 9-11 conspiracy theorists:
Christopher Scanlan makes a good point in his criticism of 9-11 conspiracy theorists:
The September 11 conspiracy theories are like a left-liberal version of intelligent design. Just as the adherents of intelligent design invoke a great designer whenever they come across some part of the natural world that they personally can't explain, the September 11 conspiracy theorists invoke the White House whenever they can't account for the events of that day....I am not stridently against all aspects of the intelligent design argument, by the way, as I have much interest in the anthropic principle when it comes to cosmology, but I still think the comparison is quite valid.
In the world inhabited by conspiracy theorists, even the absence of evidence is itself turned into evidence of how large and how successful the cover-up has been.
In the same way that supporters of intelligent design lead away from an explanation of the natural world, the September 11 conspiracy theories lead us away from any deeper understanding of the attacks, into a fantasy world in which the US has no enemies — except its own leaders.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Howard's way
The Australian is suggesting a Federal election will be called this week for October, and that John Howard will stay on as Leader.
For all the poll driven speculation that Howard might resign before an election, I just can't really see what sense it would make in light of the polling not so long ago that had indicated that Peter Costello would lose votes for the Coalition rather than gain them. If the likes of Andrew Bolt and even Janet Albrechtsen are going to let the polls determine who should lead, shouldn't they at least be consistent and accept Costello's polling as relevant too?
And as was noted by Lenore on Insiders today, Costello would surely be 'tainted' by his past support for all major government policies, and you can't imagine him being leader for a month and coming up with any significant new direction.
I find Andrew Bolt's input into Coalition fortunes particularly galling. He has painted himself into a corner on greenhouse scepticism, and I would bet money that his columns on this have influenced some in the Liberal backbench to maintain scepticism, which in turn (as conservative Harry Clarke argues) has almost certainly harmed the government's attempted message to the electorate that it does take greenhouse seriously now. Thus having helped create one problem for the government, Bolt blames Howard for staying around too long.
For what it is worth, I think the arguments for Howard resigning just don't pass muster.
As I said a few posts ago, I reckon the Liberals have to come up with some surprising and new policy initiatives during the campaign to make up ground. I hope the policy boys & girls have been hard at it while Howard has been otherwise distracted by APEC (which, incidentally, I can't see giving the government any significant bounce. The security level is going to be seen as overkill, and the Federal government will probably get blamed even though it was the New South Wales Labor controlled police who were seen as being rough with a couple of protesters on the TV last night . I think John Howard probably just can't believe his run of bad luck lately.)
UPDATE: Tim Blair and Andrew Landeryou come out in support of Howard staying on. Yay.
For all the poll driven speculation that Howard might resign before an election, I just can't really see what sense it would make in light of the polling not so long ago that had indicated that Peter Costello would lose votes for the Coalition rather than gain them. If the likes of Andrew Bolt and even Janet Albrechtsen are going to let the polls determine who should lead, shouldn't they at least be consistent and accept Costello's polling as relevant too?
And as was noted by Lenore on Insiders today, Costello would surely be 'tainted' by his past support for all major government policies, and you can't imagine him being leader for a month and coming up with any significant new direction.
I find Andrew Bolt's input into Coalition fortunes particularly galling. He has painted himself into a corner on greenhouse scepticism, and I would bet money that his columns on this have influenced some in the Liberal backbench to maintain scepticism, which in turn (as conservative Harry Clarke argues) has almost certainly harmed the government's attempted message to the electorate that it does take greenhouse seriously now. Thus having helped create one problem for the government, Bolt blames Howard for staying around too long.
For what it is worth, I think the arguments for Howard resigning just don't pass muster.
As I said a few posts ago, I reckon the Liberals have to come up with some surprising and new policy initiatives during the campaign to make up ground. I hope the policy boys & girls have been hard at it while Howard has been otherwise distracted by APEC (which, incidentally, I can't see giving the government any significant bounce. The security level is going to be seen as overkill, and the Federal government will probably get blamed even though it was the New South Wales Labor controlled police who were seen as being rough with a couple of protesters on the TV last night . I think John Howard probably just can't believe his run of bad luck lately.)
UPDATE: Tim Blair and Andrew Landeryou come out in support of Howard staying on. Yay.
International adultery
A couple of months ago, I briefly mentioned a book comparing different nations' cultural attitudes to adultery ("Lust in Translation".) Here's a link to a fairly long review of the book which provides many more interesting snippets of information. For example:
As for America's love of therapy:
The figure that is often heard - that more than half of married men, and a quarter of married women will cheat on their spouses over their lifetime - turns out to be both highly problematic and overestimated. These later figures come from Alfred Kinsey's studies in the 1950's, and they are based upon badly unrepresentative samples (46). This was exacerbated by later studies by Shere Hite and Cosmopolitan magazine which placed adultery figures as high as 70% for both men and women. It turns out that in the U.S. only about 20% of men and 10% of women have extramarital sex over their lifetimes (50), although, as Druckerman notes, statistical evidence in this area is strangely hard to come by.Yes indeed, adulterers should be wary of consoling themselves that "everyone does it" if such belief is based on statistics in Cosmopolitan.
As for America's love of therapy:
...while there were only 3000 marriage and family therapists in the U.S. in 1970 (98), that number had risen to 50,000 by 2004 (100), a staggering 1600% increase!The review talks about how American therapy is heavily geared towards complete disclosure to the partner. Contrast this:
The French, who surprisingly commit adultery about as little as Americans do, view the situation quite differently. In order to protect their spouses from the pain of their adultery, French cheaters rarely reveal the truth of their affair to their spouse, even when the affair has come to light. And they rarely feel guilt over living their double life.Russians, meanwhile, are apparently the most active adulterers around. Funny, I always find it hard to imagine a lot of sex going on in any country that is freezing for much of the year. Must be something to do with coming from Brisbane; it makes my mind concentrate simply on how cold I am whenever I visit somewhere with daytime temperatures below about 5 degrees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)