Forgive a bit of self indulgence, but I am feeling worse about blogging since I put on the new site meter and realised how many "hits" to my site are complete accidents. (And probably half of my 8 or so a day hits are me looking at my site to link to other blogs on my roll.) It is interesting, though, how high on the google search results a blog can come for certain word combinations. I suppose I am creating a bit of cyberspace opinion and information that will be around and coming up on search results for a long time...
Anyway, there seem to be precious few readers who visit this site with much regularity. And no one leaves comments (except for Zoe Brain once, I think) He (when still a he) also gave my blog a recommendation, but hasn't added a link as far as I can see. I think about 4 or 5 blogs have linked to me, the most popular of which would be the widely read and well written Currency Lad. I have emailed Tim Blair a couple of times on stories or inviting him to look here, but no answer.
Seems small "reward" for the number of times I post here. (Not a huge number of posts, but pretty regular, and causing my work efficiency to suffer no end.)
Oh well, I enjoy the process of posting stuff that interests me for all the world to see. But I feel like how Barbra Striesand must have felt before she won an Oscar. (That's a line I never thought I would use.) Namely, a need for a little bit of acknowledgement from someone that they like me (well, my blog.)
Hmm, this leads me to look at Barbra's official website. Could be awful.....Yes it is!
Who would have guessed that she blogs on politics so much? Her most recent words of wisdom:
" August 6, 2005 marks the 60th anniversary of the US bombing of Hiroshima. The Atomic Bomb, which decimated the Japanese city and its people, was never used in combat again. This day is also the anniversary of another "bomb" that was dropped 4 years ago, this time into the lap of President Bush in the form of a memo titled 'Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US.' While on yet another extended vacation at his Crawford ranch, the President chose to neglect his duties as Commander in Chief by refusing to act decisively and immediately on this impending threat, leading to the worst terrorist attack in American history. These anniversaries remind us to learn from our past actions in order to ensure a safer more secure future."
(Now back to me, me, me. Comments - or even one comment - to cheer me up welcome, but I shouldn't expect any..)
Friday, August 26, 2005
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Downsides of cycling
Research On Bicycle Saddles And Sexual Health Comes Of Age
See above link for recent article about cycling induced erectile dysfunction. The reason:
"the high pressures in the perineum while straddling a saddle compress and temporarily occlude penile blood flow. They also hypothesized that the lining vessels of the compressed arteries become damaged, thus leading to potential permanent artery blockage.
However, not all men who ride bicycles will develop erectile dysfunction. One past study suggested that sexual health consequences adversely affect 5% of riders (based on survey data that would therefore include 1,000,000 riding men with ED). "
And this line I like:
"Schrader further concluded that "the health benefits from having unrestricted vascular flow to and from the penis are self-evident."
Indeed!
See above link for recent article about cycling induced erectile dysfunction. The reason:
"the high pressures in the perineum while straddling a saddle compress and temporarily occlude penile blood flow. They also hypothesized that the lining vessels of the compressed arteries become damaged, thus leading to potential permanent artery blockage.
However, not all men who ride bicycles will develop erectile dysfunction. One past study suggested that sexual health consequences adversely affect 5% of riders (based on survey data that would therefore include 1,000,000 riding men with ED). "
And this line I like:
"Schrader further concluded that "the health benefits from having unrestricted vascular flow to and from the penis are self-evident."
Indeed!
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Unhappy in Canada too
I posted twice recently on the unhappy and deplorable state of remote aboriginal communities in Australia. Mark Steyn has here a bit about the equivalent problems in Canada. He writes:
"About a decade ago Canadians switched on their televisions and were confronted by '‘shocking'’ images of the town'’s populace passing the day snorting drugs, glue, petrol and pretty much anything else to hand.
So, as any impeccably progressive soft-lefties would, Her Majesty'’s Government in Ottawa decided to build the Mushuau a new town a few miles inland a— state of the art, money no object, new homes, new heating systems, new schoolhouse, new computers, plus new more culturally respectful town name (Natuashish)....
Two years after the new town opened, the former Mushuau chief and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police both agreed that there were more drugs, alcoholism, gas-sniffing etc., than ever before. Also higher suicide rates."
Sound familiar?
"The net result of 40 years of a '‘caring'’ policy intended to maintain communities in their traditional '‘culture'’ is that Canadian natives now have tuberculosis, diabetes, heart disease and brain damage at levels accelerating further and further away from those in society at large, not to mention lower life-expectancy, higher infant mortality, and endemic suicide."
Very familiar.
Mark's column then diverts into a broad ranging swing at multiculturalism, but his key point on the problem of indigineous cultures being "maintained" in countries like Australia and Canada is summed up as follows:
"By pretending that all cultures are equal, multiculturalism doesn'’t '‘preserve'’ traditional cultures so much as sustain them in an artificial state that ensures they a’ll develop bizarre pathologies and mutate into some freakish hybrid of the worst of both worlds."
I think he might be playing a bit loosely with the term "culture" in this column.
I guess I would be more inclined to say that it is not that all aspects of aboriginal culture are undeserving of existence (although certainly parts of it should be done away with); it's just that it is harmful to encourage the belief that such remote communities with no real integration with the actual economy of the country can be socially successful. If that means that some aspects of their "culture" are lost, well that is the cost of the greater good known as "being alive and moderately healthy." Anyway, it is not as if there is much culture being preserved by brain damaged petrol sniffing youth.
What should the government actually do? Well, the fundamental thing, I think, has to be to have policies that discourage remote communities with no prospect of economic integration from continuing to exist. Primarily, this would have to be by encouraging the young to get out of there. If the adults want to stay in their train wreck of a community, so be it, although there may be forms of incentive to re-locate that would work. But the young should definitely be taught that there is a better future for them somewhere else.
"About a decade ago Canadians switched on their televisions and were confronted by '‘shocking'’ images of the town'’s populace passing the day snorting drugs, glue, petrol and pretty much anything else to hand.
So, as any impeccably progressive soft-lefties would, Her Majesty'’s Government in Ottawa decided to build the Mushuau a new town a few miles inland a— state of the art, money no object, new homes, new heating systems, new schoolhouse, new computers, plus new more culturally respectful town name (Natuashish)....
Two years after the new town opened, the former Mushuau chief and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police both agreed that there were more drugs, alcoholism, gas-sniffing etc., than ever before. Also higher suicide rates."
Sound familiar?
"The net result of 40 years of a '‘caring'’ policy intended to maintain communities in their traditional '‘culture'’ is that Canadian natives now have tuberculosis, diabetes, heart disease and brain damage at levels accelerating further and further away from those in society at large, not to mention lower life-expectancy, higher infant mortality, and endemic suicide."
Very familiar.
Mark's column then diverts into a broad ranging swing at multiculturalism, but his key point on the problem of indigineous cultures being "maintained" in countries like Australia and Canada is summed up as follows:
"By pretending that all cultures are equal, multiculturalism doesn'’t '‘preserve'’ traditional cultures so much as sustain them in an artificial state that ensures they a’ll develop bizarre pathologies and mutate into some freakish hybrid of the worst of both worlds."
I think he might be playing a bit loosely with the term "culture" in this column.
I guess I would be more inclined to say that it is not that all aspects of aboriginal culture are undeserving of existence (although certainly parts of it should be done away with); it's just that it is harmful to encourage the belief that such remote communities with no real integration with the actual economy of the country can be socially successful. If that means that some aspects of their "culture" are lost, well that is the cost of the greater good known as "being alive and moderately healthy." Anyway, it is not as if there is much culture being preserved by brain damaged petrol sniffing youth.
What should the government actually do? Well, the fundamental thing, I think, has to be to have policies that discourage remote communities with no prospect of economic integration from continuing to exist. Primarily, this would have to be by encouraging the young to get out of there. If the adults want to stay in their train wreck of a community, so be it, although there may be forms of incentive to re-locate that would work. But the young should definitely be taught that there is a better future for them somewhere else.
Giant green lizards take over Florida
According to this story, big green iguanas are no longer considered a novelty by folks in Florida.
In Brisbane, gray lizards known as water dragons hang around many residential areas which are near creeks or watery spots, and they can easily reach 2 (or maybe a bit more)feet long. However, the article about iguanas talks of them being up to 6.5 feet long! Sorta like having goannas in your backyard. No wonder they aren't so popular.
Oh, and personally I blame John Howard.
In Brisbane, gray lizards known as water dragons hang around many residential areas which are near creeks or watery spots, and they can easily reach 2 (or maybe a bit more)feet long. However, the article about iguanas talks of them being up to 6.5 feet long! Sorta like having goannas in your backyard. No wonder they aren't so popular.
Oh, and personally I blame John Howard.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Whining lefties..
Today in The Age, staff writer Martin Flanagan writes the type of column I am thoroughly sick of reading over the last decade - a stupid whinge about how the general public of Australia has supposedly been lulled into selfish indifference by our bad, bad Prime Minister.
This way of thinking is what is holding Labor back from winning elections at the Federal level. They cling to the idea that it is the Left that is naturally morally superior in its attitude to everything from aboriginal issues to the environment, migration etc. Part of the whinge is also that there are no "big ideas" about Australia's future under Howard, which of course assumes that fuzzy "big ideas" are important in the first place. That we have become culturally boring is another line commonly run. (Jonathon Biggins keeps writing articles whining about this in the Sydney Morning Herald.) Of course, our great selfishness under Howard is a common theme in Margo's Webdiary.
Martin writes:
"Sometimes, working in the media in this country at this time, you sense this is a culture in free-fall, that it no longer knows exactly what it believes, or indeed if it believes in anything beyond self-interest, Anzac Day and the fortunes of our various sports teams - these, incidentally, being the interests of the Prime Minister who, as our politics become more presidential, becomes increasingly emblematic of us. Overlooked in this process are such aspects of his past as zero active interest in the environment, repeated flirtations with the politics of race and a farcical victory in the last election that he chose to fight on interest rates."
Giving the game away a bit by calling it a "farcical victory" aren't you Martin.
And he ends with:
"Let's fire up, as we say in sport. Let's have a real debate. Let's revive the idea of Australia."
Oh dear. I can see how useful that suggestion is going to be.
I can save Martin, Jonathon, Margo and their ilk many hours of writing by teaching them to say this: "Jeez I hate John Howard and it pisses me off that people keep voting for him." That's all you are saying guys, over and over and over again.
What's more, the majority have not become morally depraved or uninterested in serious issues. They just don't agree with your take on them. That's all.
And to the extent that the culture might be suffering, to large degree it's because it is generally comprised of dills like you whose material either has the text or subtext that most Australians are bad or dumb because they tolerate this government.
As to "big ideas" how about this one: that a government's job is to defend the country and its inhabitants, manage an economy to be as robust as possible in the circumstances, and to legislate to otherwise protect and provide a reasonable degree of services that governments are best at providing for the general population. (Took me about 2 minutes reflection to come up with that.) How in practice those things are done is a legitmate area of debate. But to suggest that we are bereft of inspiration unless we have sat around and come up with some "mission statement" for the nation reeks of 1980's management theory and is well past its use by date.
This way of thinking is what is holding Labor back from winning elections at the Federal level. They cling to the idea that it is the Left that is naturally morally superior in its attitude to everything from aboriginal issues to the environment, migration etc. Part of the whinge is also that there are no "big ideas" about Australia's future under Howard, which of course assumes that fuzzy "big ideas" are important in the first place. That we have become culturally boring is another line commonly run. (Jonathon Biggins keeps writing articles whining about this in the Sydney Morning Herald.) Of course, our great selfishness under Howard is a common theme in Margo's Webdiary.
Martin writes:
"Sometimes, working in the media in this country at this time, you sense this is a culture in free-fall, that it no longer knows exactly what it believes, or indeed if it believes in anything beyond self-interest, Anzac Day and the fortunes of our various sports teams - these, incidentally, being the interests of the Prime Minister who, as our politics become more presidential, becomes increasingly emblematic of us. Overlooked in this process are such aspects of his past as zero active interest in the environment, repeated flirtations with the politics of race and a farcical victory in the last election that he chose to fight on interest rates."
Giving the game away a bit by calling it a "farcical victory" aren't you Martin.
And he ends with:
"Let's fire up, as we say in sport. Let's have a real debate. Let's revive the idea of Australia."
Oh dear. I can see how useful that suggestion is going to be.
I can save Martin, Jonathon, Margo and their ilk many hours of writing by teaching them to say this: "Jeez I hate John Howard and it pisses me off that people keep voting for him." That's all you are saying guys, over and over and over again.
What's more, the majority have not become morally depraved or uninterested in serious issues. They just don't agree with your take on them. That's all.
And to the extent that the culture might be suffering, to large degree it's because it is generally comprised of dills like you whose material either has the text or subtext that most Australians are bad or dumb because they tolerate this government.
As to "big ideas" how about this one: that a government's job is to defend the country and its inhabitants, manage an economy to be as robust as possible in the circumstances, and to legislate to otherwise protect and provide a reasonable degree of services that governments are best at providing for the general population. (Took me about 2 minutes reflection to come up with that.) How in practice those things are done is a legitmate area of debate. But to suggest that we are bereft of inspiration unless we have sat around and come up with some "mission statement" for the nation reeks of 1980's management theory and is well past its use by date.
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Anyone out there into moral philosophy?
Amazon.com: Books: After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory
Just in case I have readers who think I post too often about space stuff, I will divert into philosophy for a minute.
The above link (perhaps obviously) is to the Amazon page for a 1980's book "After Virtue" by Alasdair MacIntyre, and I have stumbled across it before. I am not familiar with MacIntyre, but the reviews make it sound of great potential interest to me. This is the first reader review (sorry it is lengthy, but it is easy to follow, and even the non-philosophically inclined reader might see the relevance of it to current left/right debate about the Iraq war):
"After Virtue is a delightful book which presents the contemporary problem of moral philosophy today. MacIntyre says that there is an interminability of moral debate today. No consensus solution to the variety of moral issues such as abortion and war will present itself because proponents of both sides of the arguments in these two issues argue from a different set of premises from a different tradition of moral philosophy. You have Thomistic ideals of the value of life and justice against Rousseauist ideals of individuality, for example, in life issues. Can any of the enlightenment moral philosophies really help us make rational, clear decisions about the morality of a particular decision? MacIntyre investigates the moral philosophies of Kant, Hume, & Kierkegard, showing how each of them miserably fail as possible moral systems. Utilitarianism, pragmatism, and emotivism are also wonderfully skewered.
With what are we left? It seems as if after the failure of these systems we are left with the Nietzschean amorality of total chaotic relativism. MacIntyre understands the enigma of Nietzsche's ideas and shows how his attacks toppled the pompous, arrogant ideals of the Enlightenment. But Nietzsche's system seems impossible from a human standpoint, since, for example, we are left with the unsettling discovery that events such as the Holocaust are not really "wrong" in any objective sense. MacIntyre interjects that there is another alternative: go back to the source of the Enlightenment project. Sometime around then a bald decision was made philosophically to abandon the Neo-Aristotelian metaphysics that had supported Western thought for the previous 2000 years whether in the purest Aristotelian form or rather in highly developed Thomistic incarnations such as that which the Catholic Church held (and still does) and similar ones influences by Islamic and Jewish philosophers during the middle ages. Can this form of moral philosophy withstand criticism and ultimately rise as a viable alternative to Nietzsche? MacIntyre thinks so, and he spends a large amount of time laying the groundwork for a revived account of such a system. When he poses the question, Nietzsche or Aristotle, finally I at least think that he has made a compelling argument in favor of Aristotle (and Aquinas as some of his later work will evolve towards)."
Given my tiny readership here, I am unlikely to get a response. But: does anyone know about this book or author?
Just in case I have readers who think I post too often about space stuff, I will divert into philosophy for a minute.
The above link (perhaps obviously) is to the Amazon page for a 1980's book "After Virtue" by Alasdair MacIntyre, and I have stumbled across it before. I am not familiar with MacIntyre, but the reviews make it sound of great potential interest to me. This is the first reader review (sorry it is lengthy, but it is easy to follow, and even the non-philosophically inclined reader might see the relevance of it to current left/right debate about the Iraq war):
"After Virtue is a delightful book which presents the contemporary problem of moral philosophy today. MacIntyre says that there is an interminability of moral debate today. No consensus solution to the variety of moral issues such as abortion and war will present itself because proponents of both sides of the arguments in these two issues argue from a different set of premises from a different tradition of moral philosophy. You have Thomistic ideals of the value of life and justice against Rousseauist ideals of individuality, for example, in life issues. Can any of the enlightenment moral philosophies really help us make rational, clear decisions about the morality of a particular decision? MacIntyre investigates the moral philosophies of Kant, Hume, & Kierkegard, showing how each of them miserably fail as possible moral systems. Utilitarianism, pragmatism, and emotivism are also wonderfully skewered.
With what are we left? It seems as if after the failure of these systems we are left with the Nietzschean amorality of total chaotic relativism. MacIntyre understands the enigma of Nietzsche's ideas and shows how his attacks toppled the pompous, arrogant ideals of the Enlightenment. But Nietzsche's system seems impossible from a human standpoint, since, for example, we are left with the unsettling discovery that events such as the Holocaust are not really "wrong" in any objective sense. MacIntyre interjects that there is another alternative: go back to the source of the Enlightenment project. Sometime around then a bald decision was made philosophically to abandon the Neo-Aristotelian metaphysics that had supported Western thought for the previous 2000 years whether in the purest Aristotelian form or rather in highly developed Thomistic incarnations such as that which the Catholic Church held (and still does) and similar ones influences by Islamic and Jewish philosophers during the middle ages. Can this form of moral philosophy withstand criticism and ultimately rise as a viable alternative to Nietzsche? MacIntyre thinks so, and he spends a large amount of time laying the groundwork for a revived account of such a system. When he poses the question, Nietzsche or Aristotle, finally I at least think that he has made a compelling argument in favor of Aristotle (and Aquinas as some of his later work will evolve towards)."
Given my tiny readership here, I am unlikely to get a response. But: does anyone know about this book or author?
More on space radiation
I found a good detailed article on possible methods for shielding spacecraft from cosmic radiation. Unfortunately, there is no clear practical solution. The simplest idea is to be in the middle of a really big ship. But that doesn't help you while you are on Mars, say. Here's another, shorter, article that indicates this is beleived by some to be a major reason against sending humans to Mars (at least with current technology, I guess.)
"Active" shields have a lot of practical problems.
Although I find this area depressing (because it is another blow to easy exploration of space by humans) it does strike me a little as being similar to the challenges facing early maritime exploration of the earth. For example, the navigation problem of accurately determining longitude, solved by inventing an accurate transportable clock. Or perhaps there is more similarity with scurvy, suffered by sailors until they realised taking citrus juice would prevent it.
Anyway, although there are already engineers and scientists thinking deeply about it, I wonder whether this is another case (like the longitude problem) where the government ought to offer a reward for a good solution. It just seems possible to me that some sort of "new" idea for active shielding might be being overlooked.
"Active" shields have a lot of practical problems.
Although I find this area depressing (because it is another blow to easy exploration of space by humans) it does strike me a little as being similar to the challenges facing early maritime exploration of the earth. For example, the navigation problem of accurately determining longitude, solved by inventing an accurate transportable clock. Or perhaps there is more similarity with scurvy, suffered by sailors until they realised taking citrus juice would prevent it.
Anyway, although there are already engineers and scientists thinking deeply about it, I wonder whether this is another case (like the longitude problem) where the government ought to offer a reward for a good solution. It just seems possible to me that some sort of "new" idea for active shielding might be being overlooked.
Any wonder Beattie lost two seats?
With his government's stunning incompetence in handling its public health system crisis being exemplified by stories like this one (in the Courier Mail on the election day,) it would have been all but inconceivable for (Queensland Premier) Peter Beattie to have retained the two seats up for by-elections yesterday.
Short version of the linked story for those who can't be bothered clicking: just as in the case of Dr Patel (the enthusiatic but untalented and rather deadly surgeon who skipped town as soon as his case came to light), the apparently fake psychiatrist from Russia that Queensland Health employed for Townsville hospital who is now suspected of being a paedophile (practiced not just in Russia but perhaps also here) has fled the country. Unlikely to be seen again.
Short version of the linked story for those who can't be bothered clicking: just as in the case of Dr Patel (the enthusiatic but untalented and rather deadly surgeon who skipped town as soon as his case came to light), the apparently fake psychiatrist from Russia that Queensland Health employed for Townsville hospital who is now suspected of being a paedophile (practiced not just in Russia but perhaps also here) has fled the country. Unlikely to be seen again.
Saturday, August 20, 2005
A new type of space suit at last?
news @ nature.com�-�An outfit suitable for Mars�-�Slimmer space suits on the rack for astronauts.
Readers with a science/ science fiction interest will know that the type of space suit discussed in the above link has been a feature of future technology used by some sci fi authors since the 1970's. (Jerry Pournelle springs to mind, but I am sure there are others.) Anyway, its good to see that it is still under active research, and actually looks a goer.
Sounds very hard to get into though. I also wonder about women's breasts getting painfully squashed by these. Any thoughts, Zoe?
Readers with a science/ science fiction interest will know that the type of space suit discussed in the above link has been a feature of future technology used by some sci fi authors since the 1970's. (Jerry Pournelle springs to mind, but I am sure there are others.) Anyway, its good to see that it is still under active research, and actually looks a goer.
Sounds very hard to get into though. I also wonder about women's breasts getting painfully squashed by these. Any thoughts, Zoe?
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Someone finally says it
This opinion piece in the Australian today finally says out loud something so politically incorrect that even the Federal Libs wouldn't say it (yet). Namely, that you really have to question whether remote aboriginal communities are viable.
As Rosemay Neill says:
"A notion of cultural autonomy that discounts the importance of real jobs and formal education simply divorces indigenous communities from mainstream power structures, even as they are flooded with the worst aspects of Western culture, from junk food to drugs."
What a pleasure to read such common sense.
Just last week, Phillip Adams up at Garma was interviewing someone who said that it was obvious from the festival that an active aboriginal culture can save lives (pointing out all the young ones who had evident musical talent at the festival.)
My suspicion is that active culture is still only successful if it results in that particular community being better integrated with the actual economy.
No one would expect success from a new community of (say) a few hundred white folk who had the idea of going to live in a remote and infertile part of Australia so that they could be successful musicians who connect with Gaia (or some such equivalent to aboriginal "connection to the land".) Not unless the said group also had a proper plan as to how they were going to deal with growing food, getting a source of clean water, building and maintaining adequate housing, etc. I suspect that all "hippy" communes (which is the nearest real life example of my theoretical case) which are successful are in fertile areas, grow a substantial part of their own food, and are not hundreds of klicks from the nearest town or hospital.
So why do liberals think that for aborigines culture alone is enough to live on?
As Rosemay Neill says:
"A notion of cultural autonomy that discounts the importance of real jobs and formal education simply divorces indigenous communities from mainstream power structures, even as they are flooded with the worst aspects of Western culture, from junk food to drugs."
What a pleasure to read such common sense.
Just last week, Phillip Adams up at Garma was interviewing someone who said that it was obvious from the festival that an active aboriginal culture can save lives (pointing out all the young ones who had evident musical talent at the festival.)
My suspicion is that active culture is still only successful if it results in that particular community being better integrated with the actual economy.
No one would expect success from a new community of (say) a few hundred white folk who had the idea of going to live in a remote and infertile part of Australia so that they could be successful musicians who connect with Gaia (or some such equivalent to aboriginal "connection to the land".) Not unless the said group also had a proper plan as to how they were going to deal with growing food, getting a source of clean water, building and maintaining adequate housing, etc. I suspect that all "hippy" communes (which is the nearest real life example of my theoretical case) which are successful are in fertile areas, grow a substantial part of their own food, and are not hundreds of klicks from the nearest town or hospital.
So why do liberals think that for aborigines culture alone is enough to live on?
Ann Coulter on Maureen Dowd
Ann Coulter, who I don't read regularly but probably should, takes her own swipe at Cindy Sheehan, as well as the Maureen Dowd column which had the much ridiculed line that (quoting Ann, quoting Maureen) : 'it's "inhumane" for Bush not "to understand that the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute." '
As Ann says:
"The logical, intellectual and ethical shortcomings of such a statement are staggering. If one dead son means no one can win an argument with you, how about two dead sons? What if the person arguing with you is a mother who also lost a son in Iraq and she's pro-war? Do we decide the winner with a coin toss? Or do we see if there's a woman out there who lost two children in Iraq and see what she thinks about the war? "
But the line I liked most in the column is this:
'Dowd's "absolute" moral authority column demonstrates, once again, what can happen when liberals start tossing around terms they don't understand like "absolute" and "moral."'
I have been meaning to write something at length about my belief that a major problem with current day liberals is their apparent lack of knowledge of some pretty basic moral philosophical concepts. But it will probably have to wait for another day...
As Ann says:
"The logical, intellectual and ethical shortcomings of such a statement are staggering. If one dead son means no one can win an argument with you, how about two dead sons? What if the person arguing with you is a mother who also lost a son in Iraq and she's pro-war? Do we decide the winner with a coin toss? Or do we see if there's a woman out there who lost two children in Iraq and see what she thinks about the war? "
But the line I liked most in the column is this:
'Dowd's "absolute" moral authority column demonstrates, once again, what can happen when liberals start tossing around terms they don't understand like "absolute" and "moral."'
I have been meaning to write something at length about my belief that a major problem with current day liberals is their apparent lack of knowledge of some pretty basic moral philosophical concepts. But it will probably have to wait for another day...
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Good reading on North Korea
The New Yorker: The Critics: Books
The link is to an excellent book review/essay in the New Yorker on the history and current status of North Korea, with particular reference to the dictatorial Kim family. Highly recommended.
The link is to an excellent book review/essay in the New Yorker on the history and current status of North Korea, with particular reference to the dictatorial Kim family. Highly recommended.
Media Watch on Red Cross canapes
Credit where it is due. The Media Watch story this week on the alleged Red Cross plan to use donations to fund a "series of catered parties for wealthy donors" was well done. The Sydney Morning Herald should be deeply ashamed of this example of tabloid quality journalism, especially because of the problems it could mean for Red Cross fund raising in future.
Hitchens on Cindy Sheehan
Cindy Sheehan's Sinister Piffle - What's wrong with her Crawford protest. By Christopher Hitchens
See the link to Hitchen's take on Cindy Sheehan's grandstanding. It is what you would expect (pretty scathing).
See the link to Hitchen's take on Cindy Sheehan's grandstanding. It is what you would expect (pretty scathing).
In the papers today
In The Age today, some straight talk against late term abortions from a woman who would appear to be of feminist inclination (yay).
In the Sydney Morning Herald, Mem Fox takes on the phonics/whole language debate and seems to side strongly with whole language. I am not sure she makes a well argued case. For example:
"Parents often make the understandable mistake of believing that phonically sounding out words is reading. But we do most of our reading in silence: the meaning is on the page, not in the sound.... Is it necessary to have a grasp of phonics in order to be able to read? Broadly speaking, the astonishing and contentious answer is no, otherwise we wouldn't be able to read silently;"
This is a bit of a reach, isn't it? I thought the point of phonics was the assistance it gives to children (or adults) learning to pronounce a new word. The fact that you may not rely on it much as an experienced reader is neither here nor there to debate on education in primary schools.
She does make one valid point, in that she points out that languages based on pictographs don't use phonics at all. However, although Japan, for example, claims a very high literacy rate, I believe it does have the downside that it takes many years of school before they can read newspapers or similar "adult" material with full comprehension, because of the rate it takes to learn the couple of thousand pictographs that are necessary.
Her main argument seems to be against going back to a phonics only system of teaching. But is that really the likely outcome of the current federal government inquiry into literacy teaching? If the report simply wants all teachers to be able to effectively teach phonics to those student who benefit from that approach, it may not necessarily mean whole language is completely out the window. The current problem may be that some teachers may be too wedded to whole language.
And even it if did recommend going back to phonics only, if the empirical evidence is that literacy levels overall were better under that system, what is the point of insisting on whole language or a combined system being best?
To further confuse the argument, Mem then ends up with this:
"Phonics comes into its own as soon as children begin to learn to write. Josie is now courageously struggling to write. She has to match the sounds of language to the letters she scrawls across a page. During the complex battle between her brain and her hand she's now coming to grips with phonics and spelling. Those people who argue for an exclusively phonics approach in reading misunderstand what phonics is and forget how absolutely fundamental it is in learning to write."
Huh? Suddenly sounds like a bit of an argument for phonics to get more emphasis. I don't see her point here.
That Josie, by the way, is an acquaintance of hers who at age 3 can "read anything from atlases to adult books on dream interpretation."
Just what we need, more 3 year olds with a deep understanding of dream interpretation!
Mem obviously has a fair bit of sympathy for whole language, and I guess it may work well for some. The debate is more about those it doesn't work well for. Mem fails to approach the issue in this article with any empirical stuff at all.
She also had a few meetings with Mark Latham and seems to have liked him quite a lot. Maybe that says a lot about her judgment too.
In the Sydney Morning Herald, Mem Fox takes on the phonics/whole language debate and seems to side strongly with whole language. I am not sure she makes a well argued case. For example:
"Parents often make the understandable mistake of believing that phonically sounding out words is reading. But we do most of our reading in silence: the meaning is on the page, not in the sound.... Is it necessary to have a grasp of phonics in order to be able to read? Broadly speaking, the astonishing and contentious answer is no, otherwise we wouldn't be able to read silently;"
This is a bit of a reach, isn't it? I thought the point of phonics was the assistance it gives to children (or adults) learning to pronounce a new word. The fact that you may not rely on it much as an experienced reader is neither here nor there to debate on education in primary schools.
She does make one valid point, in that she points out that languages based on pictographs don't use phonics at all. However, although Japan, for example, claims a very high literacy rate, I believe it does have the downside that it takes many years of school before they can read newspapers or similar "adult" material with full comprehension, because of the rate it takes to learn the couple of thousand pictographs that are necessary.
Her main argument seems to be against going back to a phonics only system of teaching. But is that really the likely outcome of the current federal government inquiry into literacy teaching? If the report simply wants all teachers to be able to effectively teach phonics to those student who benefit from that approach, it may not necessarily mean whole language is completely out the window. The current problem may be that some teachers may be too wedded to whole language.
And even it if did recommend going back to phonics only, if the empirical evidence is that literacy levels overall were better under that system, what is the point of insisting on whole language or a combined system being best?
To further confuse the argument, Mem then ends up with this:
"Phonics comes into its own as soon as children begin to learn to write. Josie is now courageously struggling to write. She has to match the sounds of language to the letters she scrawls across a page. During the complex battle between her brain and her hand she's now coming to grips with phonics and spelling. Those people who argue for an exclusively phonics approach in reading misunderstand what phonics is and forget how absolutely fundamental it is in learning to write."
Huh? Suddenly sounds like a bit of an argument for phonics to get more emphasis. I don't see her point here.
That Josie, by the way, is an acquaintance of hers who at age 3 can "read anything from atlases to adult books on dream interpretation."
Just what we need, more 3 year olds with a deep understanding of dream interpretation!
Mem obviously has a fair bit of sympathy for whole language, and I guess it may work well for some. The debate is more about those it doesn't work well for. Mem fails to approach the issue in this article with any empirical stuff at all.
She also had a few meetings with Mark Latham and seems to have liked him quite a lot. Maybe that says a lot about her judgment too.
Monday, August 15, 2005
Able Danger rollercoaster
The Able Danger story in the States, which is also relevant to Mark Steyn's defence against last week's Media Watch story, seems to have more twists to it than your average corkscrew rollercoaster.
What impresses me a lot, though, is the rapid willingness of LGF and the other right wing sites to admit that it is looking like the allegation against the 9-11 commission may be a lot less than it first seemed.
Even if the allegation proves unreliable, Mark Steyn's point in this article (that it is still entirely possible for Atta to have been in the States prior to June 2000) seems solid. However, Mark seems to be much less emphatic about the veracity of the Florida story than before, saying that Atta "might [my italics] have been in Florida, attempting to get a U.S. Farm Service Agency loan for the world's biggest cropduster, as reported by USDA official Johnell Bryant."
He's a great read anyway, even if the Florida stories were to be debunked.
What impresses me a lot, though, is the rapid willingness of LGF and the other right wing sites to admit that it is looking like the allegation against the 9-11 commission may be a lot less than it first seemed.
Even if the allegation proves unreliable, Mark Steyn's point in this article (that it is still entirely possible for Atta to have been in the States prior to June 2000) seems solid. However, Mark seems to be much less emphatic about the veracity of the Florida story than before, saying that Atta "might [my italics] have been in Florida, attempting to get a U.S. Farm Service Agency loan for the world's biggest cropduster, as reported by USDA official Johnell Bryant."
He's a great read anyway, even if the Florida stories were to be debunked.
Peculiar plane crash
Guess you don't need me to tell you, but the plane crash in Greece earlier today is mighty peculiar. Obviously, a problem with the air is at the core of the disaster, but reports are that people were moving in the cockpit long after the problem started, and the passengers had their emergency oxygen masks on.
Surely then there were some flight attendants still able to work out what to do with the (presumably) incapacitated pilots. I mean, even if the cockpit crew all passed out due to an undetected or sudden air leak (which is rather puzzling in itself), obviously someone in the aircraft activated the emergency oxygen in time to keep some people alive. (Or is it automatic at a certain level of depressurisation?) If an attendant was alive, why couldn't they revive the pilots (or at least, taken the controls for a time and stopped a descent into a mountain?) I wonder if flight attendants all know how to use the radio in an emergency. Surely they would have to be taught?
Maybe flight attendants and the cockpit crew all passed out and it was only passengers moving around wondering what to do. Again, you would think shoving some of oxygen on an attendant would have revived one, and couldn't a passenger fly the plane at a steady, low altitude until someone could make radio contact?
If it all happened in a short space of time, it would be more understandable. But it seems to have taken place over a considerable time.
Oh well, guess we will know eventually.
Surely then there were some flight attendants still able to work out what to do with the (presumably) incapacitated pilots. I mean, even if the cockpit crew all passed out due to an undetected or sudden air leak (which is rather puzzling in itself), obviously someone in the aircraft activated the emergency oxygen in time to keep some people alive. (Or is it automatic at a certain level of depressurisation?) If an attendant was alive, why couldn't they revive the pilots (or at least, taken the controls for a time and stopped a descent into a mountain?) I wonder if flight attendants all know how to use the radio in an emergency. Surely they would have to be taught?
Maybe flight attendants and the cockpit crew all passed out and it was only passengers moving around wondering what to do. Again, you would think shoving some of oxygen on an attendant would have revived one, and couldn't a passenger fly the plane at a steady, low altitude until someone could make radio contact?
If it all happened in a short space of time, it would be more understandable. But it seems to have taken place over a considerable time.
Oh well, guess we will know eventually.
A Test Post about fonts
I have used firefox ever since I started this blog, and found that using the "normal" size font for posts looked really big, so I got into the habit of making all of them "small".
For the first time today, I looked at my blog with IE, and found the font was really uncomfortably small.
Other sites don't seem to have much difference between IE and Firefox, but then most people use additional software that I haven't investigated yet.
Oh well, sorry to any IE user who has had a problem with my font.
For the first time today, I looked at my blog with IE, and found the font was really uncomfortably small.
Other sites don't seem to have much difference between IE and Firefox, but then most people use additional software that I haven't investigated yet.
Oh well, sorry to any IE user who has had a problem with my font.
Sunday, August 14, 2005
Hold, whip and return
Just as Australia starts taking a softer approach to its detention centres, a news story from the Jakarta Post says that Malaysia has this year taken to flogging illegal immigrants, and has no plans on changing this policy any time soon:
"KUALA LUMPUR (AP): Despite increasingly congested detention centers, Malaysia will not deport illegal immigrants immediately, but will stick with its policy of sending them to trial and sentencing them to the lash, the home minister was quoted as saying on Sunday.
"If they are charged and then punished with whipping, they would think many times before running the risk of re-entering the country," Home Minister Azmi Khalid was quoted as saying by the national news agency Bernama.
More than 9,000 illegals, mostly Indonesians, are being held at the centers throughout the country as they await their trials to start or be completed, according to Azmi.
"This is due to delays in the legal process," Azmi was quoted as saying by the Berita Minggu newspaper. "The cases drag on (sometimes for more than a year) due to many postponements, whereas illegal immigrants are caught almost every day."
Azmi said congestion in detention centers will worsen as the government steps up the operation to round up illegals by empowering civilian volunteers - besides police and immigration officers - to detain them.
Whipping was introduced as a punishment for illegal immigrants as part of a crackdown launched in March 2005."
I had not heard of this in the Australian media, but maybe I missed it.Puts our treatment of such people in some sort of perspective, doesn't it.
Friday, August 12, 2005
Aboriginal woes
A detailed bad news story here about chronic aboriginal problems (petrol sniffing, sexual assault, lawlessness, etc) in the community near Uluru, despite a steady stream of income from the tourists. Part of the problem (I guess) is that the money comes without much (or any?) effort from most in the community.
I had never heard this before:
I had never heard this before:
"Some community members bought cars "like tennis shoes", dumping them in what he called a "World Heritage Car Dump" within sight of Uluru when they broke down.
"I counted about 1000 cars there – that's about $4 million ... of money that has potentially been wasted," he said."
Meanwhile, this week's Phillip Adams' Late Night Live radio show has been up in Arnhem Land doing tedious reports on the Garma festival, an annual event which has previously escaped my attention. If I can believe Phil, it would seem that the communities up there are much healthier than the ones further south. Maybe it has something to do with being nearer to a big city, and having some decent natural resources to live off. Anyway Phil, rather than rubbing shoulders with the relatively successful, and their white groupies, why not do a week from the Uluru community and help them workshop ideas to get out of their appalling mess?
Thursday, August 11, 2005
Euthanasia in practice
This item didn't seem to get much attention in the Australian media, but is interesting nonetheless.
It's about a recent study that indicates there were well over a thousand cases of euthanasia actually administered in a year in the Netherlands. (Country population: about 16.5 million; still seems a lot to me.)
A few points of interest:
"Project leader Bregje Onwuteaka-Philipsen said she was surprised that "the most important reasons for doing the request are not strictly medical." The survey asked physicians the reasons that patients sought help in ending their own lives, with the most frequent being pointless suffering, loss of dignity and weakness.
In cases in which doctors denied the requests, the most common reasons were not wanting to be a burden on their family, tired of living and depression.
Well, Australia's scientist/ aboriginal adviser/death-loving creepy doctor Philip Nitschke wouldn't have any such doubts and must think it is a stupid law then, if he can't help people who are just old from topping themselves.
"Under a law that took effect in 2002, euthanasia is restricted to terminal patients suffering unbearable pain with no hope of improvement, and who request to die when they are of sound mind. Each case is reviewed by a panel of medical experts."
The study also reportst that 13 % of those who requested euthanasia changed their minds.
The report continues:
"But in a critical accompanying editorial, University of Minnesota law professor Susan Wolf said the important question is whether mercy killings are taking place that do not follow the strict guidelines the Dutch have put in place.
If I can't trust my hospital doctor to wash his or her hands, I am not sure I should trust them with this either.
It's about a recent study that indicates there were well over a thousand cases of euthanasia actually administered in a year in the Netherlands. (Country population: about 16.5 million; still seems a lot to me.)
A few points of interest:
"Project leader Bregje Onwuteaka-Philipsen said she was surprised that "the most important reasons for doing the request are not strictly medical." The survey asked physicians the reasons that patients sought help in ending their own lives, with the most frequent being pointless suffering, loss of dignity and weakness.
In cases in which doctors denied the requests, the most common reasons were not wanting to be a burden on their family, tired of living and depression.
Well, Australia's scientist/ aboriginal adviser/death-loving creepy doctor Philip Nitschke wouldn't have any such doubts and must think it is a stupid law then, if he can't help people who are just old from topping themselves.
"Under a law that took effect in 2002, euthanasia is restricted to terminal patients suffering unbearable pain with no hope of improvement, and who request to die when they are of sound mind. Each case is reviewed by a panel of medical experts."
The study also reportst that 13 % of those who requested euthanasia changed their minds.
The report continues:
"But in a critical accompanying editorial, University of Minnesota law professor Susan Wolf said the important question is whether mercy killings are taking place that do not follow the strict guidelines the Dutch have put in place.
The study could not determine that, she said, because doctors self-reported on whether their efforts complied with Dutch rules, among other reasons.
"The ultimate question remains — if you permit physicians to take life deliberately by assisting suicide or performing euthanasia, can you control the practice? Can you keep it within agreed boundaries? ... We do not yet know the answers," "If I can't trust my hospital doctor to wash his or her hands, I am not sure I should trust them with this either.
Moon tourism and other space stuff
Interesting news about possible commercial trips around the moon, coming soon to you for $100,000,000. That's a lot of money for a holiday that offers the potential danger of death from solar flare.
But then again, maybe if the spacecraft is thickened up a bit from the average density of the old Apollo craft, maybe death is avoidable. This interesting article (from NASA, so maybe it is more optimistic than it should be) indicates that the Apollo command module would have given a fair degree of shielding. Maybe the real concern during Apollo was for the astronauts if they were caught on the moon during a flare. I am sure the Lunar Module would have offered pretty pitiful shielding, as there was not much to it.
I also found this nice little site about the possible replacements for the Shuttle. The little rocket based on the shuttle solid rocket booster looks very neat, and I don't think even I would have much worry about riding a solid rocket. From what I gather, they are pretty damn simple devices, and don't tend to blow up. Unfortunately, looks like you still need a liquid fueled second stage too. D'oh...
But then again, maybe if the spacecraft is thickened up a bit from the average density of the old Apollo craft, maybe death is avoidable. This interesting article (from NASA, so maybe it is more optimistic than it should be) indicates that the Apollo command module would have given a fair degree of shielding. Maybe the real concern during Apollo was for the astronauts if they were caught on the moon during a flare. I am sure the Lunar Module would have offered pretty pitiful shielding, as there was not much to it.
I also found this nice little site about the possible replacements for the Shuttle. The little rocket based on the shuttle solid rocket booster looks very neat, and I don't think even I would have much worry about riding a solid rocket. From what I gather, they are pretty damn simple devices, and don't tend to blow up. Unfortunately, looks like you still need a liquid fueled second stage too. D'oh...
On education..
Seems to have been a pretty quiet week in the world of blogging. At least in the bit of it I check regularly.
However, an opinion piece in The Age caught my attention. The writer, one Neil Hooley from the academia of education, talks about how being teachers forced by the terrible Federal government to use a simple scale to rank children's achievements is "letting the kids down".
"Apparently, parents are confused by other terminology that might use words such as "established", "consolidated", "developed" and the like. A grade of B, for example, is very explicit and everyone knows what it means."
Well, yeah. But in the world of education, nothing can be allowed to be so clear:
"We have a distinct choice here. Either it is appropriate to draw up an absolute scale that measures achievement, or we look at progress that has been made over time. In the former case, the context is really unimportant - all that matters is product at the time. Contrast this with the latter case, where the conditions are crucial and really shape what is achieved."
Here we go:
"The allocation of absolute grades to the learning of children fits into a particular logic of knowledge. This says that schools are involved in the passing on of predetermined information or subject content that can be known, taught, assessed and rated accurately at each age or year level. Under this arrangement, the logic is internally consistent and defensible. There trouble is, there is another logic.
An alternative view indicates that children learn by building their own knowledge and that learning is always a work in progress."
Fair enough. The problem comes with the next sentence in that paragraph:
"Under these conditions, it is highly problematic whether predetermined content can be known, taught, assessed and rated accurately. With this logic, a graded system of assessment is therefore entirely inconsistent and indefensible."
Why? Every sensible person agrees that it is good for an education system to encourage students to "build their own knowledge" and realise that you can go through life continually learning, if you want to. But why should that preclude being able to give a simple assessment of where the student is in their level of objective knowledge of a subject at any particular time?
Surely he is getting at something more subtle, and it would seem to be the lingering postmodernist idea that, at heart, there is no objective truth about anything. No point in testing kids for how much they remember or understand it then. Go on, admit it Hooley!
His ending is particularly silly:
"An imposed system of A to E labels assumes one logic. It assumes that schools are only about the passing on of knowledge from elsewhere, that both teachers and children are disconnected from their knowledge and that imposed external judgments are accurate and necessary.
Parents will make up their own minds, but children may have little option to do so, locked in the iron cage of A to E determinism."
Look, if teachers want to comment on a student's "progress over time" or general aptitude etc, can't they still do it in the way they always have (at least in primary school)? That is, little Johnny gets a C in maths, but teacher writes at the end of the report card that "Johnny could do better with increased effort" or "Johnny has improved considerably, but further effort should see better results." Damn simple, it you ask me. At high school level, you can test in other ways about general aptitude and combine it with the other testing of stuff learnt to get a general idea of a kid's potential.
And it is absolute rubbish to suggest students are going to be "trapped" by their school grades anyway. Surely everyone knows of fellow high school students who didn't do well there, but after a few years maturing have gone back to study properly and ended up with tertiary qualifications and well paying careers.
Oh,and he also starts by criticising the government not (he believes) allowing the aboriginal flag to be used at schools instead of the Australian flag. Yes indeed, I am sure the lack of that flag must account for so much of the educational difficulties in aboriginal society.
However, an opinion piece in The Age caught my attention. The writer, one Neil Hooley from the academia of education, talks about how being teachers forced by the terrible Federal government to use a simple scale to rank children's achievements is "letting the kids down".
"Apparently, parents are confused by other terminology that might use words such as "established", "consolidated", "developed" and the like. A grade of B, for example, is very explicit and everyone knows what it means."
Well, yeah. But in the world of education, nothing can be allowed to be so clear:
"We have a distinct choice here. Either it is appropriate to draw up an absolute scale that measures achievement, or we look at progress that has been made over time. In the former case, the context is really unimportant - all that matters is product at the time. Contrast this with the latter case, where the conditions are crucial and really shape what is achieved."
Here we go:
"The allocation of absolute grades to the learning of children fits into a particular logic of knowledge. This says that schools are involved in the passing on of predetermined information or subject content that can be known, taught, assessed and rated accurately at each age or year level. Under this arrangement, the logic is internally consistent and defensible. There trouble is, there is another logic.
An alternative view indicates that children learn by building their own knowledge and that learning is always a work in progress."
Fair enough. The problem comes with the next sentence in that paragraph:
"Under these conditions, it is highly problematic whether predetermined content can be known, taught, assessed and rated accurately. With this logic, a graded system of assessment is therefore entirely inconsistent and indefensible."
Why? Every sensible person agrees that it is good for an education system to encourage students to "build their own knowledge" and realise that you can go through life continually learning, if you want to. But why should that preclude being able to give a simple assessment of where the student is in their level of objective knowledge of a subject at any particular time?
Surely he is getting at something more subtle, and it would seem to be the lingering postmodernist idea that, at heart, there is no objective truth about anything. No point in testing kids for how much they remember or understand it then. Go on, admit it Hooley!
His ending is particularly silly:
"An imposed system of A to E labels assumes one logic. It assumes that schools are only about the passing on of knowledge from elsewhere, that both teachers and children are disconnected from their knowledge and that imposed external judgments are accurate and necessary.
Parents will make up their own minds, but children may have little option to do so, locked in the iron cage of A to E determinism."
Look, if teachers want to comment on a student's "progress over time" or general aptitude etc, can't they still do it in the way they always have (at least in primary school)? That is, little Johnny gets a C in maths, but teacher writes at the end of the report card that "Johnny could do better with increased effort" or "Johnny has improved considerably, but further effort should see better results." Damn simple, it you ask me. At high school level, you can test in other ways about general aptitude and combine it with the other testing of stuff learnt to get a general idea of a kid's potential.
And it is absolute rubbish to suggest students are going to be "trapped" by their school grades anyway. Surely everyone knows of fellow high school students who didn't do well there, but after a few years maturing have gone back to study properly and ended up with tertiary qualifications and well paying careers.
Oh,and he also starts by criticising the government not (he believes) allowing the aboriginal flag to be used at schools instead of the Australian flag. Yes indeed, I am sure the lack of that flag must account for so much of the educational difficulties in aboriginal society.
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
Relativistic Poverty
Peter Saunders makes a lot of sense in his continuing attack on the welfare lobby (and Left generally) insisting on defining "poverty" in a relative sense.
Funnily enough, one of the comments posted after the article says this:
"The thing that Saunders does not understand is that in wealthy societies where there is no starvation or dying from exposure, poverty is about being unable to participate in the society with respect and esteem.
A relativistic definition of poverty is not adopted by ‘the left’ just so they can advocate redistribution of income. It is favoured because it is the only real way of understanding what it means to be poor. If parents cannot afford Nike trainers for their child, the child ‘feels’ poor. The lack of money for trendy shoes ‘means’ poverty in our society."
What to make of this post? Surely she can't be saying that it reflects good, sensible values to say that children have a right to have the "coolest" brand names rather than simply a reasonable quality shoe? If she saying that, it plays exactly into Saunder's criticism of why a relative treatment of poverty is pretty stupid and unhelpful.
Picking brand fetishism as a way of illustrating being "unable to participate" is pretty startling, so much so that I wonder if she is having us on. But I don't think she is.
Funnily enough, one of the comments posted after the article says this:
"The thing that Saunders does not understand is that in wealthy societies where there is no starvation or dying from exposure, poverty is about being unable to participate in the society with respect and esteem.
A relativistic definition of poverty is not adopted by ‘the left’ just so they can advocate redistribution of income. It is favoured because it is the only real way of understanding what it means to be poor. If parents cannot afford Nike trainers for their child, the child ‘feels’ poor. The lack of money for trendy shoes ‘means’ poverty in our society."
What to make of this post? Surely she can't be saying that it reflects good, sensible values to say that children have a right to have the "coolest" brand names rather than simply a reasonable quality shoe? If she saying that, it plays exactly into Saunder's criticism of why a relative treatment of poverty is pretty stupid and unhelpful.
Picking brand fetishism as a way of illustrating being "unable to participate" is pretty startling, so much so that I wonder if she is having us on. But I don't think she is.
Dogs fight Black Dog
SocietyGuardian.co.uk | Health | What's up, dog?
I'm a dog person. Not fanatical, but a dog person nonetheless. (Cat people have a good chance of having brains affected by mind altering parasites, remember.)
The link above is to a nice Guardian story on dogs fighting depression. My favourite bit is this:
"Maureen Hennis is chief executive of Pets As Therapy, a charity which has been making the most of the therapeutic benefits of animals for over 20 years. The not-for-profit organisation currently visits more than 4,750 different medical establishments throughout the UK, and Hennis is convinced of the programme's efficacy.
"I'm very lucky because I've visited patients with depression with my own dogs, so I've actually seen the benefits in action. I remember at one of the places we visited there was one woman who would wait for us and when we arrived she would shout, 'There's my ray of sunshine! There's my reason to stay alive!' It was the dog she was talking about, not me." "
So, apart from my advocacy of cognitive therapy, send in the dogs too. I wonder if they help schizophrenics too? Yep, probably.
I'm a dog person. Not fanatical, but a dog person nonetheless. (Cat people have a good chance of having brains affected by mind altering parasites, remember.)
The link above is to a nice Guardian story on dogs fighting depression. My favourite bit is this:
"Maureen Hennis is chief executive of Pets As Therapy, a charity which has been making the most of the therapeutic benefits of animals for over 20 years. The not-for-profit organisation currently visits more than 4,750 different medical establishments throughout the UK, and Hennis is convinced of the programme's efficacy.
"I'm very lucky because I've visited patients with depression with my own dogs, so I've actually seen the benefits in action. I remember at one of the places we visited there was one woman who would wait for us and when we arrived she would shout, 'There's my ray of sunshine! There's my reason to stay alive!' It was the dog she was talking about, not me." "
So, apart from my advocacy of cognitive therapy, send in the dogs too. I wonder if they help schizophrenics too? Yep, probably.
In the news
How much worse can it get for Queensland Health at the moment? The Australian (although, strangely, not the Courier Mail yet) is reporting that the apparently unqualified Russian psychiatrist employed for a time in the Townsville hospital was a convicted pedophile and served time for it in Russia! What next...Hannibal Lector worked as a neurosurgeon in Royal Brisbane? ("I was wondering why he always brought his lunch box into theatre with him" says the nurse.)
I heard recently on the ABC that the lack of doctors is acute all over the Western world, so there is a huge "market" for qualified doctors from just about anywhere to work in the Western country of their choosing. But surely to God Medical Boards in other States or countries have done a better job at ensuring applicants are not forging qualifications.
It is also presumably a good time to study medicine if you are inclined. I know someone whose son is in first year of medicine. The joke going around the students was "what do you call the med student who comes last in exams? Answer: ' Doctor' ".
More on what some doctors will do is here (abort late term pregnancies because the mother doesn't the financial cost of a child.) Good to see a prosecution happening for this.
Meanwhile, I don't really understand this whole oil price thing. Why does just the threat of terrorism against westerners in Saudi Arabia cause the price to go up? If the threat was directly against oil production facilities, maybe I understand. But attacks on housing estates, hotels and embassies, which is the character of many past attacks, doesn't seem to have that much to do with oil production to me.
The Economist reports briefly on what oil rich countries are looking at doing with their new oil wealth. Building super luxury resorts and shopping centres is much of the answer. But how many westerners want to holiday in the Middle East at any point in the near future? These nations ought to remember Nauru , I reckon. It will all end in tears before the century is out.
I heard recently on the ABC that the lack of doctors is acute all over the Western world, so there is a huge "market" for qualified doctors from just about anywhere to work in the Western country of their choosing. But surely to God Medical Boards in other States or countries have done a better job at ensuring applicants are not forging qualifications.
It is also presumably a good time to study medicine if you are inclined. I know someone whose son is in first year of medicine. The joke going around the students was "what do you call the med student who comes last in exams? Answer: ' Doctor' ".
More on what some doctors will do is here (abort late term pregnancies because the mother doesn't the financial cost of a child.) Good to see a prosecution happening for this.
Meanwhile, I don't really understand this whole oil price thing. Why does just the threat of terrorism against westerners in Saudi Arabia cause the price to go up? If the threat was directly against oil production facilities, maybe I understand. But attacks on housing estates, hotels and embassies, which is the character of many past attacks, doesn't seem to have that much to do with oil production to me.
The Economist reports briefly on what oil rich countries are looking at doing with their new oil wealth. Building super luxury resorts and shopping centres is much of the answer. But how many westerners want to holiday in the Middle East at any point in the near future? These nations ought to remember Nauru , I reckon. It will all end in tears before the century is out.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Getting back to Earth
Watching the space shuttle having its heat shield 'repair' live this week got me thinking. NASA has always spent a certain amount of money on engineers trying to think up innovative ways of doing space things, so how much thought has gone into building a better heat shield?
First some NASA info on the current heat shield is here. It says an average of 50 tiles are replaced between every mission, although there is lots of other work done on it every time it is refurbished for the next flight.
I think I read once (years ago in a science magazine) that they had to check the bonding of almost every tile between flights, but I haven't found a reference to that on the internet (yet).
As for the history of heat shields generally, this article briefly summarises it, and contains this interesting snippet of information:
"China developed recoverable spacecraft that reputedly used wood as an ablative material. While this may seem primitive, wood (in some cases cork) is actually used as an ablative material for some American rocket engine areas and payload shrouds, which heat up as the rocket flies through the atmosphere."
It also mentions an advanced idea:
"One promising idea that has been proposed for the future is the use of a plasma torch to form an artificial shockwave in front of a reentry vehicle. Just as the shockwave generated by a blunt body can protect a spacecraft by keeping hot gasses away from the skin of the vehicle, the plasma shockwave could theoretically protect a vehicle traveling at hypersonic velocity (Mach 6+) for sustained periods of time. But there is as yet no demand for such a thermal protection system and it remains only a laboratory experiment."
Pity if it went out suddenly though.
Inflatable shields also get an article here.
Not so long ago, using water as part of a shield was discussed in New Scientist.
So, seems there are limited options to explore for future heat shielding. Maybe I'll just wait for a space elevator to be built.
Update:
More googling has revealed that in fact the cancelled X 33 project involved a new metal based thermal protection system, that did get some testing before the whole project was cancelled. See links here, and here. In fact, one NASA media release indicates it was fully tested and ready for flight.
A more recent (2002) article about metallic reentry shields generally is here.
And while wandering around the Web, I found the forgotten (by me anyway) story of the Air Force's Lenticular Reentry Vehicle, a proposed nuclear powered, flying saucerish bomber from the dawn of the Cold War. The Popular Mechanics story on the link has a Brisbane connection too.
Gee, those 1950's boffins knew cool looking design, didn't they...
First some NASA info on the current heat shield is here. It says an average of 50 tiles are replaced between every mission, although there is lots of other work done on it every time it is refurbished for the next flight.
I think I read once (years ago in a science magazine) that they had to check the bonding of almost every tile between flights, but I haven't found a reference to that on the internet (yet).
As for the history of heat shields generally, this article briefly summarises it, and contains this interesting snippet of information:
"China developed recoverable spacecraft that reputedly used wood as an ablative material. While this may seem primitive, wood (in some cases cork) is actually used as an ablative material for some American rocket engine areas and payload shrouds, which heat up as the rocket flies through the atmosphere."
It also mentions an advanced idea:
"One promising idea that has been proposed for the future is the use of a plasma torch to form an artificial shockwave in front of a reentry vehicle. Just as the shockwave generated by a blunt body can protect a spacecraft by keeping hot gasses away from the skin of the vehicle, the plasma shockwave could theoretically protect a vehicle traveling at hypersonic velocity (Mach 6+) for sustained periods of time. But there is as yet no demand for such a thermal protection system and it remains only a laboratory experiment."
Pity if it went out suddenly though.
Inflatable shields also get an article here.
Not so long ago, using water as part of a shield was discussed in New Scientist.
So, seems there are limited options to explore for future heat shielding. Maybe I'll just wait for a space elevator to be built.
Update:
More googling has revealed that in fact the cancelled X 33 project involved a new metal based thermal protection system, that did get some testing before the whole project was cancelled. See links here, and here. In fact, one NASA media release indicates it was fully tested and ready for flight.
A more recent (2002) article about metallic reentry shields generally is here.
And while wandering around the Web, I found the forgotten (by me anyway) story of the Air Force's Lenticular Reentry Vehicle, a proposed nuclear powered, flying saucerish bomber from the dawn of the Cold War. The Popular Mechanics story on the link has a Brisbane connection too.
Gee, those 1950's boffins knew cool looking design, didn't they...
Saturday, August 06, 2005
Chase giant tornadoes for fun and profit
How's this for a unique tourist venture (go to America and chase tornadoes with your tour guide.) No thanks. I haven't seen the video on this site yet, as I am on dial up at the moment. Will look next week.
Friday, August 05, 2005
Sentencing news
So the self confessed wife and (20 month old) daughter killing husband (who, as I recall, took his daughter with him while he shopped for the spear gun murder weapon) got 2 life sentences, and a non parole period of 33 years. (If you are unfamiliar with the case, read the links for the whole terrible story.)
The sentence means he is potentially able to get parole at 71. I can't see why he should ever be released. As it is, he has the potential to have a "normal" life for a decade or more after release.
This crime was so appalling that it reminds me of the Port Arthur massacre. As in that case, you can't really fathom the mental state of the killer, but there is no doubt that they were aware of their actions as they were executing their victims. John Sharpe also had weeks of forethought and planning, it would seem. I am generally against the death sentence, but there are some murders so terrible, where the facts are known with absolute certainty, that I feel they deserve an exception. This is one of them.
The sentence means he is potentially able to get parole at 71. I can't see why he should ever be released. As it is, he has the potential to have a "normal" life for a decade or more after release.
This crime was so appalling that it reminds me of the Port Arthur massacre. As in that case, you can't really fathom the mental state of the killer, but there is no doubt that they were aware of their actions as they were executing their victims. John Sharpe also had weeks of forethought and planning, it would seem. I am generally against the death sentence, but there are some murders so terrible, where the facts are known with absolute certainty, that I feel they deserve an exception. This is one of them.
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Shuttle sightings
Human Space Flight (HSF) - Orbital Tracking
I suppose that if you don't already know that this exists, you're not enough of a nerd to care. Anyway, the above link is to the NASA site for sighting times for the shuttle and ISS listed for all major cities. I forgot to check earlier this week, and may have already missed the best chance. But it goes over fairly high over Brisbane this afternoon at 5.42, and as sunset is about 5.20, it should be visible (clouds permitting).
Go impress your kids by taking them outside to see it.
I suppose that if you don't already know that this exists, you're not enough of a nerd to care. Anyway, the above link is to the NASA site for sighting times for the shuttle and ISS listed for all major cities. I forgot to check earlier this week, and may have already missed the best chance. But it goes over fairly high over Brisbane this afternoon at 5.42, and as sunset is about 5.20, it should be visible (clouds permitting).
Go impress your kids by taking them outside to see it.
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Unleash the Ducks of War
Somehow it had never occurred to me before to look for official new sites from North Korea, but a quick Google and there I was.
It's about what you would expect from the world's craziest socialist dictator stronghold. Some things I like to read about:
Kim Jong inspects the "the command of the large combined unit and Unit 615 honored with the title of Kum Song Lifeguard of the KPA situated in the forefront area in the central sector of the front....
Expressing satisfaction over the fact that the officers and men of the unit have thoroughly implemented the military line of the WPK, thus consolidating the military bulwark of Korean style socialism as firm as a rock, he set forth the highly important tasks which would serve as guidelines in further increasing the militancy of the unit and turning the defence theatre into an invulnerable fortress....
He dropped in at the operation study room to learn in detail with the training of the commanding officers of the unit. There he set forth tasks to be fulfilled to increase the unit's combat capability in every way."
Wait for it:
"Then he moved on to the duck farm built by the unit.
He put forward the tasks to be fulfilled to boost the duck production, saying that the farm should operate at its fullest capacity to pay off profusely. He had a photo session with the servicepersons of the unit."
I hope avian flu has got nothing to do with this.
We also learn that Korea's "liberation" was celebrated recently in the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, and Democratic Congo, where:
"Otete Gaston Mboyo, chairman of the National Committee of the Genuine Lumumbist Patriotic Party of Democratic Congo, in a lecture praised the undying feats President Kim Il Sung performed by defeating Japanese imperialism and bringing about a great event of the liberation of Korea after embarking upon the road of revolution in his teens. He noted that the feats of the President are shining more brilliantly thanks to leader Kim Jong Il."
Forgive my ignorance, but that the first time I have heard of the Lumumbists of Congo, who it would appear have been around for quite a few decades. Must be hard to pronounce after a drink.
Update: Sorry - individual links to articles within the North Korean site don't work.
It's about what you would expect from the world's craziest socialist dictator stronghold. Some things I like to read about:
Kim Jong inspects the "the command of the large combined unit and Unit 615 honored with the title of Kum Song Lifeguard of the KPA situated in the forefront area in the central sector of the front....
Expressing satisfaction over the fact that the officers and men of the unit have thoroughly implemented the military line of the WPK, thus consolidating the military bulwark of Korean style socialism as firm as a rock, he set forth the highly important tasks which would serve as guidelines in further increasing the militancy of the unit and turning the defence theatre into an invulnerable fortress....
He dropped in at the operation study room to learn in detail with the training of the commanding officers of the unit. There he set forth tasks to be fulfilled to increase the unit's combat capability in every way."
Wait for it:
"Then he moved on to the duck farm built by the unit.
He put forward the tasks to be fulfilled to boost the duck production, saying that the farm should operate at its fullest capacity to pay off profusely. He had a photo session with the servicepersons of the unit."
I hope avian flu has got nothing to do with this.
We also learn that Korea's "liberation" was celebrated recently in the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, and Democratic Congo, where:
"Otete Gaston Mboyo, chairman of the National Committee of the Genuine Lumumbist Patriotic Party of Democratic Congo, in a lecture praised the undying feats President Kim Il Sung performed by defeating Japanese imperialism and bringing about a great event of the liberation of Korea after embarking upon the road of revolution in his teens. He noted that the feats of the President are shining more brilliantly thanks to leader Kim Jong Il."
Forgive my ignorance, but that the first time I have heard of the Lumumbists of Congo, who it would appear have been around for quite a few decades. Must be hard to pronounce after a drink.
Update: Sorry - individual links to articles within the North Korean site don't work.
Geneva Convention and David Hicks
Forget peacetime niceties - this is a war - Opinion - theage.com.au
See the above article in (surprise!) The Age which gives a strong defence to the non application of the Geneva conventions to one D Hicks. An article contradicting this will probably appear soon.
And by the way, this stuff about some US military lawyers criticising the whole commission procedure. I am sure there is a considerable lack of understanding in the general public about the relative seniority of various military ranks that causes confusion. An army captain (but not a navy captain) is a low ranking officer, and major is only one step up from that. The US military has many, many lawyers, and it should be no surprise that some relatively junior ones (most likely very young) will have strong feelings against the military commission set up. Even if they were older and more experienced, everyone has to remember that lawyers are basically designed to disagree. Just because some of them see a great injustice in something doesn't necessarily mean they are right.
See the above article in (surprise!) The Age which gives a strong defence to the non application of the Geneva conventions to one D Hicks. An article contradicting this will probably appear soon.
And by the way, this stuff about some US military lawyers criticising the whole commission procedure. I am sure there is a considerable lack of understanding in the general public about the relative seniority of various military ranks that causes confusion. An army captain (but not a navy captain) is a low ranking officer, and major is only one step up from that. The US military has many, many lawyers, and it should be no surprise that some relatively junior ones (most likely very young) will have strong feelings against the military commission set up. Even if they were older and more experienced, everyone has to remember that lawyers are basically designed to disagree. Just because some of them see a great injustice in something doesn't necessarily mean they are right.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
Gone squatting
I am going to be a bit busy for a few days, I expect, so blogging rate may slow down.
In the meantime, the SMH today in its article on vegetarianism (which, it claims, no longer has good PR) pointed me towards this article on the Australian Vegetarian Society website as an example of vegetarians not exactly doing their image a favour.
The essay has a great title: "The Sitting Toilet - An Inconspicuous ‘Carcinogen’?" and goes into great detail about the alleged benefits of squatting over sitting.
There may be something to some of the points made the article, as it does actually cite at the end a lot of proper sounding medical journal articles. But a lot of it is pretty silly.
Having to use a squat toilet is, I think, more of an issue for men than women because of the, shall we say, different angles that are involved . When trying to use one while travelling, I have never worked out what to do with my pants, especially long pants. You wouldn't want to take your shoes off in the average squat toilet (to allow for complete pants removal) but crumpling long pants down well out of any danger is a real pain, and makes the balancing act required quite difficult. That is the real reason squat toilets are unpopular with western men, I think.
Any guidelines as to what I should be doing on my next trip would (seriously) be welcome. Yobbo at his blog didn't seem to be able to work it out either.
In the meantime, the SMH today in its article on vegetarianism (which, it claims, no longer has good PR) pointed me towards this article on the Australian Vegetarian Society website as an example of vegetarians not exactly doing their image a favour.
The essay has a great title: "The Sitting Toilet - An Inconspicuous ‘Carcinogen’?" and goes into great detail about the alleged benefits of squatting over sitting.
There may be something to some of the points made the article, as it does actually cite at the end a lot of proper sounding medical journal articles. But a lot of it is pretty silly.
Having to use a squat toilet is, I think, more of an issue for men than women because of the, shall we say, different angles that are involved . When trying to use one while travelling, I have never worked out what to do with my pants, especially long pants. You wouldn't want to take your shoes off in the average squat toilet (to allow for complete pants removal) but crumpling long pants down well out of any danger is a real pain, and makes the balancing act required quite difficult. That is the real reason squat toilets are unpopular with western men, I think.
Any guidelines as to what I should be doing on my next trip would (seriously) be welcome. Yobbo at his blog didn't seem to be able to work it out either.
Monday, August 01, 2005
Arguments a lawyer would prefer not to have to make
London bombs terror attack The Times and Sunday Times Times Online
'Actions were a peaceful protest over the Iraq war' is the headline on the above Times article on the arrested London bombing suspect Osman (caught in Rome). According to his female lawyer:
“He has justified his actions as a form of protest against the fact that civilians are suffering in wars at the present time. He has taken part in many peace marches and has never had any contact whatsoever with any terrorist organisation."
That will go over so well before a judge.
"The lawyer said that her client, who appeared at an initial extradition hearing on Saturday, was “calm” but would “prefer to stay in Italy”."
You bet he would.
And Italy being Italy, the lawyer herself is attracting much of the attention:
"Osman’s arrest has attracted huge publicity in Italy and made Signora Sonnessa, 40, into a minor celebrity. Her bronzed skin, long black hair and plunging neckline grabbed the attention of Italian newspapers, which carried prominent photographs of her in their coverage of the story."
Wait while I google for a picture of her
Here we go...
Lucky Osman!
'Actions were a peaceful protest over the Iraq war' is the headline on the above Times article on the arrested London bombing suspect Osman (caught in Rome). According to his female lawyer:
“He has justified his actions as a form of protest against the fact that civilians are suffering in wars at the present time. He has taken part in many peace marches and has never had any contact whatsoever with any terrorist organisation."
That will go over so well before a judge.
"The lawyer said that her client, who appeared at an initial extradition hearing on Saturday, was “calm” but would “prefer to stay in Italy”."
You bet he would.
And Italy being Italy, the lawyer herself is attracting much of the attention:
"Osman’s arrest has attracted huge publicity in Italy and made Signora Sonnessa, 40, into a minor celebrity. Her bronzed skin, long black hair and plunging neckline grabbed the attention of Italian newspapers, which carried prominent photographs of her in their coverage of the story."
Wait while I google for a picture of her
Here we go...
Lucky Osman!
That's fat
Hospital forced to open 'fat only' ward | The Nation | Breaking News 24/7 - NEWS.com.au (01-08-2005)
The link is to a story about how Royal Melbourne Hospital will soon open a room to deal with the severely obese, who can weigh from 350 to 500kg!
At 182 cm and about 82 kg, this is as if I was around 4 to 6 times heavier than my present weight. And I guess most obese people are shorter than me, so the ratio of their actual to their "ideal" weight is likely worse for them.
What I don't understand is this. Isn't there something seriously wrong in a person failing to recognise when they hit, let's say, 3 times their "ideal" weight that they just can't continue putting on more weight? I mean, mentally wrong. Doesn't the fact that they can no longer sit in a normal car or bus seat indicate something to them? I just can't comprehend it.
The link is to a story about how Royal Melbourne Hospital will soon open a room to deal with the severely obese, who can weigh from 350 to 500kg!
At 182 cm and about 82 kg, this is as if I was around 4 to 6 times heavier than my present weight. And I guess most obese people are shorter than me, so the ratio of their actual to their "ideal" weight is likely worse for them.
What I don't understand is this. Isn't there something seriously wrong in a person failing to recognise when they hit, let's say, 3 times their "ideal" weight that they just can't continue putting on more weight? I mean, mentally wrong. Doesn't the fact that they can no longer sit in a normal car or bus seat indicate something to them? I just can't comprehend it.
Sunday, July 31, 2005
John Lennon fights Islamic fundamentalism
Life is too short to spend too much time exploring the truly weird and wacky corners of the Web, but sometimes a site gets brought to one's attention that is worth at least 10 minutes.
Perhaps this couple (the Polleys) are better known in the USA because their site mentions some appearances on Jimmy Kimmel's show (who, I think, was the smarter looking co-host of the original "Man Show" before getting his own chat show.) I assume he would not have them in for a respectful interview.
Broadly, they appear to be spiritualists of a sort, but with a very specific and idiosyncratic set of metaphysical beliefs. Their website is chock full of interviews and messages from Jesus, Peter, and many, many famous deceased persons etc.
Just to give you a taste, have a look at this edition (one of many) of their on-line journal "Voices From Spirit Magazine". I like the way the direct messages from Jesus begin "Jesus here."
Turns out Jesus really, really hates gay sex, supported Arnold Schwarzenegger, supported the Iraq war, etc. (Apparently, attempts at gay sex in the afterlife eventually lead to the souls exploding.) I guess Jesus is a conservative, after all.
But perhaps the best part of their weird (after) world is the stuff about John Lennon and his role in helping Muhammad fight off Islamic fundamentalists (although I think this is all happening in the Kingdom of God, not down here.) There are even drawings to illustrate it.
Not only that but a lot of channeled songs from John as well, who performs in the afterlife with "Beatles and Friends" which gets its own special web site.
Turns out that John divorced Yoko in the afterlife due to her support for homosexuality. A drawing of the ceremony is here. (I don't know why, but even though all of the afterlife drawings seem to be done by Linda Polley, they seem to emphasize the women's breasts, or at least nipples, in particular. They look more like they were done by a 13 yr old boy.)
Just about every page I look at has a weirdly amusing aspect that I want to mention, but I have to get to bed. It is well worth a browse.
Perhaps this couple (the Polleys) are better known in the USA because their site mentions some appearances on Jimmy Kimmel's show (who, I think, was the smarter looking co-host of the original "Man Show" before getting his own chat show.) I assume he would not have them in for a respectful interview.
Broadly, they appear to be spiritualists of a sort, but with a very specific and idiosyncratic set of metaphysical beliefs. Their website is chock full of interviews and messages from Jesus, Peter, and many, many famous deceased persons etc.
Just to give you a taste, have a look at this edition (one of many) of their on-line journal "Voices From Spirit Magazine". I like the way the direct messages from Jesus begin "Jesus here."
Turns out Jesus really, really hates gay sex, supported Arnold Schwarzenegger, supported the Iraq war, etc. (Apparently, attempts at gay sex in the afterlife eventually lead to the souls exploding.) I guess Jesus is a conservative, after all.
But perhaps the best part of their weird (after) world is the stuff about John Lennon and his role in helping Muhammad fight off Islamic fundamentalists (although I think this is all happening in the Kingdom of God, not down here.) There are even drawings to illustrate it.
Not only that but a lot of channeled songs from John as well, who performs in the afterlife with "Beatles and Friends" which gets its own special web site.
Turns out that John divorced Yoko in the afterlife due to her support for homosexuality. A drawing of the ceremony is here. (I don't know why, but even though all of the afterlife drawings seem to be done by Linda Polley, they seem to emphasize the women's breasts, or at least nipples, in particular. They look more like they were done by a 13 yr old boy.)
Just about every page I look at has a weirdly amusing aspect that I want to mention, but I have to get to bed. It is well worth a browse.
Friday, July 29, 2005
I've heard of weeping statues, but walking?
World news from The Times and the Sunday Times - Times Online
The link is to a story of a "walking", semi-human statue of Mary in Italy, alleged to have been caught on mobile phone video. This I want to see. Why isn't it on the net already, if it exists?
From an aesthetic point of view, sounds like a particularly creepy sort of miracle too. Inaminate things should stay that way.
The link is to a story of a "walking", semi-human statue of Mary in Italy, alleged to have been caught on mobile phone video. This I want to see. Why isn't it on the net already, if it exists?
From an aesthetic point of view, sounds like a particularly creepy sort of miracle too. Inaminate things should stay that way.
The science of dating
Also from New Scientist, just what we need, more science on dating stategies:
"Men who spend big money wining and dining their dates are not frittering away hard-earned cash. According to a pair of UK researchers, they are merely employing the best strategy for getting the girl without being taken for granted.
Using mathematical modelling, Peter Sozou and Robert Seymour at University College London, UK, found that wooing girls with costly, but essentially worthless gifts – such as theatre tickets or expensive dinners out – is a winning courtship strategy for both sexes.
Females can assess how serious or committed a male plans to be and males can ensure they are not just seducing 'gold-diggers' – girls who take valuable presents with no intention of accepting subsequent dates.
Sozou came about the idea after reading about a man in his local newspaper. The man had been paying the rent of a woman he considered was his girlfriend – he was giving her a valuable gift. But she had been heartlessly manipulating him, dating another man on the sly while accepting money from her unwitting sugar daddy."
I suppose I can see value in this research...especially if it leads to tricky ideas like this:
"Sozou and Seymour believe their conclusions about people find support in the actions of animals, such as the dance fly. Males of this species give worthless cotton balls to entice partners into mating – and they work – although other scientists interpret this as male trickery."
I was always bad at the strategies of dating, so I find it hard to come up with something witty now! Suggest an end joke here please.
"Men who spend big money wining and dining their dates are not frittering away hard-earned cash. According to a pair of UK researchers, they are merely employing the best strategy for getting the girl without being taken for granted.
Using mathematical modelling, Peter Sozou and Robert Seymour at University College London, UK, found that wooing girls with costly, but essentially worthless gifts – such as theatre tickets or expensive dinners out – is a winning courtship strategy for both sexes.
Females can assess how serious or committed a male plans to be and males can ensure they are not just seducing 'gold-diggers' – girls who take valuable presents with no intention of accepting subsequent dates.
Sozou came about the idea after reading about a man in his local newspaper. The man had been paying the rent of a woman he considered was his girlfriend – he was giving her a valuable gift. But she had been heartlessly manipulating him, dating another man on the sly while accepting money from her unwitting sugar daddy."
I suppose I can see value in this research...especially if it leads to tricky ideas like this:
"Sozou and Seymour believe their conclusions about people find support in the actions of animals, such as the dance fly. Males of this species give worthless cotton balls to entice partners into mating – and they work – although other scientists interpret this as male trickery."
I was always bad at the strategies of dating, so I find it hard to come up with something witty now! Suggest an end joke here please.
Trees cause deserts?
This is the sort of story (from New Scientist)that Tim Blair loves to have fun with:
"Planting trees can create deserts, lower water tables and drain rivers, rather than filling them, claims a new report supported by the UK government.
The findings - which may come as heresy to tree-lovers and most environmentalists - is an emerging new consensus among forest and water professionals.
“Common but misguided views about water management,” says the report, are resulting in the waste of tens of millions of pounds every year across the world. Forests planted with the intention of trapping moisture are instead depleting reservoirs and drying out soils."
Over to you, Tim.
"Planting trees can create deserts, lower water tables and drain rivers, rather than filling them, claims a new report supported by the UK government.
The findings - which may come as heresy to tree-lovers and most environmentalists - is an emerging new consensus among forest and water professionals.
“Common but misguided views about water management,” says the report, are resulting in the waste of tens of millions of pounds every year across the world. Forests planted with the intention of trapping moisture are instead depleting reservoirs and drying out soils."
Over to you, Tim.
Death rates in Iraq
News about Attrition at StrategyPage.com's How to Make War.
The above link is to an interesting article (on a web site that may or may not be all that reliable) regarding death rates now and historically in Iraq. This claim is particularly relevant to arguments about the "immorality" of the current death rate since the downfall of Saddam:
"The Iraqi government now believes that at least 12,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the last 18 months. In the last ten months, about 800 Iraqi civilians and police have been killed each month. Adding a bit more to account for unreported deaths (especially in Sunni Arab areas where chaos, not the government, runs things) the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year. This is far higher than the usual rate in Middle Eastern countries (under 10). Well, most of the time. During civil wars and insurrections, the rate has spiked to over a hundred per 100,000, sometimes for several years in a row. During Saddam’s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year. This does not include the several hundred thousand killed during the war with Iran in the 1980s. There are other parts of the world that are more violent than Iraq. Africa, for example, especially Congo, Sudan and South Africa. Only South Africa has a sufficiently effective government to actually keep track of the death rate, mostly from crime, but it’s over 50 per 100,000. It’s worse in places like Congo and Sudan, but the numbers there are only estimates by peacekeepers and relief workers.
During the 1990s, Saddam used access to food and medical care as a way to keep the Shia Arabs under control, but this process caused at least twenty thousand or more excess deaths a year (from disease and malnutrition). Foreign media, especially in Sunni Moslem nations, played down Saddam’s homicides, just as they play up the current death toll in Iraq (which is still largely the result of violence by Sunni Arabs.) "
I am sure there are some other sites I can check about the claimed death rates during the 1990's, although no doubt much of the argument will revolve around whether it was the West's embargo actions that caused the deaths rather than Saddam's.
And by the way, can't they get on with his trial faster than October? Really, you sometimes wonder what the point of "due process" is in extreme cases like his. If some guard was mad enough to just kill him now, he would be doing us all a favour.
The above link is to an interesting article (on a web site that may or may not be all that reliable) regarding death rates now and historically in Iraq. This claim is particularly relevant to arguments about the "immorality" of the current death rate since the downfall of Saddam:
"The Iraqi government now believes that at least 12,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the last 18 months. In the last ten months, about 800 Iraqi civilians and police have been killed each month. Adding a bit more to account for unreported deaths (especially in Sunni Arab areas where chaos, not the government, runs things) the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year. This is far higher than the usual rate in Middle Eastern countries (under 10). Well, most of the time. During civil wars and insurrections, the rate has spiked to over a hundred per 100,000, sometimes for several years in a row. During Saddam’s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year. This does not include the several hundred thousand killed during the war with Iran in the 1980s. There are other parts of the world that are more violent than Iraq. Africa, for example, especially Congo, Sudan and South Africa. Only South Africa has a sufficiently effective government to actually keep track of the death rate, mostly from crime, but it’s over 50 per 100,000. It’s worse in places like Congo and Sudan, but the numbers there are only estimates by peacekeepers and relief workers.
During the 1990s, Saddam used access to food and medical care as a way to keep the Shia Arabs under control, but this process caused at least twenty thousand or more excess deaths a year (from disease and malnutrition). Foreign media, especially in Sunni Moslem nations, played down Saddam’s homicides, just as they play up the current death toll in Iraq (which is still largely the result of violence by Sunni Arabs.) "
I am sure there are some other sites I can check about the claimed death rates during the 1990's, although no doubt much of the argument will revolve around whether it was the West's embargo actions that caused the deaths rather than Saddam's.
And by the way, can't they get on with his trial faster than October? Really, you sometimes wonder what the point of "due process" is in extreme cases like his. If some guard was mad enough to just kill him now, he would be doing us all a favour.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Miscellaneous stuff
A quick round up from this morning's browse of the web:
Daniel Pipes and Janet Albrechtsen in the Australia : both good reads.
The Economist gave George W a tick for education reform (it seems to be working).
Christopher Hitchens points out that the legislation at the core of the Plame/Rove debacle was always a bad idea.
An academic in The Age suggests the forced closure (or take over by the government?) of all private primary schools as a way of forcing all children to learn the "civic values" of Australian society. I can imagine the State Treasurers rolling their eyes at this one. Get real, Dennis.
In Indonesia, they take their cricket farming very seriously (it sounds like something being discussed on Landline):
Daniel Pipes and Janet Albrechtsen in the Australia : both good reads.
The Economist gave George W a tick for education reform (it seems to be working).
Christopher Hitchens points out that the legislation at the core of the Plame/Rove debacle was always a bad idea.
An academic in The Age suggests the forced closure (or take over by the government?) of all private primary schools as a way of forcing all children to learn the "civic values" of Australian society. I can imagine the State Treasurers rolling their eyes at this one. Get real, Dennis.
In Indonesia, they take their cricket farming very seriously (it sounds like something being discussed on Landline):
"He added that the association would not accept crickets bred outside its membership because their quality could not be assured.
"We tried buying crickets from common farmers once. The crickets they bred had a very high water content. Only 1 kg of dried crickets was derived after roasting four kg of them, whereas only 2.5 kg of live crickets bred through the program could produce one kg of dried crickets. Besides that, due to inferior feeding techniques, their protein content was found to be lower too," said Bayu, who comes from Gunung Kidul.
Dried crickets can last for six months after being vacuum packed. Before being packed, live crickets are immersed in hot water at 70 degrees centigrade.
They are then roasted in an oven for seven to 12 hours. A one-kg pack of dried crickets can be sold at Rp 110,000.
"These crickets are also delicious, crispy when fried and eaten immediately," said Bayu, while offering a plate of fried crickets."
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Fun from Scamming
Aimless web surfing while I should be working has led me this morning to this site, which is quite amusing. (It's copies of email correspondence between scammers and their attempted victims, who in fact are just taking the scammers for a ride.)
I haven't the time to read too much yet, but this one (involving Marty McFly as the "victim" is fun. As is this one, with Juan Perez Jnr as the correspondent. Actually, just about every second story is pretty damn funny.)
I don't spend much time on internet humour, but this is good.
I haven't the time to read too much yet, but this one (involving Marty McFly as the "victim" is fun. As is this one, with Juan Perez Jnr as the correspondent. Actually, just about every second story is pretty damn funny.)
I don't spend much time on internet humour, but this is good.
Monday, July 25, 2005
A Brain Change?
Goodness, what odd things can happen in this world of blogging. Alan Brain (see left) kindly recommended this site in a post a few weeks ago, and now appears to be undergoing a not unwelcomed dramatic alteration in his life, due to hormonal changes the source of which he says are a medical mystery. Not only that, he wants to complete the task, as it were, inviting donations.
I don't think he is joking; he sounds sincere. But unusually "matter of fact" about it. He wasn't on 4 corners tonight, was he?
No one has commented on this yet as far as I can see from my blog role. Certainly there are no comments on his site to his "new image" post. I can just imagine everyone out there being slack jawed like me wondering what to make of it.
That is all I can think of to say about it ....
I don't think he is joking; he sounds sincere. But unusually "matter of fact" about it. He wasn't on 4 corners tonight, was he?
No one has commented on this yet as far as I can see from my blog role. Certainly there are no comments on his site to his "new image" post. I can just imagine everyone out there being slack jawed like me wondering what to make of it.
That is all I can think of to say about it ....
Pearson on Ronald Wilson
Christopher Pearson's article in the Weekend Australia about the late Ronald Wilson was a sizzling read, and I expect a strong counter attack will be mounted by Wilson's liberal admirers.
It is my understanding that Wilson's close involvement with the Uniting Church, which had a historic role in the "stolen children" issue, made him eminently unsuited to head that enquiry. Too much potential for misplaced guilt by association to make him an objective judge of the matter.
It is my understanding that Wilson's close involvement with the Uniting Church, which had a historic role in the "stolen children" issue, made him eminently unsuited to head that enquiry. Too much potential for misplaced guilt by association to make him an objective judge of the matter.
Feeling away morality
I am sure Currency Lad could do a better job on this, but I can't let today's peculiar opinion piece by Michael Read in The Age go without comment.
The writer feels that, although he now has a perfectly good life, and can't remember much of his earlier difficulties due to a birth defect, he is so sorry for the pain his Mum went through that he believes it would have been better for her to have aborted him. As he summarises:
"My life in many ways has been a wonderful experience, but it has been achieved through the suffering of my mother. It would have been better for her had she aborted me. After all, my life then would never have been, and logically, I could not have regretted not living it, but my mother would almost certainly have had a better one."
Talk about your liberal death wishes....
The main thrust of the article, though, is about not being too judgmental on women who want abortions, even late term ones, such as the notorious incident involving a woman who aborted late due to probable dwarfism in the child.
There are many issues I have with the "logic" of this article.
Firstly, the point about a hypothetical abortion meaning that he would not be around to regret not living adds nothing to the argument about the morality of abortion or killing. I mean, adults killed don't harbour regrets either. Let's judge an act at the time it happens. (And let's not be too confident of being able to perceive alternative futures and the degree of happiness in them either.)
Perhaps inadvertantly, Read's comment on his hypothetical termination can be read to relate to issue of "personhood" and its relevance to the Peter Singer's utilitarian arguments about abortion. That is, if you abort a child before it has any significant self awareness, it is no moral wrong at all. (Remember, Singer would even allow a period of, say, a month after birth for parents to "accept" a child, and by his logic killing even a healthy new born is not necessarily "immoral".) This is where you can trust your intuition more than your "public intellectual".
Read is surely a utilitarain himself, with his emphasis in the article of wanting to see the maximum happiness. There are many, many problems with utilitarianism, but for the sake of the argument, if we try to apply it to his case, why does Read not factor in the happy ending? Having an adult son with a successful life is a good thing for his mother, surely. Achieving that happiness after overcoming physical adversity should make it especially profound, shouldn't it? Not to Mr Read, it seems.
And what does his mother think about this? He seems to deliberately avoid telling us her opinion (she is still alive.) Isn't this a vital factor if we are going to attempt some calculation of maximum happiness?
No, his aim is just to have us avoid judgement on the poor mother facing a possible hard life. So there is no point in being rigorous about it, he just wants us to concentrate on the negative possiblities and fears of the mother, regardless of how realistic they may be.
This points to one fundamental problem with utilitarianism: the nature of happiness itself and the difficulties in measuring it. I have posted here before on cognitive therapy for depression. It appeals to me becuase its fundamental idea (that all of your moods are in fact created by your thoughts, including your perceptions, your mental attitudes, beliefs and the way you interpret things) sounds right. And besides which, as a therapy it seems to clinically work.
If you philosophically agree with this understanding of moods, it makes the emphasis on "happiness" decidedly shaky grounds for deciding moral issues. Happiness (or the lack of it) is a cognitive reaction to events that may or may not be built on sound foundations in your cognitive world. What's more important is to look at those foundations.
(There's a lot of good stuff on the problems of trying to base morals on utilitarianism on the internet. Unfortunately, it is treated as a vague default position for many people who have never had the inclination or education to really think about the basis of morals.)
It's all well and good for Michael Read (and liberals generally) to emphasise sympathy for mothers who fear unhappiness. But when it comes to matters of life or death of a fetus/baby which would be viable outside of the womb (we are talking late term abortion), it is hardly the most important factor at stake.
The writer feels that, although he now has a perfectly good life, and can't remember much of his earlier difficulties due to a birth defect, he is so sorry for the pain his Mum went through that he believes it would have been better for her to have aborted him. As he summarises:
"My life in many ways has been a wonderful experience, but it has been achieved through the suffering of my mother. It would have been better for her had she aborted me. After all, my life then would never have been, and logically, I could not have regretted not living it, but my mother would almost certainly have had a better one."
Talk about your liberal death wishes....
The main thrust of the article, though, is about not being too judgmental on women who want abortions, even late term ones, such as the notorious incident involving a woman who aborted late due to probable dwarfism in the child.
There are many issues I have with the "logic" of this article.
Firstly, the point about a hypothetical abortion meaning that he would not be around to regret not living adds nothing to the argument about the morality of abortion or killing. I mean, adults killed don't harbour regrets either. Let's judge an act at the time it happens. (And let's not be too confident of being able to perceive alternative futures and the degree of happiness in them either.)
Perhaps inadvertantly, Read's comment on his hypothetical termination can be read to relate to issue of "personhood" and its relevance to the Peter Singer's utilitarian arguments about abortion. That is, if you abort a child before it has any significant self awareness, it is no moral wrong at all. (Remember, Singer would even allow a period of, say, a month after birth for parents to "accept" a child, and by his logic killing even a healthy new born is not necessarily "immoral".) This is where you can trust your intuition more than your "public intellectual".
Read is surely a utilitarain himself, with his emphasis in the article of wanting to see the maximum happiness. There are many, many problems with utilitarianism, but for the sake of the argument, if we try to apply it to his case, why does Read not factor in the happy ending? Having an adult son with a successful life is a good thing for his mother, surely. Achieving that happiness after overcoming physical adversity should make it especially profound, shouldn't it? Not to Mr Read, it seems.
And what does his mother think about this? He seems to deliberately avoid telling us her opinion (she is still alive.) Isn't this a vital factor if we are going to attempt some calculation of maximum happiness?
No, his aim is just to have us avoid judgement on the poor mother facing a possible hard life. So there is no point in being rigorous about it, he just wants us to concentrate on the negative possiblities and fears of the mother, regardless of how realistic they may be.
This points to one fundamental problem with utilitarianism: the nature of happiness itself and the difficulties in measuring it. I have posted here before on cognitive therapy for depression. It appeals to me becuase its fundamental idea (that all of your moods are in fact created by your thoughts, including your perceptions, your mental attitudes, beliefs and the way you interpret things) sounds right. And besides which, as a therapy it seems to clinically work.
If you philosophically agree with this understanding of moods, it makes the emphasis on "happiness" decidedly shaky grounds for deciding moral issues. Happiness (or the lack of it) is a cognitive reaction to events that may or may not be built on sound foundations in your cognitive world. What's more important is to look at those foundations.
(There's a lot of good stuff on the problems of trying to base morals on utilitarianism on the internet. Unfortunately, it is treated as a vague default position for many people who have never had the inclination or education to really think about the basis of morals.)
It's all well and good for Michael Read (and liberals generally) to emphasise sympathy for mothers who fear unhappiness. But when it comes to matters of life or death of a fetus/baby which would be viable outside of the womb (we are talking late term abortion), it is hardly the most important factor at stake.
Friday, July 22, 2005
Multiculturalism wars
A matter of respect - Opinion - theage.com.au
An opinion piece in the Age today (above) rushes to the defence of mulitculturalism. The argument seems to boil down to blaming Australia for not "sharing power" enough with its new migrants. The implication in the last paragraph is that we don't give the young men enough job opportunities:
"Perhaps when Terry Lane and Pamela Bone and Andrew Bolt and the others take on Muslim young people as work-experience trainees, and are prepared to admit ignorance and seek to listen and learn, the young people might be more willing to sit on the heads of the thugs who threaten them just as much as they threaten the rest of us."
And earlier in the article:
"Immigrants often see the self-serving nature of social practices of the "host" society far more clearly than members of that society's own chattering classes and politicians. Their children, imbued with the lessons of democracy and fairness in the new world, shed their parents' acquiescence to the contradictions and demand that its claims to justice and equality be realised."
Apart from the fun of seeing Terry Lane being criticised for what would normally be called a right wing opinion, this article seems very dubious. How about some empirical evidence to support the idea that Australia (or Britain for that matter) is somehow discriminating against the children of Muslim immigrants.
At least in Australia, just when did the increase in Muslim immigration kick in? (My guess would be from maybe the mid 1980's or even a bit later. Bit hard to say for me, never having lived in Sydney. Brisbane only started having an obvious presence of Muslims since, I reckon, about 5 to 10 years ago.) Surely it takes a bit of time for the children of a new migrant group to start to get higher positions in the jobs market. And look how successful European, Chinese, Vietnamese and other immigrant children are in our society now.
He would have to do a much better job of justifying this argument before I would give it any credence at all.
An opinion piece in the Age today (above) rushes to the defence of mulitculturalism. The argument seems to boil down to blaming Australia for not "sharing power" enough with its new migrants. The implication in the last paragraph is that we don't give the young men enough job opportunities:
"Perhaps when Terry Lane and Pamela Bone and Andrew Bolt and the others take on Muslim young people as work-experience trainees, and are prepared to admit ignorance and seek to listen and learn, the young people might be more willing to sit on the heads of the thugs who threaten them just as much as they threaten the rest of us."
And earlier in the article:
"Immigrants often see the self-serving nature of social practices of the "host" society far more clearly than members of that society's own chattering classes and politicians. Their children, imbued with the lessons of democracy and fairness in the new world, shed their parents' acquiescence to the contradictions and demand that its claims to justice and equality be realised."
Apart from the fun of seeing Terry Lane being criticised for what would normally be called a right wing opinion, this article seems very dubious. How about some empirical evidence to support the idea that Australia (or Britain for that matter) is somehow discriminating against the children of Muslim immigrants.
At least in Australia, just when did the increase in Muslim immigration kick in? (My guess would be from maybe the mid 1980's or even a bit later. Bit hard to say for me, never having lived in Sydney. Brisbane only started having an obvious presence of Muslims since, I reckon, about 5 to 10 years ago.) Surely it takes a bit of time for the children of a new migrant group to start to get higher positions in the jobs market. And look how successful European, Chinese, Vietnamese and other immigrant children are in our society now.
He would have to do a much better job of justifying this argument before I would give it any credence at all.
Give me space
Sitting ducks - Tips - Travel - theage.com.au
I missed this article from earlier this week about the erosion of airline seat space, especially in economy. It is ridiculous what the airlines expect us to put up with, especially on anything over a couple of hours.
Although I don't support spurious litigation, I am a bit surprised that the litigation brought by deep vein thrombosis sufferers against some of the airlines has not (to my knowledge) met with any success yet. I mean, the airlines must have had some concern about potential liability over this, because of the sudden torrent of in-flight guidance on how to avoid it (starting maybe 3 or 4 years ago?) It is one area where I think the success of such litigation would serve a useful social purpose. Otherwise, it is really just not possible to see a way that the public is ever going to get the airlines to come up with a more acceptable standard for seat space.
I missed this article from earlier this week about the erosion of airline seat space, especially in economy. It is ridiculous what the airlines expect us to put up with, especially on anything over a couple of hours.
Although I don't support spurious litigation, I am a bit surprised that the litigation brought by deep vein thrombosis sufferers against some of the airlines has not (to my knowledge) met with any success yet. I mean, the airlines must have had some concern about potential liability over this, because of the sudden torrent of in-flight guidance on how to avoid it (starting maybe 3 or 4 years ago?) It is one area where I think the success of such litigation would serve a useful social purpose. Otherwise, it is really just not possible to see a way that the public is ever going to get the airlines to come up with a more acceptable standard for seat space.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Take sugar tablets instead?
Efficacy of antidepressants in adults -- Moncrieff and Kirsch 331 (7509): 155 -- BMJ
Wow, this story in the British Medical Journal will cause a lot of controversy, I expect. Bottom line: it's not so clear that antidepressants are better than placebo. The article summary is:
"The NICE review data suggest that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors do not have a clinically meaningful advantage over placebo, which is consistent with other recent meta-analyses. In addition, methodological artefacts may account for the small effect seen. Evidence that antidepressants are more effective in more severe conditions is not strong, and data on long term outcome of depression and suicide do not provide convincing evidence of benefit. In children, the balance of benefits to risks is now recognised as unfavourable. We suggest this may also be the case for adults, given the continuing uncertainty about the possible risk of increased suicidality as well as other known adverse effects. This conclusion implies the need for a thorough re-evaluation of current approaches to depression and further development of alternatives to drug treatment. Since antidepressants have become society's main response to distress, expectations raised by decades of their use will also need to be addressed."
I should point out that placebo tablets will only work if you don't know they are placebo (so I am not seriously suggesting swapping your tablets for sugar ones!) However, as I have mentioned in an earlier post, cognitive therapy has got years of good results behind it now. Try it, depressed Lefties!
Wow, this story in the British Medical Journal will cause a lot of controversy, I expect. Bottom line: it's not so clear that antidepressants are better than placebo. The article summary is:
"The NICE review data suggest that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors do not have a clinically meaningful advantage over placebo, which is consistent with other recent meta-analyses. In addition, methodological artefacts may account for the small effect seen. Evidence that antidepressants are more effective in more severe conditions is not strong, and data on long term outcome of depression and suicide do not provide convincing evidence of benefit. In children, the balance of benefits to risks is now recognised as unfavourable. We suggest this may also be the case for adults, given the continuing uncertainty about the possible risk of increased suicidality as well as other known adverse effects. This conclusion implies the need for a thorough re-evaluation of current approaches to depression and further development of alternatives to drug treatment. Since antidepressants have become society's main response to distress, expectations raised by decades of their use will also need to be addressed."
I should point out that placebo tablets will only work if you don't know they are placebo (so I am not seriously suggesting swapping your tablets for sugar ones!) However, as I have mentioned in an earlier post, cognitive therapy has got years of good results behind it now. Try it, depressed Lefties!
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
More on Iraq / al Qaeda
The DIA and CIA Go MIA
This story is about the issue I raised previously, namely the disconcerting way the main stream media is, by and large, completely unconcerned about looking into the question of Iraq and al Qaeda. A good read.
This story is about the issue I raised previously, namely the disconcerting way the main stream media is, by and large, completely unconcerned about looking into the question of Iraq and al Qaeda. A good read.
A Jakarta Post opinion piece on London bombing
The Jakarta Post - After the bombs, London searching for the root cause of terrorism
Contrary to the headline, the above article contains nothing about the "search for the root cause of terrorism", but takes the opportunity to try to paint a moral equivalence between the conduct of the US and al-Qaeda. To quote:
"The aims of both al-Qaeda and some of these Western governments are somehow similar: Both "sides" believe in bombing and wars, both "sides" try to create the impressions that the other is evil and deserves to be destroyed in the name of (ironically) humanity, and both sides are spreading hatred and terror.
Both have used and sacrificed ordinary working class people, to achieve their ambitions, whatever these ambitions are. As Noam Chomsky has stated, George Bush used fear as a tool for his re-election, and had to manufacture another threat to American security to win his Presidency."
Appalling....
Contrary to the headline, the above article contains nothing about the "search for the root cause of terrorism", but takes the opportunity to try to paint a moral equivalence between the conduct of the US and al-Qaeda. To quote:
"The aims of both al-Qaeda and some of these Western governments are somehow similar: Both "sides" believe in bombing and wars, both "sides" try to create the impressions that the other is evil and deserves to be destroyed in the name of (ironically) humanity, and both sides are spreading hatred and terror.
Both have used and sacrificed ordinary working class people, to achieve their ambitions, whatever these ambitions are. As Noam Chomsky has stated, George Bush used fear as a tool for his re-election, and had to manufacture another threat to American security to win his Presidency."
Appalling....
Christopher Hitchens on Rove
Rove Rage - The poverty of our current scandal. By Christopher Hitchens
The link is to the ever readable Hitchens on the Rove/Wilson stuff. Excellent! (Although Professor Bunyip did a good job on this too.)
The link is to the ever readable Hitchens on the Rove/Wilson stuff. Excellent! (Although Professor Bunyip did a good job on this too.)
Avoiding the issue
From the same website that I linked to in my last post, which from a quick look seems generally to be a relatively moderate Islamic site, note this question and answer:
"If it is proved that a Muslim carried out the London bombings and I know something about him. Shall I call the non-Muslim police to arrest him? Or hand him to a Muslim schoalr or imam who can talk to him and convince him no to do that henious act again? Does this case have an origin in Fiqh literature?
Answer In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger. According the Qur'an: (Whoever saves a human life, it is as if he has saved the entire humanity.) (Al-Ma`idah 5: 32) Therefore, if you found someone that is planning to attack civilians and innocent people, then you have to stop him by all legitimate means, including giving advice, preventing him from carrying out the crime, or even calling the police if he refuses to listen to you. There is no difference between Muslims and non-Muslims as for being perpetrators or victims, because every human life counts in Islam. The Qur'an, talking about the prohibition to kill people, used the word "nafs" which means "soul" without making a distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims. "
See how the question says the person was already involved, but doesn't concentrate on whether to report him for that, but just on what to do to stop him doing it again. And the answer doesn't address the need to arrest him because he has already done the crime.
Is it too much for an Islamic leader to just say "yes, call the police if you believe he was involved"? And I am sure the UK police have Islamic liaison officers, as if that should matter anyway.
"If it is proved that a Muslim carried out the London bombings and I know something about him. Shall I call the non-Muslim police to arrest him? Or hand him to a Muslim schoalr or imam who can talk to him and convince him no to do that henious act again? Does this case have an origin in Fiqh literature?
Answer In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger. According the Qur'an: (Whoever saves a human life, it is as if he has saved the entire humanity.) (Al-Ma`idah 5: 32) Therefore, if you found someone that is planning to attack civilians and innocent people, then you have to stop him by all legitimate means, including giving advice, preventing him from carrying out the crime, or even calling the police if he refuses to listen to you. There is no difference between Muslims and non-Muslims as for being perpetrators or victims, because every human life counts in Islam. The Qur'an, talking about the prohibition to kill people, used the word "nafs" which means "soul" without making a distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims. "
See how the question says the person was already involved, but doesn't concentrate on whether to report him for that, but just on what to do to stop him doing it again. And the answer doesn't address the need to arrest him because he has already done the crime.
Is it too much for an Islamic leader to just say "yes, call the police if you believe he was involved"? And I am sure the UK police have Islamic liaison officers, as if that should matter anyway.
Everything you may never have wanted to know about this...
I am not really mocking Islam by linking to this detailed explanation of Islamic views on toilet paper. I was just genuinely curious about how detailed they get in their teachings on this.
However, you can't but help find the reference to using rocks or pebbles a bit funny, can you? Pity the poor desert dwellers, I suppose.
I am also curious about how many Muslims really follow the shaving pubic hair bit. I mean, it's not like your fellow Mosque attendees are ever likely to see, are they?
However, you can't but help find the reference to using rocks or pebbles a bit funny, can you? Pity the poor desert dwellers, I suppose.
I am also curious about how many Muslims really follow the shaving pubic hair bit. I mean, it's not like your fellow Mosque attendees are ever likely to see, are they?
Facing facts
TIME.com: When Denial Can Kill -- Jul. 25, 2005
The link is to a good essay from this week's Time magazine, about how Islamic leaders should face up to the fact that the Koran can be used to "justify" terrorism, and start their counter-arguments from that point (rather than from a blanket assertion that Islam is all about peace.) Well worth a read.
The link is to a good essay from this week's Time magazine, about how Islamic leaders should face up to the fact that the Koran can be used to "justify" terrorism, and start their counter-arguments from that point (rather than from a blanket assertion that Islam is all about peace.) Well worth a read.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Arab conspiracies
U.S. forces behind deadly children bomb: Iraqi experts -
See the above link for stupid propaganda that Arab media is still prepared to promote. It's a worry.
By the way, although I initially thought this website was connected to Aljazeera TV, it seems not to be.
Anyway, this Aljazeera website even has a special area for conspiracy theories, where it would seem every possible rumour gets a run, without any serious commentary at all.
Are Arabs especially pre-disposed to believing rumour and conspiracy? Of course the West has its fair share of conspiracy nutters too; but it is distressing to see the websites like this (which, from its commercial advertising, looks at at least a little main-streamish) playing such a role in promoting damaging and ridiculous rumours.
See the above link for stupid propaganda that Arab media is still prepared to promote. It's a worry.
By the way, although I initially thought this website was connected to Aljazeera TV, it seems not to be.
Anyway, this Aljazeera website even has a special area for conspiracy theories, where it would seem every possible rumour gets a run, without any serious commentary at all.
Are Arabs especially pre-disposed to believing rumour and conspiracy? Of course the West has its fair share of conspiracy nutters too; but it is distressing to see the websites like this (which, from its commercial advertising, looks at at least a little main-streamish) playing such a role in promoting damaging and ridiculous rumours.
Camel robot jockeys
The Australian: Robot jockeys saddle up [July 19, 2005]
Why haven't I seen this on TV yet? Robot sports, that's what the world is waiting for...
Why haven't I seen this on TV yet? Robot sports, that's what the world is waiting for...
Monday, July 18, 2005
Mad Katter on IR reform
Damn. On ABC Radio News this afternoon, I heard a snippet from mad Bob Katter about why he will oppose the Howard government's IR reforms. Unfortunately, I can't see it quoted anywhere on the net yet, so you will have to do with my paraphrase.
Bob said he will oppose it because even though he was involved in Joh Bjelke Peterson's fights with union, he does not want to see us go back to not just the 1960's, but the 1860's, when mining companies owned the children who wore numbers around their neck as they were sent down into the mines. (I am not making this up.)
Gee, I wonder why the union's ad campaigns don't mention that? I can see the ad now. Mum gets phone call threatening the sack if she can't change her shift. "But there must be some way I can keep my job?" she asks. Cut to the kids in sackcloth in the mine elevator.
Update: OK the actual quote now:
Bob said he will oppose it because even though he was involved in Joh Bjelke Peterson's fights with union, he does not want to see us go back to not just the 1960's, but the 1860's, when mining companies owned the children who wore numbers around their neck as they were sent down into the mines. (I am not making this up.)
Gee, I wonder why the union's ad campaigns don't mention that? I can see the ad now. Mum gets phone call threatening the sack if she can't change her shift. "But there must be some way I can keep my job?" she asks. Cut to the kids in sackcloth in the mine elevator.
Update: OK the actual quote now:
"They say I want to go back to the 1960s, the McEwen era, the old Country Party era, well that's absolutely true," he said.
"But it's a hell of a lot better to go back to 1960 than where they want to go, which is 1860, where little children went down mines with steel collars with numbers and were actually owned by the mine owners."
Space shuttle coming near you (well, me)
According to this bit of fun news over the weekend, (RAAF Base) Amberley - about 40 km west of Brisbane - is on the list of potential emergency landing sites for the space shuttle.
Is the runway there long enough? Well, it seems the Florida runway is 15,000 ft, with an extra 2,000 ft of paved overruns and Amberley is close enough to 10,000. So I guess it would do in a pinch. However, if I lived at Leichhardt (Ipswich suburb more or less right on the edge of the base) and I heard the shuttle was on its way in, I would be outta there pretty damn quick.
Is the runway there long enough? Well, it seems the Florida runway is 15,000 ft, with an extra 2,000 ft of paved overruns and Amberley is close enough to 10,000. So I guess it would do in a pinch. However, if I lived at Leichhardt (Ipswich suburb more or less right on the edge of the base) and I heard the shuttle was on its way in, I would be outta there pretty damn quick.
Webdiary's unsurprising slant on London
As Tim Blair noted (somewhere, I've lost it now), Webdiary was mysteriously silent for a long time on the London bombings. Possibly the technical problems afftecting the site recently?
In any event, this article (subtitled "commentary by Margo Kingston", but containing simply her very brief introduction to an article by John Richardson) is an entirely predictable rant that blames all of Islamic terrorism on, you guessed it, the West. America in particular. London only gets brief mention, but the blame the victim message is clear.
One "new" thing I noted in it was this:
"Then this week, the much quieter voice of an Iraqi humanitarian organization reported that 128,000 Iraqis have been killed since the US invasion began in March 2003 (Civilian Casualties In Iraq)."
The link is to a website here, the "World Peace Herald", which apparently is owned by the Moonies and seems to run a suspiciously sympathetic line on Islamofacsism (see story here, headed " 'To stop terrorism, accept pious Muslims on equal terms' ".)
Anyway, there is next to no detail on the Iraqi source of this new casualty figure, and a quick Google search adds nothing. No one should take it seriously without some proper detail. But that's no problem for Richardson (or Margo, if its "her" commentary piece).
Admittedly, Webdiary follows with a piece by Darlene Taylor which briefly attacks this sort of crap, but is mostly devoted to a review of David Williamson's latest play.
I knew Webdairy would eventually come to the party.
In any event, this article (subtitled "commentary by Margo Kingston", but containing simply her very brief introduction to an article by John Richardson) is an entirely predictable rant that blames all of Islamic terrorism on, you guessed it, the West. America in particular. London only gets brief mention, but the blame the victim message is clear.
One "new" thing I noted in it was this:
"Then this week, the much quieter voice of an Iraqi humanitarian organization reported that 128,000 Iraqis have been killed since the US invasion began in March 2003 (Civilian Casualties In Iraq)."
The link is to a website here, the "World Peace Herald", which apparently is owned by the Moonies and seems to run a suspiciously sympathetic line on Islamofacsism (see story here, headed " 'To stop terrorism, accept pious Muslims on equal terms' ".)
Anyway, there is next to no detail on the Iraqi source of this new casualty figure, and a quick Google search adds nothing. No one should take it seriously without some proper detail. But that's no problem for Richardson (or Margo, if its "her" commentary piece).
Admittedly, Webdiary follows with a piece by Darlene Taylor which briefly attacks this sort of crap, but is mostly devoted to a review of David Williamson's latest play.
I knew Webdairy would eventually come to the party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)