anatole

Vanishing Foundations

2011-10-27T12:03:00.003+11:00

One of the things mathematics taught me is that you have to start somewhere. Some things you just have to accept. Axioms are assumed to be true (usually because they are self evident) but are unprovable.

One thing discussions with atheists have taught me is that everyone (no one is excepted, here) finds it easier to see someone else's assumptions while often remaining ignorant of their own.

Let's have some fun seeing what that looks like. David Hume raised the is/ought problem, also known as Hume's law or Hume's gillotuine. When used in an argument, Hume's law might be deployed something like, "You can't get an ought from an is."

"School education is a shambles, we ought to put more money into schools."
This doesn't necessarily follow, for example
"School education is a shambles, we ought to stop wasting money on a broken system."

Which contention is correct needs to be established by further argument.

That's a simplified application.

But here's a really interesting application of Hume's law to Hume's law.

This is Hume's Law as he originally expressed it:

Doh Moments

2011-09-27T08:36:00.003+10:00

Despite the great Australian tradition of the "Der" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYmPXD7OCmk&feature=related Nobody does stupidity as well as Homer Simpson. So this new category is to record Homer moments when and where they happen.
Doh moments.

Now Britney Spears is in trouble for a music video that seems at face value to be a naked attention grab in the wake of the London riots. (Sorry, mentioning Britney and naked attention grab in the same sentence was an unintended pun)

I know what Hackney's MP is trying to say but considering Britney's track record and all the material on public record, this has to be one of the stupidest things ever uttered,

"Britney should really know better,"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2042212/Britney-Spears-row-Hackney-Council-gun-toting-video-shoot-Londons-riot-zone.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

PS: I guess there's nothing wrong with Hackney, but can you think of a better place name for Britney to trot out another music mush video from?

Born This Way - NOT

2011-05-30T11:18:00.001+10:00

I was born this way.

What, with prosthetic shoulder, cheek and temple implants?

As much as the 'born this way' argument is appealling because it shuts down all opposition, Gaga herself shows what a lot of rubbish it is.

Whales Speak Oxford English

2010-05-21T14:44:00.005+10:00

Optus and WSPA have combined forces to give wales a voice. Just not their voice.

This is the website: http://www.givewhalesavoice.com.au/?utm_source=Empowered&utm_medium=eDM&utm_content=URL&utm_campaign=Give_Whales_A_Voice

Apparently wales are one of the loudest animals on the planet, but they suffer in silence when hunted.

"But together we can make their voices heard"

The site encourages us to record a word from the Oxford English Dictionary, then this list of words will be sent to the waling commission.

Do wales want to speak with an Oxford English accent?

My whole problem with this campaign is my problem with the whole animal rights movement.

This ad talks about the wales' voice, but it's really our voice. People are making these recordings. It's not wales sneaking ashore and surreptitiously recording a word in Ahab's Internet Cafe.

People who get caught up in the animal rights causes do so because they have given human characteristics, human prerogatives, human feelings and human motives to animals.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm against animal cruelty, but that's not the same things as seeing animals as the same as humans. That's just bad logic, it's not empirical and it's just plain dumb.

I was talking about this very thing to someone the other day who mentioned their pet dog and how important he was. And I pointed out, gently, that it was your attachment to the dog, your human characteristics that made cruelty to the animal seem so wrong.

We are different to dogs. They don't actually mind cruelty (unless we teach them otherwise). Ever seen a dog play with a rabbit? Ever seen a fox rip a lamb out of a ewe?

Let's shepherd creation, fish the wales humanely and sensibly if we have to, and not at all if we don't have to. But let's keep things in perspective.

Making a human being out of a wale is making a mountain out of a molehill.

In fact, it is this effort to give wales a human voice that actually robs the wales of their own unique voice.

Knutty Environmentalists

2010-03-03T12:22:00.009+11:00

Get some perspective. That's all I'm going to say.

Get some perspective.

Wake up to yourselves.

Two different articles in the same SMH bulletin.

The first one speaks for itself. Have a look around, PETA. Get some perspective. What's really important here?

The second one is the same tragic environmental myopia carried through to a sadly enviro-logical end.

A couple in Argentina attempted to kill one of their children, succeeded in murdering the other, then killed themselves and "wrote in a suicide note they were scared about the effects of global warming" (http://www.smh.com.au/world/baby-survives-three-days-with-bullet-in-chest-after-parents-suicide-pact-20100303-pgtm.html)

They don't have to worry about global warming now.

This sad story reveals the stupidity of the extremist end of environmentalism because this is the logical conclusion of the rhetoric.

Get some perspective. Take a breath. Pull your head out of the clouds of rhetoric and propaganda and have a look at the real issues that face the world.

I Really Admire Elton John

2010-02-26T08:12:00.003+11:00

I really admire Elton John.

Wow, a PHD in history and ancient languages. The years of learning and wisdom that he has accumulated is impressive.

The thoughtfulness with which he constructs each senstence, his devotion to the true, the good and the noble.

His commitment to following the truth where it lead him rather than shaping the world to his own desiring. His-

Oh wait, That's not the real Elton John. That's a made up one.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/people/elton-john-jesus-was-gay-20100222-oom2.html

Elton John: Jesus was gay
February 22, 2010

God botherer ... Elton John claims Jesus Christ was gay.

Sir Elton John has claimed Jesus was a "super-intelligent gay man".
The openly homosexual musician made the claim in a magazine interview and admits he admires the Christian Messiah because his aim was to spread peace and love in the world.
The Rocket Man singer - who is married to Canadian filmmaker David Furnish - told Parade magazine: "I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems.
"On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving.
"I don't know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East - you're as good as dead."
The Catholic League, the largest US Catholic rights group, condemned the comments.
"Jesus was certainly compassionate, but to say he was 'super-intelligent' is to compare the son of God to a successful game-show contestant,'' league president Bill Donohue said in a statement."More seriously, to call Jesus a homosexual is to label him a sexual deviant.''
Meanwhile, Elton also revealed he fears he could be killed by a crazed fan - just like John Lennon and Gianni Versace.
The 62-year-old singer was close friends with fashion designer Versace - who was shot dead in July 1997 on the steps of his Miami Beach mansion by Andrew Cunanan - and admits he decided to increase his personal security following the tragedy.
Referring to Versace and Lennon, he said: "Two of them shot outside their houses. None of this would have happened if they hadn't been famous. Fame attracts lunatics. I never had a bodyguard ever until Gianni died. I don't like celebrity anymore."
Beatles legend Lennon died in 1980 after being shot by deranged fan Mark Chapman outside his apartment building in New York.
Bang Showbiz and AFP

Leadership Integrity

2010-01-28T15:56:00.002+11:00

Freedom

2010-01-28T15:45:00.003+11:00

But What is the Unintentional Result

2010-01-28T15:39:00.002+11:00

I know, let's make the ones who believe that stuff so uncomfortable that they have to leave. What would happen then?

Unity by Decree

2010-01-28T15:31:00.007+11:00

I've been cleaning up...

Callous Indifference

2009-12-15T16:53:00.004+11:00

A newspaper article today praises a young man who rescued a woman from a submerged vehicle.

The Newspaper article is here

A young woman driving along a seaside road was distracted by an insect and her car left the raod to become submerged upside down. A passing motorist rescued her and then disappeared.

While police and various groups praise the man PETA want to know what happened to the insect.

Ultimate Authority

2009-10-19T10:55:00.004+11:00

There's a bit of a debate going on in Anglican circles about who can lead The Lord's Supper. It's no big deal, they're just working some things out, but it's been in the media, because it can be beat up into a fracas if you try hard enough.

One interesting comment that came out of the article (http://www.smh.com.au/national/legal-challenge-brewing-over-holy-communion-row-20091018-h2yo.html)

The rector of St John's Church, Gordon, Father Keith Dalby, said diaconal and
lay presidency contravened the type of church services and ministry role as
prescribed in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which is the ultimate standard of
worship in the Anglican communion.

Penultimate, he should say. There's this book called the Bible...

The Post-Race President

2009-09-30T13:52:00.006+10:00

Barak Obama was supposed to be the historical president that moved America beyond race.

It doesn't seem to be so.

In fact, it seems that in the United States it is becoming impossible to criticise Obama (Joe Wilson) or do your job (Sgt. James Crowley) without being accused of racism. Now you can't commit a crime without being racist.

To be sure this is nasty if it is a crime, and with the facts I have at this stage make it seem unlikely to me to be an accident or self harm.

But the last paragraph in this report is totally unwarranted:

Some reporters have also theorised that Sparkman's work for the Census Bureau - which is a federal government agency - linked him in the minds of his killers in conservative, mainly white rural Kentucky with President
Barack Obama, the first black US president.

Is it good reporting to finish an article with the unsubstantiated theory of other journalists that this crime was racially motivated when there is absolutely no evidence at this stage that this is so?

The fact that the deceased had "Fed" written on his chest is a fairly good indicator of anti federalism, or separatists or a southern grudge, but it in no way indicates racism.

What has the racial make up of the state, or their rural nature, or their political leanings got to do with a nasty crime in the woods. If it becomes an established fact that racist right wing guerrillas perpetrated this, then report it, but until then leave out the wild theories dripping with implications and veiled allegations.

It seems to me that it is not the conservatives who cannot move beyond race, but rather the liberals who would see racism rather than report the facts or deal with the issues.

Michael Hutton,
Conservative, mainly white rural Ariah Park

Blast From The Past

2009-08-19T12:18:00.007+10:00

Found this when cleaning up the study. A comment (cynical comment) arising out of the cafuffles in the Uniting Church at the time.

Moroney's Lane, Temora

2009-07-16T16:36:00.007+10:00

Moroney's Lane, Temora
July 2009

Probably about 5km down Moroney's lane from Temora, just after a rocky outcrop where the road narrows in the scrub as the hillside steepens there are two rubbish tips in what are probably two old mine diggings. Lots of wire and steel, a few bottles from about 50's or 60's and some broken bottles from approx 1920's.

Kevin Webb and I had a dig and excavated one pit and half of the other. The best find was two O.T. bottles, also a Reschs bottle with the Lion from about 1920's.

O.T. Registered
Refilling by Others
Is Illegal

This Bottle is
The Property of O.T. Limited
Australia
& London
1920's with beautiful picture of a chilli. Apparently a chilli fruit punch used as a mixer. The Maharaja's secret recipe, would you believe.

Later I went back and completed the dig and found a few more nondescript bottles from about 1920's and some bottles with trademarks and brand names from a later vintage.

Back Mimosa Road

2009-07-16T16:20:00.003+10:00

Back Mimosa Road, Temora
July 2009
An old brick building starting to go to ruin on the Back Mimosa Road. I went back to the farm house and asked for permission to have a look around. She reckoned that it had already been looked over and there wouldn't be any there. Funny thing is, I found two Moglia and Smith bottles, one on either side of the road, on my side of the fence.

MOGLIA & SMITH
Trade Mark
TEMORA

With AGM skirt beneath.

Faithless Hermeneutics

2009-07-15T12:26:00.005+10:00

Why is it Relevant?

2009-06-16T11:07:00.004+10:00

Why is it even mentioned?

A SMH article (SMH link) describes the successful suit of a Muslim woman against her employer, a bar, for discrimination.

She sued because she was going to be forced to wear a tight uniform that was too revealing and made her feel "like a prostitute".

She won the case because the male staff were not made to change to a similarly humiliating uniform.

A couple of questions?

Why is it mentioned that she is Muslim? It has nothing to do with how she won the case. It was a case of sexual discrimination.

The wording makes it clear that a pivotal point was that the men didn't have to wear a similar uniform. Would it be OK if the men had to sleaze themselves for the job too? I suspect it would. Our community has lost its moral compass and the only way we can measure things are the woefully inadequate "consent" and "equal"

What is a Muslim woman doing serving alcohol in a bar anyway? This is why the mention of her religious background is weird. Good Muslims have nothing to do with alcohol.

Do we get to pick and choose which aspects of our religion we will sue others over and which we disregard when it suits us.

Should religious tolerance be extended to those who don't practice their faith consistently?

Some good questions there.
Probably some good answers somewhere.

But, I suspect, not to be found in the British law courts or with this particular Muslim woman.

Air Tax Controversy

2009-06-03T11:04:00.005+10:00

Civil liberties groups are protesting the inclusion of a Oxygen Levy, or Air Tax, in the Australian Government's recent federal budget.

Buried in the fine print the levy has been largely unnoticed until now.

Margot Leifft of the Citizens Rights Coalition says, "It's only a small percentage now but it opens the door to further increases. Free air is an inalienable right."

The federal Treasurer disagrees, "A responsible government will tax the carbon a citizen puts into the atmosphere and a legitimate government can tax the oxygen you take out."

The coalition is researching to take a case to the supreme court, but it seems to be a long shot.
"There is nothing in the constitution, no case, no precedent. We've been right through the UN's declaration of human rights, and at the moment we can't find it clearly stated."

"What is clear is that the current laws were not framed with an oxygen levy in mind," he said in an issues paper released yesterday.

Couldn't happen?

Tell me this is isn't the same logic

http://www.smh.com.au/national/routine-operation-may-be-a-crime-20090602-bueh.html?sssdmh=dm16.379913

Note that only 50 years ago the majority of boys were circumcised, surely the conclusion must be that the law rests on the assumption of the complete and utter legality of circumcision.

You will find the same underhand argument in the case of the ordination of homosexual ministers in the Uniting church in Australia and the redefinition of Marriage to include homosexual etc unions.

What was common territory and universally assumed was not spoken of, hence a bit of fancy footwork can paint it as an area of doubt, or a grey area for interpretation.

Dishonest and Distasteful.

Be honest and just say, "We want to change everything."

Same Old Story

2009-05-15T12:12:00.001+10:00

Quandary.

Same old story. All the best bottles are broken. On a ride around the bent triangle of Quandary Road, Old Wagga Road and Canty's lane James and I found a few odd thrown botles. Just North of Canty's Lane the Old Wagga Road had a couple of old tips with very nice shards, but no whole bottles.

The Universal Solution

2009-04-28T10:35:00.008+10:00

What is the solution to aggression, rudeness and belligerence on our roads?

The Lord Mayor of Sydney, Clover Moore, said: "The problem is that motorists are treating cyclists really badly, and so you get the cyclists calling themselves road warriors and now you've got them driving motorists mad. Education is key."

Education, it will fix everything.

Except people who don't want to be fixed.

The problem is sin and the solution is Jesus.

Yes, the solution to road rage is Jesus.

(Full details here)

Dream Marriage

2009-04-19T18:22:00.002+10:00

Free Trial

Ummm, it doesn't work that way.

At Last, Some Unbroken Glass

2009-04-11T14:17:00.005+10:00

Mirrool Creek Stock Route. (11 April 2009)
A very pleasant ride along the stock route from Quandary to Garvans Lane (The route runs just south and parallel to Walkers Lane) yielded a couple of rubbish deposits. The first, about 7 km from Quandary yielded a few interesting, but relatively recent finds (1950's?).

A little further on in a belt of scrub there are tins and scrap dispersed over a wqide area, just near the remains of significant early earthworks (dam? mine tailings?). Some nice smaller bottles were dug from one tip that went to a depth of about 10cm.

A small bottle with a lovely blue colour. If I read the M on the base right it's from the Melbourne Glass Works between 1900 and 1915.

A couple of those small vase bottles (Pecks?) of two different designs (RG No 528067)

Two small clear bottles (A54 C 10 UGB and A54 C 5 UGB)

A lovely glass stopper, fairly chipped, but with a hint of a lovely amethyst colour.

A fancy Zarona Regd bottle, badly chipped at neck and cracked at base

Shame Culture and Getting Caught

2009-04-08T10:05:00.007+10:00

Is our society moving to a shame culture?

There are several cultures around the world that are driven not by guilt or right or wrong, but by losing face.

Doing the right thing is less important than not losing face. If we can bluff our way out of it, that is better than admitting wrongdoing.

Western culture used not to be driven by this.

But I wonder is the hollow apology syndrome plaguing our politicians and celebrities driving us toward a shame culture. Is it our society's hypocritical double standards that have caused the rise of the spin doctor and moving us toward a losing-face based culture?

North Melbourne chief executive Eugene Arocca reveals a terrible lack of focus when he reveals his concerns over the chicken video, an apparently obscene and debasing video obviously made on the North Melbourne premises. Fairfax Article

I quote the article:

"It then found its way onto YouTube. It's now been removed. I'm furious to say the least that it's gotten out, though I haven't had the advantage of seeing it."

He is not furious it was made on our premises, not furious it was made by one of our players, but furious it got out, furious we got caught.

Can we expect a tightening of the PR rules and no real dealing with the issue, or will they actually discipline the proto-rapist that made the video?

Bottle Collecting with Mother Hubbard

2009-04-04T11:01:00.002+11:00

Old Temora Road
On a very windy ride 10 km down the Old Temora Road a back lane or stock route held a sprawling surface tip. It yielded a frustrating array of shards- beautiful colours, wonderful shapes, interesting inscriptions- all broken. Either previous collectors have picked it clean or kids have had a lot of fun, or both.

Stock Route North of town.

The stock route between the Barmedman road and the Cemetery road had a number of tips. Some manganese glass indicated age in some, but all but a few recent uninteresting bottles had been smashed. Evidence suggested this location was too close to town to escape the depredations of wandering kids.

Stooping From The Shoulders of Giants

2009-04-02T18:21:00.006+11:00

Listening to the news in the car this afternoon I had two observations about the G20 protesters.

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/audio/am/200904/20090402-am02-kennedy-qanda.mp3
The Global Anti-globalisation Movement

How do protesters get to their protests? Why were there international protesters at the Sydney Summit? How long before the summit did they have to leave on their bark canoes in order to not be part of the global airline network?

I don't like global free trade. I think the little countries are always going to get pushed around by the big countries. But globalisation just is. Television, fibre optics, Internet, satellites these are the things that have made the world "globalised" These will not be wound back by protests. The protesters are completely missing the point, they need to protest outside every home that has Internet, every home that has a television, every city that has an airport.

There is something fundamentally myopic (more blind and stupid than hypocritical) about anti globalisation protesters who catch planes, trains, buses and taxis to protests and use the Internet to organise their protests.

Stooping from the shoulders of giants.

One dopey sounding protester on the news was recorded saying, "We don't need the banks." Utter stupidity. If he had said, "We don't like the banks." or "We don't want the banks." I could actually agree (kinda). But he is dead wrong. If you want to own a home, you need the banks. If you want someone to buy your corner shop which is fro sale, you need the banks.

Banks make a whole lot of things possible for a whole lot of ordinary people. One could argue that without the banks the middle class would not exist and the gap between rich and poor would be even greater. Where do you live for the twenty years it takes you to save the $350,000 under your mattress to buy your first home?

If you just remember banks are a business and are trying to make money out of their financial services you'll do fine. If you don't like banks, you should try some of the non bank lenders. banks like to make their money out of people paying off their home loan. Some other lenders are happy to make a living selling people out of their homes. In finance, by and large, the banks are the nice guys.

The protesters, who live somewhere, and utilise infrastructure, services and business all built on bank credit are like rich wastrels living of the inheritance. The enviro-protester lifestyle is made possible by the foundation of work and build over centuries with the cooperation of the financial sector.

Sure things have got financially wobbly lately. But don't forget that's as much because of the greed of the ordinary family as the greed of the banks. Our society is like the protesters. Living off the rich heritage of ethics, community, character and world view build up by generations of Christian civilisation. But like the protesters, ignorantly chipping away at the foundations as quickly as possible and simultaneously wondering why the system doesn't work like it used to.

Cultural Imperialism

2009-03-30T10:05:00.006+11:00

Cultural Imperialism is the accusation often thrown at the missionaries of days gone by.

Today's cultural imperialism, driven by economic imperialism and justified by blind idealism is a rapacious beast devouring millions of lives.

Take the latest pot shots at the pope.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/pope-faces-new-anger-over-condoms-20090330-9ftq.html?sssdmh=dm16.368758

Now there are plenty of things I would take the pope to task over if I were to have a quiet chat with him in the back room. But I would try to get the facts straight. Our secular imperialists don't have to worry about that.

The pope is in trouble for criticising the condom based programs to prevent aids in Africa. Now I haven't read the whole of exactly what he said, but what is borne out by the evidence is this. Abstinence based programs on Africa have worked. Condom based programs have not worked.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032702825.html

But how can this be?

Condoms are a western based solution to the problem of aids. They require reliable infrastructure and a good economy, a reasonable education level, willingness of the participants to use condoms and the effectiveness of the condoms themselves in stopping disease transmission. How many of these exist in Africa? The last two are in doubt even in Western countries.

What good is a condom distribution point 100 km from the man and his temptation? What good is a condom bus every so often? How can these secularists not see that there might be a problem trying to enforce this western secularist program on Africa?

Because it is not about Africa. This issue is not about legitimate concern for the Africans dying of AIDS. This is what it's about:

"About 60 members of gay and lesbian groups staged an anti-Pope demonstration outside the Fourviere basilica in Lyon as the congregation arrived for Sunday mass given by the archbishop of Lyon, Philippe Barbarin. "

This issue is really about the secularist/liberal agenda at home in Western countries.

If it were about the plight of the Africans a little research would force the agitators to support the abstinence based programs. No, this issue is just another gob of mud to throw at the religious bulwark.

It's just a shame the facts won't back up the hype.

PS: a quick look at the level of critique and the research that goes into understanding the pope's comments and countering them logically.

The uninformed backlash:
"To go to Africa and tell people they shouldn't use condoms is criminal," France's education minister, Xavier Darcos, told French broadcaster Radio J. "

The actual comment:
"He said on a plane taking him to Cameroon that AIDS "cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems."

He didn't say don't use them, he said the program doesn't work. It's like taking the neighbour who pointed out the horse is dead up before the RSPCA for cruelty.

2009-03-24T09:57:00.005+11:00

I would have expected better than this foggy thinking from a Sydney Morning Herald article:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/mouse-diet-improves-appetite-research-20090323-97go.html?sssdmh=dm16.367804

"The spinifex hopping mouse, which weighs no more than 30 grams, can suppress its appetite for up to six days when not eating in order to survive for long periods without water.

Associate Professor John Donald, from Deakin University's school of life and environmental sciences, said this ability made the mouse an ideal animal to study when trying to better understand appetite control in people."

Could we understand more about human flight by studying the albatross?

Could we understand more about human sleep by studying the hibernation of bears?

We could say, "We might be able to apply some of these studies to human weight loss." (which is inevitably where it will go- some drug to suppress appetite and induce fat burning).

But you can't say that studying, in a rodent, an ability that we do not have will help us understand ourselves.

Unfortunately the paper seems to be quoting the scientist himself and not just misquoting or misapplying his conclusions.

This fuzzy thinking seems to me to be the end result of human inquiry divorced from understanding the human situation, as the Bible shows us.

Neanderthal Neeson

2009-03-17T08:27:00.006+11:00

Just a quick comment, somewhat tongue in cheek.

I flicked the TV on for a couple of minutes the other night, nothing worth watching as usual. But there was a show on SBS about Neanderthal man.

The bit I saw had a reconstruction of the face of a Neanderthal over the bones. A lot of very interesting assumptions there. But the really interesting thing was that when they had finished the model looked like Liam Neeson. I'm not kidding.

It kinda reinforced (unscientifically of course) a little question I have had for a while...

Is the difference between Neanderthal and me, for example, any greater than the difference between a Kalahari Bushman and a Scandinavian, or between an African and a Japanese person?

I think we tend to assume that Neanderthal were stupid and backward because they didn't have the tools we have. But 99.9% of us don't develop any new technologies either.

I think there is more proof needed before we can conclude that man has evolved since Neanderthal and not merely developed new technologies.

Garvans Lane (15 March 2009)

2009-03-15T18:10:00.009+11:00

Garvans Lane (15 March 2009)
In the paddock East of Garvan's Lane just North of the Old Temora Road I spotted two very nice bottles lying on the surface and some shards in the earth. Worth getting permission and probing for a tip.

Upon digging I found the remains of many nice bottles, all broken. Apart from the two on the surface (Dinneford's and a probable Empire bottle) the only other bottle retrieved undamaged was a very plain amethyst bottle.

DINNEFORD"S MAGNESIA (very good condition)

A very plain amethyst bottle with 116 or 11b in a triangle on the base.

An unmarked ink bottle with the neck broken (Mick tells me some ink bottles were manufactured sealed and had to be broken to open them)
A triangular shaped bottle unmarked and chipped in several places that may be an Empire bottle as shards of a similar shape and colour were clearly marked EMPIRE Co.

Arthur's 70th Birthday

2009-03-12T12:19:00.003+11:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UicAYwCM3e0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evEfGeT2fYQ

Camps Lane Revisited

2009-03-01T17:46:00.004+11:00

Steel, tins and shards indicate two small tips, possibly only surface tips about 350 and 650 m from the Burley Griffin Corner on the Northern side at the West end of Camps Lane. Very small tips, the Eastern one yielded a small Brylcream bottle.

Just west of the Easternmost corner on Camps lane I left a bottle neck at the base of a tree to indicate a possible tip that has a very few shards but yielded a Parramatta bottle from the surface.

When I went back to have a good scratch around...
The larger tip (650m) yielded a few bottles from the fifties (at a guess). Cough Medicine bottles were overrepresented, possibly because larger bottles were all broken.

THIS BOTTLE ALWAYS REMAINS THE PROPERTY OF
TAYLOR CHEMICAL CO SYDNEY (1960's)

PECKS

BONNINGTON'S
IRISH MOSS
COUGHS & COLDS (1960's)

At the eastern corner I was unable to find a tip. There was, however, on the opposite side of the road an interesting shaped bottle, probably from the twenties.

A G M

T462

Some Ariah Park Wildlife

2009-02-28T12:50:00.005+11:00

This morning we saw an emu not 5km from town.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsenkGupCDI

And there's funnier critters than that around...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mce80g5eGM

My First Amethyst

2009-02-28T10:03:00.007+11:00

Peels Road
About 400 m 425m and 475m east of the Trevaskis lane corner there is slight evidence of a tip on the south side. A couple of tins and very little glass. It could be a wash down the hill, or it could be so old that it is hard to find or it could have been disturbed by roadworks. Or there could be very little there and it was only an isolated dumping. At any rate the first spot gave me my first amethyst bottle.

A pick Me Up sauce bottle with the date, 1918 on the bottle. Must be one of the latest Manganese bottles made in Australia.

"PICK ME UP"

(REG'D TRADE MARK)

CONDIMENT Co Ltd

SAUCE

THIS BOTTLE IS THE PROPERTY OF

PICK ME UP CONDIMENT Co Ltd

SYDNEY 1918

(I found it pretty easy to date this one)

On Rogers Road I found a clear bottle, again, without much evidence of any other bottles around.

THIS BOTTLE IS THE PROPERTY OF

H JONES & Co (SYDNEY) LTD

Camps Lane Litter

2009-02-26T09:23:00.004+11:00

A decent selection of fairly ordinary bottles was found on a ride down Camps Lane on 26 February 2009. All bottles were found in ones or twos down the length of the lane. My best guess is that these bottles were the result of occasional litter from moving vehicles and remain undisturbed as the roadway is virtually obsolete.

(Left to Right)
Very Pretty VINEGAR Bottle from AGM
A H WEBSTER ARDLETHAN
Sharpe Brothers Centenary 1968 (Which may become a collector if I bury it for another 100yrs)
TUCKER & CO. PTY. LTD
A small Brylcreem

And the best one
SUMMONS & GRAHAM PTY LIMITED PARRAMATTA.
(A little worn with an impact mark at the bottom but still intact and very nice.)

Bottle Collecting

2009-02-25T08:37:00.004+11:00

Garvans Lane

Just South of Mirrool Creek rubbish is tipped into a couple of small erosion gullies to stabilise the banks just inside the paddock on the eastern side of the road. Most of it is new heavy fill. There is evidence of a couple of bottles, nothing early or spectacular. It is unlikely the farmer would like his erosion work to be dug up, nor is it likely to yield any great finds. One interesting if newish bottle had tumbled through the fence.

THIS BOTTLE ALWAYS REMAINS THE PROPERTY OF HALLOWES PTY LTD

Dads n Lads Trip February 2009

2009-02-23T14:40:00.002+11:00

James and I went to Abercrombie caves with some other men and little men from church.

Here are the highlights of the trip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3_lk72CLjw

People Believe What They Want

2009-02-03T11:00:00.011+11:00

I've often heard the rubric,
"People believe what they want to believe"

I've most often heard it directed in derision against Christians. Which I find funny. If I was making my own religion, it wouldn't have looked much like Christianity.

The problem with that saying is, of course, that everyone loves to apply it to everyone else, but not to themselves.

I think the practical way of putting it would be something like,

"Be suspicious of anyone who tells you what you want to hear."

Let me show you what I mean. When the preacher man says, "God loves America" I would like the patriotic Christians of America to just ask, "Where does it say that?" and "What does it mean by that?" and to just ask, once, "How has America also displeased God?"

When the Mullah in the middle east says that killing Americans gets you to heaven, I think it's a little suspect.

And into this category I would also put the Atheist bus ads in London. The ads essentially carry the philosophical load of the old phrase, "Eat drink and be merry." (We've stopped saying the ending because it's not done to face the reality of death these days) That's what we want to hear, so wouldn't you expect the atheists to be a little more skeptical.

As to pointing the finger back at myself. As a Christian, there are times when I probably need to be challenged. I'm human. But overall I think the Christian message has stuff I really don't want to hear.

You're a sinner - who wants to be told that?
God will judge the world - is that a cheery thought?
Love your enemies - nobody likes to actually practice this.
Submit your will to God - not going to attract a lot of people.

No, I believe the unpalatable truths of the Christian faith because I lost the battle to disprove them, because I am convinced of their truth, not because I liked them.

For a discussion of those atheist ads from a person smarter than I you could look here and here.

Propaganda, Polemic and Persuasion

2008-11-28T09:32:00.011+11:00

I have learnt the same thing from two different sources in the past week.

Polemic is powerless.

Propaganda does not change the minds of it's readers. If anything, propaganda and polemic harden the resolve of those it targets, for or against. Like a fertiliser, it encourages deeper roots - for both plant and weed.

I read the title story on Stephen Baxter's collection, Traces. I found it shallow and plodding, but it raised some interesting ideas (in me). I found Baxter's characterisation of the religious fundamentalist to be stereotypical. Relying on a stereotyped character to further an argument leaves the author at risk of employing the straw man. I felt that Baxter's portrayal of the religious character betrayed a lack of empathy with believing people and a poor understanding of their views and beliefs. If you want to challenge a person's deeply held beliefs then empathy and understanding are the required preparation of the canvas before the first stroke of the argument is laid.

How many arguments and debates meet at cross purposes because of a lack of empathy and understanding. How often have antagonists argued the same point, only from differing assumptions that leads the discussion to cross purposes.

(Is this why so many debates end with both sides declaring the victory, because neither has addressed the foundational assumptions of the other?)

So two points by way of concrete example.

Baxter neatly outlined the transformation of the fundamentals of the Christian faith to include the anthropic principle and the resultant attractiveness to insecure/shallow people. This completely ignores the Christian faith's self-understanding as revealed and it's consequent resistance to change and innovation (at a core level). It also indicates a cynical and patronising understanding of why people have faith.

Baxter's antagonist has his faith shattered by the revelation that there was intelligent life before the solar system was formed. This is a well worn hypothesis. The arrival of the little green men will shatter the illusions of the feeble religious. It made me laugh (not a happy laugh). The story unfolds with the discovery of images from before the creation of the solar system by projecting images from the electron structures of the core ice in a comet. What amuses me is that this fanciful process in a fictional story to uncover hypothetical extra-terrestrial intelligence is deemed to discredit the historical Christian faith.

What it comes down to is my faith in little green men is more rational than your faith in a metaphysical being.

The confirmation:

I was also sent a pamphlet self styled as a challenge to protestants. It was sent anonymously, in the mail.

Out of interest I started to read. Rome's Challenge: Why Do Protestants Keep Sunday. A collection of editorials from the Catholic Mirror, Baltimore.

What became very evident to me was that this tract, although styled as a challenge to protestants, was written for catholics. Its caustic and self-congratulatory style was offputting to me. Again protestantism was stereotyped. The pamphlet did not interacted with Protestantism in a mature and sincere understanding.

Read by a Roman Catholic, already suspicious of protestants, it might have been convincing. Read by a protestant thinker, it was sadly funny.

So, a challenge for me, and for you.

In what ever I write, particularly when I disagree or interact with other views-

Empathy and Understanding.

In my writing I have set myself a goal of reaching the minds that disagree with me. I am beginning to be aware what a difficult challenge it is.

World's Oldest Person Dies

2008-11-28T08:54:00.001+11:00

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/worlds-oldest-person-dies/2008/11/28/1227491773556.html?sssdmh=dm16.348154

Well, it was bound to happen.

Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. Hebrews 9:27-28

A New Hobby

2008-11-25T08:16:00.000+11:00

Davey's Lane. A small shallow tip just on the edge of the road just west of the quarry. Probably disturbed by roadworks. Yielded some fairly common bottles probably from the about the sixties.

Including this cute (if common) Peck's Paste bottle.

Cordoba's Feelin' Fine

2008-11-20T21:57:00.007+11:00

My mate Lou and I put together a little song for Ellie. We are praying for you all and hope you will be able to trust in God's goodness as you move yet again. We love you all.

You can download the video here or watch it on Youtube, the words are below.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Cordoba's feelin' fine.

One, two, three, four, fine, all the kids in the car so come on let's drive
To the- new city called Cordoba.
The folks say they want to pack and move but I really don't wanna -
Feels like I been here one week.
I wanna stay here I've moved a heap.
like Croydon, Lidcombe, even Argentina.
And as I continue, it's now a new city.
So what can I do? I wanna trust you my Lord.
To me moving is getting kinda old.
But Jesus Christ, He's So good. Let me Trust Him.
Help me to trust him.

A little bit of Penrith where we start,
Then we move back to Croydon Park
A little stay at Lidcombe, that big house
Wait for Argentina in Dundas
Then we went to B.A. a dingy flat
Now behind the church is where we're at
Now it seems Cordoba's the new plan
That's OK with us we're in his hand

Cordoba's feelin' fine

Got up, went down and travelled all around.
Adventures we have found, we've covered lots of ground.
The places we've left, to do what's right.
Out the front gate or out the side.
Pack your bags once and pack your bags twice
We did all this cause we're following Christ.

A little bit...

Trust him,
I trust Him
Cordoba's feelin' fine, ha, ha, ha.

A little bit...

I do all to do what Jesus wants me to.
So movin's fine or we'll stay a while
Now Cordoba is feelin' fine

Cordoba's feelin' fine

Northern Flights (of Fancy)

2008-11-17T22:08:00.006+11:00

I found Philip Pullman's Northern Lights (filmed as The Golden Compass) in the Op Shop so I bought it. I'd heard a bit about how terrible he was so I thought I'd look-see for myself.

It's a strange book for an atheist to write.

In the first chapter there was a reference to Pope John Calvin. A not so subtle dig at Christians, although it either showed a huge ignorance or a just as huge indifference. That Calvin could be a pope or that Calvin would be the kind of pope portrayed is laughable. That every person has a daemon companion (pronounced demon according to the note at the start) is perhaps a dig at Christians also. At any rate it should make most Christians uncomfortable, and this use of the word daemons alone is enough for me not to recommend the book.

So after a slow start the book gets interesting. Maybe shopping with Mrs Coulter would amuse my daughters, but we'll never know. For me the tension was a bit dull, waiting for some tension to develop. When it does, however, he does a fine job of it. Lyra's adventures are fun and though an unusual protagonist she does become an endearing one.

But this is the funny thing. For a book that has been touted to be so anti-Christian and deliberately too, it seems to not be really trying. The church is everywhere in the background, but none of the villains are church people directly. The church is just the political backdrop against which they work. In fact, the protagonist's anti-church hero ends up being more evil than the bad guys operating under official church sanction. Either Pullman is being very subtle and lulling us before he pulls out some big guns in later books or he is missing the mark.

It's also a funny book for an atheist to write because it is full of spiritual stuff. I am cynical about new pagans who write modern fantasies with their made up worlds and creatures attacking the church - which is historical. It is laughable for an atheist in his supposed attack on Christianity to make up talking bears, quasi-spiritual beings called daemons, witches who ride tree branches, other worlds seen in the aurora. He's batting for the wrong side here. You can't argue for the nonexistence of a spiritual being with other spiritual beings and phenomena. You've opened the door.

If his intent is to discredit the church or faith, he also misses the mark because in order to make his official church doctrines look foolish he has to change the Bible to fit his world. The Bible he sets up for critique and the church he subtly discredits is not the real Bible and not the real church. In fact the church as portrays it does not resemble the church at all.

Conclusion

Unless he is able to convince someone who doesn't know better that that is what the church is really like, his book is not a powerful atheist work. Whether the sharp knives come out in later books we will wait and see. Would I encourage my kids to read it? No. Would I call the marines if they did stumble across it in the library or read it in class? No. I'd just want to talk about it.

Post Script

What I found really ironic was that in the book I found one of the most apt and most sensible approaches to the whole predestination/freewill debate in the conversation between the witch and the aeronaut. Although she uses the word fate, I believe the sentiment is correct when we think about God's sovereignty and our self determination. She says, "We are all subject to the fates. But we must all act as if we are not," I believe this summarises our Christian understanding of sovereignty and human responsibility. If God is in control, why should I do anything? "We are all subject to God's sovereignty. But we must all act as if we are not."

But the big question, "What is an atheist doing talking about Fate anyway?"

Seven White bears out of Ten but not recommended.

The Gentle Pitter Patter Of...

2008-11-15T16:11:00.011+11:00

Life in the country

Lurking In The Creek

2008-11-12T10:54:00.006+11:00

It lurks.
I see it now
eddies in the current reveal the shape
barely protruding
I see the long rectangular jaw.
Now I see rows of sharp shiny teeth descending into the water.
It waits, patient, immobile. Rebuffs the dragging current.
A shopping trolley waiting to snag unwary plastic bags on their journey downstream.

Flux and Hard Fiction

2008-11-10T09:43:00.007+11:00

Flux, by Stephen Baxter was a reasonably good read.

Although the initial pages seemed to me to set up a trajectory for the book that it did not really end up going in, it was still a reasonably interesting story.

What I found interesting, on reflection, was the illustration of a previous post of mine that there really is no such thing as hard Science Fiction. Or, to put it another way.

All hard Science Fiction is soft somewhere.

Baxter does a very good job of building a world inside a sun. He works very hard at making plausible explanations of how a living being might operate in that environment. There are a few dissonances that are resolved in a satisfying way. For example references to the metric units are quite clever. And, although I have not the knowledge to know whether the atomic effects he describes are valid or not, and suspect there would be unmentioned factors that make his creation unstable, nonetheless his world building is convincing. That's all it takes.

A good plot, interesting characters and a convincing world is all it takes.

However, trying not to give too much away, at the end of the book Baxter does resort to the Deux ex Machina. He does it well, and we have the hints and introductions earlier in the book so that it is not surprising and not discordant. But the last couple of chapters do resort to Wizard of Oz science fiction. The descriptions of mechanics and theory are abandoned and the science is minimised in favour of plot. How does this character's manipulations influence the world? How does the great big machine work?

We are not told, because, basically, at this point the vision of the science fiction writer is beyond the science to describe.

I think that's true of all science fiction. The fiction always leaves the science behind. And rightly so. The science is the servant of the fiction.

A good read, with some novel ideas.

Seven Suns out of Ten

Seeing past the devastation.

2008-10-08T12:49:00.004+11:00

A friend sent some pictures of the devastation after Hurricane Ike, and there are some more here.

It's a reminder how vast are the forces that cycle around our planet.

But one thing that it is really difficult to see from the pictures is where events like this fit into the big picture of what is happening.

There is almost an apocalyptic fervour amongst environmentalists about climate change scenarios. And images like this can fuel the fire.

We seem to be getting more and more calamitous reports more and more often.

But what we need to remember is that this impression is being fueled as much by the contraction of the world into a global village, by the speed of modern communication, by the (advertising driven) drama and ratings push of the modern media and by the ubiquity of the home video camera.

That is, the disasters are brought home to us more vividly, more often than ever before, but we need to think carefully and study the cold data to get an idea of whether there really is anything different happening out there.

One little hint of how we need to look past the overwhelming imagery and reportage was a line in a caption at the bottom of one of the other photos I was sent. The photo showed the devastation in Galveston (I think) but then commented that Galveston was spared the level of devastation of the 1900 storm. http://www.1900storm.com/

While things are bad, and people need our help, and governments need to be ready and to assess their readiness, we need to be careful of the idea that this is the worst storm ever. We need to be careful of the impression that storms are getting worse.

In 100 years, looking back, we'll be able to confirm what was really happening with our weather.

Well Strap My Face To The Side Of A Pig And Roll Me In The Mud

2008-09-22T16:40:00.007+10:00

This was on the noticeboard at the doctors.

Well what do you know, it does exist!

Interesting Cultural Taboos

2008-09-22T16:15:00.011+10:00

Keep
Your
Pants
On !

That's how you fight cervical cancer. That's the nuclear weapon for cervical cancer, the ultimate solution.

Read what the pamphlet says:

Cervical cancer is caused by infection with certain types of a common virus called Human Papillomavirus (HPV). There are approximately 40 types of HPV that affect the genital areas. Anyone who has had any kind of sexual activity involving genital contact could get genital HPV. In most women the virus is harmless and has no symptoms, but in some women infected with certain types of HPV, the virus may persist and lead to cervical cancer. Abnormal cervical cells including pre-cancerous abnormalities are also caused by certain types of HPV infection and are usually detected during a Pap smear.

The Pamphlet won't say this:

Keep your pants on till you are married.
Marry someone who has kept their pants on.
No HPV
No Cervical Cancer
100%

Why is it that "lifestyle changes" are strictly enforced on asthma and diabetes patients. Why is eating butter denounced as irresponsible if you have high cholesterol. Why do we feel so little compassion for fat people's problems because all they have to do is stop eating and get some exercise.

And yet we cannot, will not, dare not make any suggestion about sensible sexual practices because this is such a cultural taboo. Political correctness and libertarianism gone mad. You cannot tell someone what to do in sexual ethics (unless you are telling them to do more, that's OK of course) even if we are sleeping ourselves to death.

Ariah Park Show (2008)

2008-09-17T10:18:00.013+10:00

Sunday was show day.

We had a look at the pavilion. (Katie won the most outstanding exhibit for her patchwork bag and Mum won the most successful exhibitor in needlework)

Then we had a few rides.

I must have said 'no' 65 million times.

but everyone had a good day.

Claire on the Music Trip

Katie and Elie go down the slide

Katie's bag is the yellow/green one. You can also see Elizabeth and Claire's aprons.

Meredith's doll, 'Rosie', is the shorter one. She's very lazy and won't sit up straight.

The Famous Five Go Camping

2008-09-17T10:11:00.007+10:00

Mum was away for the weekend at Women's Convention, so the rest of us went camping on Friday night. We went to Mandamah Tennis court and cooked sausages on a campfire.

The weather was fantastic and we had a good time.

The Harpers and Denyers and Damien and Max came too.

Sorry, but I didn't think to take photos until after we started packing up. (So that's Harpers' Tent)

Can Our Lamb Eat Ivy?

2008-09-11T21:34:00.000+10:00

What Did That Say?

2008-08-28T17:30:00.004+10:00

I had to read it again?

Just glancing over the article headline in my SMH email, I was jolted out of my line skimming, "What does that say?"

It was 1992 all over again as former president Bill Clinton today held an adulatory Democratic convention in his thrall to deliver the message that now, finally, he's an Obama man.

No, it says adulatory

The 'ula' are in a different order and it's an 'o' not an 'e'.

Entirely different word.

Gunpowder Words

2008-08-12T18:13:00.005+10:00

What should we call them? Gunpowder words? Explosive words? Fart bomb words.

We all know about weasel words, right?

What about explosive words? What did Orwell say about them?

I noticed that environmentalists, in particular, love exaggerative words

These are words that carry an emotional content, a powerful resonance, shocking connotations, words that are inappropriately applied.

Let me give you the two examples I have heard recently.

Pollution and Destruction.

There was a lady on the radio the other day while I was in the car talking about something going on up in the Liverpool Plains. Coal mining or something, I didn't catch the whole story.

As she was talking she without a stumble talked about stopping the destruction of the Liverpool Plains. Now, think about it. They don't want to bomb it, to bulldoze it all down, to dam the rivers, to wipe it off the face of the earth, they want to run a long wall under the Liverpool Plains a kilometre underground or whatever they do.

That's just not 'destruction'. Damage may be appropriate, but it's not even despoil. It's mine under. The Liverpool Plains will be visibly unchanged by longwall mining.

The second one was pollution.
An environmental ad, I think by the government. Anyhow, in the ad, the lady talks about carbon pollution.
Hang on. Hang on there, carbon is not pollution.
Pollution is dirty, foreign, destructive, despoiling. carbon belongs in the atmosphere. Now the media has the dog by the bone trying to work out whether the balance of carbon in the air is out of kilter. But carbon is not a pollutant. It's a part of the system.

If you think carbon is a pollutant there's only one solution, hold your breath until you drop dead and then you can have a clear conscience about carbon pollution because you breathe carbon dioxide out every breath.

Fart Bomb Words, I like that name.

I just realised this kind of writing and speaking already has a name, propaganda. Gonna have to forget fart bomb words.

2008-07-28T15:25:00.003+10:00

"It is because he was fully human that we are fully saved - body, soul, mind and spirit."

The Word became Flesh: Evangelicals and the Incarnation (2003) p viii.

Three Skips and You're Out

2008-07-15T17:02:00.006+10:00

When do you stop reading a book?

I used to be a compulsive reader. That is - if I started a book I had to finish it. I have to see what happens, it might get better.

Whether I'm losing concentration or becoming aware of my mortality, I feel like I don't have time to waste anymore.

So a book gets three skips and then it's out.

If I skip a passage (a paragraph or a page) three times (or so), then I will stop reading it. What would make me skip a part?

Smut
I often skip a paragraph or a passage because of smut. I just don't need sex scenes in books. It's just not why I read, and I find it unhelpful personally, so I'll skip it. If, otherwise, it's a good book, I may white out the bits as I go or stick white labels on them. This way I can come back and read the passage later without having to skip. Most times it makes no difference. One of my favourite books The War for Eternity starts with a sex slave scene that I just don't need banging around in my head. So my copy is self-censored. And now I can read the book and reflect on the ideas of life, meaning, eternal life, humanity etc etc etc without having my mind taken to a dirty cinema with popcorn and stains all over the seats.

(Interesting aside - a friend tells the story of a girl who grew up loving pretty woman, the Julia Roberts movie. watched it all the time raved about it. It was her princess story. It took a long time for her to realise that her dad had taped it and cut out all the smut and filth and generally tidied it up. She was quite embarrassed about how naive she had been. Incidentally it's amazing how well a movie or book goes without the smut. It contributes so little to the movie.)

Boring
I will skip a paragraph or page or chapter if it gets boring.

Condescending
I will skip a bit if it gets preachy or is obviously pushing a bandwagon (although I'm more tolerant of bandwagons I also push, but it still has to be well written). This is why I have put down Time Enough for Love. I gave it a good long run, but there's no story there. Just the self important ravings of an egocentric old man (of course I'm talking about the character in the book - who did you think I was talking about?)

Badly Written
I will skip a passage if it is jarringly nonfactual, or so clumsily written that it gives you a headache trying to keep up, all the other personal taste reasons I will skip a passage. Emptiness, pomposity, slavish repetition of the current sacred cows, excessive exaggeration of the environmental emergency, etc etc etc.

Now I just have to find enough good books to keep me busy after I skip all the bodgy ones.

Ethics

2008-07-10T11:38:00.004+10:00

In the last Briefing Peter Bolt asked whether western society was able to make ethical decisions anymore. It certainly seems that some law courts are unable to deal with ethical crimes.

In Wisconsin three men attempted to dig up a week old body in order to have sex with it. Sydney Morning Herald The state of Wisconsin finds itself in the tricky situation where everyone finds it icky and gross and wants to prosecute but the law doesn't allow the prosecutors to just simply say it's wrong.

The men are being charged for 'attempted sexual assault' because the victim did not given consent. I quote from the Sydney Morning Herald article.

"In today's 5-2 decision, the high court said Wisconsin law makes sex acts with dead people illegal because they are unable to give consent."

This is a fairly convoluted and uncertain way to get a conviction on a crime that most of the population instinctively know to be wrong. It reminds me of the stories of the middle ages where a pig or chicken would be put on trial.

I think it's ridiculous that the only way the legal system can prosecute these guys is by asserting that the corpse didn't give consent. I can see the fingerprints of moral relativism all over this farce. In the wake of the alternative gender revolution we have lost the ability to apply discernment and common sense to moral questions. Consent has become the only measure of morality, but it is inadequate. Destructive sexual patterns are OK if the people consent.

What if a deceased person leaves a written consent for their partner to have sex with their corpse. What does the law do then. It's obviously OK?

Don't say it won't happen. Ten years ago you would have said bestiality and sexual cannibalism would never happen. Who would think being consentual adults would make incest alright.

It's time to bring back right and wrong.

Aliens Need to be Human

2008-07-08T21:12:00.002+10:00

Aliens need to be human.

I've been reading Robert J Sawyer's Far-Seer. A sci fi novel set in a dinosaur world. And I've decided that even if your main characters are aliens, they still need to be human. The reader still needs to relate to them.

Villains and monsters can be monstrous and inhuman as well as inhumane, but your protagonists must be human-ish. The reader must be able to relate to them at some level.

You may wish to distort or add or remove features, characteristics to make a species alien. But there must be something I can relate to. If I cannot relate to the characters, I may not want to read the book.

I guess Sawyer has managed to quite cleverly invent new characteristics for a territorial, carnivorous intelligent creatures. But I feel he hasn't done such a good job of painting emotions reactions and motivations I can relate too. The main character doesn't work for me. To be honest he feels more like a puppet to get the discoveries and revelations that Sawyer wants to discuss. AS a result, for me, it's an interesting book but not compelling.

Fair Trade and Free Market

2008-07-07T16:46:00.004+10:00

A copy of a letter to the editor for The Briefing Magazine, July 2008

I have a more radical application of economic theory to the coffee problem posed by Tony Payne in Up Front. (The Briefing July-August' 2008) Everybody give up coffee. If nobody consumes coffee then nobody will grow coffee. The farmers might be forced into some last ditch enterprise like growing food crops to feed their families.

I can joke about that because I don't drink coffee, or tea. But having been to CMS Summer School, I can't see this scheme working. So, instead, let me suggest why I disagree with Tony and why I think Fairtrade is worth a try.

Tony suggests (implicitly) that naïve consumers see the coffee market as nasty because it is a free market. The Fairtrade proponents have started up precisely because they believe rather the opposite. They argue that the price of coffee is kept artificially low by oppressive tactics of the big companies. If this can be established to be true, then Tony's economic theory arguments do not apply. Fairtrade may, in fact, restore the market to free trade.

Furthermore I would argue that Fairtrade coffee does not artificially prop up the price of coffee. I suggest Fairtrade adds a new quality, a new range to coffee buying - clear conscience. Not everybody will want this coffee variety. But those who do may be prepared to pay a premium. These buyers would not pay this premium, however, for ordinary coffee. So the possibility that this development will disrupt the whole market is, in my opinion, slim. If every coffee addict in the world however, came to prefer this coffee, then, the market would change, but it would still be a free market.

Finally however, my main disagreement with Tony is over his assertion early on that shopping choices are unlikely to have any effect on the problems on the other side of the world. My choices may seem unlikely to have any effect. But it's actually the only thing I can do. Sometimes self regulating industry bodies seem to do nothing, governments are all hands off these days (or hand in the till in some places). Global regulation has not even tried to keep up with globalisation. What else can I do but refuse to buy a shoe that was made in a sweat shop, prefer a coffee that doesn't grind workers into the dirt.

Lately, it has been asserted that Cote d'Ivore, the biggest producer of cocoa in the world has a significant proportion of it's cocoa grown on plantations using slave labour. Actual child slaves stolen from other countries. The industry is apparently going slow on efforts to prohibit this practice. It's just too complicated, you see. If this is true, then I do not want to be a part of it. The government seems unwilling or unable to take adequate steps to prohibit the practice. The chocolate industry seems unwilling to self regulate and develop a certification system. So what can I do? Only this. I will research this issue. And if I can be convinced that children are stolen, locked up, beaten and starved to make my chocolate I will pluck it out and throw it away. And if enough people do that and sales slump, then maybe the producers will take enough notice to begin the regulation process.

Rather than a feeble response, consumer choice is the only power I have in the market. In fact, it is what drives the market, especially when exerted collectively. I think ethical considerations should always be part of economic choices. As Charles Colson quotes Michael Novak, "Free, democratic capitalism is like a three-legged stool, supported by economic freedom, political freedom, and moral restraint." But I would go so far as to suggest that making ethical choices as a consumer is not only the only means I have to influence the producers on the other side of the world, it's also the right thing to do.

The great thing about organisations like Fairtrade is that they make it easy for me to do the right thing. They do the research, they have made it easy for me to buy coffee without oppressing the poor. That takes the uncertainty and time out of working out what to do in the supermarket aisle and poring over the internet. They give me more time to get on with what I want to do, Glorify God by proclaiming our saviour Jesus Christ.

Michael Hutton
Ariah Park Baptist Church
Ariah Park, NSW 2665

The Pièce De Résistance

2008-07-03T09:50:00.008+10:00

I had a terrible dream.

I dreamt I was in a restaurant. The fanciest restaurant in town.

The service was impeccable from the valet parking to the genteel waiters. The setting was fantastic, the atmosphere was warm and actually exciting. It was buzzing. It was the most well appointed place I had ever been in. Everything was top of the range and shiny and smart.

It was a thrill to be in the most talked about restaurant in town.

I was made to feel welcome, I was fussed over, I was entertained, I was in heaven.

And then they served the meal.

A waiter, handsome and tall, came in brandishing a covered platter. And how elegantly he presented it with flourishes and smiles. And then he lifted the lid...

Grass.

Grass on a platter.

To be sure it was dipped in sugar, and artfully decorated, but it was grass.

I didn't understand. I tried to get up. I was stuck to my chair. I looked around. I hadn't noticed it before. Grass. The fat lady was forking grass. The family sharing a bowl of grass.

Everyone in the place was eating grass. And they were loving it.

I moaned, "No." and tried to escape but I was stuck.

I shook my head and kicked the floor but I was still stuck.

I screamed and woke up.

I was in a church.

A beautiful church, large and new and modern.

Everything was state of the art, from the sound system to the projection to the cappuccino machine.

I had been made to feel welcome as I came in. Even the seats were comfortable.

I had enjoyed the music and been entertained by the band.

And now the preacher had stepped up to the platform. Tall and handsome and full of smiles. Oh, he was easy to listen to, polished without seeming it, professional yet personal.

But he was feeding us grass.

I looked at my Bible on my knee and prayed he would use the passage we had just read. Just dip into it once without sounding just like Andy Robbins. I stared at my Bible and I willed him to say what it meant. Hoped he would explain how it called on our lives.

But he kept feeding us grass. Oh, it was sugar coated and artfully arranged, but it was grass.

I looked around and everyone was eating it up. The message tickled their ears, the presentation slid past their eyes, and they gorged themselves on its sweetness, its abundance, but they were never full.

I wanted to leave, I squirmed in my chair, I prayed again.

I screamed.

But I was already awake.

Inclusive or Confused

2008-06-24T17:04:00.001+10:00

They say you can tell a lot about somebody from their enemies. But your friends reveal a lot about you too.

In this case Karl Hand, pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church, "the home of inclusive Christianity" has a beef with the pope. That doesn't tell you a lot. I disagree with official Catholic doctrine in several places.

But check out who the pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church gangs up with to pick on the pope. A coalition of religious, atheist, gay and lesbian groups, including: Socialist Alliance, Resistance, Atheists Sydney and the Raelians. Fuller details here.

Karl Hand feels more comfortable rioting with a coalition of sects and groups vehemently opposed to Christianity.

That tells you a lot about the Metropolitan Community Church.

Agreeing with Heinlein

2008-06-24T10:08:00.000+10:00

I was born too late to appreciate Robert A. Heinlein's work. I get too fussy about things like characterisation and plot.

Coming into Science Fiction when it has matured makes it harder to appreciate the masters who helped make it what it is.

Heinlein illustrates, for me, the contrast between idea driven science fiction on the one hand and character or plot driven fiction on the other. (although a good story does it all together) I find his manipulation of plot and assertions of 'the way it is' somewhere between flippant and arrogant.

Perhaps one could define a master as someone who breaks all the rules of writing (show don't tell etc etc etc) and gets away with it.

I also disagree quite strongly with Heinlein's conclusions about the way the world is. The meaning of life, the universe and everything, if you like.

So it was quite a shock to see within a couple of chapters some arguments and ideas that I particularly agree with. To whit:

In the mouth of Lazarus Long, who at this point in the novel is being portrayed as a sage,

"Never mind computers. Ira, the most sophisticated machine the human mind can build has in it the limitations of the human mind. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics." Time Enough For Love p29 1982 reprint.

This relates to one of the philosophical problems that people who are strict evolutionists have. How do you inject meaning and purpose, any sense of value into a world defined (by the evolutionary assumptions to have none) The common answer is that we create value, but Heinlein's argument applies equally to this question. It is impossible for the product to be greater than the system that created it. If human life is the result of meaningless happenstance, it can have no meaning.

Also:

"To figure out the basic questions about this world it would be necessary to stand outside and look at it. Not inside. no not in two thousand years, not in twenty thousand." Time Enough For Love p39 1982 reprint.

This statement seems almost anti-enlightenment in its assertion of the limit to human understanding. While Heinlein was probably not thinking along these lines (and would perhaps be horrified by my use of his words) this statement agrees with my understanding of the inability of the fallen human creature to fully understand himself without input from the creator. This idea stands in stark contrast to the enlightenment and modern ideas of the progress of human knowledge (and in particular scientific inquiry). It is also quite different to the postmodern rejection of authority and meta narrative which actually makes an absolute authority out of personal subjective understanding.

I read Heinlein because I like Science Fiction, because I respect his lofty position amidst the great authors, and because I like to understand the ideas that I disagree with.

So it's felicitous to find something in his work that I can actually agree with, even if I would come to a different conclusion at the end.

Did They Really Mean to Say That?

2008-06-23T10:15:00.001+10:00

Do I have time to make sure I double check everything I write or say? Perhaps I should make time. Sometimes what we said isn't what we meant to say.

I'm not really sure they meant what they said. I'm assuming they didn't. Looking in the Winter PRAC 08, on a case study on the Lifewell ministry in Adelaide I read this:

"While we could pray and express genuine concern, we realised we weren't equipped to offer the deeper, tangible care people needed." (top of the middle column page 04)

Is there something deeper than prayer?
Is meeting the tangible needs actually deeper than a prayer ministry?

I would say it is the other way around. Counselling and haircuts and massages are the easy part. The hard part, the deeper part is to connect with the spiritual issues and to bring gospel light and deeper faith into the crisis. To pray and trust in uncertainty.

I'm assuming they meant to contrast genuine (but inactive) concern with tangible care. I'm assuming this because the other more scary conclusion is that this whole holistic ministry idea is perhaps driven, at least in part, by a lack of confidence in the gospel and the power of God at work in prayer.

I prefer to think the pen just slipped a little.

The Wrong to Die

2008-06-20T09:25:00.000+10:00

Should social reformers be law abiding citizens?

Do the people trying to change our society's values respect the structures and fabric of our society?

Isn't it too harsh to lay criminal charges against someone who assists a suicide (whatever that means)?

Without getting into all the rights and wrongs of euthanasia. Without trying to get into this particular case. Let's just have a look at the attitude the activists display toward the laws of the countries we live in.

A Sydney Morning Herald article discusses the guilty verdict brought against two women who played a part in the death of their husband and friend. The following comment comes from a significant person in the euthanasia camp:

Outside the court, Dr Nitschke said that his organisation Exit International would now be warning its members to "tread very carefully" and hold workshops for people with Alzheimer's disease to inform them about how to get around the implications of today's decision.

The courts have laid down a ruling, and will we abide by that? No, we'll show people how to get around it.

Wrong End of the Stick

2008-06-20T08:58:00.000+10:00

I can't help reacting to this.

Water is plentiful. There's lot's of it. And we can reuse it.

Water is the ultimate plentiful, renewable resource. We live at the bottom of a huge recycling system.

Now, I care about the environment, but I still think you've got to get things right. I can't believe it when an environmental spokesperson says things like this in the Sydney Morning Herald

"Water is a scarce resource that is only going to become more scarce with climate change and we must readjust our habits on a permanent basis, not just when dam levels get low."

Water is not a scarce resource. It is plentiful. Some theories suggest that's why there is life on earth, plentiful water. It is unevenly distributed, for sure. In some places it is scarce but Sydney is not one of them.
And how will climate change affect Sydney's water? Isn't the dominant theory that the polar ice caps will melt and there will be more water in the global water system, that ocean temperatures will rise, wouldn't that make Sydney more tropical, more wet?

I'm not sure why environmentalists say things like this.

* Is it all too emotional to think clearly?
* Do you have to follow the party line to show how environmental you are?
* Do you have to overstate the case in order to get heard?
Or is it all three feeding back into a great sensationalist loop?

I don't know. All I know is that common sense sometimes goes out the window when we start talking about climate change.

There are some issues with water use:

1. Waste. We are used to luxury. For too long we have just poured water down the drain. That should stop.

2. Inefficient Collection. In the early days the policy was to discourage private water collection in order to subsidise the public infrastructure. When it rains on Sydney, most of it is unused. So get a tank.

3. Demographics. Infrastructure (dams etc) has not been increased at the same rate as population growth. So get a tank.

So, I'm all for permanent changes in water use. Reuse water - wash the car on the lawn etc. Reduce water - save up flushes etc. Recycle water - use grey water to flush the loo.

But I also think we have to get the thing right.
Water is plentiful, but it's also valuable, in fact essential, so let's use it wisely.

Do Your Research

2008-06-13T08:58:00.001+10:00

I just finished Reckless Sleep by Roger Levy.

Apart from a few scenes and expletives I skipped it wasn't a bad book. There were a couple of niggling questions unanswered and the end had a little bit of the Deux Ex Machina about it, but this was outweighed by the well wrought scenery and technology, and by the realistic reactions and portrayals of the characters. The end-of-world-by-environmental-destruction setting wasn't too overplayed and there was a reasonably convincing explanation.

But here's my big beef at one little point. This is not a big problem in the novel, but only a big problem for me from my perspective. The reason given for the earthquake and volcanic Armageddon is that a bunch of fundamentalist Christians planted nuclear bombs in the earth's crust and set of a bunch of chain reactions.

OK, here's the thing. There is no way Christian fundamentalists would do that kind of thing. I write as a Christian, of some 20 years experience in Christian circles and with some knowledge of the Bible, I can see no way this could happen.

I'm not going to try to convince you that fundamentalists are not the hateful bigots they are portrayed as. The very few who are hateful get too much publicity and the way they are censured by godly Christians is never publicised (eg Fred Phelps gets more criticism from Christians than from the secular) Also, it's very difficult for someone on the one side of a debate as emotional and entrenched as the Western culture wars to see consistency or credibility and on the other side. So that's not my point.

What I want to suggest is that the end of the world, Armageddon, the return of Christ, these things are all emphatically in God's hands in the Bible and consequently within the Christian faith. Belief in God is often given as the reason why some bunch of Christian wackos try to end the world. But it is that very belief in God that would make it impossible for them to consider such a thing. Do your research. Christians believe the end of the world is in God's hands. When they see the suffering and evil in this world they may want it to come soon, seeing it as the only solution to the groaning world. But they would never try to force God's hand.

If you were going to portray Japanese culture, or Zoroastrian ritual in a novel you would try to get it right. So why do people feel that when it comes to portraying Christians you don't have to do any research? You don't have to actually understand them? You can just scapegoat them?

Feel free to criticise Christians, lampoon our foibles, ridicule the pompous, discredit the bad arguments and expose the hypocrisy or immorality, but please, get it right.

Why Is It So?

2008-05-09T21:36:00.000+10:00

Science Fiction author China Mieville raises an idea that I have been thinking about for some time. What is it that science does? People tend to think that science answers why questions. Why do apples fall to the ground? Why do some people get sick? While science investigated these questions, I don't think it answers them.

I think science provides descriptions not explanations. This is how Mieville puts it:

"lsaac was still piqued by the ignorance surrounding watercraeft. It brought home to him, again, how much mainstream science was bunk, how much 'analysis' was just description - often bad description - hiding behind obfuscatory rubbish."
Perdido Street Station, 2000, p28

I hope we can excuse the derogatory tone (this is put into the mind of a fairly brusque scientist, so maybe we'll forgive the harshness). But it's an interesting point.

I remember the time I snuck a look at my X-ray report from the radiologist and discovered the word idiopathic, which is a word that means in layman's terms 'it's just there'. There is a word invented to put on the reports that says 'I don't really know'. I was terribly disappointed to discover that little Band-Aid of a word almost completely covers up a vast ignorance of my condition.

Before I go on, let's not underestimate the power of description. Science is a powerful tool. It is acute and accurate description that helps us understand the processes of most of the systems of our world and allows us to influence and change many of them. From scarlet fever to semiconductors science has brought great benefit.

But as I said before I don't think it answers the why questions. We ask the 'why' question, but we end up with a 'how' answer. And I think many people don't realise that, perhaps even many scientists.

An example: We ask the question, "Why does the apple fall to the ground?" And we answer, "Easy, gravity. But gravity is just a name for what happens, not an explanation of why it happens. Newton didn't discover gravity he named it. Before Newton coined the word things were falling to the ground and his label didn't make any difference.

Furthermore, Newton's equations, although powerful, and revolutionary, still do not explain why. Newton's equations with great mathematical beauty describe the manner in which bodies attract each other. And, once again, let us not forget how powerful theses equations are. These beautifully simple equations explain the complex dance of the planets in the sky. To extrapolate the falling of objects in our atmosphere to the level of the moon and planets was an astounding leap of understanding, and provided the needed foundation for the mechanics of a heliocentric universe.

But Newton still hadn't answered why. And even today, we still haven't answered why objects with mass are attracted to each other. Why is it so? We just don’t know. And diagrams and theories and descriptions of bodies of mass bending space don't take us any closer to an answer. For every question science answers, we get another question. Along the way we get a better understanding of the process, but we never seem to get closer to purpose or reason.

Let me give you a recent example of what I am talking about. This article in the Sydney Morning Herald. http://news.smh.com.au/secrets-of-the-platypus-revealed/20080508-2c2x.html

THE platypus is a bizarre creature: a furry mammal that lays eggs, makes milk like a cow, produces venom like a snake, has a bill like a duck, and detects its prey using electricity.

Now scientists have discovered why.

Scientists have discovered why…

The article goes on to talk of the recent coding of the platypus genome. And the reason that the platypus is the weird creature it is is…

Jenny Graves, of the Australian National University, said the platypus had genetic features similar to those of other mammals, birds and reptiles, as well as unique ones. "We expected the genome to be weird, and it certainly is," she said.

Can you see what I mean? This is a description, not an explanation.
I have no more than a layman's understanding of DNA, but I would have expected the platypus to have both similar and different DNA to humans. This explanation does not answer why platypuses are as they are. It gives us more detail, a better understanding of what a platypus is, but no better understanding of why.

On the other hand

2008-05-06T13:02:00.000+10:00

On the other hand. A word is a kind of deed. Speaking is doing, of a sort. In the context of relationship speaking can be an action. Refusing to speak to someone is an action. Speaking to someone is an action.

(This post refers to the previous post)

In the context of a broken relationship, restoration will require actions, but it probably starts with words.

Thought of that way, our judgement of Kevin Rudd's apology really coems down to what we think of the whole issue of the stolen generation and the history of the European settlement of Australia.

Nonetheless time is the only way to tell whether any of it helps the situation indidenous Asutralians are in.

Froth and Bubble

2008-05-02T14:29:00.000+10:00

Looking for another thing, I discovered that Kevin Rudd was ranked number 10 out of 100 of the worlds leaders and revolutionaries on the Time 100. Time 100

That's weird. He hasn't been in office long enough to achieve anything. I live in Australia and nothing has changed appreciably yet.

I'm not bagging Kevin Rudd, it's too early to do that. But it's also too early to sing his praises.

When I read the blurb underneath, it went straight to his apology to the stolen generation. Now I know many indigenous Australians felt real joy at that apology, but it was just words. Nothing has changed yet. The intervention in the middle of Australia is still along the lines set up by the Howard Government. The health discrepancies are still wide etc.

I guess I'm just saying that it's sad when words are enough to propell someone to number 10 on the world stage. That you don't actually have had to do anything or achieve anything or change anything. I'm not saying he won't, I'm just saying he hasn't yet. It's way too early.

We love our froth and bubble, don't we.

Soft Sci-Fi

2008-04-27T08:45:00.000+10:00

All science fiction is fantasy.

I'm not suggesting there aren't two distinct genres. I'm not referring to ambidextrous authors who write well in both genres. I don't like it when second-hand bookshops to lump it all together under the umbrella heading 'Sci-Fi/Fantasy'.

I guess what I am saying is that there is really no such thing as hard science fiction.

Hard science fiction is the term used to describe science fiction that pays attention to scientific detail. Science fiction that cares about scientific plausibility. I've sometimes heard the term used in almost an elitist sense, hard sci-fi is capital 'S' Science fiction. As if space opera or cyberpunk, etc. were lower life forms.

But when it comes down to it science fiction isn't just science it's science fiction. As fiction it moves beyond the boundaries of science. Science fiction is about taking the world as we know it and extrapolating into a alternative reality or a possible future. Except that in all science fiction that created world, that extrapolated future is actually not scientifically possible.

At our present level of understanding wormholes are not controllable. Time travel is impossible. Intersolar trade is completely uneconomical, interstellar war unpractical. Human consciousness cannot be understood, let alone digitalised. And there is no reliable evidence for extraterrestrial life. All of these elements of science fiction are fantasy.

The difference between science fiction and fantasy is not scientific credibility. It is a matter of themes and customs. Fantasy has common themes like magic, mythical races and creatures. Science fiction has different themes, technology and extra terrestrial races and creatures. Each genre intersects our mundane world at a different point. Fantasy leaves our world in dark forests or in the mists of time and legend. Science fiction launches into a different reality from the launch pads of a space port.

But both leave the reality of our mundane world.

What distinguishes science fiction from fantasy is the additional requisite that science fiction must seem scientifically plausible. Good fantasy must have a created world that is consistent and believable. A magic system must be logical and workable. In Science Fiction the world must also be consistent and believable but science fiction must also seem scientifically plausible. But this scientific plausibility is an illusion. At some point every science fiction writer fudges the science. Deliberately blurs the detail or skates over the limit of our current knowledge or overemphasises the strength of that force or the extent of our mastery of that technology.

They do that because we let them, we want them to.The reader and the writer have an agreement. If you have a good crack at it, if you make it half way believable, I'll suspend my disbelief. I'll come along for the ride.

We make that agreement because it allows us to explore human nature. To mentally explore the universe while we can't yet physically do so. It allows us to discuss the ramifications of science and it's effects on our societies. But perhaps mostly, we write and read science fiction because it's fun.

But when it comes down to it, science fiction is a fantasy, a fiction. A useful fiction, an enjoyable fiction, but a fiction nonetheless.

Two to Tango

2008-04-27T08:16:00.000+10:00

T H White writes in a style that reminds me of Pratchett. Funny, but everything jumps around a bit and it kind of tends to give me a headache. I spent the first half of the book (omnibus really) trying to work out whether he was trying to make serious points or just making fun of anything and everything.

I've decided he's trying to make some serious points, but is using humour as the spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down.

I found what he had to say on war pretty interesting. Since the Iraq war I haven't heard a lot of good arguments about why the war is wrong, just knee-jerk reactions about how it's really bad. Something like, 'People are dying, it's really bad, so America shouldn't be in Afghanistan.' etc.

White seems to have a more sensible attitude. He acknowledges that war is really bad, and that's why sometimes you have to fight to stop it.

He says through Merlin,

"When I was a young man," he said, " there was a general idea that it was wrong to fight in wars of any sort. Quite a lot of people in those days declared that they would never fight for anything whatever."Perhaps they were right," said the King.
No. There is one fairly good reason for fighting-and that is, if the other man starts it. You see, wars are a wickedness of a wicked species. They are so wicked that they must not be allowed. When you can be perfectly certain that the other man started them, then is the time when you might have a sort of duty to stop him."

It takes two to tango, but it only takes one to wage a war. Once someone starts a war, does the other have any choice. For example, the allied war with Nazi Germany is a war that I am glad the allies had the fortitude to finish. I suspect Japan fared better under America than Australia would have under Japan too.

But getting back to the Iraq war. I have always kind of defended Bush a bit. Partly because the criticism seems unfair and out of proportion. Sadam Hussein was interfering with weapons inspectors. We know he has used WMD in the past. He was making it look like he had some again. It turns out he didn't have any but Bush was not to know that. All we knew was that he was acting belligerent, he was breaking the restrictions put on him after the 90's gulf war, and that America had been attacked on their home soil by terrorists of a similar mindset.

What was Bush to do?

That used to be my argument.

White has made me rethink it a bit. Maybe Bush should have waited for the UN to act. Maybe it never would have. I've seen it argued that the Iraq war is unconstitutional, I don't know all that, but maybe there were other alternatives.

Saddam was definitely playing games, asking for trouble.

But now I wonder if Bush did the greater evil by starting the war. It's not quite that simple, but Bush did throw the first punch.

Mission Song, Le Carre

2008-04-27T08:10:00.000+10:00

Disappointing.

Rather pointles ending. Too much meandering without a really likeable character. Too pastey.

The Times We Live In

2008-04-11T09:40:00.000+10:00

How about this for an opening line:

"Senior minister of a Sydney Anglican parish attacks High Court judge Michael Kirby"

Seriously, what did he do? Throw a punch, throw a Bible?
Where did it happen? The front steps of the high court? A backyard BBQ?

Oh, you mean he just wrote him a letter.

This is the sequence of events.

High Court judge Michael Kirby called himself an Anglican Christian on public radio.
Anglican clergyman Reverend Richard Lane heard the claim, knowing Kirby to be a publicly proud practicing homosexual Lane wrote a letter to Kirby.

Lane wrote a private letter to Kirby on the basis of his claim to be an Anglican Christian. If you call yourself an Anglican Christian you put yourself under the discipline of the Anglican Church.

Lane's letter was blunt and uncompromising. But it did not raise issues that Kirby had not raised himself on radio. It did not seek to humiliate or harm Kirby in any way and was sent for Kirby's good.

That it was written from a different set of assumptions to Kirby's is clear. That it offends the sensibilities of the Herald writer is clear.

What is less clear in the article is that it was hardly an 'attack'.

From the words quoted in the article it is clear that Lane did not vilify, impugn, belittle, abuse or in any way mistreat Kirby. He clearly showed the inconsistency between Kirby's claims and his practice.

Yet this is portrayed as a vitriolic attack.

These are the times we live in.

Mt 5:11 "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.

Jn 15:20 Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also.

Saying Doesn't Make It So

2008-04-04T20:02:00.000+11:00

The headlines read, "Man is pregnant"

SMH

This is going to seem cruel and insensitive and is definitely politically incorrect, but shouldn't the headline really read, "Mannish woman is pregnant"

Having your breasts surgically removed and taking testosterone to diminsh femenine characteristics doesn't change you into a man.

This kind of proves it, doesn't it?

'His obstetrician, Dr Kimberly James, who practices in the Oregon town, told Winfrey, "This is a normal pregnancy.'

The headlines as much as the story itself indicate, to me, that what is touted as sexual liberation and gender rights is really sexual dysfunction and gender confusion.

No One Knows The Day Or Hour

2008-04-04T16:38:00.000+11:00

Reading the Bible can really save you a lot of embarrassment.

Not always this extreme, though.

Consider the Russion sect that are starting to crawl out of the cave they hid in because of the end of the world. Sydney Morning Herald and here

What if they had read Jesus words in Matthew 24:36?

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. "

Get Rich Quick - Guarranteed

2008-03-27T08:39:00.000+11:00

I notice another get rich quick scheme has recently been launched.

While I'm all for get rich quick schemes, I have just a couple of problems. You never really know whether one will succeed. And they all involve such hard work.

So I have developed this scheme which I am willing to share with you. You know this scheme will work because you have seen it work so many times before.

Here it is:

1) Forget all that investing and working and financial planning.

2) Write a self help book "How to get rich quick for dummies" or suimilar.

3) Sit back and watch the royalties come in. Maybe you could study to be a plastic surgeon on-line while you wait.

4) Send me 15% of all royalties you receive for your book, and 15% of all the 15% that your readers send you, and 15% of the 15% of...

5) Do your own plastic surgery and move to Majorca

It will work if you believe in it - trust me.

Worth The Wait

2008-03-26T20:11:00.000+11:00

Sight Unseen takes a while to warm up, but it is worth the wait. The connections, especially the historical ones, seem a bit tenuous at the start but they are skilfully weaved together in the last half. There are still a few things that are too abrupt, like the father's departure, but on the whole the book is a good read.

It's also refeshing to see an historical investigation novel that actually takes seriously the methods and current concensus of historians. Very refeshing. It may be harder work to do the research and put forward a plausible hypothesis for the identity of Junius, but it gives the book a great deal more integrity.

What Is It They Really Want?

2008-03-26T14:28:00.001+11:00

Secular tolerance only works one way. Try to convince me otherwise.

Why is the "Hunky Jesus" competition okay? Hunky Jesus Competition

What is it that they are trying to prove? Why on Easter Sunday? Why the Hunky Jesus? Why not the Hunky Guy, or the Hunky Historical Character, or Hunky Famous Person Competition?

How does this "promote universal joy and expiate stigmatic guilt" or are they trying to achieve something else here. Isn't this a plain and simple act of mockery of Christians. So much for the gay lobby just wanting acceptance and equal opportunity, there's another agenda here.

Or is it "Heterophobia" in its correct meaning - fear of the other. Or perhaps a word that avoids confusion might be xenophobia - fear of the different.

Human kind, at it's worst, has always feared, and so mocked and abused those who are different. Has always turned the different into 'the enemy'. In this case, you don't even have to be different, just disagree, then immediately you are an object of mockery.

Well, join the queue. Christians have been mocked, abused, persecuted, arrested, spat on, vilified for the two thousand years of our history. In fact we've come to expect it, because it happened to our Lord back in the beginning. That first Good Friday Jesus was mocked then, abused and unfairly tried and executed unlawfully under an unjust system.

Be careful, Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, you are in danger of losing your special politically correct status as endangered species and protected minority. You have just joined the establishment, the vast mass of peoples, kings, rulers, commoners, men of the street who have mocked the Lord. From the Roman Governor to the Russian political machine to the spitting soldier, now we have the Hunky Jesus Competition. All in the name of joy and freedom from guilt.

Yeah, Right. If you poke the other guy's eye out, maybe you'll look better.

Something wrong here

2008-03-21T15:17:00.001+11:00

Jenna Jameson is PETA's new pin up girl.

"Adult movie superstar Jenna Jameson is best known for hard-core pornography but her latest sexy pose is for a good cause - animal rights." According to the Syndey Morning Herald.

People for the Extravagent Treatment of Animals are happy to use porn to promote their agenda.

At first I thought there was something wrong here, but then I realised it was entirely coinsistent with PETA's weird philosophical basis,

“A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.” — Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

Something Wrong Here

2008-03-21T14:59:00.001+11:00

This quote is supposed to come from Bin Laden,

A voice meant to be bin Laden's said: "You went overboard in your unbelief and freed yourselves of the etiquettes of dispute and fighting and went to the extent of publishing these insulting drawings, this is the greatest misfortune and the most dangerous."

Sydney Morning Herald March 2008

There's something wrong with Bin Laden talking about the etiquette of dispute. The secular press print some cartoons, insulting cartoons admittedly, but just cartoons. Words and pictures. A newspaper prints some cartoons and 50 people are killed around the world in reprisals, err, 'protests'.

Muslim 'protestors' kill 50 people around the world, including nuns and aid workers to prove that Muslims are not terrorists, as those vile cartoons suggested.
If the turban fits…

All prostitution is abuse

2008-03-19T10:24:00.000+11:00

I think it's as terrible as anybody else.

Recent allegations of routine engagement of underage aboriginal girls as prostitutes by truck drivers are under investigation. Sydney Morning Herald story here.

It should be investigated, by the police, perhaps. It is shocking. But what I want to know is why is this so shocking?
Is it because the girls are under age?
Or because they are aboriginal?
Or both?

I'm not saying it's not terrible, But can't you see, all prostitution is terrible.

I recently read an article by Emma who works as a support and outreach worker with Hope Street, an urban ministry in Sydney. She says this:

"Up to 97% of the women we work with were sexually abused as children, have been in violent relationships, and all sex workers experience horrific physical violence from clients."

97%!! Prostitution of any kind is abuse. Prostitution of a consenting adult is often just a continuation of the abuse received as a child. Why is there no outrage over this? Is this OK? Or are the "common garden variety" prostitutes not worth worrying about.

As long as it is legal to run a brothel, as long as it is socially acceptable for a man to visit a prostitute, as long as people continue to look the other way, as long as this dysfunctional industry continues to be glamourised by movies like "Pretty Woman", as long as these continue, girls will continue to be abused.
Some of them will be aboriginal.
Some of them will be under age.
Some of the 'clients' will be truck drivers, far from home, tired, lonely, and told that it's OK.

It's not OK is it.

Love God, Love Your People

2008-03-17T12:36:00.000+11:00

"Love God, love Your people. it's not advice so much as a command of the most uncompromising sort-the structure of the Decalogue, the substance of Jesus' summary of the law. Get that right, and the rest follows; if it doesn't follow, what is missing will ultimately show itself to be less than essential. Get that wrong, and in the end, all the achievements apart from it-every spiffy sermon, every leap in the membership rolls-will reveal themselves for the dust that they are."

Marguerite Shuster Ministry March 2008

Even though you can summarise it in a simple statement, it's still a difficult calling.

Affectionate Cynicism

2008-03-12T14:51:00.000+11:00

An interesting quote...

"Pastoral wisdom cannot be universally critical or universally accepting. People are different. The cure of souls cannot take a "one-size-fits-all" approach. Affectionate cynicism is in order. One time when my grandson Rory was about two years old, the adults were sitting around in the living room after Sabbath dinner. We were having a good time visiting with guests, and in that setting, Rory came barreling out into the living room and announced to his father Nate, "I love Jesus." The same suspicious thought came into my mind and into his father's mind at right about the same moment. The guests were saying awwhhh while Nate headed off to the back of the house to see what his son had broken. It turned out in that case that nothing had been broken, and that Rory really did love Jesus.
And so should we all. "

from here:

http://www.credenda.org/issues/19-3caution.php

The Importance of Appearance

2008-02-25T11:43:00.000+11:00

I have long been the kind of bloke who dosen't care much about my appearance. And I have never really cared much what others thought of my appearance. I mostly just can't be bothered.

But I've changed my mind, thanks to the Archbishoip of Canterbury. Recently Rowan Williams made statements on English Radio more or less in favour of Sharia law in England. One of the blogs I read carried a picture of him. When I saw the picture something clicked for me. With his unkempt beard, unclipped hair, spectacles and befuddled expression, I at once thought, "No wonder he speaks nonsense, he even looks confused."

A good hair cut and a whisker trim would help him to look much more credible. Of course what he says would still be that curious mix of the uninteligible and the unacceptable that he is becoming reknowned for.

What's Wrong With What the Archbishop Said

What's Wrong With What the Archbishop Said

2008-02-25T10:41:00.000+11:00

Basically, the Archbishop of Canterbury is an anti-Moses. When he seeks to use Sharia law in some vague attempt to unify Britain he is trying to use a snake as a walking stick. (The point not being that Islam is reptilian but that it will bite you if you try to lean on it).

But worse than that, Williams would happily lead his people out of freedom into slavery. He holds the misguided understanding that Sharia law can be used as a system of law without bringing on board the inherent assumptions of Sharia law. Whatever we call them, axioms or principles, Sharia law contains assumptions that are integral to it and not negotiable. These are such things as the value of testimony of a woman. A woman's testimony has half the weight of a man's. An infidel's testimony has half the weight of a Muslim's. So the testimony of four Christian women that one of them was raped is only just equal to the testimony of the one Muslim man who (allegedly) raped them. With three Christian women, the charge is unprovable under Sharia law. That is unacceptable to our society.

Sharia law also has strict and often deadly consequences for apostasy, that is, for leaving the Muslim faith. So Rowan Williams would have a British Muslim who becomes a Christian suffer at the hands of his family with the British legal system's full consent.

It is unwise for the leader of the Anglican Church to welcome Islam when he knows so little about it and unacceptable for him to care so little about the believers under his care.

Heath Ledger lives on, or maybe not.

2008-01-24T11:26:00.001+11:00

Poor old Heath Ledger.

The vultures are ripping at his carcass already.

Speculations as to the cause of death way before any definitive report is possible. Putting words in the mouths of police officers ( a rolled $20 note that possibly has traces of narcotics is sent to the lab and in media reports becomes a $20 note with traces of narcotics.) Heath quoted out of context about death.

Heath said, talking after the birth of his daughter, "It's like a catch 22. I feel good about dying now because I feel like I'm alive in her. But at the same time, you don't want to die because you want to be around for the rest of her life."

Is Heath doing anything more here than thinking out loud on the new perspective of a parent? And yet the feel good about dying part is quoted in bold as a headline and the counterpoint, "you don't want to die" is buried at the end of the article. Sure, it's a weird way to be thinking after the birth of a child. I myself went the other way, taking less risks because I have responsibilities, children I don't want to grow up fatherless.

But anyhow, I find it really interesting that he can think about how he's alive in her. Is that genetically? Or that empty mushy american sit com comfort, "Lassy will live forever in our hearts?" It reminds me of a conversation I once overhead at the butcher's. The customer was showing off his grandson, who had the same name as him. The butcher remarked on the same name. The customer then explained that he named his son the same as himself. He then made his son promise to name his son with the same name. Then he made his son promise to make his son promise to do the same. And he did that so that his name would live forever. Standing in the butcher waiting to be served, I thought that was a pretty weak sort of immortality. (I hope there's no generation of only daughters - they might not be keen on a name like John Smith)

If we are going to use words like 'lives on' or 'still alive' we need to mean more than memories and lingering affections or genetic material. If that's what we mean then let's just say, we still remember him, she looks like him a bit, he will always be famous, his films will outlast him. But let's not call it life - there has to be more to eternal life than a memory.

2007-12-14T10:11:00.000+11:00

Here's a laugh (hopefully)

David Rabbitborough - Life in Mangers

Posted on Youtube

I put this together for a school Christmas service. I think the clue to the question at the end is in Philippians 2:1-11

Merry Christmas

Anecdotal Evidence

2007-12-13T22:24:00.000+11:00

It's funny, but I think we make many of our decisions and form much of our opinion on anecdotal evidence. The least reliable kind.

For example, this story Doctor's Trauma tells the story of a doctor troubled by the investigations into a 32 week abortion in which he participated some years ago.

This story is a powerful tool for shaping opinions about abortion. It is hard not to read it and think the laws criminalising abortion seem unfair. It will shape opinions because it is full of emotion, it has people we can empathise with and it plays on our unhealthy suspicion of government and authority. But it is still anecdotal evidence, a true anecdote, but an anecdote nonetheless.

Anecdotes can only ever present one side of the case. They cannot bring statistical evidence, they cannot bring balance to an argument, they cannot explore the subtleties of legal and ethical arguments. When each side of a conflict can bring anecdotes in support of their stance, how do we decide? Is the right stance the one with the most anecdotes? The one with the most emotional anecdotes? The cynic might suggest that the heart wrenching stories are published specifically to stifle argument and debate. I hope not. I hope we will consider evidence and ethical issues as some states in Australia open the issue of decriminalising abortion.
I truly hope so, because those arguing on the other side of the abortion issue don't have many anecdotes to wield in the debate. The people most affected negatively by abortion don't tell their stories. Their heart wrenching stories will never be told, never be lived.

Ignorance Is No Defence

2007-12-10T10:48:00.000+11:00

Gillian Gibbons, the teacher briefly jailed in Sudan for insulting Islam is stated as saying, "I shouldn't have done it." and "Ignorance of the law is no defence." She was found guilty for naming a classroom teddy bear 'Muhammad' (PBUH).

[SMH 10 Dec 2007: http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/jailed-teddy-bear-teacher-blames-herself/2007/12/10/1197135315035.html?sssdmh=dm16.293044]

I would have thought ignorance was the only defence.
I would have thought ignorance is the ultimate defence. "What, is that wrong??"

Or is she not ignorant.
Did she know that Muslims are very titchy about the honour of Muhammad (PBUH) and especially at the hands of ignorant/arrogant westerners.

Sometimes we are only ignorant in particular, we should have known better in general. I didn't know the minutiae of the law, but my consience knew better, but I was too lazy to listen to it. (I'm extrapolating past poor Gillian now and speaking generally).

Policeman: Did you know you were travelling at 120 km/h in a 50 zone.
Motorist: Is this a 50 zone??
Policeman: You didn't see the sign?
Motorist: What sign?
Policeman: Back there.
Motorist: No officer, I saw the houses and the park and the kids playing in the street, but I didn't see the sign.
Policeman: You saw the kids playing in the street?
Motorist: I didn't see the sign but I saw the kids.
Policeman: So why were you still doing 120 km/h?

Sometimes we claim to be ignorant of God's law, when our consciences actually did know better, if we had bothered to listen to them. We know we should have known better. Willful ignorance is no excuse.

The apostle Paul, under God's leading writes, "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

I think it's strange how ignorance has become an insult. Ignorance is not wrong, it's not stupid, it's just not knowing. No one told me, I never had schooling. That makes you ignorant, not stupid. But treasuring ignorance, or wallowing in ignorance, or using ignorance as a cloak for my sordid activities, that is both stupid and sinful.

Goyle: "The teacher said that-"
Malfoy: "Don't tell me, I don't want to know. If you tell me I won't be able to keep on doing this."

Malfoy: "But sir, I didn't know..."
Prof Moody: "You didn't want to know, Malfoy. 50 points from Slytherin"

Note: PBUH stands for Peace Be Upon Him, a phrase used by Muslims to show respect for Muhammad (PBUH) whenever they say or write his name. I do not hold Muhammad (PBUH) in the same esteem as a Muslim but have no wish for insult over etiquette to sidetrack the exchange of ideas and I certainly do wish Muhammad (PBUH) and his people the peace he never found in his lifetime.

Isn't he that french guy?

2007-12-07T22:21:00.000+11:00

What's with the funny name for the blog??

anatole brings together some key facets of who I am. Not that I have a penchant for obscure french names (or anglicised french words either). anatole menas something like 'rising dawn' in Greek. I looked it up. It conjures, for me, an image of a distant sun dawning behind a planet shrouded in it's own shadow. Rays reach forward from beyond the edge of the planet promising the new dawn of light on all bound by gravity below. You can see the cover of a mass market science fiction paperback, can't you? Although I suspect that viewing sun and planet from space rules out atmospheric imperfections which renders rays from the sun invisible. Nonetheless, I guess it's obvious that I enjoy reading and thinking about science fiction. So I like the image of anatole.

anatole, the Greek word that the french name comes from, is also a word used in Luke's Gospel to describe Jesus Christ. The rising dawn bringing light and hope to the world. That's a deeper reality of who I am. Someone who seeks to live in the light of Christ and looks forward to the spread of that light that brings peace to all who live under it's grace. And for a long time I've thought about writing about science fiction from my Christian perspective. And well, now's a good time to start. So among other things, that's what I intend to do here. Let me know what you think.

God Bless You.