I'm off!

I’ve been blogging for a little over a year now. I’ve had some great discussions and have made many online friends here at Blognow and would like to thank “Whitepage” for introducing me to the world of blogging, which in turn has introduced me to all you wonderful people. We’ve established a fantastic online community here, which I’m a bit loath to say “goodbye” to. But, like Snowy and some others, I’ve finally had enough. I’ve been putting off moving though, simply because I’ve felt like I’m at home and among friends here.

It’s a sad fact however, that Blognow has become a tad unreliable. Sad, but true. At times it’s rather slow, so slow in fact that I’ve been doing most of my commenting on blogs that use other providers. At other times, usually about ten minutes after I post, Blognow disappears for a day or so. Now that my friends, is seriously annoying, especially if someone’s asked you for your particular slant on a subject and you’ve just posted it and let them know, only to discover that it’s become invisible. I’ve also been fielding emails lately, from people I haven’t spoken to before, asking me if it’s just them or can nobody access it, so sorry Blognow, I do I.T. support for a living, I don’t really want to do it when I get home anymore.

So, you can all find my new blog at:

http://plonkasblog.blogspot.com/

I’ll leave my little Blognow tutorial up at:

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~tfforsyth/

Anyone that wants to persevere with Blognow will find a couple of tid-bits there that may help with the template.

So au revoir my friends! Feel free to come comment and hassle at my new blog. I’ll leave this here, just as it is for a while and I’ll also link to it from my new one, which still needs work BTW…

See ya,

Ted.

9:32 AM - 25/4/2007 - comments {4} - post comment

Ethics vs. Profit

Thanks to Beep and Dikkii for providing the inspiration. The issue of profit before ethics came up in comments to my previous and it got me thinking.

Bhopal. I probably don’t need to say any more than that, but I will. I certainly don’t need any better example however, they say it’s the worst industrial “accident” in history.

For those of you unfamiliar with the story, Bhopal (India) was host to a chemical plant owned and run by Union Carbide, a wholly owned subsidiary of DOW Chemical Company. An accident occurred there, that could and should have been prevented, that has had a cost in lives, of up to 20,000.

At about 3:30am on the morning of December 3 1984, a holding tank with 43 tonnes of MIC (methyl isocyanate) over heated and exploded, flooding the streets of Bhopal with a deadly heavier than air MIC gas mixture. Approximately 500,000 people were exposed to it in varying degrees. It is thought that up to 3000 people died initially, with the current figure at around 20,000 and still climbing, 23 years later. The ongoing effects such as birth defects, cancer, breathing difficulties, blindness and many more besides, has effected up to 120,000.

A sad indictment, not only on Union Carbide, but on the rest of the human race for not calling them to account. India simply didn’t have the balls, it wanted the resources Union Carbide provided. To everybody else it was someone else’s problem. The “International Medical Commission on Bhopal” was convened in 1993 to respond to it but by then, thousands of lives had already been lost because of it. A sad indictment indeed.

But why was the accident allowed to happen in the first place? Well, it was a simple matter of economics of course. Maintenance and safety to be precise. In order to save money, they’d cut back on maintenance crews, training and safety equipment. Cleaning was neglected because it required bits of the plant to be shut down and expensive parts that should have been replaced weren’t. Consequently, a valve got stuck, water flowed the wrong way into the system and caused serious havoc when it got into and reacted with the MIC in the holding tank. The rest is history, but I’ll just mention that Union Carbide (DOW) fought tooth and nail to avoid paying any compensation, despite the criminality of their neglect. And once they were forced to, they tied it up in funds for as long as they possibly could, adding needlessly to the suffering of thousands.

But if they had been performing the maintenance and spending the money on equipment, training and labour as the plant required, would they still have made a profit? As it turns out, yes. They just wouldn’t have made as much, that’s all, and the shareholders might have been a bit upset at the next AGM, the poor dears.

This issue has been raised over the fossil fuel industries however. Despite the fact that really, we could switch to a cleaner, cheaper and much more abundant fuel that goes by the name of hydrogen tomorrow if we wanted to, we continue to burn various fossil fuels at unprecedented rates. Trouble is that economies revolve around these things, despite the fact that hydrocarbons, whether they’re being burned or mined, cause pollution on a massively destructive scale. If there’s still profit to be made though, it’s not likely that an alternative will be available until the current resources have been raped for every cent of profit they can be raped for, and the planet along with them.

I don’t think there’s much we can do about it either. The only way to stop this mentality of “profit before all else” is by a lack of profit. That means boycotting products, etc. But can we really do that these days? Consider Union Carbide for a moment; I used to work in an injection moulding shop that made plastic car parts. We sold them to Ford and GMH who put them in their cars or sold them as “Genuine Holden Parts” but where did the plastic we used come from? Union Carbide, that’s where. They’re the world leaders in long chain polymer plastics after all. In fact, about 80% of the world’s raw material’s used in the manufacture of plastic goods comes from one of DOW’s subsidiary’s or another, whether it be here in Aus, America or China, so how do you actually manage to boycott them?

Then there’s the DuPont’s, Exxon’s, BHP’s, Mobil’s, etc. Both Dow and DuPont get a lot of their raw materials from Exxon and other oil companies and you’ll need petrol. Where does the steel come from that’s being used as re-enforcing in the footpath your local council built last week? So much for being pissed off about Ok Tedi. And so it goes.

The fact is that the multinationals are so ingrained within our daily lives, in so many of the products and services we use, that we can’t help but contribute to their profit in some way, however small and no matter how we try to avoid it. That means the only tool we have left is the share price and how can the likes of you an I effect that?

Well, I mentioned “Theyesmen” in my comment to Beep previously, but here’s another link to some of the fun they had with DOW. They even managed to announce that DOW was going to compensate Bhopal on national TV and caused DOW’s share price to drop about 20cents for an hour or so until DOW’s damage control machine was able to expose them for the charlatans they are.

It’s all good though. Try the acceptable risks calculator - find out at what point profitability will be threatened by danger to the public - and meet “Gilda, the golden Skeleton in the closet”, the Acceptable Risk mascot (that’s her in the middle with a very real DOW exec posing for a photo…oh dear…:)).

2:50 AM - 17/4/2007 - comments {25} - post comment

Hydrogen

Alternative Complacency III

Part I is here, Part 2 is here...

Hydrogen. The most abundant element in our universe. So abundant in fact, that we can’t begin to conceive just how much of it there really is. It’s postulated for instance, that for every cubic metre of hard vacuum (that’s deep space), there’s about one thousand atoms, give or take and it gets much thicker around stars. Did you know that Jupiter is about 90% hydrogen and in our neck of the woods, although there’s minimal hydrogen in the atmosphere, it is the third most abundant element on the surface of our planet. In short, there’s a hell of a lot of hydrogen about the place.

I was going to do an article on how there’s not enough going on in the world of hydrogen; how for all its prevalence we don’t seem to be able to get hold of much; how hydrogen manufacturing techniques are cumbersome and expensive; how it takes more energy to make hydrogen than you get out of it; how it burns to hot to use in an internal combustion engine; etc. Truth is, I can’t. Not because I can’t bring myself to do it, but quite simply because I can no longer find good links to prove it.

We’ll start with hydrogen manufacture. The traditional and cheapest production method, until recently, was the steam reformation of natural gas (heat methane under pressure in a steam atmosphere with a catalyst). That meant that hydrogen got to being rather expensive as the price of natural gas climbed from $2US MMBtu (Million British Thermal Units) to over $13US. Now however, we split water and we do it quite cheaply. CSIRO for instance, have recently come up with this little gem that can produce enough hydrogen in a day to power a car for 150km or so. That’s a “micro fuel cell” he’s holding in his hands by the way, not the unit itself (see here for more on fuel cells and the different fuels they use).

What car? Well I’m glad you asked. It seems that BMW, Ford, GM and many others I haven’t looked at as yet, have been rather busy (see the list in this here handy-dandy FAQ about hydrogen). GM developed it’s Fuel Cell car back in 2002, Ford are building dedicated hydrogen V10 engines, BMW has been busy with a “V12 power unit” and so the list goes on. Have a close look at some of the links in those and you’ll also find busses, trucks and various other means of transport discussed.

There are issues however, of that there’s no doubt. Every solution comes with its own set of problems after all. The problem with hydrogen combustion is Nitrogen Oxide or NOx which can become Ozone in the atmosphere and Nitric Acid when it dissolves in water. In atmospheric water, that means acid rain. It’s not as bad as lead or CO, but they are pollutants and need to be dealt with. It’s a good thing then that NOx reduction and capture seem to feature heavily in everyone’s research. Using pure oxygen eliminates the problem with NOx, but making and storing the oxygen reduces the efficiency of the whole hydrogen combustion process by about 11.5%, which of course, adds to the cost.

Then there’s the fact that hydrogen burns hot. Real hot. A hydrogen flame in air burns at about 2400(K – Kelvin) and  3080(K) in oxygen. Coal glows at around 1900c and a gas flame is about 1549c. I can’t seem to find anything about it, but I wonder. With that much heat, it’s my guess that you wouldn’t need anywhere as much to make steam and turn turbines.

The other thing that keeps popping up in my various searches is the phrase “Hydrogen Economy” and this is where the biggest problem of all manifests itself. Some would like to see it happen now, but it ain’t going to. Although leaps and bounds have been made in technology recently and although the US and the EU have agreed to accelerate the development of an hydrogen economy, the reality is that to much is dependant on the fossil fuel economy. The forecast in that report is for Americans to be using hydrogen by 2020.

I think that’s a reasonable target though. “Now” simply isn’t an option because so much of the major economies of the world depend on oil. Fortunes of entire countries are made and lost in the fluctuations of oil prices. To move immediately to an abundant energy carrier that can be made anywhere, by anyone, that will be cheap and have a price that doesn’t fluctuate will cause some serious economic issues. There’s also the little problem of rationalising the coal and uranium industries. These will never go away, we use them for more than energy,  but what do you do with 50,000 miners that no longer have work all of a sudden? No, this definitely needs a bit of thought.

3:48 PM - 14/4/2007 - comments {12} - post comment

The Thinking Blogger Award

The Thinking Blogger Award

Well, I’ve been tagged by Beep!Beep! It’s Me again. This time however, I have every reason to be quite chuffed. This one’s “The Thinking Blogger Award” and it goes to those blogs that really make you think about stuff. Now coming from Beep, who’s blog I read every day and where I have some of the most fantastic discussions and arguments, means that this one really means something to me (I’m such a nerd, I know). It’s got a snazzy little piccie to go with it and everything…:)

Anyway, here’s the rules:

1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with 5 blogs that make you think

2. Link to this post so that people can find the exact origin of the meme.

3. Optional: Proudly display the “Thinking Blogger Award” with a link to the post that you wrote (there is a silver version if gold doesn’t fit your blog).

4. Your chosen blogs cannot have been previously awarded.

A committee is a  cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured then quietly strangled. - Sir Barnett Cocks.

I’ve had my share of committees, I hate them and I know exactly how he feels. That said however, I’ve seen ideas get strangled in many other places besides, one or two right here.

Now this is all very well and good, but the rules make it awkward. If you really want to see most of the blogs I’d have nominated, go to Beep’s and read her award. The only one in hers that I don’t regularly lurk at is Steve G.

The only other ones are group type blogs that don’t tend to participate in meme’s, like GIFs, The 2% Company & The Bronze Dog. There is one however, run by an individual, that I regularly read that deals with a wide variety of subject matter and always has food for thought, or if you’re like me and understand very little about the finer points of finance, you’ll definitely learn something new. So my one and only tag at this stage (I really need to think some more about this) is:

Dikkii’s Diatribe - (This page is an outlet for my own hate-filled vitriol and spiteful opinions. Uneducated as I am in the ways of the world, it's still necessary to vent my spleen at the media, the music industry, the AFL and anyone else who could have offended my sensibilities. I plan for this to be updated occasionally, depending on my state of mind. So you can either look forward to, or avoid my one-sided, uninformed and dangerously unbalanced opinions on the state of the world and everyone in it.)

12:04 PM - 7/4/2007 - comments {6} - post comment

Th Big Three

I’ve recently been having a discussion with Sadie Lou who as you can see, has an excellent and very popular blog of her own.

We’ve been discussing some inconsistencies I see in Genesis and it got a bit subject specific, so I thought I’d tackle the subject head-on. Before I get into my own version of a dissection of these chapters however, I should probably apologise to Ricky Gervais, just in case. I think also, that there’s a couple of things about  the nature of God that need to be addressed and taken into account before I start. They are “the big three”, so to speak; omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient.

Omnipotent: Having absolute power.

Obviously you’d need this one if you’re going to create a whole universe out of what, it doesn’t say.

Omnipresent: Present everywhere at the same time.

I’m not sure why he’d need this, but he’s got it, so deal with it.

Omniscient: Knowing everything.

Now here’s the kicker. God knows everything that was, is and will be, or so I’m lead to believe. It does however, present a few issues for me.

So, let’s take a look at the other big three, Genesis 1, 2 & 3, bearing those three qualities of God in mind. It is in these chapters, the ones that first introduce us to God, that we find some major inconsistencies that leave me doubting that any of it could possibly be “the inspired words of God.” A God that has the qualities I’ve mentioned above would never allow such mistakes, I’m sure.

Chapter 1: Ok, God creates heaven and earth, in the dark. Then God creates light and sees that it is good and we get day and night. We get six hectic days, where God gets to show off his creative abilities and flex his all knowing muscles. No stone was left unturned, quite literally. By the end of the fifth day, we have light, the sky, land, sea, vegetation including all the seed bearing plants with fruit “according to their kind” (whatever that means), a greater light to govern the day and a lesser light to govern the night, stars, fish, all the land dwelling animals including birds, in that order.

The sixth day is the biggy, well as far as we’re concerned anyway. Firstly, the living creatures, separated by groups; livestock, creatures that move along the ground and wild animals, each according to their kind (again.. What does that mean?) and then it’s our turn. God makes us in his image. Brilliant! Then he tells us to go forth and multiply and rule over all the animals, oh and we can eat the plants. No problems there. Everything seems to be in order and “each according to it’s kind” (can someone explain that for me please?), super.

Second chapter: Well, after spending all that creative energy and of course, being quite chuffed at what he’d achieved, and rightly so, is it any wonder he has a well deserved rest? I don’t think so. It’s just after this however, that things start to get a little sticky for me.

Genesis 2:5-7 says; ⁵and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, ⁶but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground - ⁷the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

There’s a problem here though. It seems that someone got confused somewhere. Correct me if I’m wrong, but he created the plants and vegetation back in 1:11. Man however, doesn’t get a guernsey until 1:26, fifteen verses after he created the plants, which in 1:30 he gives to everything to eat. But in chapter 2 he seems to have created man before the plants. Not only that, but streams had watered the “whole surface of the ground” (with no plants, I’m assuming mud would be the result here), yet God was able to find some dust.

Now, there’s probably some perfectly simple scholarly reason why it seems to get all mixed up and turned around, but I can’t work out what it would be. This is supposed to be the inspired words of God after all and God, as we’ve all been taught and/or lead to believe, is supposed to be infallible. Most books sport the odd mistake, but would an infallible God allow such mistakes? I can’t really see it myself.

Anyway, then God plants the garden and creates “Eden” and puts man there to look after it. But in 2:9 we see what seems to be another mistake. God creates yet more plants; And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground – trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. I’d contend however, that he’d already done that – see 1:11 & 1:30 – but there’s an interesting qualification here. He also creates, in the middle of the garden, two special trees; “the tree of life” and “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil”. He then commands man to; not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die. Nothing about the tree of life though, so I guess that’s fair game.

Anyway, after that we get God’s crowning glory, woman. Ripper! Now the scene is set for chapter 3.

Things go a bit awry here though. It seems that Eve finds “the tree of knowledge of good and evil” and meets a chatty serpent. It asks her if God really said they mustn’t eat the fruit of any tree in the garden. Eve, far from being surprised by a talking snake, says that no, it’s only the tree of knowledge and they mustn’t touch it or else they’ll die (just a bit of an exaggeration here, I think. God said “eat of it”, not “touch it”). Anyway, the snake sets her straight and says that they won’t die, it’s just that God knows that when they eat it, they’ll become like God, knowing good and evil. At this point, Genesis makes it very clear that Eve makes an informed decision, carefully considering all the information she has available to her, and decides to eat the fruit. She then gives some to Adam who was with her, keeping quiet, probably because it was him that told the fib about touching it, and he ate some too. Then they realise they’re naked so fig leaves become the order of the day.

Not long after this, God finds out and get’s really upset and hands out some punishments: Woman to have pain in childbirth, man has to toil the fields and the snake has to crawl on its belly for the rest of its days. Not much of a punishment for a snake, but there you go.

Now that’s all very well and good, but there are some inconsistencies here too. For instance, they manage to hide from God and he has to call out to them. Really? I thought he was omnipresent and omniscient? Then it seems that he doesn’t know how it is that they know they're naked. Really? I thought he was omniscient? Then he asks what it is they’ve done. There’s that omniscience problem again.

Then there’s the whole problem with the serpent. It seems it didn’t lie or deceive anyone. It told the truth and nothing but. This can be evidenced by chapter 3:22 where God endorses everything the snake said - And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."  - yet we’re taught that the serpent lied and deceived Eve. Well, she did say so I suppose but then, she was trying to save her own skin. The whole episode just doesn’t make sense for an omnipotent, omniscient God.

So, these inconsistencies appearing as they do, all within the first few chapters, are more than enough to make me wonder if this, or any of the rest of it, could possibly be the testament of an infallible being.

3:32 PM - 2/4/2007 - comments {17} - post comment

The need for God

Once again I’ve found myself inspired by BeepBeepit’sme’s most bodacious blog and find I just can’t help myself. Sorry Beep, if you feel plagiarised.

There has been much debate over the centuries about God and the need for him/her/it. It seems to me however, that religion(s) should have a definite starting and end point.

There was a time when man worshipped the earth or Gaia. Then there was a time when man worshipped the sun, moon and stars. Over the millennia however, people learn about the world around them and religions must either change to incorporate new knowledge or risk becoming obsolete.

For ancient man, just as it is today, sun, earth and water were all required for his continued sustenance and survival. Is it any wonder then that he would hold these things in reverence? I don’t think it is, simply because without any one of them, he would die. And if he doesn’t understand how it is these things conspire together to produce the staples required for sustenance, is it any wonder that he views the process with awe and gives thanks to what he sees as “life givers”?

Then there’s the places where nothing grows, where man and beast simply cannot survive. A lack of water, sunlight, infertile or contaminated soil is probably the reason, but if he doesn’t understand the process, how is he to know? This must simply be a place where “something else” manages to keep the life giving forces of sun, earth and water from producing their bounty, seemingly for no other reason than to make it impossible for man and the beasts he hunts. Is it any wonder then that these places are to be avoided because “bad” things happen and people and animals alike die there?

If that was the case, and I think it’s probably close enough, then it’s hardly surprising that those ancient men, tasked with leadership within their communities, tried to devise methods to help keep those “bad” things at bay and encourage the “good” things, in the hope of bountiful harvests and good hunting.

So armed with indifference at his own ignorance, an over inflated view of his own importance and awe at the world around him, man seeks out for himself a force of such power that it can not only regulate the seasons and make the sun shine, but can create the earth it nourishes, the sky from which it shines and everything else that man sees around him, inevitably including man himself. In those places where nothing can survive we find the domain of the arch nemesis of the benign power of life, which is death. And so begins the ancient and endless struggle between good and evil that has ensued throughout the ages.

Trouble is that man is also a very curious beast. For many, the fact that there is no more evidence to suggest the existence of a supernatural force than there is to suggest the non-existence of a supernatural force, is more than enough to suggest that perhaps the gods are not responsible after all. These are the people who experiment with nature, take note of what they observe and think about what conclusions can be drawn. Then they tend to suffer horribly at the hands of their “church” for daring to think. But so it is that eventually, the gods of the sun, earth, water, thunder and lightening, etc. become obsolete. We now understand enough of the processes of nature to know that there’s no point praying to the sun for a bountiful harvest. If conditions are right the harvest will be good if not, bad. It’s really quite simple.

And so we reach the end point, where the mystification of natural forces is no longer required. The obsolescence of these deities has caused them to fade into obscurity and their rituals and trappings with them, but only to a point. I say that because there are many dates in the christian calendar that have their origins in ancient pagan festivals. December 25^th for instance, is the winter solstice and evidence would suggest that it has been celebrated since times more ancient than Abraham or Moses.

We now however, understand something of the forces that created our universe. We also understand much about biological evolution and know how it is we came to be here. We also know that certain foods do not keep well or need to be well cooked. In all of this, there is no reason to suggest that some all powerful being created the universe out of nothing, or that some benign “god of life” moulded a man out of clay and breathed life into him, or that some god or other deigned that some edible and quite delicious foods are “unclean” and shouldn’t be eaten.

So is there still a “need for god” do you think? It seems that most of the mundane questions that god answers have been explained. Sure, the church had a few issues with this in the early days, but for the most part it has come to accept that you can’t just torture and kill people because they don’t agree with you.

But I’ve been told recently that our current christian god exists outside of time and space, multiple universes have even been contemplated. But apparently, belief in today’s christian god is quite different to the simple ascribing of a god aspect to something that is not yet understood. I find I cannot agree with that. For anything to exist outside of time and space, it would need to violate the laws of physics as we know them. That means that a god that exists outside of time and space is a notion we cannot possibly understand. So how is ascribing god aspects to that which we don’t understand any different in this instance than it was to the Earth, sun, rivers, thunder, lightening, planets, etc? In short, it isn’t.

And if we look back at the history of the supernatural, christian god we can see quite plainly that over time, “He” has shifted from being a ready explanation for everything, from conception to the creation of the universe, to something that can’t possibly be understood. There was a time when he was directly responsible for everything, now he’s only responsible for the forces that shape everything. It seems to me that in incorporating new knowledge, in the vain attempt that it doesn’t become obsolete, main stream christian religion has pushed god right out of this universe and into the next. It almost seems as if the end point has been reached here as well, doesn’t it?

9:20 AM - 14/3/2007 - comments {35} - post comment

Willowsrealm

Well, another one bites the dust. Am I the only one who’s commented on a blog, only to see the blog deleted by it’s user? Twice now this has happened.

Some of you may remember Matthew Richmond. He is a christian and decided to engage a few of us in debate in my Science vs. Religion series. He got hammered pretty hard when he said we should approach some things “with our hearts open and our critical minds closed”. It really didn’t go over that well with one or two of my more ardent readers, but it did make for an excellent discussion. Well, he stopped commenting and when next I went to look at his blog, it was no longer – “This user currently has no blogs” was the message. I’ve kept him in my fiends list though in the vain hope that he will return one day. I still check from time to time.

That was a fairly sad occasion, simply because Matthew was prepared to engage in a discussion. This time however, I guiltily found myself quite chuffed at the fact that I goaded a blogger into deleting their blog.

The blog in question was a thing called Willowsrealm as you can see, “This user currently has no blogs” isn’t the half of it. It seems that Blognow have even removed the profile. I wonder if they were asked to or whether Marcel uncovered their sordid plan?

Anyway, the difference with this one was that they were asking for money. Ten dollars would buy you an emailed tarot reading and thirty, the snail mailed recording. Then there was the angels for five dollars. The angels? Well, they said that they talked to the angels and for a poultry 5 bucks would let you know what the cheeky buggers were saying about you.

Unlike the usual Viagra and travel agency spammers however, this one allowed comments, so I put one there along the lines of “Look folks, we’ve got our very own Sylvia Browne.” When I went back the next day, in the hope that there’d be a reply, I found, to my chagrin, that my comment had been deleted. Well, I didn’t swear and I didn’t say it was crap or anything, so what’s the big deal? That was when I decided that I needed to write “Woo for everyone II”.

After that, I got to thinking about what James Randi might do if he saw something like this on his free blogging service, so I whipped out a quick challenge. Now I don’t own a foundation, nor do I have a cool million bucks to spend, so I guess my challenge wasn’t quite as inspiring as his, but I figured I could scrape together a hundred in a pinch, so here’s what I did.

First I made the following comment on Willowsrealm:

Why don't you show us how good you are Willow, and advertise your skills as you go.

Here's a challenge. I'll give you any info you need about me to do a tarot reading, publicly, here in your comments and in my blog. You can post the reading here for all to see and I will get my wife or anyone you want that would know, to verify, or not, what you see in your reading, for past, present and as the future arrives, for that as well.

If you can be more than 50% accurate with anything in my past or present, I will pay you 10 times your fee, if not you get nothing. We'll leave the future out, if you want, unless you see something very short term.

Then I posted the same challenge in a comment on mine and kept an eye on Statcounter. My deleted comment made it obvious that Willow kept an eye on the blog, so I didn’t bother with a comment to let them know I’d done it, I just waited until they were online then posted it.

Sure enough, within a couple of minutes I’d had a hit on my post and the referring page was Willowsrealm. I chuckled with glee and thought nothing more about it until later that night when I logged on and saw that I had no new comments. I wondered at that point if Willow had responded on their own blog, so I took myself off to look. Well, if I was chagrined at having my comment deleted you can imagine my pleasure when I saw the whole blog had been deleted.

There are a few reasons for my glee at my success. Firstly, this is a free forum and this person was here for no other reason than to garner funds. Secondly, I’ve tested quite a few tarot readers in my time and haven’t managed to find one yet that actually got anything much right, past present or future. Lastly and to be honest, that “talking to angels” thing freaked me out a little bit.

11:04 AM - 7/3/2007 - comments {8} - post comment

The Ride

It’s called “The Great Ocean and Otway Classic”, it’s over. The reason for the training is done. For now…

It started with a knock on the door at 6:00am. It was our cycling colleague, come to take us all to Geelong for the start of the big event. It planned to be a big day with 3000 having registered to ride. We drove down to Geelong, found a park, lathered up with sun-screen, gave our bikes one last check over, made sure we had our food and fluid then rode down to the starting line. There were quite a few milling around, applying the final coat of sun-screen and fixing inevitable punctures. The event was running about 5 minutes late and while we waited we spotted the guy that dragged the Lamborghini away from the lights on the ATB ride, so we figured we were in good company.

Eventually, at about 7:35, the horn was sounded for our group, which was the “less than 6.5 hours” contingent. I’d never experienced the sound of about 500 riders all clipping their cleats into their pedals at the same time before and I was quite impressed. As we climbed up into Geelong proper from the beach, we found ourselves a nice easy pace in among the main pack, or I should say, “the peloton” (it sounds so much better when you say it like that).

We headed out of Geelong on the stretch up to Moriac where the 90km event riders turned left and headed back toward Geelong. We had a quick stop for the purposes of relief, then continued on into the Otway Ranges for the climb to the top.

I found the country roads a bit interesting. It really is quite amazing the amount of resistance there is on those rough country roads. At one point we were all coasting along nicely on some nice smooth bitumen, then we hit the rough stony stuff and dropped a good 10km/h. I thought that was a bit unfair, especially since we were going to be climbing on this sort of surface. But, there was nothing to be done about it, so it was head down and pedal.

Then we started on the hills. Having come off my bike the Sunday before the event and hurt my shoulder rather badly, I hadn’t been able to do any training that last week so figured I was in for a torrid time, especially since I’d also done no real hill climbing in the lead up at all. Hill climbing is best done at your own pace, so my two comrades and I soon found ourselves separated, with me lagging way behind.

I knew there was a big one coming (see the course profile here) so I couldn’t help but think that we’d done the biggy when I got to the top of each one totally out of breath. Trouble was that we were riding through some rather spectacular rain forest which made seeing the lay of the land a little difficult. The other problem is that the Otways have managed to space their climbs so that there’s not quite enough down between the ups for an unfit old bugger to catch his breath in between.

When I finally reached the big one however, I knew it. There was something just a little different here. It hurt more than the others and my lowest gear didn’t quite seem to be low enough. Still, there was nothing for it so I resolved myself to slow painful climb to the top. I’d be able to rest soon enough, so best just to get there. So much for the lovely rain forest…

I discovered during this ascent, that I don’t like hills with curves in them. You can’t see the top of the damn things so there’s no way to judge how much longer the torture is going to continue. Anyway, I was almost at the top, just a couple more turns to go, according to the more seasoned riders that were overtaking me, when I got the most spectacular cramp I’ve ever had in the front of my left thigh. I had to stop and stretch. When I tried to stretch however, my left calf and the back of my left thigh also cramped. It was then, once I’d put all my weight on my right foot, that my right leg decided it needed to severely cramp as well. At that stage there was nought to do but to sit down, shake my legs out and wait for it to pass. After that I thought I’d better do something different with my legs for a bit, so I walked for about 5 minutes, just to ease the cramps out a bit more. It worked and I was back on my bike, to the cheers of some more passers-by.

I have to admit, the encouragement of my fellow cyclists was fantastic. The worst I heard from anyone going past was “Good work, not far to go” when really, they could have got stuck right in because I was completely unprepared. But no, not one single bad word was heard, not even when I was walking. Mind you, I wasn’t the only one and there were plenty better bikes than mine being pushed.

So it was that when I overtook another walker with a much more expensive bike, I figured I must have the strength back to ride. I climbed back on and yes, sweet bliss, my legs didn’t hurt much at all. Another couple of turns and there it was, the crest. My colleagues were dutifully waiting for me at the top, so I took a little time here to get off and stretch some more, then it was into the descent into Lorne.

Now wasn’t that just a little bit of fun. A constant 55 – 60km/h with a top speed of 70 as we rolled down the hills and flew through the corners yelling “How good’s this!” at the top of our lungs. I’m pleased to report that my new wheels are quite impressive. I managed to out-coast people who were pedalling and that takes good hubs. Seriously good hubs considering the bikes I was overtaking. Then it was into Lorne to top up the water and Gatorade before we tackled the Great Ocean Road.

Now isn’t that just spectacular. Yes, there’s a few hills, but nothing as bad the mountains we’d just come through, but once again it was a matter of finding that comfortable cadence and sticking with it. We went through Fairhaven and Aireys Inlet. On the climb out of Aireys, one colleague was waiting. We didn’t see our other comrade and decided to go on to Anglesea. It transpired that the comrade we were waiting for had gotten a puncture. I waited at Anglesea for him to catch up while the other continued on. He figured he could beat the 6.5 hours on the clock, not just time on bike, so off he went and good luck to him.

As Torquay loomed in the distance, the rain began. It was quite nice at first because it was rather hot and oppressive out there, so a cool shower was just what the doctor ordered. The massive thunderstorm that ensued however, I could quite easily have lived without. When it comes down like that, rain hurts! Anyway, we stopped at the Maccas at the top of the hill and sucked down some caffeine laced fluids and waited for the rain to stop. That didn’t take long so it wasn’t to long before we were back on the road, riding the last 20km back to Geelong.

It was fairly uneventful as we trundled along the edge of the freeway heading home. One thing surprised me though. About 8km out we saw the “sag wagon” picking up people to give them a lift back. I said to my colleague that after doing what we’d done and having made it this far, I don’t think my pride would have allowed me to do the last 10km in the bus. If I was at the point where I had no choice, I’d have been crying I think. But to much exercise can do that to you.

So how did we go? Well, my computer said:

155.99km with a 27.3km/h average. 5 hours and 50 minutes on the bike.

I maintain that I beat my 6.5 hours nominated time, but of course, our colleague that actually beat the clock by a couple of minutes says that he was the only one that really made it…

1:00 PM - 5/3/2007 - comments {10} - post comment

El Diablo III

Here are Part I and Part II

So far in this series we’ve looked mostly at the Old Testament. In there, we have managed to find absolutely no reference to “the devil” per se. Yes, there are a few references to Satan, but I think we’ve managed to establish that Satan is an Arch Angel. He is known as “Satan the Accuser” in more benedictory surrounds and his job is to remind god of all the sins you committed while you were alive. A nasty piece of work by yours and my standards, perhaps, but God obviously felt him necessary. For me he just raises another question though. If God is omniscient and omnipresent, then why does he need someone to remind him? Hmmm…

I digress. References to entities being “cast down” from heaven seem to have been similarly misrepresented over the years. The stories we know of Lucifer and/or Satan being cast out of heaven, have actually proven to be stories about the kings of Babylon and Tyre being defeated by the Israelites.

So where does that leave us. Well really, it leaves us with the new testament. The first mention of Satan as anything other than the accuser, is Mat: 4:10. To get to someone being cast down we have to go all the way to Luke 10:18 – He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightening from heaven.” But please note that a) this is meant to be Jesus speaking and b) he said “heaven”. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if Satan is the devil, he has no business being in heaven.

Even so, if we put this into context with the preceding verse, what he actually seems to be referring to is the 72 telling him that “even the demons submit to us in your name!” In fact, my NIV bible’s study notes say just exactly that for verse 18: “Satan fall. Even the demons were driven out by the disciples (v. 17), which means that Satan was suffering defeat.” They still seem to think that the devil exists somewhere else, but you see what I mean.

This theme continues throughout the New Testament though, where Satan, Beelzebub, the Devil, etc. become the much maligned beasties that we know today. The question I have about all this though, is why so late? What happened that caused the Judaic religions to require a devil?

For at least a couple of thousand years, or so we’re lead to believe, there was only the choice between God or nothing. There was no devil or hell to serve as the opposite of God and heaven. Yet as we move into the New Testament and beyond, the legend of the devil grows until we have the imagery (the earliest of which comes to us from the middle ages), church and dogma surrounding him that we have today.

 There have been a number of ideas put forward as to why. There’s the ancient and obvious reason that you can’t have “good” without “evil”, “ light” without “dark” because they are opposite sides of the same coin, as it were. Then there’s the mythological reason that all Gods have their enemies. But my favourite runs a little deeper.

Personally, I subscribe to the theory that because there was no real alternative, no hell and the devil to torment you, the church started to lose it’s congregation. Maintaining a temple with priests takes quite a lot of resources that could probably be better used elsewhere.

First commenter get’s make comment number 666, so don’t be shy…:-)

4:01 PM - 27/2/2007 - comments {8} - post comment

Woo for everyone II

I’ve found a new blog to read. Willowsrealm is what it’s called but there doesn’t seem to be much substance. I left a comment, but it got deleted so I thought it best that I have a little look around and see what this person is up to. I figure that because they’re asking for money in a free forum and therefore have crossed the line and posted SPAM in our forum, they’re fair game. So, to Willowsrealm we go.

There’s a little bit to get through, but it’s always best to start at the beginning, so that’s what we’ll do:

Enter the magical world of Tarot,

I guess I didn’t really need to read much past that to get to the gist of it.

Readings are read (what else can you do with them?) by an experienced, passionate tarot reader, ~*willowsrealm*~.

This is all there is by way of credentials here, so thanks Willow. We wouldn’t have known that if you hadn’t told us. You could at least tell us where and when you graduated from tarot school. A little educational punch, especially if you expect people to listen when you tell them how they should live their lives, never goes astray. “Every little helps”, as my mum always says.

You’ll be pleased to hear though that your tarot reading will only cost you $10 if it’s emailed to you but $30 for a recording to be posted. Personally I think I’d go for the email. It’s always best to have the evidence in writing if you can manage it. Although, a signed transcript of the recording would probably be better in court, but as we’ve seen with various Royal Commissions, an email can get you into just as much trouble.

Trouble is though that if I was to get a reading from Willow, then a reading from one of the ladies my wife works with, then get a reading at random out of the paper, then go and see the most expensive tarot reader I can find, every single reading will be different. I know this because I’ve tried it. One or two almost got close to the truth too, but none could be more accurate than less than %50 with their guesses and predictions. That makes it no better than chance so it’s obvious that they were all guessing.

Now for my favourite bit:

Ask the Angels A question You will learn what the angels have wanted to tell you…

Oh dear… And that's just for the use of capitals and lack of punctuation. But which angels would those be Willow, the little ones in your head that just won’t keep quiet? Sorry, that was a low blow but you’re going to have to do better than that. For starters your going to have to say which ones. I mean, are we talking Arch Angels here? You know, your Michaels, Gabriels and Satans or just your run of the mill “guardian” angels like George or Nancy? I reckon you should probably do a separate line in Arch Angels though. Surely those lads would be worth much more than the poultry 5 bucks your asking. Money in the bank. But once again people, your “Angel speak” will be emailed to you within 12 hours.

Guided by Spirit, Given with Blessing, Love & Light…

I’d have thought that spirits could do better than 12 hours, but what that “light” on the end is supposed to mean has got me stumped! How do you give someone something with light? Give them a lit candle or a switched on torch I suppose.

Seriously though, this is much worse than anything even Sylvia Browne has managed to dream up so I had a poke around at the web site. At least Willow has the decency not to charge $700 for an over the phone reading like Sylvia. But everything there is nice and anonymous, not even a PO Box. All there is, is an email link to a user called “twistedwillow”. Now that made me giggle.

I had to wonder, what with all this stuff about speaking with angels, why Willow would bother with the Wicca stuff that’s advertised at that site. Has Willow not read Revelation? You’d like to think that Willow had if Willow is talking with angels, but Revelation makes it quite clear that if it doesn’t come from god then it comes from the devil and the whole pentagram/witchcraft thing seems to me at least, to be a little “devil” (notice how I’m not saying Satan here…) inspired. So it would seem my dear Willow, that biblically speaking, you can’t possibly be talking to angels unless they’re angels of the kind that most gawd fearin’ folk prefer to steer clear of. Me, I just prefer to steer clear, unless of course they should happen to try and lay down some spam and solicit business in our beautiful free forum.

1:05 PM - 23/2/2007 - comments {15} - post comment