And while we're on the topic of what it takes to be an Australian, the Herald also has this gem... an Aussie Makeover Kit for President George, who arrives in Sydney next Tuesday.
It's HERE
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Citizenship
There's been a great deal of debate here over the last few weeks about a gumnut (that's aussie for 'government') proposal to have some sort of a "Citizenship Test" that asks dumb questions like "who votes for the government?" (to which my answer would be "given the state of New South Wales, dickheads", but that's for another blog).
There's a fabulous alternative to the"official" test, proposed in today's Sydney Morning Herald. The questions it asks are far closer to the requirement. For example, under language, it's proposed that an applicant for citizenship should be able to explain the following passage...
"In the arvo last Chrissy the relos rocked up for a barbie, some bevvies and a few snags. After a bit of a Bex and a lie down we opened the pressies, scoffed all the chockies, bickies and lollies. Then we drained a few tinnies and Mum did her block after Dad and Steve had a barney and a bit of biffo."
Later, under "Food", the proposed test asks "What purple root vegetable beginning with the letter "b" is required by law to be included in a hamburger with the lot?"
Aussie readers of this blog will know exactly what all that means. The rest of you are challenged to provide answers.
The full test is HERE.
There's a fabulous alternative to the"official" test, proposed in today's Sydney Morning Herald. The questions it asks are far closer to the requirement. For example, under language, it's proposed that an applicant for citizenship should be able to explain the following passage...
"In the arvo last Chrissy the relos rocked up for a barbie, some bevvies and a few snags. After a bit of a Bex and a lie down we opened the pressies, scoffed all the chockies, bickies and lollies. Then we drained a few tinnies and Mum did her block after Dad and Steve had a barney and a bit of biffo."
Later, under "Food", the proposed test asks "What purple root vegetable beginning with the letter "b" is required by law to be included in a hamburger with the lot?"
Aussie readers of this blog will know exactly what all that means. The rest of you are challenged to provide answers.
The full test is HERE.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Half Century
I have to admit that it was with some trepidation that I actually woke up this morning. Life, you see, has changed today because of a benchmark annual event that has suddenly and mercilessly made me "old".
Today, I turned 50.
As yet, I haven't had the need to speak it, but if the difficulty I'm having even typing it is any indication, I'm in for a protracted period of adjustment counselling before I can resume my proper place in society.
I certainly don't "look" 50, even if I do have less hair. I don't "think" 50 either and my bedroom and desk are the same mess today as they were when I was 17.
I still play computer games, get excited by fireworks, drive too fast, stay up too late and sleep in too long, buy lollies (candy) at the supermarket, eat coco pops for breakfast, watch Trar Trek and Stargate at every opportunity and prefer books with pictures.
I think South Park and the Simpsons are funny, and would happily watch Night At The Museum a third time. I've read Harry Potter, seen all but the most recent of the films too. My favourite rides at theme parks always involve going fast or a roller coaster or a boat that finishes the ride with a death plunge into a pool of water, and I deliberately drive through deep puddles just because the sploosh is fun.
I am as net savvy, and tech savvy as anyone, though, I don't like the music today... actually, having listened to some of it, I have concluded that there isn't any original music today so that's not a problem either.
The language hasn't changed all that much, and neither has fashion, so I'm certainly not dressing or sounding 50, though I do occasionally hear myself chant "young people today have no respect", just as my father, and his father, and all fathers before that have done for thousands of years.
And if I was single, I'd still be chasing girls in their twenties and thirties, even if that did mean having to deal with the discomfort of having to explain stuff to their parents, some of whom may be younger than me. Of course, a twenty something or thirty something will happily go out with a bloke in his 40's, but mostly, they wouldn't be caught dead the the company of a 50 year old (unless he was exceedingly rich, which I'm not), so that proposition's entirely academic on two counts.
I must face the reality of the day though, so I've set aside a little time, just before my mid-afternoon nap, to go out and get a walking frame, a box of incontinence pads, some tinned prunes and a hat to drive in. I'll be trading in my little Smart car for something more like a lounge room on wheels though sadly, I'm not in America where I'd be able to buy the aptly named "Oldsmobile".
A little later in the day, I'll call talk back radio and tell the world that "back in my day", things were whatever they were, and I'll call for jay walkers to be publicly flogged and complain about young people having no respect.
Strange things, birthdays. I think they mean far too much.
Today, I turned 50.
As yet, I haven't had the need to speak it, but if the difficulty I'm having even typing it is any indication, I'm in for a protracted period of adjustment counselling before I can resume my proper place in society.
I certainly don't "look" 50, even if I do have less hair. I don't "think" 50 either and my bedroom and desk are the same mess today as they were when I was 17.
I still play computer games, get excited by fireworks, drive too fast, stay up too late and sleep in too long, buy lollies (candy) at the supermarket, eat coco pops for breakfast, watch Trar Trek and Stargate at every opportunity and prefer books with pictures.
I think South Park and the Simpsons are funny, and would happily watch Night At The Museum a third time. I've read Harry Potter, seen all but the most recent of the films too. My favourite rides at theme parks always involve going fast or a roller coaster or a boat that finishes the ride with a death plunge into a pool of water, and I deliberately drive through deep puddles just because the sploosh is fun.
I am as net savvy, and tech savvy as anyone, though, I don't like the music today... actually, having listened to some of it, I have concluded that there isn't any original music today so that's not a problem either.
The language hasn't changed all that much, and neither has fashion, so I'm certainly not dressing or sounding 50, though I do occasionally hear myself chant "young people today have no respect", just as my father, and his father, and all fathers before that have done for thousands of years.
And if I was single, I'd still be chasing girls in their twenties and thirties, even if that did mean having to deal with the discomfort of having to explain stuff to their parents, some of whom may be younger than me. Of course, a twenty something or thirty something will happily go out with a bloke in his 40's, but mostly, they wouldn't be caught dead the the company of a 50 year old (unless he was exceedingly rich, which I'm not), so that proposition's entirely academic on two counts.
I must face the reality of the day though, so I've set aside a little time, just before my mid-afternoon nap, to go out and get a walking frame, a box of incontinence pads, some tinned prunes and a hat to drive in. I'll be trading in my little Smart car for something more like a lounge room on wheels though sadly, I'm not in America where I'd be able to buy the aptly named "Oldsmobile".
A little later in the day, I'll call talk back radio and tell the world that "back in my day", things were whatever they were, and I'll call for jay walkers to be publicly flogged and complain about young people having no respect.
Strange things, birthdays. I think they mean far too much.
Here's Some Recommended Viewing
Urban Koda, in a comment on my last climate rant, asked for some web references so he can be better informed.
I'll give a couple to you, but before I do, if you're interested in really getting up to speed, there's a film, "Climate Catastrophe: Cancelled" that's been put out by the Canadian organisation "Friends of Science".
It's a MUST WATCH for anyone remotely interested in the whole climate debate. The thrust of that film is much as it has been here on my blog... the earth may well be warming but to blame human CO2 output for the change is dangerously wrong. There are a couple of other statistical "corrections" in that film too, that bring into questions the entire basis of the pro Climate Change argument.
Click HERE to watch that doco. It's in 5 easily downloaded parts and really is worth the effort.
As for that "error" in my last rant, first, go to the website of the guy who discovered the mistake. Steve McIntyre is a statistician who runs a blog called Climate Audit. His work, in auditing the statistical analyses that the climate doomsayers trot out to "prove" their theory, has brought some real balance into the debate. The blog's HERE.
If you really must, you can go to the Goddard Institute site, where the data is published. It's HERE, but finding any reference to the change in the nubers will be hard, because the scientists at Goddard are True Believers, so this error is just a minor inconvenience to them.
And finally, for a very good comment on the change in NASA numbers, go HERE to an article in Canada's National Post, and then go HERE to a well written article at News Busters. In that article, by the way, there are some references not just to the way the doomsayers misinterpret data, but how they're deliberately and calculatingly selective about the data they choose to use to support their cause. It's scary.
I'll say this one more time (and no, it won't be the last time I say it)...
There can be no argument that humans have been reckless with the environment. There is no doubt we've squandered precious resources and we need to change our ways.
However, to blame changes in our climate on human activity, and in particular, on human produced CO2, is arrogant in the extreme. It's also dangerous, because politicians (who are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier) are making serious, far-reaching changes based on junk science.
I'll give a couple to you, but before I do, if you're interested in really getting up to speed, there's a film, "Climate Catastrophe: Cancelled" that's been put out by the Canadian organisation "Friends of Science".
It's a MUST WATCH for anyone remotely interested in the whole climate debate. The thrust of that film is much as it has been here on my blog... the earth may well be warming but to blame human CO2 output for the change is dangerously wrong. There are a couple of other statistical "corrections" in that film too, that bring into questions the entire basis of the pro Climate Change argument.
Click HERE to watch that doco. It's in 5 easily downloaded parts and really is worth the effort.
As for that "error" in my last rant, first, go to the website of the guy who discovered the mistake. Steve McIntyre is a statistician who runs a blog called Climate Audit. His work, in auditing the statistical analyses that the climate doomsayers trot out to "prove" their theory, has brought some real balance into the debate. The blog's HERE.
If you really must, you can go to the Goddard Institute site, where the data is published. It's HERE, but finding any reference to the change in the nubers will be hard, because the scientists at Goddard are True Believers, so this error is just a minor inconvenience to them.
And finally, for a very good comment on the change in NASA numbers, go HERE to an article in Canada's National Post, and then go HERE to a well written article at News Busters. In that article, by the way, there are some references not just to the way the doomsayers misinterpret data, but how they're deliberately and calculatingly selective about the data they choose to use to support their cause. It's scary.
I'll say this one more time (and no, it won't be the last time I say it)...
There can be no argument that humans have been reckless with the environment. There is no doubt we've squandered precious resources and we need to change our ways.
However, to blame changes in our climate on human activity, and in particular, on human produced CO2, is arrogant in the extreme. It's also dangerous, because politicians (who are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier) are making serious, far-reaching changes based on junk science.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Oh. Really? You Made WHAT Mistake?
I know. I know. The Bear seems obsessed with Global Warming. And yes, I know. I promised that, because for most of my readers, the Global Warming thing is about as interesting as watching a thermometer rise, my most recent rant would be the last for a while on the subject (not counting, of course, the piece a few days ago about driving to the shops).
Unfortunately, like a seasoned politician, I'm going to break that promise because "The Media" has been remarkably silent on something that, had it been the other way around, would have been front page news...
Last week, without fanfare, NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies corrected an error in its measurement of "global" temperatures. Actually, to say they "corrected" an error is somewhat misleading, because while they certainly fixed the numbers, their disclosure of the said "correction" was buried in an obscure statement posted to the GISS website as follows...
"...the USHCN station records up to 1999 were replaced by a version of USHCN data with further corrections after an adjustment computed by comparing the common 1990-1999 period of the two data sets."
I have no idea what that means but I'm sure Sir Humphrey would be proud of them for using so many words to obscure the real meaning of whatever it was they're trying to say. All I know is that the GISS is the place that's responsible for monitoring the world's temperature. It's the place that's published the numbers that the doomsdayers point to when they want to make us feel guilty about exhaling all that CO2. You know the numbers... the ones that say 1998 and 2006 were the hottest years on record... and the ones that were supposed to show solid evidence for run away global warming....
... except that when they corrected the error they now produced a set of numbers that didn't fit the accepted Global Holy Truth. That's because 1934 regained its crown as the hottest year on record, with 1998 second, 1921 third, 2006 a dismal fourth and 1931 fifth on that list of all time hottest years. Yup... three of the five hottest years on record were BEFORE WWII. These are numbers that can not be explained by the Holy Truth of Global Warming thinking.
Oops.
I've said it before. The climate heats up. The climate cools down. Get over it.
Unfortunately, like a seasoned politician, I'm going to break that promise because "The Media" has been remarkably silent on something that, had it been the other way around, would have been front page news...
Last week, without fanfare, NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies corrected an error in its measurement of "global" temperatures. Actually, to say they "corrected" an error is somewhat misleading, because while they certainly fixed the numbers, their disclosure of the said "correction" was buried in an obscure statement posted to the GISS website as follows...
"...the USHCN station records up to 1999 were replaced by a version of USHCN data with further corrections after an adjustment computed by comparing the common 1990-1999 period of the two data sets."
I have no idea what that means but I'm sure Sir Humphrey would be proud of them for using so many words to obscure the real meaning of whatever it was they're trying to say. All I know is that the GISS is the place that's responsible for monitoring the world's temperature. It's the place that's published the numbers that the doomsdayers point to when they want to make us feel guilty about exhaling all that CO2. You know the numbers... the ones that say 1998 and 2006 were the hottest years on record... and the ones that were supposed to show solid evidence for run away global warming....
... except that when they corrected the error they now produced a set of numbers that didn't fit the accepted Global Holy Truth. That's because 1934 regained its crown as the hottest year on record, with 1998 second, 1921 third, 2006 a dismal fourth and 1931 fifth on that list of all time hottest years. Yup... three of the five hottest years on record were BEFORE WWII. These are numbers that can not be explained by the Holy Truth of Global Warming thinking.
Oops.
I've said it before. The climate heats up. The climate cools down. Get over it.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Spammers... They Just Keep Getting Better
Here's some more 'real' senders names on spam that appeared in my inbox this morning...
These were all the same spam, flogging 'The Pharmacy America Trusts', whatever that is... yeah, right, like you'd buy drugs over the internet from a spammer in China.
Bosser V. Scythes
Editor K. Freethinker
Barnett F. Arbitrariness
Exceeded B. Shortsighted
If you're interested, the site the email points to is registered to a Sam Till, who has the dubious email address of bobmarley @ safe-mail.net, and it's hosted on a server owned by someone in Shanghai named Centaur Dong.
1. There must be enough dumb idiots out there who buy from Mr Till to make this worth his while,
and
2. You'd think, in a totalitarian state like China, it would be simple enough for the government to put a stop to all this spam if it really wanteed to.
These were all the same spam, flogging 'The Pharmacy America Trusts', whatever that is... yeah, right, like you'd buy drugs over the internet from a spammer in China.
Bosser V. Scythes
Editor K. Freethinker
Barnett F. Arbitrariness
Exceeded B. Shortsighted
If you're interested, the site the email points to is registered to a Sam Till, who has the dubious email address of bobmarley @ safe-mail.net, and it's hosted on a server owned by someone in Shanghai named Centaur Dong.
1. There must be enough dumb idiots out there who buy from Mr Till to make this worth his while,
and
2. You'd think, in a totalitarian state like China, it would be simple enough for the government to put a stop to all this spam if it really wanteed to.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Drive, Don't Walk
I'll bet those of you who are still worried about your "personal carbon footprint" and your impact on global warming have decided that it might be better to walk to the shops rather than drive. After all, you'd be saving all that fossil fuel, wouldn't you?
In a stunning piece of lateral thinking, researchers in the UK decided to look at how much carbon is produced making the human fuel that feeds you. *
What does that have to do with driving? Well when you walk, you use the human fuel you get from your food, and growing that human fuel generated a carbon footprint so large that the extra human fuel you use walking to and from the shops creates MORE carbon than the fuel you burn in your car.
And that doesn't take into account the additional respiration which creates its own carbon problem.
The message? Drive, don't walk. You're helping the environment.
(*The article was published in the New Scientist in July)
In a stunning piece of lateral thinking, researchers in the UK decided to look at how much carbon is produced making the human fuel that feeds you. *
What does that have to do with driving? Well when you walk, you use the human fuel you get from your food, and growing that human fuel generated a carbon footprint so large that the extra human fuel you use walking to and from the shops creates MORE carbon than the fuel you burn in your car.
And that doesn't take into account the additional respiration which creates its own carbon problem.
The message? Drive, don't walk. You're helping the environment.
(*The article was published in the New Scientist in July)
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Thursday, August 02, 2007
What Passes As Nutrition
Just to prove a point, these pics were taken on Level 5 of Prince of Wales Hospital last week. Mum was in for a knee replacement. Take a careful look at what the food industry wants us to think is "nourishment" and "nutrition. It must be of course, because they wouldn't be allowed to put something like that next to the elevators in one of the biggest public hospitals in the country if it wasn't true, would they?
Spamese III
I don't want to turn this blog into some anti-spam diatribe, but I had to share a fine piece of copywriting that found its way into my inbox this morning...
Dolls always laughed at me and even gentlemans did in the federal toilet!Well, now I whizgiggle at them, because I took Me - ga - Di kfor 6 months and now my peter is badly preponderant than federal.gain
Dolls always laughed at me and even gentlemans did in the federal toilet!Well, now I whizgiggle at them, because I took Me - ga - Di kfor 6 months and now my peter is badly preponderant than federal.gain
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Fighting The Wrong War
We, in the west, are currently fighting lots of wars right now. Yes, there are the headline ones, like Iraq and Afghanistan, but what about the other ones...
The War on Obesity
The War on Breast Cancer
The War on Terror
The War on Skin Cancer
The War on Aids
The War on Climate Change
The War on Illiteracy
and even my own War on Stupidity (which we're losing badly, it appears).
The list could run on for pages. It seems that whenever a politician, bureaucrat or some interest group pushing a barrow wants to grab a headline, they declare "War" on something.
These wars have all the ingredients of a good war... casualties... headlines... emotion. The War on Breast Cancer is even having an event here in Sydney where women are encouraged to come to a football game, and before the game, they want everyone to stand in the middle of the field. I haven't quite figured out why, but I'm sure it will make for a good photo opportunity and grab a filler slot on the evening news.
But are we fighting the right war?
Take a look at this piece from Dr Joseph Mercola, promoting his new book.
Sobering, but somehow "The War on Medical Screw Ups" just doesn't have the right ring to it.
NOTE: I'm not necessarily endorsing or recommending the book to you... while many of Mercola's ideas are 'interesting', and while I subscribe to his newsletter, sometimes he can be a little over-the-top in his views. He is, though, an important warrior in an even more important war and much of what he says is solid... so make up you're own mind.
The War on Obesity
The War on Breast Cancer
The War on Terror
The War on Skin Cancer
The War on Aids
The War on Climate Change
The War on Illiteracy
and even my own War on Stupidity (which we're losing badly, it appears).
The list could run on for pages. It seems that whenever a politician, bureaucrat or some interest group pushing a barrow wants to grab a headline, they declare "War" on something.
These wars have all the ingredients of a good war... casualties... headlines... emotion. The War on Breast Cancer is even having an event here in Sydney where women are encouraged to come to a football game, and before the game, they want everyone to stand in the middle of the field. I haven't quite figured out why, but I'm sure it will make for a good photo opportunity and grab a filler slot on the evening news.
But are we fighting the right war?
Take a look at this piece from Dr Joseph Mercola, promoting his new book.
Sobering, but somehow "The War on Medical Screw Ups" just doesn't have the right ring to it.
NOTE: I'm not necessarily endorsing or recommending the book to you... while many of Mercola's ideas are 'interesting', and while I subscribe to his newsletter, sometimes he can be a little over-the-top in his views. He is, though, an important warrior in an even more important war and much of what he says is solid... so make up you're own mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)