Thoughts From The Wrong Side Of 50

Parallel Universes.

2011-11-19T13:20:00.000+11:00

First many thought that Europe was the only continent. Then some thought that the sun revolved around the earth. After Copernicus and Galileo put us in our place, the idea of other solar systems and galaxies became more popular. Then came the unthinkable – parallel universes, the multiverse, and the concept of eleven dimensions. Will it stop there? Probably not.

"A REALITY that would be impossible to imagine, even for the possessor of the most tortured and surreal imagination." This does not refer to a horror film, or a war veteran's recollections, but to the world revealed by science, according to physicists Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw.

To those uncomfortable with quantum theory's picture of wavelike particles that are simultaneously everywhere, their message in The Quantum Universe is clear: tough. Scientists are, they tell us, "not mandated to produce a theory that bears any relation to the way we perceive the world at large", although you might comfort yourself with the thought that even Einstein found quantum mechanics disturbing.

- New Scientist.

1O LORD our Lord, how excellent is your name in all the earth! who have set your glory above the heavens.
2Out of the mouth of babes and infants have you ordained strength because of your enemies, that you might still the enemy and the avenger.
3When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have ordained;
4What is man, that you are mindful of him? and the son of man, that you visit him? (Psalm 8)

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

President Obama’s Address to the Australian Parliament (17 November 2011).

2011-11-18T12:11:00.001+11:00

Part 1 is Prime Minister Gillard’s address. Part 2 is Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s address. President Obama’s address begins at Part 3.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

The Problem with Bats, Birds and Beasts, or: A lesson About Extreme Attitudes.

2011-10-25T13:00:00.003+11:00

'He that is neither one thing nor the other has no friends.'

“The Bat, the Birds, and the Beasts” is an ancient fable attributed to Aesop:

The Bat, the Birds, and the Beasts.

A great conflict was about to come off between the Birds and the Beasts. When the two armies were collected together the Bat hesitated which to join. The Birds that passed his perch said: "Come with us"; but he said: "I am a Beast." Later on, some Beasts who were passing underneath him looked up and said: "Come with us"; but he said: "I am a Bird." Luckily at the last moment peace was made, and no battle took place, so the Bat came to the Birds and wished to join in the rejoicings, but they all turned against him and he had to fly away. He then went to the Beasts, but soon had to beat a retreat, or else they would have torn him to pieces. "Ah," said the Bat, "I see now,

"He that is neither one thing nor the other has no friends."

Some entertaining counter-wisdom in support of the "poor", indecisive and divided Bat (Alert: tongue-in-cheek post, but with a message to hardliners of any ilk; those who insist that if you’re not on their “side”, and completely share their attitudes and worldviews, then you’re not only wrong, but unworthy of their so-called “friendship”):

Collective unity is not the result of the brotherly love of the faithful for each other. The loyalty of the true believer is to the whole — the church, party, nation — and not to his fellow true believer. True loyalty between individuals is possible only in a loose and relatively free society.

Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, Section 101

We do not usually look for allies when we love. Indeed, we often look on those who love with us as rivals and trespassers. But we always look for allies when we hate. – Eric Hoffer.

All mass movements avail themselves of action as a means of unification. The conflicts a mass movement seeks and incites serve not only to down its enemies but also to strip its followers of their distinct individuality and render them more soluble in the collective medium. – Eric Hoffer.

The uncompromising attitude is more indicative of an inner uncertainty than a deep conviction. The implacable stand is directed more against the doubt within than the assailant without. – Eric Hoffer.

Those who see their lives as spoiled and wasted crave equality and fraternity more than they do freedom. If they clamor for freedom, it is but freedom to establish equality and uniformity. The passion for equality is partly a passion for anonymity: to be one thread of the many which make up a tunic; one thread not distinguishable from the others. No one can then point us out, measure us against others and expose our inferiority. – Eric Hoffer.

Avoid popularity if you would have peace. - Abraham Lincoln

I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong. - Abraham Lincoln

Peace is much more precious than a piece of land... let there be no more wars. - Anwar Sadat.

There can be hope only for a society which acts as one big family, not as many separate ones. - Anwar Sadat.

It is the individual only who is timeless. Societies, cultures, and civilizations - past and present - are often incomprehensible to outsiders, but the individual's hunger, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained unchanged through the millennia. Thus, we are up against the paradox that the individual who is more complex, unpredictable, and mysterious than any communal entity is the one nearest to our understanding; so near that even the interval of millennia cannot weaken our feeling of kinship. If in some manner the voice of an individual reaches us from the remotest distance of time, it is a timeless voice speaking about ourselves.

Eric Hoffer, Reflections on the Human Condition, aph. 183 (1973)

The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready he is to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause.

Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, Section 9

Every extreme attitude is a flight from the self. – Eric Hoffer.

And finally,

“With friends like this, who needs enemies?”

War and Violence Still Ravage Our Planet.

2011-10-21T15:15:00.001+11:00

“Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortunes.” - Voltaire.

Maybe we need to ask why. At the risk of offending the rationalists and so-called “secularists” and “humanists” (I’m actually not against any of them), may I offer a bit of 2,000 year old wisdom (and excuse me for quoting the KJV):

1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. (Book of James, chapter 4)

Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes “pro-active” wars are necessary, against such dictatorial and self-serving regimes as the now, and thankfully, late Muammar Gaddafi, who for 42 years ruled Libya according to his own whim, and it’s probably not beyond speculation to say that not even one-tenth of his abuses have yet come to light. These are the types of people who cause wars. The exploiters for personal gain, and cabals of “authorities” who use the common people to further their nefarious and self-serving designs and agendas through their "regimes".

I wish that war would end, like most people, but I don’t see any relief from it as long as political and religious tyranny continues.

Fighting persecution in Iran.

Aussie Troops Want to Stay in Afghanistan.

2011-10-11T14:52:00.003+11:00

"DIGGERS have warned they will be needed in Afghanistan beyond the Government's 2014 withdrawal date."

Adelaide Now

One thing I have to say about Australian soldiers is that they are brave; extremely brave. This reputation has been developed from two world wars, and also the Korean and Vietnam wars. Australian soldiers often volunteered to fight “other peoples’ wars” in foreign lands far from their native soil. I’ve been dubious about this (especially a war started by America), but recent commentary has made me think twice.

In July this year, the death of the 28th Australian soldier killed in Afghanistan was reported:

His loss takes the death toll of Australian Diggers in the Afghanistan war to 28.
The deadly mission was a deliberate operation by about 30 Australians and 50 Afghans against a known insurgent stronghold.
They were backed by close air support from coalition fast jet fighters and Apache attack helicopters, which hit the enemy several times with bombs and cannon fire.

A second Australian commando was shot in the upper body about 10 minutes later and 1km from where Sgt Langley was killed. It is understood that more than 10 insurgents died and many more were wounded……

General Hurley said he often asked himself how frequently soldiers could be sent to Afghanistan.
"I don't think you can actually relate this to the number of tours; it is the difficulty of the operation," he said.
Australia plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan in 2014.
Another senior officer said the army was vigilant and alert to the risk of battle fatigue, and was closely monitoring the troops.
"We have people who understand the organisation and its people who can stand back and keep an eye on things, watching out for tell-tale signs such as medical or mental health problems," the officer said.
One commando, who asked not to be named, said that the job involved multiple deployments and they loved it.
"They have the fire in the belly to go back again and again," he said.
Australia has the third largest special-forces task group in Afghanistan.
Its troops have killed dozens of senior Taliban leaders and hundreds of enemy fighters.

Source: Another of our best has fallen in Australia's worst year yet.

Of course I can’t verify the accuracy of the following comment to SBS, but someone claiming to be a ex-soldier (ADF) wrote:

The public have no clue what is going on in Afghanistan. All they see is the bad news that comes out from the injurys and deaths, they never haere any of the good news like how a medic saved a baby. This is what soldiers do! this is what we are treained for. Since we have been in Afghanistan a huge difference has been made. Majority of the locals love us there, we have helped them in so many ways and if we were to pull out now they would back to square one. I boost a massive NO to pullong out.

Prime Minister Gillard appears intent on staying ground (until 2014, so far anyway):

Sapper Robinson, who was on his second tour of Afghanistan, had been taken to Tarin Kowt hospital for treatment but died "despite the rapid application of first aid and his evacuation ... the soldier succumbed to his wounds".
Air Chief Marshal Houston paid tribute to the popular soldier.
"Though nothing will ease sense of loss I want this soldier's family to know that their loved one, his mates and their Afghan national partners were undertaking vital work in Afghanistan yesterday," he said.
"I know our soldiers on the ground are incredible and incredibly resistant, they believe they are making a substantial difference. They believe they are winning."
Speaking from Alice Springs, Ms Gillard said the soldier was a brave man doing important work.
"It is with a great sense of sadness that I offer my condolences to the family of the young man killed in Afghanistan," she said.
The death of Sapper Robinson comes a week after the deaths of Lance Corporal Andrew Jones, 25, and Lieutenant Marcus Case, 27, and two weeks after Sergeant Brett Wood, 32….

"It's very important that all Australians grieve with the families of all of our soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan," he said.
"We need to understand though that there is no such thing as casualty-free combat.
"What our troops are doing in Afghanistan is important for our nation, it's important for the whole world."

Julia Gillard and defence chief stand firm on Afghan mission after another Digger killed

World opinion, 2011: Wiki

Australian Army Battle of Derapet (Helmet cam):

Can't see the enemy? Forty Australian and Afghan soldiers were up against 100 Taliban, and one Australian soldier was killed.

Back From Temporary Retirement.

2011-07-24T17:10:00.005+10:00

However, I've decided that my posts will be much shorter from now on. That reduces the effort I have to put into research and writing, editing and re-editing, and it also reduces "reader fatigue". I know when I look at a blog and see inordinately long posts I immediately become turned off. So to kick the ball rolling again, some quotes about writing:

The role of a writer is not to say what we all can say, but what we are unable to say. ~Anaïs Nin

And by the way, everything in life is writable about if you have the outgoing guts to do it, and the imagination to improvise. The worst enemy to creativity is self-doubt. ~Sylvia Plath

It is impossible to discourage the real writers - they don't give a damn what you say, they're going to write. ~Sinclair Lewis

The good writing of any age has always been the product of someone's neurosis, and we'd have a mighty dull literature if all the writers that came along were a bunch of happy chuckleheads. ~William Styron, interview, Writers at Work, 1958

Note: This post has a July date (when I last posted), because I've edited it.

Today's date is Tuesday October 11, 2011.

Why I am an Agnostic Theist Moving Towards Christianity and “Jesus Rediscovered”.

2011-04-08T16:13:00.010+10:00

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” – Mahatma Gandhi.

"These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.” (Matthew 15:8, NIV)

Agnostic Theism

Agnostic theism is the philosophical view that encompasses both theism and agnosticism. An agnostic theist believes the proposition at least one deity exists is true, but per agnosticism also believes that this proposition is unknown or inherently unknowable. The agnostic theist may also or alternatively be agnostic regarding the properties of the god(s) they believe in…..The classical philosophical understanding of knowledge is that knowledge is justified true belief. By this definition, it is reasonable to assert that one may hold a belief, and that belief may be true, without asserting that one knows it....Christian Agnostics (distinct from a Christian who is agnostic) practice a distinct form of agnosticism that applies only to the properties of God. They hold that it is difficult or impossible to be sure of anything beyond the basic tenets of the Christian faith. They believe that God exists, that Jesus has a special relationship with him and is in some way divine, that God should be worshiped and that humans should be compassionate toward one another. This belief system has deep roots in Judaism and the early days of the Church

Many people seem to believe that the term “agnostic theist” is a contradiction in terms. The English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley first coined the term "agnostic" in 1869, though the concept goes back to well before the time of Christ. Huxley wrote , attempting to explain this concept:

When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis,"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.

So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic." It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. To my great satisfaction the term took.

Richard Dawkins apparently considers “temporary agnosticism” as acceptable, but “permanent agnosticism” as unacceptable. In other words, given enough learning, time and effort, one should “naturally” be led to atheism, and to avoid this conclusion is “fence-sitting, intellectual cowardice”. My counter-argument to that would be, well about people like Antony Flew? As another example, let’s imagine an old man who lived in a village all his life, and claimed to be atheist. What if he had a miraculous heavenly visitation, or some kind of miraculous or supernatural experience which convinced him to reconsider his atheistic view? Dawkins would consider this “impossible”, because he (Dawkins) operates on a fixed paradigm; one that can never, and should never change once one “knows” all “the facts”.

Michael Shermer , another “supernatural denier” (I’m parodying Dawkins’ “history deniers” here), has recently written:

In all fields of science there is a residue of anomalies unexplained by the dominant theory. That does not mean the prevailing theory is wrong or that alternative theories are right. It just means that more work needs to be done to bring those anomalies into the accepted paradigm. In the meantime, it is okay to live with the uncertainty that not everything has an explanation.

Shermer apparently doesn’t even realise his absolute dogma here, so let me make it clear to the reader: “It just means that more work needs to be done to bring those anomalies into the accepted paradigm.” In other words, if something doesn’t fit into a naturalistic paradigm (i.e., nothing supernatural can ever occur), then we have to “work” to bring it into “the accepted paradigm”. In other words, both Shermer and Dawkins will define for the rest of us intellectual trilobites what “reality” is, and anything outside their paradigm is “nonsense”. One good thing about modern atheists is that they don’t believe in stake burning, but they totally fail to see how their dogma is in spirit indistinguishable from medieval inquisitions about what is “acceptable” or “unacceptable”.

I don’t know what the rest of you folks think, but I think the “scientific” dogma pedaled by the likes of Dawkins and Shermer are just as hollow as the dogma pedaled by the Church. Bear in mind that I’m not denigrating science, per se, only the idea that we can find absolute truth in science, and if you look very carefully at what I have quoted so far, you will see that this is indeed what both Dawkins and Shermer advocate, that one can only find truth within certain “acceptable paradigms”, and one that must totally discount the possibility of the supernatural, and their devoted disciples love them for it, almost to the point of worship. The amount of recorded miraculous and supernatural phenomena they have to deny, through all recorded history, to maintain this dogma, is nothing short of mind-boggling! Perhaps the least they could do, to be objective, is to be agnostic regarding things for which there seems to be powerful witness evidence. But no, they must ridicule and deny any such possibility because it doesn’t fit their “acceptable paradigm”. “I didn’t see it happen”, to them means, “it cannot happen”.

Let me put a whole new light on Eric Hoffer here:

To most of us nothing is so invisible as an unpleasant truth. Though it is held before our eyes, pushed under our noses, rammed down our throats- we know it not.

The Passionate State of Mind, aph. 59 (1955)

For though ours is a godless age, it is the very opposite of irreligious. The true believer is everywhere on the march, and both by converting and antagonizing he is shaping the world in his own image. And whether we are to line up with him or against him, it is well that we should know all we can concerning his nature and potentialities. (The True Believer)

It is startling to realize how much unbelief is necessary to make belief possible. What we know as blind faith is sustained by innumerable unbeliefs.(Ibid.)

The truth seems to be that propaganda on its own cannot force its way into unwilling minds; neither can it inculcate something wholly new; nor can it keep people persuaded once they have ceased to believe. It penetrates only into minds already open, and rather than instil opinion it articulates and justifies opinions already present in the minds of its recipients. The gifted propagandist brings to a boil ideas and passions already simmering in the minds of his hearers. He echoes their innermost feelings. Where opinion is not coerced, people can be made to believe only in what they already "know." (Ibid.)

Now on to why I remain an agnostic theist. The main reason is that I believe that we are infinitesimally small and insignificant creatures who live on an obscure planet in the Milky Way Galaxy, and cannot possibly comprehend “ultimate” truth in the universe, much less “ultimate” truth in a theoretical multi-verse

I believe in God, not because I “know” God exists, but as per the above definitions of agnostic theism. I believe that in this state of existence, almost as mere microbes in a possibly boundless multi-verse, we can no more comprehend its designs and purposes any more than an ant can comprehend a super highway being built above it, or a dog can understand Newtonian physics, which, incidentally, was Darwin’s real position:

With respect to the theological view of the question; this is always painful to me.— I am bewildered.– I had no intention to write atheistically. But I own that I cannot see, as plainly as others do, & as I [should] wish to do, evidence of design & beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent & omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice. Not believing this, I see no necessity in the belief that the eye was expressly designed. On the other hand I cannot anyhow be contented to view this wonderful universe & especially the nature of man, & to conclude that everything is the result of brute force. I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of what we may call chance. Not that this notion at all satisfies me. I feel most deeply that the whole subject is too profound for the human intellect. A dog might as well speculate on the mind of Newton.— Let each man hope & believe what he can.

(Emphasis added)

Dawkins would have you believe that Darwin would be atheist if he were alive today, yet the man known as “the world’s most famous atheist”, Antony Flew, converted to theism several years before he died. This should alert everyone to the fact that the issues are not quite so simple and clear-cut, and that even the most intelligent atheist may be forced to reconsider lifelong personal dogma.

I was raised Catholic, but converted to Mormonism at the age of 20. I “officially” abandoned Mormonism in 1987, yet I still retain a healthy respect for the basic teachings of all the world’s religions. I do not see exclusive and absolute truth in any of them, but because of my biased Catholic upbringing, I have to admit that I’m very biased towards the man known as “Jesus of Nazareth”. Even though doubts surround the historicity of Jesus, I personally see in his teachings the solution to many the world’s social ills. I’m not about to endorse Malcolm Muggeridge, especially his support of Mother Theresa, but I think this is worth nothing from his book Jesus Rediscovered

It is with the utmost trepidation and diffidence that I have collected together these miscellaneous pieces all directly or indirectly concerned with my attitude towards, and feelings about, the Christian religion. They do not set out to present a coherent, or even consistent, statement of faith. I am well aware that they are often contradictory, repetitive and imprecise; I have deliberately refrained from trying to trim and prune them into conveying an impression of coherence and consistency which would falsify my own actual mental state. All they represent and it's little enough is the effort of one ageing twentieth-century mind to give expression to a deep dissatisfaction with prevailing twentieth-century values and assumptions, and a sense that there is an alternative propounded two thousand years ago by the Sea of Galilee and on the hill called Golgotha.

What I marvel at is the number proclaiming themselves “Christian”, who have not even read the Gospels, much less the New Testament, and who have not, it appears, the faintest understanding of what Jesus really taught. His message was, primarily, one of forgiveness and love, as exemplified in the parable of the prodigal son; his condemnation of Pharisaic rule-living at the expense of the spirit of the law; his willingness to accept “publicans and sinners”, not to justify them, but to let them know that God loves them, and that they could probably live far more productive lives, and not least of all, that he was willing to die to save the repentant . When some of his disciples wanted to call down fire from heaven to consume the unbelievers, his response was, “you know not what manner of spirit you are of, For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.” (Luke 9:55).

In my opinion, many of the Christian religions created are only poor mimicry of the Jesus we read about in the Gospels. But it may be better to have poor mimicry than total unbelief, though I’m sure some will disagree. So, yes, I do have to confess that I have an “agnostic theist” faith in Jesus too. I cannot prove that he even existed, and I can prove nothing to the satisfaction of the skeptics. All I can say is that I think he did possess “the words of Eternal Life”, and that “the first shall be last, and the last first”, and no one can take their salvation for granted. The “idol-worshipping” Roman Centurion had more faith than the “chosen ones” who rejected Jesus.

I suppose, like the aging Muggeridge, I’ve sort of “rediscovered Jesus” (and, ironically, at about the same age), and I have done this not only because of my scriptural readings and re-readings, but because of practical life-experience. We fail and fail, time and time again, yet in Christ there is still hope of redemption; redemption from the misery and despair that mortal life can be. He is willing to give us all a chance at life, even Eternal Life, when everyone else has given up on us.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

And a thought from Mormon scripture:

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

18 And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged. (The Book of Mormon, Moroni 7)

To be real frank, I see little hope for humanity, and our long term survival, unless we learn and inculcate the teachings of Jesus. One can look for all the evidence for or against this man; his very existence, or even his teachings, but I would agree that, 2,000 years later, "no man ever spoke like this man" (John 7:46).

Link: Irrational Atheists on the Loose?

A Response to Channel Seven’s Today Tonight’s Report “Cabbies on Notice”.

2011-04-01T17:33:00.008+11:00

Today Tonight’s Report:

Cabbies on Notice (You may have to scroll down to find it, titled “Cabbies on Notice”.)

The first thing that alarmed me was the title of the show, “Cabbies on Notice”. We see graphic on-board camera footage of a knife being held to a taxi driver’s throat, and they title it Cabbies on notice? What viewers saw in that footage is neither common, nor exactly rare. I’ve been a night-shift cab driver for just over four years now, and have had the opportunity to talk to many drivers, some veterans, some relatively new to the industry, but I never fail to be amazed at the number of stories of verbal and physical abuse suffered at the hands of the public. My anecdotal estimation is that at least 70 to 80 percent of drivers I have talked to experienced greater or lesser forms of physical abuse. Every single one, including me, has experienced verbal abuse, almost always from drunk people. Lesser forms of physical abuse include unwanted touching, and things like “friendly” punches or a tap on the head. The public has no right to touch any taxi driver, in any way, except in the form of a handshake or a soft “I like you” tap. Yet it sometimes goes well beyond this. Most taxi drivers are male, at least among night-shift drivers, because it is too dangerous for females to work at night, so it appears that some feel it’s “okay” to “touch” a male driver when they will not do it to a female because of possible legal consequences.

Before going any further, I think it is imperative that I fully acknowledge the public complaints about taxi drivers. I am sometimes appalled at the way rude taxi drivers treat their customers, and there’s no valid excise for this providing the customer is polite and doesn’t warrant “reciprocal” treatment. Let’s get technical here. Sometimes a customer’s initial words and manners can upset a driver, especially when they refuse to give a destination address and say “just drive!” Sometimes they will even refuse to say which direction, and then blame the driver for going in the wrong direction. Then when the driver retaliates by either kicking them out or becoming equally arrogant, Channel 7 and other media will probably report it as “driver abuse”. We need to look at both sides of this complex issue. Are there rude and renegade taxi drivers? Most certainly, and maybe some of them have developed this temperament because of their increasing cynicism to the public in general, but if that is the case then maybe they should be looking for employment elsewhere. Fortunately, most people are decent and respectful (although a bad Saturday night could cause that perspective to temporally waver), and I think this is what keeps most drivers hopeful for humanity in general, that the majority of customers will be polite, and even sympathetic to a job most admit they will never do, even for a “hundred grand a year”, because of having to deal with the public and other associated risks. However, my observation remains, that a minority of drivers are ill-tempered, rude, and unsuited for the job, yet they can bring a bad name to all of us. It takes little effort to be polite to people, and in 95 percent of cases the politeness will be recompensed. Just as the public renegades and abusers are in a minority, so are the rude and renegade taxi drivers. This is a “human problem”, and it extends not only to taxi drivers, but to all people who have to deal with the public. Service station attendants are at as much risk (or even more) of verbal abuse, attack or robbery, perhaps even more than taxi drivers are. I don’t particularly see us taxi drivers as “martyrs” for a single cause. Dealing with the a moody and often unpredictable public just isn’t an easy job.

I agree with Mr. Michael Jools (featured on Today Tonight) , president of the Australian Taxi Drivers Association, who points out that it’s not always drivers who are at fault, but I also agree with his observation that the taxi industry needs to be “cleaned up”. Let’s address the points made on Today Tonight regarding taxi drivers:

1. Poor street knowledge.

Long time and experienced drivers will obviously know their way around better than a driver who’s been in the job one week, or even one day. Sydney and Melbourne are big cities, and not even the most experienced driver is going to remember every street. Because taxi driving is a high turnover industry, because of risks and poor pay, and encourages novices seeking to earn a dollar, perhaps they will have to reply on a GPS to start with. It takes time to become experienced, but if the rewards in the industry aren’t sufficient to motivate long term employment, then the public will have to keep dealing with new drivers who don’t know their basic way. Knowledge tests are not all they are made out to be, because only practical experience will enable a driver to remember streets, and he/she has to do that “on the job”. Maybe the government could create greater incentives for drivers to stay in the industry, and become experienced, but so far they have done pathetically little. There simply has to be greater rewards for time and investment in the industry, and this won’t happen until the financial incentives are there. If the government is willing to foster a three year “graduation program” for taxi drivers to learn all of Sydney, for example, and subsidise this, then maybe “poor street knowledge” complaints will reduce? They have more important priorities, it seems, like running free buses at taxpayer expense.

2. Bad Driving.

Yes this is also a problem. Being a former driving instructor I’m a bit pedantic about this, but erratic taxi drivers who constantly break the law, I’m afraid to say, are far too many. The obligation to observe road rules is written into the taxi laws, and customers are far more observant of this than I suspect taxi drivers are aware of, hence the complaints. Make no mistake, they (customers) will observe whether drivers obey the law, and they will expect it because drivers have their life in their hands, and driving at 80 kmh in a 60 kmh zone will not go unnoticed. Something not included, yet, in obtaining a taxi licence, is passing a basic RTA road rules test, and maybe that should be implemented into obtaining a taxi licence. In essence, bad or unobservant drivers should be weeded out. People are paying for this transport, and they deserve the highest safety standards attainable.

3. Rude Tempered.

As I stated above, drivers who cannot handle dealing with the public may be in the wrong job. Not wanting to sound like Big Brother, but maybe psychological assessments for the suitability of taxi driving should be done. Someone with a short fuse might not qualify. As far as I’m aware, no taxi training course comprehensively covers how to deal with stressful situations; how to administer first aid, and how to deal with, for example, schizophrenia and other mental problems of customers. I know this comment will probably attract more “bureaucracy”, but the fact is that taxi drivers have to deal a multitude of human psychoses, and have no idea where to begin dealing with them. As beginners, as far as they are concerned, all they need to do is “remember streets”, but are not taught how to deal with “real life” problems.

4. Refusing fares.

Unless a person is affected by alcohol, drugs, or acts abusively, a taxi driver is not supposed to refuse a fare. Apart from those specified grounds, it is illegal to refuse a fare, no matter how short or unprofitable. Tell me about it, like the night I waited one and a half hours on a rank only to get a $6.50 fare when the three cars behind me all got M24s, or out of area jobs worth no less than $240.00. You win some, and you lose some, but a taxi driver’s first obligation is to serve the public, and creating a good public image will increase confidence in the taxi industry, thus leading to more patronage, and a better overall result. I honestly can’t think of any situation where my losses (short fares) weren’t made up for in gains (long fares). Yes, we are “in it for the money”, but we are also a service industry which provides a vital community service, and sometimes that community obligation is more important than “earning money” (in the short term). Some drivers, apparently, don’t understand this, and think that every fare should be profitable for Number One.

5. Lack of cleanliness.

Some people take pride in cleanliness, others don’t, and they don’t reflect well on the industry in general. Some mutual respect is expected here, too. If you leave your empty beer cans, and your empty champagne bottles to roll around the back floor before the driver discovers it, he may be left with the blame. After you munch on your “Maccas” (which, incidentally is illegal, since eating in a cab is illegal, but your driver may tolerate it because he doesn’t want to offend you), then make sure you clear up your mess before leaving the cab. It’s the same as smoking. I’ve been asked a zillion times, “can I smoke?” Okay, so you want to smoke, but what about the next customer who complains about a “smoke smell” in the cab. The driver is left to deal with that because you think that you have “rights” without responsibility for the next person who enters the cab. READ the laws; smoking is not allowed in cabs. Don’t think you can get into a cab and do what you like, including “pissing up” on grog and behaving like bogans and not expect the driver to become upset. Would you like someone invading your office, farting, belching, cussing, and maybe even calling you a “moron”? That’s basically what we taxi drivers have to put up with, and yet Today Tonight says in the most tabloid fashion, “Cabbies on Notice”.

6. Poor English.

In this regard, I offer the following You Tube video:

While it is true that many cab drivers are not exactly versed in Fowler’s English, many of them are new migrants just trying to earn a living, like everyone else, and as I said, it takes time to learn. They are not going to know Sydney, or Melbourne, like locals who’ve been driving for 20 or 30 years, and all you have to do, to help them gain some confidence before they learn, is direct them if they are unsure of the way, or be patient while they use a GPS. If this really bothers you, then maybe you should ask why the turnover in this industry is so high that it is always requiring new recruits and not retaining most of the old ones. The experienced Aussie driver in the video was just spreading more vain stereotypes, and frankly, was just racist. If the Afghani driver spoke with an Aussie accent, he would have sounded more convincing, but as fate would have it, he was just an innocent abroad, on his first day cab driving, and just like you and me, trying to earn a decent living in an extremely difficult job.

The problems and challenges in the taxi industry will not be solved by biased, parochial, and even racist, attitudes. That the taxi industry needs improvement is without question, and in my opinion one way to do that is by tougher screening checks and even the possibility of subjecting applicants to appropriate psychological tests to determine whether they are capable of working in this high pressure industry. Not a thought I particularly relish since I’m rather “anti-bureaucracy”, but it seems to me that public complaints about the general state of the taxi industry may well justify this approach. That we in the taxi industry need to “get our act together”, seems unquestionable, but this cannot be done through shallow, racist, biased, and irresponsible approaches. How about, for a start, we stop talking about “ethnic drivers”? And realise that for the past 30 or more years “ethnic drivers” have been the very backbone of the taxi industry in Australia. They were prepared to make the sacrifices of working two jobs until they could survive on one, and to put in the “hard yakka” that most mainstream Aussies were unprepared to do. Their enormous contributions to this country, and many of them have come from oppressive regimes, has not been met with the respect it duly deserves. Anyone hear of the saying "fair go"?

Related link:

Link posted 11/4/11: City's mean streets turn on cabbie at Kings Cross

The Problem with Mormon Apologists and Their Critics.

2011-03-30T12:57:00.007+11:00

One of the first things a relationship therapist learns is that couples argue to burn up energy that could be used for something else. In fact, arguments often serve the purpose of using up energy, so that the couple do not have to take the courageous, creative leap into an unknown they fear. Arguing serves the function of being a zone of familiarity into which you can retreat when you are afraid of making a creative breakthrough. - Gay Hendricks.

Collective unity is not the result of the brotherly love of the faithful for each other. The loyalty of the true believer is to the whole — the church, party, nation — and not to his fellow true believer. True loyalty between individuals is possible only in a loose and relatively free society. – Eric Hoffer.

Unity and self-sacrifice, of themselves, even when fostered by the most noble means, produce a facility for hating. Even when men league themselves mightily together to promote tolerance and peace on earth, they are likely to be violently intolerant toward those not of a like mind. – Eric Hoffer

The lead quote above is aimed at both Mormon apologists and their critics. The second quote is aimed at Mormon apologists, and the third is aimed at their critics. While the third quote could apply to both, the reason I’ve aimed it at critics of Mormonism is because it is perhaps far less recognisable among critics, who often fail to realise their own dogmatic tendencies, even less so than Mormons. In stating this, I should be clear that since I’ve been on both sides of the fence, this essay is aimed at me as much as anyone else, a sort of introspection and self-examination of blind spots. The phenomenon I’m referring to is partly encapsulated by Robert Anton Wilson’s concept of The New Inquisition and based on his book The New Inquisition: Irrational Rationalism and the Citadel of Science

The Problem with Apologists

Everyone will naturally defend their personal beliefs, but Mormons have made it an art form. They appear to have invented, or perhaps reinvented, the term “asked and answered”. In other words, there’s an answer to virtually every problem confronting Mormonism, and it’s not that the answers are always illegitimate, it is just tedious, never flinching, and always “right”, often to the point of straining credulity. The Catholic Church has made a number of apologies for past behaviour, particularly towards those formerly condemned by the Inquisition but later exonerated, then some even eventually beatified. I will happily admit my error if a reader can point me to an occasion where the Mormon Church, or, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as it is officially known, has made a genuine apology for past wrongs. I would genuinely be surprised.

This stance, in turn, reflects the very nature of Mormon apologetics itself. One can find an excuse for anything and everything, and Mormon apologists have perfected the art of finding excuses. It is almost disheartening to me, when I read Mormon apologia, particularly the Internet brands, and realise that hope for any real dialogue, and concessions where concessions should be made, is virtually absent from Mormon apologetics. I feel the same way about many apologetic Muslim websites (like “Defending Islam”), by the way, and paraphrasing Dante, “abandon hope of fruitful dialogue all ye who enter here”. I was told by one Muslim website that my first five posts would be screened, and I didn’t even bother. They want me to say what they want to hear, not what I really think, and I don’t call that free speech. Mormon apologetic websites, and message boards, are no different. I’ve previously described it as "walking on eggshells".

So when I read a typical Mormon apologetic website, I know I’m in for a bore of a time with predictable answers, and the intractable “rightness” of it all is sickening, and it’s not that I’m unsympathetic to Mormons, I’m just not sympathetic to the self-righteous droning and holier-than-thou attitudes of many Mormon apologists who feel it perhaps a God-sent "mission" to excuse, for example, Brigham Young saying that Blacks were inferior fence-sitters whose "curse" was to be born Black. Why not just call him what he was - a typical 19th century racist. Does that mean he didn't do anything good? Far from it. The Old Testament is riddled with prejudiced and imperfect prophets.

I was fond of using an illustration of how I perceived Mormon apologetics, which I still do, in the form of the following story:

Three men go duck hunting one day. Two of them are inundated
with stories from the third about his "great" duck hunting
abilities.

After a few hours the first two men have bagged a couple of
ducks each, but the braggart hasn't taken a shot. They
question him on this, so he agrees to show his shooting
abilities at the next opportunity.

A few moments later, one lone duck comes flying by. As
promised, the braggart stands up and squeezes off one
shot. The duck keeps flying!

"Gentlemen, you have just witnessed a miracle," says the
braggart pointing at the receding duck, "for there flies a
dead duck."

I have seen far too many “dead ducks” in Mormon apologetics, and all it takes is a little more honesty; a little more openness to the idea that you might actually be wrong on some points, to open up real dialogue and engender genuine respect for your cause.

The Problem with Critics of Mormonism

As Phillip Adams (also known as "Australia's most famous atheist") once said:

Incidentally, if there's one thing more infuriating than a silly theologian it's an arid, doctrinaire atheist. I've had dealings with plenty of them over the years, including a famous monster from the US. To profess atheism is not to prove anything, let alone intellectual merit. Some of the narrowest, most dogmatic and silly people I've known have been atheists - or have loudly professed themselves Humanists or Rationalists.

( Source: Correspondence with Phillip Adams )

I’ve always liked the message board signature line of one Mormon who posts on Mormon related forums: “a zealot is one illuminated and blinded by the same light”. This isn’t a case of a Saul turning into a Paul, but a Paul turning into a Saul with as much or even more missionary zeal than when they were believing Mormons. As they grow in disbelief in Mormonism, and sometimes even the Divine, their certainties become more certain than ever, and we are treated to endless “Flying Spaghetti Monster” parables, and the wisdom of the faithless in anything but what they can see, smell, hear and touch. They totally fail to see that all they have done is exchange one form of dogma, for another. The great physicist (he was also a theologian) Sir Isaac Newton once reminisced:

I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.

Today’s sceptics, cynics and critics have, of course, discovered it all. With the same certainty that they as former Mormons asserted “I know…”, they now assert with equal certainty things in the order of Nietzsche’s “God is Dead” philosophy. Someone is sure to point out that it is the extremes of Mormonism that led these poor souls to the other extreme of scepticism, going from “God lives” to “God is dead”, and I think there is much truth in that, but I find the certainties, the arrogance, and the self-righteousness of the “true believer” to be as equally repelling as that of “the true unbeliever”.

Taxi Driver and Customer Disputes about Fares.

2011-03-04T12:37:00.003+11:00

"The customer is always right."

The above quote is attributed to Harry Gordon Selfridge. In an explanation of the origin of the quote, this qualifier is added:

Of course, these entrepreneurs didn't intend to be taken literally. What they were attempting to do was to make the customer feel special by inculcating into their staff the disposition to behave as if the customer was right, even when they weren't.

I think I’ve lost count of how many times customers have overcharged themselves by insisting on taking a longer route, most of the time believing it’s the shorter route. I did have one case where a customer knew he was taking the longer way, to the tune of $20 more, but he believed it was the faster way. I didn’t argue with his decision, and while I’ll occasionally and gently inform customers of a potentially shorter route, I never argue with their final decision. The person who pays the piper calls the tune.

Fare disputes are common, and in some cases have led to physical violence, but this isn’t usually about routes (unless the driver ignored a customer request and took the longer route), but customers insisting on discounts; not paying the full fare; not stopping the fare meter while they buy grog, or even arguing about the steep cost of the flag-fall and booking fee (drivers don’t set them, the government does) are usually the causes of serious disputes.

Customer complaint: “You didn’t know the way; I had to direct you, so I want a discount.”

One driver told me how he deals with this: “If I could remember every street in the region I’d be a brain surgeon, not a taxi driver.” So what about a GPS? Well informed people will know that even a GPS can occasionally get it wrong. They don’t always direct you to the shortest route (even when set to do so). This is why I mainly work in areas that I know. Taxing an abusive drunk when you don’t know where you’re going is not a pleasant experience. Knowing the area in which you work gives you the upper hand, which is why I’ll never work in Sydney again.

Customer complaint: “Why are the flag-fall and booking fee so much?”

How in hell would I know? Write your local member of parliament and put the question to him.

Customer complaint: “Why did it cost so much? Last time I caught a cab it was $5.00 less. I’ve never paid more than $20.00 for this.”

Most of the time they’re lying; it’s just a ploy to pay less. When last did you catch a cab? Before the recent fare rise? To be fair, there are some renegades in the industry who will double or triple booking fees on fare meters which allow them to do so, and most customers don’t know how to read a fare meter, unless they catch cabs regularly. I am frankly surprised at customer ignorance in this department. Being blind drunk doesn’t help the customer either. Take the time to learn how to read a fare meter. I doubt any driver would turn down such a request. Knowledge is power.

Customer complaint: “You didn’t stop the meter when I asked you to so I could buy my grog (or groceries), so I’m not paying the full fare.”

I actually had an experience with this a few months ago when a drunk customer became abusive because I kept the meter running while going through a McDonalds drive through. “Why is the meter still going; you’re supposed to stop it in cases like this”, he demanded. “That’s not how it works”, I informed him. He then threatened to bash me. Fortunately there were several police enjoying their Big Macs at the time, and I told the female attendant that I needed police help. He was detained and ordered to pay the fare up to that point, and I told the police I didn’t want the scumbag back in my cab. Here’s a hint: If you plan to go through a drive through, or stop to buy anything, you pay for waiting time. The driver could be earning money, especially on a busy night, while you leisurely browse a store or wait 10 minutes for your Happy Meal. Time is money. Don’t expect a taxi driver to waste his valuable time and money on VIP you. There are some situations when I will stop the meter, for example when I know the person is paying a big fare, and then need to get money from an ATM, or stop for “nature’s call”. I’m reasonable in that way. Unlike many drivers, I will also stop the meter at railway crossings, simply because I don’t think a customer should have to pay an extra five minutes while a 30 car freight train crosses. That’s not their fault, and it’s not the same as choosing to go through McDonalds. Traffic lights, on the other hand, are part and parcel of road travel, and it’s not very often that a cab gets stuck for five minutes or more at a railway crossing. I don’t mind sacrificing a couple of dollars for such rare occasions.

Most taxi drivers I know are honest, and will not deliberately try to siphon more money out of you. The taxi laws state that a driver must take the shortest and cheapest route, and in my experience most drivers are conscientious in this way. Those who aren’t bring a bad name to all of us, and that’s unfortunate. We also have to deal with drunks and abusive people, but fortunately they are also in a minority, so it would be equally wrong to judge all people by the behaviour of a few. When the abusive ones outnumber the civil ones, I’ll be visiting the “positions vacant” columns in newspapers. Physically it’s an easy job, but I have heard people tell me that they wouldn’t do my job for $200,000 a year, yet there are slow days and nights when we earn less than $10 an hour.

Jessica Watson Is Young Australian Of The Year 2011.

2011-01-26T14:49:00.004+11:00

It was announced yesterday (Jan.25th) that Jessica Watson is Young Australian of the Year 2001 . This was no surprise despite a few other serious contenders. The announcement was not without the usual “knocker” criticism from the opinionated armchair brigade, but despite the dogs yapping at her heels, the incredible Jessica Watson sailing show moves on. Nevertheless, it’s interesting how Jessica has divided opinion for nothing other than fulfilling a childhood dream (and I’m accounting for much more than what I’ve written below). Today, January 26th, is Australia Day, which is supposed to be a day wherein:

... “we come together as a nation to celebrate what's great about Australia and being Australian. It's the day to reflect on what we have achieved and what we can be proud of in our great nation. It's the day for us to re-commit to making Australia an even better place for the future”. (Australia Day )

One thing we are not great for is our reputation as “knockers”, and they came out of the woodwork ever since Jessica’s successful solo circumnavigation (and before). But first, from the Courier Mail (Published in Jessica’s home state of QLD)

If his reward came as a surprise, Watson's Young Australian of the Year prize did not.
It was a dead-set gimme, given her towering bravery in crossing the oceans of the globe all on her own and only sweet 16.

Then some of the comments, both positive and negative:

”Congrats, Im 40 and would'nt do what you did. A worthy recipient. Kids all around Australia will now think a hell of alot differently about what they can achieve. Enjoy your time in the spotlight and smile at your knockers safe in the knowledge that they wouldnt have the balls to do what you did.” (gladys of Kenmore)

“Could not be a better recipient. if you have any doughts, go jump in a boat and sail out into the ocean for a night or two! Think this might change your mind.” (GEOFF THOMAS of CALOUNDRA)

“Yeah coz her sailing round the world does SO much for humanity ...” (Mel)

“@ Mel. Any positive role model is a help to humanity!! (well done Jess of Brisbane)

“Surely there must be a young person actually contributing to society that is more worthy...a medical student...an engineer...” (Bob)

“Bob - get a life - she was a courageous young lady - an adventurer at a very young age that went out into a big world on the sea and proved that she could achieve her dreams. I am sure she could be whatever she wants to be ... a medical student, an engineer or ....Jess will achieve what she wants in life and I hope she can do it without worrying about the negative people out there who will not be able to enjoy the good fortune of what life offers even under the worst times. So sad for you, some advice - get out there with achievers like Jess and enjoy their life and stop putting them down .. life is better because of people like her, if you let it happen” (woody of sunshinecoast)

“To Bob: Are you serious!? This young lady sailed ALONE around the world! She endured we will never know what mental hardships! What about the southern ocean?? Oh, sorry, that's down south of us - ahhhh, forget it. Nothing can match what she did - Go Jess! (Kev of Dalby of Dalby)

“Mel and Bob, it's the fact that she showed young Australians that they can achieve their dreams! As the mother of kids who look up to Jessica and followed her journey, I am proud that she has set such an example for them! There is no greater contribution to society or humanity than to show others that dreams are worth following and that you don't have to be thwarted by critics ... there are young scientists, teachers, medical students who can follow her example and achieve great things in their chosen fields. Good on her!” (Proud Aussie of QLD)

“Mel Comment #6 .." Yeah coz her sailing round the world does SO much for humanity ..." Actually yes, it shows what ordinary people who are driven by a dream can achieve if they put their hearts and souls into it. And that, my dear Mel is the incalculable value of her achievement. I only wish there were 1000 more like Miss Watson.” (Neelie of Tenerifee)

“Congratulations Jess, it is well deserved. I note that since your voyage you have attended many functions and have been invited to speak at boat shows all over the world. On every occassion you have displayed your natural self, with grace and dignity and a maturity well beyond your years. Other celebrities should take note of your conduct. You truely are a role model for the young. Your parents must be so proud, I know I am proud to tell the world your Aussie.” (Neil Emerton)

“Seriously?? The various Australian's of the Year should be a recognition of contribution to Australian society as a whole. I applaud Jess Watson for her achievement sailing around the world - but that's just it, it is HER achievement. Not to the benefit of Australia. (and yes I know many of you will jump all over me for being negative and just putting her down for no reason, but I truly do appreciate what she achieved for herself). It's the same whenever sportspeople win the Australian of the Year award, it just makes me cringe and I love sport above pretty much all else. To Simon and Ron I say these are great choices for their respective awards. (Flutz)

“Well done Jess, but i'm afraid i would have voted for any of the other 7 finalists above you, your contribution was more about yourself while the others did alot more for community gave time and effort to worthy causes not so much about themselves. I don't think it sends a good message.” (Brian of Qld)

“I agree with Bob (Comment 8). Not taking anything away from what Jess achieved but I am sure there are more deserving young Australians who in their every day life have achieved and contributed more to Australian society than Jess.” (taxpayer of Brisbane)

The good news is that, overwhelmingly, the public supports Jessica Watson (and not judging only by the Courier Mail article and comments), and it is heartening to know this in a country generally notorious for its “tall poppy syndrome”. Her justified national honour is worthy and widely recognised. Sail World, one of her most ardent critics before and during her voyage, recently commented :

Everyone knows that the new Young Australian of the Year Jessica Watson has won her accolade with an extraordinary sailing performance.

A year ago no one could have imagined them making a comment like this.

I understand the feelings of people who feel that publicity aided Jessica’s achievement, and that there may have been “more worthy” recipients (who work “quietly”), depending on one’s personal views. I say all power to those who are the “quiet achievers”, but because millions more Australians now know who Jessica is, her potential for positive national influence is incalculable (and we so need it). To the critics who say that a “quiet achiever” was more worthy of Young Australian of the Year, my argument is that such a person, as significant as their work is, and not taking a thing away from them, that they would have come and gone with this award and forgotten (if even recognised) by the vast majority of Australians. And for me, I might add, it’s not just a matter of “publicity”, but a deserving honour given to a remarkable young human being who has become a role-model for millions of young Australians, and in particular young Australian women. Let us never forget Jessica’s words long before she set out on her solo circumnavigation (bearing in mind her description by some knockers as “the gap-toothed girl” destined to failure, or worse, death on the high seas):

"I wanted to challenge myself and achieve something to be proud of. And yes, I wanted to inspire people. I hated being judged by my appearance and other people's expectations of what a 'little girl' was capable of. It's no longer just my dream or voyage. Every milestone out here isn't just my achievement, but an achievement for everyone who has put so much time and effort into helping getting me here."

And she didn’t let down in the least in her award acceptance speech for Young Australian of the Year:

Even the most dim-witted observer should realise that this is more than just about sailing. It is about the triumph of the human spirit against almost insurmountable odds and adversity, and as Jess said in her speech, it doesn’t matter whether the summoning of courage is in regard to a driving or math test, or even sailing around the world. It is about getting up one more time than you fall down, and pursuing your personal dream until it is accomplished.

Heaven knows that we need more Australians like Jessica Watson.

Reminiscing: Only hours away from national and international recognition. The day Sydney will never forget:

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28)

”A Special Kind of Courage”. The Queen’s 1957 Christmas Message.

2010-12-16T05:23:00.002+11:00

"Today, we need a special kind of courage. Not the kind needed in battle, but a kind which makes us stand up for everything that we know is right. Everything that is true and honest. We need the kind of courage that can withstand the subtle corruption of the cynics, so that we can show the world that we are are not afraid of the future. It has always been easy to hate and destroy. To build and to cherish is much more difficult." - Queen Elizabeth II

The Queen's 1957 Christmas Broadcast was an historic event, as it was the first to be televised. It was also the 25th anniversary of the first Christmas Broadcast on the radio. The broadcast was made live from the Long Library at Sandringham, Norfolk:

Excerpts:

It’s inevitable that I should seem a rather remote figure to many of you, a successor to the kings and queens of history, someone whose face may be familiar in newspapers and films but who never really touches your personal lives, but now at least for a few minutes I welcome you to the peace of my own home.

That it’s possible for some of you to see me today is just another example of the speed at which things are changing all around us. Because of these changes, I’m not surprised that many people feel lost and unable to decide what to hold onto and what to discard; how to take advantage of the new life without losing the best of the old. But it’s not the new inventions which are the difficulty. The trouble is caused by unthinking people who carelessly throw away ageless ideals as if they were old and outworn machinery.

They would have religion thrown aside. Morality, in personal and public life made meaningless. Honesty counted as foolishness and self-interest set up in place of self-restraint. At this critical moment in our history, we will certainly lose the trust and respect of the world if we just abandon those fundamental principles which guided the men and women who built the greatness of this country and commonwealth.

Today, we need a special kind of courage. Not the kind needed in battle, but a kind which makes us stand up for everything that we know is right. Everything that is true and honest. We need the kind of courage that can withstand the subtle corruption of the cynics, so that we can show the world that we are are not afraid of the future. It has always been easy to hate and destroy. To build and to cherish is much more difficult. That’s why, we can take a pride in the new commonwealth we are building. This year, Ghana and Malaya joined our brotherhood. Both these countries are entirely self-governing. Both achieved their new status amicably and peacefully…….

In the old says, the monarch led his soldiers on the battlefield, and his leadership at all times was close and personal. Today things are very different. I cannot lead you into battle. I do not give you laws or administer justice. But I can do something else I can give you my heart, and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations. I believe in our qualities and in our strengths. I believe that together we can set an example to the world which will encourage upright people everywhere.

Merry Christmas.

Merry Drunkmas.

2010-12-14T12:42:00.003+11:00

It’s that time of the year again: more domestic violence, more street violence, more drunken hoodlums on the loose, more drink-driving, and a society losing hope that it can ever be controlled. Ironically, this is the time of the year we once celebrated as a time of “peace and goodwill to all”. Although the following report was made in September this year, it still applies to the Christmas period:

Excerpts from The Daily Telegraph Surgeons join police to change culture of binge drinking ahead of weekend blitz today, December 14, 2010:

MEDICAL professionals are joining forces with police in a major campaign to change the culture of binge drinking, warning that alcohol-related violence is almost out of control…….

"If we do nothing, we run the risk of losing a generation of young people who think it's the norm to drink until you drop," Mr Scipione said……

"If you drink yourself into a stupor you are asking for trouble ... this is supposed to be a peaceful, enjoyable time of year but there's nothing enjoyable about being arrested," he said…….

Spokesman Dr John Crozier said alcohol was a far greater problem than all other drugs combined and the "waste of human life" had to stop.
"When you see the carnage as I do ... the shattered skulls, the scarred faces and the torn bodies, there should not even be a debate about this issue, the change in drinking behaviour must occur," Dr Crozier said. As a trauma specialist and vascular surgeon at Liverpool Hospital, Dr Crozier sees the worst of what alcohol can do. "The savagery of a beer glass to the face should be incomprehensible to a civilised community," he said…..
More than 2400 people were arrested during the last rollout of Operation Unite, in September.

"This behaviour has to stop, and we will do everything in our power to see that happen," Mr Scipione said.

Also in today’s Daily Telegraph, excerpts from Drink, be merry, but don't end up as an ugly statistic , Commissioner Scipione’s Open Letter to the community:

The abuse of alcohol is not just a policing problem, it is the entire community's problem. The Alcohol Education and Rehabilitation Foundation's recent report, The Range and Magnitude of Alcohol's Harm to Others, found more than 70,000 Australians are victims of alcohol-related assaults every year.
In 2005 alone, 367 people died and almost 14,000 people were hospitalised due to the drinking of others.
More than 24,000 Australians were the victims of alcohol-related domestic violence while 20,000 children were victims of substantiated alcohol-related child abuse.
This behaviour is totally unacceptable in any society.
This weekend, Operation Unite will see police crack down on alcohol-related crime in every Australian state and territory and in New Zealand….
In NSW, phase one of this year's initiative, in September, resulted in the arrests of 737 people, charged in total with more than 1100 offences.
Don't be one of those arrested by police this weekend.
You don't want to be a drunk who ends up in a jail cell, contemplating how a criminal conviction could cost you your job, overseas travel, your reputation and ultimately, your freedom.

Every year we hear the same thing, and it never gets any better. Far more drastic measures will need to be taken, and perhaps rather than trying to curb the problem with more enforcement it may have to start with raising the legal drinking age to 21 and shutting down clubs and pubs earlier (this is how it was 30 years ago). Most of the older generation I speak to say they are now afraid to go into cities at nights, particularly weekend nights, and our streets are ruled by fear. Not that some of the older generation aren’t themselves sometimes also offenders. Let’s not entirely blame the youth because after all, we created this.

Links:

1. Police, society have had enough

2. Go drunkenly straight to jail if you break law, NSW police warn in Christmas lead up

Is Qantas Heading For A (Financial) Crash?

2010-11-05T14:55:00.005+11:00

Charlie: Ray, all airlines have crashed at one time or another, that doesn't mean that they are not safe.
Raymond: QANTAS. QANTAS never crashed.
Charlie: QANTAS?
Raymond: Never crashed. (Rain Man)

According to Wiki

It is often claimed, most notably in the 1988 movie Rain Man, that Qantas has never had an aircraft crash.[51] While it is true that the company has neither lost a jet airliner nor had any jet fatalities, it had eight fatal accidents and an aircraft shot down between 1927 and 1945, with the loss of 63 people. Half of these accidents and the shoot-down occurred during World War II, when the Qantas aircraft were operating on behalf of Allied military forces. Post-war, it lost another two aircraft with the loss of 17 lives. To this date, the last fatal accident suffered by Qantas was in 1951.

Still, 59 years of never crashing is an enviable record. Perhaps a lot of this has to do with luck, but no doubt also a meticulous planning and safety record. Over the past several years, however, Qantas has had too many near-misses and almost fatal accidents to justify the continuing comfort and reassurance of its past record. While “skirmishes” with varieties of Qantas aircraft seem to be on the increase, the immediate problem now seems to be its fleet of A-380s

Aborted landing because of a front landing gear problem:

An A-380 with a tire burst while landing in Sydney. Note the passenger’s comment, “the wing is on fire”. They’re lucky the plane didn’t explode.

And the latest incident just yesterday:

News.com.au has this report: Qantas rejects union maintenance concerns following dramatic mid-air explosion on A380 posted at 12.42pm today:

QANTAS has rejected as "outrageous" union concerns over the outsourcing of maintenance of its aircraft, after the mid-air explosion on one of its A380s.

Well last year I happened to have a Qantas engineer in my cab (yes, we get all the gossip) who mentioned the very same thing. I remarked about Qantas’ remarkable safety record, and he interjected that he didn’t know how much longer this would continue because of “cutbacks and out-sourcing”. In other words, he felt Qantas was compromising its safety record because of “financial concerns”. Now if the problem was relegated to the new A-380s, since most new aircraft have “teething problems”, that would be understandable. But two years ago The Daily Telegraph listed Qantas safety incidents since 2006. As far as I’m aware, none of these “incidents” involved A-380s, which were first purchased by Qantas in 2008 (to date they have six A-380s), and that is by no means a compressive list of “incidents”.

My conversation with a Qantas engineer seems to have been confirmed by a report in the Herald Sun yesterday: Qantas engineers want full probe

ALAEA federal secretary Steve Purvinas said safety was a growing concern for Qantas engineers with continued outsourcing of maintenance work. "We know that the dramatic increase in the number of safety incidents involving Qantas jets coincides with an increase in the amount of work that is no longer carried out in-house," he said in a statement.

In the past 10 years, Qantas has shut down every in-house engine shop in Australia, he said, leading to a reduction in safety standards.

Heavy maintenance checks - which occur over the lifetime of the aircraft - on the A380s are carried out in Germany, while other maintenance has been increasingly outsourced to Singapore and Hong Kong, the association says.

"We have seen some pretty horrid results of maintenance from the overseas facilities - things that aren't reported in the press," he said.

"A bigger (incident) we have seen of late is, last year they had three engines on a 747 that weren't bolted correctly to the wings and they flew ... this aircraft for a month or so after a maintenance check in Hong Kong."

(Emphasis added)

I sincerely hope that Qantas never crashes, because this airline has been a tremendous source of national pride for nearly 60 years, but as Simon and Garfunkel sang:

The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the sound of silence.

Governments Opening Secret UFO Files, and the Debate Goes On: Are They Here?

2010-10-30T10:16:00.009+11:00

There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... Our political life is also predicated on openness. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress. – J. Robert Oppenheimer

It’s probably the worst kept secret in modern history, that buried in many top secret government files lies strange encounters with UFOs, and even aliens, over the past 60-plus years. Some of those files, like the ones kept by the US government on the Roswell incident, are yet to be released. The Roswell files and others like them could be the ones to finally establish (publicly anyway) whether we have been visited by aliens. This, however, isn’t news to a lot of people. In 2007 Fox News reported in Dead Airman's Affidavit: Roswell Aliens Were Real :

Military authorities issued a press release, which began: "The many rumors regarding the flying disc became a reality yesterday when the intelligence officer of the 509th Bomb Group of the Eighth Air Force, Roswell Army Air Field, was fortunate enough to gain possession of a disc." The headlines screamed: "Flying Disc captured by Air Force". Yet, just 24 hours later, the military changed its story and claimed the object it had first thought was a "flying disc" was a weather balloon that had crashed on a nearby ranch.
The key witness was U.S. Army Maj. Jesse Marcel, the intelligence officer who had gone to the ranch to recover the wreckage.
He described the metal as being wafer-thin but incredibly tough.
It was as light as balsa wood, but couldn't be cut or burned.
These and similar accounts of the incident have largely been dismissed by all except the most dedicated believers.

Astonishing new twist
But last week came an astonishing new twist to the Roswell mystery.
Lt. Walter Haut was the public-relations officer at the base in 1947 and was the man who issued the original and subsequent press releases after the crash on the orders of the base commander, Col. William Blanchard.
Haut died in December 2005, but left a sworn affidavit to be opened only after his death.
Last week, the text was released. It asserts that the weather-balloon claim was a cover story and that the real object had been recovered by the military and stored in a hangar.
He described seeing not just the craft, but alien bodies.

Another report in May 2008 showed the still delicate nature of the UFO phenomenon Britain Opens Up Secret UFO Files :

LONDON — The men were air traffic controllers. Experienced, calm professionals. Nobody was drinking.
What they saw has never been explained. And they were so worried about losing their jobs that they demanded their names be kept off the official reports.
No one, they knew, would believe their claim that an unidentified flying object landed at the airfield they were overseeing in the east of England, touched down briefly, then took off again at tremendous speed.
But that's what they reported happening at four in the afternoon on April 19, 1984, at an unspecified small airport near the eastern coast of England.
Their "Report of Unusual Aerial Phenomenon" is one of more than 1,000 pages of formerly secret UFO documents released Wednesday by Britain's National Archives.

"Everyone became aware that the object was unidentified," the report on the incident said. "SATCO [codename for a controller with 14 years' experience] reports that the object came in 'at speed,' made a touch and go on runway 27, then departed at 'terrific speed' in a 'near vertical' climb."
The incident is one of the more credible in the newly public files because it was reported by air traffic controllers, said David Clarke, a UFO expert who has worked with the National Archives on the document release.

But we get a glimpse of the stigma that still surrounds UFO sightings and reports, and why people are hesitant to report them:

He said other incidents were at times reported by aircraft crews whose members also asked to remain anonymous because they did not want to jeopardize their careers by seeming to believe in UFOs.

Dismissals of UFO sightings are in tune with the current media and government political correctness, and at the end of the article we see how this is done:

The vast majority of the reports come from members of the public who see strange things in the sky and jump to the conclusion that a UFO is involved even though there is likely a logical scientific explanation for what they are observing, experts say.
"Mostly it's well-intentioned witnesses who are misidentifying things," said Nick Pope, another UFO expert who helped the Ministry of Defense investigate the phenomenon. "The most common things are aircraft lights, bright stars and planets, satellites, meteors, airships and things like that."
Some of the reports are fairly easy to explain — and quite possibly influenced by a pint or two of beer.
This was the case when a number of people leaving a Tunbridge Wells pub at 9:30 at night reported seeing a strange craft "with red and green" lights.
Asked by police where it seemed to be traveling, the pub crawlers said it appeared to be heading for London's Gatwick Airport.
Case closed.
It didn't take a scientist to figure out it was a commercial plane making a routine approach.

Like the air traffic controllers, however, I had an experience in 2001 which is not so easily explained, which I reported in a blog post in February this year:

My UFO Encounter, and Other Crazy Speculations

Fortunately the only thing at stake for me is a possibly the further denigration of an already slightly crazy reputation for being a couple of fries short of a Happy Meal. I don’t mind sticking my neck out at all, and it may or may not be a bad thing that the older I get the less I care about what others think. I like to call a spade a spade, or, in this case, a UFO a UFO, not “commercial aircraft lights”, when I know better. Whether these craft are piloted by humans, aliens, or automatically isn’t the important point. The point is that they are strange, unconventional (for example making no sound), and many reports say they are capable of speeds not attainable by any conventional aircraft on earth today – that we are aware of, and we are talking in the range of 12,000 mph (19,312 kph) to 16,000 mph (25,749 kph) in some estimated cases.

Some world governments finally open formerly classified UFO files:

One of the latest from the British archives, published August 5 in The Australian Winston Churchill may have ordered UFO cover-up, National Archives files show

The allegation came from a member of the public whose grandfather had acted as one of Churchill's bodyguards during the latter stages of the war. The correspondent, whose name has been blacked out from the released files, wrote in August 1999 to ask about an incident over the British coast in the 1940s, when airmen saw a metallic object draw alongside their aircraft and hover near by.
[b]The man said: "My grandfather witnessed the discussion of the event by both Mr Churchill and Mr (Dwight) Eisenhower in the United States, and the great concern that it caused in both countries.
"During the discussion with Mr Churchill, a consultant dismissed any possibility that the object had been a missile, since a missile could not suddenly match its speed with a slower aircraft and then accelerate again.
``Another person at the meeting raised the possibility of an unidentified flying object, at which point Mr Churchill declared that the incident should be immediately classified for at least 50 years and its status reviewed by a future prime minister."
The correspondent urged the MoD not to "dismiss my attempts to pursue this matter as trivial or motivated by 'crackpot' thinking".
The MoD followed his wishes, but was only able to find records relating to Churchill's general interest in UFOs. In 1952 the leader ordered his staff to investigate a flurry of UFO sightings. "What does all this stuff about flying saucers amount to?" he wrote in a memo. "What can it mean? What is the truth?"
A minute in the MoD file observes: "I propose [to] respond robustly, advising that we are unaware of any closed defence records on this subject dating from the time of WWII and referring him to the [Public Record Office - now the National Archives] and Cabinet Office."
The released file is one of more than 3500 cases that came to the attention of the MoD in the period between 1995 and 2003.
None of them was considered evidence of a threat to British airspace, and the UFO unit was closed last year after it became deluged with requests that were made under the Freedom of Information Act.

UK National Archives

Canada releases UFO X-Files to the World

Canadian Defence Research Board:

Source of the Canadian files:Library and Archives Canada

Denmark: The Truth is now out there

France: France: Government Opens U.F.O. Files

GEIPAN (France)

Brazil: Is the truth out there? Brazil releases UFO files

Yes, the question of whether we are alone in the universe cannot be answered with any certainty for some people unless an alien spacecraft lands on the White House lawn, but perhaps the newly released documents can help point researchers on the right track.

BRAZILIAN MILITARY RECOGNIZE UFO RESEARCH AND RELEASE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Brazil and UFOs: Making Sure the Truth Is Out There

Brazilian Ufology Supports Mexican Military Regarding The Episode Of March 2004

Spain: Military UFO Records Released: The Spanish Experience*

Russia: Russian Navy UFO records say aliens love oceans

Peru: Peru's Official UFO Office

Mexico: Mexico's Roswell

MEXICO'S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RELEASES UFO INFORMATION

Sweden: UFO Sweden releases 18,000 Swedish UFO reports to the public domain

Uruguay: Uruguay Declassified Files -
ET Hypothesis Stands

New Zealand: New Zealand releases UFO files

Finland: Secret UFO video filmed by Finnish officials was published

Ireland: Ulster's X-files: dossier of UFO sightings released

Japan: Japan's Top Government Spokesman: UFOs 'Definitely' Exist

Australia: The Australian UFO Research Network UFO Disclosure Project

China: Michael Cohen: China Discloses UFO Reality: Aliens Sending UFO Probes Here

India: India to announce UFO's are REAL

Argentina

United Nations: U.N. to Establish Protocols for When We Make Contact With Aliens

Other sources:

Despite partial disclosure, Europe's UFO files remain mostly under wraps

EU call to open secret UFO files

A EUROPEAN Union MP is calling for member governments to open their secret files on UFOs, saying people need to know about close encounters of the third kind.
Mario Borghezio, an Italian member of the European Parliament, overnight said that the EU needs its own X Files archive where anyone can see information on UFOs - including data gathered by the military.
Mr Borghezio said all European governments should go public and stop what he called a "systematic cover-up".… Opening the files is not unprecedented: Last year, Britain published 4000 pages online on 800 alleged encounters with aliens during the 1980s and 1990s.

(Emphasis added)

Astronaut UFO reports

Quotes from US and USSR Astronauts

Gordon Cooper:

"I would also like to point out that most astronauts are very reluctant to even discuss UFOs due to the great numbers of people who have indiscriminately sold fake stories and forged documents abusing their names and reputations without hesitation. Those few astronauts who have continued to have participation in the UFO field have had to do so very cautiously. There are several of us who do believe in UFOs and who have had occasion to see a UFO on the ground, or from an airplane. There was only one occasion from space which may have been a UFO….

On several occasions, he described his own sighting in Germany in 1951:

"Several days in a row we sighted groups of metallic, saucer-shaped vehicles at great altitudes over the base, and we tried to get close to them, but they were able to change direction faster than our fighters. I do believe UFOs exist and that the truly unexplained ones are from some other technologically advanced civilization. From my association with aircraft and spacecraft, I think I have a pretty good idea of what everyone on this planet has and their performance capabilities, and I'm sure some of the UFOs at least are not from anywhere on Earth."

(Emphasis added)

Astronaut Buzz Aldrin (second man to walk on the moon) Recounts Apollo 11 UFO Encounter

Edgar Mitchell (sixth man to walk on the moon) UFO interview on Kerrang Radio 23 july 2008 (“We have been visited”):

The extraordinary claim by a former US Air Force airman that NASA is aware of an alien moon base

Washington Press Conference Robert Hastings Ufos and Nukes

Very Similar but just as good:

Major-General Pavel Popovich, pioneer Cosmonaut, "Hero of the Soviet Union," and the President of All-Union Ufology Association of the Commonwealth of Independent States:

"Today it can be stated with a high degree of confidence that observed manifestations of UFOs are no longer confined to the modern picture of the world, or the simple refutation of the orthodox natural science paradigm. The historical evidence of the phenomenon, the singularity of its newly gained kinematic, energetic, and psychophysical features allows us to hypothesize that ever since mankind has been co-existing with this extraordinary substance, it has manifested a high level of intelligence and technology. The UFO sightings have become the constant component of human activity and require a serious global study. In order to realize the position of man on earth and in the universe, ufology, the scientific study of the UFO phenomenon, should take place in the midst of other sciences dealing with man and the world...

"The influence the UFO has on people, as well as the effects it produces, should become the items of special research. The UFO's interaction with the environment, the behavior that it motivates, and its genesis, also present interesting areas for concentrated study. Today, many specialists have come to the opinion that [UFO] phenomenon research should be taken up along with understanding and comprehension of other unexplained phenomena... The development of new approaches for the identification and study of energy and information processes will allow for an enthusiastic move toward the comprehension of the phenomenon. The results of these studies should aid the survival of the people on earth...

"It's necessary to carry out the popular ufological enlightenment, since the probability for a meeting of a person with a UFO exists, and this person should be ready for this event. Precautionary measures are especially important. It's necessary to tell the truth, which has been distorted previously by the politically engaged sciences and most recently by ufological dilettantes. The main purpose of the primary local groups, that of controlling the ufological situation, mustn't be forgotten. The ufologists should know all the UFO's landing places and contacts in their regions. They should have relations with the local authorities, and in particular, with the police, the civil defense bodies, as well as information, scientific, and medical organizations." (Popovich, P., "Ufology in the Commonwealth of Independent States: Organization Problems," in the MUFON 1992 International UFO Symposium Proceedings.

(Emphasis added)

The Roswell Incident

In my opinion this is one of the best pieces of literature assessing the UFO/Alien phenomenon, by Australian UFO researcher Warren Aston:

Finding the hard answers to Earth's greatest mystery within a scientific paradigm

Religion and Aliens/UFOs

According to a report on Catholic.net:

Extraterrestrials: Do they exist?

The head of the Vatican Observatory thinks there’s a good chance they do, and that their existence would be in keeping with the faith.
In a May 14 interview with the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano May 14, headlined “The Extraterrestrial Is My Brother,” astronomer Jesuit Father José Gabriel Funes said that according to his “scientific judgment,” the existence of extraterrestrials is a “possibility.”
“Astronomers contend that the universe is made up of a hundred billion galaxies, each of which is composed of hundreds of billions of stars,” he said. “Many of these, or almost all of them, could have planets. [So] how can you exclude that life has developed somewhere else?”…….

Father Funes, who took over as head of the observatory in 2006, denied that the existence of other intelligent life-forms would contradict Christian belief.
“As there exist many creatures on earth, so there could be other beings, also intelligent, created by God,” he said. “This doesn’t contradict our faith because we cannot put limits on the creative freedom of God. To say it as St. Francis [of Assisi], if we consider some earthly creatures as ‘brother’ and ‘sister,’ why couldn’t we also talk of an ‘extraterrestrial brother’? He would also belong to creation.”
The Argentine Jesuit explained that scientists studying the question of extraterrestrial life have made much progress in recent years, and will soon be able to identify if other planets have the conditions necessary for life. He added that, in theory, forms of life could also exist in parts of the universe without oxygen and hydrogen.
When asked how aliens could be redeemed, Father Funes referred to the Gospel parable of the lost sheep. Aliens, he speculated, could already be redeemed because they could have remained in full friendship with God, while the human race “could be precisely the lost sheep, the sinners that need the shepherd.”……
If intelligent life did exist, had fallen and could not be redeemed by God, either through Christ or in another way, this could pose a challenge to the Christian faith, Lewis acknowledged.
But, he said, “I think a Christian is sitting pretty if his faith never encounters more formidable difficulties than these conjectural phantoms.”….
Brother Guy believes there have been no theological statements on the subject by the Vatican apart from one allegedly made in the 1950s that he has so far been unable to track down.
Nonetheless, contrary to many reports in the secular press, Father Funes’ comments to L’Osservatore Romano do not represent an official Vatican statement but remain merely his personal views.
However, the fact they were published in the Vatican newspaper signifies support of the wider Church for the acceptability of his position regarding the possible existence of intelligent aliens.
“Essentially, it is evidence that the Vatican hierarchy agrees that there’s no problem,” Brother Guy said May 14.

Two of Today’s Most Prominent Scientists on Aliens

Stephen Hawking on Aliens, and the possible alien threat

Richard Dawkins On Aliens, God, And The Complexity Of Life

Dawkins Explains Himself

My concluding comments:

Be prepared for some major revelations in the near future as more and more formerly secret UFO files are disclosed. We don’t know the full story yet, and maybe not even quarter of it. One UFO expert has described the government cover-ups as a “cosmic watergate”, and British author Timothy Good was perhaps the first to blow the lid on this with his book Above Top Secret: The Worldwide UFO Cover-up (1987). One thing most UFO researchers face is ridicule – lots of it – but Good and others like him must now be feeling justified with the on-going disclosures. Still, there will be skeptics, doubters, and perhaps an on-going debunking campaign in some quarters. Project Blue Book was such a campaign.

The origin of these UFOs/aliens is unknown (except perhaps to some privileged insiders), but it seems unlikely that they would travel enormous light year distances, even assuming they have the technology, just for a brief sightseeing stopover or to dissect a few animals and experiment with humans, then dash back to wherever they came from. It is my view that they have had a very long association with us, going back even before recorded history. In some way it is also possible that they may have planted the seeds of life on earth, and then allowed evolution to take its course, or maybe even intervened occasionally. As Michael Shermer pointed out:

As scientist extraordinaire (most profoundly as inventor of the communications satellite) and author of an empire of science fiction books and films (most notably 2001: A Space Odyssey), Arthur C. Clarke is one of the most far-seeing visionaries of our time. Thus, his pithy quotations tug harder on our collective psyches for their inferred insights into humanity and our place in the cosmos. And none do so more than his famous three laws:

Clarke's First Law: "When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."

Clarke's Second Law: "The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible."

Clarke's Third Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." ……

Science and technology have changed our world more in the past century than it changed in the previous hundred centuries. It took 10,000 years to get from the cart to the airplane, but only 66 years to get from powered flight to a lunar landing. Moore's Law of computer power doubling every eighteen months continues unabated and is now down to about a year. Ray Kurzweil, in The Age of Spiritual Machines, calculates that there have been thirty-two doublings since World War II, and that the Singularity point may be upon us as early as 2030. The Singularity (as in the center of a black hole where matter is so dense that its gravity is infinite) is the point at which total computational power will rise to levels that are so far beyond anything that we can imagine that they will appear near infinite and thus, relatively speaking, be indistinguishable from omniscience (note the suffix!).

When this happens the world will change more in a decade than it did in the previous thousand decades. Extrapolate that out a hundred thousand years, or a million years (an eye blink on an evolutionary time scale and thus a realistic estimate of how far advanced ETI will be, unless we happen to be the first space-faring species, which is unlikely), and we get a gut-wrenching, mind-warping feel for just how godlike these creatures would seem.

Stephen Hawking’s view of the alien threat is a bit scary, and perhaps there are plundering “alien nomads” out there, but I tend to agree with Edgar Mitchell that they are probably not hostile (most anyway), otherwise “we could have been gone by now”. There could be two motives for their apparent interest in shutting down nuclear and missile sites, especially ICBMs (inter-continental ballistic missiles) – to protect themselves from humans acquiring too much firepower, or just to save us from our own potential destruction, or both. Whoever they are, they have much more power and technology than we do, powers perhaps beyond our imagination. We can only hope, and I think that hope is fairly justified, as Professor Hawking expressed, that “they will come in peace”. Considering earth’s very violent history, and ultimately the use of nuclear weapons in 1945 to kill thousands of other human beings, perhaps they have decided it’s time to make their presence known, or maybe even stop a future holocaust. Perhaps we are building a modern Babel, and "the gods" have decided it's time to intervene.

The Irony of Sally Pearson’s Disqualification.

2010-10-08T17:18:00.014+11:00

Before today, I didn’t have a clue who Sally Pearson is, and had she not been disqualified from the women’s 100 metres final, after winning it, I would have remained as clueless. In earlier days I was a very keen follower of track and field, and remember listening to radio to hear Jim Hines win the men’s 100 metres final at the 1968 Mexico Olympics (I was 14). As a teenager I could recite every Olympic gold medallist from the 100 metres to the 400 metres up to 1968, but later lost interest. In the 2000s my interest in athletics dwindled to very superficial perusals of “big games” results. So I decided to see what was going on in Delhi. And the Sally Pearson controversy hit me head on. I watched the women’s 100 metres final:

The controversy is outlined in one media report of many: The Sydney Morning Herald

In the latest report, No hard feelings: Sally Pearson forgives England team on emotional evening

So let me put it in plain English (if you’ll pardon the pun). The England team wanted to elevate their fourth-place sprinter to third place, and the Nigerian team to get their silver medallist into first place, and by disqualifying Pearson this would be made possible. Perhaps the Nigerian protest would have stood on its own, but I would suggest that the England team made it more persuasive. Thus, Australia’s first female 100 metres Commonwealth Games gold medallist in 36 years, was disqualified for “jumping the gun” counted in 1,000ths of a second. Something that was difficult to judge before the age of sophisticated computer technology and starting block sensors to measure reactions. Under the old rule an athlete could get away with one false start, but under the new IAAF zero tolerance rule since January 2010, any athlete will be disqualified after one false start. There is no question that Sally jumped the gun, possibly reacting to Turner's break, and placing her hands on her head she seemed to understand this meant instant disqualification. That she wasn't there and then has more to do with official incompetence. And here is what is so very sad. In spite of “jumping the gun”, Sally had a bad start the second time. She was trailing the field in sixth position after the start, and ploughed through every one of them to finish first. But I guess, no accolades for sheer athletic genius and talent, only to “computer technology” and envious protests.

And what is the irony? The irony is that no one will remember who “officially” won the gold medal in the women’s 100 metres final in Dehli, but everyone will remember Sally Pearson. This was not about drugs, and deliberate cheats; this was about something measured in thousandths of a second, and had little meaning to the outcome. This was not Florence Griffith-Joyner or Marion Jones. Sally’s 11.28 seconds is by no means a spectacular time, compared to Joyner’s 10.49 world record, which was drug-induced.

If other Australians feel like I do, then they will feel mixed emotions. We could all tangibly feel Sally’s pain, not the least at the incompetent officialdom at Delhi which led her on a wild goose chase, only to end in bitter disappointment. On the other hand, we are seeing a greatness in the soul of a magnificent athlete who towered above the opposition, and who is, notwithstanding “officialdom”, the fastest woman over 100 metres in the Commonwealth.

Next stop – London 2012.

“It is inevitable that some defeat will enter even the most victorious life. The human spirit is never finished when it is defeated...it is finished when it surrenders.” – Ben Stein

Postscript:

Sally's vindication; the Women's 100m hurdles Final:

Who Would Want To Live Forever As A Jellyfish?

2010-10-01T09:36:00.002+10:00

“Somebody should tell us, right at the start of our lives, that we are dying. Then we might live life to the limit, every minute of every day. Do it! I say. Whatever you want to do, do it now! There are only so many tomorrows.” – Pope Paul VI.

Someone did actually tell me that when I was a teenager – my father. He was fond of saying, “from the time you are born, you begin to die”. Being young feels like being in possession of immortality. The reality that you will die someday is a sobering thought, as no one will escape death. With the possible exception of Turritopsis nutricula , the potentially immortal jellyfish.

National Geographic explains:

Another mystery is how the jellyfish achieve their remarkable age reversal. Miglietta speculates that the creatures have very effective cellular repair mechanisms that allow them to age without incurring the usual ravages of time.
Miglietta dismissed news reports from this week that implied the jellyfish could hold a key to anti-aging drugs for humans.

"Nobody is looking into that," she said, "and I don't think you're going to find any secrets in these creatures."
But while they won't yield the next Botox, the jellyfish just might help fight one of human health's greatest threats—cancer—according to biologist Stefano Piraino of the University of Salento in Italy.

Like cancer cells, "some cells of this jellyfish that were supposed to [die] … are able to switch off some genes and to switch on some other genes, reactivating genetic programs that were used in earlier stages of the life cycle," Piraino said.

Of course this doesn’t mean it can’t die by accident, and I suppose given the odds of avoiding accidental death if one can live forever, there may in fact be no immortal jellyfish. But it’s an intriguing phenomenon that a species theoretically possesses immortality, and why it should of all things belong to a jellyfish is even more intriguing. Why not humans? I guess that wasn’t in God’s plan if you accept the biblical version of human creation, that man was initially immortal, but death came because of sin. I don’t accept such child stories, because death has been going on for as long as earth has existed, which is about 4.5 billion years, and didn’t begin some 6,000 years ago in a mythical Eden.

What turritopsis does, however, is raise the possibility of humans eventually achieving immortality in some distant and now unimaginable scientific future. It’s not at all improbable, in my opinion, given the advances made in science just in the last hundred years. But doesn’t this ever also raise incredibly complex ethical questions? For countries which still have the death penalty, would they need it? Murderers could be sentenced to 50-100 years in prison, and still come out as young. But if they killed a potentially immortal being, would 50-100 years in prison be enough? Perhaps in that case it may really have to be life for life. If you kill an immortal, then you must be deprived of immortality. But questions like this are not the most important. Who would determine who lives forever? (Presuming that this achievement was scientifically engineered, and not naturally through evolution.) What about overpopulation? We would undoubtedly have to also achieve inter-planetary and even inter-galaxy travel to avoid this.

A most intriguing question of all is, have other beings somewhere in the universe achieved immortality? Could "God" be such an immortal being? If he/she/it had lived for millions of years, I suppose what we now consider “impossible” might be mundane to such a long-lived being (that might also be an explanation to the problem of evil, and why the creator doesn't intervene). Getting into the more controversial UFO/extraterrestrial phenomenon, Allen Tough shares some provocative thoughts on What Role Will Extraterrestrials Play In Humanity's Future? (Originally published in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 39, pp 491-498 [November, 1986])

Our own progress in several areas of life has been very dramatic over the past 10,000 years. If we survive another 10,000 years, it is highly likely that we will again make dramatic progress in several areas. When we turn our attention to other civilizations that are 10,000 or perhaps even a million years older than we arc, there can be little doubt that some of them will be far beyond us in their biological, mental, technological, psychic, communication, or travel capacities. Also, because they originated in bodies, physical environments, and social environments that are highly different from ours, their patterns of perceiving, thinking, and relating may be vastly different from ours.
It is highly likely, therefore, that many of the capacities in the flowing list have already been developed by one advanced civilization or another in our Galaxy. It is unlikely that any one civilization will have all of the listed capacities: it is quite probable, though, that each of these capacities (with one or two exceptions) now exists somewhere in our Galaxy. We ourselves will probably possess many of these capacities someday if we continue to develop for another 10,000 or 1,000,000 years. Indeed, the list is based partly on the thoughtful writing of various authors about the long-term future of humankind, which has been one of the author's professional interests for the past ten years.

The ultimate question to all of this is: Given the chance to achieve immortality, would you choose to live forever? At least jellyfish don’t have to contend with in-laws.

The National Rugby League Grand Final.

2010-09-30T17:01:00.000+10:00

The NRL Grand Final is upon us this weekend. The St. George Illawarra Dragons will play Eastern Suburbs, otherwise known as “the Roosters”. I’ve not followed League in the 2000s much, preferring the “glory days” of the ‘80s and early ‘90s. St. George Illawarra, a combination of the legendary St. George team of the 1960s, and the Illawarra Steelers, who’ve never won a Grand Final, will this weekend confront their long time talking-head detractors since the combination, or merger. Known in gossip circles as the “so near, yet so far” team, St. George Illawarra will this weekend be able to prove their mettle. I wish them victory. Wollongong’s sister city, Newcastle, home of the Newcastle Knights, earned their honours 13 years ago, perhaps leaving Dragons supporters wondering why their team has not been able to match the accomplishments of their sister city. This Sunday is their opportunity. The stakes are down, and this is their opportunity to rectify past failure, and maybe even a return to the “glory days”, when St. George dominated Rugby League. In the meantime, let us savour underdogs Newcastle, when they defeated Manly in the 1997 Grand Final. Who woulda thought….one of the most thrilling Grand Finals of all time.

Fighting Other Peoples' Wars: Australia in Afghanistan.

2010-09-10T16:01:00.005+10:00

The war in Afghanistan is, really, as far as most ordinary Australians are concerned, “other peoples’ wars”. If you take the realistic view, the attack on Afghanistan was in response to 9/11. While ten Australians died in the attack on the Twin Towers, that would hardly justify the Australian military response that we have seen. Instead, other factors have motivated Canberra to “suck up to America”; the cynic would say, “as we have always done”.

In an ABC report just a few days ago, we can see that Australia’s commitment goes much further than just “sucking up to America” (though that is included). 22 Australian soldiers have died in the Afghan war so far, and who knows where the body count will end. While this is minimal in comparison to the US body count, it’s a war being questioned by more and more Australians. While Aussie diggers are dying in Afghanistan, the “ordinary people” are asking why.

The mainstream media and major political leaders are underestimating the public mood against the war in Afghanistan.
The Australian public is intelligent enough to realise that a war against insurgents and terrorists is, by default, a war against innocent men, women and children, that a war to bring peace is an oxymoron and that the impossible task of preventing places from becoming training grounds means staying there forever.

Source: The Sydney Morning Herald

Was a pre-invasion poll of Afghani residents done to ascertain whether they felt the need to be protected from the Taliban? Or do they deserve what they get? Kandahar is a long way from Bondi Beach, and maybe Afghanis don’t want any part of the freedom and nudity of Bondi Beach, and such “expressions of Western freedom”. Just a thought.

More from the article:

Yet Gillard says: "Our object is . . . to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a training ground terrorists . . ." This implies that Afghanistan isn't currently a training ground, and one wonders how the threat of international terrorism can be combatted by waging an ongoing war in a country that the terrorists have left.

Australians want to see evidence supporting assertions such as al-Qaeda "may" re-establish a training ground in Afghanistan, and they want it explained how the Taliban — which are not al-Qaeda — represent a risk to our national security.

It seems to me that the real reason behind Australian support of this war is to curry more favour with America, and its obsession with bringing terrorists to justice. If any reader would like to assess worldwide public opinion about the war in Afghanistan, then check out This.

If you want my blunt opinion, then let Afghanis have whatever they want. But I think it may be time to stop Australian soldiers dying in the wretched parched earth deserts of Afghanistan. It’s the Noble Dream that Afghanis will take to Western concepts of freedom, but I don't think they will. If there is going to be change then maybe it should come internally, not through more Vietnam-like wars.

Afghanistan has now become the longest war the US has ever engaged in. And maybe the lesson to be learned here is that when you intrude on foreigners with the intention of imposing your ideals of democracy, don’t be surprised when you encounter forces like the Taliban.

This war has now become another Vietnam, and not only is public opinion against it, but also “expert opinion”.

U.S. author calls Afghanistan war "pointless"

The Taliban are never going to surrender, and so far history shows that, generally, intrusions into foreign territory almost always result in massive losses to the intruders. The US Vietnam death toll stands at 58,000 (a lost war), and Afghanistan 4,000, with how many more years of accumulating dead, who knows? And why was this instigated? To prevent further attacks like 9/11? Have they caught Bin laden? If Afghanistan was razed to the ground, there’s still no guarantee that the Bin Laden’s will be caught. Out of the ashes of Afghanistan and the loss of innocent human life, terrorists can still arise.

Nevertheless, Aussie troops are still doing what they can to improve the basic quality of life in Afghanistan, and for that they must be commended.

Last week, I drove (I’m a taxi driver) a wannabe Aussie soldier close to joining the Australian Army, who had dreams of fighting in Afghanistan, who really believed he would be doing this for “his family”. Young men are full of adventure. But how “his family” would benefit from the potential loss of his life in a hellhole like Afghanistan, is beyond comprehension.

This post is in no way meant to denigrate the Aussie soldiers who are now fighting in Afghanistan, and who deserve accolades for their bravery. In spite of what I consider to be the fruitlessness of this war, I salute the soldiers who selflessly dedicate their lives in the service of their country, and the misguided ideals of politicians who demand that they risk life and limb fighting "other peoples' wars".

Australian forces engage the Taliban:

Stephen Hawking's New Copernician Revolution.

2010-09-04T17:11:00.006+10:00

When news of Professor Stephen Hawking’s new book (co-authored with Leonard Mlodinow) , The Grand Design , hit the news headlines, all hell broke loose. Well, that’s not technically correct, as it was more like all heaven breaking loose (see my explanation below). Reuters reported: God did not create the universe, says Hawking . Strictly speaking, that isn’t what Hawking said. He said, "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going." Call me on semantics if you like, but this was no dogmatic statement stating definitely that “God did not create the universe”, only that it is “not necessary to invoke God”. I’m not defending the God-idea. I’m an agnostic-theist, which basically means while I’m very fond of the God-idea, it would be no skin off my nose if Nietzsche was right about the death of God. Some days I feel more agnostic than theist, and other days I feel more theist than agnostic, so it would be no big deal to me to walk across a cemetery and see the tombstone of Jehovah. In some ways I’d be relieved if it was the same God of the Old Testament, as I’d consider his karma due for murdering or ordering the murders of so many people. Perhaps no greater mass murderer ever lived.

And yes, heaven broke loose, well, at least those who feel they belong to heaven, or that “heaven smiles upon them”. Jason Boyett from the Washington Post

You don't expect to see "Stephen Hawking" as a trending topic on Twitter. That designation is usually reserved for the birthdays of Jonas brothers or 140-character punchlines about #liesguystell.

But Thursday, the acclaimed physicist and mathematician shot to the top of the list--and not because of another hilarious wheelchair-bound appearance on The Simpsons. Hawking hit the news cycle because The Times of London excerpted his new book, The Grand Design, on Thursday. In the book, which releases this week from Bantam Press (and which, admittedly, I haven't read), Hawking concludes that a Creator is unnecessary for the universe to exist.

Is this news? Not really. Hawking has made it clear in the past that he's not religious, and his ex-wife, Jane, outed him as an atheist in her biography about their marriage. But Hawking has always been careful to delineate between religion and science, and his past writings seemed to have left open a window allowing for a God-like creator. In A Brief History of Time, he wrote of man's steps toward figuring out the universe as attempts to "know the mind of God."
But the new book appears to have taken that religious neutrality off the table. Due to laws like gravity, noted last week's excerpt, Hawking writes that it is entirely possible that the universe "can and will create itself from nothing." That's why we exist. That's why there's something rather than nothing. We don't need God….

And then the backlash began.

On Twitter, mentions of Hawking and his pronouncement followed three distinct tracks. A third were users passing on a news item without comment. A third were nontheists cheerfully affirming what they already suspected to be true. And the last third were my fellow Christians, who took ugliness to a new level…..
Like dogs backed into a corner, my religious brethren went on the attack, escalating the culture war between science and faith….
Jesus taught slowness to anger, compassion for the sick, and love for our enemies. But even accounting for the simplicity of Twitter, and the troll-like culture of the Internet in general, we still come across as a bunch of petty, rage-filled monsters eager to discount the life work of one of the world's greatest scientists.
A genius with a debilitating disease says something we disagree with, so we make fun of his wheelchair and laugh at his impending death. Great.
This is why people have trouble taking us seriously….

So I want to apologize to Stephen Hawking on behalf of religious people everywhere. As believers in a God of justice and mercy, we're not supposed to be heartless, ignorant jerks. But sometimes we are. I hope you'll forgive us.

So how does Hawking’s “Modern Copernician revolution” come into this? Let me first hark back to two scientific reformers of thought, Copernicus himself, and Galileo. New scientific ideas are seldom accepted by the populace at large.

"There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must needs invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth."

That was Martin Luther.

And here is a summary of Galileo.

Galileo was placed under house arrest at his villa in Arcetri near Florence until his death in 1642.
Despite this, in 1636 he finished "The Two New Sciences" describing his experiments in mechanics.
Unable to get published due to his conviction, the manuscript was smuggled out of Italy and published in Protestant Leyden in 1638.
This book helped lay the foundations of classical physics.

Professor of Physics, James Trefil, wrote this in a review:

With that background, Hawking and Mlodinow get to the real meat of their book: the way theories about quantum mechanics and relativity came together to shape our understanding of how our universe (and possibly others) formed out of nothing. Our current best description of the physics of this event, they explain, is the so-called "M-theories," which predict that there is not a single universe (the one we live in) but a huge number of universes. In other words, not only is the Earth just one of several planets in our solar system and the Milky Way one of billions of galaxies, but our known universe itself is just one among uncounted billions of universes. It's a startling replay of the Copernican Revolution.

The conclusions that follow are groundbreaking. Of all the possible universes, some must have laws that allow the appearance of life. The fact that we are here already tells us that we are in that corner of the multiverse. In this way, all origin questions are answered by pointing to the huge number of possible universes and saying that some of them have the properties that allow the existence of life, just by chance.

I've waited a long time for this book. It gets into the deepest questions of modern cosmology without a single equation. The reader will be able to get through it without bogging down in a lot of technical detail and will, I hope, have his or her appetite whetted for books with a deeper technical content. And who knows? Maybe in the end the whole multiverse idea will actually turn out to be right!

Stephen Hawking is just lucky he didn’t live in medieval times, or he could have faced a stake and flames, as Giordano Bruno did.

So what are the implications for the existence of God, in Hawking’s “New Copernician Revolution?”

No more than Copernicus himself influenced an unbelief in God among the masses. The restructuring of scientific paradigms will only, in the eyes of believers, bring us to a greater understanding of what it means to believe in God. And his “domains” only seem to be getting greater and greater with new scientific theories. The “idea of God” is just ingrained into human consciousness, and it seems that science will never explain it away. When the universe was born, and the stars created, it seems almost as if the “idea of God” was implanted into the genes of its inhabitants from the very beginning.

Fighting Other Peoples’ Wars: The Battle of Long Tan.

2010-08-26T07:21:00.004+10:00

This August 44 years ago, the Australian Army engaged the Viet Cong in what was one of the most ferocious battles of the Vietnam War, known as The Battle of Long Tan. Outnumbered by 20-1 the Australians held off and inflicted heavy casualties on the VC until reinforcements arrived. The minimal body count for the VC was 245; the Australians lost 18 men in the three hour battle. According to one source , “The Battle was one of the heaviest conflicts of the Vietnam War as well as one the few battles in the recorded history of the world to be won against such odds”.

On 28 May 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson awarded D Company 6RAR a Presidential Unit Citation, with the following:

By virtue of the authority invested in me as the President of the United States and as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, I have today awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (Army) for extraordinary heroism to D Company, Sixth Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment, The Australian Army.
D Company distinguished itself by extraordinary heroism while engaged in military operations against an opposing armed force in Vietnam on 18 August 1966.
While searching for Viet Cong in a rubber plantation northeast of Ba Ria, Phuoc Tuy, Province, Republic of Vietnam, D Company met and immediately engaged in heavy contact. As the battle developed, it became apparent that the men of D Company were facing a numerically superior force. The platoons of D Company were surrounded and attacked on all sides by an estimated reinforced enemy battalion using automatic weapons, small arms and mortars. Fighting courageously against a well armed and determined foe, the men on D Company maintained their formations in a common perimeter defence and inflicted heavy casualties on the Viet Cong.
The enemy maintained a continuous, intense volume of fire and attacked repeatedly from all directions. Each successive assault was repulsed by the courageous Australians. Heavy rainfall and low ceiling prevented any friendly close air support during the battle. After three hours of savage attacks, having failed to penetrate the Australian lines, the enemy withdrew from the battlefield carrying many dead and wounded, and leaving 245 Viet Cong dead forward of the defence positions of D Company.
The conspicuous courage, intrepidity and indomitable courage of D Company were to the highest tradition of military valour and reflect great credit upon D Company and the Australian Army.

It’s possible that few young Australians today are aware of what Long Tan means in terms of Australia’s war history, so I thought it would be a good idea to refresh some memories and enlighten others by reposting the 2008 60 Minutes report:

The Rise and Rise of Jessica Watson.

2010-08-21T13:06:00.006+10:00

"While some in the sailing world have grumbled about Jessica Watson’s record attempt, the young Australian has managed to do something that no other professional sailor has managed for a long time – become a household name." – Admin of The Business of Yacht Racing.

As Jessica Watson’s Number One fan (I’m sure she has lots of Number One fans), I feel obligated to report on her latest adventures.

Jessica’s book, True Spirit, is now Australia’s Number One bestseller (fiction or non-fiction), selling 10,000 copies in ten days: Jessica Watson unfurls huge book sales

The latest Nielsen BookScan, based on data from 1000 retailers nationwide, shows True Spirit at No.1 for the week ending August 7.

Source: The Herald Sun

On the non-fiction side of things Jessica Watson's event at Readings Port Melbourne last Friday helped get her book True Spirit to the top of the non-fiction bestsellers list.

Source: Readings

From Jessica’s blog:

I’m not normally one to get excited by statistics, but I’m really excited about this one and just had to tell you about it. My book True Spirit has been working its way up the best seller list since the launch and today it was officially announced as the number one best-selling book in Australia, fiction and non-fiction. Wow!!
Thanks again to everyone out there for your amazing support.

Source: True Spirit Hits Number 1 !

The Business of Yachting Racing website gave some serious reflection to this.

From the Admin editorial:

According to the publishers, Australians purchased more than 10,000 copies of Jessica Watson’s book True Spirit in 10 days. The latest Nielsen BookScan, based on data from 1000 retailers nationwide, shows True Spirit at No.1 for the week ending August 7. Perhaps the Defender of the America’s Cup is going down the wrong path. Perhaps sailing doesn’t need to be more exciting – it needs to be more interesting. Sailors, not their boats need to be more interesting. There is an opportunity for an athlete in the sport who is willing to be famous to step forwards and become a rock-star. If Jessica Watson can do it, then so can others.

Source: Jessica Watson Australia’s No. 1 Sailor.

I was pretty much a sailing ignoramus until I heard of Jessica Watson. I’m not about to rush out and buy a sail boat (don’t have the money anyway), but I think it’s quite amazing how one person (let alone a 16 year old) can garner so much interest in a sport, so I think the above editorial has a point.

Here’s another example of Jessica’s amazing influence:

Look out Jessica Watson, a new breed of sailor is on the rise. Children from the Maroochy Sailing Club took to the water on Sunday in a demonstration of sailing’s new pulling power among youth on the Sunshine Coast.

The kids set sail with brand new boats which were bought by the club in response to a huge rise in youth registration over the past few months.
MSC Commodore John Pearce said the desire to sail has never been stronger thanks to the sport’s recent media coverage.

“We’ve gone from having almost nobody 12 months ago to 26 of the little guys signed up today,” he said.
“We just got 26 new Optimist Dinghies which makes us one of the largest fleets on the East Coast.”
“(The recent media coverage) gives us a higher profile and attracts more sponsorship and donations. We’re getting a lot more people to help out.”
“The Jessica Watson story is giving everyone a focus to get together and go forward.”

Source: Jessica Watson inspires spike in junior sailing numbers

And harking back to Jessica’s comment to The Los Angeles Times before her incredible solo around the world voyage, her goal has been achieved:

"I wanted to challenge myself and achieve something to be proud of. And yes, I wanted to inspire people. I hated being judged by my appearance and other people's expectations of what a 'little girl' was capable of. It's no longer just my dream or voyage. Every milestone out here isn't just my achievement, but an achievement for everyone who has put so much time and effort into helping getting me here."

Jess still has her knockers, but I suspect that the majority have seen through the thin veneer of her critics and You Tube wannabes. While I wouldn’t yet put her in the same league as the great Don Bradman (which some may find offensive at this stage), it may yet materialise in the future (she's still only 17). Bradman, as great a cricketer as he was, still had his critics, to whom he responded:

There are people who wish to draw attention to themselves by attacking me.

Jessica responded exactly once to her critics, during her voyage, which is recorded on her blog, and regretted later that it may have been a waste of time. Her actions and accomplishments did all the talking.

But what about this “inspiration” factor?

It doesn’t just apply to sailing. Today (Saturday August 22), there’s a Federal election in progress. Sometime tonight, or tomorrow morning, we’re going to know who the next Prime Minister of Australia is, and it will be either the Labor incumbent Julia Gillard, or the main contender Tony Abbott of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, bells are not ringing across the world:

How to break this gently given the mantra that Australia "punches above its weight" overseas.
No-one is talking about us.

According to a survey of the some 20,000 articles and transcripts mentioning Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott since the election started just 700 of them have been reports in the international media. The rest have been published here.

Just 700. That's just 3.5 per cent of the total. If it's any consolation it's about double Australia's contribution to the world economy, so that's something…..

Chris Pash, the director content licensing in the Asia-Pacific for Dow Jones and someone who monitors news around the world, said of the international yawn: "It's not surprising, we're fairly bored ourselves."

Source: The world's not watching, it's just a big yawn

It’s quite possible; even likely, that more foreigners know who Jessica Watson is, than they know who Julia Gillard or Tony Abbott are.

If Jessica ever decides to move into Australian politics, there may yet be some hope for its resurrection from banality and boredom – because at the moment it’s as dead as Lazarus.

Endnote: A good site I recommend for those interested in following Jessica’s progress is: Jessica Watson Info

Violence on Australian Streets At Night, And The Public Order Riot Squad.

2010-08-07T14:02:00.002+10:00

From 60 Minutes:

Brute Force: Part 1

Brute Force: Part 2

My reader is probably wondering why I focus so much on violence in Australia, so I’ll once again admit my perhaps negative bias – I’m a night shift cab driver. I’ve reduced my Saturday night shifts to one a fortnight, not because I don’t need the extra money, but I can just no longer stomach the Saturday night drunkenness and bad behaviour. Before every Saturday shift, I get knots in my stomach, and when it’s over on Sunday morning I tick off one more Saturday as “survived”, and look forward to the two week break from the mayhem. I guess the most obvious question is: Then why do I keep driving cabs? I work Sundays too, but they are not as bad as Saturdays, and Mondays and Tuesdays it seems like a totally different job, even enjoyable. I enjoy the challenge of learning streets, and particularly meeting some very interesting people. Some of those experiences people will pay for, but I get paid for them. It’s sort of like rendering a community service too, and in that sense gratifying. It’s not like a nine to five job where you clock on, clock off, and see the same people everyday.

The two 60 Minutes clips above show what the reality is for every cab driver on Saturday night. Imagine having to deal with some of these hooligans without weapons or immediate protection, and back up procedures for emergencies can take a while. Rarely does a Saturday night go by without one or two drivers calling for assistance, sometimes more, as happened several weeks ago in one of the more serious incidents where a Bangladeshi driver was punched in the face only because he was a Muslim, and a foreigner. The customer asked him two questions? Where are you from? And are you a Muslim? Then bang! Punched in the head. (This driver is a friend of mine, and a very gentle person who would not hurt the proverbial fly, and never tries to force his religious beliefs on others.)

Some comments on the clips I’ve posted from 60 Minutes. Do we need a Public Order Riot Squad? Well the 2006 Cronulla “race riots”, and the Macquarie Fields riots establish beyond any doubt that we do. Beat police are simply not trained nor equipped to handle riots at this level. The larger question is whether the PORS should get involved in policing what I’ll call the “Saturday night mayhem”. Obviously a major riot isn’t going to happen every weekend, so we can’t hang out the PORS to dry waiting for the next major riot. The “tough policing” is obvious from the clips above. Were a beat police officer to “man-handle” people with physical force the way the PORS do, they could be charged with assault. This is probably a reaction to ridiculous laws restricting how much force police can legally use “within the law”.

I get the point made by a (retired?) senior police officer critical of the PORS. We’re trying to mop up instead of looking at causes. We’re trying to shut the gate after the horse has bolted. A Public Order Riot Squad isn’t going to stop underage drinking, nor the free flow of illegal drugs, but does he have a solution as to what will stop this? Can anything but draconian measures at either end, preventative or curative, stop what’s happening? I think the PORS is a good move by Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione. Do I think it’s the ultimate solution? Hell no. Do I think they’re going to solve the drunkenness, drug, and crime problems at night. Again, no. But it’s a start. A start to letting the lawless hooligans who have no respect for law and order or their fellow human beings being put on notice that their criminal behaviour will no longer be tolerated, and sometimes it is necessary to fight force with force.

What we need to do now is look at long term solutions which involve preventative measures. I’m definitely not in favour of a “police state”, nor should anyone in the right mind, but in my opinion we do need the Public Order Riot Squad at this stage. In that vein, I’ll tell an interesting anecdote. One night a customer told me that he “only had $25” for a fare which was going to be $30. No big deal? Only $5 difference? If you buy a McDonalds meal that cost $4.95, do you think they’ll let you get away with paying $4.90? Just try it sometime. You want a $7.00 kebab, do you think they’ll give it to you for $6.90? Okay, maybe if you personally know the kebab shop owner, or you’re a regular customer. Yet we cab drivers have to do “deals” all the time. Anyway, to my point. My customer was obviously trying to “bargain” his way to a cheaper fare (happens all the time), but he did say he would go inside, if necessary, to “get the extra money”. When we arrived at his home, a police car was just next door to his house – and he immediately produced a $50 note to pay for the fare. The sight of that police car struck so much fear into him that he called off his bullshit stunt. So what is the moral of the story? While police won’t stop crime, their presence alone certainly inhibits it. When I’m working with potentially dangerous or thieving customers, there’s nothing that makes me feel safer than the presence of police nearby.

Maybe Australia Needs A Benevolent Dictator.

2010-07-29T18:27:00.003+10:00

I first heard this seemingly outrageous suggestion many years ago, probably the early 1990s, from the late “shock Jock” Stan Zemanek. As outrageous as it seemed at the time, I think Zemanek may have been on to something. Imagine having a benevolent dictator, with much focus on the word “benevolent”. What would this do?

First of all, it would save us all valuable time of having to scrutinise politicians, and then cast a meaningless vote in the vast ocean of politics. What? You want me to spend hours and hours delving into politicians’ lives and their biases, who they slept with, what their sexual preferences are, whether they rubber stamp Global warming (a degree in science is necessary here), not to mention keeping up to date with “party politics”? It seems to me that I need to know what brand of underwear Julia Gillard wears before I cast my vote. I remember, years ago, one astute Aussie voter commenting about Paul Keating, “I don’t like his looks”. Which indicates to me that the donkey vote is not only based on numerical listing on ballot papers, but that some will genuinely study politicians’ policies (or not), and then vote on how much he or she “looks” electable. Maybe that explains why the charismatic Bob Hawke was elected. Yeah, like Reagan, he was good at “public relations”. Worth a vote. On the other hand, the bland and charisma-deprived Malcolm Fraser was just a mustard pickle in a hot-dog stand (and few realise his significant contributions to the less fortunate). But I sympathise. To keep up to date with politics and politicians requires the dedication of obsessed souls unburdened by immediate worries, like "where is my next meal coming from?” Or, who’s going to fix my abscessed tooth? Do I have to wait two years to get a diagnosis of my condition, by which time I will be outlining my funeral requests? Thanks to the “Federal government” who spend $millions sending out cancer bowel-detection kits while placing far less money into free medical care (I'm specifically thinking of dental care here, the lack of which can lead to heart disease)? The bad news is that you have bowel cancer. The good news is that it can be cured. The bad news about the good news is that you’ll have to pay for it. What this really means is that “the public” don’t give a shit whether you live or die, as long as the PAYG (pay as you go) (literally) system applies to your suffering. Why should they spend money on you when their hard-earned money (or not so hard-earned) could go to more worthwhile causes, like gambling on the horses or the pokies at the local club? Or investment in $Million properties.

The problem with democracy is, as Churchill said, it’s the worst form of government, save all the others. Now here’s my wildly speculative “benevolent dictatorship” for Australia:

We need a “benevolent dictator” who is compassionate.

We need a benevolent dictator who believes in law and justice.

We need a benevolent dictator who cares for poor, while not undermining the right of the ambitious to “earn money”, if they perceive the plight of the less fortunate, and try to help them learn how to escape “government handouts”. Do you notice how many complain about “government handouts” while they have $millions invested in properties to ensure their “safe retirement”? It’s not as if everyone is so talented or genetically fortunate, like James Packer, who was born rich!

We need a benevolent dictator who is driven by ideals and not monetary gain.

We need a benevolent dictator who is honest, compassionate, and genuine to the core, who feels uncomfortable sleeping at night unless the needs of his, or her, less fortunate brothers and sisters are met. In other words, someone who has a conscience, and is motivated less by money and profits and more by service to mankind. Or humankind. And particularly to the less fortunate. Why is there so much crime and violence in Australia today? A world wide trend. I would suggest it is because we have lost hope, and we no longer believe that we will see justice on earth. So the attitude is, “why should we care?” I’m not suggesting handouts for “bludgers”, but maybe we need to examine why some people feel society owes them a living, and where this mentality comes from. Could it be because, not having been born with a silver spoon in their mouth, they have also lost faith in justice, in the Universe, or in God? If people do not perceive justice around them, then they will have no stake in trying to create a just society, which in fact has failed them, and they no longer have any faith in God or politicians.

The strange thing is that 2,000 years ago, a man called Jesus supposedly set the ideals upon which Western civlisation was built. Yet we have blatantly ignored them. But I have no illusions. Even if Jesus Christ ruled Australia, some will still find fault. My idea of a “benevolent dictator” was built not upon someone like Fidel Castro leading, but someone more in the likeness of a “Jesus figure”. “The first shall be last, and the last shall be first”, said he. Speaking, of course, in theological matters, but one may well wonder how much of this applies to current social and political circumstances.

I cannot live, if you will excuse me, with a sight I have seen almost on a daily basis. People who have no where to live, no where to “rest their heads”, while “soccer stars”, as one example, earn $millions and even $billions for professionally kicking a ball on a field (sure, they deserve money, but do you, like me, remember the days when "football players" worked at a fulltime job, and sports like soccer were "recreational activities"?). The dejected face of a homeless “vagabond” may incite us to judge that it’s all his or her fault, with little or no consideration to what led to such a condition. Perhaps a "benevolent dictator" might consider this?

Perhaps I’m totally wrong, but maybe what we need today in “modern Australia” is not “democracy”, but a “benevolent dictator” in whose heart lies the feeling, “and justice for all”. Democracy only seems to encourage more abuse, and less understanding, the well-being of the "achievers", without considering that someone has to collect household garbage, fix broken pipes, and labour for a pittance to ensure your comforts. This is the theoretical model for “the kingdom of God upon earth”, an earth ruled by compassion and justice . A theocracy, perhaps, but one led by something or someone more than self-serving individual interests.

And from this post, I presume most realise that I’m just dreaming.

Muslim Extremism Spoils the Broth.

2010-07-08T15:28:00.006+10:00

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

When our individual interests and prospects do not seem worth living for, we are in desperate need for something apart from us to live for. All forms of dedication, devotion, loyalty and self-surrender are in essence a desperate clinging to something which might give worth and meaning to our futile, spoiled lives. – Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (1951)

On February 27 this year, and in a spirit of goodwill, I wrote a post titled Are Muslims A Threat To Australia? I also outlined the threat of Muslim extremism, which I still believe exists only among a minority. However, my attention turned to an article which appeared in The Australian on July 5, just three days ago:

Muslims told to shun democracy

From the article:

British Hizb ut-Tahrir leader Burhan Hanif told participants at a conference in western Sydney yesterday that democracy is "haram" (forbidden) for Muslims, whose political engagement should be be based purely on Islamic law. "We must adhere to Islam and Islam alone," Mr Hanif told about 500 participants attending the convention in Lidcombe.

"We should not be conned or succumb to the disingenuous and flawed narrative that the only way to engage politically is through the secular democratic process. It is prohibited and haram."

He said democracy was incompatible with Islam because the Koran insisted Allah was the sole lawmaker, and Muslim political involvement could not be based on "secular and erroneous concepts such as democracy and freedom".

From information I have (I took my Australian citizenship oath in 1979, after five years of residency, so I’m not up to date, though I believe this information is correct), the Pledge of Commitment to Australia for those taking citizenship is as follows (1994):

From this time forward, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

(Emphasis added)

After reading the article in The Australian, my attention was drawn to the Hizb ut-Tahrir website.

What struck me was the number of “Aussie sounding” accents from most of the commentators. Perhaps they were born here in Australia, and never had to take the Oath of Commitment (formerly known as The Oath of Allegiance, but references to God were subsequently dropped). That would indicate why they have such a poor understanding of the foundations of this country, and that it was built upon Christian principles, not Muslim principles. Democracy is enshrined in the founding of Australia. Which essentially means that no matter what your personal belief, you are not entitled to attempt to overthrow the Australian constitution nor the foundational values and principles upon which this nation was built without consequences, and it was built, like it or not, upon Christian principles, not Muslim principles. Whether or not Australians strictly adhere to Christian principles isn’t the point, any more than whether or not every Muslim adheres to every jot and title of Muslim law, including Sharia law.

So here’s my suggestion to the Muslims, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, who are advocating a rejection (or even an overthrow) of Australian democracy. The Taliban would welcome you! We don’t need you nor your ilk, nor your extremist views here. It is, indeed, a free country, and you are entitled to express your views, no matter how misguided they are, a privilege you won’t find in many Muslim countries, so go for your life, but don’t complain when your views are opposed by people like me, also exercising likewise rights to freedom of speech to say what I think.

I ask the question that’s frequently on the lips of many Australians – you left divided and war-torn countries, most of it caused by religion, to come to a land of honey and freedom to do what? Bring back the same animosities and religious and political divisions that wrecked the countries you came from? And you wonder why “anti-Muslim” sentiment is so strong? It’s strong because of the very fear that extremists like yourselves would eventually arise and try to overthrow everything that Australia was built upon, which includes your freedom to express misguided views.

I’m almost disheartened to say that because of organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir, it makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to rebut the offensive and stereotyped emails I receive about Muslims. I usually delete them all, and never forward them, but thanks to extremism, I may think twice about that in future. Maybe we really do need to be constantly warned about the threats from people like you, and your likes will give the Pauline Hansons of Australia more fuel than the Gulf of Mexico oil crisis.

Newly Appointed Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard on God and Religion.

2010-07-01T14:39:00.013+10:00

[Jon] FAINE (ABC): Do you believe in God?

PM [Julia Gillard] : No, I don't Jon, I'm not a religious person.

Australia’s first female Prime Minister is an atheist. While this would be virtually unthinkable in America, it’s not new in Australia. Governor-General Bill Hayden was also an atheist, and former Prime Minister Bob Hawke was agnostic (I presume they both still are). Not many high echelon political leaders have spoken out about their unbelief, though many, particularly in recent times, have used their belief and the religion card to attract votes (prime examples being Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd ).

According to Gillard:

"I am not going to pretend a faith I don't feel," she said.
"I am what I am and people will judge that.
"For people of faith, I think the greatest compliment I could pay to them is to respect their genuinely held beliefs and not to engage in some pretence about mine."
"I grew up in the Christian church, a Christian background. I won prizes for catechism, for being able to remember Bible verses. I am steeped in that tradition, but I've made decisions in my adult life about my own views.
"I'm worried about the national interest. About doing the right thing by Australians. And I'll allow people to form their own views about whatever is going to drive their views.
"What I can say to Australians broadly of course is I believe you can be a person of strong principle and values from a variety of perspectives."

Source: Gillard won't play religion card

Gillard’s admissions have sparked debate about whether Australia is an atheist country. From Sunrise:

So what is the truth? The truth is that the majority of Australians believe in God, but not in religion. I’m only producing one survey sample here:

Sources:

1. A question of beliefs

2. Research

Conclusion: Gillard’s atheism is very unlikely to affect her politically (any more than it affected atheist Hayden or the agnostic Hawke). Australians who identify with God mostly do not identify with religion, and may even view religious partisanship as “peddling religion”. Perhaps Ms. Gillard did her research long before making public statements, and realised that this was one issue which would not be detrimental to high office, even the highest office in Australia.

Other Links:

1. PM tells it as she sees it on the God issue

2. Julia Gillard won't bow to Christian vote

Clarification: I originally titled this post "Newly Elected Prime Minister....". Of course Gillard has never been elected, but was appointed by Labor Caucus. If she wins the next election, then she will be "elected" prime minister.

How Did Mark Webber Survive This?

2010-07-01T06:54:00.000+10:00

Valencia June 2010 F1:

Probably because of the tire barriers. 16 years ago, May 1 1994, Aryton Senna died at Imola after his car went out of control, hitting a concrete barrier. Webber’s crash speed was 321 kph. In contrast, Senna’s was 217 kph. Webber is still lucky to be alive. This revived memories of Senna’s crash, who is still the last F1 driver to die. Murray Walker offered some sage comments after Senna’s death. It’s a dangerous and death-defying sport; there have been fatalities in the past and will be in the future. Webber is lucky not to have fulfilled Walker’s 1994 prediction.

Spitfire.

2010-06-26T12:06:00.002+10:00

The Spitfire's elliptical wing had a thin cross-section, allowing a higher top speed than the Hawker Hurricane and several contemporary fighters. Speed was seen as essential to carry out the mission of home defence against enemy bombers.

From The Battle of Britain (1969).

"Give me a squadron of Spitfires."

Stuka Vs Spitfire:

The Challenge of Cape Horn.

2010-06-26T08:28:00.000+10:00

Nice video of sailing Cape Horn (You Tube).

Jessica Watson for Australian of the Year.

2010-06-25T16:18:00.005+10:00

Not just “Young Australian of the Year”, but “Australian of the Year”.

Once in a while we have the unique experience of encountering extraordinary human beings who are prepared to depart from “accepted orthodoxies”, such as, “16 year old girls should not be sailing around the world”. Jess is not only a beautiful human being, inwardly and outwardly, but a role model for all of us. Here were her words, as recorded by the LATimes:

"I wanted to challenge myself and achieve something to be proud of. And yes, I wanted to inspire people. I hated being judged by my appearance and other people's expectations of what a 'little girl' was capable of. It's no longer just my dream or voyage. Every milestone out here isn't just my achievement, but an achievement for everyone who has put so much time and effort into helping getting me here."

“I wanted to inspire people.”

It’s almost as if Divine Providence oversaw all of Jess’ incredible journey around the world. Wherever she went, though Mother Nature and the oceans were not always kind to her, and could never relieve the trials and personal deprivations of being alone at sea for 210 days, dolphins comforted her, and Mother Nature seemed to assure her that all was indeed well. No one in their wildest imagination could have written a more perfect script, right down to the perfect weather for her arrival in Sydney Harbour (and Mooloolaba), on a very special day that will live in the memory of the thousands who witnessed it.

I salute Jessica Watson, and her now incredible, amazing and famous yacht, “Ella’s Pink Lady”. Jess always referred to “we”, and had a very special bond with Ella’s Pink Lady. After docking at Man-of War berth, look at the expression on Jess’ face as she looked at Ella’s Pink Lady after disembarking, with the wind-generator still going, and Pink Lady finally berthed after 23,000 nautical miles around the globe. Jess knew she would never have made it without the resilience and strength of this 10 metre yacht. And the most chilling thought of all, is that she accomplished this feat when just 16 years of age, as her Wiki entry states:

Jessica Watson: S&S 34
Ella's Pink Lady . 16 years, 362 days. Easterly, via southern capes. Solo, non-stop, and unassisted.

Old Movies and Memories, and the Advance of Technology.

2010-06-23T13:47:00.005+10:00

I never set eyes on a television set until 1961, when I visited London with my parents, then later about 1963 in my homeland, Trinidad, and that was courtesy of an aunt and uncle we visited, who beat us to the newest technology. From the London experience I was totally fascinated by this box that generated moving pictures, in black and white of course, and the cartoons especially stick in my mind. In the late ‘50s and early ‘60s my parents and I sat around at night listening to radio, and my father always liked to tune into the BBC World News. In the mid-‘60s, we finally purchased a television, and I remember my dad trying to tune into the local channel (yes, there was only one), and what finally came up looked like very poor and fuzzy shots of the lunar surface from early exploring missions. Eventually we got it tuned, and from there opened up a whole new and fascinating world of entertainment. Now we could actually sit down and watch the news, in black and white.

I never owned a computer until 2000, some 35 years after this novel black and white TV experience, but even in 2000 I thought the slow connection dial-up experience was like going from the Wright brothers to the space shuttle. It’s funny how our expectations change with time, and even funnier is that any kid living in 2010 would roll on the floor laughing at the idea that we thought a black and white TV was “modern technology”.

In any case, for the “oldies”, here are some fond 1960s TV memories. Nights when the family sat around the TV and became totally absorbed in much simpler, less sophisticated themes than we have today, but were totally absorbing at the time. Maybe we didn’t say much, but at least we were all in the same room on Friday and Saturday nights, glued to the novelty of “the box”:

Highway Patrol:

Bonanza:

As I once noted:

1800's complaint: No running water. 2000's complaint: No broadband connection

I suppose it's probably all "relative", but I wonder if our modern day ease, comforts, and expectations have contributed to what author and critic Robert Hughes once called the Culture of Complaint?

On the first topic, he attacks Americans for having become a culture of complainers, symbolized by their growing claims to be victims of this or that injustice and their demands for the expansion of rights without concern for duties and obligations.*

*This could very equally be applied to Australian culture, which in my opinion is well into rapid yobbo and yahoo decline.

Would You Qualify To Be An Australian Citizen?

2010-06-22T13:48:00.002+10:00

The Australian citizenship test was first applied in 2007, and revised in 2009 (tightened). You can try out practise tests Here. I think a basic motivation for setting up the test is to ensure that those applying for citizenship can read and write basic English. The majority of us can already do that, but would we pass the test?

It’s Time To Leave The Sunderlands Alone.

2010-06-18T19:21:00.001+10:00

It’s time to get off their backs. It’s time to stop trying to make them into unscrupulous profiteers and rip-off merchants who would grab a dollar before principle. They are simple people, with simple beliefs, who try to live simple lives, and if it’s a crime to try to make money to support one’s family, then we are all guilty. The suggestion that Laurence and Marianne Sunderland would send their daughter off on a world voyage to bring profits to the family, not caring about her life and safety, is contrary to the facts. Laurence tried to dissuade Abigail from her solo around the world sail, to which Abby replied, “where’s my boat?” Maybe the truth lies more in the fact that they raised children outside of the “culture of complaint”, ambitious and achievement-oriented children in a protective and unambitious society anesthetised by home comforts and one-click access to “Internet facts”. They are the real “dreamers”, who look on Abby’s fate as a “failure”, while cuddling up to heaters in cosy apartments and homes with central heating and dinner-as-you-please. It’s so easy to be critical, isn’t it? And so satisfying to lesser souls who wouldn’t risk sailing in a duck pond in their backyard.

Abby will not achieve the personal goal and even fame she sought, and her name will not be recorded in the record books. But I will forever remember 2010 because of two people who inspired me: Jessica Watson, and Abby Sunderland. The first because of her incredible success and amazing journey around the world. The second, because even in defeat, brought about by Mother Nature, and maybe fate, I feel positive about our future. It is estimated that over 200 million people lost their lives in war in the 20th century . In the 21st century we complain, criticise, ache, groan and anguish over 16 year olds attempting to circumnavigate the world. Perhaps we are forgetting that they possess the same spirit of those who felt that there’s a higher purpose in life, and that staying alive and coddled in suburban safety at any cost is not what the “human experience” is all about. It’s about risk-taking, failure, success, and living for something greater than yourself.

The Media: A Modern Torquemada?

2010-06-18T15:55:00.001+10:00

The more I live, the more I come to loathe the modern media. They have, unfortunately, become the Grand Inquisitors of our age, no less than Torquemada . Some of the scum who infest this information control over society are, perhaps, responsible for more wrongful persecutions, biased views, and plain prejudice against innocent people, or perhaps people who never had a chance against their public courts of judgement and public harassments and metaphorical hangings, all motivated by sales profits and irredeemably inflated egos. If a car salesman is the “lowest form of life”, then the media has not yet been defined in any recognisable category. They have carte blanche to defame, defile, and wreck the reputations of whomever they will. This was formerly a power only granted to Grand Inquisitors, and how many lives have been shipwrecked by their unctuous and sanctimonious moralising one can only guess.

Abby Sunderland Versus Mob Hysteria.

2010-06-16T13:21:00.020+10:00

Jessica Watson: Broken mast after a collision with a tanker on a trial run.

Abby Sunderland: Broken mast in the Southern Indian Ocean

"Excellence can be obtained if you care more than others think is wise, risk more than others think is safe, dream more than others think is practical, and expect more than others think is possible." - Unknown.

Bravo Abby..you have more guts and savvy in your little finger than your detractors have in a lifetime. They will never raise extraordinary children who do extraordinary things.. You are blessed to have great water skills and you will complete your journey some day
Posted by: Christine Craft | June 12, 2010 at 06:52 PM (Los Angeles Times)

What was my reaction when I saw the news flashed across every major online Australian newspaper, “Abby lost at sea”? To be honest it was one of shock. My next feeling was that this could just as easily have been “Jessica lost at sea”. Later though, the sight of “Wild Eyes” lying dismasted in the Southern Indian Ocean, literally in the middle of nowhere and as far away as you can get from the mainlands only made me feel more respect and admiration for this intrepid young sailor (my apologies to those who think I’m among the ignorant and waffling sentimental adulators, but so be it. I like to look on the bright side, that’s all, really).

As one blogger phrased it:

Over the last few days, the world was captivated with the fate of Abby Sunderland, the sixteen-year-old girl missing at sea. I actually feel a certain kinship with Abby, because we both (not together!) set out on a small boat from Marina del Ray in California. At that point, the similarity ends: Me (age 25): I got as far as just outside the marina, whereupon the high waves of the Pacific caused my little motorboat to toss around a little, whereupon, suffering from mild hydrophobia, I began to totally freak out and headed back to shore as quickly as possible, whereupon I lay down on the ground…..Abby (age 16): Set out solo to circumnavigate the entire world non-stop, complete with six months' worth of dehydrated food and her eleventh-grade schoolwork. She managed four months and thousands of miles before her boat was damaged and she had to be rescued.

Source:Abby Sunderland: The Torah Perspective

When Abby’s dream of becoming the youngest solo and non-assisted circumnavigator came to an end with autopilot problems, having to pull into Capetown for repairs, her blog almost fell silent. I too wondered how she would recover from this enormous setback. Not long after this Jessica Watson sailed triumphantly into Sydney Harbour to cheering thousands, and millions more watching live, to take the unofficial title of youngest solo, non-stop and unassisted circumnavigator. Male or female, that is. When Abby again set sail from Capetown to continue her quest at a different level (to become the youngest assisted circumnavigator), it seems only her die-hard followers took much interest. That is, until the morning of June 10 when she encountered heavy seas and suffered multiple knockdowns in the southern Indian Ocean, and lost contact with her parents and then manually activated two of her emergency beacons. I could hardly believe the headlines when I woke that morning, “Abby lost at sea”. I initially thought it may have been a joke. I could also imagine in my mind the voices of the critics, “we told you so”. For a chilling twenty-fours or more, no-one, not even her parents, knew her fate. Her father Laurence speculated that the boat was probably upside down and keel-less, and she may have been in an “air bubble”, but even worse was imaginable – was she ripped from the boat and in the freezing ocean, in which case she might not have lasted very long? Laurence also speculated that “it’s going to take something special” to get her out of this one, maybe even a “miracle”.

The next morning the “miracle news” was provided by a Qantas A330, chartered by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (Australian Search and Rescue), which took off from Perth just before 8am with eleven trained observers on board, following the trail of the emergency beacons. Once arriving at the location it didn’t take long (ten minutes say reports) for the searchers to spot Abby and hear the words from two-way contact, “this is Abby”, and report back that the boat was upright, though dismasted and un-sailable, but she was “alive and well”. Abby’s first blog post after the incident, A Note From Abby , subsequently drew an incredible 12,000-plus comments; 2,000-plus of which have been posted to date. I don’t know if this itself is some kind of record for a personal blog post, but it must surely be. And this in response to a 272 word post by a 16 year old girl. What does that tell you? It tells me that behind all the criticism and incessant whinging of the nay-sayers, there was enormous world-wide interest and concern. The paradox is that that had Abby sailed to victory in her down-scaled quest, her arrival back at Marina de Ray would have gone largely unnoticed by the rest of the world. People like drama and suspense, and Abby provided it in truckloads, unwittingly of course, and the irony is that she is now more well-known than her successful brother/circumnavigator Zac Sunderland

All that aside, what was most revealing to me, and maybe lessons we can learn, is not that 16 year old girls shouldn’t be doing this sort of thing, but much of the negative, hysterical and distorted critical responses. That’s not to say that some criticisms were not valid, especially what she was doing in the southern Indian Ocean at its most perilous season. But I guess that's what “adventurers” do. Had she successfully negotiated it, it would have been a feat to talk about and added a lot more wind to her sails, if you’ll pardon the pun, but it would still never match the real-life drama that ensued and brought her to world attention. Whether we admit it or not, events like this add much flavour and interest to our lives, even when the “play” ends in tragedy. The difference between us "ordinary people" and adventurers like Abby is that we prefer “safe interests”, and the closest many of us come to real-life danger may only be Internet generated, which reminds me that even that has its perils: Dangers of Internet Addiction . So where do we go to escape danger in our lives? No where, really. Absolutely no where, and the degrees of danger are often exaggerated by ignorance.

It must be borne in mind that the tragedy of life does not lie in not reaching your goal. The tragedy of life lies in having no goal to reach.

- Benjamin E. Mays

One of the more hysterical responses, and from not a few in the US, is that Abby’s parents should be “locked up” for “child abuse”. Maybe someone should have locked up Steve Irwin before he was mauled to death by a stingray. Known for handling and planting loving kisses on some of the world’s most deadly snakes, he was surely out of his mind, right? And then there was the incident when he held his one-month-old son, Bob, in his arm while hand-feeding a chicken carcass to Murray, a 3.8-metre (12 ft 6 in) saltwater crocodile. Child welfare and animal rights groups likened it to “child abuse”, and Irwin later apologised (probably more out of a duty to political correctness). Irwin was thrilled with danger and challenges and lived dangerously. He paid the ultimate price, but that is what “adventurers” do, and they do it fully realising that in the process they could die. The reader may recall my former post about The Moral Panic Generation, and it seems like officially appointed do-gooders want to control every aspect of our lives, “for our own good”. The safety nannies and neighbourhood macos (nosy person, busy-body and gossip-monger in Trinidad-speak ) have their life-path cut out to a tee – to moralise to and police the rest of us. We have become so curtailed, rule-driven, lectured to, pampered, cocooned, protected and set upon by modern day Pharisees that the 1950s once again seems very appealing. You know, those days when we could sleep at night with the front door unlocked and there were no dog-poo laws. We need laws and rules and regulations because that is how every society co-exists and survives (I’m pointing this out for those a few chips short of a Happy Meal), but the way we are going is more like King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella refusing sponsorship of the seafaring dreamer Christopher Columbus because sailing off the edge of the world was just too frightening a thought to condone (for those who like adventure, I highly recommend reading about the voyages of Columbus). And I seriously don’t know where the mollycoddling ends.

In closing, I’d like to address sundry criticisms of Abby Sunderland and her family, somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

1. She’s too young to be sailing solo around the world.

She’s also too young to be pregnant, on drugs, or smashed on alcohol, which a significant number of young people are, which they call “adventure”. Expenditure on drug law enforcement in Australia: $1.3 - $2 billion annually.

2. Her parents are irresponsible and should be locked up for child abuse.

Do you know where your 16 year old son or daughter is on a Friday or Saturday night? “At a friend’s place”? Does he/she keep in constant contact with you so that you know her every movement, exactly where she is, and what her ETA (estimated time of arrival) is? Be my guest to one example:Two teens killed in horror smash And also: Worldwide road fatalities 1998: 1,170,694 See also Youth Suicide and Self-Injury Australia.

3. The Sunderlands did this for money and fame.

After pulling into Capetown, Abby’s dream was all but over. She was unlikely to get rich, and the popularity of her blog was failing rapidly. So this was her plan: Saw off her mast in the middle of the Indian Ocean, and deliberately cut communication to create some drama. Exaggerate the height of the waves and the terror, and last but not least – leave her treasured “Wild Eyes” to the elements. The money should really start rolling in. And isn't money what it's all about? Your kid becomes a surgeon or a dentist or a doctor only for money, and no interest whatsoever in the profession? Got it.

4. Reality TV rewards motivated the Sunderlands.

No doubt they were motivated by Big Brother , and anxiously awaiting something like the $450,000 prize for sleazing around a house and acting like yobbos and bozzos, and attracting millions of viewers. Actually, the very same people who take more interest in criticising “too young” solo circumnavigators. Some media and blog commentators have called Abby’s solo sail “boring”, and not worth the attention it has been given. Maybe a show that rates 2.1 million viewers, about young people swearing and fornicating, must be some kind of indication of the mettle of people who criticise a 16 year old girl who wants to commit the grave sin of sailing solo around the world. I hope not, but I do fear this is the direction we are headed.

5. Australian taxpayers should not have to pay for risk takers like Abby Sunderland.

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority, however, recognise something that many don’t: That here’s a young girl, like Jessica Watson, who dares to stand out from the crowd, and do something to inspire and motivate others to accomplish the “impossible”. The funny thing is that we all end up paying for “risk-takers and adventurers”, of the “other kind” that so many of our adults and youth are. Be my guest and go through these links in detail:Illicit Drugs in Australia: Use, Harm and Policy Responses

You see, when Australian authorities are prepared to spend a mere $200,000, or $300,000 on the rescue of a solo girl-sailor, and do so without reservation, and employ the most skilled crafts-people to save her, who all willingly volunteered to help, and even the Defence Force willingly offered its services if needed, to drop food supplies for Abby, we are seeing people who duly recognise honour and courage, which is becoming rarer, and rarer. I am totally ashamed of those Australians, especially the media, who criticise this expenditure, but I realise that we are dealing with a different generation; a generation prepared to sit back, and from the champagne-comforts of hotels, homes and nightclubs willy-nilly criticise those who dare to dream, and who dare to revive the spirit in which the following was written (even though apocryphally attributed to Ernest Shackleton):

WANTED: Volunteers for a hazardous journey. Small wages. Bitter cold. Long months of complete darkness. Constant danger. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in case of success.

Source:Quotiki

"Pour me another vodka and orange, mate, while I contemplate and criticise these deluded adventurers." - The Mob.

"Dreams don't come true every night; it takes a lot of hard work and perseverance, but with that it can happen." - Abby Sunderland.

Notes:

Reporter who sailed with Abby Sunderland shares perspective

Evolution Made Simple.

2010-06-09T09:49:00.003+10:00

Definitely one of the better videos explaining evolution (the whole series is available on You Tube):

With respect to the theological view of the question; this is always painful to me.— I am bewildered.– I had no intention to write atheistically. But I own that I cannot see, as plainly as others do, & as I [should] wish to do, evidence of design & beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent & omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice. Not believing this, I see no necessity in the belief that the eye was expressly designed. On the other hand I cannot anyhow be contented to view this wonderful universe & especially the nature of man, & to conclude that everything is the result of brute force. I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of what we may call chance. Not that this notion at all satisfies me. I feel most deeply that the whole subject is too profound for the human intellect. A dog might as well speculate on the mind of Newton.— Let each man hope & believe what he can.

(Charles Darwin correspondence, 22 May 1860)

Sources:

1. Religious Belief
By Charles Darwin

2. Charles Darwin's religious views

Reflections on the Cumbria Massacre and Derrick Bird, Taxi Driver.

2010-06-04T13:44:00.002+10:00

For the last several months I’ve been on a mental and emotional high following Jessica Watson in the final stages of her incredible solo, non-stop and unassisted voyage around the world. “I wanted to inspire people”, said Jessica, and she certainly inspired me. Although I have been following all of the latest developments in the Cumbria Massacre with perhaps as much interest, the reasons are very different, and there’s nothing inspiring about the murder of twelve people. I suppose a large part of my interest is that I’m also a taxi driver, and I’m personally aware of some of the problems in the industry which eventually send Bird feral.

To start with, however, here are some summary links to the latest media reports (and no doubt there will be much more to come):

KILLER'S HIT-LIST OF HATE (Daily Star)

GUNMAN DERRICK BIRD WILL HAVE PLANNED CUMBRIA RAMPAGE FOR YEARS (Express.co.uk)

Cumbria gunman feared prison over £60k tax dodge (Belfast Telegraph)

Police investigations will no doubt reveal much more later, but for now media reports will have to do.

It is emerging that Derrick Bird apparently harboured his “Terminator fantasy” for many years, and unfortunately it became reality. Millions of people have viewed the Terminator movies, yet have never felt the need to act them out, so that immediately puts Bird into a different category, unfortunately. It is also apparent that Bird was a man who felt cheated, undervalued, perhaps used, and taunts about his “failures” (particularly with women), would only have fed his Terminator fantasy. Few of us are free from the life-challenges, difficulties, problems, and yes, even occasional taunts that Bird faced. Facing up to the fact that life can be a bitch, and then you die, isn’t something that motivates most rational people to grab a gun and slaughter others. Maybe, perhaps, this was only Bird’s fantasy for many years, perhaps a way of relieving mental anguish, but on the night before the massacre the demon finally made fantasy become reality. According to some reports, his facial expression changed to one of blankness and a lack of emotion. He appeared to be in another world, one where reason and rationality don’t exist, and that final “crossing over” seems to have been triggered by the taxi rank row with colleagues.

Considering that Bird had difficulty with “small talk” would not have made his job any easier, and the 2007 fare evasion which led to him being bashed would only have added another emotional scar (as well as physical scars). At a diminutive 5 feet 3 inches, he may have felt intimidated at times, especially as a night-shift cab driver having to deal with drunks and inevitable verbal abuse, particularly from much larger males. The number of former night-shift drivers who have switched to the less-risky day-shift is legion, and being a taxi driver is a job where you really have to work hard to maintain your faith in humanity, because you see the lowest of humanity on the streets after midnight. It’s not very hard for me to imagine how his taxi driving experiences may have bloated and fed his Terminator fantasy. That is, perhaps, for now the unrevealed part of Derrick Bird’s psyche, but as a taxi driver myself I would find it difficult to believe that his job didn’t contribute to an increasing cynicism and carelessness about humanity. Sure, eighty to ninety percent of customers are great, but it only takes a few bad experiences to warp your senses if you are not careful. One bad and abusive customer can spoil a whole night for a taxi driver. I don’t think, also, that the public understands how fare evasion can enrage a taxi driver and even leave permanent emotional scars in some, and unfortunately it’s fairly common, too common. In my mind, all of these “little bits” of experiences would only have contributed to Bird’s increasing silent inner rage. Taxi drivers also frequently have to deal with people who want “discount fares”. If you buy a Big Mac for $4.95, and you give the attendant $4.90, do you think they’re going to say, “oh, five cents won’t matter”? Yet taxi drivers are frequently asked for discounts in dollars, not cents. All I’m trying to do here is point out how the pressures of taxi driving, and especially of Bird’s increasing financial problems, would only have frustrated him more.

That the trigger to the massacre apparently started over a row about other drivers stealing fares only tells me that Bird keenly felt all of these pressures slowly building up, particularly in light of the fact that he was possibly facing jail (at least in his mind) for tax evasion. Fare evasion, and so-called “workmates” stealing jobs became a molehill turned into a mountain for Bird. There’s an old saying among taxi drivers that “when you’re in trouble, a taxi driver is your best friend, but when you’re competing he’s your worst enemy”. I recall one night on a rank near to clubs, on the same block, and some drivers were “cruising” past the clubs hoping to pick up fares that were legally entitled to ranked drivers, and “cruising” is in fact illegal under the taxi by-laws, which can attract huge fines, but it doesn’t deter the mavericks. A driver on the rank, doing the right thing, commented to me, “one night a driver is going to go berserk and kill one of these renegades”. That’s how high emotions can rise among drivers.

What Bird was complaining about was drivers taking fares from the back of the rank. I don’t know about Cumbria taxi by-laws, but in New South Wales a customer can legally choose any cab they want, even the one at the very back of the rank. However, there’s a “gentleman’s agreement”, in the spirit of fairness, that customers be directed to the first cab on the rank, who has obviously been waiting much longer to get a fare. Bird possibly felt betrayed by so-called “friends”, who were driving off with a fare he should have had. It’s not that difficult for me to understand the anger he would have felt, and that “fairness” just went out the proverbial window. Unfortunately, according to media reports, Darren Rewcastle not only taunted Bird about his “failure” with women (while he [Rewcastle] was popular with them), but also stole his fares. That is not in any way to justify what Bird eventually did, because no human life is worth a fare, and it is a tragedy that Rewcastle’s life is over. That’s the woof and warp of taxi driving – you cop the s*** and move on, whether it be from customers or fellow drivers. Grabbing a gun and shooting people dead is no solution, and only the resort of the truly desperate. Unfortunately, Derrick Bird acted out in reality that which most of us might feel ashamed to admit that similar thoughts may have occasionally crossed our minds.

I am not Derrick Bird’s judge, and if there is a God, and an afterlife, then perhaps all things will be “weighed in the balance”. There are no winners in this tragedy, but maybe it will motivate us to realise that the simple and supposedly small things that we do and say to others can have consequences way beyond our imagination, and that none of us should consider ourselves worthy of casting the first stone.

Maybe we need to look more closely at our values and judgements, and maybe, ironically, out of the slaughtering mess of Cumbria, might emerge something positive in our understanding of the complexities of human nature.

English Cabbie on Gun Rampage Kills 12 People.

2010-06-03T13:25:00.006+10:00

12 dead, 30 wounded in massacre by British taxi driver in Cumbria

It’s kind of ironic that only a couple of weeks ago, on May 20, I did a post titled And Justice For All , which for me was a revisit to the movie “Falling Down”. Now the news of cab driver Derrick Bird’s shooting rampage fills the news pages around the world. I swear I didn’t pre-empt this, but the timing is rather uncanny. In various media Derrick Bird has been described as a “quiet man”, friendly, approachable, and liked by many, and no one appears to have had an inkling that such a devastating act was possible for him. The killing spree appears to have been pre-meditated, for at least 24 hours, but at this stage no one knows how long Bird held anxieties and grudges and flirted with the idea of a killing spree. It may have been weeks, months, or even years. What triggered (no pun intended) his killing spree may have been something relatively minor (a Will disputation is being touted), but it appears to have been sparked by an argument on a taxi rank (which included one of his close friends). That argument wasn’t really the catalyst for murder; it was just, possibly, the final straw for Derrick Bird. No doubt as time goes on we will learn more about his life and the motivation for these killings, and what would motivate an otherwise “placid man” to turn so violent. It’s probably best not to speculate too much until we learn more.

The loss of innocent life is appalling, and this is a tragedy that will haunt Cumbria for years and years, just as Martin Bryant’s massacre has haunted Australia, and in particular Tasmania. Bryant’s mass killing was three times greater, standing at 35 dead. But Bryant was a disturbed individual from his childhood, unlike Derrick Bird, at least as far as we know at this stage. It is important to get to the bottom of why Bird snapped, and for three hours had absolutely zero respect for human life, including his own. As I wrote in my post “And Justice For All”, quoting Alexander Solzhenitzen:

“If only it were so simple: if only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”

- Alexander Solzhenitzen

It appears that Derrick Bird felt he was the victim of an injustice, or injustices, and had little or no faith that recourse to the legal system could help him. When people get to this stage, and have lost all hope for justice and fairness, they are likely to do very radical things, and place little value on human life and existence itself. It seems obvious that Bird well knew that this would culminate in his own death, by his own hand. Better, I suppose he rationalised, than spending the rest of his life in a prison cell. There’s little point carrying on with the “cold-blooded killer” sentiments, because it will solve exactly nothing. Far more beneficial and worthwhile to society would be to understand what made Derrick Bird snap, in his seeming Jekyll and Hyde existence, and how we can prevent such tragedies in the future. Many, too many, choose to end their lives by suicide, though this is certainly better than taking out 12 other people with you. In that sense suicide is the more “honourable” option, but it seems that Bird wasn’t content with suicide, and the real paradox is that though suicide in Australia is at plague proportions (See my April 12 post: Customer Suicides ), very few care about or pay attention them, except maybe agencies like Lifeline. This is the horrible paradox of Derrick Bird’s killing rampage. It seems as though he wanted the whole world to witness his feelings of anger and revenge, and take note of it, and that he could not have done had he ended his own life in obscurity by a noose in his home, which no one would have noticed except his close friends and family. This is perhaps a very sad reflection of how uncaring and hard-hearted and judgemental our society can be. As Solzhenitzen noted, the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. We can learn from this, if we will, that the old adage that “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” is rather empty. Words can sometimes hurt more than actions.

It was words, personally devastating words that hurt (though also a culmination of many other factors which came into play), which appears to have sent Derrick Bird on his killing spree.

The Moral Panic Generation.

2010-06-02T13:57:00.005+10:00

This is what I’m dubbing our present generation. It seems these days you can’t scratch without some medical or scientific expert warning you of the dangers of scratching, or whatever innocent else we may do. Everything, it seems, is bad for you in some way. Anyone ever follow dietary advice, and the vast literature on it since it developed circa the 1950s and 1960s? Are you, like me, mostly confused? One day something is good for you, the next day it’s bad for you. I suppose there are some axioms that all except, for instance that tobacco is bad for you, even though all of the longest living people were smokers (see also: Oldest Living People Continue To Smoke While Non-Smokers Die Younger). Now I’m not justifying smoking, but don’t expect to have a warranty to live to 100 because you don’t smoke. The statistics are hardly in doubt in regard to lung cancer, for example, since the vast majority of lung cancer sufferers are smokers. Many will also remember Yul Brynner’s famous warning : “Don’t smoke!”

Brynner died of lung cancer at the age of 65. Presumably, according to statistical calculations from studies on smoking , had he not smoked he could have lived to at least 75. Another significant figure is the late and great Jesse Owens, who also died of lung cancer, at age 66. Theoretically, this famous sprint icon could have lived to 76, had he not smoked. I suppose it seems almost “tragic” that such a fit and incredibly talented athlete should take up smoking, thus (again theoretically) ending his life ten years early.

These, in my opinion, are worthwhile warnings to smokers who’d like an extra ten years of life. At the same time we must not forget the important role that genetics plays in longevity, hence why all of the world’s longest living people were smokers. Theoretically, they should have been long dead while they were still puffing away. The role of genetics is, in my opinion, hugely underestimated in longevity. Also, poor living conditions, depression and anxiety, and other factors which may induce many to take up smoking and contribute just as much to early death has to be considered. We can’t always pinpoint smoking as the decisive factor in premature death.

Now to the “Moral Panic Generation”. A report in today’s (June 2, 2010) , Daily Telegraph, "Smokers' kisses 'fatal'", really got up my goat.

"Passive smoking isn't the only smoking risk to children," said Prof Booy, who is director of research at the National Centre for Immunisation and Research at Sydney's The Children's Hospital at Westmead.

"Smokers carry more germs like meningococcus, so normal family cuddles and kisses can pass on dangerous germs, even if smokers only smoke outside."

But smoking outside did not reduce the increased threat posed by meningococcus, Prof Booy said, adding that cases of its resulting disease usually spiked during winter.

The good professor, however, provides us with no statistics, and even admits that:

"Although its rare, meningococcal disease can be serious and up to 10 per cent of patients can die.

But remember, he provides no evidence whatsoever that even among the low 10 per cent of cases that passive smoking is involved, yet says:

"This is another good reason for smokers to quit, not just smoke outside,"

This is what I call straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel (no pun intended). If a smoker desires at least another ten years of life, and is willing to “smoke outside” and not blow his/her smoke in the direction of non-smokers, then there’s no need to dictate to them the benefits of ten more years. Maybe they don’t want to live that long? Maybe they are afraid of far worse consequences of living that long, like dementia, age-paralyses and other related diseases that significantly decrease the quality of life? I suppose, and I’m speaking totally hypothetically here, if Jesus of Nazareth was a smoker, the “Moral Panic Generation” would have been after him. Imagine, Jesus, if you had lived to 43 instead of 33, because of not smoking! Never mind the politics of it all and the real cause of your untimely death. But shall we doubt the wisdom of The Moral Panic Generation? Those who know what’s best for all of us – and want to enforce us to live longer, if necessary by Pharisaic laws and rules and regulations, “for the benefit of society”.

As far as "saving costs" to society is concerned, need I remind anyone that the most ubiquituous squanderers of our tax dollars are the politicians themselves? Hiking the price of cigarettes by 20% will never affect them, even among the politicians who smoke. So they target the poor (monetary-wise) smokers to give up by slapping price-hikes on them, while many of them (the politicians) continue to indulge in smoking on $100,000-plus-per-annum taxpayer funded salaries. It's most certainly a case of, "do as I say, not as I do".

The 1974 Crash of Turkish Airlines Flight 981.

2010-05-28T14:29:00.005+10:00

Being a bit of an aircraft “nut”, I’ve always been interested in aviation history, which includes not only successes, but disasters, and what we can learn from them. I’ve flown on many types of aircraft, including 707s, DC-10s, DC-8, 727s, Comet (I had to reference that one because few may know the de Havilland Comet), VC-10 (London to New York), 737s, and even Cessna 150s, yet I’ve never flown on a 747, probably because my “flying adventures” stopped in 1978. I’ve also been fortunate to experience several landings from the flight deck (mainly because of an adopted “uncle” who flew Spitfires in the Second World War and later became a commercial airline pilot), something that stopped after increased terrorist threats. One funny experience I had was flying from Barbados to England’s Gatwick airport aboard a propeller plane. I don’t even remember the make of the aircraft, since this was in 1970, but it was a cheap charter flight. I undertook this flight with a couple of cousins of mine, who were also going to school in the UK (I was going on to Ireland, which is where I flew on a Comet). I flew to Barbados on an Air Canada DC-8, and remember a young lady not far from me praying as we took off. Flying really scares some people, even though it’s much safer than traveling on roads.

When I arrived in Bridgetown, Barbados, meeting up with my cousins, only a few hours would lapse before we boarded our flight to the UK. We exchanged some pleasantries, and looked forward to our flight. When boarding time came, we were directed to this propeller-aircraft. My (female) cousins were struck with terror (we were all in our mid-teens). No, it can’t be, we’re flying to England on….on…on….that??! Mum, Dad, how could you do this to us?! We all knew it was a cheap charter flight, but none of us expected to be flying to the UK on a propeller aircraft! And I’m quite sure Mum and Dad didn’t realise this either; at least I’d like to think so. Was saving a few quid really that important? My cousins began crying – no, no, we’re not going to make it on that...we are not boarding it; surely this is a mistake. With some gentle persuasion on my part (though I had my own doubts), we boarded. The flight to the UK took 17 hours, with a stop-over in Tenerife (sort of a relief…well we got this far, so…not much more to go…maybe we can really make it). The arrival at Gatwick was somewhat bumpy, but we landed safely, much to the relief of my cousins. The only “incident” of the whole journey, for me, was when looking for my passport to show immigration officials, and having found it, raised my head very quickly only to hit it on the counter, which drew a few laughs.

That wasn’t the last time I flew on a propeller aircraft. A few days before migrating to Australia I flew in a Cessna 150 to Tobago with a friend and trainee pilot, which my brother thought was “mad” (in the bad, not good sense), but I enjoyed every minute of it, and it wasn’t the first time I’d been up in a Cessna with trainee pilots. So as you can see, my personal aviation history is quite colourful. I always wanted to be a pilot, and applied in writing to BOAC (subsequently British Airways) when I was just 15. The reply that came back shattered me. Not because I needed high “A” and “O” levels in school examinations, but that I would have to undergo a hearing test, and I already knew that I had a 20% loss of hearing in both ears. Thus my dreams sank to the bottom of the ocean – I didn’t even bother to follow through, because I knew I’d fail on that count alone. But I’ve maintained a great interest in aviation, and aviation history.

I remember reading about the crash of Turkish Airlines flight 981 in the news, and the tragic loss of life involved in that accident, and things like this interest me because they show that safety isn’t necessarily the domain of “modern jets”. The DC-10s had an early history of problems, which included the outward-opening cargo doors (to allow more space for luggage), and that was what proved fatal to flight 981.

Are DC-10s safe? According to Wiki :

Despite its troubled beginnings in the 1970s, which gave it an unfavourable reputation, the DC-10 has proved a reliable aircraft. The original DC-10's bad safety record continuously improved as design flaws were rectified and fleet hours increased. The DC-10's lifetime safety record is comparable to similar second-generation passenger jets as of 2008.

Following the 1974 Turkish Airlines crash, all DC-10s underwent mandatory cargo door modifications. That, of course, is little compensation for the tragic loss of 346 lives on March 3, 1974. Perhaps life is a lottery, but maybe many more should have raised questions and concerns and followed through with modifications before this happened.

The Mc Donnell-Douglas DC-10

Paradise Lost.

2010-05-26T13:37:00.005+10:00

I left my native homeland, Trinidad & Tobago, in 1974 (to migrate to Australia). In 1979, after the (then) required five years of temporary residency, I took up Australian citizenship in 1979, and I have never regretted nor looked back in any way. Mind you, Australia itself today isn’t exactly the “paradise” it was in the mid-late 1970s when I arrived here, but at least it isn’t as bad as Jamaica - yet.

At least 60 civilians have been killed in the Jamaican capital of Kingston as police stormed a drug kingpin's stronghold while violence spread to outlying regions.

Hospital sources told AFP that more than 60 bodies had so far been unloaded at a morgue in one of Kingston's main hospitals. Another 32 people have been injured and more than 200 arrested.

The clashes broke out when military and police officials attempted to arrest accused drug lord Christopher Dudus Coke….Most of the million tourists who flock to the island every year do not visit Kingston -- long dubbed one of the murder capitals of the world, with 1,700 murders recorded in 2010 out of a population of 2.8 million.

Source: Jamaica unrest fatalities reach 60

According to a report in the Trinidad Express, March 18th 2009: Murders fall in J'ca but rise in T&T .

Jamaica has, over the last decade, been one of the most homicidal nations in the world, consistently ranking in the top three countries with the highest per capita murder rate.
In both islands, gang violence remains the one of law enforcement’s biggest problems, with gangland murders pushing the annual toll to record highs.
More people have been murdered in gang violence in Trinidad and Tobago than in Jamaica in 2007 and 2008, with our Caribbean neighbour actually seeing a decrease in gang-related violence last year.
In 2008, Jamaica saw an almost six per cent drop in the number of gang-related murders compared with the year before, while this country saw an increase of almost one per cent.
What is even more staggering is that while Jamaica’s murder rate grew by less than two per cent in 2008 compared to the year before, Trinidad and Tobago’s climbed by over 38 per cent.

In another report:

According to the Economist, the English-speaking Caribbean, which extends from the Bahamas in the north to Trinidad & Tobago in the south, averages 30 murders per 100,000 inhabitants per year, one of the highest rates in the world.
By comparison, the murder rate in both Canada and the UK is about two per 100,000.
With 550 homicides in 2008, Trinidad and Tobago has a rate of about 55 murders per 100,000 making it the most dangerous country in the Caribbean and one of the most dangerous in the world.
The rate of assaults, robbery, kidnapping and rape in Trinidad and Tobago is also among the highest in the world.

Source: ETN

After the so-called Black Power Revolution in 1970 (when I was 15 going on 16), I decided it was time to make plans to leave the country. That decision seems to have paid off. I often get asked “why did you leave such a tropical paradise to come here?” ”Tropical paradise” it may well be, but geography and climate are not indicators of reality. The Caribbean (or some parts of it), for some reason, is one of the most violent places in the world to live, and Jamaica and Trinidad rank among the highest. The Caribbean and surrounding regions are, in fact, disproportionately represented in world homicide rates.

Source: List of countries by intentional homicide rate

Per 100,000, Australia has a homicide rate of 1.2. Trinidad = 42.1.

Why this is so is difficult to answer. I remember, in the early-mid 1960s, when we in Trinidad never locked our front doors at night (admittedly a sort of cliche today), but somewhere between 1965-1970 all that seemed to change, or begin to change. Maybe much of this unrest has much to do with inequality, and the 1970 Trinidad “Black Power Revolution” was really nascent leanings towards communism as a “solution” to inequality. Looking at countries with the highest murder rates, gang warfare and underworld drug barons, it seems apparent that because of social and financial inequity the rule of law goes out the window. Government corruption doesn’t help (and actually encourages other forms of corruption), so my guess is that the current problems in Jamaica are probably more complex than we imagine. It’s not just about “the good guys versus the bad guys”, it’s about years and years of corruption and inequality at “official levels”. We also saw what happened in Grenada in 1983 The United States, "acting", at least in pretense, under the Monroe Doctrine may well have “rescued Grenada” from communism, but 27 years on we can see that military solutions have not stopped the subsequent carnage. The Caribbean (apart from Cuba) may be “communist free”, but the price of that “freedom” has now become evident to all.

Songs That Stick in Your Mind - Heart: "These Dreams".

2010-05-22T12:44:00.001+10:00

Lyrics:

Spare a little candle, save some light for me.
Figures up ahead moving in the trees.
White skin in linen, perfume on my wrist,
And the full moon that hangs over these dreams in the mist.

Darkness on the edge, Shadows where I stand
I search for the time on a watch with no hands,
I want to see you clearly, Come closer than this
But all I remember are the dreams in the mist

CHORUS
These dreams go on when I close my eyes.
Every second of the night, I live another life.
These dreams that sleep when it's cold outside,
Every moment I'm awake, the further I'm away.

Is it cloak and dagger, could it be Spring or Fall?
I Walk without a cut through a stained-glass wall.
Weaker in my eyesight, a candle in my grip,
And words that have no form are falling from my lips.

CHORUS
These dreams go on when I close my eyes.
Every second of the night, I live another life.
These dreams that sleep when it's cold outside,
Every moment I'm awake, the further I'm away.

BRIDGE
There's something out there I can't resist.
I need to hide away from the pain.
There's something out there I can't resist.

The sweetest song is silence that I've ever heard.
Funny how your feet in dreams never touch the Earth.
In a wood full of princes, freedom is a kiss.
But the Prince hides his face from dreams in the mist.

CHORUS
These dreams go on when I close my eyes.
Every second of the night, I live another life.
These dreams that sleep when it's cold outside,
Every moment I'm awake, the further I'm away.

CHORUS
These dreams go on when I close my eyes.
Every second of the night, I live another life.
These dreams that sleep when it's cold outside,
Every moment I'm awake, the further I'm away.

Final Thoughts on Jessica Watson.

2010-05-21T18:19:00.008+10:00

She brightened my life, and gave me hope; hope that humanity hasn’t, finally, resorted to complete cynicism. That’s why we need more 16 year olds who believe in following their dreams, before being tainted by the doubts and scepticism of adulthood (and “specialists”). Perhaps this sort of voyage really isn’t for everyone, but in Jessica’s case it seems as though the Gods smiled upon her, and maybe even made an “exception” (if you so believe). She was a girl on a mission, and they (the Gods) could not have chosen a better representative. Her disarming and totally charming personality, and humility, as so often recorded on her blog, was inescapable. Even after her arrival in Sydney, she said nothing that would compromise the spirit of her round the world sail. “I’m just an ordinary girl”, was her friendly rebuttal to the Prime Minister of Australia. Something that few of us, apart from Jessica, really believes. I watched a video of Jessica on New Year’s Eve 2009-2010, wishing everyone a “Happy New Year”, her lips almost frozen by the cold as she did so, and knowing that she would be spending this time alone. Maybe, or maybe not, she shed a few silent tears after producing that video, knowing that most “normal” 16 year old girls would be out there partying, and enjoying the comforts of food, family, and friends.

I have to candidly admit that I feel nothing but contempt for her critics, who mostly from their heated Internet homes and everyday comforts voiced sometimes scathing criticism. Watching Ella’s Pink Lady plough through the waves on its approach to Sydney, is something I will never forget. Jessica’s excitement was obvious, but what would anyone expect after seven months, 210 days at sea? Her self-steering mechanism, “Parker” was crooked and bent from a severe knockdown, but still in working condition. One solar panel bore the marks of a huge wave that virtually bent steel, and at one point Ella’s Pink Lady was upside down, as described by Jessica:

That much wind means some very big and nasty waves. To give you an idea of the conditions, they were similar to and possibly worse than those of the terrible 1998 Sydney to Hobart Race. We experienced a total of 4 knockdowns, the second was the most severe with the mast being pushed 180 degrees in to the water. Actually pushed isn't the right word, it would be more accurate to say that Ella's Pink Lady was picked up, thrown down a wave, then forced under a mountain of breaking water and violently turned upside down.

With everything battened down and conditions far too dangerous to be on deck, there wasn't anything I could do but belt myself in and hold on. Under just the tiny storm jib, the big electric autopilot did an amazing job of holding us on course downwind, possibly or possibly not helped by my yells of encouragement! It was only the big rogue waves that hit at us at an angle (side on) that proved dangerous and caused the knockdowns.

The solid frame of the targa (the frame that supports the solar panels) is bent out of shape and warped (see pic below), which provides a pretty good idea of the force of the waves. Solid inch thick stainless steel tube doesn't exactly just bend in the breeze, so I think you could say that Ella's Pink Lady has proven herself to be a very tough little boat!

With my whole body clenched up holding on, various objects flying around the cabin and Ella's Pink Lady complaining loudly under the strain, it was impossible to know what damage there was on deck. It was a little hard at times to maintain my positive and rational thoughts policy, but overall I think I can say that the skipper held up us well as Ella's Pink Lady. It was certainly one of those times when you start questioning exactly why you're doing this, but at no point could I not answer my own question with a long list of reasons why the tough times like that aren't totally worth it!

Source: Official Jessica Watson Blog

On arrival back in Sydney, and hyperactive from the excitement of arriving, barely able to sleep, she still managed to face the media with aplomb that would be the envy of anyone. Her joy and excitement shared by those most deserving – her family – as Sydney harbour lit up with buzzing helicopters, thousands of boats, and a water-spraying boat, which drenched everyone including Julie, her mother, who was too overjoyed to even fret. I’ve never really paid much attention to the Sydney-Hobart race, but this occasion entirely absorbed me. And maybe many readers feel I’m being too “sentimental”, but the fact is that Jess Watson has, truly, inspired me, with her courage and utter determination and bravery. I never tire of reading about her, and watching that teen face take on the world, and conquer. She has permanently cemented a place in my heart, and I will forever look back at her epic voyage as the absolute highlight of 2010.

To those who suggested that she could be “better engaged” in “worthy causes”, like “helping the poor”, and complaining about taxpayer expenses, maybe you should realise that this is a young lady who has, in my opinion, revived the “true spirit” of Australia, which is no less than overcoming the odds against her. The thousands who greeted her at the Sydney Opera House, no doubt realised they were witnessing a very special moment in Australian maritime history, regardless of “official” records. This is a young girl, who perhaps in the eyes of many naively said, “tomorrow I will wake up and sail around the world”.

And she did.

May the road rise to meet you,
May the wind be always at your back,
May the sun shine warm upon your face,
May the rains fall soft upon your fields,
And, until we meet again,
May God hold you in the hollow of His hand. – Irish Proverb.

Almost home (the catamaran in the background is Bruce Arms' "Big Wave Rider". Bruce was Jessica's sailing "mentor", and remained in constant contact with her during the voyage. He sailed out to accompany her home over the last miles to Sydney Harbour:

Links:

1. Going solo: Jessica Watson's 'mental toughness'

2. 60 Minutes: Jessica's Excellent Adventure

3. Jessica Watson with Alan Jones

“And Justice For All…….”

2010-05-20T15:45:00.011+10:00

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you." –Nietzsche

London Bridge is falling down,
Falling down, falling down.
London Bridge is falling down,
My fair lady.

One of my favourite movies has long been “Falling Down”. A summary of the movie is available HERE . One of the most moving scenes is when William Foster (played by Michael Douglas), asks in puzzlement, near the end of the movie, “I’m the bad guy?” In the closing scenes he pulls a gun on LAPD sergeant Prendergast (played by Robert Duvall), but it’s only a water pistol, which belonged to his daughter. Pendergast then fires real bullets, and Foster falls over into the water, meeting his death. What brought this train of events into Foster’s life is what’s intriguing. He’s an accredited, but unemployed defense engineer, and all he wants to do is get home in time for his daughter’s birthday (he’s divorced). His frustrations with society rise with a series of events which most would think inconsequential, but they only add to his anger, and what he feels is injustice in society, and maybe life itself. Foster becomes a sort of nomad on the way to his daughter’s birthday party, extracting revenge on everyone who crosses his path, seemingly demanding of them the same expectations he feels society has laid upon him, as in this scene:

Though Foster becomes the outlaw, extracting revenge upon society, he still maintains his values and personal beliefs. So he becomes a rare and paradoxical combination of outlaw and justice-seeker. He’s not about to enlist in radical causes and prejudice against others, and perhaps feels sympathy for those despised by the “mainstream”, as perhaps he himself feels. He encounters “Nick”, a homophobic Nazi-sympathiser who provokes in him memories of the very sort of prejudice he feels directed at him, and takes revenge:

(Warning: Language may be offensive to some.)

This is a fascinating movie, which provides insight into how otherwise sane and normal people can violently turn against society because they have felt misunderstood or undervalued, or felt cheated by the unfairness of life. It kind of makes me wonder about all the violence we now see increasing in society, and what frustrations may motivate this. A recent example is the case of former cop, Des Campbell . In Campbell’s own words:

I was as bad as the criminals I was arresting. I remember my time with the Victoria Police as one long, endless rollercoaster of lies, fabrication of evidence, perjury, stealing and scams. Looking back, I was just scum. I became like the people I was arresting. It was my fault. If I had been a better person and a stronger person I might have resisted but I wouldn't have been able to stay in the police force. You couldn't be an effective policeman if you didn't lie to get around legal restrictions.

Source: News.com.au.

While no one can excuse what Campbell has been convicted of, maybe we should wonder a bit about why an apparent "straight" cop became corrupted, "like the criminals" he was arresting.

“If only it were so simple: if only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”

- Alexander Solzhenitzen

Australia’s Tall Poppy Syndrome.

2010-05-19T16:38:00.004+10:00

Definition of Tall Poppy Syndrome from Wikipedia:

Tall Poppy Syndrome (TPS) is a pejorative term used in the UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada to describe a social phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are resented, attacked, cut down, or criticised because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers.

Etymology:

The term originates from accounts in Aristotle's Politics (Book 5, Chapter 10) and Livy's History of Rome, Book I. Aristotle wrote: "Periander advised Thrasybulus by cutting the tops of the tallest ears of corn, meaning that he must always put out of the way the citizens who overtop the rest." In Livy's account, the tyrannical Roman King, Tarquin the Proud, received a messenger from his son Sextus Tarquinius asking what he should do next in Gabii, since he had become all-powerful there. Rather than answering the messenger verbally, Tarquin went into his garden, took a stick, and symbolically swept it across his garden, thus cutting off the heads of the tallest poppies that were growing there. The messenger, tired of waiting for an answer, returned to Gabii and told Sextus what he had seen. Sextus realised that his father wished him to put to death all of the most eminent people of Gabii, which he then did.

As noted earlier in this blog, I began following Jessica Watson when she was somewhere in the Indian Ocean, and call me maudlin sentimental, but I was completely absorbed once this came to my attention. A teenager who was “out there” engaging in “risk-taking” behaviour very different to risk-taking behaviour teens these days mostly undertake without the knowledge of their parents. Yet among the sanctimonious, this was risk-taking behaviour not only observable, but stoppable, and according to them, there should be “rules against this”. According to the public “ideal”, Jessica should have been in school, and doing what “normal” 16 year old girls do, which in some cases isn’t a very pretty picture, and sometimes most certainly involves “risk-taking”.

There is little doubt now that Jessica Watson has sealed her place in Australian History. On her arrival in Sydney the three major television networks cancelled all schedule programs (Channel Ten beforehand on notice) to air her arrival (to the dismay of some), and comments on the Internet were coming through literally every second, mostly positive, but some negative and cynical. It would not be an understatement to say that on Saturday 15th May 2010, Jessica Watson “stopped a nation”. The only other event on a par with this is probably The Melbourne Cup. Her arrival on Saturday 15th, afternoon, was certainly planned, and I’m not so naïve to think that she just “happened” to arrive at an hour when it was convenient for Sydney to turn out to greet this amazing young lady. She was totally deserving of this fanfare arrival after 210 days at sea, even if planned, and she is deserving of every single dollar that comes her way henceforth.

The Tall Poppy shooters, however, were armed to the teeth, and ready to cut down any and every aspect of Jessica’s round the world sail, from her looks, her “rich background”, to only having to turn on the GPS and sit back while Ella’s Pink Lady glibly sailed her hassle-free around the globe. Like evenings with TV dinners and numerous channels to chose from, not, heaven forbid, 40 foot waves, knockdowns, loneliness, uncertainty, and no face-to-face human contact for seven months; oh, and having to bathe in a bucket of seawater now and then and being deprived of all of the comforts “normal” teenaged girls take for granted. Another intellectual armchair giant flippantly noted that Ella’s Pink Lady, a Sparkman and Stevens 34, was “unsinkable”. So, reportedly, was the Titanic – until this steel fortress struck an iceberg and went to the bottom of the North Atlantic on its maiden voyage.

Some of the commentary, frankly, scared me and made me feel dismal about the possible narcissistic future of this country, and the loss of the spirit of early Australian adventurers. While this is most probably fiction, it has a spirited message:

"Men wanted for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in event of success." – Ernest Shackleton

But it embodies the spirit of adventure, a spirit which we have traded for lives of physical ease. I’m not for one minute saying I’d do any of these things, but the least I can do is acknowledge greater and more daring souls than myself, willing to sacrifice much, much more than I am, and acknowledge their sense of adventure and personal bravery. I’m not prepared to sit at comfort in my home-heated house and criticise those willing to “have a go”; to live out their childhood dreams, and to do so as an armchair critic seems superficial and empty.

One person who realises, from her own experience, what Jessica has accomplished, is American teenaged adventurer Abby Sunderland . Months younger than Jessica, Abby was forced to retreat to Cape Town for repairs, thus ending her quest to unofficially (according to WSSRC rules) become the youngest “solo and unassisted” circumnavigator. I could almost feel her anguish, and wondered if she would continue (or even criticise Jessica), but to her credit she will continue (as "assisted"), even though her potential to be globally recognised is somewhat diminished in comparison to what she initially expected. Yet, in what one commentator on her blog called a “class act”, Abby had this to say about Jessica:

Before I go into everything we've done today, I'd just like to send a BIG congratulations to Jesse Watson! She has done an absolutely amazing job and while to be perfectly honest, I am a little envious, she deserves the record. She sailed around the world, alone, non-stop, and unassisted. I know how difficult that is to achieve. I can understand that you need to be fair to the last person to break the record and respect the fact that they followed certain guide lines. But in my book, Jessica Watson is the youngest person to ever sail around the world, and she should be given the credit she is due. It is hard to watch someone else accomplish what you have dreamed of for years and to be thinking, if I had only done this or that things may have turned out differently. But things are the way they are. Records, whether they are on paper or not, are made to be broken and it most likely will be one day, but Jesse is amazing, what she did is amazing, and that will never change no matter who holds the record.

Source: Abby’s Blog

My estimation of Abby shot up about 100 rungs after that post on her blog.

In a world of despair (certainly in some regards, don’t you agree?) and the daily dose of weirdness, mayhem, political and social hypocrisy and violence we see all around us, we have two young “girls” reminding us of old, and maybe forgotten values and fairness. This more than about just sailing. It is about character, adventure, hope and faith, and to see it coming from such a young generation should give hope for our future. I think every Australian who showered a big welcome home to Jessica, always realised that this was far more than just about sailing.

It is about the very future of our planet, and our species.

Jessica Watson: A Great Australian.

2010-05-15T16:52:00.004+10:00

Jess crossed the finish line at about 1:55pm Sydney time, accompanied by hundreds of other vessels (it was really spectacular; equal to the Sydney-Hobart start), and thousands observing on shore. Jesse Martin and Mike Perham boarded Ella's Pink Lady after Jess was cleared by Australian Customs, and Jesse Martin took the helm as Mike Perham chatted to Jessica for the media after she tasted her first fresh orange in seven months, as the sails of Ella's Pink Lady went down - for the last time. Both boat and skipper somewhat bruised, but no where near crisis point, and reports say that Jess lost some weight, but a few rounds of pavlova should soon rectify that. During the coming week Ella's Pink Lady will be on display at the National Maritime Museum in Sydney, and I dare say it will not be a minor attraction. After Jesse Martin berthed Ella’s Pink Lady, Jess disembarked and set foot on dry land for the first time in seven months, supported by her patents Julie and Roger, for a tearful yet joyful reunion with them. Then she walked down the pink carpet with her brother's and father's arm around her shoulder. One thing that kind of disappointed me was that Bruce Arms didn’t receive any mention in the Channel Nine coverage, even though a reporter indirectly suggested it. Though it was obvious that Bruce was always nearby in his catamaran. The incredible achievements and invaluable support Jess’ most ardent supporters and helpers gave will no doubt later come to the surface, because Jess could not have done this without them.

Towards the end, the 200 metre bow exclusion zone, and 100 metres to the sides and stern seemed to go haywire, with boats coming uncomfortably close to Ella’s Pink Lady, in my opinion, but fortunately nothing happened. Perhaps the water police just couldn’t control it. After making their way to the stage, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd gave a speech, in which he mentioned his contact with Jessica during her voyage, particularly on Australia Day, and what message she had for Australians. Then NSW Premier Kristina Keneally (related to Thomas through her husband) also gave a speech, and both, I might say, were quite dignified and in keeping with the elation of this special occasion. Finally Jess was given time to have her say, and she respectfully disagreed with the Prime Minister that she was a “new Australian hero”, by saying:

“I’m an ordinary girl with an ordinary dream,” she said.
“You just have to have a dream believe in it and work hard.
“Anything really is possible.”

This is very characteristic of Jessica Watson, as anyone who has followed her blog will realise. Pomp and ceremony seem to be the last thing on this amazing young lady’s mind. As one media person mentioned, you could hardly tell the difference in her attitude, whether she was battling 12 metre waves and knockdowns, or sailing smoothly, because it was always so temperate and positive. She took the good and bad in the same breath.

Maybe Jessica doesn’t, and maybe never will see herself as a “hero”, or extraordinary, but in the eyes of people like me, she will always be a special and extraordinary human being, even a “hero”, and in my opinion a real positive example for generations of young Australians to follow.

Ella's Pink Lady Approaches Sydney.

2010-05-15T08:44:00.011+10:00

This video taken from a helicopter about 57 miles off Sydney is worth watching, as it will give an idea of the sort of conditions Jessica Watson has endured. She has described the final run to Sydney as "a bit bouncy". Video and photo are From The Daily Telegraph (click on "watch more video" to get full screen):

VIDEO: Jessica's final night

Update - 12.45pm (15-5-10)

It's now impossible to get on to Jessica's website. At last try:

We are currently experiencing exceptionally heavy traffic; please check back later to view the full site.

One Day To Go, and the Biased Criticisms of Jess Watson Haven’t Let Up.

2010-05-14T14:34:00.010+10:00

Not that I think there shouldn’t be criticism, constructive criticism, but what I’ve been reading sounds more like sour grapes, or armchair critics who haven’t done the hard yards themselves, or live in some ideological cocoon of a perfect world. From an ABC News report today:

But the Australian Families Association (AFA) says it is still worried Watson has set a bad example for young people with her record-breaking trip.
AFA spokesman Tim Cannon says while he is pleased the teenager is safe, he is worried.
"It's certainly a phenomenal achievement," he said.
"But in general, the concern is still there that when you've got people chasing these records to become the youngest person to achieve something, that is quite clearly an extremely dangerous feat - there's a certain amount of recklessness.
"We do worry about the example that it sets other children."

Last year Dr. Michael Carr-Gregg, a critic of Jessica’s round the world sail, also wrote on his blog :

The weekend death of 2 experienced sailors (Sunday Age 11/10) highlights the dangers inherent in yachting and the inadvisability of Jessica Watson's bid to sail solo around the world.

Many experienced yachties have added their voice to a growing chorus of experts which includes Queensland's Maritime Safety Bureau saying that 16 year old is too inexperienced to embark on such an 11 month voyage.

And from a recent report in the Brisbane Times (May 13, 2010), Dr. Carr-Gregg hasn’t budged from his position :

Leading Child and Adolescent Psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg believes her decision to travel could set a bad example by encouraging teenagers to put themselves in harm's way. "I worry this may encourage even younger children to emulate her feat ... and I do not believe that the average teenager has the cognitive or emotional maturity to embark on such an adventure," he said.

In October, Dr Carr-Gregg said he didn't think the 16-year-old had "sufficient maturity" to do such a trip, and that he didn't "care how skilled she is".
A few days before her scheduled weekend finish and Dr Carr-Gregg was singing the same tune.
"Her achievement is without doubt truly remarkable and I offer her and her family my warm congratulations, however I still maintain that her epic adventure does have a down side," he said.

Ironically, Dr. Carr-Gregg also notes on his blog :

Last month, hundreds of teenagers dressed in black and pink fill St Francis of Assisi Church in Mill Park, 23 km north-east from Melbourne's central business district to say goodbye to Anthony Iannetta, 18, one of five young men killed when a speeding car driven by Steven Johnstone, 19, hit a tree at 140 km/h in the early hours of Sunday morning.

Of the major risk factors associated with teenage road deaths, many were present, the driver was speeding, had a blood alcohol level of .19, it was early morning, there was passenger overcrowding, and of course driver inexperience.

The horrific car smash, predictably reignited debate about penalties for hoon drivers and the Opposition and State Government began trading blows in the media over who has the toughest anti-hoon policy.

I might also add that, being a night-shift cab driver, I’m all too aware of the risk-taking that young people engage in, particularly on weekend nights, in relation to alcohol and drug abuse, and anyone who cares to visit any major Australian city after dark on weekends will see for themselves just how reckless and irresponsible youth can be, and how violent weekend nights can be. Downing lethal cocktails of alcohol and drugs, and then roaming the streets after midnight is not just risk-taking, it’s utter stupidity. This is not even “planned” risk-taking (which Jessica’s voyage was).

In an earlier post I mentioned suicide in Australia, Customer Suicides . This was in response to the suicide of a relatively young man who inherited an enormous sum of money, and squandered his life on it, ending in his suicide. Why would a young man feel that he had nothing to live for, and hang himself? Maybe he had no dreams, no hopes, no aspirations, and money came too easy? I knew this person, but obviously I want to keep his identity concealed. But his suicide bothered me greatly (he was a very kind and generous person, but totally lacking in self-confidence). If he had a dream, hope, self-confidence and aspirations, he might still be alive today. Nothing, apparently, inspired him to keep living. He felt his life was a waste, and meaningless.

In response to the above criticisms of Jessica, I again refer to the wise words of Don McIntyre:

Things are getting really grim here at the moment. Adventure is something that can be a swear word to a lot of people.

As soon as you say adventure, they say rescue. And there's a lot of people that sort of question the values of it. But the bottom line is; if we keep wrapping up our society and our young kids in cotton wool, which is what we're doing, we're changing the culture of Australia.

Australia needs heroes, Australia needs adventurers and there's a lot of real serious positive benefits from anyone that's getting out there and having a go, and chasing their dreams and really pushing themselves to the limit.

Wrapping “kids” up in “cottonwool” is no solution. It is probably no exaggeration to say that while Jess spent Christmas on the high seas, many of her same-age peers were probably imbibing in either drugs or alcohol, and the age when they start this is getting younger and younger. If Jess Watson had said to her parents, “I want to go out and try cocaine tonight”, do you think they would have supported her? If she had said, “I want to go out tonight and get pissed off my head”, do you think they would have supported her?

And now to Sail World, where opinion seems to be divided. In the latest expert revelation from the Moses on Mount Sinai of sailing, the last word according to the Gospel of Sail World (anyone who has studied the real gospels will know how contradictory they are) we have The Wetass Chronicles: Jessica Watson's 'Adventure Lost':

I don't want to take too much away from her accomplishment. Any solo, RTW voyage is a big deal, and I sincerely doubt I would have fared as well. She was knocked down multiple times, slugged her way through gales and headwinds, and, at least early in the voyage, sometimes appeared on the verge of tears.

But after following her voyage I was struck by how much the nature of this sort of adventure has completely changed. It just doesn't feel very 'solo' or 'unassisted' anymore, and that takes the blood and guts out of it.

In 1968, sailing around the world solo and non-stop was so hard Robin Knox-Johnston could barely do it. In 2010, it is so easy a 16-year old can do it. It's just not that exciting anymore. Knox-Johnston's book, 'A World Of My Own,' is one of the greatest adventure books ever written. I sincerely doubt I'll read Jessica's.

(The bold emphasis is mine.)

The author of the article is Tim Zimmerman. Well, Tim, apart from the fact that you wouldn't have the balls to do what Jessica did, would you like to compare Juan Fangio to Aryton Senna , or Michael Schumacher ? Is Formula One today “not real racing” because of modern technology and design which enables Formula One drivers to survive crashes that no one could have survived in the 1950s? Yet the great Senna was killed at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix. Fortunately, he still remains the last Formula One driver to die, thanks to improvements and “modern technology”. But according to Tim’s reasoning, we should not hold Aryton Senna, or Michael Schumacher, in the same esteem as Juan Fangio, because of "modern technology".

And the weirdness and sour grapes go on, and probably because they have all been outdone, baked and fried and humiliated by a 16 year old girl who has more courage and determination than all of them put together. My best advice to Sail World would be to stop making public asses of themselves with sarcastic headlines and commentary, and maybe do something to cure their Tall Poppy Syndrome.

PS: To the moron who has been constantly suggesting in various media that Jessica was "chaperoned" around the globe, you had better provide your evidence quickly. My suspicion is that you can't tell the difference between photos taken before, and after Jessica left (some of the "before" photos were used during her voyage). All of the "after" photos clearly show that they were taken by Jessica while on board Ella's Pink Lady. To spin out of this some weird "theory" that she was "chaperoned" is probably more a reflection of your imbecility than the truth.

Saturday Too Far Away.

2010-05-13T13:32:00.004+10:00

There must be a beginning of any great matter, but the continuing unto the end until it be thoroughly finished yields the true glory.

Sir Francis Drake. (Leader of the first English circumnavigation of the world, from 1577 to 1580.)

"I wanted to challenge myself and achieve something to be proud of. And yes, I wanted to inspire people. I hated being judged by my appearance and other people's expectations of what a 'little girl' was capable of. It's no longer just my dream or voyage. Every milestone out here isn't just my achievement, but an achievement for everyone who has put so much time and effort into helping getting me here." "It's experience, not age, the ocean doesn't care how old you are." - Jessica Watson

As one media organisation commented, Australia is holding its collective breath that Jessica Watson will arrive safely in Sydney Harbour in just two days. From the beginning there were problems, with the tanker collision, and much criticism from certain quarters about her age and experience. This isn’t something sixteen year old girls should be doing, they said. But it has become more and more apparent that Jessica Watson is no ordinary sixteen year old girl.

I came to this amazing solo sail late, when Jessica was somewhere in the Indian Ocean, and I’m really not sure why it has affected me so much. I vividly remember watching John Bertrand skipper Australia II to victory in the America’s Cup in 1983, ending 132 years of American domination. It was a moment you could replay over and over, but one captured in minutes, not in hours, days, weeks and months. Yet ever since I became aware of Jessica’s solo sail I’ve become almost obsessed in following her journey. This isn’t just about sailing. It’s about character and courage, and, yes, inspiration.

Even in the final leg home to Sydney, the elements have not let up. According to the Weather Channel (12-5-10):

A cold front that surged through Tasmania, Victoria and New South Wales earlier this week is now moving out through the Tasman Sea. Behind this front we are seeing gale-force south to southwest winds off the South Coast of New South Wales, leading to the formation of large seas and swells. The combination of these strong winds and the large seas will make for challenging conditions for teen sailor Jessica Watson as she makes the final leg of her journey towards Sydney Harbour.

Jessica Watson is expected to reach the safe and protected waters of Sydney Harbour on Saturday, although it's not going to be an easy few days. As mentioned, gale-force south to southwest winds are expected off the South Coast of New South Wales on Thursday, while combined seas and swells may reach 6 metres. The positive news is that the south to southwest winds should aid Jessica's northward journey.

One thing I’m heartened to see is that Sail World is now looking more positively on Jessica:

Teenage Sunshine Coast schoolgirl Jessica Watson will claim a deserved place in the history of Globe solo sailing when she sails Ella’s Pink Lady through Sydney Heads on Saturday…Many will stand in disbelief that a young girl who has demonstrated super human courage and determination has achieved her goal to sail over the weather tormented oceans and complete the adventure to become the youngest person to sail alone and unassisted around the World. The truly remarkable teenager deserves all the applause and recognition for having defied the advice from many experts that she was too young, too small and inexperienced to sail a small and relatively slow yacht around the Globe alone….Jessica progressively gained support from numerous positive admirers after she set sail from Sydney last October. However understandably there were many others including this columnist who held personal concern for the ambitious female teenager. But day by day over the energy absorbing period of almost seven months Jessica personally answered her critics who had some grave fear on how she would cope.

Source: Spinnaker Tales – Jessica Watson

Congratulations, Sail World, for finally catching up with public sentiment. You may be experts on sailing, but it is the public who will judge Jessica Watson, not experts and “committees” and their arbitrary nitpicking rules, even if you intend to go on with “legalities” according to cigar-smoking and tea-sipping “committees”. I would not even know who Sail World are were it not for Jessica Watson, and would not care less. As Sir Donald Bradman once said, “There are people who wish to draw attention to themselves by attacking me”. How true this has been in regard to Jessica. On a brighter note, another sailing great, James Spithill , echoing John Bertrand’s sentiments, said:

One of the world's leading sailors yesterday heaped praise on the teenager. Australian and America's Cup winning skipper James Spithill said he was in "awe" of the teenager who is now heading to a hero's welcome in Sydney on Saturday after seven months at sea.

"There were a lot of people against her," he said.

"She has silenced them."

Source: Jessica Watson storming home on a wild wind

Solo Circumnavigation, “Official” Records, and the Spirit and Letter of the Law.

2010-05-08T14:09:00.006+10:00

I’ve been in email contact with Rob Kothe of Sail World (and thanks, Rob, for your gracious replies), also the author of the article Jessica Watson – no criticism of Jessica – just her PR Team . Once again, I point out that Jessica’s record was never, in the first place, going to be recognised by the WSSRC since it has discontinued “youngest” category. That’s really where the debate should end, if we look at all of this from a “technical” point of view. Arguing over a couple of thousand miles or so won’t make a difference to this fact. The WSSRC will not recognise Jessica’s sail, and not because she failed to go far enough north, but because of her age. We need to get that firmly fixed in our minds. The recognition that Jessica will get is for her incredible and courageous solo around the world sail, at only 16 years old, and even John Bertrand recognises this. Perhaps Jessica’s PR team could have done a little more homework (or maybe have been more precise), by stressing exactly what I’ve pointed out above in regard to age requirements, and that this would never be a “world record attempt” according to WSSRC rules.

Lest anyone doubt that the WSSRC have discontinued the “youngest” (and “oldest” ) category, here is the evidence: Other Kinds of Sailing Records In other words, Jesse Martin will perhaps remain forever as the youngest person to solo circumnavigate the globe, at 18 years of age, so Jess was never going to “smash” Jesse’s record, according to WSSRC rules. (And it should also be noted that even Jesse Martin's record is listed in "Other Kinds of Sailing Records", therefore not officially accepted.)

The other interesting fact I should point out, is that Kay Cottee, recognised as the first female solo circumnavigator, is not listed in the WSSRC "Official" records. Check for yourself, and let me know if something escaped my attention: WSSRC Ratified Passage Records . She is listed in "Other Kinds of Sailing Records", but not "Official" sailing records.

Regardless, when Jessica sails into Sydney Harbour in a week’s time, she is more than deserving of a hero’s welcome, and no less than that given to Kay Cottee, because like Kay, she embodies the “true spirit” of Australia, of “having a go”, and most importantly, fulfilling a personal childhood dream. Let us not let “committees” and “official rules” get in the way of recognising real courage and inspiration in the face of almost insurmountable odds.

Some Thoughts on Jessica Watson and Her Critics.

2010-05-06T17:22:00.008+10:00

A Platypus is a duck designed by a committee – anon

I suppose I should apologise to the half-dozen or so regular readers of my blog for focusing so much on Australia’s most recent and sensational news item: Jessica Watson. I also suppose that I should “come clean”, that I’ve never really had an interest in sailing until I read the name “Jessica Watson”. I lived through Kay Cottee, and Jesse Martin, as mere “blips” on the radar (nothing derogatory, just being honest), but it is a 16 year old from Queensland who has totally captivated me and made me familiar with sailing terminology I never knew. I’m so ignorant that I initially didn’t even know what a “knockdown” was. And my first question was, like so many amateurs, is how can a sailing boat recover from a 180 degree capsize? This voyage was no doubt calculated and planned with expert precision, but I’d never let this precision pre-suppose that Jessica would only have to sit back and “enjoy the ride”. A journey like this takes a special kind of spirit, one who is prepared to sacrifice and forgo the comforts of daily living to fulfil a dream, knowing that adverse circumstances, and even the threat of death, notwithstanding modern technology, can still prove exceedingly dangerous. “Modern technology” cannot protect one from the raw elements and whims of nature and the sea.

So let me start with the Keeping the Record Straight commentary. There is one, to me at least, obvious reason why they didn’t mention this at the start of Jessica’s journey rather than now: They didn’t believe she’d ever make it. But when Jessica neared Tasmania, Sail-World’s panic buttons were activated. They probably had a cold-shiver run up their collective sailing spines when they read:

Good news. Ella's Pink Lady and I have made it around the South East Cape of Tasmania and we're now headed north on the final leg to Sydney!

Source: Official Jessica Watson Blog

Remember that this is a girl who is unable to compete in the Sydney-Hobart race because she’s “too young”, and she casually says that :

I never expected rounding Tasmania to be much of a big deal, but all of last week's struggles made finally getting around the cape 10 times sweeter. (Insiders tip, jumping up and down in a 5 metre swell isn't a good idea. ouch!) There's no letting the guard down yet, but it's great to be back in to more familiar waters.

These “familiar waters” include the annual 630 mile Sydney-Hobart race, when in 1998 five boats sank and claimed the lives of six people. In comparison to her previous travails, Jessica considered this “easy sailing”. Now I’m quite aware that the Sydney-Hobart crews were probably not as well equipped as Jessica’s S&S yacht, which is specifically designed to withstand the sort of conditions Jessica faced. So it is sort of like comparing apples and oranges. Nevertheless, Sail-World decided to add its critical voice to Jessica’s solo circumnavigation, in their article titled Jessica Watson: Keeping the record Straight

Why they waited until Jessica was virtually in her final run to Sydney is anyone’s guess, and mine is that they never, for one minute, believed that a 16 year old girl could accomplish what she did. After her “infamous” collision with a tanker, they most likely wrote her off as a “dreamer”. Not having a clue what she was doing, and waiting for news of her prognosticated demise. However, Jessica is now only about 500 nautical miles from Sydney, as I write this, and about to throw scrambled egg on the collective faces of all of her detractors and critics. So Sail-World has stepped into the action, and doing everything it can to detract from Jessica’s phenomenal achievement, acting like a real “committee” dedicated to crossing T’s and dotting I’s. My question here is whether Sail-World, or the WSSRC kept careful track, for example, of Kay Cottee’s first female circumnavigation? Did they haveTracPlus? They know, for sure, that Kay Cottee covered the required distance? Don’t get me wrong, this is in no way meant to demean Kay Cottee’s achievements, and my only question is what precise measurements were used to determine Cottee’s course: The same being applied to Jessica’s? Sail-World seems to have no problem accepting Kay Cottee as the first female circumnavigator, and all the accolades she well deserves, but how did they measure her course as acceptable to the WSSRC? Did they take her word? There is no question that Jesse Martin met the requirements of “youngest circumnavigator”, but Jessica Watson knew, from the start, that she could not qualify as “youngest circumnavigator” as this was discontinued. All the light banter about “taking Martin’s” record has to be viewed in the light of Jessica’s original motives – to fulfil her dream of sailing solo around the world. To put it in blunt Aussie language, she probably didn’t give a “rat’s arse” about records, but only wanted to fulfil her dream, but media expectations and sensationalism must also have weighed upon her.

Moving on to other commentary. The media always like a good contrary story, and they provided it in bucketfuls. See, for example:

Confusion over whether Jessica Watson has sailed far enough beat world record
The Australian

Teen sailor Jessica Watson now the apple of Pink Lady's eye
Threatened Litigation

Jessica Watson's youngest solo unassisted world record sail 'fail'
"Sail Fail"

Doubt cast over Watson's record attempt
ABC

Maybe they should use trac-plus to bring Joshua Slocum's solo circumnavigation under scrutiny. They accept that without question? And they accept Kay Cottee’s solo voyage on what? Whether she crossed the equator?, or met the antipodean points?

The one thing that should be obvious to all here is that Sail-World and other “expert” sailors are plainly jealous of the fact that a 16 year old girl from Buderim, Queensland, has proved all of the “experts” wrong. Fortunately, someone of the stature of John Bertrand has spoken out on Jessica’s behalf:

"What Jessica has achieved is phenomenal," he said. "For such a young girl to tackle this feat, in sometimes extreme conditions, braving the elements of mother nature ... it's inspirational for the country and in a sense represents the spirit of Australia."

He said he would be surprised if her efforts weren't recognised.

"To sail around the world, by yourself at 16, it's remarkable," he said. "I think that it will be something she can be proud of for the rest of her life."

Source: John Bertrand

It’s time, folks, to stop the nit-picking, and fully recognise that we are looking at history in the making. And to those who consider Jessica’s solo voyage as a “glory and fame” adventure, consider these words from Kay Cottee :

After the voyage she found it difficult to adjust to being surrounded by people again. She threw herself into writing the story of her trip, and fundraising appearances for the Life Education Centres. Of all the awards she received, Cottee says that she has been bewildered and embarrassed by them, that she 'only set out to achieve a dream, a personal goal'.

So in closing, I refer to Jessica’s youthful dream:

And there was no laughing or saying no when Jessica announced, just after her 12th birthday: "Um, I want to maybe, um . . . sail around the world by myself."

Source:: The Daily Telegraph

Yeah, and I say this sarcastically, it was "all about money and fame". Sailing solo around the world as a personal achievement never occurred to Jessica Watson. The dollar signs bedazzled her!

My only hope is that when Jessica Watson finally completes her incredible voyage around the world that we will all acknowledge that in an age of cynicism, we all still believe in a “fair go for all”. Australia has had so many heroes, so many who have defied the odds, and most seem to come from the “common stock”, and the underdogs. From the reports I have, Jess is now enjoying the solitude and not in a hurry to return to all the fanfare that will inevitably greet her upon returning. Her greatest treasure, will without doubt, be the times she and "Ella's Pink Lady" battled the unforgiving oceans together, and came out victorious.

May you have a safe return to Sydney, Jess.

Why Jessica Watson Matters to All of Us.

2010-05-01T14:56:00.006+10:00

I have to admit that in the past month I’ve done more reading up on sailing, watching videos, and becoming more informed on this subject than I ever have in my life. Not that I’m an expert; still quite a novice, really. Strange, I suppose, for one who originally hails from the Caribbean. I grew up, and have lived all of my life, near beaches and the sea, but apart from water-skiing, snorkeling, spear-fishing, some deep-sea fishing, and a few cruises on sailing boats, my knowledge is quite lacking. (I was fortunate enough to travel on many oceanic ship journeys, including one on the way to England in 1961 which encountered seas so rough that we later heard the captain say that he didn’t know it we’d make it). Jessica Watson has now stirred in me much more interest in sailing. I also have to admit that I didn’t fully appreciate what Kay Cottee and Jesse Martin accomplished. It was Kay Cottee and Jesse Martin who inspired Jessica, and Cottee really did it the hard way in 1988. No GPS or autopilot; she had to wake up every hour to stay on course, and she was violently thrown overboard in a knockdown during monstrous seas the Southern ocean, only saved by her harness and just managed to get back on board.

Unfortunately, the knockers and critics are still legion. I can scarcely visit a forum or read commentary without someone giving an armchair lecture from the moral high ground. Comments range from the variety of the “little dolly girl” with the internet on board; the “feminisation” of the voyage, with everything in pink, to some truly macabre suggestions and comments about her sexuality, and wishes for her “opponent” Abby Sunderland to “smash into an iceberg”. Not to mention sarcastic comment about these “two little rich girls” who should be at school rather than attempting world records for solo sailing. I think my point is encapsulated in a recent article from The Daily Telegraph

THE email arrived in my inbox two years ago. It read simply: "Hello, my name is Jessica Watson. I'm 14 and I want to be the youngest person to sail round the world."… It may seem like an extraordinary ambition for such a young person - but two years on, as her dream is close to becoming reality, it is apparent Jessica is no ordinary girl….And there was no laughing or saying no when Jessica announced, just after her 12th birthday: "Um, I want to maybe, um . . . sail around the world by myself."….When Jessica said "maybe" it meant she'd already made up her mind….Her dream started about five years ago with a book called Lionheart, written by Australian Jesse Martin….To Jessica, it was a call to arms. An almost personal challenge to become the youngest person to sail around the world alone….But for Jessica's parents there was no choice. While her dad Roger Watson originally tried to talk Jessica out of it, her mum knew her daughter was doing everything in her power to prepare properly for the adventure.

And she could not bare the thought of Jessica leaving without knowing she had her mother's support.

"I knew she would do it with or without us. What if she had gone and she didn't have our support? I could never forgive myself," Mrs Watson said yesterday….In about three weeks, weather permitting, a teenager just shy of her 17th birthday will sail her trusty little 34-footer back through Sydney Heads, having survived hurricane-force winds, monstrous seas, lightning storms, freezing conditions, sail damage and five terrifying knockdowns. [Make that six knockdowns]…. She wrote emails to find backers, she asked experienced hands to share their knowledge, watched every machine she could find being stripped so she knew how they worked and could repair them.

She pestered tradesman to show them their craft, took a diesel mechanics course and washed dishes to pay for airline tickets so she could gain more offshore sailing experience delivering yachts to Australia and New Zealand.

"She wanted to do a Sydney to Hobart but she was too young," Mrs Watson said. Instead she flew to New Zealand to sail down to the Antarctic.

"She did a radio operators course, safety at sea, Maritime First Aid, a marine diesel course," her mum said.
"She saved up and flew places so she could sail and get experience.

"When she sailed to the south Antarctic islands she was working.

"She was helping with meals, navigating, doing watches and she was talking to everyone, hearing their stories, learning from them. Educating herself."… "She's isn't your average 16-year-old girl preoccupied with what 16-year-old girls are preoccupied with. She has a mental toughness about her," John Hallas said of his company Ella Bache's decision to be one of Jessica's earliest financial bakers.

"She is brave, she chases her dreams and she has a conviction and drive to be the best she can be.

"When people ask me why I got involved I say it is part of the Aussie spirit to have a go . Just have a go.
"It's the Anzac spirit and Jessica is an extraordinary person and extraordinary people have to be supported."

That mental toughness was clearly demonstrated when Jessica ploughed into a 63,000 tonne tanker on her trial run. From the Courier Mail , Sept. 9, 2009:

TEENAGER Jessica Watson, who is attempting to sail solo around the world, has vowed to carry on with the voyage despite a collision with a ship….Fronting a media conference on the Gold Coast shortly after powering her yacht through the Southport Seaway, the 16-year-old said she was disappointed by the incident but was more determined than ever to complete her solo voyage. "The whole incident gives me confidence - wow, I can actually handle this," she said. "It could have happened to anyone ... I'm unlucky I suppose, but you also learn from it."

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh, initially a critic, said in a backflip:

Premier Anna Bligh urged Jessica to continue her "big dream" once she has recovered from the accident.

Ms Bligh said Jessica was "a determined young woman" who would almost certainly continue her quest.
"There's been a lot of discussion about whether this young woman is up to it; I think she is".
"She's had a bit of a hurdle and a stumble but that's what happens when you have a big dream."

Her major sponsor was also undeterred:

But her major sponsor, cosmetics company Ella Bache, said it had full confidence in Jessica’s sailing abilities and would not be withdrawing its support. "Ella Bache continues to support her in every way," a spokeswoman for the company said.

More criticisms came from The Australian Family Association:

The Australian Family Association says the trip is too risky because Jessica, who turns 16 next week, will be too young when she sets sail.

But Jessica's mother, Julie Watson, said her daughter had what it took to see her dream realised.
Ms Watson said she could understand people's concern but said Jessica was no ordinary teenager and she had completed several training voyages, including eight in open water. Each skipper had given a glowing assessment of Jessica's ability, knowledge, problem-solving skills and attitude, she said.

"If you have a chance to meet her, you'll understand where she's coming from," Ms Watson said.

Source: Sunshine Coast Daily

Jessica has had some influential backers all along, not the least being Don McIntyre, the owner of Ella’s Pink Lady (Jessica is the operator):

THE TRADEABOAT TEAM
With the prospect of many hours needed for the refit, I placed an ad in Trade-a-Boat looking for volunteers to help. The response was amazing. At times there were up to 11 people working on the boat. Corporate executives, retired carpenters, sailors and friends from around Australia. They all moved up to Queensland to pick up tools. In fact, sometimes, they even went to the shop and bought the tools with their own money!

Like all aspiring adventurers, Jessica was not flush with cash. So began many weeks of frantic effort with all the emotions, frustrations, joy, anger and exhaustion that goes with that. There was a great deal of collective expertise among the workers to help Jessica make decisions. Bruce Arms, the boat manager, also became social worker and people coordinator extraordinaire, while Jessica’s parents had to house and feed them all in between other campaign management duties as well as helping to sand and grind.

The hull was cut back, epoxied and painted, pink of course! All skin fittings, valves and hoses were renewed, and keel bolts X-rayed and one replaced. The pedestal and wheel were off and a new rudder and tiller fitted. New cockpit drains were designed and installed. All chainplates came out to be checked and new rear lower gussets glassed in and extra chainplates fitted. A new watertight bulkhead was glassed in forward of the chain locker to hold the new inner forestay chainplate and then the anchor locker filled with foam and sealed making a great crash compartment. The electric anchor winch was removed and the anchor now stowed below. All the cockpit lockers were made independently watertight, with their own bilge pumps, so as not to drain into the hull. Four Johnson electric bilge pumps were installed, together with two big manual pumps, one inside and one outside.

All deck gear came off, including hatches, windows, winches, tracks, travellers, cleats, stanchions, and more — absolutely everything. Decks were sanded, all holes glassed and filled, then painted (light pink of course) and everything refitted was brand new! Then came the dodger, not your average dodger, more like a work of art that consumed everyone during its construction. It was a gift from the “workers” to keep the skipper dry, safe and happy. It was a passion and symbol for all who worked on it and, yes, it too was pink.

People were going the extra yard to help Jessica. The mood was infectious.

Source: tradeaboat.com.au

It is little wonder that Jessica later remarked:

"I wanted to challenge myself and achieve something to be proud of. And yes, I wanted to inspire people. I hated being judged by my appearance and other people's expectations of what a 'little girl' was capable of. It's no longer just my dream or voyage. Every milestone out here isn't just my achievement, but an achievement for everyone who has put so much time and effort into helping getting me here.”

Source: Wiki (From the LA Times)

However, the most significant comment (in my opinion) came from McIntyre himself, on the ABC:

Things are getting really grim here at the moment. Adventure is something that can be a swear word to a lot of people.

As soon as you say adventure, they say rescue. And there's a lot of people that sort of question the values of it. But the bottom line is; if we keep wrapping up our society and our young kids in cotton wool, which is what we're doing, we're changing the culture of Australia.

Australia needs heroes, Australia needs adventurers and there's a lot of real serious positive benefits from anyone that's getting out there and having a go, and chasing their dreams and really pushing themselves to the limit.

Source: The 7.30 Report

So why do I support Jessica so much? Because I’m a humble night shift cab-driver, and I see the best and the worst of society. I see drunkenness, violence, verbal abuse, excessive drug and alcohol abuse, people (including young people) who can barely walk to a cab (much less sail around the globe) because they’re so high in the skies; people who have lost hope in humanity and society, and perhaps some even heading towards eventual suicide because of hopelessness. Don McIntyre is completely right when he says that we’re “wrapping up our society and our young kids in cotton wool”. The knockers and critics ought to take heed of Jessica’s lesson for all of us, and it is, indeed, in the spirit of the ANZAC tradition. With all of the “modern conveniences”, many still fail to realise that this was always a life-risking adventure which could have gone horribly wrong at any moment, and Jessica, as I write this, is still not in the clear, as she battles nasty weather around Tasmania on her final leg of this journey. Nothing is final until she sails safely into Sydney Harbour, and not without the hopes, good wishes and prayers of literally millions across the globe hoping for her safe return. If she gets filthy rich from this, she deserves every single penny of it.

Pauline Hanson’s Racism.

2010-04-28T15:19:00.010+10:00

I continue to be amazed at how many Australians still subscribe to Pauline Hanson's racist views and politics.

Ms. Hanson recently announced her decision to migrate to the UK. Perhaps her biggest surprise, on arrival, will be that the Muslim presence and influence in the UK far exceeds that of Australia. One report (of many in the media) in The Australian quotes her as saying:

"I have no intentions of selling my home to a Muslim,'' she told Sunrise.

"I don't believe they are compatible with our way of life, our culture and I think we are going to have problems in this country further down the track.''

First of all, what would it matter to her if Muslims invaded Australia, since she’s moving overseas? Why doesn’t she stay here and “fight the good fight”? The unaware reader should become aware that Ms. Hanson has been peddling her politics of division since 1996, and apparently somewhat successfully. One thing that should be obvious to observers is that her logic has never been sterling, and she once again amply demonstrated that with her recent comments. For example, she said she has “no problems” selling her property to certain “foreigners”:

"To an Australian who is of Asian background: no problems whatsoever,'' she said.

This is the same Pauline Hanson who said, in 1996, that we are being "swamped by Asians" (somewhat like how the British "swamped" Australia after 1788) and that Asians “do not assimilate, and form ghettos”, and threaten the “Australian way of life” (the same thing was said of continental European migrants in the 1950s and 1960s, known as "wogs"). Yet out of these “ghettos” arose the very Asians Hanson now accepts as Australian. What did she expect? Instant assimilation? Did she expect Asians to come to Australia and immediately don shorts, thongs, and hold a schooner in one hand while saying “Ow ya going, Mate!” What does she think this “Asian background” entails? What it entails is the very genre she rejected as “not assimilating”. The people she would willingly sell her home to came from the very stock she criticised as “not assimilating”. It might take a couple of generations, but it always happens.

So here, in a nutshell, is Hanson’s brilliant logic: I will sell my property to the children of Asians who have assimilated, but I will not sell my property to their parents (possibly boat people who have not naturalised) who have not assimilated, and don’t speak with an Aussie accent, and still hold on to their “Asian traditions”. If the parent approached Hanson to buy her property, she’d judge them by their accent, and “assimilation”, but if a child of the same parents approached Hanson to buy her property, but had an Aussie accent and had, by all appearances “assimilated” - “no problems”.

How Hanson holds and weighs all these criteria of superficial judgements is a marvel to behold. She is in effect saying that she’ll accept the product of Asian immigration, but yet in the same breath do everything to stop Asian migration.

And finally, she says: "I want peace in my life. I want contentment, and that's what I'm aiming for.” We all want that, Pauline. And that includes the very people you deem as being “unfit” to buy your house. All you have done for this country for the past 14 years is spread your politics of racism, hatred and division, and the world would be a much better place if you in fact retired yourself and your ill-informed commentary to an igloo in Iceland. You foster prejudice and intolerance, and that can never be a good thing. All I need now is for you to tell us that you’re a “Christian”. That would be the icing on the cake.

Jessica Watson’s Progress on the Home Stretch.

2010-04-27T13:57:00.008+10:00

Well news hit the headlines only a few hours ago here in Australia that Jesse Watson’s “rival” (apparently they don’t like to view each other as rivals) Abby Sunderland is now out of contention as far as the “unassisted” circumnavigation is concerned. Sunderland announced her decision to head for Cape Town for autopilot repairs with this blog entry :

I have some big news today. It's not necessarily good news, but the way I look at it, it's not bad either. I am going to be pulling into Cape Town for repairs thus ending my non-stop attempt. My whole team and I have been discussing whether or not I need to stop ever since my main auto pilot died. It's one thing to sail across an ocean with one well-working auto pilot, it's another to keep going with one that is not at all reliable.

It would be foolish and irresponsible for me to keep going with my equipment not working well. I'm about 10-14 days from Cape Town right now and though my auto pilot is working for now, we're all holding our breath and hoping it will last.

Now that’s what I call a sensible and mature skipper.

However it’s not yet over for Jesse Watson, as she approaches the notorious Bass Strait , also know as the Bass Strait Triangle (1)

Approximately 240 km wide at its narrowest point and generally around 50 metres deep, it contains many islands, with King Island and Flinders Island home to substantial human settlements.

Like the rest of the waters surrounding Tasmania, and particularly because of its limited depth, it is notoriously rough, with many ships lost there during the 19th century. A lighthouse was erected on Deal Island in 1848 to assist ships in the eastern part of the Straits, but there were no guides to the western entrance until the Wilsons Promontory Lighthouse was completed in 1859, followed by another at Cape Wickham at the northern end of King Island in 1861.

Strong currents between the Antarctic-driven southeast portions of the Indian Ocean and the Tasman Sea's Pacific Ocean waters provide a strait of powerful, wild storm waves. To illustrate its wild strength, Bass Strait is both twice as wide and twice as rough as the English Channel. The shipwrecks on the Tasmanian and Victorian coastlines number in the hundreds, although stronger metal ships and modern marine navigation have dropped the danger sharply.

Many vessels, some quite large, have disappeared without trace, or left scant evidence of their passing. Despite myths and legends of piracy, wrecking and alleged supernatural phenomena akin to those of the Bermuda Triangle, such disappearances can be invariably ascribed to treacherous combinations of wind and sea conditions, and the numerous semi-submerged rocks and reefs within the Straits.

You’d think after six knockdowns, including a 180 degree knockdown in the Southern Atlantic, that there’d be some relief, but Jesse has always realised that the home stretch was going to be the toughest of all. Even after Bass Strait (whether she goes inside or under) it’s unlikely to be smooth sailing, with weather forecasts not looking the best. I certainly recall the 1998 Sydney-Hobart race tragedy:

The 1998 Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race was marred by tragedy when, during an exceptionally strong storm (which had similar strength winds to a lower-category hurricane), five boats sank and six people died. Of the 115 boats that started, only 44 made it to Hobart. As a result, the crew eligibility rules were tightened, requiring a higher minimum age and experience. G. Bruce Knecht wrote a book about this race called "The Proving Ground". A coronial enquiry into the race was critical of both the race management at the time and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.

Many of these yachts were maxis that reach up to 30 metres (100 feet) in length and multi-crewed, compared to Ella’s Pink Lady, which is only 10.23 metres (33.56 feet), and here is a photo of Jessica’s “crew”:

Pic: The crew were starting to smell a bit musty, so the skipper sent them outside for a bit of sunshine and fresh air!

Despite her always obvious sense of humour, Jessica has mentioned “pretending to be brave”, or putting on a brave face, and Abby Sunderland was quite frank in a recent blog entry:

I know that some people will look on my trip as a failure because of this, and there really isn't anything that I can do about that. When you're surrounded by critics it can be hard to remember your own goals and expectations, you start to judge yourself by what other people are saying.

This is the experience of a life time. It's hard and sometimes down right terrifying, but I love it out here.

My hat goes off to both of them.

Notes

1. According to one report: "This leaves Australian Jessica Watson with no competition. Make that: No competition except for the Southern Ocean. Watson is reporting another knockdown in the biggest seas she's witnessed yet, as she sails south of Australia, on the home stretch of her journey. She's quickly approaching the Australian state of Victoria now, and by her course, it looks as if she plans on taking Bass Straight and going inside Tasmania, rather than dipping below the South East Cape as her route predicted. No doubt a prudent decision, as that big of a risk that close to her finish could prove disastrous."

The Death of Antony Flew, February 1923- April 2010.

2010-04-24T04:54:00.002+10:00

In August last year I wrote a post about Antony Flew titled Antony Flew and The “Slippery Slope” of Theism. In that post I gave sources which cover Flew’s conversion to Deism , so it won’t be my purpose here to go over that again. Now that Flew is gone, I felt that it would be interesting to hear his views on the afterlife. Here he is interviewed by Lee Strobel:

In regard to Flew’s 2007 book There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind suggestions have been floated that much of it was “ghost-written”. Kenneth Grubbs outlined this argument in this tribute to Flew Antony Flew, 1923–2010
Following the Argument Wherever it Leads :

Subsequent to Oppenheimer’s story, Varghese wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times magazine: “First the good news: Antony Flew is alive and well (physically and mentally)” (“Doubting Antony Flew,” November 5, 2007. This letter was written just one year prior to Flew’s dementia requiring hospitalization).

When I spoke with Mark he reminded me that Harper One wasn’t entirely satisfied with Varghese’s prose, so they asked Bob Hostetler, an evangelical pastor, to re-write many of the passages, “To make it more reader friendly,” according to Varghese himself. So the ghostwriter had a ghostwriter!

In essence then, two-thirds of Antony Flew’s book is actually Roy Varghese writing for Flew, with some undefined portion written by Bob Hostetler writing for Varghese. The remaining one-third of the book is Varghese writing as Varghese, taking puerile whacks at the “New Atheists” in Appendix A; and Bishop Wright in Appendix B, writing as Bishop Wright, presenting his 28-page Christian dissertation. As Annis said, “All those Christians [were] trying to pull him to their bosom.” Yet almost unbelievably, nowhere in There is a God is any of this information disclosed. The omissions alone are disturbing. “The most disappointing thing to me,” Oppenheimer told me, reflecting back with clear candor, “is the cynicism of the publishing industry. They knew they made a mistake, and never took the opportunity to correct it.”

However, bethinking.org published a letter written by Flew, countering suggestions that the views expressed in There is a God were not his own:

I have rebutted these criticisms in the following statement: “My name is on the book and it represents exactly my opinions. I would not have a book issued in my name that I do not 100 per cent agree with. I needed someone to do the actual writing because I’m 84 and that was Roy Varghese’s role. The idea that someone manipulated me because I’m old is exactly wrong. I may be old but it is hard to manipulate me. That is my book and it represents my thinking.”

On the same page is Flew’s review of Richard Dawkins’ book The God Delusion, in which he writes, in part:

The fault of Dawkins as an academic (which he still was during the period in which he composed this book although he has since announced his intention to retire) was his scandalous and apparently deliberate refusal to present the doctrine which he appears to think he has refuted in its strongest form. Thus we find in his index five references to Einstein. They are to the mask of Einstein and Einstein on morality; on a personal God; on the purpose of life (the human situation and on how man is here for the sake of other men and above all for those on whose well-being our own happiness depends); and finally on Einstein’s religious views. But (I find it hard to write with restraint about this obscurantist refusal on the part of Dawkins) he makes no mention of Einstein’s most relevant report: namely, that the integrated complexity of the world of physics has led him to believe that there must be a Divine Intelligence behind it. (I myself think it obvious that if this argument is applicable to the world of physics then it must be hugely more powerful if it is applied to the immeasurably more complicated world of biology.)

Antony Flew’s views were anything but simple and straightforward, and in my opinion Kenneth Grubbs does make some valid points in the following:

Flew/Varghese argue that, “Perhaps the most popular and intuitively plausible argument for God’s existence is the so-called argument from design.” Having now read hundreds of pages of masterfully constructed arguments from this classically trained Oxford philosopher, in my opinion Professor Flew would shudder at the notion of employing “popular” or “intuitively plausible” statements as arguments for or against anything. They write, “What I think the DNA material has done is that it has shown, by almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved.”

Consider this passage from God and Philosophy, written by Flew in 1966: “Certainly it is proper to feel the awe in the contemplation of the human eye or of the single living cell. But no exploitation, however breathtaking, of the limitations and potentialities of materials would give good ground for inferring Omnipotence.” So what changed? Did complexity became more complex? Did design became better designed? Is Flew’s qualification, “however breathtaking,” invalidated by the complexity of DNA?

Another cornerstone of any argument for deism is the Anthropic Principle. Flew/Varghese submit the weight of electrons, the speed of light, and gravitational constants to demonstrate that the universe is too “fine tuned” to be accidental. Again, these observations contribute nothing substantive — they are simply statements about the universe, not packets of data’ — save the same misleading implication what else could it be, but God? The authors conclude: “The only satisfactory explanation for the origin of such ‘end-directed, self-replicating’ life as we see on earth is an infinitely intelligent Mind.” The logic proffered fails as an argument because it requires us to accept the lack of knowledge as knowledge, and the lack of evidence as evidence. This is Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, or, appeal to ignorance. It is also the Burden of Proof Fallacy, which states that if we cannot prove X to be false, then X is true; the inability to disprove X becomes the proof of X. The argument is of course invalid.

Bertrand Russell was fond of suggesting that a teapot orbited the sun just beyond Mars; no one can disprove his claim, therefore it is true. If we follow the this line of reasoning we must accept the conclusion that the more evidence we lack … the greater the likelihood that God exists. The argument beckons for God to be defined as “the sum of all knowledge yet acquired.”

This was the reason Flew wrote The Presumption of Atheism back in 1976. It was written to mirror the legal maxim, Ei incumbit probation qui dicit, non qui negat, or “The onus of proof lies on the proposition, not on the opposition.” Flew noted in that book: “If it is to be established that there is a God, then we have to have good grounds for believing that this is indeed so. Until and unless some such grounds are produced we have literally no reason at all for believing.” The absence of evidence hardly qualifies as “good grounds” for anything, much less god, and thus our expectations for some epiphanic insight to leap from the pages of this book and help us understand the basis for Professor Flew’s recantation have been thoroughly dashed.

The landscape of science has changed in almost unrecognizable proportions since Flew’s early life. However, it is unreasonable — irrational even — to suggest that Flew’s original position opposing complexity as an argument for a Divine Mind was only a matter of degree. If complexity is a poor argument for the existence of God (and it is) then the degree of complexity is an irrelevant attribute.

Flew, The Conclusion

As a species our hunger for answers is insatiable. So desperate are we to understand the universe around us that for untold centuries we have refused to accept any “gap” in that understanding. Unexplained phenomena are the spawning grounds for ghost stories, sea monsters, grassy knolls, and a Divine Mind.
Antony Flew understood this as well as anyone. He devoted a lifetime of vigorous intellectual argument against presuming God. Today we are asked to accept that he has changed his mind. With asterisks in hand, we accept.

Could we make a cogent argument “pointing to” his age and capacity as factors that might mitigate a change of this magnitude? We could. Are there uncertainties that could warrant a tenable challenge to the motives of those individuals surrounding Flew, with regard to his “conversion” and the curiously construction and authorship of the book? There are. Should the publishers bear any responsibility for preventing misperceptions concerning the disclosure of would-be ghostwriters? They should. There is little hope of ever reconciling the Antony Flew of 87 years with the Antony Flew of 27 years. Did he change his mind, or did his mind change him?

The Real Cause of Earthquakes: “Loose Women.”

2010-04-23T04:31:00.003+10:00

Or so says an Iranian cleric:

"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which increases earthquakes"

Source: The Guardian

He continues:

"There is no other solution but to take refuge in religion and to adapt our lives to Islam's moral codes…A divine authority told me to tell the people to make a general repentance. Why? Because calamities threaten us…And now, if a natural earthquake hits Tehran, no one will be able to confront such a calamity but God's power, only God's power ... So let's not disappoint God."

The cleric isn’t talking about scantily clan women, bikinis on the beach, or Playboy centerfolds, but women who dress like this:

If what the cleric says is true, then theoretically the whole Western world should be buried under a pile of rubble, the act of an angry God. It does not even occur to the cleric and his like-minded peers that Iran is simply in an earthquake zone. Geological factors do not register with many pious minds, it seems. But let’s not think that this warped thinking is peculiar to pious Iranian clerics. In our own “enlightened” Western society Iranian clerics have met their match in the likes of American evangelist Pat Robertson:

Pat Robertson, the American Christian televangelist and host of "The 700 Club," said that Haitians need to have a "great turning to god" while he was reporting on the devastating 7.0 earthquake that shook the island nation — the most powerful to hit the country in a century…"I was reading, yesterday, a book that was very interesting about what God has to say in the Old Testament about those who shed innocent blood…But have we found we are unable somehow to defend ourselves against some of the attacks that are coming against us, either by terrorists or now by natural disaster? Could they be connected in some way?"

Source: CBS News

The only “connection” is in Robertson’s overly pious mind. If what he says about Haiti is true, then parts of Africa should also be buried under a pile of rubble, or any nation which doesn't adhere to his brand of religion.

Although Richard Dawkins has been criticised for his essay Viruses of the Mind , I’d like to know which right-thinking person doesn’t agree with Dawkins when it comes to Iranian clerics and the Pat Robertsons of the religious world.

More Evidence That It’s “All in the Brain”?

2010-04-21T11:54:00.003+10:00

The media today reports about an English woman who was treated for severe migraine in hospital, and woke up speaking with a Chinese accent.

Source: Migraine left woman with Chinese accent

The original report in the UK Mirror says:

Sarah, 35, has lived in Devon since she was a toddler but now sounds as if she is from the Far East.
She said yesterday: “I have never been to China. It is very frustrating and I just want my own voice back but I don’t know if I ever will.
“I moved to Plymouth aged 18 months so I have always spoken like a local. But when I had my attack last month an ambulance crew told me that I sounded Chinese.

“Since then I’ve had friends hang up on me as they think I’m a hoax caller. I speak in a much higher tone, my voice is all squeaky. I’m having speech therapy but don’t know if the Chinese accent will ever go away.

Foreign Accent Syndrome is a rare condition diagnosed in only about sixty people between 1941-2009. Another report in the Telegraph UK tells about a Croatian girl who fell into a coma and woke up speaking fluent German, and unable to speak her native Croatian.

Doctors at Split's KB Hospital claim that the case is so unusual, various experts have examined the girl as they try to find out what triggered the change.

Hospital director Dujomir Marasovic said: "You never know when recovering from such a trauma how the brain will react. Obviously we have some theories although at the moment we are limited in what we can say because we have to respect the privacy of the patient."

Psychiatric expert Dr Mijo Milas added: "In earlier times this would have been referred to as a miracle, we prefer to think that there must be a logical explanation – its just that we haven't found it yet.

"There are references to cases where people who have been seriously ill and perhaps in a coma have woken up being able to speak other languages – sometimes even the Biblical languages such as that spoken in old Babylon or Egypt – at the moment though any speculation would remain just that – speculation – so it's better to continue tests until we actually know something."

A reader comment on this article was interesting, though I naturally can’t verify the truth or accuracy of it:

My wife (we are french) had a brain stroke 4 years ago. When she "woke up" 2 days later she couldn't speak french but started to speak a "bumpy" english. It lasted over three weeks.
Amazing, isn't it?

I’m extremely sceptical of “outside theories”, that is, the idea that phenomena like these arise outside the brain, and I suppose in a way it goes back to Descartes “mind-body problem”. Is there a ghost in the machine? In a not entirely unrelated article, E.O Wilson writes:

I am an empiricist. On religion I lean toward deism, but consider its proof largely a problem in astrophysics. The existence of a God who created the universe (as envisioned by deism) is possible, and the question may eventually be settled, perhaps by forms of material evidence not yet imagined. Or the matter may be forever beyond human reach. In contrast, and of far greater importance to humanity, the idea of a biological God, one who directs organic evolution and intervenes in human affairs (as envisioned by theism), is increasingly contravened by biology and the brain sciences.

The same evidence, I believe, favors a purely material origin of ethics, and it meets the criterion of consilience: causal explanations of brain activity and evolution, while imperfect, already cover most facts known about behavior we term "moral." Although this conception is relativistic (in other words, dependent on personal viewpoint), it can, if evolved carefully, lead more directly and safely to stable moral codes than can transcendentalism, which is also, when one thinks about it, ultimately relativistic.

Of course, lest I forget, I may be wrong.

Source: The Biological Basis of Morality (The Atlantic, online)

That could be the subject of another post, but in essence I agree with Wilson. We still live in a superstitious age where many accept at face value phenomena like “speaking in tongues” and mysterious “spiritual forces” that supposedly act upon us outside the brain. I suppose it’s a compelling idea for many that “God” really controls our individual lives (crossing t’s, dotting I’s, and all that), even though we have often ended up hating or killing one another, driven by this idea that “God is okay with what we do, think", etc. And “God” will tell one “prophet” something, and another “prophet” something entirely contradictory.

Are we yet prepared to accept the possibility that a psychotic serial killer might simply have different brain functions to what is considered “normal”, and is not actually under “demonic possession”? How will the judicial system deal with this when it finally and seriously considers applied science in future, in regard to morality and ethics? One thing I am certain of is that we’re not going to find satisfactory answers by consulting one, two, three, or four thousand year old “holy books”. I am, somewhat like Wilson, not averse to the idea of deism, but if such a God exists, I think it’s necessary to reiterate Darwin’s dictum that trying to discover this God (or ultimate truth) is like a dog trying to contemplate the mind of Newton. In outright candour, I suppose I might as well consider myself atheist in that regard. I am not, for one minute, under the serious delusion that the “God idea” is going to go away, but I’m becoming more and more convinced that it is, indeed, all in the brain. There is no “ghost in the machine”, and what you see is what you get. In a post to follow this one, I’ll give one example of how the “God idea” can not only at times be silly, self-serving, arrogant and fatuous, but downright dangerous.

The Absurdity of Life.

2010-04-19T13:07:00.003+10:00

A few days ago I was browsing through various forums on the Internet (I rarely post these days and don’t plan to become as involved as I was before) when I came across a lady’s claim that she had “proof of life after death”. Having studied this subject at some length, I was nevertheless curious to see whether I would read a novel argument, a twist I hadn’t read before. My expectations were low, and they were fulfilled. She claimed to have visited a “medium” who made contact with a deceased friend of hers, and the medium’s descriptions fit to a tee some unique aspects about her friend. Further studies in this area will alert anyone with a reasonable knowledge in this field to how problematic this is. It gets complicated. First, because this phenomenon isn’t unique. People giving fairly accurate descriptions of past events, or foreign words, or even flora and fauna (to give a few examples) they could not have consciously known (as far as they were aware) isn’t an earth-shattering phenomenon. Second, so-called séances and attempts to establish contact with the “dead” have sometimes resulted in the discovery that the “dead” people “contacted” were actually still alive! Third, presenting a fictional “dead” person to a medium has sometimes resulted in elaborate readings about a fictional character.

In any case, I was interested in one comment made by a man who realised that this lady, like so many before her, was seeking meaning in life, and part of that meaning is that there’s a purpose to life, and an afterlife. That’s the grand hope of much of humanity, that we are not just wasting our time here, and that life does indeed have a purpose. This man asked the lady whether she’d ever read the writing of Albert Camus It was a subtle hint that, like Sisyphus, she was trying to accomplish a fruitless task, and perhaps grasping at straws to attribute meaning against impossible odds. The basic story of Sisyphus is:

As a punishment from the gods for his trickery, Sisyphus was made to roll a huge rock up a steep hill, but before he could reach the top of the hill, the rock would always roll back down again, forcing him to begin again.The maddening nature of the punishment was reserved for Sisyphus due to his hubristic belief that his cleverness surpassed that of Zeus. Sisyphus took the bold step of reporting one of Zeus' sexual conquests, telling the river god Asopus of the whereabouts of his daughter Aegina. Zeus had taken her away, but regardless of the impropriety of Zeus' frequent conquests, Sisyphus overstepped his bounds by considering himself a peer of the gods who could rightfully report their indiscretions. As a result, Zeus displayed his own cleverness by binding Sisyphus to an eternity of frustration. Accordingly, pointless or interminable activities are often described as Sisyphean. Sisyphus was a common subject for ancient writers and was depicted by the painter Polygnotus on the walls of the Lesche at Delphi.

This was the basis for Camus’ 1942 philosophical essay, The Myth of Sisyphus in which he lays out some of the concepts of Absurdism. It is a concept with which I entirely agree, and it’s basically this:

As beings looking for meaning in a meaningless world, humans have three ways of resolving the dilemma. Kierkegaard and Camus describe the solutions in their works, The Sickness Unto Death (1849) and The Myth of Sisyphus (1942):

* Suicide (or, "escaping existence"): a solution in which a person simply ends one's own life. Both Kierkegaard and Camus dismiss the viability of this option.

* Religious or spiritual belief in a transcendent realm or being: a solution in which one believes in the existence of a reality that is beyond the Absurd, and, as such, has meaning. Kierkegaard stated that a belief in anything beyond the Absurd requires a non-rational but perhaps necessary religious acceptance in such an intangible and empirically unprovable thing (now commonly referred to as a "leap of faith"). However, Camus regarded this solution as "philosophical suicide".

*Acceptance of the Absurd: a solution in which one accepts and even embraces the Absurd and continues to live in spite of it. Camus endorsed this solution, while Kierkegaard regarded this solution as "demoniac madness": "He rages most of all at the thought that eternity might get it into its head to take his misery from him!"

I am, like Camus, in agreement with the third option.

Having strong religious beliefs is one way many attach meaning to their lives, and the often contradictory fervour with which they hold such beliefs is, in my opinion, quite good evidence that having meaning is more important to them than a thorough examination (or more often denying) of the often glaring contradictions, both internal (within the religion itself) and external (conflict and contradiction with other religions). Trying to point this out to a believer, though, is well nigh impossible. Kierkegaard “solved” this problem with his idea that one must still believe in spite of absurdity, or perhaps even because of absurdity.

The only meaning in life is what we attach to it. What we make of it. And if there is an “objective” meaning, we are no where even close to knowing what it might be. As Camus wrote in The Myth of Sisyphus:

"Thus I draw from the absurd three consequences, which are my revolt, my freedom, and my passion. By the mere activity of consciousness I transform into a rule of life what was an invitation to death, and I refuse suicide"

Tragically, or maybe not so tragically considering a comment attributed to Aristotle, Camus was killed in a car accident in January 1960, at the relatively young age of 46. Aristotle wrote:

Wretched, ephemeral race, children of chance and tribulation, why do you force me to tell you the very thing which it would be most profitable for you not to hear? The very best thing is utterly beyond your reach: not to have been born, not to be, to be nothing. However, the second best thing for you is: to die soon.
Eudemos

It is important to note, though, that Absurdism is not the same as Nihilism

Life is, literally, what you make it.

Bridge Over Troubled Water: A Song For Jessica.

2010-04-16T19:25:00.002+10:00

From Jessica Watson’s latest blog entry, “Headwinds and More Lightening”:

The last few days have been a bit tough (yes that's an upgrade from the usual interesting!), with strong headwinds, messy seas, lots of lightning and a few high drama moments this morning.

The night before last there was a lot more lightning hanging around and it was much too close for comfort. This time there wasn't any wind and rain with it, which in one way made it even worse, because I could see how close the lightning was flashing into the water around us. One lightning cell after another rolled past, keeping my nerves on edge and stopping me getting any real sleep as I worried over it. Some of the flashes were so bright I felt like putting my sunnys on!..... After that, the wind picked up to 25 to 30 knots on the nose and along with a messy sea and pouring rain. That's not my definition of comfortable sailing….Everyone's telling me not to let my guard down being so close to home. But believe me, with this weather keeping me on my toes, there's no way I'm relaxing in the slightest. I was beginning to think that I'd seen a fair range of different weather but this lightning has been something new.

But it's all part of the challenge and will only make me appreciate finally being able to relax even more when we are safely tied up to a dock in Sydney. Oh and a bed that's not damp, I'm really looking forward to that too!

Official Jessica Watson Blog

Hang on, Jess, not far to go to Sydney! At the moment, come what may, you are the pride of the nation.

Darryl Reanney and "The Death of Forever".

2010-04-15T15:57:00.002+10:00

Many years ago I bought Darryl Reanney’s book The Death of Forever: A New Future for Human Consciousness . A little background to Reanney, from his own autobiographical comments, is that he started out as a skeptic but ended up a believer, well sort of. Reanney’s credentials were, indeed, impressive. A molecular biologist and an internationally recognised authority on the origin of life, and also the author and presenter of Genesis (somewhat in the mode of Carl Sagan’s Cosmos), a seven part series produced by the ABC. I highly recommend reading Reanney’s book, if for nothing else than intellectual stimulation and unorthodox thought coming from “scientific circles”.

Here is Reanney with Phillip Adams (podcast), on an episode of Late Night Live in 1993 (Reanney died of Leukaemia in 1994):

Darryl Reanney with Phillip Adams on Late Night Live

Quite a fascinating interview. Note that towards the end of the interview Phillip notes that Reanney expressed the opinion that he was “kidding himself”. My understanding is that he was uneasy about his sequel (Music of the Mind) to The Death of Forever as being “too speculative” and “unscientific”. The explanations for consciousness are legion, but to date, not a single person on the planet understands how consciousness originated, and that it must somehow be connected to some form of life after death is even more speculative. Reanney notes during the interview that the human brain makes “constructs”, but is it possible that Reanney’s own ideas are themselves nothing but “constructs”? Nevertheless, I think there is some merit in at least pondering his ideas. In his book, Reanney leaned somewhat to Buddhism as being the religion that is “closest to science”. Maybe he didn’t have enough time to examine the Buddhist concept of hell/s, which is as primitive, and perhaps even more perverse than the Christian view of hell. Reanney also talks about near death experiences, but seems to have a rather superficial knowledge of them, for example, why many Japanese NDErs do not “see” a tunnel, but a cave, and why the “Being of Light” is interpreted according to the religious biases and upbringing of the one having the experience. NDEs, for anyone who has studied them, do not come neatly packaged and explainable, nor do they necessarily point to a life after death, because every one who has experienced an NDE didn’t, in fact, die. A few minutes, or even a couple of hours of death, does not indicate final death. It may well be that some part or portion of “us” survives death, but I wouldn’t base such speculative ideas on the writings of Darryl Reanney as the final word on the subject, particularly in regard to his pre-death admission that they were too speculative. His contributions are, nevertheless, worth pondering.

I don't believe that science has all the answers, nor that it can summarise "truth" by equations and pure logic. I'll leave that to the mathematicians, but I equally don't see any reason to accept any concept or idea without consistent evidence to support it. My study of NDEs, if nothing else, only supports the idea that they are not only inconsistent, but seem to point quite heavily as having arisen in the brain. We would all like to live forever, perhaps, and maybe our "constructs" are biased by that idea, and maybe the brain is more than capable of creating this illusion of "foreverness", which, in the end, lead Reanney to feel that he was "kidding himself".

Disaster in Tenerife: The 1977 KLM/Pan Am Crash.

2010-04-14T12:38:00.004+10:00

Date of accident: March 27, 1977, at 17:06:56 local time.

Place of accident: Los Rodeos Airport, Canary Islands.

Death Toll: 583.

Pan Am: 380 passengers and 16 crew.
Survivors: 61.

KLM: 234 passengers and 14 crew.
Survivors: None.

Cause of crash: Runway incursion, pilot error, ATC error and technical limitations.

To date the Tenerife crash is still the worst disaster in aviation history. The following You Tube video is a re-enactment of the crash, with commentary from actual survivors.

Clearance for take-off was not given by ATC, but Captain Jacob Veldhuyzen van Zanten (KLM) thought the Pan Am had cleared the runway, and attempted to take-off. What this video doesn’t show is that co-pilot initially tried to stop the KLM captain from taking off, but on the second go he didn’t. When the captain proceeded to throttle the jumbo the first time, the co-pilot forcefully pulled the throttle-levers back and said they didn’t have permission to go. The captain replied, "I know that. Go ahead, ask." Moments later, as the co-pilot was repeating ATC instructions, the captain interrupted, “we’re going”. One might ask why the co-pilot and flight engineer didn’t try to stop him the second time. One of the speculations for this was:

The flight engineer's apparent hesitation to challenge Van Zanten further, possibly because Captain van Zanten was not only senior in rank, but also one of the most able and experienced pilots working for the airline….A study group put together by the Air Line Pilots Association found that not only the captain, but the first officer as well dismissed the flight engineer's question. In that case, the flight engineer might have been either reassured or even less inclined to press the question further.(1)

One of the changes made in the safety response to the accident was:

Cockpit procedures were also changed. Hierarchical relations among crew members were played down. More emphasis was placed on team decision-making by mutual agreement. This is known in the industry as Crew Resource Management.

Although there were a number of causes of the accident, the primary one is pilot error. Notwithstanding other errors and misunderstandings, 583 lives would not have been lost had the KLM captain not felt pressured to go before fog restrictions would delay the flight.

The investigation concluded that the fundamental cause of the accident was that the KLM captain took off without takeoff clearance. The investigators suggested the reason for his mistake might have been a desire to leave as soon as possible in order to comply with KLM's duty-time regulations, and before the weather deteriorated further.

Two things we can learn from this:

1) People’s lives should never be secondary to bureaucracy and business schedules.

2) Questioning, and even over-riding authority is sometimes necessary for the benefit of all.

Notes:

1) Wikipedia

Customer Suicides.

2010-04-12T12:23:00.005+10:00

It was confirmed to me last night that a regular customer of mine committed suicide a few weeks ago. I picked up someone who had gone to his funeral on the day, who mentioned that he was only thirty, a regular at the X-tavern (real names or places will be not be revealed), and that everything seemed okay, then they got the news that he’d hanged himself (I didn't realise at the time he was one of my regulars). I’d been transporting this bloke for over three years, and while he never seemed to be a ball of extroversion and enthusiasm about life, I was shocked when another driver confirmed his identity to me last night. He was always generous with money, giving a tip 99% of the time, and once gave me $20 for a $7 fare. Apparently he left a long note, apologising to everyone. I’ve had many regular or former customers die, and once transported a lady whose partner was bashed to death only a couple of nights previous, but I think this was the first time I’d heard of a suicide.

I could only wonder what drove this young man to end his life, but I knew it certainly wasn’t a lack of money (which I know from sources other than his very generous tips). That’s one thing about being a cab driver, you get to “know” so many people, and hear about both the blessings and tragedies in their lives, and it sometimes amazes me how people are willing to reveal the most intimate details about their lives in the privacy of a taxi. In this case, however, my customer let on to none of us what his dark intentions were.

Suicide is a relatively serious problem in Australia, especially among the young. According to the fact sheet, Suicide in Australia, a Dying Shame

Suicide affects hundreds of thousands of Australians every year. Whilst the incidence of suicide is relatively rare (in 1998, 2% of all deaths were attributed to suicide), they are nonetheless premature, needless deaths which have a devastating impact on extended family relationships, workplaces, schools and ultimately, the community as a whole.

What is even more startling is that male suicide outnumbers female suicide by 4:1, and it is the second leading cause of death in males aged 25-44 (according to Lifeline it's now the leading cause of death in Australians under 44), and is the second leading cause of death among 15 - 24 year olds. A review of the fact sheet is quite an eye-opener. More people die by suicide in Australia than die annually in motor-vehicle accidents. Although the fact sheet is a bit dated, a 2005 report from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed little change in this trend.

There were 2,101 deaths from suicide registered in 2005, similar to the number registered in the previous year (2,098). Nearly 80% of these were deaths of males.

The 2008 ABS Report also showed little change:

Intentional self-harm refers to a range of behaviours including cutting, poisoning and attempted suicide. It is likely that only a small number of young people who harm themselves will seek medical treatment. In 2005-06, there were 8,040 hospital separations for intentional self-harm among people aged 15-24 years. The 2005-06 hospital separation rate for young women (392 per 100,000) was higher than in 1998-99 (294 per 100,000). The rate for young men was similar in both 2005-06 (171) and 1998-99 (165).

I suppose suicide is no joke, and a report in yesterday’s UK Mail Online site confirms that:

A medical technician killed himself after being suspended from work after someone complained that he made a politically-incorrect joke about a black friend. Roy Amor, 61, who was devastated at the prospect of losing his job making prosthetics, shot himself in the head outside his house. He was facing a disciplinary investigation after suggesting to the black colleague that he ‘better hide’ when they noticed immigration officers outside their clinic. It is understood that the man was a close friend of Mr Amor and was not offended. However, it was overheard by someone else who lodged a formal complaint.

And in Australia in the last few weeks we saw a similar report in the Herald Sun about a senior police officer with 30 years service who shot himself:

The officer, who had more than 30 years' experience in the force, had been under investigation and tendered his resignation on Friday after a probe into "disciplinary issues". The resignation took effect yesterday, and it is believed the officer took his own life after returning to collect his belongings last night. Other officers at the station had left on an urgent job, leaving him at the station alone, before returning to make the shock discovery. He said the death had come as a shock to his colleagues, and that he was well liked and respected. It is understood the member leaves behind a female partner.“This is pretty horrible for the local police, for the member’s family and for the broader community," Mr Lay said.

My regular customer certainly didn’t do anything “out of the ordinary”, if we go by Australia’s suicide statistics. I’ve “counselled” at least two people out of suicide in my job, but I think when someone’s mind is really made up, it’s very difficult to change them.

For those in Australia seeking help, you can ring Lifeline on 13 11 14, or visit their site at Lifeline.

No matter how bad it gets, there’s always hope of a better tomorrow if you can hang on through “the dark night of the soul”.

The Amazing Jessica Watson.

2010-04-09T17:55:00.012+10:00

I have to confess that I came to this late. I didn’t even realize that a young lady (16 to be exact) named Jessica Watson had set out to try to become the youngest person to circumnavigate the globe in a sailing boat, solo and unassisted, without stops. It immediately grabbed my attention. I looked up her bio on Wiki and found this:

Jessica Watson (born 18 May 1993 in Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia) is an Australian sailor (age 16), resident in Buderim, Queensland. She is currently attempting to become the youngest person to sail solo, non-stop and unassisted around the world.

Status: At sea.

God, I thought, what have I been missing? History in the making? Ever since this realisation I’ve been following Jessica’s blog like a demon possessed, wishing I could see every moment live. Can’t get enough of it.

Reading further on Jessica’s Wiki entry, I saw this:

I hated being judged by my appearance and other people's expectations of what a 'little girl' was capable of. It's no longer just my dream or voyage. Every milestone out here isn't just my achievement, but an achievement for everyone who has put so much time and effort into helping getting me here."

Well, this “little girl” has shown the world the mettle she’s made of, and what a lesson it is for all of us. It really doesn’t matter that Abby Sunderland may eventually take the “youngest” record from her, because Jess has proved to all of us what she set out to prove – that “little girls” have something important to contribute to our global awareness, and even the betterment of humanity, and that people should not be judged by appearance. The word “bravery” is no longer the province of adult male heroes. And Jessica’s bravery is something that is worthy of total adulation. We live in an amazing world that is never short of pleasant surprises, and Jessica Watson is our latest awakening to this. Her humility and her sense of humour amid some of the toughest physical trials any human can face, candidly laid out in her blog entries, is a stunning realisation. Her parents must be so justifiably proud of her.

I have little shame in admitting that I wept, and wept again, at the courage and determination of this amazing young lady. This is my favourite video, when Jessica rounded Cape Horn (known as the "Everest of sailing" because of notorious rough seas):

Jessica kept saying how “amazing” rounding Cape Horn was, but to me the only amazing thing was Jessica herself.

And this is my second favourite video, a tame and mature Jessica, “aged” ten years more than her 16 years (mentioned in her blog entry below after the big Southern Atlantic storm and the knockdowns):

Here, in my opinion, was Jessica’s most poignant blog entry (which caused her to "age ten years"):

That much wind means some very big and nasty waves. To give you an idea of the conditions, they were similar to and possibly worse than those of the terrible 1998 Sydney to Hobart Race. We experienced a total of 4 knockdowns, the second was the most severe with the mast being pushed 180 degrees in to the water. Actually pushed isn't the right word, it would be more accurate to say that Ella's Pink Lady was picked up, thrown down a wave, then forced under a mountain of breaking water and violently turned upside down.

With everything battened down and conditions far too dangerous to be on deck, there wasn't anything I could do but belt myself in and hold on. Under just the tiny storm jib, the big electric autopilot did an amazing job of holding us on course downwind, possibly or possibly not helped by my yells of encouragement! It was only the big rogue waves that hit at us at an angle (side on) that proved dangerous and caused the knockdowns.

The solid frame of the targa (the frame that supports the solar panels) is bent out of shape and warped (see pic below), which provides a pretty good idea of the force of the waves. Solid inch thick stainless steel tube doesn't exactly just bend in the breeze, so I think you could say that Ella's Pink Lady has proven herself to be a very tough little boat!

With my whole body clenched up holding on, various objects flying around the cabin and Ella's Pink Lady complaining loudly under the strain, it was impossible to know what damage there was on deck. It was a little hard at times to maintain my positive and rational thoughts policy, but overall I think I can say that the skipper held up us well as Ella's Pink Lady. It was certainly one of those times when you start questioning exactly why you're doing this, but at no point could I not answer my own question with a long list of reasons why the tough times like that aren't totally worth it!

.

Source for the above: From Jessica's blog

Being somewhat of a skeptic, I searched the Internet to find out if, as Jessica reported, that a sail boat could survive a 180 degree capsize, or "knockdown" (not being a sailor myself). Here are some of the results I found:

Perhaps the following broader definition is closer to what modern designers aim for: a seaworthy sailboat is one that is
• able to recover quickly from a 180-degree capsize without serious damage and without sinking
• strong enough to look after herself while hove-to or lying ahull
• seakindly—free of violent, jerky rolling and pounding
• well-balanced, docile on the helm, and easily handled at all times
• agile downwind and able to avoid most plunging breakers
• able to beat to windward, or at least hold her ground, in all but the heaviest conditions
• habitable—able to carry ample crew with good headroom and comfort, plus water and supplies, for extended periods
• capable of good average speeds on long passages

Thus silenced the skeptic in me (non-sailor that I am) . And I’m sure that like the 1969 journey to the moon, some will still doubt that Jessica Watson circumnavigated the globe solo. And in closing, may I reiterate that the most “amazing” thing about this whole journey isn’t the sight of Cape Horn, nor anything, but Jessica Watson herself.

You are an amazing human being, Jess, and you restore my faith in humanity, and more importantly, the future of our species. We can hardly go wrong with people like you, and your inimitable bravery.

Outcast.

2010-04-08T17:45:00.002+10:00

For the dim regions whence my fathers came
My spirit, bondaged by the body, longs.
Words felt, but never heard, my lips would frame;
My soul would sing forgotten jungle songs.
I would go back to darkness and to peace,
But the great western world holds me in fee,
And I may never hope for full release
While to its alien gods I bend my knee.
Something in me is lost, forever lost,
Some vital thing has gone out of my heart,
And I must walk the way of life a ghost
Among the sons of earth, a thing apart;
For I was born, far from my native clime,
Under the white man's menace, out of time.

Claude McKay

(Claude McKay is a West Indian born [Jamaica] poet.)