Scientists have discovered that clever people tend to live longer than the less clever among us. People with a so-called “smart gene” can expect to live, on average, to around 100 years of age, while those with the less smart variation of the gene can only expect around 85 years on this Earth.
Another scientist has concluded that people with higher IQs tend to more often be atheists than the general population.
Therefore, if you have the “smart gene” you are less likely to believe in God!
…
Okay, it’s not actually the “god belief” gene, but I love me some conflation and these two articles were listed as related…
The articles linked for both have more details. The former is a more reliable study than the latter, since the former is a study performed by multiple scientists with a somewhat decently sized sample group.
The latter is one scientist, who is not particularly well regarded due to previous studies that have been less than well received. And the sample size is not great - only looking at some academics and not necessarily getting their true beliefs is no way to run a study.
Sadly, Professor Gordon Lynch’s response is founded more on the “Shhh, don’t upset god-botherers” principle than any scientific merit. I guess we won’t need to test him for the smart gene.
I have always believed that all citizens are equal and should be treated accordingly. On the other hand, no group of citizens should be given government sanction and support to promote their social and sexual agenda upon the rest of us and especially, on our children.
Considering the fact that the same school system does not want to allow just one Minute of Silence in the classroom for God, this is preposterous. - Hillsborough County School District 6 Commissioner, Brian Blair
(Source: Tampa Bays 10)
No group of citizens should be given government sanction and support to promote their social and sexual agenda, unless they’re Christian and then it should be okay for them to promote their social, sexual and moral agenda on everyone?
I think the “Day of Silence” is a stupid idea and I would not participate, but they’re doing it to promote tolerance and prevent bullying of people of a homosexual persuasion. It’s not a recruitment drive, it’s “The Secret Gay Agenda“. ie; “Leave us alone”.
They’re not asking that you become homosexual, or that you be silent for a minute a day to acknowledge the existence of a God you may or may not believe in, they just don’t want to be harassed.
Matthew Hayden’s characterisation of serial racist Harbhajan Singh as an “obnoxious weed” has clarified once and for all the real difference between the Australian and Indian cricketing teams.
Both sides are guilty of indulging in sledging. Of that there is no doubt. It’s something that probably shouldn’t be in the game, but for whatever reason it seems to have become standard practice for sides all round the world. Whether the Indians or the Australians are more offensive when they do it is probably not something you could gauge, without secretly recording them throughout a game.
If you simply make everyone wear a microphone, very little will be said of any consequence.
But where does the real difference between the sides come in, then?
When an Indian cricketer is accused of making a vile, racist, taunt, in full hearing of a number of players, he can expect the full support of his cricketing association in fighting the charge. This support can include lawyers and even threatening to withdraw from any further matches involving the victim’s team.
When an Australian cricketer gives a frank, honest, but scathing review of an Indian player’s character, he is immediately required to front up to a hearing with his association and may face fines and/or a suspension.
This is on top of behaviour like Ishant Sharma’s abuse of Andrew Symonds, wicketkeeper MS Dhoni’s use of illegal gloves and the constant refusal of certain Indian players to walk when given out throughout the recent Test series and in some of the One Day matches this summer.
India love to make a big deal about playing “in the spirit of the game”. I fear the day when everyone plays the game in the same “spirit” India has shown us.
First and foremost, as a wise man once said - shit or get off the pot.
Either continue with the tour and abide by the decision of the judge, whenever it may be handed down. Or go home.
Holding the threat of a cancelled tour over the heads of the Australian team, the Australian public and the ICC is very clearly “not in the spirit of the game.” It’s never been part of good sportsmanship to take your ball and go home if a decision doesn’t go your way. Harping on about the Australian team’s lack of sportsmanship while continuing to threaten the governing body if you don’t get your way only makes you look like hypocrites.
So do what you’re threatening or shut up and get on with it.
Secondly, you are very much entitled to appeal Harbhajan’s suspension. The system is in place to do so and you might get a better result from the appeals process.
A three match suspension is not the maximum punishment though which, as a repeat offender, is what he really should have received. The Australians did try and let it stay on the field the first time, but when it’s a pattern of racial abuse coming from one player, are they just supposed to ignore it? That is why racism in cricket became so prevalent - nobody did anything about it.
Cop it sweet and tell him if he can’t stop using racial epithets, just shut the hell up. It’s not rocket science!
Thirdly, I agree with the rumoured stance you will be taking in the Third Test, assuming you go through with it. If the Australians are such horrific sledgers, report them. Every single time. Gentle ribbing is to be expected, but if the opposition really is referring to your player’s as bastards, why wouldn’t you report them?
The only reason I can think of is that you know full well you’re replying with much the same language, or worse. Well, it’s time for it all to stop. If your team isn’t being abusive and the other team keeps getting reported if they start in, it’ll get cleaned up right quick, won’t it?
So don’t just mutter about it. Do it! You’ll have a lot of support from a lot of quarters. A lot of fans don’t like that aspect of the game, so you’d be doing us a favour as well.
Last but by no means least, if you’re going to talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. Criticising Australia’s batsmen for not walking when they were out comes off very hollow when many times your own batsmen are not walking when they have actually been given out by the umpire. The rules are very clear in this regard - you do not have to leave your crease when you have not been given out by an umpire. But you do have to do so when you are. You don’t get to walk down the pitch to question the umpire, nor do you get to stand around for 10-20 seconds looking down the pitch in disbelief.
That is not in the spirit of cricket, either.
Oh and if you could speed up your over rate while bowling, that’d be ace.
First and foremost, someone in the Australian Cricket camp needs to deliver an ultimatum to the Indian Cricket Team - either they give an assurance now that the rest of the Tour will go ahead, irrespective of administrative or disciplinary decisions, or they go home immediately. Whilst the Australian team did instigate the complaint against Harbhajan, what happened after that is not their responsibility, nor is it fair to punish Australian fans by threatening to cancel the tour.
If India refuse to provide such an assurance, cancel the tour yourselves. And refuse to play any further Test matches involving India in the future, unless the ICC sanctions them heavily for having brought the game into disrepute with their blackmail. The mere fact that they are threatening to cancel a tour unless they get their way ought to be enough to ensure censure, yet nothing is being done. Would Australia suffer the same fate? If not, why should you tolerate it?
Secondly if, by some miracle, the Third Test in Perth does go ahead, give the Indians a real demonstration of aggression, passion and general hard-nosed play. Put Shaun Tait in the team and give him free rein to rip some bouncers in. Ditto Brett Lee. If you think an Indian player is out, appeal, loudly, even if it is very clear - clean bowled should receive the same volume as a faint edge. Always be sure to appeal directly to the umpire and never look, gesture or otherwise acknowledge an Indian player.
Do not walk if you think you’re out. Wait for the umpire to signal that you are out, then immediately vacate the crease. You are entitled to stand your ground until such time as the umpire raises a finger, so do it!
And throughout the match, from the start until you’re back in the team hotel after the match, there should only be one word said to an Indian player, and it should be one of the following: Heads or Tails.
Do not sledge them, do not compliment them, do not shake their hands after the match. They do not deserve such signs of respect after the way they have carried on in the last couple of days.
And last but not least, take a hardline approach to any comments directed at Australian players by Indian players - if there is even a suggestion that there may have been some offensive intent behind a comment, report it immediately to the umpire. Every time. No exceptions. If you have said nothing to them then they will not have any excuses to fall back on.
If you’ve been following the election news you will have noticed the big kerfuffle over the apparent copying of policies, primarily accusations that the Labor Party are copying Liberal Party policies, though there’s the occasional Liberal copycat labels being thrown around as well.
What people on all sides seem to be forgetting is that it’s not the “other side’s” responsibility to blindly oppose everything proposed by one party. That isn’t how the system is supposed to work. Good ideas - regardless of who they come from - are supposed to be supported, while bad ones are supposed to be voted down.
While it’s true that neither side should simply be automatically matching everything the other does, it is also true that there ought to be some areas on which both sides concur. Neither Labor nor Liberal want to see gay marriage legalised and yet that is not considered a “copycat” stance.
But when it comes to giving money to sick kiddies, whoever gets their pork barrel in the door first is the only one allowed to do so?
I think the Liberal Party is simply scared to run with few significant policy differences between the parties, forcing it to come down to a test of character.
I know I said I was going to do these once a week but, well, I forgot. :-)
The previous poll results were as follows:
Labor (14 votes)
Liberal/National (9 votes)
Someone Else (6 votes)
Undecided (1 vote)
Have any of the parties done enough to change your mind since the election campaign started? Vote in the poll and feel free to discuss in the comments!
Loading ...
(This poll will run until noon-ish on Election Day.)
The Australian Christian Lobby has actually done something useful for a change and have sent out a survey to the major political parties in Australia, canvassing their opinions on a variety of moral issues that are important to Christians and thus probably important to everyone else for the exact opposite reason.
Whichever side of the fence you’re on, the website where they have collected all the responses and sorted them according to category is likely to be a valuable resource for you to check on the party lines of the candidates in your electorate.
If you’ve ever wondered how our country got into it’s current state, the SMH’s profile of Wentworth may be able to clue you in.
With such pearls of wisdom as “The future is the way that we need to go”, “Little Johnny is credible” and “John Howard is the best Prime Minister we’ve ever had”, is it any wonder the Liberals keep getting back in.
“If they stuff up, they need to be punished but they don’t need to be punished if they’re doing fine, why punish them if they’re doing fabulously?”
Let’s see, the Liberals have overseen the introduction of a widely despised GST, declining standards and funding of education and declining standards and funding of the healthcare system. They’ve gotten us involved in two wars, one of which was without the support or sanction of the United Nations. They’ve told us illegal immigrants throw children overboard. They twisted a referendum on becoming a republic such that the vote was a foregone conclusion. They’ve introduced the WorkChoices system, which is widely despised and/or feared by the working population of the country.
How many stuff ups must be made before they’re considered less than fabulous, people of Wentworth?
Prime Minister John Howard is once more trying to weasel out of past promises, this time his promise that interest rates would always be lower under a Coalition Government, and an ad that ran during the last election which stated that there wouldn’t be any interest rate rises if the Coalition was returned.
Of course now we know that interest rates have steadily risen since the last election and while it is true that they might have risen more under a Labor Government, most people are quite rightly upset as the implication was always that the interest rates would, at worst, not increase under Liberal leadership. And that is quite obviously false.
As Labor accused Mr Howard of weasel words over interest rates, the Prime Minister said it was more important to concentrate on the future and “not so much what happened three years ago”. [Source: SMH]
The future, Mr Howard? Would that be the future where interest rates will always be lower under a Liberal/National Coalition Government?
As a former lawyer, I’m sure you’re familiar with the phrase, “goes to pattern, your honour.” You make a promise or otherwise insinuate something will be true of your Government, should the public choose to vote for you, then at some point after the election you go back on your promise or carefully spin your pre-election statements in an attempt to make it appear like you weren’t telling lies.
Well, the public is starting to wise up to you. Between the GST, “Children Overboard”, interest rates and a myriad other things it is abundantly clear that you can not be trusted with the future of this country, Mr Howard.
Loading ...
Entries (RSS)