Random Playlist Song: Bach - BWV 996 Suite in E minor for Solo Lute - 03 Courante
The sound of the lute is so much more pleasant and refined (at least to my uncultured ears) than that of the guitar, though it does sound slightly messier.
***
A project group from NTU Mass Communications wanted to interview me and a friend about blogging.
18 hours before the interview, they called it off because my "entries r generally on issues and stuffs" and so "it does not really go in line with the topic".
I hope they plan their next project better.
Panelist 1: maybe u can snub them online, by emailing them a video clip of you flicking your lustrous long locks in their faces
or maybe a video clip of your jiggling moobs :P
Panelist 2: spam them with that prince dude's pics [Ed: Asian Prince]
Panelist 3: i'll be angry on your behalf.
@#!@#@Q#!~@
***
donaq recounts an anecdote:
"*after a long discussion*
Me: So genocide is justified if God commanded it?
Some blood god pimp in NTU: Yes.
Me: So supposing God told you to hijack a plane and crash it into the Petronas
Towers because Islamic countries are sinks of great iniquity, you'd do it?
Him: Yes.
Me: I have nothing more to say to you, psycho.
Him: *tries to say something*
Me: *leaves*
I swear this conversation took place. Frightening."
I think even if their god came down to them and told them that evolution were true and that the fundies had got it wrong in many other ways, they wouldn't believe him.
Splendid.
loupgarou points me to this thread on Channelnewsasia.com's forums:
Darwinism and the bible..a conflict??
The thread is really damn sad. Even the worst US creationist forums don't look as bad as that one.
I guess Singapore is pathetic, oh well.
A response to the Embryogenesis picture:
"Haeckel's embryology pictures were based on von Baer's original work. Take a look at the original drawings by von Baer http://home.tiscalinet.ch/biografien/sources/baer_embryos.htm and read his biography under http://www.zbi.ee/baer/biography.htm. You will notice that he was against "evolution" and thus not likely to modify drawings to make them more in line with Darwin's Evolution.
If you want to see more recent photographs of human embryos showing the tail and the gill buds, you could look at http://www.nurseminerva.co.uk/tailbud.htm or http://www.med.unc.edu/embryo_images/unit-welcome/welcome_htms/akgs.htm. Similar images can be found for chicken, fish etc..."
Also: another interesting tidbit - "The fact that all land vertebrates have seven neck vertrebrae in indeed very interesting. Regardless of the length of the neck they stick to this number. That's very difficult to understand from the point of view of Intelligent Design..."
Me on hair: will you grow it out again?
Someone: yup... supposed to
cos of dance
Me: haha why do dance girls need long hair?
is swirling your hair a pre-req?
Someone: we need long hair to tie our hair up
Me: haha that's silly
why have long hair if you tie it up
why not have short hair then
Someone: haha uniformity mah
Me: ...
ask everyone to cut lah
Someone: it's neater lah. as in can tie up so no hair on your face when you dance
Me: crew cut lor
or hair clips
that's weird logic [hers, not mine
Someone: haha
isn't it unsettling to see a troupe of bald girls dancing
Me: hahahahhaha
break barriers!
Someone else: I'm surprised you can stand the banal innocence of mozart
Me: I don't dissect my music, I enjoy it :)
it depends on what you're looking for, really
do you view music as a critique of or commentary on reality?
I just view it as something to enjoy
Someone else: it should be primarily beauty
descriptive things should be left to soundtracks
Me: yeah I don't find atonal or anti-tonal (so to speak) music beautiful
***
Some gems from the January 2004 archives:
On faith: The philosopher Ronald de Sousa once memorably described philosophical theology as "intellectual tennis without a net," and I readily allow that I have indeed been assuming without comment or question up to now that the net of rational judgment was up. But we can lower it if you really want to. it's your serve. Whatever you serve, suppose I return service rudely as follows: "What you say implies that God is a ham sandwich wrapped in tinfoil. That's not much of a God to worship!" If you then volley back, demanding to know how I can logically justify my claim that your serve has such a preposterous implication, I will reply: "Oh, do you want the net up for my returns, but not for your serves? Either the net stays up, or it says down. If the net is down, there are no rules and anybody can say anything, a mug's game if there ever was one. I have been giving you the benefit of the assumption that you would not waste your own time or mine by playing with the net down."
Suppose, however, that God did give this law to the Jews, and did tell them that whenever a man preached a heresy, or proposed to worship any other God that they should kill him; and suppose that afterward this same God took upon himself flesh, and came to this very chosen people and taught a different religion, and that thereupon the Jews crucified him; I ask you, did he not reap exactly what he had sown? What right would this god have to complain of a crucifixion suffered in accordance with his own command? - Robert G. Ingersoll
--- A quote on Jewish law and sentencing deviants to death that I always want to reuse, but never manage to find on Google (keywords: Jesus Christ, sentenced to death, blasphemy, killed him)
(From: Some Mistakes of Moses: XXVIII: 'Inspired' Religious Liberty (The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll: Volume II (Lectures) [1900]))
raintree tries
"I can explain this.
You see, in Old Testament times, the way God ruled was: disobey me, and I'll zap you. Obey me, and I'll reward you handsomely. Sin must be removed, eradicated etc etc or else Israel will get into trouble with God. Every sin must also be paid for with a blood sacrifice (this is true both then and now).
The Amalekites were a sinful people, and their presence would be a sinful influence on Israel, and God's chosen people cannot have sin in the camp. Therefore they were exterminated.
Let me repeat again: this was in Old Testament time. Old Testament time, unlike New Testament time, was not a period of grace. Secondly, do not confuse Israel with the Church. Israel is God's chosen people. They are two different entities. The Church is under grace, both in New Testament and post-New Testament (i.e. now) times. Christians are not Isralites/Israelis, and vice versa. Today's Israelis are NOT Christians, the main difference being that they're still waiting for the Messiah to come to earth. Christians, however, believe that Christ (the Messiah) has come, been crucified, rose again, and gone up to Heaven.
The Old Testament accounts of Israel exterminating evil people (in God's standards) and of Israel being punished when it itself sinned against God is to show us that humankind can never attain God's standards of holiness, and that grace is needed. That's why God sent his Son Christ down to die for humankind--a perfect sacrifice for all, that by His grace those who believe can be saved.
I hope this makes some sense. :)
"How can anyone gain faith reading a bible unless they've been brainwashed into its assumptions by a charismatic preacher, friends or family prior to reading the book?"
My reply to such a person would be: I haven't been brainwashed. I always consider all viewpoints with respect to things said in the Book. :)"
My reply:
But then the Christian god is supposed to be both unchanging and omnibenevolent.
If he wanted to rule that way - so be it. But one so grotesque and repellent as to choose the path of blood and death has no right to set himself up as a bastion of morality and goodness, and no right to demand worship.
Respect is earned, not demanded.
The debate on my Anti-Halal Manifesto has ended on a good note (No, NiHL, do *NOT* go there).
ceci is right that, in the past and at present, where religions have met and come into conflict, much misery has resulted.
I argue that this is not because people have been discussing, comparing and examining religion(s) critically, but because they instead have been engaging in "rumour-mongering, fiery rhetoric, FUD-ing and one-sided preaching", not to mention trying to impose their beliefs on each other.
In any case, "our ultimate objectives aren't in conflict".
***
Here's your chance to play finance minister - Pretend you're Singapore's Finance Minister
It is interesting to note that Defence is taken as an endogenous variable - so much for sacking incompetent regulars to raise productivity and total output.
Overheard (on the SAF and deterrence): "in fact, part of the reason why one needs a credible defence force is to act as a deterrent. but as i also pointed out, being credible is more than size and/or expenditure. i assure you that russia in 1905 and 1914 had a very large army. but the army was also very incredible, in more ways than one. which led to its embarrassing defeats at the hands of like everyone else."
And on our dear Israeli friends, whom we are often compared to: ""...Labor-saving advances in military technology have further reduced the need to draft every able-bodied 18-year-old. For instance, the soldiers who once did the math required for aiming artillery batteries have been replaced by computers. At the same time, the I.D.F. hates losing, after three years, conscripts in whom it has invested enormous resources preparing for the future battlefield of high-tech missiles, sophisticated tanks, computerized avionics.
To lose the bums and keep the techies, the army is considering shrinking the intake of draftees, chosen perhaps by lottery to ensure enough grunts, while recruiting volunteers for the better jobs by offering salaries designed to attract and retain prime talent. The reserves may go professional too, à la the U.S. National Guard. One senior officer suggests the army keep only a third of the 600,000 reservists now on the books. The rest, he says, "would be kept in abeyance for Armageddon."
Some army commanders worry that dividing the military and civilian worlds would remove the I.D.F. from the central place it occupies in Israeli life. And ditching the draft would mean losing a unifying force that does help stitch together an immigrant society. A professional army would be less enchanting than a citizens' force—but it might make more sense."
singapore's population, at 4 million, is not far behind israel's, which is now slightly under 7 million. perhaps it's time to do some compare and contrast?"
