Evolution

Monday, November 27, 2000 ~ Comments Off

The human species is evolving. But into what?

Recent propositions have detailed a system where you can order products that you see when watching a film or tv programme. Product placement is now commonplace in major blockbusters, so now when you think – hey cool phone! – all you will need to do is push a button to order it.

WAP phones enable you to access up-to-the-minute information and news. The next generation will feature an ‘always-on’ connection, allowing business to push information out to you – when you are walking past your local cinema your phone will beep and you will be able to get cut-price tickets to the latest movie…walking past a fast food chain, it’ll tell you the latest tasty(?) deals.

You have a wealth of information available to you, and every day information is pushed at you from all sources. So much information to process, you probably spend a large amount of your time just deciding which bits of information you want to keep and which to ignore or discard.

And so we begin the evolution, we don’t need to get up, we can have food and products delivered. We only need to be able to process information. Soon social convention will kick in (it’s beginning already) to make the stay-at-home information human an acceptable reality. The life-span will shorten, due of lack of exercise and proper nutrition, and the body shape will change. The brain will grow, the arms become more fixed in a palms down hands out position, and legs will slowly shorten and disappear.

Yeuch…amorphous blobs, huge brains. Kinda like the Mekon meets Jabba the Hutt.

Alongside this there will be a separate species of human. One who is able to step away from this madness. Breathe fresh air. Walk in the park. Swim in the oceans. Ohhh wait, that one already exists.

Faith

Wednesday, September 27, 2000 ~ Comments Off

I was in a church, yesterday, for the first time in, oohhh…4 years? longer? I felt very hypocritical, but was glad I went – it reminded me why it leaves such a strange taste in my mouth.

Now, don’t get me wrong (again…), I have amazing respect for anyone who can devote themselves to a religion, mainly because I could never do it myself. I still don’t understand how anyone could let their minds and souls be controlled in such a fashion.

The thing that struck me most, and something I had never really noticed before now, was how the picture of the world at large was divided easily into black and white. Church of Scotland is by no means a strict branch of christianity, and is often seen as ‘less religious’ than Catholicism, but both branches share similar doctrines. “This is the way we do things, you must do them our way, any other way is wrong.” Whilst this is never fully stated, it is thinly veiled in the ritual that is a Sunday morning service.

On the plus side, there is a definite community appeal to attending church. It is like an extended family, but then again, I could say the same about my circle of friends – except that we have a more interesting time as we don’t all believe or do the same things.

The Church of Scotland complains that people are turning away from God, and after experiencing the service on Sunday, I can see why. The exclusivity of common knowledge, when you are the one who is excluded, is a very lonely feeling. You feel out of place, nervous, uncomfortable.

My lack of faith doesn’t disturb me, or frighten me, it is a comfort. I am happy in the knowledge that I am not blinkered, that I can look around and see things for myself. I may not always like what I see, but I will never condemn anyone for their beliefs, I hope you don’t condemn me for mine.

Petrol

Monday, September 11, 2000 ~ Comments Off

“That is not the way to make policy in Britain and as far as I am concerned it never will be.” – Tony Blair.

Totally agree Tony. Well said. We can’t have a government that is dictated to, that’s the entire point in voting, elections and the democratic process.

Slight problem though, aren’t the people we voted for supposed to act on our behalf? Aren’t they supposed to listen to what we say, take it on board and at least consider it? Mr.Blair’s reaction seems rather childish. He is already lifting what is a simple campaign, based around one simple idea (we pay too much for our petrol) into the political arena, and trying to stamp his authority on the matter. Aside from that small matter of not being able to take someone… who uses pauses…. far too much…. when speaking to…. the public, seriously, I think this is another example of the basic flaw that every politician develops.

We think we are paying too much for our petrol. The government says, we’ll sorry…tough. So we ask again and start a small scale campaign (the ‘don’t buy on the 1st of the month’ one). Response from the government, yes we do hear you, but we can’t do anything. We start a blockade. The government gets twitchy and starts getting authoritative.

So, we ask, and ask, then act. The government politely declines us twice, then clamps down (to stop the matter getting out of hand, no doubt). What is stopping them acting? What are they afraid of?

They have just launched a £1billion initiative to get more of the UK online. What the hell are they spending it on? The last published figures, from the government, stated that around 60% of households in the UK are online, with over 85% owning and using a computer. Schools all have computers (usually shiny new iMacs that no-one uses, the staff not having received any training).

We work longer hours than every country in Europe, pay more tax, and earn less. So, the government receives, per head, more money from us than any other company. We have less in our pockets, so obviously we shouldn’t mind paying high prices for just about everything.

What is the government afraid of? They are afraid that if they act over the current petrol dispute, they will very soon be put under pressure to lower prices, tax etc on many, many other things.

We need a strong government. I don’t doubt that. I am fully aware that there is no quick fix. Mr.Blair and the Labour party need to learn one thing very quickly. What they are doing right now is not being strong. They have been pushed into a corner, and want to come out fighting. This is not a display of strength, this is a display of petty schoolboy (public schoolboy?) arrogance. I’m all for keeping integrity, and stay focussed to reach goals that will benefit everyone. The hardest part of keeping your integrity is learning when to give it up.

Flirt

Friday, September 8, 2000 ~ Comments Off

Flirting is fun. Hell, I don’t need to tell you that! But why do we do it? I’m very happily married (I love her), so why do I flirt?

Initial thoughts of those who have not adopted the flirting doctrine (if it moves, flirt with it) is to try and categorise flirters by saying “You’re actually cheating on your partner, not physical, but mentally”…eh…Excuse me? Admittedly men are worse than women when it comes to ‘looking’, as in we make it more obvious, but both sexes do it, committed or not, and that is not flirting, that’s looking/gawking/staring (delete as applicable).

The reason I flirt is because it can be fun. It is important to note here that it is only fun if both parties are comfortable, and realise that flirting goes no further than the suggestive. Where does the fun come from? I’ll fully admit that it comes from the excitement of something illicit, the sense that you are starting down a path you shouldn’t be taking. Flirting is naughty.

It is a strange thing, comparable to outdoor sex, for want of a better comparison. There is nothing wrong or bad about the activity, but it still feels naughty, and that’s where the fun is. It may be an odd description, but I suppose flirting is a kind of rebellion, of doing the wrong thing. The beauty of flirting (bearing in mind the above note) is that, unlike other illicit activities, you can’t get caught. There is no end consequence, nothing happens. The day finishes, and the flirting stops, with no harm inflicted, no blame to be laid, and no guilt of having done the wrong thing.

Admittedly the above wouldn’t ring as true if my relationship with Louise wasn’t as strong as it is, and obviously flirting is not a sole occupation, but at the right time, in the right place, with the right people, it can be damn good fun.

Addendum:
Since writing this, and re-reading it a few days later (before I published it for your greedy eyes), I’ve had a nagging feeling that the tone wasn’t quite right. I was going to re-edit it, but decided to leave the original intact, and try and clarify a few points here.

I do not flirt with everyone. You can’t as you run the risk of offending. Flirting should only be done with those who realise what is going on. It is possibly to take flirting too far, blatant flirting at the exclusion of others it not to be condoned. Flirting should be subtle affair (although this does depend on the people involved), and should not affect anyone else, only those directly involved.

To clarify, flirting is not a precursor to sex, it is mischievous, suggestive fun, the end goal is fun, not the exchange of bodily fluids.

OK, serious bit over.

And for the record, when she wants, Louise can out-flirt me without even trying!

Health

Sunday, May 14, 2000 ~ Comments Off

Which is more important to you – your body or your mind? If you had the choice, how which would you sacrifice? Would you sacrifice your imagination, intelligence, sense of logic for the ability to walk down the street, to run along a beach, to climb the highest peak and admire the view?

Bye bye Mind.
So you can walk, run, climb, swim, and more. You climb that mountain, and stand astride the top, and survey the world beneath you. You swim in the bluest oceans, diving to the coral reefs below to be with the exotic fishes, in the warm currents under the water. But what kind experience would it be if the mind was gone, no emotion to call on, no reference against which to measure the beauty of what you were seeing?

Bye bye Body.
Second scenario, your senses are alert, your vision keen, mind active, always working. Anwers leap out at you, solutions emerge effortlessly, a million and one questions fill your head. Yet your body refuses to obey you. You are thirsty, yet you can’t pick up the cup in front of you, the sun is shining, but you can’t walk in the fresh air. The mountain mocks you, looking down from the impenetrable height. The questions in your head remain trapped there, incommunicado.

Health is a blessing, taken too quickly for granted. With awareness and understanding, a muscle ache is welcomed, an ‘impossible’ puzzle a challenge to be enjoyed.

So why are we so intolerant of those who don’t share our blessings? Why do we look down, with scorn and pity, when it would take less time and effort to understand, and communicate.

A friend ends emails “With Blessings”. How often do we truly count them?

With Blessings – may your health be yours to control.

Foxhunt

Sunday, March 12, 2000 ~ Comments Off

BAN FOXHUNTING!…but what about the dogs?

We were watching Crufts on TV the other night <insert sarcastic comment here – I can’t be bothered thinking of one>, and they did a report on the impact a foxhunting ban would have on the hounds. It was very interesting, and made me stop and think, which is always a good thing.

My view on foxhunting is pretty simple, it should be banned, it’s barbaric and no longer required as there are many more humane methods of keeping the fox population down. The main focus of the report was the impact an immediate ban would have on the packs of fox hounds that are kept and bred specifically for foxhunts. Figures varied but a rough estimate of around 20,000 pack hounds exist in Britain. So what would happen to these dogs if foxhunting was banned?

Pack hounds are bred and brought up in packs (kinda obvious ain’t it) and, as such, are unlike most dogs. They have no territory, their identity coming from the pack. These dogs would have a difficult time surviving without the pack, as they rely on the pack community and social interaction to develop. Their owners wouldn’t pay for their upkeep (most are homed in specialist kennels) as they wouldn’t be able to hunt with them.

So, ban foxhunting, and the problem shifts from the well-being of the foxes, to the well-being of the pack hounds, 20,000 of them. You can’t put that number of dogs to sleep (and it would contradict the animal rights activist main aims) – interesting dilemma isn’t it! They did talk briefly about drag hunting (where I think they use a stuffed toy, or something, and drag it round fields behind a horse or 4×4) but you must have the correct terrain and there are only a few drag hunting sites in Britain, no where near enough to keep 20,000 dogs busy.

The obvious answer – well obvious to me – is to stop breeding and developing pack hounds now. Eventually pack numbers will dwindle, foxhunting can stop, and both sides will have plenty of time to prepare and plan alternative methods of fox control, and the pack hound breeds can be developed for other purposes.

Obvious? I hope so, I’m sure it has many pitfalls. Getting two sides, so vehemently opposed, to agree being the main obstacle. The activists want foxhunting banned now, the huntsmen are concerned about the knock-on effects, and argue about their rights.

And for that reason alone, this type of argument will continue to rage – how do you argue against someone’s belief system and how they perceive their rights? Why can’t everyone see the ‘other’ side?

Anyway, I think MY plan will work. Or maybe I should stop thinking about it and do something.

Information

Monday, January 10, 2000 ~ Comments Off

The internet is a wonderful thing, it has removed boundaries, and connected the world. Three cheers for Tim Berners Lee!!

Or perhaps not…

I was looking through some of my rants on here, and was quite shocked to find how quickly I had forgotten the incidents and issues I was so vehemently spouting about. Well, forgotten isn’t really the right word, but the issues had certainly slipped to the back of my mind (which I must clear out soon).

So what is this an indication of? My lack of integrity and true morals? Probably. But I think, or maybe want to believe, that there is another answer.

How many emails do you READ a day? How many news sites do you visit, on whatever topic? Information overload? The internet moves so fast, with new information coming so fast you feel cheated in your favourite “obscure 70′s Arcade games” website hasn’t updated it’s news for one day. I’m conscious that I spend too much time on the PC, and far too much time on the Internet – which is costing me a fortune, let me tell you Americans, you’ve got it easy! – and I am beginning to realise that my attention span is, well, is it decreasing? or is it ravenous for more?

The thought of sitting down to read a book seems almost prehistoric. Novels don’t contain the latest version of the wonderful shell you’ve been raving about, do they?

Pretty soon, something you thought about last week, seems like last month, and events creep past you, barely registering. Yesterday’s news is now last hour’s news. Scary.

I hope that future generations will remember to interact with the world outside their PCs (yes, there is one), keep a good sense of right and wrong, and remember past mistakes. I’m part of the first generation not affected by World War 2, and it seems so long ago now, especially in a new century, but we mustn’t forget. Now what we need is a global repository, that can be accessed from anywhere in the world, listing the atrocities, and reminding future generations of what can happen.

Dammit, I hate it when my brain does that to me…

And I think I’ll leave the back of my mind alone, I had a quick look and, frankly, I don’t want to go back…