Sky Lights and Carringtons

The Tavern is well located for observing the Aurora. We have the Aurora Australis here, rather than the Borealis which is seen up in the northern hemisphere.

The 'cause' is the same - solar activity which impacts the Earth's magnetic defences.

It can make for quite a light show. 

And we know when they are about to happen because Aurora nerds keep a sharp eye open and use an array of instruments to not just look at the sky but at the Sun. You can get an idea of that here.....

http://www.aurora-service.net/aurora-forecast/

As you can see it does not need a lot of radiation hitting the atmosphere for Tasmanian to see it.

Go up higher though and the ISS - International Space Station does not have to wait around. It sees auroras several times a day.

It can look pretty but there is a significant sting in its tail.

The root cause is the ejection of plasma from the Sun. Modest amounts can light up the sky, but what of far greater amounts?

Then we are in deep doo doos.

As we were told by  Josh Davis just yesterday.

Here's How The White House Would Deal With A Huge Solar Storm That Could Send Us Back To The Dark Age

The worst solar storm to hit the Earth in recorded history happened in 1859. Known as the 

Carrington Event 

it generated auroras as far south as Cuba and caused havoc with the primitive electrical system of the time, generating fires in telegraph stations. 

 http://www.iflscience.com/space/white-house-releases-strategic-plan-prepare-major-solar-storms

It’s estimated that such a large solar storm will occur roughly every 150 years or so. If one of a similar magnitude were to hit the Earth now, with a society much more dependent on electronics and technology, it would undoubtedly have catastrophic consequences.

Due to this increasing threat, the White House’s National Science and Technology Council has released a National Space Weather Action Plan, in which it details a strategic plan to prepare for an event such as a major solar storm.

Somehow, for some reason, I do not have a lot of confidence in 'White House' plans. No doubt they will say that the Sun's plasma ejections are caused by global warming and its all your fault and you should pay the UN billions in taxes.

The document warns that with electrical systems becoming increasingly interconnected, if one were to be knocked out, it could cause a cascade of system failures. It recommends a federally-coordinated approach to a number of procedures, from reducing the vulnerability of those infrastructures deemed most at risk, to increasing our forecasting and communications abilities.    

The Sun is constantly ejecting charged subatomic particles in the form of solar winds, some of which hit our atmosphere. It is this that causes the northern lights, or auroras, though most of the particles that reach us are deflected by Earth’s magnetic field. 

Occasionally, particularly large flares will burst from the Sun and the particles will make it through our magnetic field. A recent study has estimated that there is a 

12 percent chance that one of these “megaflares” will erupt within the decade, sending a massive solar storm our way.  

We’ve already had a taster of what might happen if we were struck by a storm, albeit on a much smaller scale. 

Back in 1989 Canada got hit by solar storm that created a power surge on the electrical grid. Within 90 seconds this caused the shut-down of Hydro-Québec’s electrical system, leaving millions without power for nine hours. If this were to happen on a much grander scale, the damage would be huge.

One estimate suggests that if a storm the size of the Carrington Event were to hit today, the cost of the clean-up in the U.S. alone would be somewhere between $1-2 trillion (£657 billion to £1.3 trillion) during the first year, with a recovery that could take up to a decade. 

Every facet of our lives would be impacted, from transportation, communication, banking and government, as we live in an increasingly electronic world.

In Tasmania the clean-up cost would probably run into hundreds of dollars.

In fact the danger is so great that the European Space Agency is also working on its own warning system using scientists spread across 14 countries across Europe. At the moment there isn’t actually much we can do if a storm were to hit, except warn the necessary parties of the incoming threat, who could then make preparations, such as shutting down relevant systems to limit the potential damage. 

Hmmmm. No, I guess there is not a lot we could do. The Stone Age may be a reach into scary imagination but a more realistic one would be the middle ages. 

Stock up on goodies.

Drink deep.

It will not be just pretty skies for a while but roving bands of brigands again. 

Pax

Today I am a Man.

I suspect, from long experience, that when I awake from my slumbers on the morrow I shall still be a man.  Many a trouser-wearing customer will make the same assumption about themselves and get on with their day. Many ladies - the skirt-wearing variety - will get on with being the woman that they were yesterday and expect to be next week too.

But that may only go for Tavern customers.  Out there in the badlands of Hillary's Village they wake on the morn and decide for themselves rather than simply rely on precedent and rational expectation. For this is the era of 'choose your own'.

A lady with a very long and distinguished experience of being a lady / woman / female / wearer of skirts and dresses was in the Oz room bringing some wisdom to the throng. Babette Francis; a fine - perhaps should I say without any aim to demean - a Grand Older Lady, and well known in Oz for her staunch defenses of Christendom and all that comes with it.

She refuses to be confused by Facebook or the UN with their lunatic designations of simple sexual parts and nomenclature. It took her a little while to get around to it so I busied myself pulling pints and refilling glasses.

56 ‘genders’ – 

pick one for yourself

A man is a hero if he calls himself a woman, but if he calls himself Napoleon he is crazy. 

Is it any more likely that Bruce Jenner is a woman than a reincarnated Napoleon?

And what if a man thinks he is a chicken ‘trapped’ in a man’s body? If a man is called courageous because he says he is a woman, isn’t he even more courageous for saying he is a chicken?

Babette's joke about a man claiming to be a chicken has come more or less true for Englishman Ted Richards who has had his face tattooed with feathers. He has also had his ears removed and is looking for a surgeon to turn his nose into a beak. He does not identify as a trans-species.

And how long before our health service provides him with feather implants, poultry hormones and beak surgery? Let him strut and crow and legally marry hens? Open a new frontier not merely in transgender but in trans-species?

 http://morningmail.org/56-genders-pick-one-for-yourself/#more-36336

Well, where did all this nonsense start? One can speculate that some of it is caused by the concentration of estrogen from contraceptive pills in water supplies which has been observed to cause fish to change sex. However, human beings are not fish, and I prefer the witty observation of a mathematician who commented that she thought the earth was rotating through a cloud of stupid gas.

Where my observations started was when I was appointed a member of the Committee on Equal Opportunity in Schools in my home state of Victoria in Australia in the late seventies. The committee’s function was to encourage more girls to study maths and science and to encourage boys to study home economics and sewing. 

The committee was dominated by feminists whose thesis was that there would be more equalization of subject choices in school if lesbianism and/or an androgynous, unisex society was promoted, starting with books in kindergarten such as Jane Has Two Mothers.

Well, I had done maths and science in India 50 years ago in what was quite a traditional society, and I didn’t think lesbianism had anything to do with girls choosing to study maths. I discovered that the leading private schools in Victoria had twice as many maths classes in their timetables than the government schools. I wrote a minority report, making the recommendation that the number of maths classes in government schools be doubled.

But I found that feminists are not interested in rational debate. 

They insist at one and the same time that there are no differences between men and women, but also that the world would be a more compassionate place if more women were in power. 

If one argues that this is not logical, feminists retort that logic is a male construct and that women think differently, with “empathy and intuition” rather than logic. 

Have you ever noticed that arguing with a feminist is like wrestling with Jell-O?

After the publication of my minority report, a number of women around Australia got in touch with me and said they had experienced the same frustrations with feminist domination of education in their home states, and eventually we got together and established Endeavour Forum. 

We realized that some political aspects of educational policy in Australia were a trickle-down from interpretations of United Nations treaties and conventions. So we began to attend the annual sessions of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women in New York, and in 2000 achieved NGO status recognition by the Economic and Social Council of the UN.

At the UN we discovered that the policy was not so much the promotion of a unisex society as the promotion of multiple genders: 

they were lobbying for five genders: male, female, asexual, transsexual and hermaphrodite. The situation reached high drama at a session of the Commission on the Status of Women when the development agencies of the Scandinavian countries threatened to withhold development money from Nicaragua unless the Nicaraguan government sacked the head of its delegation, Max Padilla, from his then Cabinet post as Minister for the Family.

His offence, on-going from the 1999 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in New York, dubbed “Cairo plus five”, was to refuse to accept the European Union definition of “gender” as an arbitrary social construct which could include several “genders”. 

He insisted that “gender” be defined in its common meaning of two sexes, male and female. 

The hapless Mr Padilla was duly recalled – Nicaragua is a poor country vulnerable to economic coercion. His replacement duly arrived, but he had apparently not been briefed about what he was supposed to say, because he looked at the papers before him and said, “But in my country we only have men and women….”.

2 ?

23?, 58? This is what passes for debate at the UN. Today, however, five genders seems comparatively modest. 

The Australian Human Rights Commission acknowledges 23 genders, and Facebook recognizes 58 genders, all of which are also recognized by the Australian Broadcasting Commission, so you have a wide choice.

These genders are: Agender, Androgyne, Androgynous, Bigender, Cis, Cisgender, Cis Female, Cis Male, Cis Man, Cis Woman, Cisgender Female, Cisgender Male, Cisgender Man, Cisgender Woman, Female to Male, FTM, Gender Fluid, Gender Nonconforming, Gender Questioning, Gender Variant, Genderqueer, Intersex, Male to Female, MTF, Neither, Neutrois, Non-binary, Other, Pangender, Trans, Trans* Trans Female, Trans* Female, Trans Male, Trans* Male, Trans Man, Trans* Man, Trans Person, Trans* Person, Trans Woman, Trans* Woman, Transfeminine, Transgender, Transgender Female, Transgender Male, Transgender Man, Transgender Person, Transgender Woman, , Transmasculine, Transsexual, Transsexual Female, Transsexual Male, Transsexual Man, Transsexual Person, Transsexual Woman, and Two-Spirit.

Our Victorian Labor government has recently appointed a Gender and Sexuality Commissioner. 

Her name is Rowena Allen, and she derives her inspiration directly from Native Americans. 

But, but, no but.... yes but.... she'he's WHITE !!!!

She is quoted in a recent article in Melbourne’s Age newspaper as follows: “I identify as a Walker which is a Native American term for someone who walks between genders. At any point people will call me male or ‘sir’, which is great when you’re buying a car, but I’m just as comfortable in a group of women.” 

Will we ever have a Male 'Gender and Sexuality' Commissioner? Or a Male 'Eeeek-wallet-eee'  Commissioner?  Do not hold your breath until you turn blue.

She also identifies as a lesbian. 

She has a daughter, and lives with her partner who has a son. 

And how does one select one’s gender? Well, the Yogyakarta Principles, enunciated by a handful of human rights lobbyists and a radical homosexual group who met in Yogyakarta in Indonesia in 2007, determined in its preamble that “gender identity” refers to “each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense of the body (which may involve, if freely chosen, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical or other means) and other expressions of gender, including dress, speech and mannerisms”.

All this may seem absurd, but it also involves tragedies. No doubt you have all read about the Reimer twins, victims of the late Dr John Money’s grand experiment into changing sex.

One of the boys, David, due to a circumcision accident, had his penis badly damaged. Dr Money – who was professor of pediatrics and medical psychology at Johns Hopkins University from 1951 until his death in 2006 – encouraged his parents to have him castrated and to bring him up as a girl. Dr Money also coerced the boys into “sex play” with each other. 

The experiment did not work, and both of the boys as adult men committed suicide.

This tragedy is also reflected in data from Sweden, which shows that the incidence of suicide is higher among those who identify as transgender and who have had sex-change surgery than among those who have not had the surgery.

It is even worse when he bends down to pick up a dropped fag.

The Gender Identity Clinic at John Hopkins was closed, and Dr Money’s controversial evening course in human sexology was cancelled in the late seventies. Dr Paul McHugh, chairman of the Psychiatry Department at John Hopkins, criticized transsexual surgery as “the most radical therapy ever encouraged by 20th century psychiatrists”, and likened it to the once widespread practice of frontal lobotomy. 

Dr Jon Meyer, a Hopkins psychiatrist and former director of the Gender Identity Clinic, produced a long-term follow-up of fifty post-operative and pre-operative adult transsexuals treated at John Hopkins and reported that none showed any measurable improvement in their lives and concluded that “sex re-assignment surgery confers no objective advantage in terms of social rehabilitation“.

There is a determined push by the homosexual rights movement to legitimize sex changes and also for the right for birth certificates to be altered to show the “new” gender, even when there has been no hormone treatment or surgery, i.e., individuals should have the right to be regarded as male or female regardless of anatomy and based solely on their feelings of self-identification.

New York is moving forward with a plan to let people alter the sex on their birth certificate, even if they have not had sex-change surgery. People born in the city would be able to change the documented sex on their birth certificates by providing affidavits from a doctor and a mental health professional stating why their patients should be considered members of the opposite sex, and asserting that their proposed change would be permanent. Applicants would need to have changed their name and shown that they had lived in their adopted gender for at least two years, but there would be no explicit medical requirements. “Surgery versus non-surgery can be arbitrary,” said Thomas R. Frieden, the city’s health commissioner. “Somebody with a beard may have had breast-implant surgery. It’s the permanence of the transition that matters most.”

Then there are the staff and students of the University of Tennessee’s Office for Diversity and Inclusion who want people to think beyond the “he/she” pronouns and are encouraging the use of gender-neutral pronouns such as “xe”, “xym” and “xyr”. 

And, at Washington State University, Professor Selena Lester Breikss told students of her “Women and Popular Culture” class that they would risk “failure for the semester” if they used the terms “males” or “females,” because they are “gross generalizations” and “derogatory/oppressive language”.

She added: “Not everyone in society identifies on a strict male-or-female basis, according to diversity office staff, so they are asking people to be aware some may identify themselves with a name and gender that’s not strictly male or female. We should not assume someone’s gender by their appearance, nor by what is listed on a roster or in student information systems,”

Donna Braquet, director of the University of Tennessee’s Pride Center, wrote in a newsletter last month: “Transgender people and people who do not identify within the gender binary may use a different name than their legal name and pronouns of their gender identity, rather than the pronouns of the sex they were assigned at birth.” She suggested instructors learn students’ chosen names and chosen pronouns during the first few weeks of classes.

“We are familiar with the singular pronouns she, her, hers and he, him, his, but those are not the only singular pronouns. In fact, there are dozens of gender-neutral pronouns.” State Rep. Bill Dunn, R-Knoxville, said he thought the suggestion was a joke. “And then I found out it was true,” he said, “at which point I thought, ‘Are we really paying somebody to come up with this stuff?’.” Dunn, a graduate of UT, said he would rather see public money spent on other academic areas such as maths or technology.

“I just think that when people pay their taxes, they would rather have it go to a university so that people can learn something,” Dunn said, “not be brainwashed into some gobbledygook.” State Senator Frank Niceley posted on Facebook: “It seems to me the biggest lack of diversity we have at the University of Tennessee is people of common sense”.

Universities in Michigan, Maryland and North Carolina have had campaigns on gender-neutral terms, he said. University of Vermont has gender-neutral terms on its forms. Students enrolled in Selena Lester Breikss’ “Women and Popular Culture” class at Washington State University can be failed for referring to men and women as males and females. This is considered oppressive language and heterosexist.

Australian stupidity. The idiocy is not confined to the University of Tennessee – in Australia our federal Labor government in 1974 appointed a royal commission on human relationships, which recommended that “id” be used for both sexes instead of he or she. Most Australians thought this an idiotic recommendation.

Good grief! Gender inconsistency. But there appears to be a dose of partial sanity from Boulder, Colorado. A law there was passed a few years back extending legal protection to transsexuals (known as “gender-variants”) so that they will not be discriminated against in housing, public accommodations or employment. Transsexuals may have full access to public toilets which serve the sex of their choice. The law states: “At work, employees can change gender identity and dress as the opposite sex without fear of being fired – but only three times within every year-and-a-half. After that, their employer is permitted to fire them on the grounds of ‘gender inconsistency’.”

I will conclude by telling you a story about Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of Great Britain. She was visiting a psychiatric hospital and one of the patients, a nicely-spoken lady, came up to her and asked her who she was. Mrs Thatcher replied, “I am Margaret Thatcher, the Prime Minister of Great Britain”. The woman patted her on the arm and said “It is okay, dear, I used to think I was too when I first came here, but they eventually cured me.”

But why should that nice lady have been “cured”? If Bruce Jenner can be “Caitlyn”, why can’t that lady be Margaret Thatcher? Why should I be cured? You see I also think I am Margaret Thatcher, and I hope you will applaud my bravery and courage in “coming out”. I just happen to be trapped in this small brown Indian body, but I hope you will all treat me with the respect due to the Prime Minister of Great Britain.

I stayed quiet as quite usually whenever someone talks sense in the bar I get innundated with rude comments from smartarse European Mensa members. Lord knows why.  I usually just polish my sword and watch my Bouncer throw them out.

Pax.

The Eleventh Hour of the Eleventh Day

Of the Eleventh Month.

We Remember.

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old;

Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning

We will remember them.

It was the most terrible start to the Century.

Then we did it again. 

Evening Hymn, Last Post and Sunset 

by The Central Band Of The Royal Air Force 

Conducted by Wing Commander H.B Hingly MBE

Peace.

They fought hard for it.

Yes, other Nations' young men fought too and the slaughter was immense. I honour Australians here, just now, but do not dishonour those others.

God take and keep them all.

The Southern Gal understands. We can take one nation as an illustration of all others, and praise the sacrifice. She suggests the tribute video below.

It is notable that in the near 100 years the scale of war has changed.  The mass slaughter is now individual. The anonymous 'ranks' are now deeply skilled and equiped Knights. 

These are, as always, the very best of Men.

Pax.

Aboriginal Entitlement.

As if feminists weren't bad enough, even they have much to learn from some other primitives in Hillary's Village.

The talk over the past session since opening time has been a constant whinge about Aboriginal matters. It has covered ground from old comic songs to spear fights in the street, and I scratched my old grey head wondering where it was all coming from.  

It was the terrible twins, Bolt and Blair, and then along comes the Prof, JJ.  He pointed out some salient matters.

Aboriginal ethics (said JJ ) are a form of Communism.  They really do practice, "From each according to his ability and to each according to his need". A windfall for one Aborigine does not stay with him alone.  It must be shared with others of his tribe. 

And a windfall received today is used up today.  There is no sense of saving for the future.  And those ideas are totally contrary to mainstream Western ideas.  Why?

There is mention of it below but in summary, it all goes back to tribal life. Those ethics were logical and served Aborigines well in a tribal state -- when a windfall consisted of catching a large and tasty animal.  You shared your  catch with the rest of the tribe in the assurance that others in the tribe would share their catch with you next time. And in the absence of refrigeration, nothing could be saved for tomorrow so it all had to be used up straight away. 

Unfortunately for the do-gooders, the tribal life is quite recent in the Aboriginal experience so they still have the old ethics and attitudes.  So what is described below as profligacy and corruption is in fact by Aboriginal standards right, ethical and proper.  

Giving Aborigines stuff always ends up the same way. It all tends to be glossed over now but the first big example of giving stuff to Aborigines was probably the Lake Tyers experiment in Victoria.  In 1970 a large rural property was handed over to the Aborigines living there in the hope that they would run it as a going concern and become largely self-supporting.  They promptly ran it into the ground and put their hands out for welfare.  They have been wailing ever since about how the white man doesn't treat them right.   

And there have been other handovers of rural properties with similar results. Will anybody ever learn anything from such episodes?  Not when policy is formed by urban whites who know nothing about Aborigines

So why is readily available anthropological knowledge about Aborigines ignored?   

It is ignored because of the Leftist "All men are equal" gospel.  That Aborigines are different cannot be allowed. 

  Aborigines must be seen as "just like us only browner".   

To say otherwise is to be branded a racist.   

So what is on trial in Darwin at the moment is Leftism:  The stupid gospel that Aborigines are the same as us. It is that gospel that has led to the great waste described. 

 Aboriginal and Western ethics collide

What happened to $34 million from Aboriginal fund on Groote Eylandt?  It was millions of dollars in mining royalties that was meant to be spent for the benefit of the Groote Eylandt community.

 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-04/groote-eylandt-trust-fund-what-happened/6905600

Instead, tens of millions were spent on 156 cars and boats, fridges, a barge, gambling at the casino and charter flights.

The latest chapter in the extraordinary saga played out in the Darwin Supreme Court on Monday.

The former public officer of Groote Eylandt Aboriginal Trust (GEAT), Rosalie Lalara, had earlier pleaded guilty to misappropriating almost $500,000. Her bail was revoked and she is now behind bars awaiting sentencing.

If you don't know where Darwin is, there's no helping you.

A total of $34 million disappeared from the GEAT coffers between 2010 and 2012, leaving just $400,000 remaining in the account.

While Lalara has pleaded guilty to a fraction of the missing millions, exactly what happened to the rest remains a mystery.

But those involved in the case said little of it appeared to have been spent on housing, education or the needs of the community.

Jacqueline Lahne was brought in as the interim operations manager at GEAT when the trust was put into administration in 2012.

"My initial impression was that there was a group of people [on Groote Eylandt] who were literally living like rock stars," she said in an interview with the ABC.

"Chartered planes, vehicles waiting for them at airports, they owned multiple vehicles and boats themselves. They had access endlessly to cash for their lifestyles and then for their families."

Groote Eylandt, a remote island off Arnhem Land in the Northern Territory, regularly appears at the top of the Northern Territory's richest postcodes. 

It earns millions each year in royalties from the nearby South32 manganese mine.

Since its inception in the early 1960s, the trust has earned more than $200 million in royalties.

Lalara told the ABC she is not responsible for all the money that went missing.  "They accuse me of being a thief and I don't steal," Lalara said in an interview with the ABC.

Lalara was the community's go-to person on the trust and said not everyone was happy with the trust's rules on how royalty money should be spent.

"They say, 'Oh, it's our money, you should spend this money on us. Why you keeping the money, what for? It shouldn't be up there in the bank, it should be down here spent'," she said.

Court documents in a separate case allege Lalara was involved in the purchase of 156 cars and boats at a total cost of $5 million.

A barge and real estate in Cairns were also bought with trust money.

The documents alleged cash cheques to a total value of $3.5 million were written from the trust account and fraudulently recorded against funeral costs.

Millions remain unaccounted for due to poor record keeping

In court documents in civil proceedings against Darwin's Skycity casino, it is alleged Lalara gambled more than $1 million of trust money.

"If I had a million dollars would I be gambling it? No, thank you. That is all bad," she said. "We went and bought a whole heap of stuff ... maybe fridges, washing machines, even air conditioners, yeah, beddings, beds, mattresses, yep."

But what exactly has happened to the remaining $33 million is unclear.

Ms Lahne said that many millions remain unaccounted for because GEAT kept poor records. She believes non-Indigenous businesses who preyed on the trust received a large percentage of the missing millions.

"I guess we'd call them carpetbaggers wouldn't we?" she said.  "They're people, or sharks, that prey on vulnerable populations.

"They find that organisations are limited in their governance structures and capacity, they work their way in there."

Court documents alleged one operator who did business with the trust regularly charged 30 per cent commission to the trust.

"Vehicles that had been purchased by the trust weeks before for perhaps $35,000, were sold on for $5,000 or $10,000 in cash," Ms Lahne said.

"So the trust automatically lost a portion of cash and the vehicle disappeared, plates were destroyed, it's gone."

Purchase of cars for teens triggered 'distrust'

Not all of the community were benefiting from the largesse. It was the purchase of cars for kids barely in their teens that caused the community outrage and made them act.

"Thirteen-year-old girls getting bought a car and 15-year-old boys getting a boat," said Keith Hansen, who has lived on the island for 25 years. "That's when the distrust really came into place, when they were buying for a birthday for a 13-year-old girl a flash Ford Falcon sedan."

Groote Eylandters told the ABC that 300 locals confronted Lalara about the trust's finances on the oval in the town of Anuragu in early 2012.  Punches were thrown, the police were called and there were multiple arrests.

On March 12, 2012 more than 500 locals signed a petition which was sent to the Northern Territory Attorney-General, saying "many millions of dollars have been wasted and corruption is rife ... no-one is game to do anything for fear of retribution".

The Government stepped in and a statutory manager was appointed. Ms Lahne worked alongside the statutory manager and said she was "shocked" when she arrived on Groote Eylandt.

"I would have expected with all the years of royalties going into that island to see more supporting infrastructure, better local health services, better support agencies that the trust might be investing in but there was no evidence of that," she said.

But Lalara said she was put under great cultural pressure by beneficiaries to keep buying things for them with money from the trust. 

"I reckon I was stuck with the two worlds. White-man world, white-man way and blackfella way. And what I was trying to do was to do it our way, and it's not written in the book," she said.

Not that she is 'racist' for saying that of course.  

"We try to balance the both sides so it doesn't how you say ... ruin things. But it obviously ruined [things]."

Lalara is angry that the community has not defended her since charges were laid against her in 2013. "The community is the fault and I say they are gutless and they are coward and it's their fault all this happened," she said.

"Now everybody's ... happy sitting behind their cars and steering wheels and that they don't even want to help [me]."

Groote is a long way from Tasmania and our Aboriginies were all wiped out a couple of centuries ago by the racist white fellas.  That's why we never hear of corruption and  misappropriations of aboriginal benefit monies here.  Hah ! That or the ABC keeping quiet about it. That's what all the Aboriginies here say, anyway, although I have no idea how they came back from the total and utter genocide they suffered.

They all vote labour of course.

Drink up.

Pax

Relax away your Tensions

We try to offer a variety of experience in the Tavern.  

After the ABC fiaso earlier and the resultant choking and spluttering, we thought to try some relaxation techniques.

I am not sure it is going to work, but hey, we cater for all sorts as long as they don't soil the carpets.

Ve heff vays......

Peace, tranquility.

The Reliable ABC

If only one could laugh. 

The whole Tavern groaned at the ABC this weekend.

So let me get this straight. (said Tim)

Having a picture of a critic of the ABC having sex with a dog on national TV is ok?

Having a convicted felon, woman hating Muslim on national TV is ok?

A harmless song that offends one person is bad?

Your ABC folks. What a joke!

 http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/now_it_will_never_come_back/

A goofy old novelty song is forever banished by the ABC: 

Complaint: A 936 ABC Hobart listener complained that an offensive song was played on the Weekends program.

Complaint Finding Status: Upheld.

Audience and Consumer Affairs response: The broadcast of the song ‘My Boomerang Won’t Come Back’was not in keeping with the ABC’s editorial standards for harm and offence; there was no editorial justification for playing it. The song was not on a regular ABC playlist but was aired because it was requested by a listener. This error was due to staff not being familiar with the track’s lyrics. The ABC apologised to the complainant,removed the track completely from the system and took steps to ensure that this would not happen again. 

Curiously, in recent years only the ABC has bothered to even reference Charlie Drake’s elderly tune (although Andrew Denton mistakenly thought it was performed by Rolf Harris). This may be the first George Martin-produced track to be banned by the ABC following one complaint from a solitary Tasmanian.

The song was by a comedian 56 years ago.

Alan spluttered into his ale and said:

How about Phillips Adams’s theme song: 

“Always Look on the Bright Side of Life”. 

A song poking fun at Christ’s crucifixion. 

I’M OFFENDED! 

BAN IT IMMEDIATELY. 

Take Phillip Adams off the air for so offending so many people over such a long period!

Now there's a thought.

Meanwhile, something else that does come back with fierce regularity.....

Tribal trouble

A NERVOUS peace hangs over Angurugu today as senior community people meet in an effort to prevent a repeat of yesterday’s violence that left two men — aged 19 and 29 — dead and more injured…

Commander Tony Fuller said the spear fight of 50 to 60 residents of Angurugu began as a family feud…

“Police attempted to disperse the crowd but were forced to retreat due to the overwhelming number of armed persons who had gathered on each end of the street brandishing spears at each other,” Commander Fuller said…

Groote Eylandt has a troubled history of intra-clan violence and while yesterday’s deaths were sparked by new sequence of events, feuds go back generations. 

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/tribal_trouble/

We didn't see that on the ABC in Tasmania.

Hey, blackfellas, its Oz and the 21st century. Write a friggin' song.

I suppose it makes a change from Muslims.

The mind boggles. 


Pax, dammit !! 

If Looks could Kill.......

Islamists to the right of us and Commies to the left, and here we are stuck in the middle, a target for both. That neither like one another is frankly neither here nor there. Our best strategy is to see both for what they are and avoid them like the plague.

And, perhaps have a bit of chocolate. 

Everyone likes chocolate.... but more of that later.

The warriors amongst us may need to confront both plagues. I have personally faced off against the commies  in recent decades and who knows when my aging bones may have to wield a sword again against the Islamists as in days long past.

But many in our world are determined to deliberately not see the dangers and even laud some aspects of both awful social systems, ideologies and creeds.  Do not be fooled.

In the west we have suffered from fools disguised as wise men. We continually elect such fools even when we can see their stupidity staring at us. Hope and Change eh?  Looks can Kill but refusal to look and see the bus about to run you over has the same result.

When all we get is decline and filth, lies and manipulation, things quickly become dark and dirty. 

Like Sump Oil.

Looked at in some sunlight and we can be fooled by the rainbow colours of 'Hope and Change', 'environmental care', 'compassion for refugees' etc. Much of modern life is not a 'Forrest Gump' box of Chocolates.

His Mum is no sage - just look what she produced.

It is still old sump oil.

So, we 'see' that President Putin has quickly become the great Western hope when it comes to Islamist wickedness. Obama, the western leader by default, and the rest of the hangers-on such as Merkel and Cameron have failed miserably in confronting Islam.  Each in his/her way has welcomed chaos and mayhem into our cultured homes. One might as well have sent Boudicca's washerwomen to do the job.  And along comes Putin to muscle in and everyone and his dog cheers.

Hello!  Putin is no Eiesenhower. He is a KGB Colonel to his bones.  No friend.

And even my Catholic brothers can be fooled into thinking that Russia is Christian. It ain't.

You would think that in our scientific age we just might be able to discern the sump oil from wholesome Olive oil. But even science has turned to sludge and is subject to manipulation and decline.

Customers in the Tavern were taking a look at Russia and at Science today. Neither are our saviours.

'Slick Willy' Clinton ain't got nothin'

Marko Dumančić is and assistant professor of Cold War, Modern Russia and Eastern Europe studies at Western Kentucky University, and he had a few observations about 'post-communist' Russia. Frankly he confirmed by rhuemy-eyes view that it is a mafia state now.

Russia's Conservative 'Family Values' Are a Sham.

Western observers should be careful not to play into Putin's hands by rehashing the tired propagandistic image of Russia as the protector of global family values — whatever these might imply.

If the recent coverage of Russia is anything to go by, the country appears not only to be stuck in the past but actually sprinting backwards. So seemingly regressive is contemporary Russia that, among Russian liberal intellectuals and Western commentators, even medieval comparisons do not seem too far-fetched.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/506555.html 

"Russia is like a block of ice floating back into the 16th century," asserted controversial Russian novelist Vladimir Sorokin in a BBC interview. 

14C or 16C. Be careful what you think 'Improvement' means.

Sorokin went on to compare President Vladimir Putin to Tsar Ivan the Terrible, who summarily and arbitrarily murdered hundreds of thousands of his compatriots when he unleashed a bloody reign of terror in the second half of the 1500s.

Sorokin argued: "Again we are living under a centralized government, like in the time of Ivan the Terrible. This power vertical, which Putin keeps talking about, is a completely medieval model for Russia. There is no accountability, no transparency."

The Putin-supported revival of the Russian Orthodox Church, whose ceremonies and doctrine have changed little since the Middle Ages, seems to confirm that Russian culture is actively turning away from modern liberal values.

It even appears that the Kremlin has warmly embraced its medieval past, particularly when it comes to matters of gender and sexuality.

In his most recent presidential address to the federal assembly, Putin noted that the world supports Russia's "defense of traditional values" against the "so-called tolerance" that he accused of being "genderless and infertile." 

'Traditional' ain't what you think it means. It refers to the traditions of the Steppes, where ripping off your neighbour and stealing his wife is an age old custom. 

LOOK carefully.

And Russian officials, clearly seeing which way the wind is blowing, have begun propagating dubious views with such frequency that Western media outlets have a hard time keeping up.

News of the radically feminist Pussy Riot members being — literally — whipped by Cossack police during the Sochi Winter Games appalled Western media but did not surprise Russia watchers. 

After all, only 14 percent of Duma representatives are female, domestic violence is rarely reported and/or prosecuted, and women continue to face alarming rates of workplace discrimination.

This is the dark and violent side of Putin's casual sexism. The Russian state is bent on actively propagating a pro-family, pronatalist policy; any complaint or lawsuits that distorts the image of the nationwide domestic bliss is discouraged or silenced.

Recent surveys of Russians superficially support the notion that official declamations about moral conservatism constitute an expression of the popular will. 

For instance, an IPSOS MORI Global Trends Survey in June that polled 500 Russians found that 79 percent of men and 67 percent of women believe the woman's role in society lies in her domestic responsibilities toward her husband and children.

Similarly, a 2013 Pew poll concluded that about two-thirds of Russians consider homosexuality and extramarital affairs to be morally reprehensible. 

Russia's VTsIOM pollster conducted a survey in March 2012, the results of which showed that 93 percent of Russians consider their primary goal to be to start a family and raise children.

Almost anything looks good compared to Obama's profile.

But despite Russians' earnest declamations, the strict maintenance of traditional values is more propaganda than sociological reality. Far from living out a monastic, medieval, and sexless utopia, Russians are, in some senses, less family-oriented than Western Europeans.

For instance, Russia has the highest divorce rate in the world — hardly a qualification for a nation that proclaims itself as the defender of traditional values. 

All the more ironic is the fact that one of the chief factors for divorce are extramarital affairs — the very same practice that Russians reject as only slightly less reprehensible than homosexuality.

Russia's abortion rate also remains one of highest in the world — partly because contraception remains expensive or unavailable and partly because families are not necessarily women's top priority.

The level of irony is equally evident in Russia's condemnation of homosexuality. Russia's public space is no stranger to cross-dressing, drag, and unorthodox gender-bending. 

However vocally Russians denounce homosexuality, anyone familiar with Russia's entertainment scene can promptly enumerate many celebrity figures that purposefully cultivate sexually ambiguous identities and have even become famous because of it.

Although it would be foolhardy to refute the fact that Russians do, in fact, believe themselves to be virtuous, I do have to point out that Russia remains — as per Churchill's assessment — a country of paradoxes.

I do not doubt that Russians would like to cultivate ideal families and embody normative sexual identities, much like Victorians and Puritans wished to remain above their carnal desires. 

Reality, however, bears little similarity to the ideal. Even as they publicly embrace Putin's support for traditional values, Russians' actions betray their true inclinations.

Western observers should be careful not to play into Putin's hands by rehashing the tired propagandistic image of Russia as the protector of global family values — whatever these might imply. 

Should commentators believe Putin's wishful thinking over the inconvenient facts about Russians' actual practices, they will only be doing Russia's bare-chested strongman a favor.

Yes, we must look at the evidence rather than simply who says what we want to hear. That is what Scientists (used to ) say. But even that once-reliable 'art' is fast becoming rainbow coloured like an oil slick.

William Reville is an emeritus professor of biochemistry at UCC and he was telling the crowd in the Irish room between sob-songs. 

Something has gone very wrong with science

The modern world depends on science, but as much as half of the literature may not be fit for purpose

Chief concerns with the way scientists do research include inadequate understanding of statistics, publishing studies that can’t be reproduced because they used shoddy procedures or didn’t have enough data, or because they ‘spun’ the data to please sponsors

 http://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/william-reville-something-has-gone-very-wrong-with-science-1.2245846

The1960 Nobel laureate in physiology or medicine, Peter Medawar, famously remarked in 1983: “In terms of fulfilment of declared intentions, science is incomparably the most successful enterprise that human beings have ever engaged upon.”

Compare Medawar’s sentiment with the 2009 statement made by Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and quoted in PLOS Medicinein October 2010: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”

In 1983, looking back on the history of science since the 17th century, we could all justifiably salute Medawar’s sentiment, but today we must face up to the fact that in recent times something has gone fundamentally wrong with science, perhaps our greatest human creation. On April 1st and 2nd, a UK meeting was organised by the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Medical Research Council, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council and the Wellcome Trust to discuss this problem, specifically as it applies in biomedical research.

The Chatham House rule was applied at this meeting; that is, participants are free to use the information they receive but neither the identity nor affiliation of any speaker nor any other participant must be revealed.

Ask yourself, from where do YOU get 'science' news?

Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the Lancet, attended the meeting and wrote a memorable account in the journal (April 11th), illustrated by the following quote: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, 

science has taken a turn towards darkness. 

As one participant put it, ‘poor methods get results’ . . .

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. 

Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale. 

We reject important confirmations. Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent, endpoints that foster reductive metrics, such as high-impact publication . . . and individual scientists, including their most senior leaders, do little to alter a research culture that occasionally veers close to misconduct.”

Science is supposed to Illuminate, not lead you to a dark place.

Shoddy procedures. John Ioannidis, director of the Meta-Research Innovation Centre at Stanford, is a respected critic of science. His chief concerns with the way scientists do research include their inadequate understanding of statistics, publishing studies that can’t be reproduced because they used shoddy procedures or didn’t have enough data, or because they “spun” the data to please sponsors. University scientists are compelled to publish prolifically, which favours quantity over quality, and the pre-publication peer-review system is no longer fit for purpose.

Much of this could be tackled effectively by improving the training of scientists. Young scientists receive little formal training in how to carry out reliable research. You spend undergraduate years studying the established body of knowledge in your subject and you learn how to research only later, during your PhD project, when you are apprenticed to an established scientist. 

But this latter learning is an informal, hit-and-miss affair, largely absorbed by osmosis. All science students should have to undertake rigorous coursework on how to carry out effective scientific research.

Neither is there any formal code of ethics in science. 

Ethics should be taught at undergraduate and graduate levels and a code of ethics should be assented to by graduates at all graduation ceremonies.

We can no longer doubt that a crisis looms in science. The modern world is utterly dependent on science, so this crisis must be resolved. That great cathedral of scientific progress, the peer-reviewed scientific literature, is beginning to crumble. We either restore the cathedral or we will soon stand in its rubble.

In all aspects of modern life we must open our eyes. 

There are fools, charlatans, clever buggers and crooks galore who can lead you right into the oil slicks, and worse.

Into the Tar Pits.

Drink up and look deep into your tankards. 

Ah yes, and have a bit of Chocolate. 

Everyone likes Chocolate, as I said. We eat masses of it. And it makes us 'feel' good. 

Some can be very easily convinced that it is the answer to life, the Universe and Everything. (We all know that is really '42') 

But science can convince us ...... John Bohannon knows !

I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How.

“Slim by Chocolate!” the headlines blared. A team of German researchers had found that people on a low-carb diet lost weight 10 percent faster if they ate a chocolate bar every day. 

It made the front page of Bild, Europe’s largest daily newspaper, just beneath their update about the Germanwings crash. 

From there, it ricocheted around the internet and beyond, making news in more than 20 countries and half a dozen languages. It was discussed on television news shows. It appeared in glossy print, most recently in the June issue ofShape magazine (“Why You Must Eat Chocolate Daily,” page 128). 

Not only does chocolate accelerate weight loss, the study found, but it leads to healthier cholesterol levels and overall increased well-being. The Bild story quotes the study’s lead author, Johannes Bohannon, Ph.D., research director of the Institute of Diet and Health: “The best part is you can buy chocolate everywhere.”

I am Johannes Bohannon, Ph.D. Well, actually my name is John, and I’m a journalist. I do have a Ph.D., but it’s in the molecular biology of bacteria, not humans. The Institute of Diet and Health? That’s nothing more than a website.

Other than those fibs, the study was 100 percent authentic. My colleagues and I recruited actual human subjects in Germany. We ran an actual clinical trial, with subjects randomly assigned to different diet regimes. And the statistically significant benefits of chocolate that we reported are based on the actual data. It was, in fact, a fairly typical study for the field of diet research. Which is to say: It was terrible science. The results are meaningless, and the health claims that the media blasted out to millions of people around the world are utterly unfounded.

Here’s how we did it.

Now, I could let his explain the ins and outs but you can find out that for yourself by going here....

http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800

Let me fill your glass while you go and take a look. 

It won't kill you.


Pax