This article is caused by my research of the Chernobyl disaster in a geography lesson and the resulting joke; Chernobyl wasn't an accident, Stalin wanted to crack some nuts. This started me thinking about events in history that seem (ah, the miracle of hindsight) to be over reactive now but obviously seemed justified at the time.
Take the two atomic bombs that ended the second-world-war for example. Little Boy and Big Daddy, infamous throughout history due to the destruction they caused when dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in Japan. Where they worth it? Was it worth all that destruction to end the war? Lets review the situation: After years of fighting for hundreds of islands controlled by the Japanese with terrible casualties on both sides, the Allied forces in the Pacific were, by 1945 nearing the Japanese mainland. The Atomic Bomb project was drawing to a close and despite the extensive fire-bombing campaign by the U.S.A.F (US Air Force) Emperor Hirohito, ruler of Japan at the time, was determined not to give up. The Allies had entered negotiations with the USSR and the Russians were on the verge of invading Japan. President Truman, president of the US at the time, did not know that the Russians were planning the invasion of Japan, however and with the fire-bombing appearing to have little effect, Truman ordered the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Nagasaki, followed by the second on Hiroshima.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, because we can see, from evidence on both sides, that the Japanese, despite their bravery, were on the verge of defeat. The USSR was readying to invade, the fire-bombing campaign by the USAF was having devastating effect on morale and the Japanese navy was all but sunk. One general was quoted to say that the war in the Pacific would be over in two weeks! It is clear that the atomic bombs were useless in regards to ending the Pacific War and World-War 2 but with hindsight we can see that Japan's surrender stopped the USSR taking control of Japan like they had Eastern Europe stopping possible future repercussions. Either way, the dropping of the two atomic bombs is a good example of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, therefore ending this rant, for now at least...
Lethargy: A Poem
Dark clouds over an ashen wasteland
Devoid of life
A fat cat
purring to itself
slowly elongating
its limbs, stretching out to brush against
a broken chair, its legs splintered,
Helpless.
Useless for its task.
A grey sphere,
lazily spinning,
one endless face.
As Rye bread,
coarse and bitter, the stinging despair of failure.
The slow, lazy drone of classical music,
ambling along an endless lane,
struggling against the wave of helplessness.
A broken washing machine,
helpless,
unable to spin.
Devoid of life
A fat cat
purring to itself
slowly elongating
its limbs, stretching out to brush against
a broken chair, its legs splintered,
Helpless.
Useless for its task.
A grey sphere,
lazily spinning,
one endless face.
As Rye bread,
coarse and bitter, the stinging despair of failure.
The slow, lazy drone of classical music,
ambling along an endless lane,
struggling against the wave of helplessness.
A broken washing machine,
helpless,
unable to spin.
On the Edge of a Knife
This rant is based on the chances of a nuclear war and the advantages and disadvantages of Nuclear Apocalypse. Not a very large topic as you can see, just a bit of light discussion about, well, the lives of around 8 billion people and the chance of nuclear apocalypse.
Since the end of the Second-World-War, there has been little conflict on the scale of a world-war or even close for that matter and that is due to the invention of the atomic bomb. After the surrender of Japan at the end of the second-world-war, both the USA and the USSR raced to build up their stocks of this exceptionally powerful weapon. Not only did both sides build up their stocks of atomic bombs, new weapons were developed. The USA and the rest of the "Allies" formed NATO and the USSR and other assorted eastern countries formed the "Warsaw Pact". The board was set, the pieces were ready to move. The move never came. Despite both sides preparing for the worst and even, in cases like the Cuban Missile Disaster, coming close to starting a nuclear war, both sides never actually came to blows. The Cold War cooled down. Still the danger lingered and more countries developed nuclear weapons. Today, UN forces are still fighting in Afghanistan to stop the Taliban and in some cases Al-Qaeda from gaining a nuclear weapon. World politics balances on a knife edge. One wrong move and the whole world tumbles into nuclear apocalypse, and Fallout 3 becomes more of a reality than fiction.
Of course some people claim that this would be a good thing, Al-Qaeda would use this to destroy "the west" and therefore most of Christianity, in fact, a nuclear war would very quickly turn into a religious one. Nevertheless, there are some secular (non-religious) parties (I think) that would welcome the chance of nuclear apocalypse for reasons such as purifying human genes, re-organizing laws and religion and other such tasks that are impossible and seen as insane to all but figures like Stalin and Hitler. It is a terrifying prospect to know that world politics balance on a knife edge but only one to consider and ponder on if you are a major world leader, if not then feel special and don't criticize important world leaders for their mistakes too much, you never know what they might have up their metaphorical sleeve...
Since the end of the Second-World-War, there has been little conflict on the scale of a world-war or even close for that matter and that is due to the invention of the atomic bomb. After the surrender of Japan at the end of the second-world-war, both the USA and the USSR raced to build up their stocks of this exceptionally powerful weapon. Not only did both sides build up their stocks of atomic bombs, new weapons were developed. The USA and the rest of the "Allies" formed NATO and the USSR and other assorted eastern countries formed the "Warsaw Pact". The board was set, the pieces were ready to move. The move never came. Despite both sides preparing for the worst and even, in cases like the Cuban Missile Disaster, coming close to starting a nuclear war, both sides never actually came to blows. The Cold War cooled down. Still the danger lingered and more countries developed nuclear weapons. Today, UN forces are still fighting in Afghanistan to stop the Taliban and in some cases Al-Qaeda from gaining a nuclear weapon. World politics balances on a knife edge. One wrong move and the whole world tumbles into nuclear apocalypse, and Fallout 3 becomes more of a reality than fiction.
Of course some people claim that this would be a good thing, Al-Qaeda would use this to destroy "the west" and therefore most of Christianity, in fact, a nuclear war would very quickly turn into a religious one. Nevertheless, there are some secular (non-religious) parties (I think) that would welcome the chance of nuclear apocalypse for reasons such as purifying human genes, re-organizing laws and religion and other such tasks that are impossible and seen as insane to all but figures like Stalin and Hitler. It is a terrifying prospect to know that world politics balance on a knife edge but only one to consider and ponder on if you are a major world leader, if not then feel special and don't criticize important world leaders for their mistakes too much, you never know what they might have up their metaphorical sleeve...
Technophobia: Symptoms and Causes
Technophobia is spreading fast! Be aware of the risks and make sure to combat this disease BEFORE it strikes!
What is Technophobia?
Technophobia is the illogical and irrational fear of technology. It is usually caused by little knowledge of technology but this can be a symptom, causing a vicious cycle.
What are the symptoms?
Symptoms Include:
- Little or no knowledge of certain aspects of technology
- Use of rhymes or myths such as "watching TV gives you square eyes" to try and prove that your illogical fear of technology is perfectly logical, when it isn't
- Irrational fear of certain aspects of technology, such as the microwave radiation from cordless phones
- Blaming problems not caused by technology on pieces of technology (e.g. - I got soaked on the way home from work, now I'm going to shout at you for being on the computer for too long even though none of my arguments make logical sense)
And many more...
What can I do?
If you know someone showing these symptoms then please follow the advice in this section:
- Do not approach the suspect directly
- Try to treat the symptoms by showing good points of the technology they fear
- Try to disprove the arguments they make with stronger ones without losing your temper, this will end in the suspect concluding or changing the subject
- Use the suspect's personal experiences to disprove the arguments they make.
What is Technophobia?
Technophobia is the illogical and irrational fear of technology. It is usually caused by little knowledge of technology but this can be a symptom, causing a vicious cycle.
What are the symptoms?
Symptoms Include:
- Little or no knowledge of certain aspects of technology
- Use of rhymes or myths such as "watching TV gives you square eyes" to try and prove that your illogical fear of technology is perfectly logical, when it isn't
- Irrational fear of certain aspects of technology, such as the microwave radiation from cordless phones
- Blaming problems not caused by technology on pieces of technology (e.g. - I got soaked on the way home from work, now I'm going to shout at you for being on the computer for too long even though none of my arguments make logical sense)
And many more...
What can I do?
If you know someone showing these symptoms then please follow the advice in this section:
- Do not approach the suspect directly
- Try to treat the symptoms by showing good points of the technology they fear
- Try to disprove the arguments they make with stronger ones without losing your temper, this will end in the suspect concluding or changing the subject
- Use the suspect's personal experiences to disprove the arguments they make.
Religion
So, how is gardening similar to religion? Religion is completely different; the art of worshipping so called "Gods" as a way of acquiring their favour. Whereas gardening, well, read the last rant.
I'm an agnostic. I see the strengths and weaknesses of religion and, despite my more atheist leanings, I still see the arguments for religion.
So, what are the main points for religion? Well, although human science appears to shoot religion down in flames, it really doesn't. There are still flaws to the theory of evolution like, for example, where did evolution start? That's where religion comes in, claiming that God started the chain by creating the Universe. The problem is; how was God created? What is God? These are questions that we, as humans, can never answer. So why do we try? We try because it gives us hope. Hope is the cause of religion. The often futile feeling of coming salvation. We created religion through centuries, even millennia of hoping for salvation and the knowledge to explain the universe because the truth is too hard to take. We, as humans, are just another pack of wolves baying into the darkness of the night. On the other hand, we might not be alone. Their may be an unknown deity somewhere, watching and waiting for the chance to show its hand. We shall never know.
So how is religion similar to gardening? They're both driven by one feeling, religion is driven by the hope of a second life, the hope of salvation from evil, whereas gardening is driven by the feeling of satisfaction. You only get satisfaction from gardening if you need satisfaction in something you have done and this applies to religion; you only gain hope if you need it.
I'm an agnostic. I see the strengths and weaknesses of religion and, despite my more atheist leanings, I still see the arguments for religion.
So, what are the main points for religion? Well, although human science appears to shoot religion down in flames, it really doesn't. There are still flaws to the theory of evolution like, for example, where did evolution start? That's where religion comes in, claiming that God started the chain by creating the Universe. The problem is; how was God created? What is God? These are questions that we, as humans, can never answer. So why do we try? We try because it gives us hope. Hope is the cause of religion. The often futile feeling of coming salvation. We created religion through centuries, even millennia of hoping for salvation and the knowledge to explain the universe because the truth is too hard to take. We, as humans, are just another pack of wolves baying into the darkness of the night. On the other hand, we might not be alone. Their may be an unknown deity somewhere, watching and waiting for the chance to show its hand. We shall never know.
So how is religion similar to gardening? They're both driven by one feeling, religion is driven by the hope of a second life, the hope of salvation from evil, whereas gardening is driven by the feeling of satisfaction. You only get satisfaction from gardening if you need satisfaction in something you have done and this applies to religion; you only gain hope if you need it.
A.O.W.F.A.G
Against Obsession With Flowers and Gardening, that's what the title stands for and that's what I stand for (sort of). So I decided to type up my opinion on this slightly trivial matter and launch it into the void that is the internet.
First off, Gardening. I don't see the point, why would anyone want to plant flowers in different patterns that look nice, I mean, how can you enjoy making patterns with brightly coloured leaves? I know that it heightens your self-esteem to see that you've succeeded in making your name out of vibrant coloured plants but, honestly, you must have a very low self-esteem and sense of enjoyment if you find that seriously enjoyable and would want to become say a professional gardener.
Why would you want to become a professional gardener? Okay, so you enjoy gardening and making patterns with plants and then watching them wither and die? It's like playing with food, you enjoy making the patterns, but you know that sometime soon, you're going to have to eat the food that you lovingly tended.
However, I'm not against plants altogether, plants are useful. In fact, without plants we wouldn't be alive and I'm not going to be the one going round with a chainsaw, cutting down trees. I don't go against people striving for the world's green spaces, plants are useful, to give us oxygen and to hold back ambitious countries like China from destroying the planet with thousands of factories belching acrid smoke.Nevertheless, I'm against the obsession with flowers and gardening; gardening so much that it takes over your life like a virus.
First off, Gardening. I don't see the point, why would anyone want to plant flowers in different patterns that look nice, I mean, how can you enjoy making patterns with brightly coloured leaves? I know that it heightens your self-esteem to see that you've succeeded in making your name out of vibrant coloured plants but, honestly, you must have a very low self-esteem and sense of enjoyment if you find that seriously enjoyable and would want to become say a professional gardener.
Why would you want to become a professional gardener? Okay, so you enjoy gardening and making patterns with plants and then watching them wither and die? It's like playing with food, you enjoy making the patterns, but you know that sometime soon, you're going to have to eat the food that you lovingly tended.
However, I'm not against plants altogether, plants are useful. In fact, without plants we wouldn't be alive and I'm not going to be the one going round with a chainsaw, cutting down trees. I don't go against people striving for the world's green spaces, plants are useful, to give us oxygen and to hold back ambitious countries like China from destroying the planet with thousands of factories belching acrid smoke.Nevertheless, I'm against the obsession with flowers and gardening; gardening so much that it takes over your life like a virus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)