Coldrick Web Site - Old Blog Page

	QUICK SITE INDEX
	Home	Jokes	Message Board	Paranormal	Random Trivia	UFO Spot

This Site Contemplateous Countdown to Christmas Home Internet Family Tree Jokes Link to Us Message Board Old Blog Pages Old Photos Paranormal Polling Booth Search This Site Surname Coldrick Random Trivia Reviews - Thumbs Down Trivia Quiz UFO Spot Recommended Links Hobby Engineering Supplies Miniature Bearings Australia Paris Panorama Qumoz Business Directory Small Parts and Bearings The Divine Miss M The Wedding Trivia Party UFO Research Queensland Unfair Contracts Wikipedia Windows to The Universe World Time Worldometers Yajugle Random Trivia You Tube	Old Blog Articles The main entries from the old blog site have been reproduced further down this page. There was a time when Contemplateous had an opinion on almost everything that didn't concern her, but now she has lapsed into a state of deep contemplation and has given up opinionating - we don't know for how long. Contemplateous is so preoccupied contemplating that she has no time to maintain the blog. The original blog is still available in the archives. Please feel free to visit and browse. VISIT BLOG ARCHIVES See below for the main topics from the old blog.			Picture Collection There are over 500 different small random pictures in the database. There are over 1000 large random pictures in the Jokes pages
	Telephones Suck 23rd February 2006 When are people ever going to realise that telephones are archaic, intrusive technology? Communication is so much simpler by e-mail and fax. Unless something is super urgent, there is hardly ever a need to telephone people these days. The only exception being when you are calling a friend or family member for a chat at a mutually convenient time. We try to run our business by e-mail and fax wherever possible. You end up with a copy of whatever was arranged, so there can rarely be a misunderstanding or argument about what was said. Fax and e-mail communications also give the recipient time to work out the best response. In our business, there is nothing worse than people who simply have to telephone every communication no matter how basic. A telephone call is often intrusive, as the person who takes the call was most likely doing something else when the phone rang. Then when the phone call ends, it takes time to get back into whatever it was you were in the middle of doing. An e-mail or fax can be handled whenever you have a free moment. After years in business I have grown to HATE the telephone so much that I won't even answer it at home. I would rather let it ring out. I'll only answer my mobile if I know who is calling. Whenever I hear the telephone ringing, all I hear is some impatient person shouting at me "talk to me; I need your attention; I don't care what you are doing now, I can't wait; talk to me now". Have you noticed how most people will drop everything to answer a telephone? It doesn't matter who they were talking to first, as soon as the phone rings the person on the other end of the phone butts into the conversation as if to say "I don't care what you are doing right now, I need your attention". Telephones suck! Don't you just hate it when you visit a bank, office, business or wherever, and you have to stand in a queue, slowly inching your way towards the front. You finally get to the front, and someone phones the business. The clerk who was about to serve you suddenly drops everything and handles the phone call. You have to wait, even though you were there first. Common courtesy on the part of the clerk would be to say to the person on the phone "I'm sorry but there are other people in the line before you, you will have to wait your turn", and then serve the people who were in the real line first. Once again, in case you didn't get it the first time - I HATE PHONES! PHONES SUCK! Equal share of the workload 1st March 2006 About a year or so ago I got into a bit of a heated discussion with a group of about 10 people at a BBQ. Not one of them agreed with me on this, and I still have a lot of difficulty understanding why. The discussion began when I stated my view that "ideally, in any shared household, both partners should share the ENTIRE workload on an equal basis, including apportioning household chores and external work according to their value." Now I realise that there is no such thing as a work-o-meter that allows people to attribute a value to their input, but all I was getting at was that if the wife has a more demanding external job than the husband, then the husband should perform more of the household chores than the wife, and vice versa. Every person at that BBQ seemed to be of the belief that both partners should equally share the housework no matter how demanding that partner's external work load. After a while, they began to hit me with questions such as "well how can you measure something like that?". By the end of the discussion, not one person agreed with my position. I restated what I was saying several times, as I wanted to be sure that people understood exactly what I was saying, and still nobody agreed with me. Naturally, this sort of thing needs to be worked out between the couple who share the household, and there will never be a definite value put on either partners input, but I still maintain that if one partner has a greater external input to a household, the other partner should be prepared to take on more of the internal workload. This is how the old stereotype of the husband being the breadwinner and the wife being the homemaker began. The husband had more external input to the household and the wife had more internal input. These days with more women joining the workforce, the situation needs to be re-assessed and in a household where both partners work then both partners need to provide some input to the household chores. BUT, not necessarily to the extent that both partners share the household chores 50/50. If a husband puts in 10 hours a day in a coal mine and the wife does 8 hours in a florist shop, would it be fair to share the household chores 50/50? Definitely not. That is just one extreme example. Some jobs are more demanding mentally, whilst some are more demanding physically. It is quite conceivable that in some situations a partner may perform less hours in their main job than the other and still do less than half the housework. Every situation is different and needs to be assessed by the couple involved. I thought this was a reasonable argument, but do you think I could get anyone at that BBQ to agree with me? Nup! What I definitely don't agree with is any culture that stereotypes the roles of their people, and that includes this seemingly new western stereotype of 50/50 housework. It must have crept up on us whilst we weren't looking It's raining again and still no water in the dams 3rd March 2006 The rain has been falling pretty hard lately, but we are still on level 2 water restrictions in Queensland, with threats that level 3 is just around the corner. The official comment is usually that the rain is not falling in the catchment areas. If they don't say that the rain isn't falling in the catchment areas they say that the dam levels have only risen by 0.1%. 0.1% ??????????? How do they measure that? Trichorders? But have you ever wondered where all the bottled water in the shops is coming from? Looks to me like someone is profiting quite nicely from all this rain that never seems to make it into the dams. I remember when I was a kid (vaguely); no bottled water in the shops whatsoever, and no water restrictions either. Funny that! What's with all the fees? 4th March 2006 What planet are the current generation of accountants from? Accountants seem to have gotten their grubby fuggly little fingers into management everywhere these days, making the whole world much more complicated than it needs to be. Remember when you placed money in a bank and they gave you a percentage interest, or you borrowed from a bank and they charged you a slightly higher rate of interest. AND THAT WAS THE END OF IT!!!!!!! Now the banks have a 30 page brochure listing all the fees and charges applicable to every conceivable transaction you may want to make. If they could find a way to charge you to stand in line, they would. It's not just the banks anymore. You used to be able to order goods from a company and they would tell you a price, you pay the money and they send you the goods. Now they have their added picking fees, packing fees and fees for paying by credit card. Some even have "accounts fees" which are supposedly your fee for their accountant to process your payment. The next time you get a bill with a tacked on "account fee", send back the payment minus your own "account fee" - the fee you charge them for processing the invoice. That would be fair wouldn't it? They think they can add these discrete fees to everything and no one will notice. I've got a message for all the companies out there who tack on their added fees and charges, and all the bank managers too - WE NOTICE! If they would just put their prices up by a mere 1% and drop all the silly fees, the world would be a much more pleasant place. Come to think of it, if they would find that idiot accountant who first suggested the additional fee regime, strip him of all his credentials and put him in a cage on display where everyone can throw eggs at him, then the world would be an even more pleasant place. Any guesses what Country he hails from? My money would be on the USA. MISSION: FIND THE IMBECILE WHO STARTED IT! Bank fees 11th March 2006 Bank Fees I noticed the Commonwealth Bank has increased their fees again!!! All 589 of them. I suppose the money to pay for those thick brochures that list their fees has to come from somewhere. Save energy We can save a lot of energy if we all resolve to be apathetic. On second thoughts, why bother. Puce 12th March 2006 I seriously believe that we should ban the colour puce! Water Solution The voices have spoken to me and have told me that the Queensland State Government will soon see the light and begin to investigate the costing of a water pipeline between Queensland's major dams to enable better sharing of resources in the future. Driving in Queensland (Part 1) 17th March 2006 Now that I have lived in Queesland for over 10 years I feel qualified (through observation) to impart the unwritten road rules of Queensland driving to anyone who may be interested. If you are a visitor planning on driving in Queensland, you would do well to take this "crash" course so that you can drive like over 70% of the people you will be sharing the road with. Rubber Necking Queensland drivers have the rubberiest necks in Australia. The general rule seems to be that if there is anything other than a tree at the side of the road you must bring your vehicle to a near stop whilst you take a gawk, crawl along at about 20kph for 100 mtrs and then slowly increase speed back to around the speed limit. You never travel at exactly the speed limit, but we will save that for another lesson. Instances which require rubber necking include any of the following within 50 mtrs of the roadside: council workers collecting rubbish, car wrecks, shopping trolleys, people taking a pee, drivers stopped for a rest, bicycle riders, just about anything. Exceptions If a bicycle rider is not at a safe distance from the side of the road, it seems to be standard practice to speed up and scare the rider. If there is a speed camera or police radar unit at the side of the road, you should reduce your speed to approximately 10-15 kph below the speed limit until you have passed the police, then increase back to your previous speed. I don't understand this requirement, but it is common practice, so there must be some logic to it. Over 80% of traffic hold ups in Queensland are caused by people slowing down to gawk at something off the side of the road. SURVEY % OF TRAFFIC JAMS WITH NO SPECIFIC CAUSE Listed by State / Territory Tas 25 Vic 16 ACT 6 NSW 18 QLD 86 NT 0 WA 23 SA 21 Well done QLD - topping the polls as usual. Driving in Queensland (Part 2) 18th March 2006 Indicators In Queensland, you should only indicate when you remember that you are sharing the road with other road users. Most of the time, Queenslanders drive around oblivious to other road users, and so the use of indicators during these times is purely optional. Despite what the law actually says, a Queenslander NEVER indicates when they are of the mindset that everybody else should know where they are heading anyway. I am referring here to times such as when a Queenslander is sitting in a right turn only lane. In this instance it is beyond the comprehension of the average Queenslander that it is still a good idea to use your indicator so as to reassure other road users that you are actually going to turn right. This applies equally to situations where there may be two options but one of the options is only rarely used (say a right turn into a major road and a through road that becomes a parking area or minor road). In these situations a Queenslander will not indicate to turn right because everybody should know that 99.9% of the vehicles follow the main route. Queenslanders are pretty big on the "everyone should know what I'm going to do" rule. Indicating in Parking Lots Queenslanders rarely find this necessary. The only signals to be used in parking lots are hand signals such as "the finger", or the ever popular "Richard Cranium" signal. Driving in Queensland (Part 3) 19th March 2006 Driving in Right Hand Lane In the year 2000 the Federal Government enacted several new road rules designed to help unify the Australian states driving laws in a few grey areas. Most Queenslanders would never even have heard about these rules. One of the rules concerns driving in the left lane of a multilane highway where the speed limit is 80kph or above. To drivers in other states this is usually just seen as a courteous thing to do. To most Queenslanders it does not matter that they are in the right hand lane doing 10kph below the speed limit, just so long as nobody else gets past them. One rule most Queenslanders seem to agree on is that nobody should be allowed to get in front of you unless they were already in front of you when you joined the traffic. If you are contentedly driving along in either lane at your 5-10kph below the speed limit and another car approaches from behind, you should increase your speed until you are able to catch up with another vehicle ahead of you, being very careful not to let the car approaching from behind pass. Once a suitable vehicle has been found ahead you should pull alongside that vehicle and match their speed. This will prevent the vehicle approaching from the rear passing, giving you a real sense of power. This happens almost daily and is even practiced by emergency vehicle drivers, such as the driver of the Ambulance station wagon rego 873QCD on Creek Road about 4:20pm today near the rifle range. Contentedly sitting in the right hand lane doing about 70kph, until he realised that I was coming alongside him in the left hand lane and (god forbid) about to get in front. He sped up to about 90kph came alongside a 4WD further ahead and then matched the 4WD speed, staying next to the other vehicle and creating an obstruction for the entire length of the 80kph zone. Meanwhile, two other vehicles came up behind him doing about 90kph, had to slow down and proceeded to tailgate the ambulance driver. Of the 5 cars on that section of road, only the 4WD driver and myself were not breaking the law. % of Consistent Right Lane Drivers By State Tas 5 Vic 16 ACT 6 NSW 12 QLD 46 NT Who cares WA 9 SA 8 Driving in Queensland (Part 4) 20th March 2006 Mobile Phones To successfully drive like a Queenslander you need to be able to hold a mobile phone to your ear whilst driving like a complete turd. Again, the law says not to do this, but it is very obvious that the 45% of Queenslanders who do it are not capable of doing two things at once. Herein lies the dilema. Once their phone starts ringing they find it difficult to think, and so automatically pick up the phone. Once they start talking they lose the ability to drive without swerving. Mindset of The Average Offender "Yeah I've seen all those people who don't know how to drive and talk at the same time, but it doesn't apply to me because I'm smarter than everyone else." Not compulsory Obviously with only 45% of Queenslanders doing this, it is not one of the compulsory rules of driving like a Queenslander. However, this lesson will help prepare you for the phone talkie swerving drivers. Driving in Queensland (Part 5) 21st March 2006 Roundabouts The basic rules for negotiating roundabouts in Queensland are as follows:- Roundabouts are a free for all Option A. Head straight into the roundabout without checking for traffic already on the roundabout. If you nearly hit someone, just swerve a few times to avoid an accident and then continue as normal. Option B. When approaching a roundabout come to a complete stop even if there are no other vehicles already on the roundabout. Before proceeding, check your rear view mirror to see if there any cars behind you. When the vehicle behind starts to blast his horn, check your rear view mirror again then enter the roundabout and continue on your way. If you approach a roundabout with the intention of travelling straight through, it is customary in Queensland to indicate either a right or left turn. There is no need to indicate your intention to exit the roundabout as "everyone should know what you are going to do" (refer lesson 2). If the exit you require is on the right, it is often easier to travel the roundabout in a counter-clockwise direction instead of the more lawful clockwise option. Above all, feel free to experiment with your roundabout experience. Roundabouts can be loads of fun because over 82% of Queenslanders like to experiment. Roundabout rules are simply beyond their comprehension. Remember though, roundabouts can be dangerous places when there are more than 2 Queenslanders on them at a time. If you try something new and it causes a lot of horn honking and aggravation it is usually best to change your method. Happy circling. Driving in Queensland (Part 6) 23rd March 2006 Roadwork Speed Reduction Signs Many Queensland roads are in desperate need of repairs (probably due to all the 4WD vehicles travelling on them). On any 10km trip around Brisbane you will doubtlessly encounter at least two areas where roadworks are being undertaken. These sections of road are usually signed with a reduced speed limit sign, normally 40kph. It is generally accepted in Queensland that these signs are only for decoration. If you happen to be unfortunate enough to be trapped behind a vehicle whose driver slows down in observance of the lower speed limit, standard practice is to tailgate the slow poke to within a metre of his car. Sometimes you may also like to give the slow driver a flash of your lights, a honk of the horn or the finger. Exception If the roadworks are being monitored by the Police (especially if their lights are flashing), then all drivers will slow to approximately half the signed limit. Australian Crazy Privacy Act 24th March 2006 Did you realise that there are aspects of the Australian Privacy Act that actually make it easier for people to use credit cards fraudulently? Take the following scenario. It has happened to us as an internet vendor, and the rules for American consumers differ from the rules for Australian consumers. A customer sends us an order via internet, gives us a credit card number to charge and a delivery address to send the goods. We are a little suspicious of the transaction. What are our options? If it is an American customer, we phone the American bank attached to the credit card, give them the details, tell them that we are a little suspicious and just ask a simple question - "could you please confirm that the address given to us is correct?" The American bank either confirms the address or advises that the address is not correct, puts a stop on the card and contacts the customer. Fair enough, they have not released any information about the customer other than to confirm or deny information that we have already been given. Australian banks however have the Privacy Act stuck so far up their clackers that they won't even confirm or deny the address details. Where does that leave the vendor? Where does that leave the customer who may have had their card number stolen and not know it? Rules can only go so far in the right direction before they end up passing the mark and heading in the opposite wrong direction. Driving in Queensland (Part 7) 25th March 2006 Speed Limits It is customary in Queensland to drive at either 10kph below or above the speed limit. When travelling on a multi lane highway, the driver travelling at 10kph below the speed limit has his choice of lanes, whilst the driver travelling at 10kph over must swerve in and out between the slower vehicles whilst giving the finger to the other drivers. Queenslanders find this to be lots of fun and it is standard practice on Queensland roads. Added Fun For a bit of added fun, many Queenslanders who take the 10kph below limit option also practice changing lanes without checking for faster drivers approaching from behind in the adjacent lane. This makes for lots of laughs, horn blowing, hand signals (usually the finger), and quite a few accidents. Sometimes things can get a bit tense, but being Queenslanders all is forgotten within 24 hours due to their short attention spans. Driving in Queensland (Part 8) 26th March 2006 Fog Lights In Queensland we don't get fog. But despite the law that only the headlights of a vehicle should be on, many Queenslanders find a need to travel around with their fog lights on. You should note though that this practice has different meanings in different areas. In lower socioeconomic areas, the meaning is quite clearly "hey look at me everyone, I can now afford fog lights". In the middle class suburbs, they are referred to as "Wanker Lights". People driving with them on are generally new to the middle class suburb and still think they have to prove that they can afford fog lights. In the upper class suburbs they are called "Poofter Lights" and have come to represent a signal to other like minded people that you are available. SO BE CAREFUL WHERE YOU USE THEM. First determine whether you want to be known as an upstart, wanker or poofter and only use your fog lights in an appropriate area for the image you want to portray. Be warned however that even though Queensland Police do not seem to know it, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW to drive with your fog lights on except in adverse weather conditions. The Queensland Police could make their annual fines budget in one night when they start enforcing this.... Two rules apply. "A person must not cause or permit: any fog light affixed to a motor vehicle on a road to be lighted except in fog, mist or under other atmospheric conditions that restrict visibility ie. Heavy rain,snow fall." SOURCE: Road Transport(Vehicle Registration) Regulation 1998, division 5 clause 55(a). THE INFRINGEMENT NOTICE THAT CAN BE ISSUED SPECIFICALLY FOR FOG LIGHTS: `UNLAWFUL USE OF FOG LAMP` $74. "USE/ALLOW USE OF LIGHT ON/IN VEHICLE LIKELY/TO DAZZLE" $74. SOURCE: Australian Road Rules. (rule 219) Driving in Queensland (Part 9) 28th March 2006 West End If you want to be kept really alert, try driving in West End. Within any 5 minute drive through this suburb, you may expect at least two drugged out crazies to walk straight off the footpath in front of your car. Most West End pedestrians are unaware of the cars, the roads or even the world around them. The Brisbane Council had developed a reaction team called the WESP (West End Scraper Patrol), whose only job is to travel the streets of West End scraping splattered West End zombies from the roads. They are kept very busy. Drive in West End at your own risk, but remember to stay alert. Driving in Queensland (Part 10) 29th March 2006 Stay Ahead In Queensland it is important to stay ahead of anyone who was not in front of you when you joined the traffic flow. When driving on a single lane road, you may travel at whatever speed you like. A common practice is to drive at 10kph below the speed limit so as to annoy road users behind you who may want to travel at the speed limit. The real trick is to speed up to just above the speed limit whenever approaching an overtaking lane. This will mean that the vehicle behind you has to exceed the speed limit if they want to overtake. It also annoys the hell out of the driver, but a true Queensland driver doesn't give a rat's you know what about other drivers. The main goal of a Queensland driver is to stay in front. If another driver does successfully pass you, you should then set your sights on passing them so that you can get back in front and annoy them by doing 10kph below the speed limit again. To a Queenslander, it is intimidating when another vehicle passes you. Queenslanders see this as a personal affront to their driving abilities (as if they have any). Once passed, a Queenslander must regain his rightful position ahead of the other vehicle at almost any cost. Unless... The desire to regain the lead will wane if another vehicle begins approaching from the rear. Once this happens, the struggle to beat the vehicle in front is forgotten, and the struggle begins to keep the vehicle behind from passing. As previously noted, most Queensland drivers have difficulty concentrating on two things at once. Many have trouble concentrating at all. Islamic "values" 31st March 2006 Why is it that every time westerners show their disgust at the enforcement of some barbaric Islamic Sharia law, the muslims all get up in arms saying that they are entitled to their beliefs just as we are entitled to ours? The argument makes absolutely no sense. The difference between Sharia law and most western law is not simply about values. The difference is about freedom and oppression. It is about allowing free thought or imposing ones views on others. Most western law is designed with freedom in mind. People are free to do almost anything so long as it does not unfairly affect others or present a danger to themselves or others. Western laws are designed to protect people from danger and or unfairness. Sharia law is designed with a different purpose. The writers of the laws wanted to impose their views on others. They actually impose the death sentence if a muslim converts to another faith. Muslim laws tell people how they should think, and sanction murder of people who don't "think" the way the leaders want them to. With disgusting uncivilised laws such as these, why would anyone "choose" to be a muslim? No sane person would. That's why they need these dirty little laws to prevent the oppressed from leaving. Given the choice, any sane person would choose freedom over the tyranny of Muslim laws. Muslim grubs show no respect for women and no tolerance for other religions or cultures. They use barbed rhetoric against anything not Muslim whilst at the same time crying foul when anyone says anything negative about Islam. Muslim culture is rife with paranoia, hatred, distrust, cruelty and authoritarianism. Until these dirty little uncivilised animals can learn respect, tolerance and a right to personal freedom of thought, we should not be helping them in their grubby little wars. We should not trade with them. We should not allow them into our countries. We should not enter their countries. They are dangerous and backwards and they should be treated as such. We should definitely keep an eye on them to ensure the animals don't gain any ability to harm civilised countries, but we should not attempt to interact with them. If these creatures ever evolve into people then, and only then, should we try to deal with them like people. Civilised Western countries have sent their people to Afghanistan and Iraq to help one lot of animals get rid of another lot of animals. Now the Afghan animals have arrested a former Muslim, Abdul Rahman, for converting to Christianity and he faces the death penalty. He does not "think" the way they want him to. Try convincing me that these are civilised "people" our soldiers are dying for. Leave them to rot in their own stink! Driving in Queensland (Part 11) 2nd April 2006 Turning like a Queenslander Left turns are performed like in any other state. Right turns are completely different and there are two styles of right turn that you must learn depending on the situation. Situation 1 - Turning right when there is no traffic island If the road is clear between yourself and the side street, you should take the shortest route. This usually means cutting straight in front of any traffic coming out of the street into which you are turning. In simple terms, cut the corner without regard for anyone else. Situation 2 - Turning right when there is a traffic island When there is a traffic island in the centre of the road you are turning from, you need to adopt a semi-trailer strategy. Swing out as wide as you can as though you are driving a semi trailer. Queenslanders have some hidden fear that the back end of their car may become floppy and hit the traffic island. Don't ask me why, I'm just the observer. Surveys we have conducted around Brisbane streets indicate that on average 87% of Brisbanites turn in this manner. The worst street for Situation 2 driving is at Carindale where traffic turning from Greendale Way into Amersham Street scored a whopping 98.2% on pretending to be truck drivers. Interestingly, traffic in this same area scored very high on the "Wanker Lights" scale (use of fog lights when no fog). The 13% of us who don't turn in this manner, refer to these two Queensland turning peculiarities as "arsehole driving". The arseholes who do it don't see the problem at all. Driving in Queensland (Part 12) 3rd April 2006 Don't let anyone turn in front of you It is deeply important for most Queensland drivers that they are able to exert their power by not allowing anyone to turn across their path. When driving along at a constant speed and an approaching driver calculates that he has enough time to make a right hand turn that will cross your path, it is your duty as a true Queensland driver to increase your speed just enough so that you create a near miss and send the other driver a clear message that he miscalculated. This is called the "NAH NAHNY NAH NAH" maneuver and is commonly practiced by over 60% of Queensland road users. Driveways A similar situation can be observed when a vehicle leaves a driveway ahead of you. If the vehicle leaves the driveway and turns across your path onto the other side of the road, then the situation calls for the above "NAH NAHNY NAH NAH" manouver. However, if the other driver has the audacity to pull out in front of you travelling in the same direction, the maneuver is somewhat extended. Begin with the classic "NAH NAHNY NAH NAH" maneuver, so as to inform the other driver that he is a bad driver and made a horrible miscalculation. Then follow this up with flashing of your headlights, blasting the horn and tailgating the other vehicle for at least 500 metres. This is designed to increase the other driver's awareness that he erred. Be careful though. If an accident results, you will most likely be at fault even though the other driver had the audacity to pull out in front of you. Driving in Queensland (final) 4th April 2006 Advanced maneuver This is an advanced maneuver that many long time Queenslanders use in an attempt to convince themselves that they are better drivers than other road users. When following another vehicle (vehicle A) at or around the speed limit and in the correct left lane on a multi lane highway... Wait until a slower vehicle (vehicle B) is spotted ahead. Move into the right hand lane and just into the blind spot of the vehicle A. Match vehicle A's speed all the way until getting very close to the slower vehicle B. Option 1. Slightly increase your speed so that the driver of vehicle A realises you are there and has to slow down to avoid coliding with vehicle B. Vehicle A must now come around behind you as you pass vehicle B. You have successfully taken the lead and will now feel very powerful. Option 2. Remain in vehicle A's blindspot and wait until the driver of vehicle A starts to pull out towards your vehicle to overtake vehicle B. Now blast your horn and swerve eratically calling the driver of vehicle A all sorts of names. Again you will feel powerful, but even more importantly you will have taught the driver of vehicle A that he has no business being on the road. Queenslanders just love arranging situations where they can assert themselves over fellow road users and make the other road user feel bad. This maneuver is best used by the Queenslander who feels so bad about himself that it actually makes him feel good when somebody else feels worse (about 55% of Queenslanders fall into this category). US patent office 8th April 2006 Does anyone else see how ridiculous the US patent office has become. They will allow people to patent anything these days, and then the person who patents it can sue anyone else that uses the item. Talk about stymying invention and progress. The latest one making the news is some relatively unknown loser who "invented" the "buy it now" feature on an online web store, had it patented and is now sueing ebay for $35,000,000. What a crock. Someone should lock the guy up for impersonating a human. I can think of many much more innovative ideas than a "buy it now" feature, that have never been patented and have gone on to advance mankind in very positive ways. The wheel for one. Imagine where we would be today if some stone age patenting office allowed a patent on the wheel so no one was allowed to develop anything using wheels unless they paid a royalty to the inventor. All those early inventors who used the wheel in their own inventions probably wouldn't have even tried. But a "buy it now" feature? And what about the idiot jury that originally awarded him the damages settlement (it's currently being appealed)? Am I the only one who thinks Americans are loopier than me? Fast Cars 11th April 2006 After reading about the 4 year old boy who was killed by a speeding driver on the weekend, i'd just like to make a few comments. The boy was playing in a neighbors front garden, the car was speeding and left the road, the family must now come to terms with the fact that some unthinking, uncaring idiot has taken their child from them forever. An added injustice is that the idiot will get to continue living his life, and looking at previous cases such as these, the killer will probably be given little more than a slap on the wrist and told not to drive so fast in the future. My opinion on petrol powered cars in general is that they should be a restricted item and only available in special circumstances under strict lisencing conditions. What do we do for transportation then? Electric powered cars with a speed limiter which restricts them to a top speed of 40kph. WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN. Make less appointments. Make them further apart. Enjoy the scenery as we travel around at a much safer speed, without feeling the need to get everywhere an hour ago. Travelling interstate? Take the train, a plane or a coach. It is rather wasteful when you look at how many cars travel long distances with a single occupant. I would just love to see cars banned from our streets, remove the temptation for hoons to endanger peoples lives and see the whole world take a step back from the ever increasing speed of todays society. Hindu Teachings 18th April 2006 Just when we thought that Islam was the only remaining regressive religion, check out the following excerpt from a textbook released by Rajasthan State Education Board in predominantly Hindu India. Whilst the book is written in Hindi, I don't know if this excerpt is typical of Hindu doctrine. Obviously though, it is a common enough belief with Hindu people if it was allowed to be printed in an educational text book. "A donkey is like a housewife. In fact, the donkey is a shade better, for while the housewife may sometimes complain and walk off to her parents' home, you'll never catch the donkey being disloyal to his master." So there we have it. Words of wisdom fully approved by the Rajasthan State Education Board. Western ladies don't know how good they've got it. Now get your man a beer and get back to work. Gambling and Probability 23rd April 2006 I am often amazed at the comments people make about how they "always win" at some game of chance like poker machines or Keno. After they see my look of incredulity at their comment, they will usually change to "almost always win". What is truly amazing is how many of these people's stories defy the laws of probability with their winnings. I would pay 100 to 1 odds against the majority of people who make such comments understanding probability at all. Of course there are certain betting games where the punter can increase their odds with a little knowledge. Several card games come to mind, various forms of racing and markets such as shares, options and futures. If the punter is good at these games, they can nudge the odds in their favour. People actually make a living out of such games. Some games however have absolutely no way of changing the odds to the punters favour. Roulette, poker machines, Keno, Lotto, Powerball, Craps etc. We need to differentiate between gambling which is "pure chance" and gambling which can "involve skill". There is no skill in roulette or keno. Skill can be involved in racing, some card games and financial markets - yes financial markets can be considered a form of gambling. It should also be noted that to the novice even the games which can involve an element of skill are simply games of chance. Some facts .... In games of pure chance, the odds are stacked against the punter. People who "win more often than they lose" are either very forgetful or are riding against the odds and waiting for a fall. People who think that it is possible to win at these games over the long term do not understand probability. IF YOU PLAY THESE GAMES LONG ENOUGH THE PROBABILITY IS THAT YOU WILL LOSE. What about someone who wins $1,000,000 on the Lotto you ask? Same thing. If that person does not understand probability and decides that they are going to keep gambling on the Lotto and increase their bets using their new fortune, they will lose it all. The only way to come out a winner, is if you are lucky enough to beat the odds before you lose too much, and then to stop playing the game (or keep playing, but stick to bets small enough that you will never make much of a dent in the original win). Winning at one of these games of chance can be the worst thing to happen to an impressionable young person who does not understand probability. It gives them the false notion that "winning is easy" and can lead to large losses in the future. Not only do they gamble away all the winnings, but they often continue gambling with money that they can't afford. I'll let you in on a secret. People who like to give money away don't own casinos. The best money we've ever made from a casino is when we've invested in their shares. How little do people understand probability? I was reading a book about share trading recently and the author commented on an otherwise seemingly intelligent person he met at a party. The author asked the person a simple question - "if the chance of rain is 50% on Saturday and 50% on Sunday, what is the chance of rain on the weekend?" The person's answer - 100%. No matter how much the author tried to explain to this person that the odds were not 100%, the person could not understand. THIS IS WHY THE CASINOS MAKE MONEY. Keno Odds 24th April 2006 Just a little more on the probability of winning games of pure chance. Note that the odds I am quoting below only take into consideration the first prize payments. There are other minor prize payments which make all odds a little better than those stated below, but I don't want to go into too much detail. I am just trying to illustrate a point and for simplicity I am basing it on the first prize odds. As discussed yesterday, games of pure chance are designed with one thing in mind - profits for the people who run the games. So why do I play the occassional game of Keno? It's quite simple. I am not saying that you should never play these games. My personal philosophy is Play them if you have a little spare cash and nothing better to spend it on. Never spend a lot on these games in the mistaken belief that the odds are in your favour, and Only go for the big odds and big payout opportunities. I generally go for the 10 from 10 in a 20 from 80 number Keno Draw. The odds of taking out the first prize 10 from 10 are about 11,000,000 : 1 against me. The prize for 10 from 10 is a jackpot and is usually between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000. So if I was playing this game constantly with a view to profit from it I would be losing about $11,000,000 for every $2,000,000 returned. Not a very wise business investment. But I don't treat this as an investment. I treat it as a bit of fun, and if I am going to throw money away for a bit of fun I like to know that there is at least some chance of a decent life changing outcome. I meet people who say "go for 3 from 3, the odds are better". Well, yes the odds are better but what do you really hope to achieve by going for a $43.00 payout at 72:1 odds against you? Sure, if you treated it as a business investment you wouldn't lose as much of the $11,000,000 as you would going for 10 from 10. In fact, at the end of your 11,000,000 games probability indicates that the 3 from 3 player should still have around $6,500,000 whilst the 10 from 10 player should have around $1,000,000 to $2,000,000. But since you are playing this game with the full knowlege that you are likely to lose, why would you play it in such a way that you can NEVER win anything worthwhile? The consistent 3 from 3 player is a consistent source of income for the casino. For every $66.00 they spend (taking into account 2 from 3 payments also), the casino gives them back $43.00. Not too many people would find $43.00 to be life changing. The player comes out with a number of small wins but never enough to cover the outlay. The casino takes their cut and says "thank you very much for not understanding the odds of the game you just played". The 10 from 10 player is also a consistent source of income for the casino and also has a number of small wins. Taking into consideration minor payments (5 from 10, 6 from 10 ...) the actual return for the 10 from 10 player is similar to the return expected for the 3 from 3 player. When you add the jackpot to the calculations the expected return (long term) playing 10 from 10 is actually better than playing 3 from 3..... but you still wouldn't do it as an investment because the odds are against you. The big plus for the 10 out of 10 player, is that IF the first prize is won, the payment would be life changing for most people. How about people who play 1 number? For every $11,000,000 they play they can expect to get back $8,250,000. The casino takes a 25% cut of all the money these people thow into the game, and the most they can win on a single game is $3.00. How smart is that? Many players of 1 from 1 would counter that argument with "Yeah but I don't just bet $1.00 a game, I bet $100.00 a game so I could potentially win $300.00". If that is you, then go back and start reading this and yesterdays entries again. Keep reading until you understand it. Gamble for fun. Gamble only with money you can afford. Know the odds. Don't expect to win. Selective Memory 27th April 2006 Have you ever noticed how people who play the poker machines a lot will usually tell you that they are ahead? Referring to games of pure chance such as poker machines, roulette, craps, Keno etc, if someone consistently tells you about their winnings and rarely mentions their losses, they are either laundering money or in denial about their gambling problem. Assuming they are not laundering money, a regular gambler in denial over their losses is a gambler with a problem. If you are close to someone like this you may wish to keep an eye on them and be ready to suggest Gamblers Annonymous if things start looking too bad. The only way to beat the odds at gambling is to become very good at a game that requires an element of skill. Cardinal Pell urges Understanding of Islam 4th May 2006 Cardinal Pell, the head of the Catholic Church in Australia, has urged Aussies and Americans to read the Koran for a better understanding of Islam, and I agree. This is not to say that we should be understanding of Islamic ideology, just "understand it". Islamic idealogy is just plain wrong. Reading the Koran will allow all intelligent people to see just how wrong Islam is. Cardinal Pell admits that he was able to get through no more than 70 pages of the Koran due to there being so many calls to violence. He compared Islamic ideology to that of Communism and Nazism and said that any society based on strict adherence to Islamic law (such as Afghanistan under the Taliban) would prove unsustainable. Better be careful what you say Cardinal Pell. Followers of Islam aren't quite right in the head. You don't want to upset them. Kim Sleazley 5th May 2006 Kim Sleazley (Beazley) keeps popping up his ugly little head (it's small compared to his body) every time an opportunity arises to have a dig at the Government. It doesn't matter how flawed his arguments are, he believes that the Australian public are too stupid to remember facts and that they will believe his dirty little lies. He blatantly criticises the current Government because official interest rates have just risen another quarter of a percent and the average home loan will now be around 7.5%, but he neglects to mention the 17% interest rates we had last time we had a Labor Government. The last three times John Howard has run for Prime Minister, Sleazley and his Labor cronies have tried to scare everyone into believing that John Howard was going to step aside as soon as he had won and let someone else head the Government. Howard is still there. Sleazley lied as usual. He could have a point about the Australian public not remembering the facts though. I remember an otherwise intelligent person just before the last election parroting the Sleazley diatribe, and believing it. The only time Kim Sleazley has anything to say is when it suits his purpose. His only policy is to criticise Government policy. He has no real policy of his own. The last time the Labor Party had any real policies of their own, it was headed by Bob Hawke. Not that I condone all of his policies, but at least he had some. If Kim Sleazley ever gets to be Prime Minister of Australia he is going to sit around for 6 months eating cake and wondering where he is going to get some policies from. Listening to him on the ABC's broadcast of parliament he comes across as a loud mouth lout, only marginally less verbose than Mark Latham. Let him run Australia and we will definitely notice changes. But we will all be pining for the return of an intelligent Government. Since the Liberals have been in control we have had a very stable economy. The Liberal Government runs the country like a cruise liner, slow and careful and most people have a good time. Eventually people are going to grow tired of stability and they will elect a Labor Government. The Labor Govenment sticks the huge outboard motors on the ship and starts running amok. Some people have a great time, some people get mowed down, and the economy gets trashed completely. Then the people bring back the Liberals for a while to get things under control. It generally takes at least two terms to get the compass working, and by then the people are forgetting the last Labor episode and are actually thinking about handing them the helm again. Labor = High Interest Rates Labor = No Policies Labor = Louts in parliament Labor = Labour When I hear Sleazley squealing on the radio I picture the George Orwell story Animal Farm and I hear the Beatles song "Piggies". The Labor piggies are all having a food fight and right there at the head of the dining table I see Kim Sleazley rolling his face around in a cream cake. Phone surveys and telemarketers 9th May 2006 Do telemarketers actually make any sales? Doesn't everyone just hang up on them? Obviously some people are taking the bait because the telemarketers keep doing it. If you are sick and tired of telemarketers and phone survey people invading your privacy, ask them to hang on a minute and put them on hold. If you don't have a "hold" button, just stick the phone next to a small radio and let them think they are on hold. Leave them for about 5 minutes then hang up. Why is this better than just hanging up? It slows them down and costs them more. If you simply hang up, the telemarketer immediately phones the next victim. If you place them on hold, they will wait for a short time before ending the call. If everybody does this we can more effectively inform these dirty little scumbags that they are not welcome. They are happy to waste our time and invade our privacy, so we should not even think twice about wasting their time and money. Another example of Islamic barbarity 10th May 2006 Anyone who is still of the opinion that Islam is not inhumane, oppressive and immoral obviously hasn't heard about Mukhtaran Bibi. She is a Pakistani Muslim whose brother was accused of walking with a girl from a higher tribal group. The village court found her brother guilty of this "offence" and passed sentence. The sentence? That the boy's sister, Mukhtaran Bibi, be raped by four men and paraded naked through the village. THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED CASE. THIS IS HOW MUSLIMS TREAT WOMEN. Does anyone still think Muslims are human? Diet Coke vs Coke Zero 17th May 2006 I can taste very little difference between these two products. When I discuss this with others, they invariably tell me that they prefer Coke Zero to Diet Coke. I still get the bitter aftertaste from the artificial sweeteners. People I talk to don't. So what's the real difference? They both have no sugar and no calories. The only difference between Coke Zero and Diet Coke is the types and quantities of artificial sweeteners. Here are a few quotes from various websites ..... http://ries.typepad.com/ries_blog/2005/06/its_a_net_zero_.html "The only chemical difference between Coke Zero and Diet Coke is that Coke Zero has about half the aspartame but has more ace-k. Confused anyone? It's a marketing thing - Coke have manufactured a "diet" coke without using the word diet... which in their eyes will appeal to a different demographic." http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/2005/06/14/coke_zero_confused_anyone.php The idea behind Coca-Cola Zero is to attract young male consumers who shun beverages with the word Diet on them. I guess we are assuming young men are really stupid. Any one who has finished the fifth grade can figure out Coca-Cola Zero is the same as Diet Coke! http://www.mikeindustries.com Coke Zero is Diet Coke with two sweeteners (Aspartame and Ace-K), rather than just Aspartame. It tastes better than regular Diet Coke, but it's still just as dangerous (as is anything else with artificial sweeteners): http://joi.ito.com/archives/2002/10/26/is_diet_coke_bad_for_you.html Aspartame is poison! Aspartame is not very sweet in itself, that may be why Equal puts Dextrose (sugar) and maltodextrin as the first ingredients, so that it tastes sweet. Aspartame is a brain drug that stimulates your brain so you think that the food you're eating tastes sweet. If you pay attention you'll notice that when using Aspartame, everything you eat at the same time also tastes sweet! This may be why Aspartame causes you to crave carbohydrates. Hence, you won't lose weight using it. BTW, cyclamates got pulled off the market in the 70's in the US (but not Canada or the rest of the world) because the sugar industry saw too much of their market disappear. Aspartame (aspartylphenylalanine-methyl-ester) breaks down to its poison constituents at 86 degrees (Aspartic Acid 40%, Phenylalanine 50%, and Methanol 10%). Remember your stomach is at 98.6 degrees! Therefore you should never use Aspartame in hot beverages or cooked foods such as Jello. How the FDA allows this remains a mystery. There is mounting evidence that the "Burning Mouth Syndrome" experienced by the Desert Storm troops was actually Methanol poisoning from the Diet Coke they drank lots of, after being exposed to desert temperatures. Aspartame's 10% Methanol appears in the body quickly and is the same alcohol (wood alcohol also in lacquer thinner), that your mother correctly warned you could make you blind. Many skid-row alcoholics had major problems with this cheap but deadly form of alcohol. Aspartame's 40% Aspartic Acid is an "excitotoxin" in the brain and excites neurons to death, i.e. it kills brain cells and causes other nerve damage. Aspartame triggers Migraine Headaches This even happened to me!. The Usenet is filled with posts by people who have pinned their migraines down to aspartame consumption. Aspartame's breakdown products attack the bodies tissues and create Formaldehyde which builds up in the tissues forever. Remember the smelly, eye watering fumes from the frogs you dissected in school? They were preserved with Formaldehyde! Formaldehyde is thought to cause cancer. The American Bottlers Association did not want the FDA to approve Aspartame because of what the test report showed. But the FDA approved it anyway! Airline pilots stay away from Aspartame because they are well aware of the documented dangers. Aspartame also breaks down to diketopiperazine [DKP] which is proven to cause Brain Tumors! Brain Tumors used to be rare. Several of the rats in the original study formed brain tumors during their Aspartame exposure. The researchers surgically removed the tumors and returned the rats to the study and discounted the tumors. So there we have it. Not exactly the same as Diet Coke, but just another of the many "Diet" soft drink variations and so close to Diet Coke that there's really no point arguing the difference. What about the old TAB Cola? Again, just a slight difference in the quantities of the same ingredients and again, a few different artificial sweeteners. Why bother? All artificial sweeteners taste like crap, and after looking into this I can see why they do. Twisting the Facts 19th May 2006 In a surprising statement the Australian Bankers Association have twisted the facts and accused Australian Retailers of profiteering by not passing on reductions in credit card processing fees to customers. What the bankers neglected to mention was ... Most retailers didn't increase their prices when credit cards became fashionable in the first place. Most retailers wouldn't have increased their prices each time the banks increased their fees in the past. Did the bankers mention that when they lowered the processing fee (due to legislation) they also increased the terminal rental fee and all the consumables costs? Has anyone ever known a bank to pass on one of their savings unless it was specifically legislated that they must do so? When the banks are made to pass on savings through legislation, have you ever known them not to find an alternative way to make up the lost income? Have you known any Australian bank to share some of their profit with customers or to show compassion to their customers? Do any Australian Banks have decreasing profits? The banks have one concern only, and that is the accumulation of money. The difference between the tax office and Australian banks is that the tax office only taxes you if you are making money, and on a sliding scale according to how much you make. Banks tax you on everything you do whether you are rich or poor, whether you are making money or losing money and with no sliding scales. The poor are being taxed by the banks at a disproportionate rate to the wealthy. In short, Australian banks suck big time !!!!!!!!! MORE BELOW THE FOLLOWING ADVERTISEMENT ---- Do you like to blow things up? 8th June 2006 The message is clear. If you like to blow things up and murder innocent people, you are welcome to do so in Indonesia. Abu Bakar Murderer Bashir, the convicted Indonesian Bali Bomber is due to be released from prison very soon. Abu Bakar Murderer Bashir has been treated to a luxurious stay in his own private cell, with privileges reserved for people of high regard. After just a few years he is being released, and word from my sources are that the Indonesian government may be paying him a lump sum for the inconvenience his stay in prison has caused. Terrorists and murderers: visit Indonesia. You will be treated like royalty. Trouble's a brewing 9th June 2006 Conflict in the Middle East is imminent. The beings that speak to me tell me that it won't take much of a spark to set off a clash between Israel and one or more of it's neighbours. The most probable sparks would be Iranian nuclear ambitions, a threat by Hamas or Hezbollah, or Israeli agents being discovered in Iran. The beings believe that the most likely starting point for conflict will be within Lebanon or Syria, and that there is a greater than 50% chance that once conflict begins it will spread to two or three more countries within 6 months. The beings have spoken. Come on Aussies leave Iraq. They don't deserve your help. 23rd June 2006 An Australian patrol in Iraq is in trouble because they killed and wounded several armed Iraqis who sped along in a 4WD beside the Australian convoy, ignored the Australians gestures to back off and slipped their vehicle in between two of the Australian vehicles. THE IRAQIS WERE ARMED WITH AK-47's AND ACTING IN A WAY THAT COULD BE PERCEIVED AS MENACING. In a country that is full of insurgents the Australians had every right to take defensive action. Now the Iraqi Government wants an apology because it turns out that the idiot Iraqis were actually security agents. I say, write the apology on a paper airplane and throw it to them as the Australian troops board their planes to come back to Australia. The apology should go something like this ... "Australia apologises to the people of Iraq for the fact that we have been unable to assist your leaders to increase their mental capacity beyond that of 5 year olds". If the Iraqi Government does not want it's security agents to be killed, it should issue a stricter IQ test for new recruits. Just because an Iraqi IQ of 50 is considered above average, it still should not qualify someone to carry a weapon or drive a vehicle. Extra protein in our water 24th June 2006 I just thought I'd warn you all to check your sports water drinks thoroughly before you drink them. The following images show some extra protein we found in a sports drink. Luckily it was a clear drink so we could see the big gob of gunk. If it was one of those coloured ones, the gooby wouldn't have been noticed. The company told us that they would arrange to collect the offending bottle of goober and replace it for us with a full carton. They collected the goober, but neglected to send us the carton. I bet they didn't think we had taken photos. Red Shift is not what it seems 22nd July 2006 They took me again last night. This time they didn't do anything weird to me. We just chatted. My little buddies keep telling me how Earth scientists are still in the dim dark ages of cosmic understanding. Apparently the Earth scientists lack of understanding of the properties of light makes for a large portion of extraterrestrial jokes - yes they do tell jokes. It seems that Earth scientists like to take an assumption, call it a fact, use it as a basis for another assumption, and repeat the cycle until the result is totally screwed up. Scientists assume that the red shift we see in the light from distant galaxies proves that the galaxies are moving away from us at enormous velocity. Even more curiously they see that the further away a galaxy is, the more it's light has red shifted, and so by some extremely simple logic they conclude that the further a galaxy is from the Earth, the faster it must be travelling. Then to explain this, they make up wild theories about "expanding universes". My buddies tell me that the reason humans haven't achieved interstellar travel yet is that our most intelligent people make too many assumptions and theories such as these. Apparently there is much more to light than meets the eye. On Earth, testing of the properties of light is limited to what we can observe in a very small distance. Tests whereby lasers are bounced off mirrors on the moon are by cosmological standards extremely limited. Has it not ocurred to any Earth scientist yet that the properties of light change over vast distances? Our entire understanding of cosmological speeds and distances is wrong simply because nobody considered that light has a natural tendency to red shift over distance. Why else would the furthest galaxies appear to be more red shifted? Surely we didn't think that by some coincidence the further a galaxy is from us the faster it would be moving away. Our nearest neighbouring gallaxies are closer, and moving slower than our most brilliant minds can comprehend. The Pope vs Islam 22nd September 2006 Summary of the past few days events: Muslims were in danger of forgetting who they are and what they represent. The Pope reminded them about their inherent violent disposition. Muslims did not like what they heard. Muslims responded with violence. The Pope smirked and the rest of the world nodded in acknowledgement of the Pope's insight into Muslim behaviour. Patents Pending Production of Proof 26th September 2006 Innovation in the world is being stifled by morons who patent anything and everything they can think of, regardless of whether or not they intend acting on the idea and creating a legitimate invention. Adding to the problem are the patent laws that allow this to happen. Simple solution - An idea may be patented for up to 24 months, after which time the patent may only be renewed upon the production of a working model. If a working model can't be produced, the patent owner is fined (may be waived if they can show that they have put reasonable effort into creating the item), and the patent expires. A new patent for the same item may only be taken out by a person who can demonstrate absolutely no relationship with the original patent holder. I'll leave the finer details to the "experts". Or we can just go on letting the morons stifle innovation. Daylight savings 9th October 2006 It's nearly that time of the year again, when Queenslanders drop an extra hour behind the rest of the eastern states. We're already 25 years behind when it comes to political proficiency and Queensland driving habits are known throughout Australia as being notably different. Just to rub in how different we are, every summer the whole state bows to the fears of a few ignoramuses. The smarter states put their clocks forward an hour so that they spend more of their waking time in sunlight. Queenslanders however try to sleep through the first 2-3 hours of daylight, spend the whole day an hour behind the other eastern states, lose two hours of business with the other states, and then get home just as it is going dark. Sorry kids, no going to the park when we get home from work this summer, because the government still wants to be different. Australian Jackasses 24th October 2006 AUSTRALIANS PLEASE NOTE!!!! The word is "Jackass" not "Jackarse". A jackass is an animal, and the second syllable is spelled and pronounced the same way as Americans pronounce the word "ass". It is not and never has been spelled or pronounced jackarse. Unfortunately "jackarse" is likely to become the accepted pronunciation soon because so many Australians don't know the origin of the word. However, if we are going to create a new pronunciation, we should also look at changing the spelling to be reflective of the new pronunciation. If we are going to continue spelling the word correctly as "jackass", then we should also pronounce it correctly. So stop saying "jackarse" and you won't sound like a jackass. Muslim Sentiments 25th October 2006 So a senior Muslim fascist cleric, Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali, thinks women who wear makeup and dress nicely deserve to be raped huh? His analogy goes something like this... "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?" What Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali does not seem to realise is that in the non Muslim world people have evolved beyond the primitive animal insticts of cats. If Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali and his followers have not yet evolved past this point then I would suggest that he round up his followers and move back to a country like Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran or Pakistan where regressive Muslim thinking is encouraged. Daylight Savings 26th October 2006 Let's face it, Queenslanders are never going to go for an idea like daylight savings. Apparently 68% of Queenslanders think it would fade the cows and stop the curtains from giving milk (or something along those lines). To be honest, whilst I am fully for the concept of daylight savings I don't really want them to bring it in up here. Why not? Because we are going to have our own private daylight savings. Our company will be changing it's opening hours to 7am - 4pm. From next week we won't have to battle in the traffic with all the plebs who are working to silly Queensland business hours. It's really quite simple. If the government won't change the official time, business owners who want to be in step with NSW and VIC and have more daylight hours after work should just change their opening hours. If you are not the business owner, why not suggest the idea to your boss? They might even appreciate you more for being able to think outside the square. Another advantage for those of us changing our business hours is that institutions like banks, post offices and government offices will keep working to the "official" Queensland time, making them more accessible to the shrewd minority at the end of the sensible business day. Talking to Bruce 29th October 2006 I was talking to Bruce the other day. Do you know him? Bruce is 6 foot 2 inches, weighs 115 kg, is homosexual and has been in trouble when he was younger for sodomising cats and a priest. Anyway, I was talking to Bruce about this Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali and his recent comments ("women who wear nice clothes in public are at fault if they are raped", "if you leave out the meat, the cats will eat it"). Bruce agreed wholeheartedly, and took a bit of a liking to the Sheik. Then I showed Bruce a picture of the Sheik. "Nice dress", says Bruce, "he's one sexy looking Sheik." Bruce really loved the way the Sheik was trying to make himself look sexy in his little white hat and his long flowing gown. He especially took a liking to the Sheik's well groomed beard and toned face. I told Bruce that the Sheik was planning a visit to nearby Mt Gravatt soon. A huge smile beamed forth as Bruce said quietly, "Bring on the meat". Sorry Bruce 31st October 2006 Sorry Bruce, looks like your meat (Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali) won't be joining you in Mt Gravatt. Why don't you go down to Sydney and wait for him to get out of hospital so you can give him a good welcome home greeting? I'm sure that if he didn't want your affections he wouldn't wear those pretty flowing white dresses that you find so appealing. The week in review 9th November 2006 The Australian Reserve Bank drums home the fact that they are a bunch of reckless morons, ignorant to anything but high school economic theory, by somehow thinking that raising interest rates will bring down the cost of bananas, end the drought and solve the problems of the Middle East. Simple economics by simple economists. Americans decide that their 90% support for George Bush invading Iraq 3 years ago was wrong, and send a message to the Government in their mid term elections. The message sent to the Government was "We were wrong, so you will have to pay." Come to think of it, isn't that typical of a lot of US law suits too? We had rain in the catchment area this week. The State Government announced that the day's rain would only provide an extra 3 days worth of water in the dams. So, does that mean that it needs to rain every fourth day just to provide for our level 4 usage rates? At that rate, the drought will never break. We may find the dam water lasts longer when they stop selling so much of it to bottled water and beverage companies. Japan raids Melbourne, taking over the Flemington Racecourse and nicking off with a trophy. Good on them. I like to see people get the better of those Southern dudes. U2 performs in Brisbane and asks for the release of somebody called David Hicks. David Who? Is that someone we should care about? Why Bush got it wrong! 18th November 2006 US President George W Bush will most likely go down in history as the Frog President. He keeps leaping into trouble without looking first. If he had taken a moment to sit down and plan the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq a little better, both countries would have been closer to achieving stable rule, less lives would have been lost and the US would still have a strong military respected throughout the world and ready to get involved in the next trouble spot. The US military is good at doing the initial "shock and awe" phase. It is not good at micro-managing the internal affairs of a country after the invasion. If America had stuck to what it does best, the scenario for changing the political landscape of a country like Afghanistan or Iraq would be something like this... Discuss and establish a stabilising coalition with allies in the immediate area of the planned invasion. US invades with a clear goal to remove the reigning power. The stabilising coalition does not get involved in the invasion. As soon as the invasion is over, administration is handed over to the stabilising coalition with a clear blueprint of what is expected. US pulls out, leaving several large bases in remote areas of the country. These bases, including air bases, would be ready in case of trouble. Let's face it, would the insurgency in Iraq have even taken root if the US had pulled out immediately, leaving a coalition of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Kuwait to administer the return to self rule? Maybe, but not likely. They got closer to getting it right in Afghanistan by bringing in UN peacekeepers early. However, by not removing the large US presence they have given the Taliban opportunities to see that the US can be beaten. The administrative coalition in Afghanistan should have been comprised of more Pakistanis and possibly Chinese if they were willing to get involved. US bases should have been established ready to assist, and apart from those bases the US should have pulled out completely. If they had gone about the Afghan and Iraqi invasions in this way, the US would be seen by the world as having quickly and efficiently facilitated regime change in 2 rogue countries, having suffered very few casualties for their efforts. The US military would be respected as an efficient means of keeping such rogue states in check. Iran and North Korea would not be quite so bold in their quests for Nuclear Weapons, or if they were, we may very well have seen lightning invasions of Iran and North Korea by now. Even errant dictators like Kim Jong Il would be a little worried that the US's superior air power might easily unseat his position. So, there you have it. With the benefit of hindsight I just solved many of the world's problems. Some would say that we shouldn't be so harsh on President Bush since he didn't have the benefit of hindsight, but Presidents are supposed to make their decisions based on foresight. That is why they are elected. They are supposed to be smart enough to make intelligent decisions. Voters should only elect smart people into power. American voters got it wrong twice. Bush just can't seem to get anything right at all. Schoolies Dopes 23rd November 2006 I feel sorry for all the kids who got hurt at the Gold Coast Schoolies celebrations. Not because they got hurt, but because they were too dopey to heed the warnings. The kids who go there are warned about the dangers well in advance. They see examples of the violence in the media. Their parents warn them. Often their schools organise talks by police about the dangers. Yet they go anyway. They make the choice to go. They think that they are infallible. They think that they are smarter than everyone else. Just like kids who have car accidents resulting from disobeying road rules, the schoolies kids make their own choice and put themselves in danger. Kids who go to schoolies need to know that they are indeed fallible, and they are definitely not smarter than everone else. In fact, those who make the choice to go to schoolies are most likely less intelligent than their peers who choose to celebrate in a safer manner. Let's get with the times - the email CC. prompt 29th November 2006 I've seen so many web pages referring to the cc: prompt in an e-mail as meaning "Carbon Copy". Roll over you old dinosaurs and make way for rational people who realise that since carbon paper is not used with e-mails, the more correct term these days is "courtesy copy". Some points to think about... The copy is being sent to the cc: recipient as a courtesy and is not being sent using anything remotely resembling carbon paper. If cc: in e-mails stood for "carbon copy", that would make bcc: "blind carbon copy". Now that's even more ridiculous than sending a "carbon copy" e-mail. Try "Blind Courtesy Copy" it makes more sense. If you still insist on using the term "Carbon Copy" when referring to e-mailing, it is most likely because you have trouble spelling "courtesy". Get a dictionary and copy the word 50-100 times until you can spell it. Then you won't sound so stupid by inferring that copies of your e-mails are being sent with the aid of a piece of smudgy black paper. "Carbon Copy" is still acceptable terminology. It refers to a copy of a paper document made with carbon paper. Nobody is saying that the term doesn't exist; just that it has no place in e-mailing terminology. Why do there seem to be more people in the "carbon copy" than the "courtesy copy" camp? Firstly, you've got the old people (even older than me) who used real carbon paper a lot when the term cc: correctly meant "carbon copy". They are stuck in their ways and unable to grasp the change to "courtesy copy" for electronic communication. Most of these people can't follow instruction guides for DVD players or mobile phones and don't own an MP3 player. Secondly, you have a younger generation who are too accepting of what the old buggers (above) tell them. These young people wouldn't know what carbon paper was if they were using it to wipe their bums. So when the old bugger who won't change their ways tells the young gullible person that cc: means "carbon copy", the young person accepts it. The less than 50% of people using the correct terminology - "courtesy copy" - are those who think about, and like to know the reasons behind the words they use. Daddy Longlegs 28th December 2006 Back in 1990 I had an extremely hard time trying to prove to a bunch of morons in Albury NSW that they had fallen for a well known Urban Myth that "Daddy Longlegs spiders are the most poisonous .... blah, blah, blah". You've probably heard it yourself at least 10 times. The "proofs" that were offered to me by the Albury mob at the time included such gems as .... "Jimmy Whackhead told me it's true, he's a pest controller, he should know." (I substituted the name) "I saw it on a nature program on TV." "My school teacher told me." It's amazing how the proof I needed to debunk them was so hard to find in 1990, but now you only need to Google "Daddy Long Legs" to come up with enough pages to convince the most die-hard misinformed believers. I wonder if any of the Albury mob are ready to pay up on our various $50.00 and $100.00 bets yet? Not likely. Most of them probably can't even remember 1990. Politicians should be remunerated according to their abilities 8th January 2007 Why do Australian politicians get to legislate for their own salaries and superannuation packages? Politicians should have their salaries set by a vote from the constituency they represent. High marks should reward them to the tune of around triple what they are currently getting and low marks should see them with a salary of around a third of what they currently enjoy. Annual reviews of performance never harmed anyone except the undisciplined and disinterested. The best politicians would be aptly rewarded, and have incentive to run for office again at the end of their term, whilst dunga politicians would have no incentive to run again. Give them what they are worth, not what they legislate for themselves. What about their retirement plans? Simple. Bring them back in line with everyone else. What sort of message does it send to the Australian people when politicians legislate themselves higher government funded (read "tax payer funded") superannuation packages whilst bringing in new taxes like the GST for the rest of us plebs? Where's Robin Hood when you need him? Keno - Know what you are playing for 29th January 2007 For those of you who like to play a little Keno I've done a few calculations to help you pick which game you would like to play. This is based on our local Queensland Jupiters Keno, but I'm sure that Keno games throughout the world are based on similar numbers and payment schemes. The Keno here is based on 80 numbers. A player makes a selection of numbers and hopes to match some or all of them with 20 numbers drawn by the Keno computer. It is up to a player how many numbers they choose, and the rewards paid correlate to the probability of matching those numbers. eg. You choose 3 numbers from 80, the computer chooses 20 and you match all 3 - you get $44.00 return for a $1.00 bet. You would have returned $1.00 if 2 of your 3 numbers matched, and you would lose if 1 or 0 numbers matched. The Three Number Game I've heard people say that they like to play 3 number games because if they win they get $44.00 back, and it feels like they have quite a few wins. If they match 2 numbers they get their money back. This is exactly what the Casino wants you to think. When you consistently play the three number game, only the Casino stands a chance of getting rich. The odds All games offered by the Casino (from 1 number to 40 number picks) offer roughly the same odds over time. See below for the probable return you will get for each dollar you play on various Keno games... 1 number: $0.75 3 numbers: $0.75 7 numbers: $0.82 (assuming a $12000 jackpot) 10 numbers: $0.762 (assuming the jackpot is at $2,000,000) 15 number: $0.748 40 numbers: $0.746 This means that over time, you can expect to lose. If you're playing a 3 number or 1 number game because you think the returns are better, think again. If you think that there just has to be more chance of getting 20 out of 40 than there is getting 10 out of 10, again the answer is no. In actual fact the probability of getting 10 from 10 is 1 in every 8,911,711 games, whilst the probability of getting 20 from 40 is one in every 25,646,754 games. Getting 10 from 10 pays a Jackpot prize which is often around $2,000,000 dollars whilst 20 from 40 only pays $250,000. The reason the overall probabilities are so similar is due to the combinations of smaller prizes for getting less matches than the numbers selected. Life Changing Wins So looking at the above I ask, if you are going to play the Keno at all, isn't it more sensible to play the game that has the best chance of giving you a life changing win? What one person considers life changing may not necessarily be life changing for another, but look at the following analysis and make up your own mind. Analysis based on playing 1000 games for $1.00 per game Play 1 Number - Average money returned: $750.00 - Expected* Money Returned $750.00 - Biggest possible single game win: $3.00 - Estimated chance of winning the maximum within your 1000 games: 250 times Play 3 Numbers - Average money returned $750.00 - Expected* Money Returned $750.00 - Biggest possible single game win $44.00 - Estimated chance of winning the maximum within your 1000 games: 14 times Play 7 Numbers - Average money returned $821.00 - Expected* Money Returned $567.00 - Biggest possible single game win $12,000 (depends on jackpot) - Estimated chance of winning the maximum within your 1000 games: 0.024 (1 in 41) Play 10 Numbers - Average money returned $762.00 - Expected* Money Returned $415.00 - Biggest possible single game win $2,000,000 (depends on jackpot) - Estimated chance of winning the maximum within your 1000 games: 0.0001 (1 in 8,911) Play 15 Numbers - Average money returned $748.00 - Expected* Money Returned $654.00 - Biggest possible single game win $250,000 - Estimated chance of winning the maximum within your 1000 games: 0.00000000233 (1 in 428,000,000) Play 40 Numbers - Average money returned $746.00 - Expected* Money Returned $464.00 - Biggest possible single game win $250,000 - Estimated chance of winning the maximum within your 1000 games: 0.000039 (1 in 25,647) Average Money Returned is based on the overall probability %. It assumes that a person playing the number of games required to win the 1st prize will win the first prize once and each successive prize the exact probable number of times (this itself is highly improbable). * Expected Money Returned takes account only of the winning combinations with a probability of 1 or more in 1000 games. If you are going to play the Keno, you should at least know what you are playing for, and your chances of getting it. Hopefully the above will help to clarify this. Now, for those who didn't work out that the 10 spot game is the best option, drop me a line, I think I have a deed to the Sydney Harbour Bridge somewhere I can let you have for cheap. Keno - More 1st February 2007 Something I neglected to mention in the previous Keno post is that most people re-bet their winnings if the winnings are of lower value than the amount originally played. This can be explained by simple psychology: if you win less than your original bet you feel as though you should keep trying for "the big win" using the returns - nobody wants to be a loser, and accepting less than your original bet is accepting a loss. With this in mind, a person playing any system is more likely to walk away with nothing than with a win, but the person playing a minor system such as a sytem 3 is more likely to have some days where they walk away with a win larger than their original bet. However, played over a long time, those wins will be much less than the amount of money lost, and they will never have had a chance at winning any substantial figure. So... If you like to put a few dollars on with the hope that you might walk away with a few dollars more, but the knowledge that the odds are strongly in the casino's favour - play the minor systems. If you want the best chance at winning a substantial amount, again knowing that the odds are strongly against you - play the system 10. Don't Vote the Unions into Government 24th August 2007 This will (should) keep you awake at night................ Sometimes in today's presidential politics, all the emphasis is on the the leader....If you're considering voting for Kevin Rudd, perhaps you should consider who would sit around a Rudd Cabinet table?!! Prime Minister: Kevin Rudd Deputy prime Minister and Minister for Industrial relations: Julia Gillard, former student radical and AUS president Treasurer: Wayne Swan, former ALP state secretary Attorney general: Joe Ludwig, former AWU official Minister for Homeland security: Arch Bevis, former organiser Queensland Teachers' Union Minister for Trade: Simon Crean, former president, ACTU Minister for Transport and Tourism: Martin Ferguson, former president, ACTU Minister for Finance: Lindsay Tanner, former state secretary, Federated Clerk's Union Minister for Environment and the Arts: Peter Garrett, lifelong anti-American activist Minister for Infrastructure and Water: Anthony Albanese. former assistant general secretary, NSW ALP Minister for Human Services: Tanya Plibersek, former student union official, UTS Minister for Immigration: Tony Burke, former official Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Union Minister for Resources: Chris Evans, former official Miscellaneous Workers' Union Minister for Veterans' Affairs: Alan Griffin, former official Federated Clerks Union Minister for Primary Industry: Kerry O'Brien, former official Miscellaneous Workers' Union Minister for Superannuation: Nick Sherry, former state secretary, Federated Liquor and Allied Trades Union Minister for Sport: Kate Lundy, former official CFMEU. and if that wasn't bad enough, waiting in the wings are: Greg Combet, candidate for Charlton and former ACTU president Doug Cameron, NSW Senate candidate and secretary of Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union Bill Shorten: candidate for Maribyrnong and national secretary, Australian Workers' Union Richard Marles: candidate for Corio and former assistant secretary, Transport Workers Union.

Jesus saves, he shoots, HE SCORES!!
Pickup Lines: Your Daddy must play the trumpet, cos he sure made me horny!

Site Summary: The Coldrick Web Site is available to everyone and the content is family orientated. It is a place to slow down, relax and browse. It isn't a fast paced site. To get the most from the site you need to click a few buttons and read the pages or look at the pictures. There are over 2000 jokes which appear randomly at the bottom of most pages, admittedly many are quite lame. We even believe that the lamest joke in the world may be amongst them - see if you can find it. A few jokes may be slightly risque but we don't believe there are any that would be unsuitable for a young audience. There are over 1700 trivia questions which can be browsed using the random trivia page. You may like to play the trivia quiz when you feel you know enough of the answers. The site also contains some information on UFO's (Unidentified Flying Objects) and some interesting paranormal information including voodoo, spontaneous human combustion and psychic powers. You might like to voice your opinion on the questions in the Polls Page, or check the family tree to see if you may be remotely related to the yobbo's who run the site. We assure you that no Eskimos were harmed in the production of these pages.