When is it too much haka?

The last commonwealth games were not massively successful by past standards for New Zealand, considering we only pulled in 32 medals in total, compared to the previous 30 or so years. But it was still an awesome achievement for our athletes from a small nation of 4 million, who compete on a world stage and bring back medals - bloody good show I say. Screw all the naysayers who whinge about the number of medals - I don't see any of the local sports journo's getting off their fat butts to applaud the effort, let alone running a marathon for their country. And with the Olympics on the cusp of starting, I can only smile in anticipation of our plucky teams taking on the world, and bringing home the glory. In saying that, I must admit I do have a small, ah, not a complaint but maybe a suggestion - less haka this time round eh?

The haka is a national icon for our country - nothing stirs the blood of a kiwi more than seeing the All Blacks before the next clash with the Boks, the Frogs or the Criminal Element and putting the fear of our mana into them.



Its origins lie in our Maori history, and it has always been used in conjunction with ceremony of some form. The earliest forms are attributed to formal proceedings between tribes before tribal councils were held. The most common form of haka Ka Mate! is said to have been introduced by a particularly fierce and successful Maori chief by the name of Te Rauparaha in the early nineteenth century. It is a short tale of his escape from pursuers from another tribe, and the exhilaration of his ultimate survival (see NZ.com). It has been used by the All Blacks since 1888, and performed before nearly every single match since 1922 - its one of the best parts of a home rugby test match.

These days however, we see it being used not only in rugby, but in every other sporting code as well. Not so much by the women's teams, which is ironic because the first haka's were apparently performed by Maori women, but its not really their scene I suppose. Although it would put the shits up the Aussies if the Silver Ferns Netball team came out onto centre court before a match and did Kapa a Pango. It turns up all over the place, and its for this reason that I wonder if its losing a bit of its uniqueness. Is it possible to have too much haka? Is it possible that it could lose its special place in our nations heart, and fail to cast a smidgen of fear in the oppositions if we do it all the time?

Case in point was the 2006 Commonwealth games in Melbourne. When you win a medal in the pool, its tradition that the medal winners, after being awarded their bits of metal on a string, wander down the ranks of their team mates and fans waving and soaking up the applause. Normally this is a reasonably quick process as it doesn't really take that long to walk, except if you are a Kiwi who has won a medal. Every single time one of our athletes made their way down the line, they had to stop and wait while the entire swim team did a haka. I know it doesn't take long, but after the 3rd or 4th time you could see the officials, other competitors and spectators beginning to roll their eyes and get a bit frustrated. Is it really necessary to haka someone who came third? And how do you think that makes the person who got the gold feel - I won but I'm being shoved aside so some yahoos can celebrate their mates bronze?

Dallas Seymour, ex sevens legend and Olympic Official for the NZ Team says otherwise. He concedes that people may have had the impression that it was trotted out for anything and everything, but he also points out that its not just a challenge or a call to the fight - its used as part of ceremony and a uniquely NZ way of welcoming people. "In Maori culture it's one of those everyday things done in a whole lot of different settings. It's one of those things that people get a real kick out of." He also said that a well timed haka can be more special that anything from the official ceremony of the Olympics or Commonwealth games. "Sarah [Ulmer] said in Athens to be acknowledged in a uniquely New Zealand way was more emotional than anything else she went through. It was the only time she cried in terms of getting the gold as well."

I guess I agree with Dallas that it is a very important part of our culture, and its not about other countries, and more about our national identity. I just wish it was used a little more judiciously, and perhaps not in the middle of other peoples ceremonies - show a little more respect and perhaps some of the haka-haters will chill out.

In saying that, most of the haka-haters I have heard from a Poms or Aussies, and really they are just jealous of not having something of their own to perform before a big game. Waltzing Matilda sung by some big fat hairy beardy weirdy or Swing Low Sweet Chariot sound slow and lame - the complete antithesis of what is required to rev you up for the big game ahead. So screw them.

Go the Kiwi's at the olympics - you'll do us proud I'm sure. And go the AB's next Saturday against the Boks in Capetown. Give them the good news boys!

Guns don’t kill people...

I was always fascinated by that saying and how simple it seems. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. In essence, it is compelling because it is true. Guns do not kill people of their own volition, they require a motive force such as a finger pulling the trigger, a hand to aim it and a person to decide what to aim at. But is it oversimplifying things? Do guns in a larger sense actually kill people through actually existing, or am I just talking out my butt?

Recently I had my house broken into, and although nothing much was taken luckily, and no one was home, the sense of some scumbag rifling through my personal effects pissed me off something chronic. I went through the classic stages we experience to cope with things.

DENIAL
“What? Someone broke in? Don’t be ridiculous! They can’t break in when we’ve got things like, doors and windows covering the openings. Well of course they could have just smashed a window, but who in their right mind would do that? That’s crazy talk!”

ANGER
“Fucking pricks! How dare they break into my house! I’m going to....well...I...I’m going to get pretty upset is what I’m going to do!”

BARGINING
“Please please please please please please let my new xbox still be there”

DEPRESSION
“This sucks. How can someone do this to me and my family. What sort of nihilistic a-hole would invade my house and rifle through my shit?”

ACCEPTANCE
“What? Are you joking? Acceptance? Fuck. That. The next time I see someone snooping round the neighbourhood I’m gonna get the rake outta the shed and beat seven kinds of snot out of them!”


It was the last statement (which I actually did think to myself) that I have come back to ponder in the light of a few recent events in New Zealand. In early June an owner of a liquor outlet Navtej Singh in South Auckland was shot dead, even though he had complied totally with the offenders demands. Since then there have been a spate of shootings and assaults (not entirely related to shop owners) that have been highlighted in the media. A majority of these we all shake our heads, do the old “tut tut” thing and continue on with our lives because we are not shocked by this sort of thing – we have been desensitised to it. It is remote. Its happening to someone else we have nothing to do with, so we feel comfortable dismissing it from the worry centre of our brain and concentrating on more personal matters. Which is all perfectly normal – you can’t expect people to live in total fear because of the worry and stress caused by events which have no immediate impact on their lives. Unless you live in the US of course, and then the Government and media make damn sure you worry about every perceived terrorist threat there could possibly be.

But I digress. On Monday night, two machete wielding offenders charged into a Christchurch dairy and attacked the owner and his wife without provocation. The owner Nike said "Usually in the movies they say 'Give me the money' but they tried to kill us from the very start. It happened really fast. They ran in holding the knife out and started trying to chop me." At this point, Nike whipped out his air pistol that was stashed behind the counter, and shot the knife wielding maniacs, wounding one of them in the face. He saved his life, his wife’s life and didn’t kill anyone in the process. Bravo Nike – well done.

This has raised the obvious question however – should people have the right to arm themselves for protection? I saw on the news tonight, several people calling for the ability of shop owners to defend themselves. What would have happened in any of these situations where a small business owner is confronted by an armed nutter, demanding they “gimme the casshhhhh” is armed with a .357 magnum, or a small .22 pistol? It’s obvious really – the outcome would be much worse. As soon as you arm everyone for “personal protection” you increase the death toll at every robbery. The more guns there are, the more people will get shot and it wont be for reasons of “personal protection” either. You then put a gun in the hands of every husband who has an argument with his wife, of every disgruntled employee who has forgotten the TPS reports, and every bored teenager who feels like taking their frustrations with the world out on someone.

Its relatively hard in New Zealand to get a gun, and although we are seeing an increase of crimes linked with guns, I wouldn’t want to change that. If you see someone with a gun, it stands out – they look out of place and you can identify them as a possible offender because they are armed. If you arm everyone, they blend into the crowd and make them impossible to find. Increasing the number of weapons owned legitimately will make it harder to trace the ones that are not, making it incredibly hard to capture and prosecute successfully people who commit armed offences.

“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people, but if you give everyone a gun, more people will be killed” – proliferation of weapons has never helped solve anything. All it does is give people who are pissed off, down on their luck or just bored something to play with.

Britain from Above

We all know what the countries of the World look like from space. Italy is a boot, America has a pan handle and Australia is a big smudge. Ever wondered what a countries infrastructure would look like from space? No, well I’m sure some people have. The BBC have a new documentary called ‘Britain from Above’ which uses state of the art computer graphics combined with GPS information from Taxis, planes, ferries and other vehicles to show how the country functions. After the cut you will find some facts and a link to the video on the BBC website.

Hosted by Andrew Marr the show will present imagery of Britain and the daily heartbeat that is the countries commute and communications network. Also included in this series is a look at how the cities have changed and how technologies keep us moving.

Video link

Facts from the show.

• The English Channel is the busiest shipping lane in the world: on a typical day 400 plus vessels travel through the Dover Straits, the biggest of which weigh up to 150,000 tonnes and take 3.5 miles to come to a stop.
• East London's Beckton Sewage Plant - all 280 football pitches worth of tanks, troughs and waterways - is one of the largest in Europe.
• On an average day, Britain's water pipes carry 16 billion litres of water - enough to fill 18 million bathtubs.
• In less than a week the waste sent to sewage plants is clean enough to be able to be pumped back into our taps.
• At the peak of the working day Britons send more than 5,000 text messages per second.
• 109 square miles of British countryside is just used for landfill.
• Between 7 and 10am, 36 million Britons are on the move commuting to the office or school.
• The average road user will spend more than 6 months of their life stuck in traffic jams.
• Every day more than 7,500 civilian aircraft crowd Britain's airspace, carrying more that half a million passengers.
• Over three quarters of a billion pounds in hard cash is transported around the roads of Britain every day. Driving one of the secured vans is one of the most dangerous jobs in the country with sometimes 15 attacks a week.
• Every day the nation's rubbish trucks collect more than 82,000 tonnes of refuse.

What has NASA ever done for us…….

Many people don’t believe that space travel is worth the massive amounts of money that we spend, or the Americans spend should I say. Here in New Zealand we do not have a space program so our tax money does not feature in the final frontier. Needless to say that we are fortunate that everyone reaps the benefits of the space programs provided by other countries.

Rob Sharp over at The Independent has chronicled some of the top 50 developments that the Worlds space programs have given us. Things such as the hand held vacuum cleaner, safer runways, freeze dried meals and Heart Surgery have all come about due to the research and development that goes on at NASA and other agencies.

Check out the link to see the top 50 inventions given to us by space exploration.

Solar Eclipse from 27000 feet.

One of the items on my list of things to do before I die is to see a full solar eclipse. We dont get many down here in NZ, in fact someone recently mentioned that we will get one in about 30 years or so, so that means I will have a bit of a wait. Anyway here is some footage of the latest solar eclipse as seen from an aircraft flying at 27,000 feet over the Canadian Arctic. It is pretty cool footage as you can actually see the shadow moving over the position of the plane. The people on board are obviously quite happy about what they have just witnessed. Have a look after the cut.

Mythbusters Moon Hoax Special

Here at RD we are firm believers in the fact that NASA and the US government successfully landed men on the Moon. There is no hoax, there is nothing fishy going on and there is an answer to every single so called 'fact' that the hoaxers come up with. Go to BadAstronomy.com to read more info about the Moon hoax.
Well it looks like our favourite buster of myths, The Mythbusters are doing a Moon Hoax special. Yay, I am supremely confident that every test, experiment they do will add weight to the truth, that we as a species landed on the Moon. I am not going to debunk the the Moon hoax stuff here as there are plenty of reality based sites out there with that info.
Check out the trailer after the jump for the Mythbusters Moon Hoax special.

"Dubya" - Action, Drama, Comedy?

Oliver Stone is not new to controversy, several of his films have fallen into that particular category. Salvador with James (freaking cool) Woods, Platoon with Charlie (I like my characters to be called Charlie) Sheen and JFK with Kevin (Waterworld) Costner would all be considered politically challenging subjects. Well he’s only gone and done it again. The trailer for his new socio-political George W. Bush drama, aptly named “W” has just come out and boy, this looks a doosey.

Actually it looks pretty good. I like a lot of what Oliver Stone has done in the past, excluding Alexander which was a bore fest and look forward to the approach he takes. Stone has assembled a great looking cast too, Josh Brolin as Dubya himself, James Cromwell as Daddy Bush, Thandie Newton looks particularly good as Condolezza Rice as does Jeffery Wright as Colin Powell. Stone has said that he didn’t want to make an “anti-Bush” film, but to be honest when you make a movie about someone like GWB its going to be hard not to be objective. Some people have read part of the script and New York Post writer Cindy Adams said, “Pro-Bushies will hate it, antis will love it.”

Stone deserves a good film soon as his last few have been decidedly average\crap. Check out the trailer.

Sensing Even More Horseshit

Check out the Silly Beliefs website and their dissection of the Sensing Murder episode where a supposed "die hard skeptic" was turned and is now a fully fledged believer of the woo. Well it certainly helps when the so called "skeptic" rings them up and asks to be on the program.
He admits that he did approach 'Sensing Murder', not the other way around as he claims in his book. So we were right after all, but why did he fudge the truth in his book? Perhaps to suggest that he was such a famous psychologist that 'Sensing Murder' would naturally seek him out?)"
Check it out along with heaps of other good stuff.

Things to do in Wanaka when you're dead

Well, maybe not dead - just with a couple of hours to kill. Why not head over to The Puzzling World which according to Stuart the owner "is a world unique attraction specialising in puzzling eccentricity." And if you are some kind of fruit weirdo have problems with reality psychic or diviner, you can try your hand at Stu's amazing $100000 challenge. It sounds pretty funny actually - and a few nutjobs have had a swing at it too.

The Psychic Challenge has been going on for about 14 years now, and in that time Stuart has had 4 "serious" contenders. As per the rules of reality, all four have failed to come within cooee of scoring the loot, and Stu's money remains safe, much in the way that the $1 million dollar challenge from James Randi has remained safe all these years. And what it this mighty task you ask? What arduous chore is the mere psychic supposed to carry out? Is it steal the secret of fire from the gods? Or maybe predict who will win the Bledisloe this year? No - its actually reasonably simple (if you claim to have amazing psychic powers that is). Find the money. That's it - and he even tells you where it is, down to 100 square metres. Surely the amazing powers of the psychics should be able to predict something like that?
The unsurprising answer is no, they can't. What is surprising is some of the techniques people try and use to find it. I thought the best one was the nice lady who wanted him to grab her boobs :

One of the strangest challenges involved a lovely young lady who declared that she could find the Promissory Note. All Stuart had to do was to put his hands on her bare breasts and she would get the message (what message?!). Stuart, mindful of potential lawsuits, declined the challenge.

Bizarre to say the least. But unique!

But its not really surprising to hear that no-one has succeded, and that a majority of the bigger names in this enterprise have declined to try this test. Whenever a practitioner of the paranormal is asked to prove their claims, they always beg off with some excuse to try and avoid the sucking disappointment of their phony trade being proven wrong (again). And of course the irreparable harm it would do to their business if the word got out that they actually can't do the tricks they advertise. It does not pay in business to advertise the fact that you are selling ice blocks to Eskimo's, especially when they buy them in large numbers.

As Stu's site says, "As a matter of interest, worldwide, there is over $US 2.5 million offered as prizes to anyone who can prove psychic ability, as yet, none of these prizes have been claimed." Not surprising at all really.

Do we turn left or right after the complete and utter darkness?

Ever wondered what its like to drive into a dust storm in the outback in Australia? Well wonder no more - check the video after the jump for a lovely ride with techno accompaniment into the heart of darkness. Coooool.













Via Gizmodo

Sensing Horseshit : Update

And here's what I was worried about when I posted the other day about this psychic crap on NZ television. The mainstream media has latched onto a statement made by police, jumbled it around to sound interesting and posted it in the "Psychics are right!" style of article. I thought Fairfax media, who run Stuff and a majority of the newspapers in NZ, might have had a shred of journalistic integrity, but it looks like I was wrong. They have an article on Stuff entitled "Psychics stir up murder mysteries" - oooooh! I had hoped it was because the title "Psychics make vague pronouncements about tragic death in vain hope of milking even more money out of gullible idiots" was too long, but after reading the article I don't think so.

What a load of crap. It starts out with the worst sentence possible - "The death of a South Otago teenager, subject of an investigation this month by psychics on the TV2 programme Sensing Murder, is being re-examined by police." Investigation? If that's an investigation I'm a monkeys bum. They wandered around looking dreamy, with bad cuts and re-enactments from actors, and said that someone as a "practical joke" threw something aflame into his car, burning it out with the young man still inside. Not exactly easy to prove, or disprove, and its the latter that is probably more telling. In the standard line of mentalists and so called psychics they pick a story that seems plausible and cannot be proven wrong on the current evidence. The police have already said that they do not know what started the fire, so that meant the clowns could say pretty much anything they like.

But what's even more annoying is the way the article is written to blatantly ignore the facts and twist the words of the police. The police said they had spoken to the Stott family (relatives of the deceased) and were looking further into some aspects of the case. The article slips the words "since the programme went to air" implying that the opinion of the entertainers on Sensing Mo' Money had something to do with it. And in a very oblique way, they did (someone contacted the police after seeing the show with some info they are looking into) but not the way you might think after reading the article.

I think the most important bits are the twisted logic used to tie the programe and the Police investigations together. Phrases like "while the case was technically closed, police would re-examine it if new information came to hand" just point to the fact that there has been no new information. And technically closed? Its closed because there's no reason to re-open it! You could use that statement to describe every single cold case in world history!

"While the case of who shot JFK was technically closed, police would re-examine it if new information came to hand"

"While the case of Hitler's final resting place was technically closed, police would re-examine it if new information came to hand"

"While the case of who shot first, Han or Greedo was technically closed, police would re-examine it if new information came to hand"

I can only take solace in the fact the the NZ police are making rational statements, like "But just because someone with a crystal ball says something. . . it's got to be something that is tangible. . . something useful." They might be asking a bit much there. That's the whole point - psychics don't give "useful" information. They use word games and tricks to make you believe you are getting information when most of the time they are merely parroting what you say back to you, telling you things they have secretly found out about you, or just making shit up.

All in all, its not true that the psychics "stirred" anything up at all - the only new information has come as a result of the show re-enacting the details known about the case on TV, perhaps jogging someone's memory. Nothing they have said in 3 seasons of this tripe has ever been proven right. It makes me wonder why people keep watching this, even when you apply the old maxim "people remember the hits and forget the misses", especially when they have had no hits whatsoever.

Amazing Volcano Images

The guys over at Boston dot com have done it again with their new set of high res pictures. They have compiled a selection of images of volcanoes that have erupted or are currently erupting around the world. Several of these are pictures from the international space station and orbiting shuttles. The space images really help with the scale of some of these events, it is truely difficult to know how big they are until seen from high altitude. Great stuff. Check out the samples after the jab.

Go here for the full set.

Robocop legs make Man walk

Here at RD we have mentioned before that science fiction is starting to become science fact, no more is true that the advancement in exoskeleton technology. We reported on the military applications of this here. Well it looks like the development has been taken to the next level, as what often happens with military uses, they find their way into our every day life.

After the jump you will see a video that shows the practical use of an exoskeletal suit on someone that has been bound to a wheelchair for a long time.


Granted, this chap will not be climbing mountains or running marathons just yet, but in time this could be possible. Many people who are unable to walk may be able to use this technology to ensure a better standard of living, that has to be a good thing.

Catholics use Pope as excuse to "get it on!"

In a case of totally misreported figures, many sites on the interwebtube are saying that due to the huge influx of pilgrims to Sydney this month, the sex industry would have a bumper year. This is of course alluding to the fact that some travellers who have come to see the man in a dress have taken the opportunity of being on a road trip with their buddies, to score some cheap hookers and party till dawn. While its a pretty funny story, its total crap unfortunately - yet another case of the media taking a statistical fact and tying it to an event that is only linked to it by being in the same year. But that does not stop us having a bloody good laugh about it.

The actual report that these bogus news items are based on is a report done by IBISWorld for the Aussie sex industry. In it they show a prediction that there will be an increase of earnings from brothels for the 2008-2009 year, due to an increase in tourist numbers. IBIS World senior industry analyst Ed Butler said the report did not suggest the 225,000 international pilgrims or clergy would be heading to brothels or strip clubs.

But I bet a few did - can you seriously convince anyone that of 225,000 people not a single one took the "what goes on tour, stays on tour" excuse to sample a bit of Kings Cross night life? And I'm not necessarily talking about getting it on in some shady den with ladies of the night - no, just visiting a strip club would be probably more likely.

"Ah yes brother, I'm just stepping out for a midnight stroll"

SHOCK HEADLINE : Pope Caught Stuffing Bucks into Strippers G-String!
When asked for a statement the Vatican said it was investigating a miracle claim that one of the dancers could heal with touch. When this reporter asked "touch with what?" there was no answer forthcoming.

Ok ok - its a cheap shot. But I think one of the funniest, and most ironic things is all the security around the pontiff while he's busy waving at his desperate fools followers, and the speed at which he travels past waving - he moves so fast it could be anyone in there! I saw a news report where several of the sheep believers were a tad miffed because he tore around a parade route at about 60kph.

Rrrrowww!
"Was that him mummy or was that batman?"
"I dont know dear - they both wear costumes so it could have been either"

But why the desperate need for all the dudes in sunglasses surrounding the pope in his pedalo popemobile? Who are they afraid of? Yeah I know someone shot the PJP2 (sounds like a rapper handle) but the point I make is that it isn't radical atheist extremists, bent on taking down the church. It isn't pro-evolution Darwinian rebels, taking the fight to the holy city (they're back and they're discussing things rationally). Nor is it internet bloggers, who couldn't get off their fat butts if they were paid to.....hey hang on!

No - the three main attempts (my Wiki-fu is strong on this one!) on the man in the dresses life were a politically funded terrorist named Mehmet Ali Ağca, a right wing extremist preist Juan María Fernández y Krohn who didn't like the reforms in the church, and Al-Qaeda, who funded a Filipino plot to blow up a suicide bomber dressed like a priest. The latter sounds a bit fishy as I think Al Qaeda have been blamed for everything from the 9/11 bombing to the clothes pegs being blown off the line at night (curse you Al Qaeda!). Either way, we have 1 politically motivated attack, 1 from an alternate religion and 1 from within the same church - who is he afraid of? His own worshippers, worshippers of other religions and governments who don't like the things he says. Very typical of a dictatorship style powerbase don't you think? And Saddam Hussein always wore long flowing white robes. And what about Ayatollah Khomeini?

Anyhoo, its all over now - the pontiff has left the Australian continent. Exit stage right. Shows over folks, time to leave the flag waving, praying, and cheap hookers for another 3 or 4 years or so. Goodnight and dogbless.

Sensing Horseshit

Oh FSM, I feel a wave of nausea and disgust coming upon me - what could it possibly be? Did I eat a dodgy vindaloo? Have I been drinking that vile Green Chartreuse again? Did I just catch a glimpse of The Love Guru? No, its worse than that- the new series of Sensing Money Murder is coming back on the telly, and this time I fear, even more people will be sucked into its black hole of bullshit and milking relatives of dead people for money.

Where to start? Well, back in January of 2006 the first episode of Take 'Em for All They've Got Sensing Murder aired on NZ television, and they've managed to milk it out into a second and now third season of half baked ideas, bad acting and unsubstantiated claims. The show features three Asshats Psychics with supposed paranormal skills, who are taken to locations around New Zealand, shown old case files of unsolved murders or deaths, and then proceed to divine the causes behind the deaths. Like Columbo but without the dude in the trench coat. The producers of the show claim to have the full support of the families of each of the victims, but there is evidence that once they have completed the filming and sucked them dry they refuse to speak to them and don't really give a crap whether the case is solved or not. I'd probably beg to differ on the latter point in that if by sheer fluke they managed to get at least one of the predictions correct, their ratings would go through the roof, so I'd say it is pretty important to them.

The three faux psychics (currently) are Deb Webber, Sue Nicholson, and Kelvin Cruickshank. Deb Webber was amusingly "outed" by an Aussie Investigative News show a couple of years ago, and our man Jeremy Wells on Eating Media Lunch showed this on a segment in his show called Sensing Bullshit.



Its all the same crap that we see every time one of these so called psychics gets on our telly. They spout the same wishy washy crap, vague pronouncements of eeeevil, and generally ham it right up to the point that you think only Kevin Costner could do a worse job of acting.

Recently Tony Andrews posted a challenge to the Sensing Murder team, saying that if they completed a series of tests they could get themselves $10000. The standard fob off response came back from David Baldock, managing director of Ninox Television saying he's not interested in these tests, this "circus approach". He's already tested them. When the show was developed, he auditioned 75 psychics by giving them an obscure but solved murder case to work on. Yeah - right. It was probably things like "which famous australian criminal wore a tin helmet?" or "how many fingers did the famous Wellingtonian Madman Four Fingered Jack have?".

Oh well -I guess the only thing we can hope for here is that the voice of reason is heard, this show goes down the gurgler, or the psychics take up one of the many challenges around to prove they have the powers they claim. I wont hold my breath - thats not how this works in reality. The con artists are too smart to take up those tests when it would spell the end of that particular gravy train.

Check out the article on Stuff for some more background info, and the Aussie BadPsychics site for info on Australasian Scepticism, and their line on Deb Webber.

Watchmen trailer hits net and geeks swoon

Check out the trailer for the new Watchmen movie being produced at the moment by Zack Snyder (he directed 300). If you've read the graphic novels (ok, comics - whatever) you'll be a bit nervous about how this is going to be translated to the big screen. Well, wonder no more - it looks freaking cool. Rorschach for the god damned win.

Swing on over to IO9 for a squiz at the new trailer.

E3 Game trailerfest.

Most people know that the E3 game\gadget\technology fest is on in the States. Well here is a bunch or previews for some of the games that have featured so far. We have the likes of Resident Evil 5, the new Wolfenstein game, Ghostbusters and Fallout 3 among others. Have a look after the jump for some of these beautiful new games.

No doubt there will have to be some serious hardware updates needed to play some of these titles. Mirror's Edge looks brilliant.
Resident Evil 5


Wolfenstien


I am Alive


Ghost busters


Madworld


Singularity


God of War 3


Fallout3






Mirrors edge demo reel

Australian gamers pretty pissed - and rightly so

I'm a big fan of the original Fallout game series. I think I fell in love with it during the black and white still images being played during the opening credits, with the dulcet tones of Ron Pearlman ringing in my ears...
War. War never changes.
Its an awesome little clip to get you primed for the post apocalyptic world of the Fallout game, where mutations abound, a desert covers the landscape, and you spend hours and hours building the perfect character to accomplish every single mission you possibly can, including finding the splattered Whale, the Tardis, the Godzilla footprint and the Alien crash site. And now, Bethesda are bringing out the 3rd in the series, and it looks just as tasty as the previous ones. But the Aussies may not be able to see it (without legal chicanery) because their dumb ass Australian Classification Board have refused to give it a rating.

"Obscenity is not a quality inherent in a book or picture, but is solely and exclusively a contribution of the reading mind, and hence cannot be defined in terms of the qualities of a book or picture." Theodore Schroeder, author

It is apparently the problem within the game itself, part of the gameplay in fact, that has drawn the ire of the censors. And its not gratuitous violence (GTA, Condemned 2, pretty much any 1st Person Shooter), depiction of sex (GTA again, Soulcalibur, Duke Nukem 3D) or even banned substance use (GTA, Bioshock, Battlefield Bad Company). No, its much more insidious and dangerous (apparently) than that. Yes its the dreaded....morphine. Huh? Yes, apprently the morons at the OLAC are refusing to give the game a rating (thereby making it illegal to distribute and sell) because the character in the game gains an reward for using drugs. Heres the words :

"In regard to the computer game Fallout 3, the board is of the opinion that the use of morphine in the game has the positive effect of enabling the character to ignore limb pain."

"This ability to progress through the game more easily is the incentive to take the drug while the reward is in the character's abilities."

Am I the only person in the world scratching their head and wondering what illegal substances these twerps imbibed before saying that? What they are effectivley saying is that its okay for characters in a game to snort pounds of coke, inject gallons of heroin, drink till they go blind and smack around (and kill) prostitutes, but its not okay to use morphine in a game to kill the pain? Huh? But in nearly every single game I can think of (thats had much lesser ratings than GTA) the main purpose of the game is to shoot people, and heal yourself when you get shot! In Max Payne, he takes painkillers to restore health and return use of his legs - is that not EXACTLY the same thing? And it was given an MA15+ which means its "not suitable for under 15" BUT this does not mean an under 15 year old cannot buy it if accompanied by an adult. So it means in reality "There's some pretty full on shit in this game. Are you sure your kids should be playing this?" The responsibility falls to the parent to watch what their children are playing/watching and use their discretion. As it should always.

I was originally going to call this post "10 reasons we should not decide who can watch stuff by elected committee", but that sounded a bit naff. But I will still use the original title's idea to explain my point. The problem the Aussie gaming fraternity, and indeed the film appreciation and media consumers in many countries have is that the ones hired to serve on the boards of censorship committees are people with specific moral values that differ to the majority of the intended audience of the game. And this is the biggest problem with Censorship - what may disgust one may titillate another.

“The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.” Henry Steele Commager American Historian

When we allow a bunch of people (and I don't mean anyone specific - it could be any bunch of people) to decide what we can and cannot watch\play\listen to in our own homes, we have lost one of our freedoms. And I'm not saying "old sad bastards on Censorship committees have their finger far from the pulse, jammed firmly up their ass". No - if I was on this comitttee I'd ban any and all forms of RnB music - its crap and no-one should have to put up with it. And Kenny G - don't get me started on the big KJ and his abominable wind instruments of torture. Thats my point - what some people (with no taste) like, I despise. But I dont care - because I dont have to put up with it. If I dont like it, I turn it off. If Britney is on the radio, I change the channel. If the god botherers are on the telly, I mute it or turn it off. If the mormons are at the door, I throw the cat at them. No-one is forcing me to tune into something I dont like.

Except in elevators in department stores - whats wrong with those people? Are they inhuman as well as rip-off merchants?

"Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime." Potter Stewart, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

We should be able to make choices as adults to view whatever the hell it is that interests us, or listen to whatever music we feel like. I agree with an idea that there is a committee to rate things to give us an idea of what this media contains, and that children should not be able to view things that they may be ill equipped to deal with, but the responsibility for deciding what is best for the children lies solely with parents and care givers. Surely the people who are raising these children have a better idea of their maturity levels, and can gauge what is and what isn't appropriate for them? Never let the government dictate to you what their opinion of good and bad is - I've never seen a government get it right yet.

Case in point, the Australian Government - you cant play a video game where you use morphine to make yourself better, but you can help others invade Iraq and kill people in reality. Are they really the best people to be judging what morally right and wrong?

Aussies - if you want to make a difference, head on over to Gameplayer.com.au and sign their petition to the board to get the decision reviewed.

Did you ever hear anyone say, "That work had better be banned because I might read it and it might be very damaging to me?" Joseph Henry Jackson, author

Knock Knock, who’s there? Doctor Who.

Am I the only one that thinks that the new Doctor Who show is trying too hard? I have caught a few bit of the newest series and it feels like the writers are trying to hard to make a successful British science fiction show. I am probably biased because I feel that the only good sci-fi show to come out of the UK was Red Dwarf. Oh, and who the hell is David Tennant……

I have to admit that I watched Doctor Who as a kid, back when Tom Baker and Peter Davidson played the Doctor and it was cool then. That was until Colin Baker took over, what a goose. It was crap for a bit, then Sylvester McCoy did his stint and it was good again. I think that my problem might stem from the fact that when I watched Dr Who I was six years old and in order to watch Dr Who it meant I could stay up late. The other thing is that when you are at that age the bad guys seem incredibly scary. I mean the Daleks were terrifying back then, now though they are cool. The Cybermen looked like they had come of the set of Battlestar Galactica or Star Wars and The Master was mysterious and dangerous. What about the TARDIS. I still don’t know how they get all that space into that little telephone box, amazing.

After McCoy played the Doctor the show had a bit of a hiatus until Paul McGann took over for the film. Both McCoys and McGanns portrayal were very much in the vain of the Doctors that went before. They were quirky, old fashioned, old and a little bit self absorbed. When they reinvented the character they modernised the Doctor with leather jackets and short buzz cut hairdo and also gave him an attitude. That’s just not who the Doctor is, then finally they chose to have the Doctor as an over acting egocentric nobody.
had never heard of David Tennant until he popped up as the Doctor. The other thing is the Doctor is too young now. All the others had been wise old men or father like figures, and since Paul McGann played a fairly young Doctor they seem to have been getting younger. The Doctor should be played by someone like Ian McKellan or Ian McDiarmid thus giving the character an air of wisdom and time.

I would like the new Dr Who incantation to be more like the old version, but then it wouldn’t be new or different. Maybe Dr Who is not for me anymore and I should stick to watching Top Gear. I am getting old and cynical.

F.E.A.R. Sequel - Game Trailer

The original FEAR game came out when the likes of DOOM, FarCry and Half-life 2 were splashed across our computer screens and filled the gap left by the uselessness of Doom which was garbage. FEAR was all about being a scary game with some good gun play which exactly what it delivered. Close Quarter combat with a ghostly story as a backdrop, creepy. FEAR then expanded with a 'Expansion pack' which basically delivered more levels and the same gun play and the same scary stuff, which by now was not so scary.

Then came a full stand alone game, 'great', I said 'new stuff...' Not so. If it wasn't for that fact that I liked the original I probably would not have played the stand alone addition. I enjoyed it because I really have nothing else to play at the time, but essentially it was not any different from the original game or the expansion. No new guns, no new bad guys, no new graphics, it was literally new maps to run around in, a little disappointing to say the least. In fact all three episodes should now be bundled into one game.

But now we have a proper sequel coming and it looks great. Below is the new trailer for FEAR2, I have to admit that the story does not look to have progressed to far but the update to the gameplay and graphics is long overdue. Some nice combat visuals, new badguys and new weapons might just revitalise this game franchise. Have a looksie.