Wednesday, February 04, 2004
How accurate is "The Da Vinci Code"?
Even if you lived under a rock - a rock in a remote area of the Sahara desert - you could not avoid hearing about The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown's runaway bestseller of a novel.
This book has spent 43 weeks at the top of the New York Times' bestseller list, and has prompted huge public debate over its claims that the church (particularly the Catholic church) has distorted and invented many of the accepted teachings of Christianity. It also claims that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and their descendants live on today. Although the book is a novel, Brown presents his ideas as facts, even though they fly in the face of what most Christians have been taught. Where is the truth?
Here's a look at some of the burning questions brought up by The Da Vinci Code - and the real religious history behind those ideas.
Even if you lived under a rock - a rock in a remote area of the Sahara desert - you could not avoid hearing about The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown's runaway bestseller of a novel.
This book has spent 43 weeks at the top of the New York Times' bestseller list, and has prompted huge public debate over its claims that the church (particularly the Catholic church) has distorted and invented many of the accepted teachings of Christianity. It also claims that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and their descendants live on today. Although the book is a novel, Brown presents his ideas as facts, even though they fly in the face of what most Christians have been taught. Where is the truth?
Here's a look at some of the burning questions brought up by The Da Vinci Code - and the real religious history behind those ideas.
Tuesday, February 03, 2004
Ayeeeeee! Another doomsday scenario!
I admit it - I am a sucker for doomsday scenarios. So I feel compelled to bring you the latest, which carries the same health warnings as the posting a couple of days ago about global warming causing massive extinction of flora and fauna (can you have mini-extinction?).
According to Thom Hartmann, we are in danger of being hit by a new ice age. Anytime soon. Real soon. I'll give you the details in a moment. I don't know how good Mr Hartmann's science is, but I should preface this by saying he appears to be very anti-right wing politics (not that an ice age will take any notice of anybody's politics). But it does mean he favours a left-leaning view of the world, which is committed to global warming theories. And, of course, not all scientists are convinced that global warming is an established fact.
So here's the scenario: In quick summary, if enough cold, fresh water coming from the melting polar ice caps and the melting glaciers of Greenland flows into the northern Atlantic, it will shut down the Gulf Stream, which keeps Europe and northeastern North America warm. The worst-case scenario would be a full-blown return of the last ice age - in a period as short as 2 to 3 years from its onset - and the mid-case scenario would be a period like the "little ice age" of a few centuries ago that disrupted worldwide weather patterns leading to extremely harsh winters, droughts, worldwide desertification, crop failures, and wars around the world.
Okay, so the choice seems to be: a) dismiss Mr Hartmann (at your peril, perhaps); b) lay in very large quantities of fuel for the winter (and the summer); c) move house - but goodness knows where to.
I admit it - I am a sucker for doomsday scenarios. So I feel compelled to bring you the latest, which carries the same health warnings as the posting a couple of days ago about global warming causing massive extinction of flora and fauna (can you have mini-extinction?).
According to Thom Hartmann, we are in danger of being hit by a new ice age. Anytime soon. Real soon. I'll give you the details in a moment. I don't know how good Mr Hartmann's science is, but I should preface this by saying he appears to be very anti-right wing politics (not that an ice age will take any notice of anybody's politics). But it does mean he favours a left-leaning view of the world, which is committed to global warming theories. And, of course, not all scientists are convinced that global warming is an established fact.
So here's the scenario: In quick summary, if enough cold, fresh water coming from the melting polar ice caps and the melting glaciers of Greenland flows into the northern Atlantic, it will shut down the Gulf Stream, which keeps Europe and northeastern North America warm. The worst-case scenario would be a full-blown return of the last ice age - in a period as short as 2 to 3 years from its onset - and the mid-case scenario would be a period like the "little ice age" of a few centuries ago that disrupted worldwide weather patterns leading to extremely harsh winters, droughts, worldwide desertification, crop failures, and wars around the world.
Okay, so the choice seems to be: a) dismiss Mr Hartmann (at your peril, perhaps); b) lay in very large quantities of fuel for the winter (and the summer); c) move house - but goodness knows where to.
Monday, February 02, 2004
Cease and desist, O ye prophets of doom!
After all the doom and gloom I seem to have been collecting lately, I thought it was time to kick back a little and bring you a few light-hearted items.
I can almost guarantee the Braden files will provide me with my daily dose. This one's purely visual - you'll have to go to the link. As is this. (Warning: you might need your sunglasses.)
My kids latched onto the following, which is one of my favourites:
When I become an Evil Overlord
~ My legions of terror will have helmets with clear plexiglass visors, not face-concealing ones.
~ My ventilation ducts will be too small to crawl through.
~ My noble half-brother whose throne I usurped will be killed, not kept anonymously imprisoned in a forgotten cell of my dungeon.
~ Shooting is not too good for my enemies.
~ The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box.
~ When the rebel leader challenges me to fight one-on-one and asks, "Or are you afraid without your armies to back you up?" My reply will be, "No, just sensible."
~ When I've captured my adversary and he says, "Look, before you kill me, will you at least tell me what this is all about?" I'll say, "Nope" and shoot him.
~ After I kidnap the beautiful princess, we will be married immediately in a quiet civil ceremony, not a lavish spectacle in three weeks time during which the final phase of my plan will be carried out.
~ I will not include a self-destruct mechanism unless absolutely necessary. If it is necessary, it will not be a large red button labeled "Danger: Do Not Push".
(See here for the full list)
If you want to explore the outer fringes of Christian humour (but be warned, this stuff is not for the faint-hearted), try the website Ship of Fools. The extremes are definitely being pushed with the section The Ark - billed as the world's first reality game show featuring Biblical characters.
After all the doom and gloom I seem to have been collecting lately, I thought it was time to kick back a little and bring you a few light-hearted items.
I can almost guarantee the Braden files will provide me with my daily dose. This one's purely visual - you'll have to go to the link. As is this. (Warning: you might need your sunglasses.)
My kids latched onto the following, which is one of my favourites:
When I become an Evil Overlord
~ My legions of terror will have helmets with clear plexiglass visors, not face-concealing ones.
~ My ventilation ducts will be too small to crawl through.
~ My noble half-brother whose throne I usurped will be killed, not kept anonymously imprisoned in a forgotten cell of my dungeon.
~ Shooting is not too good for my enemies.
~ The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box.
~ When the rebel leader challenges me to fight one-on-one and asks, "Or are you afraid without your armies to back you up?" My reply will be, "No, just sensible."
~ When I've captured my adversary and he says, "Look, before you kill me, will you at least tell me what this is all about?" I'll say, "Nope" and shoot him.
~ After I kidnap the beautiful princess, we will be married immediately in a quiet civil ceremony, not a lavish spectacle in three weeks time during which the final phase of my plan will be carried out.
~ I will not include a self-destruct mechanism unless absolutely necessary. If it is necessary, it will not be a large red button labeled "Danger: Do Not Push".
(See here for the full list)
If you want to explore the outer fringes of Christian humour (but be warned, this stuff is not for the faint-hearted), try the website Ship of Fools. The extremes are definitely being pushed with the section The Ark - billed as the world's first reality game show featuring Biblical characters.
Global climate change — 1 in 10 animals and plants extinct by 2050?
The biggest issue affecting global livelihood and employment over the next fifty years will be climate change, according to an article in the scientific journal Nature. The report, compiled by the largest collaboration of scientists ever to apply themselves to the climate change problem, studied six biodiversity-rich regions around the world — covering 20% of the planet's land area. It found that 15%-37% of all species studied could become extinct under climate warming scenarios that are likely to occur between now and 2050.
The scientists claim that, as temperatures rise, many species will simply be unable to adapt or migrate to new habitats. The global warming will therefore bring with it one of the biggest mass extinctions since the time of the dinosaurs, 65 million years ago. The sheer scale of the disaster facing the planet has shocked those involved in the research. Much of that loss — more than one-in-10 of all plants and animals — is already irreversible because of the extra global warming gases already discharged into the atmosphere.
It should be said that not everybody agrees with either global warming or the doomsday scenarios. Leading the pack is Norwegian Bjørn Lomborg. In a controversial book, The Skeptical Environmentalist Lomborg challenges widely held beliefs that the global environment is progressively getting worse. Using statistical information from internationally recognized research institutes, he examines a range of major environmental issues and documents that show the global environment has actually improved.
Lomborg criticizes the way many environmental organizations make selective and what he calls misleading use of scientific data to influence decisions about the allocation of limited resources.
In return, of course, Lomborg has come in for huge criticism from both the scientific and "green" community. The debate continues.
The biggest issue affecting global livelihood and employment over the next fifty years will be climate change, according to an article in the scientific journal Nature. The report, compiled by the largest collaboration of scientists ever to apply themselves to the climate change problem, studied six biodiversity-rich regions around the world — covering 20% of the planet's land area. It found that 15%-37% of all species studied could become extinct under climate warming scenarios that are likely to occur between now and 2050.
The scientists claim that, as temperatures rise, many species will simply be unable to adapt or migrate to new habitats. The global warming will therefore bring with it one of the biggest mass extinctions since the time of the dinosaurs, 65 million years ago. The sheer scale of the disaster facing the planet has shocked those involved in the research. Much of that loss — more than one-in-10 of all plants and animals — is already irreversible because of the extra global warming gases already discharged into the atmosphere.
It should be said that not everybody agrees with either global warming or the doomsday scenarios. Leading the pack is Norwegian Bjørn Lomborg. In a controversial book, The Skeptical Environmentalist Lomborg challenges widely held beliefs that the global environment is progressively getting worse. Using statistical information from internationally recognized research institutes, he examines a range of major environmental issues and documents that show the global environment has actually improved.
Lomborg criticizes the way many environmental organizations make selective and what he calls misleading use of scientific data to influence decisions about the allocation of limited resources.
In return, of course, Lomborg has come in for huge criticism from both the scientific and "green" community. The debate continues.
