My take on religion
To eat or not to eat…beef, pork, fish, etc, etc…..Religion and their mysteries….
I read a book given to me by my dad called “How the great religions began” by Joseph Gaer and it pretty much summed it all up for me.
We (Man) first began to pray to the sun. When we discovered that it rose everyday, we stopped.
We then prayed to the moon and stars. That soon stopped as well.
Next came the rain, wind, clouds, trees, mountains, fire, water, etc, etc. When praying to the rain god couldn’t bring rain during the draught, when it couldn't stop the rain during the monsoon, we got creative again.
“There must be a supreme, unseen, all knowing, all powerful god” Out there somewhere. Surprisingly, this concept appeared at about the same time all over the world. The changes occurred in civilizations where the poor and weak were being oppressed and seem to always have one key person making the change. So, are we going to consider Richard Dawkins (The leading atheist) and Barack Obama (The man of “Change”) in similar light?
I believe that Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, all the swamis, etc, etc, were teaching people around them to be good. I learnt from their words and deeds, used my intelligence and let logic do the rest. Organized sectarian religions (Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Taoism) although having initially good lessons, just seem today, to have a greater disruptive potential rather that anything else.
As my topic suggested, this is MY take on it and I think the entire “One God” concept is just plain weak.
Books like “The GOD Delusion” by Richard Dawkins and “In GOD we doubt” by John Humprey further drove the point home. My Mainland Chinese friends and colleagues during my sailing days also helped me understand the “No religion” concept.
I haven’t prayed in years and so far, my up’s and down’s in life have been pretty much the same as the last 30 years of my “believing” years.
“Shit happens”……yup…and life goes on. “Good stuff happens”…yup…life goes on too.
An old friend once told me, “Nanda, do you know what the difference is, between you and me?”……”You believe in GOOD and I believe in GOD”
Well, I’ll take GOOD over GOD anytime. But for those who still believe in the One God concept, by all means, carry on if it makes you happy.
So, whether you eat beef or pork, drink alcohol or don’t, smoke weed, fornicate like rabbits, listen to “Death Metal”, are gay or bi, go to church or temple….. you’ll be my friend if:
1. You are sincere and trustworthy.
2. You don’t lie or cheat.
3. You care about the things and people around you.
4. You’re polite.
5. Respect your elders.
6. Respect the views and opinions of others.
Generally, just be nice and life as a human being on this crazy planet is easier to handle!!
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Monday, July 14, 2008
A third of the world's reef-building coral species are facing extinction.
This is from the most recent BBC report:
That is the stark conclusion from the first global study to assess the extinction risks of corals.
Writing in the journal Science, researchers say climate change, coastal development, overfishing, and pollution are the major threats.
The economic value of the world's reefs has been estimated at over $30bn (£15bn) per year, through tourism, fisheries and coastal protection.
"The picture is frightening," said Alex Rogers from the Zoological Society of London, one of 39 scientists involved in the assessment.
"It's not just the fact that something like a third of all reef-forming corals are threatened, but that we could be facing the loss of large areas of these ecosystems within 50 to 100 years.
"The implications of that are absolutely staggering - not only for biodiversity, but also for economics."
The analysis shows that reef-building corals are more threatened than any group of land-dwelling animals except amphibians.
'Incredible' destruction
The most dramatic decline in recent years was caused by the 1997/8 El Nino event, which caused waters to warm across large swathes of the tropics.
CORAL - KEY FINDINGS
Known species of reef-building coral: 845
Enough data to assess 704
Critically endangered: 5
Endangered: 25
Vulnerable: 201
Near threatened: 176
Least concern: 297
When water temperatures rise, coral polyps - tiny animals that build the reefs - expel the algae that usually live with them in a symbiotic relationship.
The corals lose their colour, with reefs taking on a bleached appearance, and begin to die off because the algae are not there to provide nutrients.
The new analysis shows that before 1998, only 13 of the 704 coral species assessed would have been classified as threatened. Now, the number is 231.
"It was a devastating event in terms of the destruction of corals, with 16% of reefs irreversibly destroyed - an incredible amount," said Kent Carpenter from Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, in the US.
"The big problem is that if these bleaching events become more frequent as temperatures rise, as we suspect will happen, then we will see whole tracts of coral wiped out."
Adding to this, scientists have come to realise in recent years, is ocean acidification. The water absorbs some of the atmosphere's extra carbon dioxide, making it slightly more acid, enough to compromise the capacity of corals to build their skeletons, and snails to build their shells.
"We know that high sea surface temperatures are bad for coral, but we also have an idea that some might be able to adapt," said Professor Carpenter.
"But ocean acidification is a much more insidious thing. We don't know how bad it will be, but the evidence suggests it will be absolutely devastating, perhaps on the order of decades, perhaps on the order of years."
Complex web
But carbon dioxide is not the only culprit.
Overfishing in many regions - especially the use of dynamite to fish in East Asia and heavy trawls that reduce reefs to rubble - the excavation of building materials from reefs, coastal development, invasive species and pollution are all fingered in the new analysis.
The Caribbean shows how the threat jigsaw fits together.
Coastal development and farming produce effluent, which stimulates the growth of types of algae that smother growing coral.
Meanwhile, fishermen are catching fish that would usually graze on these algae.
In this stressed condition, coral then fall prey more easily to disease, such as white-band disease which has swept through elkhorn and staghorn corals in the region.
The line taken by many scientists and campaigners is that these problems should be easier to tackle than the rising tide of greenhouse gas emissions; so this is where attention should be concentrated.
Along Australia's Great Barrier Reef, protected areas have been established in the sea, and the use of fertilisers controlled on land to reduce pollution.
Recent research there has also shown that algae-munching fish can clean up smothered coral.
But there is another view; that these measures can only reduce and delay the inevitable impacts of rising greenhouse gas emissions.
The political response to climate change, said Alex Rogers, could be likened to "fiddling while Rome burns".
"Could you imagine if a single event wiped out 16% of the Amazon forest, or 16% of ecosystems in the UK?" he asked.
"I don't think politicians and the public are aware of the gravity of the situation we're in regarding coral reefs and other marine ecosystems."
Beyond value?
About one quarter of marine species are believed to depend on coral at some stage of their development. Many fish live their entire lives on reefs, while others use them as nurseries; presumably if the coral dies out, so do the fish.
The economic impact of losing coral is also significant.
Estimating the monetary value of natural ecosystems is far from being an exact science.
But one assessment published two years ago by the UN Environment Programme (Unep) concludes reefs provide services worth on average between $100,000 and $600,000 (£50,000 and £300,000) per square kilometre each year.
That gives a total global value between $30bn and $180bn (£15bn and £90bn) annually. In some regions, such as Sri Lanka, the value has been estimated to be 10 times the global average.
The same assessment concluded that protecting areas of reef costs about 0.2% of the value they bring.
The new assessment forms one element of a major project to measure threats to ocean ecosystems, the Global Marine Species Assessment, a joint initiative of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Conservation International (CI).
It will form part of the new IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, due to be published in October.
The IUCN's director general, Julia Marton-Lefevre, said world leaders faced a stark choice.
"We either reduce our CO2 emissions now, or many corals will be lost forever."
This is from the most recent BBC report:
That is the stark conclusion from the first global study to assess the extinction risks of corals.
Writing in the journal Science, researchers say climate change, coastal development, overfishing, and pollution are the major threats.
The economic value of the world's reefs has been estimated at over $30bn (£15bn) per year, through tourism, fisheries and coastal protection.
"The picture is frightening," said Alex Rogers from the Zoological Society of London, one of 39 scientists involved in the assessment.
"It's not just the fact that something like a third of all reef-forming corals are threatened, but that we could be facing the loss of large areas of these ecosystems within 50 to 100 years.
"The implications of that are absolutely staggering - not only for biodiversity, but also for economics."
The analysis shows that reef-building corals are more threatened than any group of land-dwelling animals except amphibians.
'Incredible' destruction
The most dramatic decline in recent years was caused by the 1997/8 El Nino event, which caused waters to warm across large swathes of the tropics.
CORAL - KEY FINDINGS
Known species of reef-building coral: 845
Enough data to assess 704
Critically endangered: 5
Endangered: 25
Vulnerable: 201
Near threatened: 176
Least concern: 297
When water temperatures rise, coral polyps - tiny animals that build the reefs - expel the algae that usually live with them in a symbiotic relationship.
The corals lose their colour, with reefs taking on a bleached appearance, and begin to die off because the algae are not there to provide nutrients.
The new analysis shows that before 1998, only 13 of the 704 coral species assessed would have been classified as threatened. Now, the number is 231.
"It was a devastating event in terms of the destruction of corals, with 16% of reefs irreversibly destroyed - an incredible amount," said Kent Carpenter from Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, in the US.
"The big problem is that if these bleaching events become more frequent as temperatures rise, as we suspect will happen, then we will see whole tracts of coral wiped out."
Adding to this, scientists have come to realise in recent years, is ocean acidification. The water absorbs some of the atmosphere's extra carbon dioxide, making it slightly more acid, enough to compromise the capacity of corals to build their skeletons, and snails to build their shells.
"We know that high sea surface temperatures are bad for coral, but we also have an idea that some might be able to adapt," said Professor Carpenter.
"But ocean acidification is a much more insidious thing. We don't know how bad it will be, but the evidence suggests it will be absolutely devastating, perhaps on the order of decades, perhaps on the order of years."
Complex web
But carbon dioxide is not the only culprit.
Overfishing in many regions - especially the use of dynamite to fish in East Asia and heavy trawls that reduce reefs to rubble - the excavation of building materials from reefs, coastal development, invasive species and pollution are all fingered in the new analysis.
The Caribbean shows how the threat jigsaw fits together.
Coastal development and farming produce effluent, which stimulates the growth of types of algae that smother growing coral.
Meanwhile, fishermen are catching fish that would usually graze on these algae.
In this stressed condition, coral then fall prey more easily to disease, such as white-band disease which has swept through elkhorn and staghorn corals in the region.
The line taken by many scientists and campaigners is that these problems should be easier to tackle than the rising tide of greenhouse gas emissions; so this is where attention should be concentrated.
Along Australia's Great Barrier Reef, protected areas have been established in the sea, and the use of fertilisers controlled on land to reduce pollution.
Recent research there has also shown that algae-munching fish can clean up smothered coral.
But there is another view; that these measures can only reduce and delay the inevitable impacts of rising greenhouse gas emissions.
The political response to climate change, said Alex Rogers, could be likened to "fiddling while Rome burns".
"Could you imagine if a single event wiped out 16% of the Amazon forest, or 16% of ecosystems in the UK?" he asked.
"I don't think politicians and the public are aware of the gravity of the situation we're in regarding coral reefs and other marine ecosystems."
Beyond value?
About one quarter of marine species are believed to depend on coral at some stage of their development. Many fish live their entire lives on reefs, while others use them as nurseries; presumably if the coral dies out, so do the fish.
The economic impact of losing coral is also significant.
Estimating the monetary value of natural ecosystems is far from being an exact science.
But one assessment published two years ago by the UN Environment Programme (Unep) concludes reefs provide services worth on average between $100,000 and $600,000 (£50,000 and £300,000) per square kilometre each year.
That gives a total global value between $30bn and $180bn (£15bn and £90bn) annually. In some regions, such as Sri Lanka, the value has been estimated to be 10 times the global average.
The same assessment concluded that protecting areas of reef costs about 0.2% of the value they bring.
The new assessment forms one element of a major project to measure threats to ocean ecosystems, the Global Marine Species Assessment, a joint initiative of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Conservation International (CI).
It will form part of the new IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, due to be published in October.
The IUCN's director general, Julia Marton-Lefevre, said world leaders faced a stark choice.
"We either reduce our CO2 emissions now, or many corals will be lost forever."
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Malaysians and the cry for a decent salary
The Sun carried an interesting article on their front page today. It was about a Malaysian born, world authority in keyhole surgery in children, paediatric surgeon, Prof. Dr. Tan Hock Lim and his "so called" eyebrow raising salary of RM 168,000 a month!! (USD 52,000)
In other articles recently, we Malaysians lamented that the minimum wage should be raised to RM 1,500 from the current RM 600-700 range.
So...are our salaries too high or too low????
I work in the Oil & Gas industry and find an amusing yet prevailing Malaysian mindset in our senior management that prevents them from paying capable Malaysians a decent wage.
We seem to be willing to pay consultants, expatriates, foreign contractors, etc. millions of dollars but find it sooooooo difficult when it come to our own local talent.
I have expats working with me, getting paid USD 1,200 per day as project managers. (USD 36,000 a month)
So back to Prof. Dr. Tan.......
How much do we expect to pay a " Malaysian born, world authority in keyhole surgery in children" la???? RM 10,000......RM 20,000.......PLEEEASE LA........
I received similar responses when I came home to work from working abroad for over 10 years. "Wah...we cannot match your USD salary la....." was the standard response.
When are we gonna understand that we have good Malaysian workers who would love to be back working in Malaysia??? Actually....we do..........but they work for Shell or some other multinationals!!!
Another good example was my cousin, who is Malaysian, and was recently made an offer to return to Malaysia (He's currently based in Dubai) and work for the national airline. Salary in RM. (Pretty low)
He insisted that since he has been trained overseas and has been working with international airlines all over the world, he should be paid international standard USD wages.
Their response was the killer............"You give up your Malaysian passport la....get another country passport and then we can pay you the expat salary package!!!!!"
So the bottom line is.......FOR THE SAME JOB IN MALAYSIA, AN EXPAT WILL BE BETTER PAID!!!! .......Sick isn't it???
And this is after 50 years of independence!!!
Prof. Dr. Tan should just get an "Aussie" passport!!! Hell...any "Mat Salleh" passport!!
The Sun carried an interesting article on their front page today. It was about a Malaysian born, world authority in keyhole surgery in children, paediatric surgeon, Prof. Dr. Tan Hock Lim and his "so called" eyebrow raising salary of RM 168,000 a month!! (USD 52,000)
In other articles recently, we Malaysians lamented that the minimum wage should be raised to RM 1,500 from the current RM 600-700 range.
So...are our salaries too high or too low????
I work in the Oil & Gas industry and find an amusing yet prevailing Malaysian mindset in our senior management that prevents them from paying capable Malaysians a decent wage.
We seem to be willing to pay consultants, expatriates, foreign contractors, etc. millions of dollars but find it sooooooo difficult when it come to our own local talent.
I have expats working with me, getting paid USD 1,200 per day as project managers. (USD 36,000 a month)
So back to Prof. Dr. Tan.......
How much do we expect to pay a " Malaysian born, world authority in keyhole surgery in children" la???? RM 10,000......RM 20,000.......PLEEEASE LA........
I received similar responses when I came home to work from working abroad for over 10 years. "Wah...we cannot match your USD salary la....." was the standard response.
When are we gonna understand that we have good Malaysian workers who would love to be back working in Malaysia??? Actually....we do..........but they work for Shell or some other multinationals!!!
Another good example was my cousin, who is Malaysian, and was recently made an offer to return to Malaysia (He's currently based in Dubai) and work for the national airline. Salary in RM. (Pretty low)
He insisted that since he has been trained overseas and has been working with international airlines all over the world, he should be paid international standard USD wages.
Their response was the killer............"You give up your Malaysian passport la....get another country passport and then we can pay you the expat salary package!!!!!"
So the bottom line is.......FOR THE SAME JOB IN MALAYSIA, AN EXPAT WILL BE BETTER PAID!!!! .......Sick isn't it???
And this is after 50 years of independence!!!
Prof. Dr. Tan should just get an "Aussie" passport!!! Hell...any "Mat Salleh" passport!!
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
SODOMY
O.k....that's the charge againts our ex-deputy PM Anuar.......AGAIN.
Now I really was not sure what this was about so decided to get some proper info. Below is the actual legal "stuff"....
Statute: Section 377 of the Malaysian Penal Code: Unnatural Offences
Penalty: 20 years/caning and fine
Restrictions: None
Unnatural Offences 377. Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years and shall also be liable to fine or whipping.
Section 377a. Outrages on decency. Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years."
Explanation - Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.
Now my question is......If you were sodomised, and your @#$ hurt, wouldn't you report it ASAP?
I mean, if my boss did something like that when we went on a business trip, etc.......hell......wait a minute......how does it even get there la???
I can imagine if my boss says, "so how tonite???" (Seeing that my boss is a 50 year old Punjabi guy....hmmm...he might!!)
....My reaction....."@#$@ OFF You freak!!!!!" AAARRGHHH!!!!
Right???
So then, what's with this guy?????? He was o.k. with it...........for a while????
Then he woke up one day and felt "Dirty" ????? Then decided to make a police report????
Wouldn't it be better to say, "Hey Anuar.....give me some $$$$$ or I'm gonna tell the press how you made me scream your name last night while you @#$%@# me up the #$#!!!!! I also have the videos.......which I'll put on YouTube.......in 2 parts, of course..."
On the other hand.....what if Anuar says....."Hey....he actually made me scream his name la......"
Does that mean the charges are on the other guy????
Pretty hilarious, isn't it???
Let me know what's your take on it guys!!!!
O.k....that's the charge againts our ex-deputy PM Anuar.......AGAIN.
Now I really was not sure what this was about so decided to get some proper info. Below is the actual legal "stuff"....
Statute: Section 377 of the Malaysian Penal Code: Unnatural Offences
Penalty: 20 years/caning and fine
Restrictions: None
Unnatural Offences 377. Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years and shall also be liable to fine or whipping.
Section 377a. Outrages on decency. Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years."
Explanation - Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.
Now my question is......If you were sodomised, and your @#$ hurt, wouldn't you report it ASAP?
I mean, if my boss did something like that when we went on a business trip, etc.......hell......wait a minute......how does it even get there la???
I can imagine if my boss says, "so how tonite???" (Seeing that my boss is a 50 year old Punjabi guy....hmmm...he might!!)
....My reaction....."@#$@ OFF You freak!!!!!" AAARRGHHH!!!!
Right???
So then, what's with this guy?????? He was o.k. with it...........for a while????
Then he woke up one day and felt "Dirty" ????? Then decided to make a police report????
Wouldn't it be better to say, "Hey Anuar.....give me some $$$$$ or I'm gonna tell the press how you made me scream your name last night while you @#$%@# me up the #$#!!!!! I also have the videos.......which I'll put on YouTube.......in 2 parts, of course..."
On the other hand.....what if Anuar says....."Hey....he actually made me scream his name la......"
Does that mean the charges are on the other guy????
Pretty hilarious, isn't it???
Let me know what's your take on it guys!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
