Unsure...

I can't work out what I think about this article on the religious right in Kansas in the US.

Is the article applauding the Christians in Kansas for stopping holding to what the Bible says? On the other hand, the kind of things that have come out of Kansas (God hates gays for example), are pretty dispicable and un-biblical in the extreme. God hates sin, that's for sure, but anyone homosexual is no different to anyone else in that we're all sinners, and God loves everyone enough to have sent Jesus Christ to die on the cross to take that sin upon himself so we can know God.

However, it seems the undertone of the article in the BBC is rather like most articles that come in the Economist - Christians are ok so long as they believe what everyone else believes - so long as they take evolution as the only plausible way we have got to where we have got, so long as they admit that, really, abortion's absolutely fine, so long as they don't have "outdated" views on sex, etc.

Yet what makes Christians distinct if they do that? Nothing. And what is a Christian, if it is not someone who follows Christ, hence believes in the Bible, hence takes his lead from the Bible? Now if that Bible states God created the world, and everything in it (like life - who are we to decide when to end it?), and states that sex is an amazing thing - but for marriage alone, then shouldn't Christians believe and argue in these things?

Beaten to it!

It was my intention at some point to look into the effect of playing soccer at altitude after FIFA slapped a ban on playing football above 2,500 metres (8,125 feet) last year (and subsequently revoked it after protests). However, Patrick McSharry, another Oxford scholar, has beaten me to it!

Never mind...

Original Sin

I've just returned from a conference on international economic development, an area which I'm not a huge expert by any stretch of the imagination - but a recent paper I've written with someone else happens to fall into this area of economics.

I was surprised that a number of people talked about original sin quite frequently - naturally this was the name some economists have given to some practice carried out in the financial sectors of economies - if a country can only borrow money denominated in foreign currency, then it is guily of original sin.

Naturally, once these countries begin to be able to borrow in their own currency, they can get around original sin. Now if the name wasn't already a bit of a misnomer, it certainly becomes it here. Sin is, as Wikipedia describes it, a Christian doctrine, and it can be defined simply as rejecting God. Sin cannot be got around by different practices, or by any human action, the Bible teaches. The only way around it is through trusting in the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross 2,000 odd years ago, something I'll be celebrating on Tuesday...

Deutschland ist rad!

I don't know what it is about Germany, but I love the place! Everything is so orderly and neat and tidy, things work, the people are usually very helpful indeed, and they have Christmas markets! And beer...

I'm in Bonn for a few days for a conference. I've roughly finished my presentation work (have to discuss someone else's paper and present my own (joint) paper tomorrow), and so I'm sitting back in my hotel room. The internet costs and is metered, while I have only a single bed, and no desk to work on, no ironing board, iron, or thingie to stick my rechargable toothbrush (which went flat in my case) into to recharge. But it's still great - I get free breakfast here, all I can eat breakfast no less. And I walk out of the hotel, two minutes down the road and I'm at the central station and the subway/U-bahn/underground, which takes me to the conference venue in minutes and minutes...

To To:, to CC:, or to BCC:?

I just read an amusing article in the Economist about etiquette when new technology comes along. One of the questions about emailing was the To or BCC question (you're writing to many people, do you put their addresses in To or BCC?), and the article writer, without any ambiguity, said the answer was to BCC, with your own address in the To.

Now I hate getting emails that have done that, because you have no idea who else got the email. So I'm firmly a To person, if nothing else, because within friendship groups, others can re-use emails sent round if all addresses are in the To field, whereas that's not possible with BCC. Also it seems a little secretive and shady to put addresses in the BCC field. So I don't agree!

A bunch of moaners

Well, England are about to, it seems, appoint an Italian, Fabio Capello, as the new national coach.

Yet it's greeted with a load of moaning, because he's not English. What happened to the last English manager? Hasn't he just produced possibly the worst set of performances imaginable given the quality of players before him?

And where are all these English managers queuing up to manage the team?

Paul Ince talks about how discouraging it is. Maybe that's England's problem is this kind of mentality. Capello won't be in the job forever, and there will be more chances in the future to manage England. It's hardly like it's banished forever the possibility the manager will be English.

More questionable assertions about English football

Gordon Taylor asserts quotes are definitely needed to deal with the "crisis" in English football.

However, he cites the Italian league as being a great example of how a league should work, where both the league does well, and the national team. Now, are there quotas in the Italian league? (The answer is no).

Protectionism never works, and won't work in football either. It will promote the mediocre, and will not solve England's problems either short term or long term.

Dawkins in Christian admission shock

Richard Dawkins calls himself a cultural Christian - he enjoys singing carols, which begs the question - why does he like singing about things he completely disagrees with?!

Leaving Toronto

It's nearing 9pm Eastern Time, and I have another two hours to kill at Toronto airport before catching my flight back to Heathrow. It's been an eventful few days here in Toronto. I arrived on Thursday evening, and quickly got acquainted to the notorious traffic I'm told Toronto suffers from. Even getting the bus back out to the airport tonight, a Sunday evening, took a long time as traffic was very heavy.

I certainly experienced that Canada gets cold, and even then I only experienced a mild version of this: at worst it was about -4 degrees here; while I've been here, it's been -29 in both Winnipeg and Edmonton, so it's been quite warm relatively here!

I've experienced the problem with not informing NatWest that I was going to be in Canada, as very quickly my debit card was blocked, and looking online, my balance hasn't been affected so it's unlikely to be fraud elsewhere. Thankfully my credit card remained useful.

I've remembered that Tim Hortons is pretty damn useful - they're cheap, and they're everywhere! Other things I've been reminded about: Not being allowed to cross the road apart from at specified crossings, and cars that can turn right when the lights are on red, having to ask for the washrooms and not the toilets (or even bathrooms apparently in Canada!), and the distinct lack of privacy afforded in public washrooms/bathrooms/toilets - big gaping hopes between the doors!

I enjoyed Toronto. It would have been better had the weather not been quite so cold, and not snowing, as it was today, on my day of sight-seeing. It meant that heading up the CN Tower, the world's largest building, didn't give particularly spectacular sights, because the top of the tower was obscured in clouds and visibility was low due to the snow.

But never mind, there'll always be some other time I'm sure to explore what Toronto has to offer. Toronto doesn't have numbered streets as far as I could work out; all had names, and slightly strange names like Bloor, and Yonge, and Harbord. They even have a railway station here, with real trains going to real places! I guess there's a lot more towns nearby that make a train service realistic in this part of Canada, whereas over in Alberta there's about 4 big towns a long way apart from each other.

Anyhow, enough rambling about Toronto.

What's going on at Newcastle?!

You might think Newcastle fans never learn; they're calling for Sam Allardyce, a manager in charge for all of 16 matches so far, to go!

One day soon I'll investigate something which I'm certain of; a club with a stable manager over a number of years will succeed more than one that chops and changes all the time.

Newcastle have been chopping and changing for years now, and they've been doing badly as a result. Keegan was there a long time, and he did pretty well for them. The examples of other managers in a job a long time and doing well are many. Man Utd under Alex Ferguson, Crewe Alexandra under Dario Gradi, Leicester City under Martin O'Neill...

There are some exceptions; Jose Mourinho is one. That's why he should be the new England manager!

Economist Letters

Sadly this link doesn't pull up the actual letter that caught my attention in this week's print copy of the Economist, but it was someone suggesting that the increase in church attendance and religiosity in the States was entirely driven by "non-spiritual" factors such as movement into suburbs, and a need for community from somewhere.

I'm quite sure this is true. The Bible is clear that Christianity is not man seeking God, but God seeking man. On our own, we try to avoid God, and keep Him out of our lives as much as we can. Right now I'm blogging and not doing something useful like communing with God in one of various ways (prayer, reading Bible, reading Christian-based literature). Thankfully God reaches out to us, and provides Jesus to take the punishment we deserve for this rejection of God (eternal separation from God and all He's created - i.e. everything - since that's what we short-sightedly want isn't it?!).

Thankfully Christianity isn't about what I do, but about what Jesus did.

So, just like part of my attendance at church is the social side of things (going to the pub after church), I'm sure a big part of the US attendance is similarly motivated. It's human nature after all, and what the Bible predicts fully well.

Does David Cameron ever shut up?

I guess not, given he's leader of the opposition and has to try as best he can to get in power. However, constantly harping on and on about something that really doesn't appear to need harping on about don't really seem to me to be good strategy.

However I am biased. There's no way I ever want to see a Tory government in power ever again. There are Tories I sometimes like, and really wouldn't mind if they were in power. Michael Howard's not that bad, and I always liked Ken Clarke (probably because he wasn't anti-Europe, as most Tories appear to be), and Boris Johnson, for his comedy appeal.

But Cameron? I really hope we never have to have four or five plus years of him in power. On the other hand, I may well be in another country by then, which may make such a thing bearable. In the meantime, keep going Gordon...

Finally: an attendance prediction

Well, it's reached December (it will have by the time the match I'm predicting takes place), and finally I've updated the dataset for the new season, and am predicting gates. I knew it would be a big job, and indeed at 8pm on a Friday night, having just spent three hours updating the dataset, my suspicions have been confirmed.

However, tomorrow afternoon Oldham entertain Crewe Alexandra (interestingly enough Crewe to go Oldham while I go to (near) Crewe for a family get-together tomorrow) in the FA Cup Second Round. Signs are Oldham are finally getting their act together. Hopefully in the weeks to come, the score prediction modelling will get back online too.

Attendances this season, well they have begun pretty much as they did last season - the Oldham public don't seem that convinced after the disappointment of missing out in the play-offs last season, and perhaps they've been right - so far Oldham have lost twice as many home matches as they've won. Thankfully a few away wins have meant Oldham are roughly mid-table now.

Anyhow, the prediction for the gate tomorrow is a slightly underwhelming 4587. I wonder how close it'll be... it certainly seems a roughly right ball-park figure - gates have been about there, the opposition is Crewe, they are local but not hugely well supported, it is the FA Cup, but then Oldham haven't won a home match for quite a while now - in fact since Crewe last visited Boundary Park at the end of September. Here's hoping for another win!

Update: this was supposed to be on my work blog website, but I posted it on the wrong one...

An amazing website!

For a geek like me who likes football numbers, Tony Kempster's website is immense. It's also damn helpful for putting together any dataset on anthing at all football related, which is exactly what I'm currently doing, revamping my Oldham Athletic FC attendance prediction model...

Woohoo

Today I spent a good amount of time re-organising my website. It needed it, and it's not been updated in a long time, and my research has (thankfully!) progressed a little.

Interest Rates

They move in line, right? Economics says so. Within limits, you move your money to where it earns the most. If the Chinese interest rate is higher than the US one, you put your money there and earn, right? Though you factor in the exchange rate too, or at least the expected one for the point where you've earnt your interest and want the money back in your own currency. That's what uncovered interest parity says.

But since 1998 it doesn't look like that's what's been going on between China and the US, as the plot above shows. In fact it looks pretty much like the opposite has been happening. These are three month interbank interest rates, and they certainly seem to suggest that something else is at work. The exchange rate between the US and China has remained fixed this entire time, with the odd revaluation, suggesting something else is at work. Inflation differentials? Capital controls?

Answers on a postcard please...

Immigration

A very good article in the Economist on immigration, and why it's not quite as bad as the Daily Mail might have us believe...

Politics...

...what a joke! The BBC reports how yet again it seems all they're doing in the House of Commons is trade insults with each other instead of discussing the relative merits of different policies...

Naturally I'm sympathetic to Brown as a Labour voter, and certainly think Cameron should get on with his job of coming up with good alternative policy proposals rather than attacking Gordon Brown because some chap donated a load of money under different names. It's quite good Brown isn't like Stalin (as the Lib Dem "leader" suggested he once was like), and doesn't know every single little detail about his party. I'm happy to think Brown's more bothered about running the country than that...

Phillip Pullman

I doubt I will read his books, nor see his film (I haven't read the Narnia books, Harry Potter or any of the Lord of the Rings stuff, and seen the first Narnia film and fifth Harry Potter) so I doubt I'll change here.

Plus given his scathing criticism of the purpose of the CS Lewis Narnia books - that's they are a thinly veiled attempt to indoctrinate children, a criticism which Pullman is quite guilty of himself - I'm quite put off.

But I'm intrigued by the idea that at the end of the third of his books (see BBC article), "God dies" - people often talk about God dying, or having died, as if his existence was dependent upon what we thought. It's not that often, however, that (say) a clay pot will kill its maker, and the same is true with us. Whether or not we believe in God, he is either out there or not; we can't kill him.

Pullman finds the God of the Bible offensive, and presents some other view of God that he's made up. We can all do this, but the Bible claims to be God's revelation to about himself to us (see John 1:1-18 as one of many bible passages that claim this), and can be argued to be persuasive and reliable.

Soccer matches decided by flipping/tossing a coin

After a dubious question in a sports quiz on Saturday night, I decided to set out to prove that the only football match settled by a toss of a coin was not the European Championship semi-final in 1968 between Italy and the Soviet Union, as claimed. In fact, the Wikipedia entry I can find relating to this states that this was simply one particular match settled by a toss of a coin...

I'm pretty sure a match involving one of the US or England in a World Cup in the 1950s was settled by the toss of a coin from memory, but from Google I find that Spain was eliminated by Turkey in the 1954 World Cup by a toss of a coin.

The Guardian Unlimited website also tells me that Liverpool beat Cologne in 1964-5 in the European Cup quarter finals by the toss of a coin, though it does agree with the poser of the sports quiz question that the Italy-Soviet Union match was the most important to be decided by a coin toss!

Pride

I heard a few great quotes from CS Lewis over the weekend on pride.

Before becoming a Christian, I agreed with everyone (I thought) that pride was a good thing. "Show some pride" is often an encouragement/insult thrown at people. Taking pride in one's neighbourhood or country is seen as a good thing. But is it? I don't think so any more, and CS Lewis puts it much better than I ever could, so I'll give you those quotes, which come from one of the best book I've ever read, Mere Christianity:

Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man. We say that people are proud of being rich, or clever, or good-looking, but they are not. They are proud of being richer, or cleverer, or better-looking than others. If everyone else became equally rich, or clever, or good-looking, there would be nothing to be proud about. It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest. Once the element of competition has gone, pride has gone.

The Christians are right: it is Pride which has been the chief cause of misery in every nation and every family since the world began. Other vices may sometimes bring people together: you may find good fellowship and jokes and friendliness among drunken people or unchaste people. But Pride always means enmity—it is enmity. And not only enmity between man and man but enmity to God.

In God you come up against something which is in every respect immeasurably superior to yourself. Unless you know God as that—and, therefore, know yourself as nothing in comparison—you do not know God at all. As long as you are proud, you cannot know God. A proud man is always looking down on things and people: and, of course, as long as you are looking down, you cannot see something that is above you.

Tony Blair's a religious nutter

Well, he feared being labelled as that while Prime Minister so he kept it quiet...

I certainly find it a shame that it's deemed better for one's career in politics to keep it quiet about their faith in God, and that other politicians firmly believe that he wouldn't have got anywhere near as far as he got had he made it clear he was a Christian.

Interesting in a society that takes horoscopes seriously enough that they're in all the magazines and papers that belief in God is such a no-no...

Death Penalty Saves Lives?

Does it? Apparently, some economists have run some regressions and decided there's a deterrent effect of between 3 and 18 lives.

Off away for the weekend (hurrah!), so none of my usual whitterings on such topics, but thanks to Holly for the tip off.

Four-limbed Wolfson star...

Four-limbed Wolfson star...
Originally uploaded by jjreade

This came in Wolfson's disappointing 8-1 home defeat by Corpus-Linacre last weekend. I'm getting into sports photography, hopefully next weekend I'll get another chance to capture the mighty red and yellows, when they play Magdalen in the Oxford University Cuppers competition...

Try and celebration

Try and celebration
Originally uploaded by jjreade

A few weeks back now, but this picture made it, thanks to Ed Mezzetti, into the Oxford Mail in their report on table-topping Chinnor Rugby Club.

Some good writing on the England situation...

...from the Economist. Protectionism, in the form of quotas on foreign players will not change the fact our players are mediocre because little investment is going into grass roots development, compared to that in Europe. Lets hope the FA still have enough money to set up a system like the French system, because they churn out excellent players year after year in vast quantities, as do the Dutch and Spanish.

The BBC also opines on the passing of a golden generation of English footballers. Were they really all that good though? The proof ought to have been in the pudding, or results. These guys have been lacking. But not helped by the lack of grassroots development. They were helped by having to play week-in week-out against top world footballers. Long may that continue in a free football labour maket...

The Harlem Hot Stompers

This is my dad playing in his band - he's on the piano far left. Probably not everyone's cup of tea, but I love it!

Home Internationals

Once more there's talk of re-introducing home internationals, which are matches between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It probably wouldn't be a bad thing to create some kind of "friendly" matches that have a bit of an edge to them, in order that England, and the rest of the home nations (well, looks like Scotland and Ireland are doing well without them) get a bit of practice, especially since they've nothing better to do now next summer...

Why capitalism is best...

A good article on why communism is doomed to failure, and the underlying cause of the "tradegy" is than mankind is not good, and is certainly not getting any better.

Thankfully there is a solution to all this.

McClaren's gone

See the BBC article. I feel very sorry for the guy, it has to be the most horrible job in the entire UK, to be England team manager, probably worse even than Prime Minister! But after last night's shockingly poor performance and 3-2 home defeat to Croatia, which ensured England didn't qualify even for the European Championships, never mind the World Cup, there was little doubt he had to go.

And the blame game begins. Sure, McClaren put out a team that should have been able to work much more effectively as a unit, and ensure England at least got the draw they needed. But what about the over-played over-hyped players on the field? What were they doing when it mattered?

What about the media? How our media completely clobbers any player the moment they show any sign of weakness. Poor Scott Carson, his error conceded the first goal, but his subsequent saves to keep the scoreline reasonable as England continued to be hopeless and aimless, will be forgotten in the tabloids today. England has a small number of good goalkeepers, and our media continues to hound each one of them out of the England jersey for small errors committed here and there. It's far too much to hope that instead of berating each of these young goalkeepers, the media might build them up a little.

And what about the FA? Incompetent enough to leak announcement of Scolari's immenent appointment way back when, the Brazilian then got a quick idea of the kind of media scrum he was likely to face, and got out quick. Any quick appointment that followed that would easily be seen as the second (at best) choice. Curbishley moaned and moaned about not being talked to, but if this is true, that's pretty shocking. Curbishley would surely still make a good manager, having achieved a great deal with what he had at Charlton. Martin O'Neill would also have made a great choice.

Furthermore, the FA has presided over the watering down of international football to a dangerous extent. Top players are conveniently "injured" when friendly internationals come about, and in fact friendly internationals are largely ignored. Yet this is a far cry from only a few years ago, when it was said English players did not know how to play "friendly". Less practice playing together, less time as the clubs demand their players back asap, and release them late, means an ill-prepared England team.

Yet everyone's pointing the finger at the wrong thing - it's the number of foreigners in the Premiership, of course! But I've ranted enough. Sadly it seems the thing that most needs to be realised is that England are a second rate nation that thinks too highly of itself in footballing terms. I'm sure they'll recover and qualify for the next few tournaments, but it would be good if a dose of realism was injected into us all...

Spaghetti religion!

Follow the link to a rather "special" website, home of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

Evidently someone in the States has got a little fed up with the prevalence of Christianity and "Christian" reasoning over there, such as the debate about whether creation has a role in science teaching.

Does it? Well, insomuch as science tries to explain "why" we're here, then creation has some role, because science cannot ever explain "why" we're here. It might get some grasp on "how" we got here, but even then it's grasping at straws the further back we go. So why does science get to preach its faith about how we arrived?

It may be worth pointing out that as a graduate in the semi-science that is economics, I have a lot of time for science, and scientific investigation. I love trying to work out more about this world God's given us. But try as I might, I won't find out why this world is here by science alone.

Capping foreign players...

Recently there have been more and more calls for some kind of cap on the number of foreign players playing in the Premiership. Steven Gerrard has joined the chorus begun by Steve Coppell and Alex Ferguson. However, recent mootings from the EU are that they wouldn't allow such a restriction on the movement of labour within Europe.

I have to admit I'm a bit in two minds on this. One has to ask, why are there so many players here in the first place? One reason is that Premiership clubs have an awful lot of money and so can afford the best players from around the world, another is the English players generally, for a given standard, are reputed to cost more than their overseas equivalents.

Another reason might be that the English players just aren't good enough. However, it doesn't follow that restricting the number of competing foreign players will increase this quality of English player. Right now, the best English players have to cut the mustard in an extremely competitive domestic league, and so those that are actually in the Premiership are world class.

Restrict that, and will English players necessarily be so good?

England are (in all likelihood) about to fail to qualify for the European Championships, which is a national embarrassment, yet it would bring an end to a run of five consecutive championships (World Cup or Euro Championships) that England have qualified for - which is a record, hence it doesn't follow that necessarily the England team is suffering that much for the current Premiership situation.

All in all, I think I'm against a quota, and not just for this reason - it's giving a false sense of quality, of achievement. Being in academia, where universities employ people from all over the world, I think I might feel a little uneasy to know that I only got my job because someone else couldn't have even applied for it. The same goes for English players in the Premiership - it's up to them to prove themselves!

Is health all that matters?

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/11/where-would-you-rather-be-sick.html

Greg Mankiw waxes lyrical about health in the States - once you've controlled for murders, car accidents and other "premature deaths through non-health-related injury". Apparently the stats will look even better when obesity is controlled for.

His question is, where would you rather be sick? Clearly, the US is doing something right in terms of healthcare to some extent.

However, one has to ask about all those murders and car accidents. Presumably there is a higher chance in the States of being involved in both, if they have such a considerable effect there?

Furthermore, averages hide an awful lot. The distribution of "outcomes" of lives would be interesting. Is it skewed in the US due to their insurance-based system? Do the wealthy who can afford the better treatment live longer?

Good to see...

...it's not just England that the Aussies thrash at cricket: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/7086351.stm

How often, if ever...

is doing 45 in a 30 zone "safe"?! The only possibility I can think of it perhaps, maybe just, a dual carriageway going through a forested area that also happens to house a massive grave yard, which is 30 and used to be 40.

The BBC article is here.

Other than those oddities (and in those cases, you have to accept that the law's the law), 45 in a 30 zone is NOT safe, not matter what the enlightened Paul Smith of "Safe Speed" might think. The mind boggles that someone can actually say something like that.

Increasing the number of points people get for speeding offences is a fine (boom boom) idea - if someone (like me) gets 3 points for creeping up to 35mph in a 30 zone as he reached the top of a steep hill in his banger car, yet someone doing 45 or 50 in a 30 zone also gets 3 points, how is that fair, or right?

Both should be punished for sure, but one is dangerous, the other is not, and there ought to be better reflection of this. Drivers that drive too fast should be able to be banned after just two offences.

Also, Mr Smith says "we all know exceeding the speed limit isn't automatically dangerous," but it does automatically break the law, and it remains that in 99.9% of the cases, 45 in a 30 will be dangerous.

Answer: it's not. Bring on increased fines for dangerous drivers.

How does that work?!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7080301.stm

The Royal Mail thinks that it should have secular images on its Christmas stamps every other year and avoid "religious" ones. Last time I checked, Christmas celebrates the birth of Jesus, and hence is a fairly Christian (not "religous") event.

It may have been taken over by industry, but it remains a Christian celebration, so it hardly seems inappropriate if stamps at Christmas have a Christian theme.

Oh dear oh dear

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7072404.stm

Reading BBC articles on Christian groups makes me slightly sceptical about some of the article's accuracy, but on the other hand it wouldn't surprise me if some "Christians" do this kind of thing. Not only is cheering the deaths of others abhorrent, they also haven't got a clue about their Bibles either, and they also haven't, to use a tired old phrase, got a clue about what Jesus would do.

The Bible says the whole world is under the suspended sentence of death because of its rebellion against God, not particularly the US, and not for a particular sin. Jesus himself is pretty clear in Luke 13:1-3 - some people that had died in unfortunate circumstances were not worse sinners than anyone else. So these guys in the article, who claim to be Christian, by asserting that God punishes US soldiers for particular sins taking place in the US, are a long, long way off the mark.

In particular, Jesus clearly rejects the idea that one sin immediately leads to a judgement. Thankfully there is hope that everyone can avoid this suspended sentence - see here.

Given also that the Bible says that judgement is God's alone (1 Peter 2:23), and furthermore says that only if we repent of our sins can we be right with God (1 John 1:8-9), then these guys cheering deaths with placards saying "You're going to hell", and claiming that in the appeal court they'll win, are firstly casting judgements, and secondly unrepentent of their abhorrent and patently sinful behaviour.

Really makes you wonder...

Just the very next day...

...I'm once again reminded why I have concerns about politicians:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7069011.stm

On the need for two signatures for abortion, MPs suggest that "the requirement did not serve a useful purpose and might be causing delays". I can see one purpose it serves - it makes it harder to take a life, which can't be a bad thing.

And thinking back to yesterday, if anyone argues for abortion on the grounds of rape, then they've already conceded abortion on demand is wrong.

Another draw...

...another one we should have won, according to the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_2/7065127.stm

However, I must admit, I've been to a few matches where I've disagreed with the BBC reporter. Disappointing though, at some point soon we actually need to start scoring goals and winning matches. Currently it's a case of lose home games, and draw away ones. Not good enough really... come on Oldham!

Interesting indeed...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/10/27/do2702.xml

Abortion hardly seems to be the issue it is in the States here in the UK, but in the Torygraph, a newspaper I usually do my utmost to avoid, is a very interesting article on abortion, taking a clearly anti-abortionist line. I'm certainly against abortion on demand, and would fiercely oppose any attempts, as have recently been mooted, to allow abortion here on only one doctor's signature (against the current two).

However, I wouldn't claim to have seriously thought through answers to issues of rape and the possible resulting pregnancy. My initial thought is, just like a child concieved in infinitely happier circumstances, the child of a rape is human nontheless, and killing it is still killing it. Adoption would of course be an option, but then that would put the woman through nine months of being reminded (more so than otherwise perhaps?) of what happened. Anyhow, I'm not a woman so I'm not sure about whether I can really comment on something like that. I'll leave that to others and simply say I am also anti-abortion.

Good news!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4181629.stm

Bed bugs apparently don't thrive on unmade and dirty beds - get in!

Oh no!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7056501.stm

They're going to have a cull of badgers in the UK! To stop TB in cattle apparently. So it seems that will no longer be the badger!

God FAQ

Actually, there's a proliferation of these websites, as Google points out, but the one in particular that I was directed to by my friend Tom is at http://www.400monkeys.com/God/.

It simply says "Q: Does God exist?", with the response "A: No".

Quite amusing, witty, but slightly unsatisfying. Why doesn't He? What evidence does the author, who turns out to be a chap called Alain Omer Duranceau, have for this? Well, he has none, simply claiming, as most do, that somehow the burden of proof falls on Christians (or God believers) in this case, and not atheists.

Yet atheists are making just as dramatic a claim as Christians are about the existence of God - why should they get away without having to reason why they've said what they've said? Seems a little unfair to me. Dawkins does talk a bit more, but mainly attacks Christians in misguided ways. Though I'm told he isn't atheists' main spokesman these days, he irritates them as much as he does Christians and agnostics, in his position for public understanding of science.

Either God exists, or He doesn't. Neither case will be proved by scientific reason, simply because science asks the "how?" questions, and is stumped by the "why?" question. But it also certainly isn't opinion. The Bible makes dramatic claims about God, as does the God FAQ. All good fun...

I like Scrabble, and I like writing

Well, I've just finished a real live game of Scrabble. Not one of those online ones, great as they are. I like Scrabble, but I guess it's just like golf really, it can still be very frustrating. I think quite possibly I take it a bit too seriously - it did really affect my mood the other week, when on arriving home from a great road trip through the Rockies, into Vancouver and on to Vancouver Island, I found that a friend had got a seven-letter word and gone out (effectively) in a game against me, and won!

Or maybe that's just the competitive gene I have in me (not to excuse myself by genetics!), as my dad is currently bemoaning his poor strategy, as I just edged our game tonight by a couple of points.

I'm currently in a good mood about Scrabble, so I'm going to go and ruin it by playing a game of Scrabulous...

Missing Canada?

Finally I've got round to setting up a blog where I can rant on things unrelated to my work. My "work" blog originally began as a way that I could try to link being a Christian with being an economist. That still runs, and is mainly work related, hence not really the place to write all the thoughts that come across my head that I think I'd like to write on something people might even choose to read.

I do wonder about the value of setting up a blog. I can rant about the world around me to my friends, so am I just spending more time online I could be spending socialising? Or am I spending more time that I should be working? I'm also not taking much in while I do this, just ranting my own self-declared important and interesting views. Maybe I should spend this time reading? Reading my Bible even, perhaps? Or doing some work? Or finally transferring all the numbers from my old phone to my new phone? Or watching the football?

Anyhow, I thought I'd lament on missing being in Canada, since I am. I don't think I'm missing being on holiday as such. Anyone who knows my girlfriend lives in Canada will know I have a good reason to miss it. I certainly miss her a lot and miss being in the same city as her. But there wasn't just that there. I was there during the autumn, so I didn't get the freezing cold winters they get (though even in September there was at least three frosts!), but then also I didn't get the wonderful hot summers I kept being told about. There's a lot more to learn about a place than you learn in one month, and for sure the grass is not necessarily greener on the other side. I think right about now it's browner over in Edmonton than here in England, and yellower in the summer, but maybe I do fancy that move away from Oxford.

I have a wonderful base in Oxford, and I've had five memorable years there. I have a great church to go to, I have many friends both in church and in the economic department, and there's no doubt I'd leave them behind. I'd have to attend a church which sung some of the most lame Christian songs I've ever heard, even despite otherwise being very biblically sound and forthright (this is Beulah Alliance church), and I'd be starting from nearly scratch in terms of friends. Would I be able to carry on doing economics? Well, I think I'd only be moving there if I got a job with a university, so yes I'd carry on doing economics. It could be pretty exciting too, and I wouldn't shut off working with people back here in Oxford, given the modern age and Skype, email, and super-fast internet connections.

Anyhow, this was all prompted by playing a track I listened to loads while out there last month, which is Mi Swing Es Tropical by Nickodemus, which is the salsa track off the recent Apple commercials. I'm sure I'll rant a lot more on this and on other things on here. Woohoo...