eXTReMe Tracker
"Where the Mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action;
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake."

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Time Machine - More Fact than Fiction?

Remember the Eloi and the Morlocks in HG Well's timeless classic - the Time Machine? In the book, Wells predicted that in 802,701AD, the Human race would split into two - the upperclass, intelligent, good-looking Eloi and the underclass, industry worker, ugly-looking Morlock. However, if you have not yet read this classic (considered as one of the greatest Science Fictions ever), you can read it online. The book is more of a narration and the underlying philosophy is more important! It has been made into two movies. If you want to see the movie version please see the 1960 version.


Now it seems that Fact seems to be overtaking Science Fiction - that too by 700,00o years! According to the e.volutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics, in about 100,000AD we may have the Human Race split into two - the "tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative" genetic upper class and a "dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like" underclass a la Eloi and the Morlocks.


However, the immediate future seems to be interesting, In about 3000AD, mankind would be around 6ft to 7ft tall, live to about 120years. We would know how our body functions best and we would have the proper food supply, better diets, etc.


The article by Oliver Curry
is available in PDF and also in HTML. You may also want to read a BBC report summary on this subject.

Monday, October 15, 2007

Climate Change - the Science and the Mind

This year the Nobel Peace Prize went to Al Gore and UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) .

In my opinion, the question is not whether the person and the organization are the "rightful heir" of the movement to save the planet from the ravages of Man. That debate can go on without solution.

The prize goes on to recognize the fact that our planet needs help and needs to be addressed in a consorted global effort.

And there are two things against this happening: the interests that do no recognize the fact and the Environmentalists themselves (as ones own worst enemy!)

One cannot help but see the deluge or articles, letters to the editor etc against Mr. Gore winning. They all say one thing. Science is not 100% certain that Climate Change is man made. The answer to that is the following: Science is never 100 percent certain. And that is the beauty of science. We are moving closer and closer to the Truth. I've once written a nice article on Science which I request everyone to read.

The scarier part are the Environmentalists themselves. I think they are their worst enemy. I met a number of environmentalists myself (including some close friends) and I feel this - in short: (a) they cannot articulate the problem to the common man and when questioned goes in hysteria instead of providing convincing answers; (b) they seem to preach what to do instead of what to address.

I'll leave the first part. Most scientists cannot seem to articulate in common man's language (some even take a pride in it - maybe they would fall in love with their reflection on water). It is the second issue that makes them loose. They prefer to preach than explain!

Environmentalists: Please articulate the problems created by climate change and what the "cause". Explain to them that to mitigate the problem the cause needs to be addressed. If the common person puts in an effort to find out the way to address the cause that would have a lasting effort. Again, articulate the problems and the causes and ask the people to find out the way. And how to test if their actions helps in addressing the causes. Let everyone contribute to the solutions. And to do that, you need to do your bit and explain.

The final truth is explained very well in an article in the
Time web site.

"The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a more and spiritual challenge to all of humanity." But Gore is wrong. Climate change absolutely is a political issue, the greatest political issue of our time, and it will only be solved in the political arena, with all the mess and compromise that entails. Environmentalists hate to hear this; they think that global warming is so important it should transcend politics, as the IPCC does, and as Gore himself has in many ways these past seven years. But the final war on global warming will be fought not with PowerPoint but with politics, and it will be fought in the halls of power around the world. The scientists represented by the IPCC have spoken — what we need now are passionate, even partisan political soldiers to lead the way and push the final tipping point from awareness to action.


Thursday, October 11, 2007

Divine Question

The question of God - in an increasingly emotional way. I think this would me my theme for some time. I just came across an article in WSJ that expressed surprise.

Religion is about connectivity of the society (or reconnect as the Latin re-ligare) and does not have to do primarily with God. The Buddhist monks protesting in Burma does not have any such metaphysical gadget. Yet they are revered throughout the world for their actions and not denounced for their atheism.

Debates about the existence of a form-full “creator-dictator-god” or a “formless-immanent god” is a continuing debate in Hinduism with currently the latter school winning. Theistic schools of Hinduism debated with its atheistic schools and Buddhism/Jainism without the emotion displayed today!

So the question that is asked? Why this debate is supposed to display emotion. Why the existence or rather the lack thereof of God be considered a mere academic discussion. Or better still, an inquest for selection the path of our Spiritual Journey. God is merely a means to the end and not an end in itself!