Archive for August 30th, 2006

Matrix Ping Pong

August 30, 06

A skit that’s quite famous on the net. Watch as the actors play ping-pong with ‘Matrix’ style special effects… Live, on stage! No computer effects! The whole thing is really cool to watch, especially the second last stunt. You have to see it to believe it right here.

   MatrixPingPong

Slicing a Bullet in Half…Mid-flight

August 30, 06

Samurai swords are near the very TOP of the ‘cool weapons’ list. If you follow manga and anime, films like Too Close and Kill Bill, or especially Samurai Jack on Cartoon Network, then you’ll know that katana can cut through ANYTHING! I betcha even light-sabres can be sliced into two individual pieces of pure energy.

Okaaaay, back to the real world. Can a well-forged Japanese sword cut through metal like Roronoa Zoro does in One Piece? Can it deflect bullets like in Final Fantasy: Advent Children?

Take a look at these videos…

The first one shows a katana splitting a 9mm handgun bullet. Short and not so clear, but watchably cool.

The second one shows a katana splitting automatic rifle bullets. This is much longer, and has close-up slow-motion takes at about 1 minute and 8 seconds into the video that actually let you see the bullet splitting in half! The pic below is of when the blade finally breaks from the impacts.

   KatanaVSBullet

Killer Mantis

August 30, 06

Let me introduce a new category on my blog – Amazing Creation. As the description says (mouse over the Amazing Creation link and wait a while), posts grouped under here will focus on the really COOL living things I’ve found out about.

Apart from that, some of the life forms have adaptations or behaviour that is so complex, you really have to stretch the bounds of Darwinistic, Naturalistic evolution to explain it!

For my first offering, here is something I found at this bird watching site.

WARNING! WARNING! Emmeline and like-minded cute-animal lovers should not look at the below pictures.

You have been warned!

Look out!

Here it comes!

   MantisHummer1

Eh, don’t blame me, I told you NOT to look :p Y

Yes, that is a hummingbird that got speared by a praying mantis! Said mantis managed to score a critical strike that ignored target’s armour rating, then proceeds to eat the hummer while hanging upside down – the bird’s full weight still on the mantis’ claw.

   MantisHummer2

So now you know that mantids not only look scary, they ARE scary!

PLUS: A whole collection of other mantis-kill-bird pics can be found at this page. Use Google Translate which can auto detect the lamguage as Spanish and translate it to pretty understandable English.

Morality: Of Absolutes and Relatives

August 30, 06

Part of the dilemma facing American (and worldwide) society today is the basis and origin of their laws. Their Constitution is based on laws set down by the Founding Fathers, many of whom were practising traditional Christians. Therefore, you find many traditional Christian values guiding such laws as forbidding homosexuality, polygamy and forced adoption of religion.

According to the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, these laws were not arbitrarily decided. They were laid down by our Creator God Himself. Their underlying moral basis is not open to debate – the morals are ABSOLUTE.

These laws are some of the ones being challenged as ‘biased’ and ‘bigoted’ and ‘old-fashioned fundamentalist discrimination’ by some today. They argue that such laws are no longer relevant or fair in today’s liberal, free, non-Christian dominated society.

These laws should change with the times, they say, depending solely on human society’s demands. Their underlying morals are dependant on our mood – the morals are RELATIVE.

But this line of reasoning naturally rejects divine inspiration for those said laws. By extension, this line of reasoning rejects morality itself as a having divine source.

They reject morality as having been defined by some Creator, because as atheists or agnostics or non-practisings, they don’t believe there is a Creator. Therefore, morality does not have an absolute definition.

If that is the case, then where did moral and ethical ideals come from? They must be human inventions or decisions. If they are not absolute (already set in place and defined), then they must be relative (chosen and moulded by ourselves).

Simply put, if there is no ultimate source of moral right and wrong, then we shall choose our OWN right and wrong! If human societal consensus is the basis of morality, then we are free to create or modify morals to suit our society.

When homosexuality is prevalent, then make it permissible to have gay marriage.

When men with many wives can prove that their families are fair, stable and nurturing, then allow lawful polygamy.

If a 6-year old boy thinks he can choose whether or not to have sexual relations, then by all means, introduce NAMBLA to the neighbourhood kindergarten!

Feeling kinky? Your dog feels kinky too? Then get on down and do it doggie-style! Yeah!

Oops! Were those last few ones a bit risque? Unacceptable to modern society? Well, maybe modern society isn’t enlightened enough yet. What argument can one make against paedophilia and bestiality, if one does not subscribe to any particular pre-set morals?

See the problem? Even the most liberal of us balk at the idea of sex with underage kids, or animals, or even underage animals. But what logic can they use? That it is immoral? Who chooses the morals? For us Bible-believers, God chose.

*Gasp*, is liberal society saying that they have SOME Christian values ingrained in them? That must be SO horrible for them to realize!

But this extends far, far further than just marriage conventions. If there is no absolute basis for morality, then EVERY MORAL is open to debate and re-definition. There is no appeal to a higher power – you cannot accuse me of being evil, since evil is merely what I choose to define it as. I can say that in my opinion, YOU are being evil in not tolerating my beliefs.

So if population numbers are becoming too great and babies are unwanted, then abort them and leave the corpses in the town dump.

When citizens are old, sick, disabled or otherwise unproductive in society, euthanize them for the greater good of civilization. Stop their resource drain and churn out some Soylent Green in the process.

Take it to the furthest extreme it has historically gone: When a large enough majority of society decides that a new moral code should be implemented, then kill the Jews. Massacre the Gypsies. Purge the nation of anyone who professes a religion or a different political viewpoint. It’s not morally wrong, because I say it isn’t!

This is the logical result of moral relativism, which says that morals are NOT based on an underlying, pre-set definition of right and wrong.

Incidentally, realize that the biggest perpatrators were atheist, Communist leaders – Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il.

Because there is no God in Communism, therefore there are no divinely-placed rules. Man is free to be his own god, to choose his own rules. And that is exactly what these Great Leaders did, they became cruel and oppressive gods over their people. Mao’s Little Red Book anyone?

In conclusion, let me just say that humanity, with our puny brains and mere millenia of collective experience, has NEVER known what is best for ourselves. We need something, someOne higher to trust in. Us children need a Father to lay down the rules, and to guide us by the hand every day of our lives.

So where do YOU get your definition of right and wrong?


%d bloggers like this: