Ray Lamontagne new song

I just happened across an upcoming track from Ray Lamontagne's new album out soon called 'Gossip in the grain'. I was responding to somebody over at Aaron Darc's site about a comment Tina Arena made regarding big voiced singers being out of vogue. I wanted to use Ray as an example of someone who understands when to use the big voice and when to use a more subtle approach.

His new song provides us this as an illustration. It is another beautiful song. He is in my humble opinion on of our generations greatest singer/songwriters.

Speaking in tongues - the real deal

I have just come across some more amazing new technology that has the capacity to completely change the life of a person unable to speak. Let's use cerebral palsy as an example of a specific disability that in many cases has this very issue. I have spent a number of years in my 20's working as an aid for people with cerebral palsy. The greatest shame to me was not the disability of the person with cerebral palsy but the disability of the carers to understand them. Given time shared with a specific individual it is amazing how much non-verbal communication you can share however the barrier still remains. Particularly with the pace of communicating an idea.

When I was working in London I was assisting a man my own age with driving his car to music college and also with lunch and bathroom visits. Much like the film 'My Left Foot' that famously portrays the life of Christy Brown, my client also had full control of his left foot and did his composing with a tab on the end of his shoe. He also used the electronic speaking device im sure we have all seen used by the like of Stephen Hawking. Once I got to know my client better I was able to pick up his body language and this meant that communication became quicker and with less fumbling for the point. One of the ways he would maintain control over his destiny was to take me a different route every day, so that I would be forced to rely on his directions whilst we were driving. Many a morning I would be driving through the maze of inner London, watching for other cars and pedestrians while at the same time looking in the rear view mirror at my client pointing directions with his head when he wasnt quick enough to type them out. On a number of occasions he would be calling for my attention frantically only to discover that he wanted me to check out some hot lady walking down the street. He was a horny little devil.

It was always a challenge working with anyone with limitations of verbal communication. I doubt we can truly appreciate what it is like not to be heard. Let alone be able to do simple tasks on our own like turn on a light or change a channel. 

Which brings us to a recent article on theage which can be found here. It is essentially some new technology which works on using the tongue as a means of controlling a mechanism which once perfected will aid people in speech and other tasks. The reasoning for the tongue being the controller is that it is connected to the brain rather than the spinal column. In the cases of people with quadriplegia this would be a vital new technology. I am less certain that it will work for all people with cerebral palsy as the tongue movement for some people may be involuntary. In these cases using the eyes and facial expressions would be more useful. Below is an amazing talk on this very thing. Watch this guy perform a self composed piece of music live with just his face and head movements. 

So next time you are thinking of handing over some money to somebody, consider helping researchers like this who are trying to make a real difference to a very silent minority. 

Pastor Michael Guglielmucci and why we dont get morals from religion.

An interesting report on news.com.au has caught our attention.

Read it here -
http://www.news.com.au/comments/0,23600,24216087-2,00.html

Add to this a paragraph from an earlier report - 'There is an amazing moment on the latest Hillsong DVD, This Is Our God, when Michael Guglielmucci, stricken with cancer, walks on stage with an oxygen tent to boldly sing his song Healer.'

In essence this pastor told his congregation and indeed the world that he had cancer. He has preached to thousands of impressionable people and even recorded a hit song called Healer. The major problem with all this was that he never had cancer in the first place.

It is a fascinating and sometimes disturbing thing to see the reactions in the comments section of this article and articles like it. I decided it would be worth some time to comment on the comments as it where. It is also fascinating to note that TV has refused to pick up this story.

I am not intending for this to be a chance to mock some Christians, rather I would like to use this opportunity for people to view the many ways that religion protects itself. Remember that they have had a long time to finesse these responses and the excuses are almost a tradition in themselves.

Let the diversions begin…………... my comments in blue.

I think it's sad that other people who don't belong to a religion as such who make detrimental mistakes don't have to be ostracized the way Mike has. I don't belittle the effects of what he's done but it's unrealistic to hold him to a different standard than any other human being who's made huge mistakes because of his faith in Christ. As a "crazy Christian" myself, I believe in an enemy as much as God. So as much as Mike is not exempt from the enemy, he's neither exempt from God's grace. It's a shame others don't consider exercising that grace too.
Posted by: Kate Lauren of Australia

And yet the very same argument is used against non-believers - where does your morals come from? Implying that without faith you would have no moral compass. What double standards this is. The apt term here is 'if you cant handle the heat get out of the kitchen'. Don’t aspire to be societys moral compass if the people in the faith behave no more morality than those not of the faith. And of course the other chesnut is the fall back - satan. If a believer is immoral it must surely be the devils work.

If only you knew what this man has had to endure, then you would not sneer but feel commpassion. I have know Mike for many yeras now and this is a shock to me too, just because the messenger fails, doesn't mean the message is false. I think what we need to remember is that Mike is not God, he is a man and i just hope that he gets up from his fall to show us what the power of God can really do.
Posted by: shaun of melbourne

Just because a person is perceived to be suffering, it does not justify immorality. It just means that this person decided that through his suffering he would show the worst in himself rather than the best, which every single Christian was praising him for before this bombshell hit. Its like shooting excuse arrows at a moving target.

What is the message if not to be a moral person, to be a good representative of the faith and to do no harm? And lets not forget the most important disctinction here - we are told ovre and over again that without faith we cannot be moral. This is the distinction here.

Again we see the moving target. Sin is not frowned upon, it simply gives us a great opportunity to show how no matter what we do there is forgiveness after the fact.

God see's your little lie as the exact same thing as Mikes big fraud. Infact all sin is the same so we're all on the same scale here.
Posted by: kelly of brisbane

This must be a great deal of comfort to murderers, dictators committing genocide and men pretending to speak for God. If its all the same and we are forgiven anyway, lets go nuts.

Wow. Sounds like 90% of the comments are from people just waiting to pounce the moment a 'christian' screws up. So if it had been a politician, would the whole government's laws & regulations be a sham? If it was an athlete, are the olympics not real and all in our imagination? You gotta remember, there are things that your weak minds and limited perception that you just cannot grasp. ie, the idea of something OTHER THAN YOU. Praying for you Gug..
Posted by: Carey Lee of Melbourne

No Carey, but then the politician does not make a promise to abide by a set of commandments does he. Given the Church consistently tells us that without God there is no morality, it is well within our rights to criticize a person for not acting out his faith. When a politician acts in a manne which contravenes his roles and responsibilities then he is indeed held fully accountable. If the laws and regulations are not robust enough then they can be adjusted, unlike the Bible.

For a Christian to use the terms 'weak minds' and 'limited perception' is about the funniest thing I have read so far.

And as for those who think all we do is pray, therefore nothing, take a look at the women's and children's hospital and schools around the country that have been renovated for no other reason than because the church wants to love people.
Posted by: Kate Lauren of Australia 3:36am

This is completely false. It shows a complete lack of knowledge. Kate simple assumes that the Church is the only thing keeping hospitals and schools together because Christians are taught not to research, but to merely believe. Belief does not unfortunately make a thing true.

As my co-blogger Mark has pointed out - It's confusing the difference between there being people who do good things AND are Christian, and people who do good things BECAUSE they are Christian.

But take it from this Christian--believing in something bigger than yourself, like God isn't being brainwashed. It's being brave. And at the end of the day, sure I could be wrong. But I'd rather take my chances believing there is a God and die wrong than believe there wasn't only to find out there was.
Posted by: Kate Lauren of Australia 4:43am today

With this argument it stands to reason that Kate should also join every other faith, because one particular faith could be wrong. And im sure she would rather take her chances believing in them all 'just in case'. What a horrible and selfish reason to devote yourself to a belief. Forget the religions positives to the community and all, im just looking out for number one here.

As Infidel of Adelaide has also confirmed- Pascal's Wager is a fundamentally flawed reason for believing in God. Looking at it rationally, the only sensible option is to go with the overwhelming evidence provided by science, not religion, for the answers to the big questions of the universe.. but then, religion has never been about logic, rationality or making sense, has it?

Mark also adds - This argument if a famous one. It's called Pascals Wager. You've identified one hole in this logic - that there a lots of different gods to believe in, and some gods say not to believe in the other ones. There's also two potentially false premises: 1) that there would be bad consequences for not believing if he does exist, 2) and that there are no consequences for believing if he doesn't.

Oooh, big news, Christian lied, therefore all Christians are deceived liars. So if we extend that line of reasoning a little further: Atheist Hitler killed people, therefore all atheists are evil murderers. All people make mistakes. Nobody is perfect. But thank goodness somebody paid the price for my sins.
Posted by: Ben of Canberra

In fact Hitler was NOT an atheist, he was a Catholic. Let me repeat that just in case it is forgotten. In fact Hitler was NOT an atheist, he was a Catholic.

I actually had a tangible spiritual experience at one meeting he spoke at... which I attribute to God... I know some may mock... it doesn't worry me... I'm just pointing out God uses anything (including fakes) to bring people closer to him. Essentially the only thing separating a Christian from a Non Christian is faith... we are just like everyone else. I personally apologize for our self righteous mentality. We really are no better, we are just like you.
Posted by: Jezer

Wow, this is a new one. God uses anything to bring people closer to him, including making a mockery of his apparent teachings. With that sort of argument we could attribute the holocaust, hiroshima or even a dab of vegemite on toast to being God's way of converting people to the true faith? Obviously it would require someone of faith to point them out to us otherwise, well it could be mistaken for just a piece of toast.

I'm saddened for him that he felt that he needed to go this route. i have faith however that god will use this situation for his glory.
Posted by: ben

It has actually been proven that prayer has absolutely no impact on the sick individual that they a praying for. This test was conducted by the faithful by the way. They are just keeping it quiet obviously.

The larger these christian institutions become, the stronger the self-preservation instinct seems to be which generally results in what we see all too often
Posted by: Dan of Hobart

Right on brother! The comments above provide many examples of self preservation. It truly is all religion has left. The last gasp.

Good comments Kate Osutsider of Perth would rather believe that he came from a monkey and his words do depict the culture. A foolish man says in his heart there is no God" and I dont choose to be foolish
Posted by: Sorry i missed this persons name.

Do you think this person has ever considered opening a book about evolution or do you think perhaps she is basing her opinion on someones comments within the church? Perhaps she should also do a little reading or watching of monkeys and their culture. Personally i like to test my beliefs with others who conflict mine. If my beliefs are based on knowledge and evidence then iI should not be afraid to read an alternative view. Which is why I began to read up on evolutionary theory.

I embrace my foolishness with all my heart.

This is hardest for the people who know Mike and have been on the journey with him for the past 4+ years. But of course. Then you get a bunch of atheistic dorks who have nothing better to do with their life, than try and "Prove" that God doesnt exist from a MAN'S flaw.
Beau of Melbourne

The onus is on YOU to prove God exists. Because there is plenty of evidence out there to support he doesn’t or at the very least we have still seen nothing that cannot be explained without a Gods input. Point me to the relevant studies my friend.

Finally a great comment from Jonathan -

Shaun - what he's had to endure? Regardless of what may have happened in his life (I have no idea what he's been through), he brought this on himself. Nobody forced him to pretend to have cancer for 2 years. I've been through a lot in my 26 years on this planet (including 16 years of very serious illness) but I would never do what he has done. I've no idea if he made money out of this lie but at the very least if he didn't, his church and Hillsong made a packet. It's time evangelical Christians stopped making excuses for crooked preachers.The traditional denominations have far more than their fair share of problems, to be sure, but time and time again, evangelical preachers are shown to be charlatans. It's an easy way to make money, when no divinity training is required and people flock to your place of worship and can be convinced to hand over 10% (often more) of their income with few questions asked. Maybe Hillsong et al will donate any money they made out of this man's songs and sob-story to charity. Nah, not likely! They'll probably use it to promote their 'mental health services' which are nothing more than money-making exorcisms. I dare say Mike has already been exorcised.

Another great comment -

There seems to be a lot of defenders here. I actually went to school with this guy and am quite shocked. I have just had a friend die of cancer and for anyone to pretend to have cancer is despicable. I would have the same feeling for a person who would do that no matter what their religion is. For someone who should know better to actually benefit from a despicable lie like this just makes it even worse. People who put themselves up as moral leaders and behave in this manner deserve a more severe punishment than an average person because they are in a position of trust. Much like if a Supreme Court judge got caught stealing, they would receive a harsher penalty than the average Joe.
Posted by: Seraph of Adelaide

And a final word from Mark - Overall opinion: the actions of someone who has a belief doesn't speak to the merit of that belief. It does speak to the culture of the Pentecostal church in Australia though.

If you are someone who wants to learn more about the world you live in and how we got here. We suggest you have a read of books by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens. If you are of a faith, our challenge is for you to read one of these books and test your beliefs for their robustness.

Septuagint translators and the immoral perpetuation of the virgin birth.

There are likely few reading this who have not been connected with Christianity at some stage of their life. Probably not many could claim complete secularism, particularly if their parents considered themselves of the faith. Perhaps you were christened or it could be if you are a man that your johnson received some God endorsed plastic surgery. If nothing else it is likely your school had some form of religious studies. No matter what your history with this religion i wonder if you have heard of what i am about to discuss?

Personally I considered myself a Christian for about seven years during my teens. I used to go to this horse riding slash indoctrination facility called Mill Valley Ranch. If you ever attended one of these camps it was impossible not to be drawn in to the all encompassing salesmanship. It never stopped. Daily church attendances, smaller group discussions and every tee-pee we slept in contained a cool Christian councillor to ensure you had no place to escape. Suffice to say it worked a treat on me.

I soon got tired of the lack of non-spin-doctor answers to any of my questions and moved on. That and the fact that my cat died while i was away at some God awful (hee hee) weekend camp with the most aggressive bunch of sexually repressed teens in my life. I took it as a sign and never went back.

I am slightly off point here however i felt it necessary to paint a picture of where i am coming from when telling you about something i discovered while reading The Selfish Gene. It was merely an offside remark Dawkins makes to describe the replication of genes, however i took note of it and as usual went a googling.

The section i am referring to in the book is this - "I suppose the scholors of the Septuagint could at least be said to have started something big when they mistranslated the Hebrew word for 'young woman' into the Greek word for 'virgin', coming up with the prophecy: 'Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son ..'.

Huh? What was that again?

I couldn't believe my eyes. I went to the footnotes for further clarification as well as googling it. There are many links to various sites below however for the sake of completeness i will stick with Dawkins response to those who corresponded with him after reading his book. He explained that this is well known to biblical scholars and indeed not disputed. The Hebrew word in Isaiah is Almah which means 'young woman' of marriageable age, whether married or not, or a virgin or not; in a broad general sense exactly like girl or maid in English. If virgin were the word they were translating it would have been 'Bethulah'. What occurred is the pre-christian Greek translation known as Septuagint used 'Parthenos' which really means virgin. Many English translations also carry this error - 'Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son ..'.. The New English Bible correctly gives 'young woman' in Isaiah. Honestly translated, the verse reads: "Behold, the young woman has conceived-[is with child)-and beareth a son and calleth his name Immanuel."

So the story of the virgin birth is false, the Church know it is false and yet belief in the virgin birth is still maintained. This is outrageous and completely immoral to me. After all this is a huge part of the religion we are talking about. It is also a huge shock that i had never heard of this before. There are plenty of sites out there that will try and counter some of the facts however it is as usual with a profound lack of reasoning or credible evidence that they present their arguments.

If i had any respect straws left on my faith camel they are well and truly broken now. What will we find out next, that the second coming was also false? Perish the thought my heathen friends.

Indeed I once was blind, but now I see.

Want to read more? Here is a nice article - http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/2virgi93.html

Fleshing out evolution.

I grew up believing in evolution. The concept didn't clash with any closely held beliefs of the community I was born into, so I'd heard of the concept and understood it to be the scientific reality that it is. But it wasn't until recently that I actually understood the concept properly. My pre-university concept of evolution was pretty simplistic, something like "creatures gradually get better over time; humans came from monkeys".

But evolution is much more interesting than that, much more profound in its implications, yet not that difficult to understand. The key is why evolution occurs, not just that it does. My sense, however, is that the majority of evolution acceptors in Australia have only ever been exposed to the one sentence version of the concept, as I had been.

So if you want more, here's two recommendations:

Read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. I believe my co-blogger, Dan, is in the middle of it himself.

AND/OR

Check out Dawkins' new TV series The Genius of Charles Darwin

Dan recommends you check out this site for even more fascinating information to help us understand more about us and the world we live in.

Aint the Internet a 'font' of knowledge ;)

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

Tamsyn - her drug of choice? The media.

Tamsyn Lewis has made comments over the last few days regarding the number of drug cheats she is up against during the coming Olympics. But surely Tamsyn knows the score here, how can you not? Is she really this gullible?



I mean who actually wants more stringent drug testing? Which group out there is actually going to benefit from the removal of drugs from sport?


Lets face it, the reason that sporting events are so popular is because records are being broken, athletes are consistently pushing the limits of the human body. It is exciting stuff watching these people beat that yellow line which shows us what is important now to viewers. The racers are not racing against the handful of athletes in that particular race, who cares! We want to see them racing the entire history of athletes and we want them to win. Break that damn record, beat the yellow line or its just no fun.

Look at what is being said about the Australian swimming team. Apparently they will be winning 11 gold this year. Nobody cares for what, as long as the numbers are up from last year. As long as we show these damn Americans who the sporting gods really are.

Tamsyn is an ok runner, she will never be the best even if these other athletes stop using performance enhancing drugs. And lets be honest here, she is there partly because she has a pretty face and makes the sport look glamorous (and diverts the attention away from a culture of drug use). She is sort of like Kournakova in this respect. You didn’t think she was in these Tennis tournaments because she was that good did you?

If they cant break a record they damn well better be able to give the viewer a stiffy. Your honour, at this time I would like to offer Beach Volleyball as exhibit A.

I ask this again, who actually is going to gain from more stringent drug testing? We all know the answer to this and it is why the current setup is designed to ensure the athletes can work around tests easily enough as long as they play the political game as well as they play their sport. But if you get too cocky or start becoming too obvious, then you are the next scapegoat to be used to fool the public that something is being done to stop this from getting worse. Sorry to burst peoples bubble but unless you are using these drugs you are not likely to be standing on any pontoon in your life time.

Drugs are rampant throughout sport, not just at the top either. It is part of the sporting culture. Just go on any athletes forum and you will begin to see how entrenched it is in the industry. Tamsyn was never going to win a medal. She knows it and we know it. Making some song and dance about it now is just face saving to the sponsors who she relies on to keep handing over the money so she doesnt have to get an actual job. Lets face it, from her perspective she has to do this. She doesnt win the damn races and without her face in the paper their sponsorship will be handed over to the next pretty young thang that can make a final.



Taking performance enhancing drugs is far from cheating. It’s a must if you care about winning. The truth is harsh and all I can say is don’t go complaining about these people as being cheats if you intend on watching the Olympics this year. You don’t want to be a hypocrite do you? That’s for world class athletes who speak up against drugs in sport.

10 iPhone improvement suggestions

I love my iPhone. I really do. But it's because I love it so much that I want it to be even better. Here's 10 small things I'd love to see the iPhone do:

1. Preferencing the 2.5G signal over the 3G when the 3G signal is there but so weak as to be slower than 2.5G. Ditto for preferencing 2.5G or 3G over wifi when the wifi is so weak as to be useless.

2. Automatically turning on the VPN when the only wifi connection available requires it (as is the case when I'm on campus). Or at least some way of programming the phone to do this.

3. Google Street View on the maps application

4. An indication of how much data I've used visible on the home screen, not buried in the menus.

5. For updated applications to remain in the same spot on the home screen that they started at.

6. Allow video recording through the camera.

7. Cut and paste.

8. Allow you to put a custom data feed into the screen saver holding screen.

9. Haptic feedback.

10. Sync video playlists like a regular iPod.