A quick update from some current new items, reminiscent of John Stewart or Stephen Colbert; sadly without the investigative journalism, pinpoint timing, or humour.
So, in other news:
Maria Sharapova has been promoting a new dress that alerts the wearer to a call when it's normally too loud to hear. Which poses the obvious questions:
If it's too loud to hear, how can you talk to the person who is ringing?
How important are you to have to take a call, even when you are out at a pub? And who are you pissing off in the process?
How obnoxious are you that not only do you need your phone to ring, but also your entire body?
And in a case of mixed media messages, the Retirement Commission released report gauging New Zealanders' financial literacy. Unfortunately The Press forgot which angle to take.
Lastly, the All Blacks won their game against France (14-10), redeeming themselves somewhat in terrible weather. Yet still reporters found something to complain about.
I didn't even know there was a trophy until this week.
Cinema is no stranger to controversy and condemnation from the Catholic church, in recent years it's been up against such movies as Harry Potter, The Golden Compass, and loudest of all - The Da Vinci Code (and Tom Hanks' hair).
So it was no surprise when I heard that the church had banned director Ron Howard from filming in parts of the Vatican for the new Angels and Demons movie.
Having seen said movie this week it is then ironic that the church has less to fear from this movie (about the divide between religion and science) than the previous one about Mrs Of Nazareth; and actually comes out fairly unscathed, showing off the beautiful St Peter's Basilica and a number of antiquities to good effect (or at least studio reproductions of them).
Add a bit of momentum and this movie is considerably better than the first (which was terrible); though that doesn't necessarily mean it's good, but I found it enjoyable.
BUT, the movie does require a large amount of suspension of disbelief (ie turn your brain off at the door); and this time the disbelief doesn't come from a two-thousand year old wedding conspiracy.
It's not the religion at all, this time it's the science; and it bugged me throughout the movie.
Movies have long used "artistic licence" with science, whether it be hacking computers, rerouting spy satellites, or curving bullet trajectories; but when the A&D story revolves around a canister of antimatter being used as a bomb, things are stretched to the extreme.
There are two real issues:
Creating antimatter. It's not that easy. Actually it's really really really hard, and impossible for in any sort of "visible" quantity.
Storing antimatter. Magnetic fields are the way to go, since as soon as antimatter touches anything (ie matter) it's explosion time. But in a clear glass container the size of a thermos? They don't even use that for regular explosives!
And underlying the story there is another subtler issue:
Religion v science - Enemies? Or two sides to the same coin?
I have heard and read opinion that science is mutually exclusive with religion. That isn't my belief (I am a relatively well informed individual) - nothing I know leads to a conclusion that they aren't just describing the same thing.
This is not as vaguely sarcastic as the previous post, because to be honest I was quite interested in the whole affair. I haven't been in a district court ever before, so seeing the 'inside' is quite an eye opener and all quite structured,
Yes there is a lot of waiting around, but only because there are legal processes occurring in the background that jurors have no need to see.
The juror pool was not (as I had wondered) entirely made up of stay-at-home mums and the unemployed; it seemed to be a fairly good representation of NZ.
The intro video was actually worth watching, and not horribly cheesy.
The jury officer used an actual rotating ballot box to select the jury panel (two groups of 50 people)
And it was tense.
I don't know what it is, but waiting to have your name called out of a random ballot and list is surprisingly blood pumping. Waiting to see who gets challenged (and trying to guess why) is like an advanced class in people-watching.
However, I didn't get picked for a jury today, so my tour of the judicial system ended at 11am.
I will leave you with two statistics though:
the jury that was picked was: female-4, male-8
jurors that swore on a bible were-3, and not-9
Should we be surprised with number 2? Dismayed? Where is NZ in reality? :(
The Lord God has told us what is right and what he demands: "See that justice is done, let mercy be your first concern, and humbly obey your God." Micah 6:8
Hello again, Tomorrow I begin a scheduled week of jury service. I'm quite looking forward to it, as I haven't been 'selected' before. Everyone who has, recommends to bring a good book.
Having read the instructions there are a couple of idiosyncrasies that are worth mentioning:
1. Payment A juror gets paid $31 per half day, or $62 a day (plus travel) Expected times are 9am-5pm, with an hour lunch - giving you a standard 8hr work day This gives the princely sum of $7.75/hr (or if you only want 7 hours and unpaid lunch, $8.86)
The NZ minimum wage is $12.50...
2. Governor General You can't be a juror if you are the Governor General. Fair enough, the representative of the Queen isn't really suitable.
However...
Do they have to mention it on the juror information sheet? There is only one Governor General after all, it should be easy to figure out.
Ergo; either the Governor General is particularly poorly informed; or the Ministry of Justice is a bit obsessive-compulsive.
I forsee the Hon. Sir Anand Satyanand opening his jury summons with a groan, then after reading the information sheet, he high-fives his secretary once he finds he is excused. Possibly unlikely.
I expect more oddities tomorrow, so there will probably be a Part 2. Don't expect a case report though - justice is blind.
About a week ago I watched the Watchmen at the movies.
This isn't a review of that movie. (But suffice to say, if you've never heard of it before, it's probably not for you).
In the movie there is a character called Dr Manhattan. He is a genuine superhero, thanks to a failed science experiment. He glows blue, he can breathe in space, he can teleport, he can see through time.
In short he becomes the closest thing to a god around, and even manages to get worshiped at one point. He is also totally not like God, at all.
The most well-known (and cliched) verse in the bible is John 3:16:
"This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life..."
Christians know that God is ultimate never-ending love. Sometimes we forget to tell everyone else, amidst all our guilty finger-pointing, but it is a fundamental truth (see also Mark 12:28).
Dr Manhattan is not this. As the years have gone on he grows increasingly dispassionate; until he almost forsakes humanity (and all forms of life) altogether in order to live alone on Mars. Superman he is not.
Now, you probably don't know any blue superheros living on Mars; but I bet you've wished a few people you knew (or yourself) acted with love a bit more often; after a long day at work; when the baby has been crying for an hour; after driving together in the car for 4 hours.
"Love others as well as you love yourself."
It sounds so easy. Right? Forget the finger-pointing for a while. Try something new.
Welcome to my first post of the year. Yes it is March, time moves on. Back to the travel diary this time, while I think of a theme for next time.
In that lost three months after Christmas I had the opportunity to see a part of India for two weeks. Mumbai mostly, but a quick side trip to Delhi and Agra (Taj Mahal).
Everyone asks: "How was it?"
To answer that requires quite an unraveling of emotion and imagery. Especially for someone from New Zealand, the population of which is a quarter of Mumbai (forgetting the other 1 billion people).
India. It is extreme.
The largest democracy in the world. Everyone has an opinion, and someone is bound to disagree.
Food has Flavour. Spice is inherent in everything, unless it's super-sweet.
Infrastructure is overloaded - water stops, power goes out.
A few people are extremely wealthy, and a lot of people are very poor. Beggars are prevalent almost everywhere, only slightly outnumbered by the taxi drivers, or balloon salesmen.
It is Hot. 30+ degrees C during the day in Mumbai. In winter.
The Bollywood industry makes hundreds of movies a year, almost stripping Hollywood; most of the films never leave the country.
India. It is a paradox.
Officially a secular state, religion is part of everything. A large proportion is Hindi, but it's not hard to find Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Jain...the list goes on.
The Taj Mahal is truely a wonder of the world (it is amazing), yet rubbish lines the nearby city streets.
Women dress in colourful, beautiful saris; while the men are plain in their shirts, pants and shoes.
Modern ideals and freedoms (particularly for women) are in conflict with a traditional India lifestyle. Valentines Day this year was particularly heated.
A movie about India, directed by an Englishman, and courtesy of America won the Oscar Best Picture award (Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire).
It has taken me a while to get my head around it, and if I went back I imagine it would hit me again. And why did I go at all? If you've seen any photos of the trip then that should be clear; the best reason there is.
The Sunday just gone (30 Nov) signaled the beginning of Advent. Advent is an important tradition in the Christian church, as it marks the start of the lead up to the birth of Christ (and hence Christmas). For everyone else (and many Christians too) Advent also marks start of the calendar that has little chocolates behind each door; and is otherwise a good word to use in scrabble.
Advent is commonly observed (at least in Baptist NZ), by the lighting of five candles, one each week till Christmas itself (week 1- Hope, 2 - Peace, 3 - Love, 4 - Joy), and the fifth is the Christ candle (white coloured) and lit on Christmas day.
It's all very pretty and really adds something to the weeks before Christmas (otherwise overrun by endless advertising and jingles).
Of course; it never actually happened in the bible.
Mary was a bit preoccupied at the time to think about lighting candles (with all the riding the donkey, and looking for a place to give birth going on), Joseph was more concerned about getting back home safely, and the wise men hadn't arrived yet.
So where did Advent come from? The early church - people made it up (arguably with God's influence). History otherwise regarding Advent is a bit vague, it may have started as early as the 4th century but that is still 300-400 years later than the birth of Christ.
There are many traditions that are sourced directly from the Bible - communion (Matthew 26:26-) and baptism (Matthew 3:13-) being two significant ones that spring to mind. These traditions were acted out by Jesus and are therefore given serious weight in the church today (even if you don't believe in Jesus, I hope you can respect that for those who do, following His actions is really important). And there are these other traditions that have developed over the centuries (for good or bad), and have merged with the originals. Funny how humans do that.
Does it matter?
As with most things, the answer is yes and no. There's no point blindly repeating something that you don't understand or believe to be true; so it's at least worth asking some questions as to what it all means (Christians strangely enough ask questions all the time, because we often don't know the answers). If you don't understand a Christian tradition (or any tradition) I suggest you investigate further.
Tradition has its positives as well: My family has for many years assembled the Christmas tree in the first week of December (sadly I have missed out recently, being in the wrong city). Each time we play the same (often terrible) Christmas music, and place the dozens (or hundreds) of ornaments on the tree, and at the end we get to turn on the lights and look at the twinkling glow. Our tradition is associated with good times, and family bonding. It may only be a tradition for my family, but it's a good one.
So, this December I invite you to think about Advent - even if for the chocolate - as it might add new dimensions to your lead up to Christmas.
I find myself sitting at my computer, at 9.30pm the day before the New Zealand general election - completely mystified as to who I will vote for tomorrow.
I am a strong believer in democratic process (and currently a public servant*), so I will be voting; but currently I'm thinking about flipping a coin - or since there are so many parties - rolling a die.
The issue I have is that policy 1 from Party A is quite good, but I don't agree with policy 2; so I look at Party B and quite like the look of policy 3, but worry about policies 1 and 2; and so on.
It would seem that no party is quite leftcentredright for my ideals.
I can think of two possibilities why:
I'm highly unusual and/or strange: Definitely a possibility, but if that's the case I'm unlikely to change in time for voting tomorrow;
I don't fit party policy: Also likely, as regardless of your political leaning, I'll bet you have never heard a speech on 'supporting the up-trodden well paid, educated, middle class, single, white male minority class'. Because if you did, it would be either for comedic value, or that person would be being booed off stage.
I also find myself slightly saddened by the plethora of placard waving volunteers (or are they?), that have stood on traffic islands, across Wellington city, braving gale force winds, to proudly proclaim their chosen political party on a cardboard sign**. It seems, after over one hundred years of democratic process, New Zealand's political parties have finally managed to rise to the lofty levels of pizza street advertising.
Could I have some policy with my pizza please. Hold the tomato.
Please excuse me while I go find a die to roll.
* As a public servant I am constrained by the Public Service Code of Conduct, hence no actual political parties mentioned in this post ** At least four political parties did this
For many, this week is one of the most significant of the year, I refer to of course:
1. Guy Fawkes, and 2. The beginning of Christmas retail.
If you were expecting me to say:
1. The election of the leader of the free world, and 2. A small election in the USA*
Then you are sorely mistaken, as nothing beats market desire to sell sparklers, cards, and chocolate Santa Claus's to all and sundry - even Barack Obama's reportedly $700 million campaign budget.
We (New Zealand) are in day two of the four days we are able to purchase fireworks legally each year; although each year that period gets shorter and shorter, and what we can buy gets less and less. This year the dreaded sparklers can only be purchased as part of a pack of 'normal' fireworks; you know the ones:
"Shoots flaming balls and reports. Light fuse and get away"...
...Because sparklers are the dangerous ones.
And I hope the (double) irony isn't lost this year, as during Guy Fawkes we celebrate:
- The ending of a plot to blow up the government by the man Guy Fawkes (and some others who didn't get to go down in history); - by purchasing explosives; - three days before a nationwide election.
But even that is nothing compared to the fact that Christmas advertising has begun, a full two months early. I personally find it very difficult to contemplate Christmas shopping outside the month of December, and seeing blatant product placement, fake snow (in NZ!), and hearing incessant jingles far far too early does put me off. And I haven't even begun on the true meaning of Christmas (maybe closer to the time).
Nevertheless what is known that on that key day, millions of children will be looking forward to an elderly, jolly, white haired man turning up to fulfill their greatest wishes.
(Apologies in advance to Americans, you won't understand)
It is official, I am turning into my father as I get older. The most recent proof this week was as I read the new Christmas advertising on the Duxton Hotel's signage (one of the larger hotels in Wellington), and became incensed, due to:
'Organize Christmas Function'
This is obviously a to-do list for getting something done for Christmas. Fair enough, it's getting to that time of the year after all. There is just one problem - 'organize' is not a word. The word you would use (being a New Zealander, speaking English, language originating from England) is 'organise'.
Alas, we have merged American 'English' into our language, so we have -ize and -or; and no longer have -ise and -our. It's logical if you think about it - which word processing software do we write with? MS Word probably. And what does it always (incessantly) default to? English (U.S.)
Even as I write the word 'organise' it is marked as incorrect by the browser; a polite little red underline telling me something is wrong. It is inescapable.
So I implore you to stay eternally vigilant and keep New Zealand safe. Save me from becoming my father (though if you've met my father you might say that it is far far too late).
PS: I have recently noticed my bible to be written in American English too! I'm sure St Paul didn't spell organise with a 'z', he did things properly. Yeah...
In my last post I mentioned a change of tone, so be warned there are "Christian Themes" at some point in this post.
I picked up the Whitcoulls Top 100 books list this week, it's something I like to review from time to time and use it as a guide to read something new. I tick off books I've read and total them up in the aim of feeling self-righteous because I am so incredibly literate.
Twenty three.
That's how many books I ticked off. Out of one hundred. Lit-er-ate. That includes all 6 Harry Potter books too. High brow reading.
In my defence there are books on the list that I don't actually ever want to read:
Anything by Marian Keyes,
Same goes for Diana Gabaldon,
The Notebook, Chocolat, Captain Corelli's Mandolin - forget it.
That removes ten books (Marian Keyes to blame there), but even so twenty three from ninety is hardly a sterling record; a fraction over 25%. Fail.
I could cheat a little, as there are books I have started but never finished, and usually only a few pages in. I could almost count them. Almost. I am quite content to stop reading a book if I am getting nowhere (unlike my mother who forces her way to the end of everything; including Marian Keyes).
But if I decide to cheat, I run into problems. There are two books on the list (every time!), that cause considerable issue:
The Edmonds cookbook. Yes it's a classic. It is also a recipe book. I am not tempted to absorb it from cover to cover, but yes I do turn to it to perfect a lasagne cheese sauce.
The Bible. For the unobservant, this is where the entire post has been heading (Christian themes...), because as a Christian I obviously place the Bible as the most important book written, bar none*.
But I must confess:
I haven't read it all.
I have certainly read a lot of it, and that amount is slowly increasing (currently quite well, other times not so much); but there are many passages that I am completely in the dark over - Old Testament books mostly, for whatever reason.
Does familiarity breed contempt? No; but familiarity does breed apathy. It's like the teddy bear you have had since you were a child; it's been there for thirty years and you like having it around because it's a piece of your life; but it isn't like you need to look at it, just know it's around...somewhere.
So it's time for the confession. Because recently it has become obvious that in order to be a 'better' Christian a sound knowledge of the Bible is not just important, it's essential. Essential. It doesn't sound like an amazing revelation, and it's not, but that's how it goes; better to do something about it now than leave it longer. It might take time but it is worth it.
So, all going to plan the next time the Whitcoulls Top 100 list comes out, I should still have twenty three books ticked off; but at least I can say I've read them all cover to cover.
And now a surprise post from the technology news desk.
The internet isn't very old, not even 20 years yet for the 'real' web. In that time though there have been a number of phenomenon-menom..s; I'm not talking about chain emails promising money from Bill Gates, or Nigerian bank scams either. The real thing:
1. David 'Don't Hassel The Hoff' Hasselhoff The original master of Knight Rider and Baywatch himself has since 'appeared' in many online satire, some of it his own. And yes, he does own rights to 'Don't Hassel The Hoff'. He's also the highest selling music artist in Germany...
2. Chuck Norris Fact: Chuck Norris can divide by zero. Fact: There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Oklahoma. Fact: Chuck Norris knows the last digit of pi. These 'fact's any many many more have sprung up all over the internet surrounding this mythic martial artist. But the question you have to ask is, if so many 'facts' exist where did they come from in the first place? The answer is of course "a roundhouse kick to face".
3. Star Wars Kid A tragic tale of embarrassment, turned into viewing for millions of people. Take one unfortunate adolescent doing lightsaber tricks and film him. Put it on the internet. Add visual fx. Put on internet again. Create an internet legend. Get sued. Terrible or funny? You decide.
4. Rickrolling From Wikipedia: Rickrolling is an Internet meme involving the music video for the 1987 Rick Astley song "Never Gonna Give You Up". The meme is a bait and switch: a person provides a Web link they claim is relevant to the topic at hand, but the link actually takes the user to the Astley video. The URL can be masked or obfuscated in some manner so that the user cannot determine the true source of the link without clicking (and thus satisfying their curiosity). When a person clicks on the link given and is led to the web page he/she is said to have been "Rickrolled"...
5. Ok Go "Here It Goes Again" You might know it as 'the treadmill song'. A genius music video and a great song too.
6. Strongbad/Homestarrunner Very clever and funny animations created from user submitted emails, to Strongbad. Made famous mostly by word-of-mouth, so much so that there is now a computer game (plus other merchandise).
The list goes on. It really does.
"So what?" you ask. Because this leads me into another internet phenomenon - Google.
Google is celebrating it's tenth birthday at the moment (huzzah). Starting small with their search engine (strangely called 'Google') they have expanded beyond belief into nearly all aspects of web-life:
The aforementioned search engine, so popular that the word 'Google' is now a verb and a noun. Where would we be without it?
YouTube, bought by Google for the tidy sum of 1.6 billion US dollars; and one of the most popular sites on the net (and already used a bunch of times in this post)
Google AdWords. Where Google gets it's income from. They appear on many many websites, but you might not have noticed
Google Maps and Google Earth. The reason you can surf the web at work; because it's 'educational'. Also really brilliant for finding directions; like to this amazing place!
Gmail and Blogger. Almost unlimited online email, and a blog site (which you are reading from)
A recently released web browser 'Chrome', which had some trouble with the user licence but will probably take off (I still like Firefox though)
A recently announced touch phone to rival Apple's Ipod
Why are Google so successful, and enjoying continued consumer fandom?
Everything is free! (well not the phone...probably)
So with that in mind, join me in wishing Google a happy tenth birthday. Long may it continue.
I'll finish with a warning - I'm thinking of writing my next post(s) as a serious look at Christian religion and living. There may be a dramatic shift in tone. You have been warned.
Hi again, I'm back with something conspiracy theorists are going to love. A public safety message.
In my last post , I said that although the newly developed CERN particle ring had started up, it hadn't caused the end of the world through a black-hole.
Yes that's right, giant confectionary maker Cadbury-Pascall pulled the iconic New Zealand lollies** from shelves, meaning the sudden disappearance of Sparkles, Tangy Fruits and Snifters. Will Jaffas be the next casualty? who can tell.
And this occured at the same time the particle accelerator started up. Coincidence? I think not!***
Luckily for New Zealand and the rest of the world this phenomenon was short lived; as the accelerator in question developed a world-confectionary saving fault and was shut down.
Add some heated environmental protesting via consumer outrage, and it looks as though Cadbury may restore the missing lollies to shelves - the damage to the earth will be minimal. But it was a close thing.
In case this should happen again, stock up on your favourite lollies now to be prepared. There's no telling when such a disaster may occur again, and next time we may not be as lucky.
* May not be statistically valid ** Lolly; aka confectionary, candy, sweets *** Ok yes, maybe coincidence
It didn't cause the end of the world (or if it did no-one noticed), and is instead trying to find the existence of new forms of matter; using the tried and try technique of smashing things together at high speeds. Much like a demolition derby, but with smaller cars and a bigger arena.
In this article Kiwi with his finger on the Big Bang Button our famous Kiwi is quoted as saying, "We have been shown to meet all safety standards. In terms of the black-hole scenario, LHC is safe."
The black-hole scenario?!
I don't know about you but that statement makes me more worried than some assumed apocalypse from an oversized science lab.
I mean, really what is the scenario for a black hole?
Scenario 8.1 Black-Holes Description: [EVENT: APOCALYPSE] The event the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) causes the spontaneous creation of a black-hole, or holes. Shortly after (ie. immediately) the intensive gravitational field sucks all matter into said black-hole, causing the end of the world. And the solar system. Risk: Low, but honestly we don't know since no-one has ever made a black hole before. Person Responsible: John. Yeah, definitely John. Mitigation: Unknown, but options may be - i. Pray to God (possible conflict of interest) ii. Stop, Drop and Roll iii. Fire extinguisher iv. Time Machine (to be designed) v. Evacuate to Alpha Centarii (undergoing budgetary constraints) vi. Chuck Norris Note: At all times act positive for the media; and Chuck Norris.
Valuable scientific work, yes. Crazy? Also yes. It leads me to the following statement: Science is about hypotheses and testing. If you want absolutes, look elsewhere.
"Where were you when I created the earth? Tell me, since you know so much! Who decided on its size? Certainly you'll know that! Who came up with the blueprints and measurements? How was its foundation poured, and who set the cornerstone, While the morning stars sang in chorus and all the angels shouted praise?" Job 38:4-7
"And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day." Genesis Ch1:4
And now from the political news desk, Me. This may be a one-off post, as politics isn't usually something I dabble in; and I warn you there is controversy ahead (yes really) which is why it may be the first and last post. However now for the news...
Sarah Palin, the new deputy for John McCain is almost a Republican dream-boat:
Miss congeniality at a beauty pageant
Married to pro sports person
One child in the army
One child disabled
Member of the NRA
Anti-abortion
Pro death penalty
If it wasn't for daughter Bristol things would be hunky-dory (this should test her anti-abortion stance at least). http://www.stuff.co.nz/4677901a12.html (was that controversial?)
But it isn't abortion or lack thereof that I'm questioning, that issue is infinitely large and emotive and I'm not qualified to comment. (safe here)
My question is purely based on logic (Vulcan's beware): How can you support the death penalty, yet not support abortion? (hey, that sounded controversial)
Abortion - noun - "any of various surgical methods for terminating a pregnancy." Death penalty - noun - "a sentence of punishment by execution."
From the above definitions it could be implied that abortion attempts to improve the life of the mother by terminating a pregnancy; whereas the death penalty attempts to improve society by terminating an individual. Which may sound similar; but they aren't; or are they; no definitely aren't-are. Which one was correct again? (argh controversy again)
I have another question: What about grace* and mercy? (and more controversy, end it now!)
Just throwing ideas out there.
* Grace is a Christian concept of favour and forgiveness for the undeserving. And you thought abortion was a tricky topic...
So I have been back in New Zealand for a week, and my previous post was a 10 days ago (which is almost infinity in email-time). Trouble was I didn't know how to convert a travel blog into something sophisticated like discussing the thematic relationships of Wall-E.
So I haven't.*
When you come back from holiday it turns out there is one, and only one, question that people ask you - "What was your favourite place?"
This is a ridiculous question, as every day I saw something I hadn't seen before (or thousands of things I hadn't seen before) having to rate them on some sort of scale is impossible. Three things define the experience: 1. What you see 2. What you do 3. Who you are with
If you don't believe me, try going to Disneyland by yourself, go to the Grand Canyon with a paper bag on your head, or eat a romantic dinner for one.
For anything to be enjoyable (and this isn't just for travel) you will be able to have fun with one of the above; can go a long long way with two; and if you get all three then it's probably one of the best days of your life.
So I invite you to take today and use it to appreciate something new, and share it with someone special.
(The Grand Canyon is pretty amazing too) * The next post I promise.
As I prepare to leave London for New Zealand, I thought I'd give five quick highlights from USA.
1. Alcatraz (San Francisco) Touring around The Rock is quite an experience, especially finding out the flaws in the movie 'The Rock'.
2. Yosemite National Park Having been to Yosemite twice now (winter and summer) I can say it is a beautiful place in either season. Go in summer to enjoy some excellent views and challenging walks
3. Grand Canyon One of the national wonders of the world and once you arrive it is easy to see why. A simply breathtaking place.
4. Niagara Falls Another natural wonder, and where the Grand Canyon stuns the eyes with epic scale, the Falls also include the senses of touch and hearing, as the huge flow of water thunders over the cliffs.
5. Lincoln Memorial (Washington DC) Immortalised in a number of movies, including Forrest Gump; this memorial to President Lincoln is sobering and classic. Turn around for a excellent view up the mall to the Capitol.
PS: Remember that in America the most useful currency is: One dollar bill - Used in tipping, which means all the time; don't substitute for the one dollar coin. Quarter dollar - Used in every coin operated machine everywhere
Being back in London again, some things stand out as unusual:
1. Summer Everything you hear about an English summer is true. Expect to be rained on, blown away, or electrocuted in a thunder storm. You wonder why sun screen is even sold here.
2. Left and Right English drive on the left (the correct side) and hence overtake on the right, but on the underground you stand on the right and overtake on the left. Nonsensical.
3. Weights and Measures The English have a 'relaxed' attitude to metric measure. Expect to see litres used on liquid volume; but miles used in distance - unless they use kilometres. As Daniel also mentioned, a sign saying 5m could mean 5 miles or 5 minutes.
4. Princess Diana Memorial Fountain With all respect to the late princess, calling her memorial a 'fountain' is a stretch of the definition at the best of times. More apt would be 'aqueduct', 'drain', or more poetically a 'cascade'.
5. Madame Tussards Everyone knows Madame Tussards, the famous celebrity wax museum (and worth the price of entry). However it isn't quite that easy. a. The models are made of fibreglass, not wax. Only the original scuplt is wax, and then moulded with fibreglass to make it last longer. b. Part of the tour includes a dungeon (what's with the British and their dungeons) where live actors frighten the audience. Surely this is a blasphemy for a wax museum.
Tomorrow I leave for New Zealand and back to whatever you call a normal life. Time to sort out my photos
11. Angel Food Cake I ended the previous post with this lead-in, and it didn't disappoint. A cross between sponge cake and meringue, a sweet tooth delight.
12. Taco Bell From the mexican fast food chain. They sell cheap tacos ($0.89ea), which, while hardly brimming with options (you get beef, lettuce and cheese), are surprisingly tasty.
13. In and Out Burger Another fast food chain, in the California region only. If you read the menu, you will see only 5 things*: -Burger (beef) -Slightly larger burger (same ingredients as above) -Slightly even larger burger (as above) -Fries -Soft drink Given the lack of choice, you would think they would be pretty special. Think again. Think a cross between a fat fried pattie from Burger King and the swept up remains of a Wendy's bun with lettuce; throw in the worst fries ever. Voila.
14. A slice of Cheese pizza Taking pizza to a whole new level of minimalism (except the portion), the cheese pizza has only one topping - cheese. This may not scream 'tasty'; but much like Taco Bell, it's cheap and what you pay for isn't too bad. I'd add pepperoni for a bit more flavour though.
15. Philly Cheese Steak Steak coneseuirs will be disapointed, as this is basically a steak and cheese hot roll (or sub), don't expect them to ask if you want it medium-rare either. It's tasty enough, but the cheese is runny and horribly processed (what I wouldn't do for a slice of Edam). Which brings me to...
16. Cheese Whizz "Cheese What?" might be a better name, due to it's complete indifference to anything resembling actual cheese. First of all it sprays from a can (like dairy whip cream), and second it is orange. If you like your cheese not at all then this is for you.
17. NYC Hotdog From a roadside stand even. $3 gets you one with everything (cue zen joke), which is reasonably tasty. The portion size is on the small size though so I felt a bit cheated.
18. Soft Pretzel Also available in roadside stand versions. $3 gets you a large pretzel and enough salt to fill the pacific ocean. Avoid unless you adore salt with everything, or are looking to have a heart attack.
19. Bagels This high-carb donut wannabe, available with every variety of cream cheese filling imaginable. A fresh one is very nice, and very filling. However this almost doesn't qualify Bagels are readily available in New Zealand.
20. Crispy Creme If bagels are not for you then donuts have all the sugar you need. The Crispy Creme glazed donut (without a hole) is very nice as a dessert; unfortunately American's haven't figured out the right time to eat them, so the are available any time from breakfast. The glaze will melt in the sun, so eat it quickly.
I hope you can now go out yourselves, knowledgeable of the dangers ahead.
End Transmission
* There is actually a secret menu for those in the know. But it doesn't have 'added flavour' on it.
Time to break up travel reports with a breaking opinion story.
Pick the odd one out: 1. New York 2. London 3. Munich 4. Singapore 5. Auckland 6. Los Angeles
If you said Los Angeles you get half a point because they ARE odd there; but no, the correct answer is Auckland (and not because it's the only southern hemisphere city on the list). Why then?
It's the only city (or perhaps - metropolis) without a metro train system (yes, even the infamous LA is getting in on the action now); and the Britomart terminal doesn't count, you need to have actual trains for it to work. If you look at most large 'western' cities they will be likely to have a metro system of some kind, that functions (for better or worse); and the reason they work is that large numbers of people use them daily to: travel to and from work/go shopping/be tourists/... because they are: 1. Cheap 2. Fast 3. Easier than driving 4. More environmentally conscious than driving (I bet London didn't think of that one when they started the underground in the late 1800's)
Having spent today using the New York subway to get all over Manhattan (for a total of $7), I find them to be generally excellent; and from a statement I heard today, another 5 million people in New York agree with me.
So why not Auckland!
The obvious answer is because of the cost, they aren't cheap. But if the metro will be used for 100 years, perhaps someone should think about how history might value such a decision. I know I'd like it.
(PS: Aucklander's, take a look at Wellington's example. Electrified rail. The Future. In the 20th Century.)
In other news; being atop the Rockefeller Centre during a lightning storm is not advised. But the view is excellent.
I'm Russell Browning reporting from New York city, back to you in the news room.
Posts
