The Random thought thread

[pmccarthy]

I can get up at any time but I can't get it up at any time.

[facthunter]

They say Viagra works but I'm not game to try it.  Nev

[nomadpete]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

They say Viagra works but I'm not game to try it.  Nev

Try it!  It'll stop you rolling out of bed.

[onetrack]

I just had a random thought on Monday evening as I was returning from the Wheatbelt to the City, and driving South down the Tonkin Highway past Ellenbrook, looking at a huge golden sun setting.

As I watched the sun sink, I counted up and realised 27,588 sunsets have gone down, since the day I first drew breath. That's a lot of sunsets.

I've missed a fair few of them, for various reasons, but I've also seen some pearlers.

 

This is one I took a photo of, in July 2019 - on the coast at Gnaraloo Station in W.A.

 

 

Edited December 18 by onetrack

[pmccarthy]

Two things that the Yanks are annoying me with at present:

 

They think the plural of aircraft is aircrafts.

They think speed is only a noun and so report about a "high rate of speed".

[old man emu]

I hate the insidious "not on my watch". 

 

Fair enough that it is a term used in the navy, and so it would be acceptable for it to be used by John F. Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Lyndon B. Johnson, who all served in the navy. However, its use by politicians who did not serve irks me, especially when I hear Albo use it.

[facthunter]

Being elected to SERVE could validate it's use. Why single out Albanese for  "Special" Mention on this?  He's responsible for what HE  DOES WHEN in a Position to do something, (has the Helm) and NOT when he doesn't.. Fair enough?  Same IF you're a CAPTAIN of anything. The BUCK stops with you.    Nev

[old man emu]

Just now, facthunter said:

Why single out Albanese

Not attacking Albo, but simply his use of the phrase. It's a terrible Americanism and could be replaced by something more in keeping with Australian language. For example, he could say, "Not while I'm running the show". That means the same, but is not a slavish following of a foreign style of speech. It shows a degree, however small, of independence. 

[facthunter]

"Running the Show?" He'd be howled down for saying HE's RUNNING the SHOW. Dictator they would claim. On my watch has been around since Pontius was a pilot. Nev

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

He'd be howled down for saying HE's RUNNING the SHOW.

Well, he is the Prime Minister and that makes him the leader of the government. Say what you like about the truth or otherwise of his being the leader, but all I was trying to say that I hate the use of that particular phrase by Australians. If Valdemar used that American phrase, I would react in exactly the same way. Australians used to have a really good selection of appropriate phrases, but we seem to have lost the ability to free ourselves from the yoke of American culture, and are slaves to their terms.

[facthunter]

I can't see why these things bug you so much. Pollies have to watch every word they utter Particularly IF Rupey doesn't like you.. You quoted ME but didn't respond to it.. . It was a very specific comment.  Nev

[old man emu]

FFS!

Do you even comprehend what I write? Do I have to draw diagrams? 

 

I said that I wasn't attacking Albo. I was attacking the use of an Americanism in place of an Australianism. 

 

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

I can't see why these things bug you so much.

Because I have this obviously stupid love of a unique Australian culture, which I don't want bastardised by a foreign country which forces itself into places it is not wanted. I'm happy to see the culture evolve through the influences of those people from various cultures who choose to live here and contribute. I don't want to see that evolution thwarted by a culture which is a laughing stock and whose people don't have the sense to see how different reality is from actuality in their own land.

[facthunter]

You went off on a tangent about that,  as you often do. Can't some things be simpler?. It's not worth the effort to clash over this $#!t. .  Nev

[onetrack]

American culture is all-pervasive and has infiltrated every country in the world where they've rolled up. They even built a town here in Australia, using all American building standards, power standards (110V power station), and even imported a sizeable number of LHD cars, so they wouldn't be forced to drive those dreadful RHD cars!

 

That town is called Exmouth and if you were silly enough to buy an ex-U.S. Navy-built house in Exmouth, you'll find nothing made to Australian Standards fits! The doors are all 3 feet wide (to accommodate lots of portly Americans, I suppose), the windows are also oddball dimensions, all household fittings, wiring and plumbing is U.S.-made materials, and even the cladding for walls and roof is unknown in Australia! Some of the Americans sold their LHD cars locally when they returned to the U.S., and made a financial killing.

 

Edited December 20 by onetrack

[nomadpete]

Take succour from the fact that Exmouth has largely been outsourced to Australian  defence contractors.

 

I have heard similar reports about Alice Springs (Pine Gap).

[nomadpete]

Random thought because we don't have a thread for it.....

 

Have you read a good book lately?

 

My present read:- "The Sea Was Kind"

 

Long out of print, the story of a bloke you wouldn't get your lotto numbers from.

 

A German jew who in the 1930's thought it a good idea to get as far away from Germany as possible so he moved to Japan, learnt the lingo,built a business. But the 1940's started to look bad. He then started moving to a safer place - Philipines ....

 

A story of survival against the odds. And sailing.

 

https://archive.org/details/seawaskind010917mbp/page/n8/mode/1up

 

[Marty_d]

Good books - if you like hard science fiction, try Neal Asher.  I've just read 3 of his.  Good, solid big SF books with all the good stuff - planet sized AI, androids, augmented humans, aliens etc.

[old man emu]

I think Asimov's Foundation series is good sci-fi because it deals with humans in an environment where the sci-fi elements are mainly background elements and it is the human reaction that are the story. That's if I recall the gist of the series correctly. Long time since I read it. No bug-eyed monsters or non-human invaders. 

[Marty_d]

3 minutes ago, old man emu said:

I think Asimov's Foundation series is good sci-fi because it deals with humans in an environment where the sci-fi elements are mainly background elements and it is the human reaction that are the story. That's if I recall the gist of the series correctly. Long time since I read it. No bug-eyed monsters or non-human invaders. 

There's a very good series based on the Foundation series, on Apple TV.

[spacesailor]

I tried  reading a " Jame's Bond '' book but after a dozen pages I was still at the restaurant table. 

We're everything was described in detail. 

Too bored without dialogue & flashing lights .

So dropped it in the litter-bin .

Books used to enthral me !. Now I think , watching that book as a film of 60/70 minutes. 

Is better than two or three days reading it .

spacesailor

[onetrack]

I can't handle fiction, I get handed too many fictional stories nearly every day in normal dealings with people. I do like adventure books, especially the exploits of people during wartime.

I got given a book titled "Great South Land" by Rob Mundle last Christmas.

 

I was a bit reluctant to start on it, but when I did a few months later, I was quite surprised at how entertaining and informative the book was. It's all about the early seafaring explorers looking for the Great South Land in the 16th and 17th centuries, and how the Dutch seafarers Janzsoon, Hartog and Tasman - and William Dampier - who was a pirate, no less - actually contributed a lot to knowledge about Australia, long before Capt Cook took all the honours and glory for "finding" Australia.

 

Mundle is especially admiring of William Dampier, who was an extremely observant man, who also recorded vast amounts of what he saw and experienced. Dampier recorded in detail, winds, currents, tides, flora and fauna, and also recorded the inhabitants of many places - including NW Australia.

 

He wrote at least two books, but a lot of his journals and written information was lost when his ship at the time, the Roebuck, was lost at Ascension Island, due to worm-eaten planking.

Capt James Cook utilised a lot of Dampiers accurately-recorded information, from Dampiers book, "A New Voyage Around the World", to assist in his exploration and claiming of Australia for the British Crown in 1770.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dampier

Edited December 23 by onetrack

[nomadpete]

15 hours ago, onetrack said:

I get handed too many fictional stories nearly every day in normal dealings with people.

The worst is murder fiction - the popular whodunnit 'mystery'.

 

There is so much real murder and cruelty carried out today, that I cannot abide the creation of more for macabre 'entertainment'.

 

But traditional SF is usually opening my mind to the inner workings of human nature. I don't get off on violence, or impressive theatrical visuals that have become essential to modern movies.

[old man emu]

If one of your brothers or sisters is in a long term family relationship, which used to be called a de facto marriage, is it correct to refer to the other half of that relationship as an in-law?

 

Given that our Family Law considers such relationships to have the same legal standing as relationships formalised according to the Marriage Act, shouldn't our day-to-day terminology reflect that standing? 

 

Call me out-of-date, but I shudder when I hear those people referred to as "partner". To my mind, the use of "partner" was a euphemistic way of describing the other half of a same-sex relationship before they became more accepted and the Marriage Act was amended. 

[nomadpete]

10 minutes ago, old man emu said:

If one of your brothers or sisters is in a long term family relationship, which used to be called a de facto marriage, is it correct to refer to the other half of that relationship as an in-law?

 

Given that our Family Law considers such relationships to have the same legal standing as relationships formalised according to the Marriage Act, shouldn't our day-to-day terminology reflect that standing? 

 

Call me out-of-date, but I shudder when I hear those people referred to as "partner". To my mind, the use of "partner" was a euphemistic way of describing the other half of a same-sex relationship before they became more accepted and the Marriage Act was amended. 

Prior to our marriage, we referred to each other in conventional terms - husband and wife.

 

For me, the existence of a piece of paper makes no difference to my personal commitment to my partner.

 

Anyway, legally, after a brief period of living under the same roof, the law sees 'living in sin' as having the same legal obligations as formal marriage.

 

And sometimes knowing my wife is my partner elevates her above the old demeaning label of 'the wife'.

[spacesailor]

yes. ! .

It is & always was , known as a marriage. 

as it was , before the government's made it formal .

did the Greeks & Roman's . have a government wedding .

Religious weddings are different from a formal wedding. 

spacesailor