I see an #49

Yep, TSV time again, this one #49. Check out Alden's post for good articles to read, and Paul's for all that background goss.

And me? I got reviews! Which I totally don't remember doing. And roll those 'r's, 'cos I use a lot of them!

The Rescue is up first. I liked the book a lot, and a lot more than the TV episodes. There were some decent character moments that played well on the page, but they just didn't translate that well onto the screen. But, from the the looks of the review, I liked the TV episodes pretty well, so I guess that makes the book extra good!

The Romans was paired with The Rescue on one tape, so I guess it made sense for me to do them both. Again, the book well done, but this time the TV episodes work a lot better, especially for seeing William Hartnell is high farce mode. Just thinking now of his fight in the bedroom and the scene where he plays for Nero is making me laugh! Classic stuff.

Resurrection of the Daleks is now a chore to watch. I didn't like it then, and I'm not fonder of it now. Just too much being crammed into one episode. Frankly, the criticisms of this story are true, which is a shame considering that this is Tegan's leaving episode. (But then, leaving episodes were never that well treated for most companions. Usually it was a quickly tacked on "Well, see ya, Doc!", if that!)

Anyways, be sure to check out the rest of the issue.

[END]

Read more!

SNS: The Mystery of the Missing Hour

The last story of Season Two: The Mystery of the Missing Hour by Joseph Lidster. (Note: This will be the last review I use white space on. From now on I'll hide reviews below the fold.)

SIXPENCE: I do love this.
SHUFFLE: And I love you! Come here, my dear!
<They kiss!>
SIXPENCE: Mark, what is it?
SHUFFLE: I don't know. That felt wrong.

Joseph Lidster brings us a tale of two very different halves. The first CD is very much a rip off of the most basic of Agatha Christie style stories, with an odd small group of people, random deaths, and two detectives by the name of Shuffle and Sixpence (evoking her previous pair of Tommy and Tuppence). It's a very casual murder mystery, more intent on the soap opera aspect than the actual murder, and might be preferably summarised as Carry on, Sapphire! (That Steel and Sapphire seen to be playing rather bizarre roles evokes more Adventure 5 than anything else, but I'm not sure if Joseph was hoping for that, or wanted the audience to feel uneasy. If it was the latter, I think that would have made the first CD interminable.)

The second CD is a different beast as Sapphire and Steel finally arrive, and we find out the truth behind this radio play set in Cairo, Egypt, Land of the Pharaohs. There are hints set up that refer to the previous two seasons of SNS audio plays, right to the first play, but the main links are to Water Like a Stone. However, I think it would have meant more if we hadn't found out that there was a Season Three, evoking as it does the ending of Adventure 6.

It's quite the challenge that Joseph attempts, and, certainly on a first listening, when the true nature of events unravel it's quite exciting. On the second listen, the clues placed in can be spotted, but also questions are raised about how the mechanics of the trap actually work, making more the novelty than any real sense of horror, that grabs the listener. (Not that PJ was ever forthcoming about what the hell he was doing either.)

The cast probably thought the whole thing quite surreal, especially Sarah Douglas I'd be bound, and I do wonder how the original script read without the cast having been set. Stirling performances all around, and Colin Baker remains quite the treat to listen to.

This would have been a decent episode to end the series on (and I hope Joseph fully realised just how more enjoyable the fun stories are over the suicide inducing ones). There is, however, a Season Three in the works, so we won't have to go without them just yet. (However, recalling some of my previous reviews, I do hope Big Finish to take an opportunity to sort out just what they are doing.)

[END]

Read more!

Eeewwwww.....

Now, I know this article is about a terrible disaster, and we shouldn't be making fun of it (yet... as they say, comedy is tragedy plus timing...), but this headline evokes the sort of image you really don't want to think about...

Diarrhoea patients fill wards after floods

[END]

Read more!

Intelligence Tests and World War Two

In the news has been articles about the changes to the immigration act. This reminds me of what I read in "The Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen J. Gould, the moral of which is: what criteria are you applying to make up the new guidelines?

Binet created the "Intelligence Test" to identify children that needed help learning. That's it. He knew that "intelligence" wasn't really a good term, that there is no one thing that could be called "intelligence", and certainly that it shouldn't be used to judge, but to inform to help.

But the idea of the test was taken up, and taken to America, and it was decided that intelligence tests could be applied to everyone, that it does measure "intelligence" and this is something we can measure people by.

On applying all the tests (which were really measuring how well one understood American culture of the time), they found out that recent immigrants weren't intelligent. (Read: didn't get the American culture.) Immigrants from longer ago did score highly... which clearly meant that the more intelligent ones had immigrated earlier, and now only the dregs were coming.

This all fed into the 1924 Immigration Act, which set quotas on how many people from European countries could come in. Including Jews, who were trying to flee from a certain disastrous turning in Germany.

So, when the purges and WWII hit, there were more Jews in Germany that would have been had the quotas not been set as the data was understood from the "intelligence tests". (And no, I'm not saying this is the one underlying cause for everything wrong. That would be stupid.)

While we may want to change our immigration laws, this might be good. Or... again, just what criteria is being used to decide who gets in?

[END]

Read more!

D, of course!

"Thanks" to Rebecca, I'm now aware of a "quiz for Skeptics", 43 questions that show...um... that skeptics are idiots? I guess. Anyways, my answers are:

1) D is close, but I doubt I would be so formal. But it's simple politeness!
2) Rook.
3) Crucification and Resurrection are old hat.
4) Just another expression of "trust me, not them".
5) B was likely a decent part of it.
6) B. (Although replace 'good' with 'bad'.)
7) B mainly. Just forcing them connections.
8) I'll accept D just because it starts with "according to passage X".
9) Without knowing the exact passage, I'll accept D.

10) That one should believe in "heaven" rather than trying to get anywhere on earth. (D is amusing in that it implies Jesus didn't say anything original.)
11) That it's really Olde Englishe! Er... be generous?
12) A. (A bible error? Really?) As has been pointed out, if D then what else has been changed?
13) Mainly B. And, if D, then that just shows the NT as a rip off of the OT.
14) Look at the evidence! (As opposed to 'D', prove him wrong!)
15) Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
16) Again, another "according to passage X", so whatever it says. But D made my brain collapse as it attempted to suggest the bible didn't present an erroneous cosmology.
17) While A is likely true, D is the current accepted answer.
18) Don't write the bible while drunk!
19) Could be C, could be D, but if D what else was scribely errored?
20) Flat. A.
21) Christians, trying to find something nice to believe in.
22) In at least three different, contradictory ways.
23) B mostly, in that Christianity, for Christmas, ripped off a lot of other stuff.
24) That drugs aid creation myths!
25) Hume doesn't believe savages can be educated.
26) They are niggling over small details to avoid considering that the whole is wrong.
27) "Don't lay the smack down on yo bitch!"
28) Yeah, I'll side with D.
29) People need mental help.
30) immediately challenged to debate his point, and he better have evidence!
31) The gospels were written by different people. (Again, another case for "well, depends on the words, which get changed...")
32) "Dude, chill."
33) "Let's see the evidence!"
34) The basis of this entire quiz!
35) realise you'll need a new computer.
36) The convergence of evidence.
37) Evidence! Note: anecdotes and eye-witness testimony is not reliable evidence.
38) A bit of A, a bit of C. Mainly getting new wives for their tribe and picking on the cute young-uns.
39) People haven't got it? (In regards to D, indeed, let's bring on the evidence. Oops!)
40) The question is begging it's own dismissal? (Again, Rook!)
41) Personal experience is easily flawed, so don't think much of that point.
42) I like C, but D's about right. (At least no expression of 'faith' there.)
43) Mock it. Mock it ruthlessly. And invite others to mock it as well.

[END]

Read more!

Cos gas is funny

This segment of Mythbusters was never screened on TV. When the producers wanted a "viral video", after a few suggestions this bit was proposed. Now, they couldn't just put it on YouTube, but when Adam screened it at MIT and said "Well, if it just so happens to end up on YouTube..."


[END]

Read more!

x-k-hear-d

Xkcd is one of the best webcomics around, drawn by creator Randall Munroe. Rebecca Watson, the Skepchick, is trying for her own radio show in a contest.

These two things come together as Rebecca interviews Randall for round three in the radio contest. Check it out and hear this (rather short) interview with someone who gets the math jokes and can find the romance. (And feel free to sign up and rate the show!)

[END]

Read more!