The light in Gabrielle's eye.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Image
O.K. So.... Its like this right... Niel Gaiman's T.V. adaptation of Good Omens, is Fantastic... Brilliant... I could pile superlatives on it for quite a while. I loved it. Now I hasten to add... this isn't a 'review'. At least... not in the ordinary sense of the word. 'Reaction' would be a better description. And... that said... I am a little biased... because I have loved the book since it was first published. And... as anyone who knows me, knows (brd) I am a huge fan of Terry Pratchett, one of my all time favourite people. Never mind author. In a lot of ways the experience reminded me of seeing Jackson's Fellowship of the Ring for the first time. Likewise I loved it, but when it was done... I missed Tom, and Old man Willow. And now... dear reader, if you don't wan't spoilers, would be a good time to postpone reading further.* And with Good Omens I missed, Big Ted, Pigbog, Greaser and Scuzz, AKA  Grievous Bodily Harm....
Keep reading

DEATH

Image
THIS BLOG POST MAY NOT BE AS MORBID AS THE TITLE MIGHT SUGGEST. ALTHOUGH IT MIGHT. I SUPPOSE IT COULD DEPEND ON YOUR POINT OF VIEW. I love death. Not the twisted arms and legs, torso cut into pieces, struck down by a heart attack, kind of death, but a particular character in a series of books by a now ( sadly ) deceased author. And if you haven't figured it out, his name was Terry Pratchett. But this isn't really about Sir Pterry, or even Discworld. Its about appropriation. I didn't mean to steal this character, and two others ( The death of Rats, and Quoth the raven he rides on ) for my own nefarious ends. It happened some years ago, sort of by accident. Few people can fail to have encountered those posters who, WRITE IN ALL CAPS, NO MATTER WHAT THE TOPIC. Usually making statements and claims one thinks are, lets say 'odd'. ( Or.. flying mammal poo bonkers ) And I am no exception. And every time I have, the first thought in my head was of Sir Pterr...
Keep reading

If we Suppose....

If we suppose, that there is a 'sum total' of all existence. Which supposes that the cosmos is finite. Which of course it might not be.....Many physcisists do disagree. (Seriously they do, always falling out that lot) Then: what does this mean? The cosmos has a begining and end? Yet the theist will say, "No! it cannot be.....   something  must be eternal!" Why? I will agree, the cosmos does seem to be eternal. If we are to think correct, Penrose, Kaku, Carrol  and the others. And I can see no good reason to doubt them But there is no logical reason we should imagine, an 'infinite regression of cause' should be named 'god', for arbritary reasons. We have no reason to think an infinite regression of cause, should represent consciousness. Life, intelligent life, Humans, minds, consciousness are trivial things, with no logical reason for a 'designer. No evidence consciousness is not just an emergent property of matter. An inevitab...
Keep reading