Creating a new and challenging version of Tetris seems to be all the rage. First Person Tetris will make you dizzy and nostalgic at the same time.
Instead of pieces rotating when you spin them the screen rotates.
Author: Nathan Campbell
Nathan runs St Eutychus. He loves Jesus. His wife. His daughter. His son. His other daughter. His dog. Coffee. And the Internet. He is the pastor of City South Presbyterian Church, a church in Brisbane, a graduate of Queensland Theological College (M. Div) and the Queensland University of Technology (B. Journ). He spent a significant portion of his pre-ministry-as-a-full-time-job life working in Public Relations, and now loves promoting Jesus in Brisbane and online. He can't believe how great it is that people pay him to talk and think about Jesus. If you'd like to support his writing financially you can do that by giving to his church.
Wears ya bean(ie)
If you wear this beanie don’t go near any Italian plumbers. They’ll want to climb nearby piping and jump on your head. Be warned.
Corrugated tie
If you’ve ever been in a situation where you’ve wanted to join a bit of a bluegrass jam but haven’t had the requisite instrument – buy this washboard (complete with thimbles) tie and wear it everywhere.
Just a spoon full of pain
This movie contains some language and the contents may be disturbing. But I watched the whole thing. And it made me laugh.
Weapons of mosquito destruction
Mosquitoes are dangerous. They carry all sorts of nasty tropical diseases. You should kill them. You should overkill them.
Here’s a nifty little mosquito killing contraption made from common household items.
From here.
A wee bit of physics
I spent a couple of days trying to decide whether to post this picture. My mum said it was ok.
Via Reddit.
We’re thru
While being technically acceptable the use of the word “thru” really annoys me. And this sign vandal.
Virtual billboards
Streetview is cool right? For the luddites (who are unlikely to be reading a blog) it’s Google map’s feature where you can actually experience moving along certain streets because they sent a car that looks like this out into the wild to take photographs.
These photographs have been built into maps. Making it much easier to stalk people or check out the neighbourhood you are thinking about living in.
Google is great at turning things like this into money. So Make is reporting that Google has patented technology that will allow them to turn billboards in their street view photographs into spaces for adwords. If these adwords are location based this will be a fantastic tool for geographically specific advertising.
Hell’s bells
My friend Mike is a minister in Rockhampton. He made the local news today for being generally awesome. You can read the story here.
Hell, the pizza chain, created a stir in Brisbane this week which led to a story in the Rockhampton paper, which Mike commented on online, this comment led to an interview, and a great story. Featuring this little gospel presentation that simultaneously showed that Christians are a bit normal.
This is a great example of how churches should be using the media. I thought I had written a post on that before, but I can’t find it. So I’ll write it today.
Ordained eight years ago, Reverend O’Connor said he did not find Hell Pizza offensive, irreligious or blasphemous.
“I find it amusing and would probably use it for sermon illustration,” he said.
“Christianity is not about rules and regulations, it’s about having a relationship with Jesus.”
Reverend O’Connor said St Andrews was a growing church with a number of young adults among the congregation.
“It’s important to interact with cultures that surround us, not standing back and labelling everything as evil.
“I’m just a normal bloke who likes having a beer, watching the footy and who loves Jesus,” he said.
“Hell is a real place, but it’s unhelpful for Christians to be jumping up and down about a pizza shop. We’re on about Jesus, not about being anti-everything,” he said.
In praise of hot wives
Dear person who writes their online profiles mindful that your wife reads it,
We get it. You love your wife. You think she’s hot. That’s why you got married.
The rest of us may be inclined to disagree. We may believe that our own wife is hotter.
The fact that you need to reassure yourself that your wife is hot is great. But it comes across as, umm, a bit overstated.
Regards,
Nathan.
You might be wondering why I’m posting this. Well, I was trawling the archives of the Stuff Christian Culture Likes and came across this post. It’s one of my favourites.
Here’s Stephy’s take:
Fortunately, Christian hotness standards are not quite the same as conventional (secular) hotness standards. Value is supposed to be placed on the person rather than on appearance. Even so, hotness is still a valuable commodity even in Christian culture. The public declaration of a spouse’s hotness is a lovely gesture, but can become disquieting when expressed so frequently and fervently. It can begin to sound as if they are trying to convince themselves of something. Could thou protest too much?
My absolute favourite part though, and the part that makes this utterly postworthy, is if you do a bit of a phrase search on Twitter (I can’t guarantee that the results you get will be the same and/or safe for work/your holiness) you get a bunch of people talking about their hot wives. And a startling percentage are Christians. From my quick profile check of the people at this link I would say that close to 80% of the people using the phrase on Twitter either define themselves as Christians in their little description or tweet regularly about the Bible.
How odd.
For the record, I think my wife is hot – but seriously – I don’t need to tell you that.
A silver wining
Climate change had to have a benefit somewhere… and I’ve found it.
“The consequences of warming are already detectable in wine quality, as shown by Duchêne and Schneider (2005), with a gradual increase in the potential alcohol levels at harvest for Riesling in Alsace of nearly 2% volume in the last 30 years. On a worldwide scale, for 25 of the 30 analysed regions, increasing trends of vintage ratings (average rise of 13.3 points on a 100-point scale for every 1°C warmer during the growing season), with lower vintage-to-vintage variation, has been established (Jones, 2005).”
Here’s the study (pdf).
Via BoingBoing
Man pens mathematical theory of singleness, gets girlfriend
You can get a PhD writing about just about anything these days. But applying an obscure mathematical theory about the probability of the existence of alien life to the question of your own singleness would appear to be about the limit. Surely.
But that’s what Peter Backus did. He took the Drake Equation – a mathematical analysis of the chance that alien life exists – to decide that there were only about 26 girls who would make appropriate partners for him in all of the United Kingdom.
The Drake Equation (penned in 1961 by Dr. Frank Drake) says N = R* x Fp x Ne x Fi x Fc x L. I’m not sure what that means, but it found that there could be 10,000 civilizations in our galaxy.
The Backus iteration of the Drake equation had the following findings:
His equation looked at the total number of women in the country, then narrowed it down using relevant factors including the number of women in London; the number of “age-appropriate” women (those aged between 24-34); women with a college degree; and those who Backus would find physically attractive.
In the paper Backus summarized that on a given night out in London there is a 0.0000034 percent chance of meeting a woman that meets his criteria and who is also interested in him. That makes his odds of finding a girlfriend only about 100 times better than finding an alien.
You can read his thesis here (pdf).
In a random turn of events he now has a girlfriend who meets all his criteria.
Warranted Belief
Mikey keeps posting quotes from this philosopher guy Al Plantinga (wiki). It turns out the book he’s quoting from – Warranted Christian Belief – is available in its entirety online. And free.
Might be worth a read if, like me, you keep getting in over your head in philosophical arguments with atheists. It’ll save you reaching out for the succor offered by a quick Google. And it’ll give you an intelligent “scholar” to quote…
Here’s a (long) quote on historical criticism – particularly on why it’s hard to argue with people who presuppose that the miraculous accounts in the Bible are mythical because they are miraculous, and why this shouldn’t be convincing:
The Troeltschian scripture scholar accepts Troeltsch’s principles for historical research, under an interpretation according to which they rule out the occurrence of miracles and the divine inspiration of the Bible (along with the corollary that the latter enjoys the sort of unity accruing to a book that has one principal author). But then it is not at all surprising that the Troeltschian tends to come up with conclusions wildly at variance with those accepted by the traditional Christian. As Gilkey says, “Suddenly a vast panoply of divine deeds and events recorded in scripture are no longer regarded as having actually happened.” Now if (instead of tendentious claims about our inability to do otherwise) the Troeltschian offered some good reasons to think that, in fact, these Troeltschian principles are true, then traditional Christians would have to pay attention; then they might be obliged to take the skeptical claims of historical critics seriously. Troeltschians, however, apparently don’t offer any such good reasons. They simply declare that nowadays we can’t think in any other way, or (following Harvey) that it is immoral to believe in, for example, Christ’s resurrection on other than historical grounds.
Neither of these is remotely persuasive as a reason for modifying traditional Christian belief in the light of Troeltschian results. As for the first, of course, the traditional Christian knows that it is quite false: she herself and many of her friends nowadays (and hundreds of millions of others) do think in precisely that proscribed way. And as far as the implicit claims for the superiority of these Troeltschian ways of thinking go, she won’t be impressed by them unless some decent arguments of one sort or another are forthcoming, or some other good reason for adopting that opinion is presented. The mere claim that this is what many contemporary experts think will not and should not intimidate her.