Tuesday, December 04, 2007


When I was a kid I dreamed of aliens landing on our planet and making contact. I also believed that it would change humanity. Then I realised that bills, mortgage, career and women sprang to mind. Now I've got used to those things being more or less a neccesity in life I ponder yet again about life on another planet. So do scientists. Amusingly I watched a documentary justifying the need to send people to Mars. Mars. Once the confident source of the home world of an alien race hell bent on the destruction of earth...that is until a little bit of tin landed on the surface of the red planet and concluded that it was nothing more than a very cold and barren planet with little atmosphere.

The evidence is clear. There is no life on Mars. But scientists want to prove that life did exist once upon a time. Why bother? If there was any then it has long since gone. Whilst we consume huge amounts of natural resource not to mention the economical dent on tax payers money on pursuing something that will reveal or not reveal themselves to us, shouldn't we be taking care of our home? Have we forgotten that our planet needs looking after like a child does?

Just reading today about the amount of sun lotion spent on in a month should be better used to help reduce our carbon output and to help developing countries do the same too. Why do we persist in chasing something that is nothing more than a remote possibility. Even if we were to find life on another planet. What would it do for us? Would it cure pandemics? Solve world poverty? No. Of course not. We are destined by our very nature to suffer these things due to over population, artificialising medication and manufacture with products not naturally synthesised to help humankind. Just as with any dominant and enlarged entity, humanity will implode and simply disappear for another emerging species to do just the same. Again and again and again. I'm sure this cycle of self destruction will never end. Its just a pattern of life on this planet. Should we fear the end of humankind? I don't think so as I believe we are just a part of a repetitive cycle of a produce of this planet.

Another interesting point make in this documentary was the assumption that carbon and water and amino acids are building blocks for like. Says who? As we may not detect other comibination of chemicals to be catalysts for life, where there are possibly chemicals in existence not on this planet that may interact with traditionally benign earthly chemicals that could create a different kind of life and perhaps on different path of time not familiar to our own.

We really do make too many assumptions to think that we believe what the basic building blocks of life really could be somewhere else.

A rock to us could be a form of life on another planet. But not as we would know it.

TwoDarts, having a tiring day, signing off.

Monday, December 03, 2007

How's your Father?

Has this country gone mad??? Sperm donor pays for child.

A spokesman for Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) said: "The law says that men donating sperm through licensed fertility clinics are not the legal father of any child born through that donation.

....yet the consequence of a civil marriage breaking down is that the male donor has to pay for the children. Am I missing something here? Isn't that the best excuse ever to get divorced and still have your kids looked after ? By someone who legally isn't entitled to anything other than the payment of the child. How emotionally barren is that ?

My reaction is purely emotional and devoid of the legal authority that exists. Sometimes I wonder where the respect for basic human rights have gone? If the father is emotionally detached from his paternal instincts to donate a "child", why should he be penalised for a marriage breakdown not of his own making ?

Or maybe the very idea of donorship is wrong if this is what the law of the land demands in such a case. Would the consequences be the same for an adopted child? Who would be responsible for the child's well being financially if a same sex partnership fail? or indeed a hetrosexual partnership?

The mechanism for sperm donor's should promote an emotional detachment from a very natural process of giving life for the donor and in this respect the detachment should also apply financially and morally.

My question then is, what has this case done to the numerous donors; out of the sheer selfless act of donating their sperm or egg affected a childless couple some hope of having a family of their own?

Everyone who wishes to have a child of their own but cannot may wish to pursue this avenue, but because the law wishes to make the accountable not accountable and vice versa at times, where is the acceptable middle ground?

The problem is with what marriage means to people these days. Lets not make children an excuse or a reason for our own failures.

Marriage in any sense is a commitment for life just like a child. Why do we persist these days to make it a convience when we find it convinient? and a legal "get out clause" when things get a little rough?

Bring up a child when your ready to bring up a child and not because its a fashionable statement.

Note: By no means do I suggest that this is biased to a gender partner preference. Grow up and remember what it was like to be a child first before you realise how much love you can give them.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007


As some of you know, my opinion of religion can rub certain people up the wrong way. Once upon a time I knew of a lady who had a particulary close association with the guy/gal in the sky who told me that one day I would return to believe in God. It was a casual comment. Yet somehow this stuck in my mind. Every so often I think of what she mean't by that. I was brought up to believe in God and for reasons mention in previous entries I don't. I do however think about what she said. God has a mention in Wikipedia. One line in it says "the source of all moral obligation". Would it be inappropriate to say that individuals are sources of moral obligation? Surely the leaders of our land are obliged to fulfill a moral obligation if there was an alternative arguement. Whatever the arguement, I have discovered a book by Richard Dawkins which seems to provide a solid debate on the issue. I have yet to read it. Scientists continually through their own practice try to dispprove of the notion of a higher being. Could it also be by their own actions that they are by the sum of all their discoveries prove that God does indeed exist but not in the way God is traditionally protrayed? Just for a moment, put on a different hat and perhaps realise that the language that we speak may not always be so accurate to describe a higher being. What if either through ancient text or mathematics we are all describing the same thing? I think that inside our hearts and soul that there is a force that breathes life into every component of everything.....absolutely everything.

Test of Time

Its been a while since I've written something on this blog. A lot of time seems to have passed and yet hardly any time at all. Some of my fellow bloggers have long since left the blogging scene in favour of Facebook.

I too sucumbed to the temptation of Facebook. As it has matured and gone are the people's idea that to be popular is to have a zillion "friends" listed on facebook, its has become quite an important tool for communicating with long lost friends and family or for friends and family that live too far away to be practical for a visit.

Update so far in the world of 2Darts:

Lewis Hamilton didn't win this years grand prix. If he did then the world would truly be a perfect place to live in but alas this isn't so.

Gone is the single life for 2Darts. And I might add I announce this with much celebration. Gone are the hedonistic days, the days of kebabs are but a distant memory. As is the many nights of boozing and shameful behaviour. Yes, I've joined a convent. No. Actually it is the love of a good woman that should me the righteous path.

Has blogging had its day with me? I don't think so.

I've spent the last couple of months catching up with the real world and the real world is full of friends getting married and having babies. Its a joy to hear one friend of mine has recently given birth to a son. And I feel chuffed to bits as she and I grew up in the days of reckless behaviour and to find a real life outside the now senseless partying that once consumed and apparently fulfilled our lives. Everybody moves on. For some it takes a life time and for others it is now. It must be an inbuilt mechanism that tells us when we are ready to do the right thing. Are we pre programmed to follow this path? It seems so when you believe that is the way forward. I used to think that you could predict the future. Cover every eventuality; but even then, something out of the ordinary happens, something you think may never happen and it suddenly does. I guess sometimes we wish to think that our lives are set before us and then........and then.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

A Dark Day for Formula 1 Grand Prix

Am I a McLaren fan? Yes. Do I think Ron Dennis is an honest man? Yes. Do I think the penalty given to the team is unfair? Yes. Do I think the World Motorsport Council has got it wrong? Maybe.

I was shocked to hear amount of the fine imposed on McLaren. Then I found out that the team would lose all its constructors points. Even worse. $100 millon. Will we ever hear about how the WMC came to its conclusion? Probably not. I for one would think that the public need to know about the why's and what, and how's to better understand the judgement. The team by virtue of the huge penalty imposed on them will certainly take away sponsorship for the team. How on earth can they send the most competitive team to the gallows? It is a complex turn of events leading to the risk of undermining the pinacle of motorsport that is F1. What does the FIA now need to do in order to ensure the integrity of the sport. A single engine manufacturer sport? Not likely. F1 allows car manufacturers to advance motor technology and feed their technology to the everyday man. Think BMW with the development of F1 technology into road cars. V10 engines in their M Sport division. Suspension geometry to the masses. Braking technology saving peoples lives. And lets not forget tire technology. Although it is a sport, it is an advancement in motoring technology that benefits all. The last time we had a huge technological leap in transport was through several furious wars. Do we really need to do that? No. Sport provides much the same for improvement and innovation in technology.

Hopefully history will see this as a blip in F1 and not a turning point in the degeneration our approach to what we gain from a very interesting, strategic driven sport.

F1 does not appeal to everyone. And nor is it supposed to. Football, Rugby, Tennis, Basketball to me is akin to Street Fighter, Doom, R-Type (for those old enough to know) and Pac man. A quick fix of competitive sports. F1 is more like Age of Empire and other suitable strategy based games. There is plenty of chess play involved in F1. The subtle psychological battle field played both on and off the arena. Where for the ill informed or uninitiated, its a bunch of fast cars going round and round a circuit. Some may say that the sport has been diluted and that the spectacle of a car bursting into flames was part of the excitement is lost. This isn't a sport of brutality. It is a game of the utmost in professionalism. Of course there are the diva mentalities of the drivers which is part and parcel of the sport.

This years competition and competitiveness of two great drivers in McLaren should not be overshadowed by the spy scandal that looms over what has been so intriguing so far. What F1 has been missing is not the overtaking and sheer speed of old but the rivalry of totally brilliant and engaging driver personalities. Does this sound like a formula for a sporting soap opera? Of course it is. It is very much like a drama unfolding over a year and not like the total orchestrated dominance of one driver and one team that was Ferrari. The FIA listened to the paying public in our outrage of unsporting behaviour withing Ferrari and changed the rules accordingly to provide a fairer racing spectacle. Irvine and Barichello suffered at the hands of a team in love with a driver who although was somewhat of a miracle and a natural successor to Senna, discredited the sport. This recent event is clearly not on the same level. Espionage has been part of the make up of F1. How else would it have worked in the first place?

Another thing to consider is how this has come to be. Well into this years season and some wrong doing was discovered by who else but Ferrari. Miffed at not employing the world champion, although supposedly doing well to poach Raikkonen from McLaren, Ferrari knew from the start of the season that the opportunity to stamp their dominance on the sport was to be an aborted re-birth. Seeing the new talent Hamilton, a loyal servant to McLaren steal away points right from the start, initiated an intensity of suspicion that would accumulate in this terrible mark on the sport. Can I be bold enough to even suggest that Ferrari made a sacrificial lamb of Nigel Stepney. With his knowledge of intent to deliberately entrap McLaren to be a suspect of spying on Ferraris technology and strategy. Would Ferrari be willing to win the title by delibrately framing McLaren to win this years title? As distasteful as it may sound and also as biased as it may sound from me (after all we are all faced with taking sides now), could it be possible that Ferrari would stoop so low to win a title after the embarrassment of Renault winning twice.

On track form would suggest that McLaren had a rubbish time of it for the last two years. They could have done with a helping hand to be so successful this year. But just look at McLaren's conservate strategy for the times they did dominate the sport. Yes, through fairness towards its drivers and compliancy through the regulations and rules put to the sport. Ferrari regularly would push the boundaries of acceptable behaviour ultimately undermining the rules of the game. Some might say that they identified the weaknesses of the rules. Others might say that they took advantage of the bias of the members of the council. Let us be clear that Ferrari have always been close to being the death of F1. It is through their own arrogance that we are in the position that we are. Ever closer to F1 losing its identity and authority in the world of motorsport.

Most of all I feel sorry for Ron Dennis. A man greatly regarded as the most professional team bosses in Formula 1. His reputation more than tarnished. A man who has built career, reputation and "family" on the one thing special to him. You only have to look at how he has shaped the career and future of a young man from child to adulthood. Why? Because he believes. There are those like me who only believe in one thing about Ron Dennis, that he is the most sincerest operator in Formula 1. I hope this judgement will not see out an amazing man's career. The sport needs Ron Dennis. The sport needs McLaren.

Monday, September 10, 2007

The Spanish Inquisition

Speaking to a friend of mine this afternoon he mentioned his trip to the Belgium grand prix. His first trip to see one. A virgin. Good for him I say. I hope to do so one day too. We moved on to the subject of our favorite racing driver Diva, Fernando Alonso. It is absolutely scandalous in my opinion to think that McLaren, a team of great integrity has been already tarred and feathered with allegations of cheating. A couple of weeks ago they were aquitted for involvement in espionage. Ferrari naturally not happy with the outcome were keen to pursue this case. I for one believe that although justice should be served if there was evidence of wrong doing am satisfied by reputation alone of McLaren that no cheating was involved.

So now we turn to recent eveents that once again threaten McLaren's reputation as an honest F1 team. And what better starting point than a communication between the World Champion and the reserve driver. Alonso has never hidden from the fact that he believes the team favours the british driver (Hamilton), because the team is essentially British and that Hamilton has been bred since he was a little acorn (awww) to be "The One". His miserable attempt to sabotage Hamilton's Turkish grand prix was nothing but childish. His arrogance to suggest that any team on the grid would be willing to give him number one status in their team is nothing short of laughable. Sure Spyker would do it......for the money, but for reputation? Not a team like McLaren. Does Lewis Hamilton's performance have something to do with the car? Yes. Favoritism? No. They have a world champion driving for them after all. What would be the better bet at the begining of the season? Alonso of course. But Hamilton is something of a miracle.Ok. Not a miracle, but something unexpected. Jenson Button had and has comparable talent too. McLaren are all about exploiting the natural ability of its drivers. Each driver has his own dedicated engineering team and both have an overall strategist to squeeze the maximum performance from the team as a whole.

Lets not forget Hamilton's proven ability to succeed. McLaren want the constructors title. To do that they need both drivers to excel in every race. Why on earth would they favour one driver to the detriment of the other? They'd want a 1-2 in any combination.

So to the latest. Alonso has been implicated in the scandal. Was there a secretive pact to obtain and use information from Ferrari to gain the upper hand. Maybe. One man's selfish desire to win? With Alonso's recent admission to preferring to land the drivers championship over the constructors title surely alludes to a lack of team spirit and being disassociated with the amibitions of the team. A very disappointing attitude indeed. Would Alonso be content in the dismise to a great team's reputation? Questionable. His ability to publically exercise his lack of loyality to the team that have paid him to work for them is not good. McLaren would be better off trying to poach Button.

Saturday, September 01, 2007

One of Those Days

Waking up to a hangover is never fun. Hangovers are either bad headaches and sore limbs or that fuzzy, still a little pissed feeling. I recall the moment I began stumbling down that boozy road. Bad day at the office and in need of a drink. Seemed like a mate of mine needed one too. So off down the local boozer for beer and a whinge. Fast forward to this morning. Check the phone for evidence of boozy texting or calling. None. Phew! Bruises? Nope. Bank balance? Not sure. Getting too old for that kind of lark? Definitely!

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Having something in Common

Whilst watching wife swap and its interesting ability to pitch people together with totally different social extremities noticed the bit with the inevitable boozy party. Posh family against working class "mum" and vice-versa. Once everyone has had a couple of shandies, everyone seems to make a complete twat of them selves on the same level. This also extends to weddings, funerals, birthday's etc. Does booze bring people together onto same level? Seems like it.

Thursday, August 09, 2007

Harry Enfield.

What's happened to that genius of a comic. I found this YouTube clip for your amusement.

Saturday, August 04, 2007

Scientology....makes yer skin crawl

I've spoken about Scientology previously. This cult, erm religion has caused a lot of controversy.

Whilst basking in the warm of the first proper summers day in good old blighty I mentioned noted that a friend of mine had jokingly inputted Scientology as his religion of choice. More orignal than putting down Satanism. I mean that is sooooo old religion/cult. So we discussed the strangeness of the whole idea behind Scientology let alone the theory about how humans were created from bits of alien flesh fused together by an exploding volcano.

So this morning's hangover cure was a dose of the Panorama programme about Scientology. A friend had recommended that I watch it. After close to thirty minutes of watching the creepy man in black harrassing the poor BBC reporter, I too felt like I was being watched.

Scientology adopt a fair game policy which means tha anyone who actively speaks out against the cult, erm religion will be subjected to intrusive harrassment and targeted for defamation of character or worse public humiliation. Good enough reason not to piss them off I suppose. As I watched more of this it occurred to me that if they are left alone then they pretty much keep themselves to themselves. Am I being a little sympathetic? No, not at all. Give them an inch and they will quite possibly take a mile.

As you know I am not an advocate of religion as I find the whole idea of it segregates people rather than integrates them. Whether Scientology is a religion or a cult, it still amounts to the same thing. Like any young religion, it feels threatened and encourages paranoia within. They film ever encounter with non believers who supposedly give them a hard time. Laughable really. But then you think about the Crusades. What was that all about but to protect the Christian faith. Hindu's and Muslims have fought each other for centuries. Religions mature eventually into peaceful ways of life. There will always be a few nutters who claim to be the protectors of the faith through violence and intimidation. But those are few. Scientology in its infancy just has a lot of them at the moment. Of course I don't blame them for being paranoid. But I do think that they just do not do themselves any favours whatsoever in their agression and verbally threatening manner. What is more useful for them, to coin a phrase from some other loony religion is "to turn the other cheek". It works for a few million of them.

After watching the programme and a couple of other more amateurish anti-Scientology clips, the phone rang. Expecting it to be my parents I was greated by a bloke with a dodgy northern accent. He was calling from Consumer Awareness or something like that. The cynic in me said sales person. It was at the point when he asked for the value of the property that I got a little paranoid. Have those creepy men and women from Scientology tracked me down already? When can I expect posters of me and details of my misdemeanours be put up in shop windows?

Scientology doesn't like being referred to as a cult; its more like a religion. But I'm afraid that it has already reached cult status. Much like Mulder and Scully.
Have you noticed the Scientology symbol? Why on earth is it similar to the Christian symbol of Jesus's crucifiction cross? Not very original is it. Especially for a cult, erm religion that claims to originate from outer space. Where are the UFO's and laser beams?

One last thing. When will they start doing door to door rounds? I don't see my regular Jehovah's gang these days? Where have they gone? What have they done with them? Creepy.....

Monday, July 30, 2007

Frank Butcher Dies

Mike Reid who played Frank Butcher died. Hats off to a fine actor and most remembered for me in Runaround.