PETA has made a name for itself around the world in its quest for animal rights. One of their current activities is a lawsuit against Seaworld, claiming that they are violating the US’ 13th Amendment ban on slavery. Continue reading


Speed kills, arrive alive

The title comes from the Arrive Alive project which aims to make South African roads safer. On the one hand it’s a very simple view of things, speeding itself doesn’t kill and there are places where people drive faster than in South Africa and still have fewer accidents. The problem has less to do with driving speed and driving ability and attitudes. In favour of the slogan is that higher speeds do make it harder to control the vehicle, reduce time to react and increase the severity of a crash. Most people probably understand this already, yet they still speed. In fact people can get really upset when they can’t go as fast as they want, though the irony never wears thing when you watch someone zoom past you, weaving through traffic, only to stop behind him at the first red light. So the question then is should you allow people to go past you when you are already driving at the speed limit? Continue reading

The UFO cover-up

For some strange reason a UFO piece was published as a science story on News24. I can only imagine that it was a slow news day because there isn’t anything scientific about UFO conspiracy theorists because it lacks evidence. Meaning there is no reason to take it’s claims seriously.

Herschel insisted that it would only be a matter of time before there was irrefutable evidence for alien beings visiting Earth.

That really doesn’t say anything and could apply to anything. Sam makes the point extremely well in his comment.

I’ve written a book about how there’s a massive worldwide coverup to prevent the truth about fairies and hob goblins getting out. Like Herschel’s book it also contains loads of speculation, wild theories and no evidence. I’ve also created a chapter called “Irrefutable Evidence” where I explain that some day there will be irrefutable evidence.

Continue reading

Leave the revolution behind

This is also an older posting, since I might as well archive them here in the beginning, rather than perhaps wasting people’s time later when I have more readers. This was another letter that was published by News24 on 21 April 2011.


It is sad that 17 years into our democracy our political leaders are unable to leave the mindset of a revolution behind them.

I am speaking, of course, of Julius Malema who is facing charges of hate speech for his singing of the song “Shoot the Boer”. Not only has he refused to apologise for the offence his singing may have caused but part of the defence he has made has been that the song has historical importance as a struggle song, a claim which, whether true or not, misses the point.

Hate speech is that speech which can be reasonably construed to demonstrate an intention to be hurtful, incite harm or promote hatred. The song Shoot the Boer fits into hate speech as it singles out the Afrikaner and calls for violent action against them. As such it is not acceptable in society and does not receive the protection of free speech. Continue reading

All rights are inalienable

I have before me an open blog and the entire internet as a possible audience.There doesn’t seem to be much point to making a long introduction as that isn’t what this blog will be about. It will be my views, either in the form of short written pieces or comments and links to articles that I find interesting or worth sharing. I do want to keep it fairly broad so you can expect comments on what is happening throughout the world, religion and science with a general theme of evidence and reason. To start off with I will be sharing a letter I wrote to the Southern Suburbs Tatler which was published on May 19 2011.


I’m writing in reply to Motshabi Moemise’s piece (“You have the right to live your life with dignity”, Tatler April 28). Overall, I support the article and its defence of human rights, however there was one point in particular with which I disagreed and would like to challenge, that being the difference between unalienable and inalienable rights. Continue reading