Polo

My friend Noel of Port Hueneme, CA wrote to me of the passing away of his great dog, Polo.

He had Polo for many years and Noel being single, had Polo looking after his apartment. The missus and I met this dog when we visited Noel in 2005. For an Australian Shepherd dog, he was quite big for his size. One thing I appreciate in Australia is that Australian dogs are smart. Polo was smart and well trained. I remember Polo holding his water until he was allowed to get out of the apartment. Luckily for Noel, he got a Labrador called Petra a year before Polo passed away.

I have not bothered having a dog since I lost my last one - P.D. in 1998. He was a kelpie-cross, a mongrel for sure, but he was smart and he would learn new tricks and commands simply by association or instinct. The kids and I remember a lot of times we had with P.D., the many times he made us laugh.

Anyway, this is to honor Polo, a faithful friend and a blessing to Noel. Polo was simply a great human being.

It is official, the journey is over, for now.

It is now official. I am now a certified quack doctor, too LOL. I wrote about this project here.

They graduated me last night.

I read somewhere that anyone who specializes in pure maths must be a little loco or winds up that way. I knew there was something wrong with me when I accepter my Uni's scholarship 7 years ago.
The trip has not been easy. There were several moments when I felt very close to aborting the project. Also, I do not know why, but looks like whatever I write attracts controversy. What can I says, such is (my) life, to quote Ned Kelley.

Last year my Prof and I wrote a paper based on my research. We submitted it to 3 international conferences. All the blind reviewers rejected the paper. They did not understand it. Then we submitted it to another international conference which turned out (we did not know at that time) to have a much lower pass rate. The reviewers were a lot more stringent. Not only did they pass our paper, they even gave it the Best Paper Award.

The same happened when examiners examined my thesis. One wanted it resubmitted, the other one loved it and wanted it passed with his suggestions. This needed a third opinion, an adjudicator had to be consulted to resolve the dead lock. They got a heavy duty professor from Cornell University to re-examine the thesis. I had to write a defense. He came back passing the thesis without any modifications required. He also somewhat chided the negative examiner for his opposition and also the positive one, for his suggestions. The professor believe the thesis should have been judged on its own merits and not what people might do had they been writing the (my) thesis.

Well that is what happens in academia. Some might find your work an absolute junk or the greatest thing since slice bread.

I thank the Lord it is over and for his answering the prayers of those who prayed with and for me. Thank you to those of you who prayed.

My soul blesses the Lord.

I end with the motto of my uni : ancora imparo, I am still learning.

Does it have to be bad, because I am no good?

Theologians consume words. They are the building blocks of theology. I am no theologian, I do however listen to them and I read what they write. I consider pastors to be professional theologians.

Often I hear some pastors describe the Gospel as "trumping" the Law. Now, I think I know what they are saying, they are implying that mercy triumphs over judgment. Put it this way, let us say they are possibly implying that.

However, trumping sometimes carries the notion of trashing or overriding and a layman might get the impression that the Law is a bad thing, something that must be despised, rejected. When that happens, one has become an antinomian.

Hmmm. Is something bad because it makes me feel no good? How can an evil thing condemn another evil thing?

Reading St. Paul's letters, I could not say that he ever ones hinted that the Law is bad thing. His words do not go there. Read Rom 7:7, 12.

It does not serve well if one gives the impression that since the Gospel has come, the Law must be condemned. Rather St. Paul speaks of sin that is to be condemned, not the Law. St. Paul repeatedly said that the Law is good.

For sure, I am condemned by the Law, but though it condemns me, it is a very very good thing for it makes me run to the Gospel such that Christ might shelter me, cover me with his righteousness and shield me.

So does it have to be bad, because I am no good? Nope.

Godel - yours truly, your hero

The missus keeps reminding me that people with a sense of humor are smart people.

Thanks to Pr. Greg for this.

Some tips on Scholarship I

I may not be an ordained minister today, but I was before. Also, I had university training, a so called graduate degree in Religious Studies where I studied the original Biblical languages - both classical and Koine NT Greek, Biblical Hebrew and Early Judaism. For my Ancient Greek training, I am proud to say I studied under this professor here.

Below are a few things I learned from my studying, not in seminary, but in a university:

1. You must never plagiarize, instead give credits for your quotes.
2. You must go to the source documents, eliminate hearsay.
3. You must listen/read your critics or those that have views contrary to yours.
4. You must practice critical thinking.
5. You must spot logical fallacies in yourself so as to correct them, and spot fallacies in others so as not to be lured by them.

This is just a nutshell list. If you have some suggestions to add let me know.

It is my hope that the readers find the above points something they can use in evaluating the merits of the arguments found in the posts and comments in this blog.

Using Chemnitz to help doubting Christians

HT: Ichabod here.

"We must note the foundations. For we are justified by faith, not because it is so firm, robust, and perfect a virtue, but because of the object on which it lays hold, namely Christ, who is the Mediator in the promise of grace. Therefore when faith does not err in its object, but lays hold on that true object, although with a weak faith, or at least tries and wants to lay hold on Christ, then there is true faith, and it justifies. The reason for this is demonstrated in those lovely statements in Philippians 3:12: 'I apprehend, or rather I am apprehended by Christ' and Galatians 4:9: 'You have known God, or rather have been known by God.' Scripture shows a beautiful example of this in Mark 9:24: 'I believe; help my unbelief.'" Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici, 2 vols., trans. J. A. O. Preus, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1989, II, p. 503. Philippians 3:12; Galatians 4:9; Mark 9:24

"Therefore God, 'who is rich in mercy' [Ephesians 2:4], has had mercy upon us and has set forth a propitiation through faith in the blood of Christ, and those who flee as suppliants to this throne of grace He absolves from the comprehensive sentence of condemnation, and by the imputation of the righteousness of His Son, which they grasp in faith, He pronounces them righteous, receives them into grace, and adjudges them to be heirs of eternal life. This is certainly the judicial meaning of the word 'justification,' in almost the same way that a guilty man who has been sentenced before the bar of justice is acquitted." Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici, 2 vols., trans. J. A. O. Preus, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1989, II, p. 482. Ephesians 2:4

"For we are not justified because of our faith (propter fidem), in the sense of faith being a virtue or good work on our part. Thuse we pray, as did the man in Mark 9:24: 'I believe, Lord; help my unbelief'; and with the apostles: 'Lord, increase our faith,' Luke 17:5." Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici, 2 vols., trans. J. A. O. Preus, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1989, II, p. 506 Mark 9:24; Luke 17:5

We need to say something.

Notice what Chemnitz is doing here. He sets forth why faith justifies. What is it about Christ that we are to trust about, that God imputes the righteousness of Christ to the one who is holding on to Christ as propitiator through his death at the Cross. Notice too what Chemnitz did not do that Walther and Pieper did. Chemnitz did not say - you are saved to believe (contra Walther). Nor did he say (contra Pieper) - "I would eliminate faith as a requirement that makes justification true. That would be making faith a work of mine".

None of these.

Not just a war on words

Brett Meyer:

Luther's Works 33, 25.

"If I were to strangle someone's father and mother, wife and child, and try to choke him too, and then say 'Keep the peace, dear friend, we wish to love one another, the matter is not so important that we should be divided over it,' what would he say to me? This is what the fanatics do to Christ, the Lord, and God, the Father, and to mother church and the brethren with their rejection of God's Word while at the same time claiming it for themselves."

http://www.confessionallutherans.org/papers/drpreus.htm

Why faith gets a bum rap?

I noticed that Dr. Ichabod blog about how faith becomes a four letter word here.

Yes, I wondered about this phenomenon of making faith a foul word.

I came from a Charismatic background and I know how the concept of faith has been abused in that circle. For example, faith is seen as a force. Prosperity teachers spoke of faith that way. It is like an infused stuff. Since they have been influenced heavily by Arminian Evangelicalism, Charismatics in general believe that everyone has faith, even the pagans and it is just a matter of exercising it or not. It can be turned on or off. Though my Charismatic friends may affirm it is a gift, it is not really in practice.

Take now a look at Pieper said about faith:

"I would eliminate faith as a requirement that makes justification true. That would be making faith a work of mine." Franz August Otto Pieper, A Final Word, http://www.franzpieper.com/

This is the type of overstating the case that gives faith a bad rap.

Really Dr. Pieper? What about Mk 16:16? Peiper makes a non-sequitur fallacy, aside from what Dr. Maier pointed out in his paper - a tertium non datur fallacy too.

Indeed faith is a requirement, a condition! However, it is a condition that God meets for you the sinner by creating it in you through the Word and/or Sacraments. He does not give this gift without using means. It does not drop from the sky and zaps you neither is it something inside you such that you must pedal in your own steam to generate it. Like the Gospel - faith is EXTRA NOS. From the outside it comes to you. That is the payload of the Gospel (sorry for my little unsanctified way of saying it).

So a few observations I make from say Eph 2:8-9 and Heb 12:2

1. It is a gift from God not internal to us.
2. It is not a work, you cannot work it such that you can produce it.
3. The author of your faith in the Gospel is Jesus
4. It cannot boast and if it can, then it is not the faith spoken of by the Bible.

I think what was happening during Walther's time and Pieper's time was that they have been surrounded by revivalism which uses faith like a tool and they wanted to correct this abuse. However, this wrong should have been corrected through the the Scripture of which the BoC expounds well specially on faith. It cannot be corrected by going off the other way.

Oops I criticized Dr. Pieper, a UOJ proponent. That is a no no.

One thing I notice with Pentecostal preachers and pastors. The moment you question the pastor, immediately the pastor gets offended and also his members too get offended with him and so watch out. They will no longer be your friend. You will be shunned like the plague. What can I say? Words like "immature and insecure" come to my mind.

I notice this type of behaviour is present amongst UOJ pastors too. They are quick to say that the anti-UOJers are wrong, they are quick to fly off with remarks of heresy and false doctrine etc. It is a type of bullying if you ask me. So what happens? Instead of people getting closer to the truth, having dialogue, the situation becomes a political play on people's affections.

My case in point is Dr. Maier's paper. That paper was written in a scholarly manner and I have found it to be well argued and well researched. His exegesis was not even peculiar. Yet did anyone take his thesis and work with it? Nope.

Is the Christian served well in this way? I doubt it.

Some Tips to the Calvinist Becoming Lutheran

If you were like me, I was a Charismaniac Calvinistic Evangelical - who had no confession. Deep down inside I knew the problem was this - what should I confess? Because frankly, my confession at that time came from the kitchen. It did not come from the study room.

If you are one of those who walked the same path as I did, here are some tips for the trip, based on my experience.

Don't start off reading some Lutheran theologian like Walther and Pieper. Not that they do not have useful things to say, and not that one can not learn from them, but the issue for you is not what this or that theologian said. Because at the end of the day, you will not be signing your name on the books they have written. At the end of the day, you will have to sign your name to a confessional statement.

I know, I know, some give you the impression that Walther's and Pieper's books etc are part of the BoC, and they appear as if they have signed thier names on the Synodical Father's books. But let us be honest, their books are not part of the Book of Concord.

Most Calvinists who turn Lutheran almost invariably become a fan of the Synodical Fathers, they get loved and get considered to be their hero. For after all why would a Calvinist read a Lutheran theologian if in the first place, he/she did not have anything already bothering the conscience? Mind you these Fathers do have a lot to say about the perils of Calvinistic theology. They pinpoint well the ills of Calvinism. Saying they are anti-Calvinists is an under statement. So for a Calvinist who is already sad about the uncertainty brought about by that theology, reading the Fathers seems like having a liberator releasing you from the jail of mental anguish, and depression, the misery induced by uncertainty . Their reputation of being anti-Calvinists are so strong amongst (what is called - repeat-after-me) Lutherans that a Lutheran questioning these Fathers is immediately branded - guess what - a Calvinists! (I wanted to say I laugh my ___ off, but this blog is rated G).

There was a time when I was bothering more with some books other than the BoC, finally I slapped myself in the head and I said - you must go through the process. The process is the BoC first! Is the Lutheran confession Biblical? That is the question on the table. I said to myself I have no right reading this or that book if I have not answered the question about the BoC. That is why today I do not have lots of books authored by Lutheran theologians. I got delayed by the BoC. I have a few but not a lot.

So as you read and listen to say Issues Etc. never forget to take the Bible in your left hand and take the BoC on your right. Then start scrutinizing what the BoC says compared to Scripture. Spend time doing that. For my case I went to the heart of the whole thing - Justification like that found in the Apology Article IV. I would also read what the BoC says on Original Sin, Repentance, Free Will, Election etc. I cannot part with my Tappert BoC because it is heavily annotated with my notes, incidentally the red covering has turned to white, due to handling.

Why do I say go to the BoC first? Because IMHO if we do not go to the Confession, then we will be repeating the mess we found ourselves in and then all over again. It is again sailing through the high seas with a ship that has no rudder. Also when controversies explode, and they will, you will not know where to stand. You will have a pastor dictating to you and ruling over your conscience. So we are back again, in the same mess.

It is a great shame, if someone can quote what the Synodical Fathers said, but that someone does not have a clue as to what the BoC said. It is a great shame too is to endorse the BoC and not have read it. That would be terrible too.

Let me share with you what the late Reformed theologian H O J Brown said. He said that between Calvinism and Lutheranism, Calvinism has produced more heresies than Lutheranism (but who knows, it may be catching up). You can read this in his book - Heresies. Brown was impressed that when the BoC came out 8,000 pastors and thelogians signed it.

One more thing. Whereas in Calvinism, you see regional confessions, you won't find that in Lutheranism. In Calvinism you have confessions like Heidelberg, Belgic, Helvetic, Westminster, Savoy Confessions. Notice how many confessions there are? You have none of this in Lutheranism. There is no such thing. It does not matter which country you come from, if you cannot in good conscience endorse the BoC as correct exposition of Scripture - then you are not a Lutheran (at least not Confessional that is).

Lastly, where does the BoC shine? In its exposition of Justification By Faith Alone.


God bless.

Filipinas by Trio Los Panchos

Continuing on with some more cultural postings. I am featuring Los Panchos.

When as a boy who wandered around Manila (in a section called Dapitan to be exact), I heard of the songs on the radio made popular by the Los Panchos. Quizas, quizas, quizas. Amapola. Sabor a mi. It was in the 60s and I was too young to understand of course the enjoyment experienced by the grown ups around me. Searching around the web, I discovered that this Mexican group (actually one is from PR), composed a song about Filipinas. Another Indio (what the Spaniards called us) blogged about it here.



This is my translation of the song which I gave to my children (I would appreciate corrections of course):

Filipinas, mi madre adorada
Filipinas, my adorable mother

Del mundo admirada, por su resplandor
Admired by the world, because of its splendor

Filipinas, mi novia encantada
Filipinas, my enchanted sweetheart

La tierra que ofrece respeto y calor
The land that offers courtesy and warmth

Filipinas, princesa de oriente
Filipinas, princess of the orient

Tú eres la estrella que orienta mi amor
You are the star that guides my love

Filipinas, la tierra de mi amor
Filipinas the land of my love

Tus hijos te adoran
Your children adore you

Te ofrecen la sangre de su corazón
They give you the blood of their heart.

Mexico y Filipinas, hermanas nacionales

Only in the last year did I realize that the two countries were very very close. It was the missus who told me about this. I was shocked to hear that Filipinas and Mexico were like one country separated only by the seas. She highlighted this to me as part of her research into the effects of colonization to a country's psyche and education. I knew the Spanish soldiers that went to Filipinas were first assigned to Mexico, but I did not realize there was more to that. Our history books never spoke of this very close relationship with the Mexicans. I hope the few Filipinos who visit this blog may get to realize what their history books neglected to tell them.



As a tribute, here is Thalia, a Mexican singer, singing a Filipino song when she was in Manila - "I am here".



Muchachos, no sabía que estábamos como hermanos.

Why Piper invited Warren - Jonathan Edwards

Dr. John Piper is hailed to be the popular hero of young Calvinists of today. In my days in Calvinia, I was a fan too, until I learned about Law and Gospel and I am no more. Read about my critique of his Desiring God - Hedonistic Christianity here. Read some more in here.

Piper is getting flak from his fans for inviting Rick Warren to his Desiring God conference. Look at this video, the long version here .

Why did Piper invite Warren to his conference? Because Warren has been reading Jonathan Edwards, the Revivalist of long ago, since Piper is a fan of Edwards, there you go. This shows you that when Enthusiasm becomes the common cause, people get together. This is why Calvinism does not work because it is Enthusiastic and Experiential. It is the experience that unites rather than the confession. I wrote about Edwards' famous sermon here. Sadly the most famous sermon has only Law, no Gospel.

The more I think about Calvinism, I conclude it is shaky. In fact, I think it is a big contributor to the mess and instability that present Evangelicalism finds itself in. If you think Walther and Co. is the answer, think again. It does not solve it.

Favoring KJV on Rom 3:25

In the KJV of this passage, we read Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood.

Most modern translations do not have this reading, they leave off in his blood away from faith even though in the original Greek word order, KJV is the most accurate.

For example in the ESV, we get this whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

Notice, how the ESV moved his blood closer to propitiation, technically differing from the KJV. What is the reason for this? Well, the ESV translators following others do not want the readers to put their faith in the material blood of Jesus, that red liquid part of the human body.

IMHO, the KJV is quite accurate here which brings me why I posted the picture of the late Aussie NT Scholar Dr. Leon Morris. Many years ago, I went to converse with Dr. Morris in his Donvale home, a suburb of Melbourne. I got to discuss this thing about the "blood" of Jesus with him when he agreed to be interviewed. He said to me, that whenever you read "blood" in the NT, it does not suggest per se the material blood the flows from the body. He said, each time you read it, equate it with "death". The KJV is not suggesting the material blood per se that is the object of faith, but the death of Jesus as faith's object. Hence, properly understood the KJV does a very good service of pointing the reader to the death of Jesus.

In my readings, when people speak of believing in Jesus, faith in Jesus etc., what is exactly neglected is what is it in Jesus one should believe? This is the reason why in my last interaction here, I asked what exactly is the object of faith? In Romans 3:25, the object is the death of Jesus, that his death is payment for our sins. That is the object of faith as taught by Romans 3:25.

Broome's Japanese Connection

As you know I have been sharing with you my trip to North Western Australia. Many Australians do not know this but Broome, its main town, has a Japanese connection.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s Japanese pearl divers where brought in to Australia to help in the pearling industry of Broome.


Some of the pearl divers died due to drowning or what the called diver's paralysis.

Some of the Japanese also died in the cyclones and their bodies are buried here in Broome's Japanese cemetery.

As you can see there is not a few of them.






The tombstones used are those of the sandstones found in Broome's beaches.












Some of the families of these Japanese pearl divers settled in Australia and have intermarried with those with Aboriginal or European heritage. So from time to time I have seen people with Asian features but are quite tanned/dark.

This cemetery is still used today by those people with Japanese ancestry. Those who have stayed behind.




I noticed that these tombstones face the setting sun, the west. Yet the Chinese cemetery near by has its tombstones face the east, the rising sun. I want to ask Augustinian Successor about this, why is that noticeable difference?

This cemetery has only 2 Japanese Christians buried here. Here is one of them and it is fairly recent at that. His grave is located at the back part of the cemetery, alone.

How I lost my (atheistic) religion

My kidz [sic] have no interest in understanding or learning about the background of their parents. I mean, I hope they might have at least a passing interest in my activities, even as a fellow human being and wonder off around here.

My close friends could not believe I was once an atheist. It all happened when I was in university. Even today I still could not figure out how I winded up being accept to study at our national university, where I never paid any tuition fees. If there is one thing we really really thank the Americans for, it is that they gave us education. My university was established by them and almost all of the professors there have been trained in some American university somewhere in USA.

In my first year I was undecided if I would major in physics or mathematics or switch to engineering since my father and his brother are engineers. Since I was good in algebra, I picked on mathematics. However, in that system, you are given lots of elective subjects. So in a way, they want you to pick a major and a minor. I was becoming philosophical so I picked on philosophical subjects as my minor. It was because I was becoming sceptical about life. Life was becoming absurd and meaningless to me. This scepticism grew and I found myself being sceptical about God too, not to mention that I was reading the works of existentialist philosophers which added fuel to the fire. So I started denying God. At that time, I was in the school's philosophy club wherein there were only two kinds of people - agnostics and atheists. I was on the second group. I was like this up until in my last year.

One early morning I was waiting for my lecture so I sat outside a cafeteria where there were trees and seats. I sat under one of them. It was quiet, I remember looking on my left staring at the ground with these thoughts - "What is life? what is this for? So you are born, you grow, you go to college, get a career, get married, have children, grow old, you retire and then you die. What is up with that? What is the sense of that"?

I was also taking mathematical physics and for some reason, my prof one day decided to show us slides of the universe, the nebulas and the galaxies. They were very pretty pictures. That kinda impressed me of its beauty.

So again, one morning same scenario, seating under the trees. But this time as I waited for my class I started staring up at the trees in front of me, how they swayed with the breeze and since it was still morning, the moon was there in the background. Then these thoughts - "it can not be that these stuff just simply happened. It cannot be that they simply happened by accident of nature, it is just too suspicious to have this randomly happened. I could not believe there is no God who created these stuff".

From then I posited that there must be a God. But you know, when I said that - I became terrified, because if there is a personal God, I know for sure I do not know him and I am absolutely lost. Not knowing him is synonymous to me as being lost.

What happened to me? I guess what happened was that I became sceptical of the things I was sceptical about. I think at that point I became an honest atheist - honestly recognizing there must be God. Though I was terrified at my conclusion since I did not know who this God was, the solution for me was not to deny him so I can drown my fears of him, I felt the solution was to find him. He certainly was not the one lost, it was me instead.

So I went to the library and borrowed books about religious beliefs. I worked on reading Confucius, the Budha, and Taoism. I remember I borrowed so many books, I had stacks of them my two hands were not enough to hold them. None of these satisfied my inquiry. I can tell you why in another post. This is another story.

Here is a thought though: I would love to see Richard Dawkins debate Antony Flew.

Aussie bishops head for Rome

Just an update on what is happening here. Australian bishops are taking the lead to go to Rome sweet Rome.

Here is the news from The Australian newspaper just out this morning.

The RC e-apologists must be very happy.

I should like to say "think before you convert".

No, I wasn't saying this to Anglicans. I meant this to the Lutherans who get so nervous, they are left out of the party.

Anyway, I have just thought of a technique for those RCs who want to become priests but are afraid of being celibate. Why not be an Anglican priest first, then convert. You can have your wife and the ministry too. I think that should do the trick.

Broome and Cape Leveque

I am continuing to share with you my trip to the north of Western Australia, I went to Cape Leveque. You can see a more professional picture here. Google map has it here. That is the road to Cape Leveque. Dirt road all red earth. Some parts are sealed but any unsealed part is like this. Red. Also you can not go there with an ordinary vehicle. You must use a 4X4. Our guide carried with him a trailer filled with supplies and a tent. He warned us if it rained on the way back, this road is unpassable, so we would have to sleep in the bush until it gets dry. Being stranded is a possibility.


This is a view of the red cliffs from the right.


This is the view of the beach at the Cape.
Open space view of the beach.

This is on the right side of that previous picture. We were not allowed to go to this place because this is Aboriginal holy ground, a burial site where they bury their dead.

This is on top of the red cliffs.
This is my shot of the red cliffs.

Red cliffs with a bit of light exposure.
More red cliffs behind.


This is the one shot I like of the red cliffs.
Wherever you turn and watch the sunset, it is always beautiful in Northern Western Australia. God is good. I did not have to go to the theatres to get entertained.

Atheist Prophet Evangelist - Dawkins, the Fool

We interrupt our regular programming to report on the latest news in this part of the world.

Dawkins is here, telling all believers to repent for believing in God.

Read about it in The Age report here.

According to the Bible, God has a certain opinion about people like Dawkins. Read about it here.

Don't get mad at me, I am just reporting what Dawkins and God are saying.

Update: Read this writer's response. Some women do have...some guts.

Broome and her beach rocks

People, you should visit Australia and you should plan to see the Kimberley's. As Bob Barker used to say "Come on down". The missus has a project with the Aboriginal people of the Kimberleys and she wanted to bring me where she works. Once a month she is with them, in the desert. So a few weeks ago, I went to Broome where she stops over before she goes to Fitzroy Crossing.

Broome, is a small town north of Western Australia. The weather is quite hot and humid. I like it. You will sweat a lot.

Broome has beaches that is filled with interesting rock formation.


The above is my failed attempt to catch the camels at sundown.



You can see them in the photos here.

In one side of the town you can catch the sunset and also the sunrise.


Me and the missus.










Notice the interesting rock formation. It is quite amazing to look at. This one is a about 3 stories tall.









Another example of how the ocean has influenced the rock formations here.

This is not a very big bridge. It used to be that in Victoria, there was such a thing which was a real bridge which you could walk on. It is no longer there because it collapsed.

This one is solid rock. I could give more examples of the shots I took.


















Have a look at this rock pillar. Now in this photo, yours truly happened to be a few meters in front of this rock pillar. It is about 2 stories tall.













Now what about this figure here. Now does that not remind you of something in the Middle East?

Clue. Starts with the letter "S".

Mind you, this is not a complete attraction in Broome. My eye just caught this angle. From this side, it looks like the one in Egypt.







This is the sunrise. See the colors of the sky? This is quite common in Broome. It is the colors that will captivate you. It changes as the sun rises and also as the sun goes down.

I wonder if this redness might be caused by the red earth that is so characteristic of Northern Western Australia (which by the way WA, is 1/3 of the continent).








Here is the example of the red earth I was talking about.

See how red this is? You see this all around northern WA.

BTW, this is a small plateau.

iTeach

Whoever said those who can't do, teach --- must have been a guy who had no education.

I have been there and done that.

After 25+ years as a software developer/engineer I have had it. I work for myself as a consultant. The pay is good but I am now tired of programming. I mean I am really tired of it. I want to share and handover some ideas to kids out there. Teaching is a lot of fun but lots of admin work too.

I still have consulting work but I like to tone it down. I like to interact with people now, not with machines. So this semester I am teaching for two regional universities who have their presence in my city. Universities are discovering there is money to be made from foreign students. So even if they are from out of town they look for city partners which can give them access to big cities like mine, where the people are and where foreign students would rather settle. So in my classes, I kid you not, all of my students are foreigners, majority from East Asian origins.

So today I had a long day lecturing. One of my students sat in the corner. I allowed him to listen from time to time as he played with his drink bottle and some paper envelopes.

When it was time to go home the students said good bye and he passed by my desk. As he walked away - he showed me his drink bottle wrapped in envelopes. As he exited the class room, he said - "look sir, I made a bomb", then he walked off. His name is Muhammad.