zimmergimmer

  It appears (given this image) astrologers believe the sun and moon actually have humanoid faces.....well that helps their credibility, doesn't it.

I was idly flicking through the newspaper yesterday, when I came upon the horoscope section. Which I never read. Except yesterday when I was drawn to the Pisces section (my allotted star sign), and out of pure curiosity, I read it. This is what it said:

Irish Daily Mirror. Tuesday 8th May 2012.

"Duty calls and although you might wish you could ignore your responsibilities, you are too aware of the consequences if you did. If you aren't enjoying your job or some volunteer work is draining your energy, think about making some changes soon. There's no harm in looking at other options."

Now this got me thinking: firstly, how did the author (Russell Grant) translate his astrological chart into this statement about my future life? Secondly, how does it compare to a different Astronomer and thirdly, what about the maths?

Now, as it happens, my dear wife also bought a newspaper yesterday (different publication) so I was intrigued to see what their Astrologer (Mystic Meg) had to say and how close the two might be. I mean, if they read the same charts, it can't be that different, can it?

Well here's what she had to say:

"You have gifts you have never really used but all that is set to change now you're ready for success. An application form you fill in today has a part to play. You feel lucky to have each other and love promises you make are meant. A friend wants to make amends."

Now before I go on, lets look at some maths: the current world population is around 7 billion. Given a roughly equal division of 12 per star sign, that's about 580million Pisces in the world. There are 196 countries in the world. Given an average of national and regional publications that have a horoscope as 50, then there are about 10,000 DIFFERENT horoscopes for Pisces. Therefore, there are about 5.8 trillion potential variances in the predictions for their future.

Yet Mystic Meg and her 9,999 collegues all read the same chart.

So what's my point?

Well, I think I have just proven, not just beyond any reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt at all......that Astrology is a load of poo.

And if you want further proof, find me one that offers a gloomy future. They're all so damn positive. When did you see a horoscope that offered a bleak future? I mean, out of 580 million Pisces, someone's going to end up in the shite.

I mean, sod the charts, I think I'm going to offer my services to the Irish Times.... as Cryptic Chris. My first column will include the same prediction for all 12 star signs: along the lines of.......

"The moon makes a stop-over in your birth sign which basically means life is about to change for you. So hold onto your hat. Your partner will begin an affair with next doors' German Shepard. That will be just before your house burns down and you find out the insurance only covers half the value. And in your haste to leave the house before you burn to death, you stub your toe on the bedpost. The toe turns to gangarine and your leg will be aputated just below the knee. On the upside, it doesn't get any worse.....at least for a month or so."

Out of 7 billion people, there's a good chance I'll get it right with someone.

My eyesight is shite. Relatively speaking.

That is, I need spectacles for both long (driving and TV) and short (reading, computer and removing fluff from belly-button). In other words, two separate pairs. The only time I don't need to wear spec's of any kind is playing poker or in the loo, (hard to miss when you're sat down).

Now, for long sighted bins, I don't mind splashing the cash. In fact I paid a minor fortune for my long lenses. They are cared for and protected in a nice leather case and are moderately fashionable.

However, for readers, the most I ever pay is about €5. All chemists sell them....and basically the lenses are about 1/2" thick, made of re-cycled bin-liners, can be scratched by cotton wool and have a clear focal point of roughly a square centimeter. But who cares. They work. Ish. And they're cheap.

Now, my current pair had become rather the worse for wear to the point where replacement was demanded. So on the way home tonight, I dived into my local drug-store and purchased a brand new pair of magnifiers. Great.

Well, not great actually. As you may know, readers are classified by their magnification strength. From about 1 through to 4 and in half increments. Therefore 1.5 are required by people who only need to read a newspaper at arms length and 4.5 are required by scientists who can't be bothered to get out the microscope and want to study pond life by just peering over the edge.

My current (redundant) pair are 2.5. So, did I buy a pair of 2.5'ers? Nope, I did not. I thought I'd be clever. Given that I too started on 1.5, but as the years speed by the need to increase the magnification increases linearly. Therefore, I decided that as I've been on 2.5 for some time, I might as well bite the ego bullet and move up a half point to 3.

Mistake. Big mistake. It seems such a small step from 2.5 to 3. In fact in mathematical terms it's an increase of 20%. However in focusing terms it's about 2 feet.

Therefore, I am currently typing this with my head about 5" from the screen. To focus on each word, I have to physically follow the sentence from left to right....my head feels like a carriage on an old typewriter. There is an up-side though, it makes the font size about 48.

So, I guess there's a moral to the story.....yep, you guessed it.....should have gone you know where.

Here's a newspaper clipping that kinda says it all about fat-cats.....

The Star:

FAT CAT bankers are finally having their perks axed. Millionaire investment bankers at taxpayer-owned Royal Bank of Scotland have been told to pay for their own Christmas bash this year after a £10-a-head subsidy was axed.

New BlackBerry phones, magazine and newspaper subscriptions have also been given the chop.

RBS’s chief financial officer Chris Kyle, said: “There is a current need to further tighten and minimise the rate of spend on non-staff costs.”

I wonder how the hell they will cope.

But this guy is just class...............

http://youtu.be/koY6kXhQDQo