If it sounds too good to be true...

It probably is.

I bet this is what many people who paid up to S$12 000 for a ONE-YEAR Bachelor degree from the ROYAL MELBOURNE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY found out.

How is that even possible? I also wonder...

How is it possible for near academic morons - sorry, I don't know how else to describe them - achieve a degree from a top Australian university in ONE year when top government scholars take at least 2 years of full loads (including two summer terms at full loads) to complete the same degree at the same university. In fact, most top students attempting to do so at any of these accredited universities need about 2.5 years to complete a degree.

And many of these people paying for the shortcut cannot even write a proper sentence to save their lives.

Rubbish Rushes in to Fill a Vacuum

Lost Generation by Jonathan Reed

I am part of a lost generation
and I refuse to believe that
I can change the world
I realize this may be a shock but
“Happiness comes from within.”
is a lie, and
“Money will make me happy.”
So in 30 years I will tell my children
they are not the most important thing in my life
My employer will know that
I have my priorities straight because
work
is more important than
family
I tell you this
Once upon a time
Families stayed together
but this will not be true in my era
This is a quick fix society
Experts tell me
30 years from now, I will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of my divorce
I do not concede that
I will live in a country of my own making
In the future
Environmental destruction will be the norm
No longer can it be said that
My peers and I care about this earth
It will be evident that
My generation is apathetic and lethargic
It is foolish to presume that
There is hope.

And all of this will come true unless we choose to reverse it .

Read the message, then read it again in reverse.

Which generation do you belong in?

---@---@---

Guess what? As I arrived at work, I saw the lost generation. The latecomers, the stragglers, the lost souls, the headless ghosts, the useless bums, the lazy bones... And there were all made to stand outside the office while the rest went through the passage.

Me? I am part of a lost generation. I will tell you that money will make me happy. More money will make me more happy. Ok, bad English. Still, you get the point.

Happiness comes from within. It can't come from anywhere else. I don't laugh or gloat at others' misery. But having money can make me happy.

I am part of a lost generation. Despite me telling my employers that they are not the most important things in my life, I can't stop working. Because I need money. Remember, money will make me happy.

My family is more important than my work. But they will have to take a back seat. Don't forget, money will make me happy. And money makes them happy too.

I don't believe in spending money to be divorced in 30 years. I can't afford that. So I won't marry and won't have children. This way, my money is all for I, me and myself. And money will make me happy.

Environmental destruction is part of nature. Global warming has to do with the less than perfectly circular orbit of the earth. The hell I care about spending any of my hard earned money on environmentally friendly nonsense. Why should I pay others money and make them happy? I should amass my wealth. After all, money will make me happy. Perhaps I should want to be buried in a dollar bill mache coffin. To be buried in money will make me happy.

I am not apathetic and lethargic; watch my energy levels as I throw myself at money. I already know there is no hope (for the hopeless others). Might as well now work towards getting them to bequeath me their money...

All together now: Money will make me happy.

So WRONG!

Singapore - More than half the investors who lodged complaints over the way they were sold investment products linked to Lehman Brothers will get some money back.
And about a quarter will be fully compensated, ending months of worry that started when their investments went belly-up together with the collapsed US investment bank.

This is so wrong. Greed should not be guaranteed. Instead, these investors should be given a goodwill payout NOT AMOUNTING to an admission of guilt.

There is a huge difference between an outright compensation and a goodwill payout. The premise of the former suggests that there are some greed that are more acceptable than other greed. There are some gullibility that are less heinous than other guillibility. It also assumes that when you are old, you need not be responsible for your actions.

In the latter, you acknowledge that all are placed on an equal slate and then judged and sentenced equally. But out of goodwill, a certain more vulnerable group is given a little assistance to alleviate their sufferings from their mistakes. This, itself, is already a less than ideal situation but to give an almost outright compensation to the "old and guillible" is really BS.

Surely, these OAGs, being salt of the earth compared to the young and rapacious, should know better the downfalls of the greedy, especially over an additional 1% interest per annum.

I feel sorry for those who did not get any money back in this circumstance, though my definition of the ideal case is for all investors to suffer comparable (percentage) losses.

An Analogy to Madoff's Ponzi Scheme

Seems that a G.I. during the Korean conflict, as he was leaving the mess tent in Korea, picked up a can of sardines so that he could have a snack later in the day. As he was walking down the road a Korean soldier saw his sardines and thinking they would make a nice dinner, asked if he could buy it. The G.I. said "sure" and sold it to him for 10 cents. Another Korean saw the sardines and thought they would make a great lunch and asked to buy them. The deal was done at 15 cents, a 50 percent profit in a matter of minutes. A third Korean, who hadn't eaten for over a day and was starving, saw the sardines and bought them for 30 cents and immediately tore open the can. Unfortunately the sardines were rotten. As he was screaming at the seller for selling him rotten sardines the seller looked at him and said: "Why did you open the can?"

by Clyde Jenkins, Panama City, Panama

Are we so gleeful of our doom that...?

Noted Sea Level Expert Accuses IPCC of Falsifying Data
Michael Asher (Blog) - December 11, 2007 4:48 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Claims IPCC estimates are bunk; Observational data shows no sea level rise trend


Note: Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner has been studying sea level change for 35 years. He is the former head of Stockholm University's department of Paleodeophysics and Geodynamics. Dr. Mörner is and an expert reviewer for the IPCC, leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project, and past president of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes.

A noted expert in sea level change has accused UN's IPCC panel of falsifying and destroying data (PDF) to support the panel's official conclusion of a rising sea level trend. The accusations include surreptitious substitution of datasets, selective use of data, presenting computer model simulations as physical data, and even the destruction of physical markers which fail to demonstrate sea level rise.

The expert, Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, also raps the IPCC for their selection of 22 authors of their most recent report on sea level rise (SLR), none of which were sea level specialists. According to Mörner, the authors were chosen to "arrive at a predetermined conclusion" of global warming-induced disaster.

Sea level changes can be detected by a number of methods. Rotational timing is a very precise method, and is based on the fact that a change in the earth's radius will cause minute differences in it's rate of rotation. A rise in sea level increases the radius slightly, and can therefore be detected by precisely timing when the sun rises and sets. This method can detect changes in sea level as small as one millimeter. Data collected in this manner has shown the ocean to have risen and fallen slightly several times since the early 1900s, without any definitive trend.

Satellite altimetry is another method. Mörner says that, in 2003, The IPCC's altimetry dataset, which had previously displayed no clear trend, suddenly changed, with past readings modified to show a strong uplift. Though corrections to datasets are supposed to be clearly announced and identified, this was done secretly, and not labeled. When Mörner inquired about the discrepancy, he was told the readings had been adjusted by a "correction factor".

Where did this factor come from? The least precise method of measuring sea level is tide gauge records. These are problematic as the land under the gauge may itself be rising or falling. Hong Kong maintains six tide gauges, five of which show no trend. The sixth, located on land where compaction is causing the ground to sink, was chosen by the IPCC as the correction factor for global altimetry data.

Tide gauges kept in the sensitive areas of Pacific and Indian Ocean islands show a different story. In Vanuatu, Tegua, and the Tuvalu Islands, gauge records show no trend at all. In the Maldives, tide gauges kept from the 1950s show a small drop in the 1970s, and no change since.

More shocking is Mörner's claim of the destruction of evidence. A famous low-lying tree in the Maldives has long been a marker for sea-level change, and noted in several research papers. But when an Australian team visited the island on a data-gathering trip, they saw the tree and pulled it down, according to local eyewitnesses. Mörner's team later replanted the tree in the same spot.

Climatologist and IPCC Expert Reviewer Dr. Madhav Khandekar, contacted by DailyTech in regards to this story, also believes SLR is being exaggerated by the IPCC. Khandekar says SLR over the next 100 years will be "insignificant" and pointed to recent research demonstrating SLR had actually declined in the latter half of the 20th century.

Dr. Mörner also had harsh words for the Maldives government. When the Maldives Sea Level Project concluded there was no threat to from rising sea levels, a documentary was made to reassure residents. The government, however, banned airing of the film. According to Mörner, the rationale for the ban was financial. The Maldives stands to gain hundreds of millions of dollars in climate change aid from Western governments. "Because they thought that they would lose money." He said, "They accuse the West for putting out carbon dioxide, so they wanted the flooding scenario to go on."

Mörner says it's becoming increasingly hard to perform objective climate research. In the European Community, a prerequisite for research grants is that the focus must be on global warming. Papers which don't support global warming aren't funded. "That's what dictatorships did, autocracies." He added, "They demanded that scientists produce what they wanted."

http://www.dailytech.com/Noted+Sea+Level+Expert+Accuses+IPCC+of+Falsifying+Data/article9978.htm

Fortunately for me, I am neither a believer of global warming - hey I'm in an aircon room most of the time - or a supporter of the green lobby - though I eat my vegetables without complaining. But to resort to falsifying records to bring incite irrational fear of infernal armageddon is really lowly.