Originally published at A few words from Rob Mansfield. You can comment here or there.

Chief among this year's contestants are the perma-tanned George Hamilton, 80s Page 3 'stunna' Sam Fox and camp design duo Colin & Justin.

But woe betide anyone who thinks that winning the annual jungle junket is a key to further riches. If you look back at the roster of previous winners, many of them have fallen foul of the IMACGMOOH curse.

Of the 8 previous victors, four have fallen on hard times. Kerry Katona's - queen of 2004's jungle - problems have been well-documented, but few could have predicted that when she overcame the likes of Peter Andre and Jordan to lift the crown.

In 2006, Carol Thatcher took the crown and all was going swimmingly until she was booted off of the One Show earlier this year for calling a tennis player a golliwog.

The following year, former Busted member Matt Willis charmed the pants off of the viewing public and donned the regal get-up. Any thought that he would go on to conquer the pop charts again were swiftly dispensed with. His debut solo album failed to crack the top 50, he was dropped by his label and then had to go to rehab to clean up his drinking habits. Happily, he's back in fighting form, but things weren't good for a while.

Even last year's victor, former EastEnder Joe Swash isn't immune. He may have got a gig for Living following Pamela Anderson around, but he had to file for bankruptcy in the past few weeks. Money's a sore spot even for the success stories.

Of the other four winners, three are what one might call veteran entertainers who had a solid career before they started, so were unlikely to lose out too much. Tony Blackburn, Joe Pasquale and Christopher Biggins weren't exactly A-List, but it meant that their careers got a little boost for a bit longer. Phil Tufnell is, well, Phil Tufnell.

Anyway, my point is that winning the show doesn't necessarily guarantee success after the celebs fly back from Australia.

So all this year's contestants: you have been warned.

This from the preceding post:

And Dr Collins sees no problem with where aliens might fit in with the belief that man was created in God's image.

"Every creature reflects the goodness and the creativity of God. Humankind, we certainly would argue that we represent that most fully and most completely," he said.

"But all of creation represents God's creativity. So any extraterrestrial being would certainly represent that creativity as well and may be or may not be more developed than we are."

I've long thought that humans make a fundamental mistake in that they arrogantly assume that the universe is all about us. That is why stupid statements like the above are made. We see God as some super human who created a stupendous universe for us to run around sinning in. And, what's more, we are supposedly made in God's image. All the other creatures on this Earth apparently weren't. Only us. Yeah, right. God must be delighted with that one. Think Hitler.

We weren't even around for most of the Earth's history. The first life appeared 4,000 million years ago. Something resembling us (and supposedly God) appeared on the scene 60 thousand years ago. Why did God take so long you may ask? And just when did we acquire a soul? One would think such questions could be easily answered by the men who point to a book written 2,000 years ago for answers. Of course they can't. So I do wonder why they pontificate at such length with such inane garbage that can be easily disproved by anyone who cares to exercise a few brain cells.

Do they really think we're that stupid? Apparently so. I think I need another drink. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/13/2742484.htm?section=justin

Alien life is possible: Vatican

By Barney Porter for The World Today

Posted 1 hour 35 minutes ago

The Pope's chief astronomer has conceded other intelligent beings could exist in outer space.

The conclusion has been drawn by scientific experts called in by the Vatican to study the possibility of extraterrestrial life and its implications for the Church.

It has been four centuries since the Catholic Church locked up Galileo for challenging the belief that the Earth was at the centre of the universe.

The Vatican's five-day conference attracted 30 astronomers, physicists and biologists, including non-Catholics.

It was led by Jesuit priest Father Jose Gabriel Funes, an astronomer and director of the Vatican Observatory.

Father Funes says the possibility of alien life raises "many philosophical and theological implications" but that the gathering was mainly focused on the scientific perspective.

One of the organisers was Chris Impey, a professor of astronomy at the University of Arizona.

He says the aim was to assess the most recent research in the burgeoning field of astrobiology - the study of life in the universe.

"And also getting a sense of when you know the vital breakthrough is going to be made, which is the discovery of life elsewhere," he said.

"Because even though we're looking hard we still only know one planet anywhere with life and that's this one."

Breakthrough coming soon

He says that major breakthrough may be just around the corner.

"If you were going to take a set of bets of the 30 scientists gathered for that meeting, I think most of them would have said on about a time scale of 10 years maybe," he said.

That's a guess from the scientists involved and it could come from either of two directions - it could come from a planetary mission within the solar system that looks at one of the most hospitable places for life nearby which is probably Titan, Europa or Mars.

"Or it could come from telescopic observations of planets that we're finding in increasing numbers around distant stars."

But before one starts looking at the concept through Hollywood eyes, professor Impey has another observation.

"I think there's a big distinction between the finding of microbial life, bacteria or something like that which is actually the most likely form of life to discover initially, and intelligent life - sentient beings with technology, and that's a different strategy," he said.

"So I think on the former, on microbial life it's not likely to challenge the world's major religions - but if we find creatures that rival us or exceed us in intelligence, then I think that's going to be very interesting."

Church's positive response

But perhaps not too interesting, according to Dr Paul Collins, a former priest and now Church historian and Catholic commentator.

He says a belief in extraterrestrial life does not necessarily contradict any basic tenets of the Catholic religion.

"I would think that our response would be a positive one," he said.

"I'm not infallible on this of course, but the reality is that I don't think it does contradict anything within Catholicism.

"Essentially what the Christian faith generally is saying and certainly Catholicism specifically is saying is that God is the ultimate source of life, the ultimate source of reality."

The views of the Catholic Church have shifted radically since the Italian philosopher Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake as a heretic in 1600 for speculating other worlds could be inhabited.

The Vatican Observatory has been at the forefront of efforts to bridge the gap between religion and science and today senior clergy openly endorse scientific ideas such as the big bang theory and evolution.

And Dr Collins sees no problem with where aliens might fit in with the belief that man was created in God's image.

"Every creature reflects the goodness and the creativity of God. Humankind, we certainly would argue that we represent that most fully and most completely," he said.

"But all of creation represents God's creativity. So any extraterrestrial being would certainly represent that creativity as well and may be or may not be more developed than we are."

Two television "lifestyle" programs made in the UK were recently aired in Australia. Both of them advocated with double-barrelled enthusiasm a return to subsistence gardening, as well as hunting and collecting as a way of putting healthy food back on Britain's family plate.

The presenters used shotguns to kill any animal that looked remotely feral and unprotected, fishing tackle to hook anything which swam, then plucked and pillaged hedgerow and seaside edibles with gay and/or straight abandon.

Now I hope these programs will never see the light of day in the Mother Country.

The prospect of having 40 million adult Britons evacuating cities every Friday afternoon with Land Rovers loaded to the gunwales with rifles, shotguns, slingshots, truncheons, spears, fishing rods, flies, lures, gelignite, detonators, traps and snares for a weekend of food gathering in the countryside is frankly quite frightening.

I can forsee an extraordinary amount of collateral damage occurring, as well as a massive injury list through "friendly fire".

There may inevitably be some spinoff television shows:

"So you think you can do  #%$@&%$  WHAT!"
(a rural landowners perspective)

"UK's biggest loser"
(a weekly review of the most serious incidents of blood and limb loss from last weekend)

In view of this latest social development I would like to be the first to suggest that England's current National Anthem might be replaced by the 50 year old offering (below) from my hero Tom Lehrer.
 
Now is an appropriate time with the Olympic Games rapidly approaching.
 
Athletes and citizens of every nation on earth can learn the simple words of this anthem, then the massed choral voices of 100,000 can raise the roof during the opening ceremony.

It will bring tears to my eyes, and dramatically shorten the odds of my receiving a second Nobel Peace Prize.

The Hunting Song

http://chandramoon.efx3.com/2009/11/11/open-mic/