Darts: By The Numbers and a Debate with Graham Hancock

The orange stemmed dart was thrown first (a very fine diddle from my wife) ...

I have to admit that I am really quite pleased and perhaps even proud of myself.  being as new to darts as I am I have always known and been comfortable with the notion that it would be a very long and steep road towards any kind of real competence as far as sticking darts where I want them to stick.  What I am not however, is a numbers person. I am not just 'not a numbers person' I am horrible with numbers and this has haunted me as my Achilles heel in darts as out shots can be quite a distraction for me.  
Well lo' and behold I have decided to put in a little bit of time, and while still not a numbers person I have actually managed to memorize out shots from 100 down to about 65.  I did it Bobby George style, pretty much just memorizing them like phone numbers.  I don't have them down 100% but I'd say 90% and it's amazing what a boost they can give to your game.  Obviously knowing what I need to peg out doesn't make my arm work any better, but I think knowing it give the brain that works the arm less things to worry about and hence more focus on the job at hand of making the darts stick where I want them to stick. Results so far are looking positive, but lets see how i do moving forward. So far I've pegged a 96 and a 89 and a few nice close calls. (no out but left the double).  I'll keep you all posted but in the meantime if you are new to darts I'd recommend learning your out shots.  

Author Graham Hancock

Moving off the topic of darts, some of you may not be aware that I am also the laziest member of the moderating team for author Graham Hancock.  My moderating work mostly consists of sitting around watching the other moderators do a lot of hard work and then interjecting the odd pithy comment here and there. Now for those of you who don't know Graham Hancock he is a cornucopia  of interesting and thought provoking ideas but writes mostly on issues of historical mysteries and more recently on consciousness .both it's nature and ethics.  His books are engaging, amazingly well researched, enjoyable and incredibly controversial.  He openly posits questions about our established understandings and suggests and provides evidence as to why we might consider alternate views. He is excruciatingly cautious in saying "I think there is something to explore here" rather than "I am right!" and never has made any claim to being a scientist. Nonetheless he can be the frequent target of derision and portrayed somehow as an 'enemy of science'.
Recently he has given a talk on TED (along with Rupert Sheldrake) which was jumped on by TED's anonymous 'science board' along with a series of unfounded allegations that to TED's credit has since been retracted.  However they are now trying to make Graham and Rupert's talks fade away quietly.  
I am not suggesting for a moment that anyone reading this has to agree with what Hancock is saying but only that he presents his arguments in a reasoned and reasonable manner and that to dismiss his ideas with blanket dismissals such as 'pseudoscience' is disingenuous and counter-productive to advancing understanding of both orthodox and unorthodox ideas.
With that in mind I direct you all to this conversation on TED and hope that whether you agree or disagree with Graham's ideas  that you will add support behind his and Rupert Sheldrake's request for a proper debate on these issues.  

TED Talks and a call to debate with Graham Hancock


I think it is a debate well worth having and quite frankly would be an incredibly interesting one.  If you are for the free and open (but moderated) discussion of ideas then please check this out and add your voice! 


-Cheers!


See you all next time!!


Dave 'The Abominable Throw man' Sproull 

---