Nike+ Challenge


Get a Voki now!

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

hi

hi hows it goin

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Wonders of the World - Taj Mahal

Taj Mahal was built by a Muslim, Emperor Shah Jahan (died 1666 C.E.) in the memory of his dear wife and queen Mumtaz Mahal at Agra, India. It is an "elegy in marble" or some say an expression of a "dream." Taj Mahal (meaning Crown Palace) is a Mausoleum that houses the grave of queen Mumtaz Mahal at the lower chamber. The grave of Shah Jahan was added to it later. The queen’s real name was Arjumand Banu. In the tradition of the Mughals, important ladies of the royal family were given another name at their marriage or at some other significant event in their lives, and that new name was commonly used by the public. Shah Jahan's real name was Shahab-ud-din, and he was known as Prince Khurram before ascending to the throne in 1628.
Taj Mahal was constructed over a period of twenty-two years, employing twenty thousand workers. It was completed in 1648 C.E. at a cost of 32 Million Rupees. The construction documents show that its master architect was Ustad ‘Isa, the renowned Islamic architect of his time. The documents contain names of those employed and the inventory of construction materials and their origin. Expert craftsmen from Delhi, Qannauj, Lahore, and Multan were employed. In addition, many renowned Muslim craftsmen from Baghdad, Shiraz and Bukhara worked on many specialized tasks.

The Taj stands on a raised, square platform (186 x 186 feet) with its four corners truncated, forming an unequal octagon. The architectural design uses the interlocking arabesque concept, in which each element stands on its own and perfectly integrates with the main structure. It uses the principles of self-replicating geometry and a symmetry of architectural elements.

Its central dome is fifty-eight feet in diameter and rises to a height of 213 feet. It is flanked by four subsidiary domed chambers. The four graceful, slender minarets are 162.5 feet each. The entire mausoleum (inside as well as outside) is decorated with inlaid design of flowers and calligraphy using precious gems such as agate and jasper. The main archways, chiseled with passages from the Holy Qur’an and the bold scroll work of flowery pattern, give a captivating charm to its beauty. The central domed chamber and four adjoining chambers include many walls and panels of Islamic decoration.

The mausoleum is a part of a vast complex comprising of a main gateway, an elaborate garden, a mosque (to the left), a guest house (to the right), and several other palatial buildings. The Taj is at the farthest end of this complex, with the river Jamuna behind it. The large garden contains four reflecting pools dividing it at the center. Each of these four sections is further subdivided into four sections and then each into yet another four sections. Like the Taj, the garden elements serve like Arabesque, standing on their own and also constituting the whole.

Wonders of the World - Great Barrier Reef

The Great Barrier Reef is the world's largest coral reef system, composed of over 2,900 individual reefs and 900 islands stretching for 2,600 kilometres (1,600 mi) over an area of approximately 344,400 square kilometres (133,000 sq mi).The reef is located in the Coral Sea, off the coast of Queensland in northeast Australia.

The Great Barrier Reef can be seen from outer space and is the world's biggest single structure made by living organisms.This reef structure is composed of and built by billions of tiny organisms, known as coral polyps. The Great Barrier Reef supports a wide diversity of life, and was selected as a World Heritage Site in 1981. CNN has labelled it one of the seven natural wonders of the world. The Queensland National Trust has named it a state icon of Queensland.

A large part of the reef is protected by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, which helps to limit the impact of human use, such as overfishing and tourism. Other environmental pressures to the reef and its ecosystem include water quality from runoff, climate change accompanied by mass coral bleaching, and cyclic outbreaks of the crown-of-thorns starfish.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Review Of The Rugby World Cup Final

With France as their quarter-final opponetnt the All Balcks, untested since the Tri-Nations, were about to take on the Six-Nations Champions. Whether the All Blacks' preparation had been ideal remained questionable, but it was widely thought France playing away from home wouldn't pose a serious threat.

The naming of the All Black side was eagerly awaited, as graham Henry had rarely selected his top team during the last year, with most interest focused on whether Dan Carter would play following his calf injury, and the ever contentious midfield selection.

With Carter declared fit, McAlistar and Muliaina were selected to start outside him, significant in that Muliaina was brought into centre at such a late stage of the tournament. More than anything it showed the coaching panel did not have confidence that the two specialist centre in their team - Conrad Smith and Isiah Toeava - were capable of doing the job. This decision became even more significant when the French named their team, electing to go with the big punters of the ball at fullback and first-five, clearly planning on kicking a lot of ball long before pressurising those who returned it. With no Mils Muliaina to threaten from the back, this tactic would prove worthwhile.

The match couldn't have started worse for the French with Serge Benson concussed in a tackle after only five minutes and having to be replaced.

A great first half by Luke McAlister saw him feature in one of the All Blacks' few highlights, when he created and finished the only try of the first half. This came just a minute after desperate French defence bundled Ali Williams into touch before he crossed the line. For McAlister it would be the case of hero to zero, as a harsh yellow card for obstuction five minutes into the second halfswung the momentum of the match away from they All Blacks, when the French capitalised on the opportunity and tied the match up at 13-all while he was in the bin.

Ali Williams was the star player for the All Blacks stealing five of the French throws to the lineout while managing to win everyone of their own throws. This lineout dominance translated to a 71% share of possesion and 63% of territory for the All Blacks' game. This time they won possession, but let themselves down by kicking the ball away nearly as much as the French kicked theirs away. This showed through in the statistics, where the All Blacks kicked 38 balls away to France's 41, and it was soon clear that Dan Carter wasn;t anywhere near his peak fitness or form. He eventually hobbled from the field after 56 minutes, at the same time as Byron Kelleher was replaced by Brendon Leonard.

In contrast to Daniel Carter, France's star first-five in recent years, Frederic Michelak, set up the match-winning try for the French with 11 minutes to go. He'd come off the bench just one minutes before and showed he still had the gas to make the crucial line-break and the composure to wait for his suppport on the inside to be a controversial forward pass to Yannick Jauzion to score and Jean-Baptiste Elisasalde kicked the crucial conversion, giving France the lead for the first time. The final quarter of the match was meant to be where Graham Henry's very difficult team preparation was meant to come in to its own. Instead it was shown to be fatally flawed.

As the All Blacks rolled on their substitutes, the team that already lacked cohesion began to look like 15 individuals trying to take on the tenacious French defence on their own. If one-off running really was the way the All Blacks wanted to win, all I can say is one name, Ma'a Nonu who would have really threatened the French.

The All Blacks' desperation and fatal disorganisation was summed up in the final minute when Luke McAlister had a wild attempt at a drop-kick from half way, without any concerted effort by the team to work their way into position for a match-winning field-goal. Too desparate, too little and much too late. The French had done it again. The All Blacks choked.

Why I think Adidas is a good brand. (Business Studies Stuff)

I think Adidas is a good brand because they have great quality products. I have been buying Adidas gear since I was very young. The thing I like most about Adidas is that their products last a long time. I also like how Adidas make Judo clothes and good, cheap ones as well. Another thing I like about Adidias is their catch phrase "Impossible is Nothing" and how they refer to Mohammed Ali and other sporting greats to back up the statement. I also like how Adidas' products are stylish . Like their shoes for example, sometimes I get Adidas shoes just because they look good rather than how they help me run. I also like how they sponser the mighty All Blacks who by the way lost to France( I threw my pocket dictionary at my tv when they did). I know Adidas is a good brand becuase they make shoes, shirts, balls, jackets, sports bags etc. Also Adidas has dominated the world in sports gear, so if I go to a country like China or Japan I can get the same equipment for so much cheaper

Museum Trip

On Friday we went to the Auckland War Museum. At first, when we were told I though "Yay" because I thought that the Auckland War Museum was a place which I have never been to before. Later on I found out that the Auckland War Museum was the Auckland Museum my heart sank. So anyway I thought that the trip itself was very boring. I thought there was too much work but the difficulty was just right, some of the questions were hard but some weren't. I think we shouldn't have had that much work because I learn more by just browsing(I love this word) around and stubling upon useful information rather than having a worksheet and feeling the pressure of having to complete everything. Altogether I rate this trip a nice 4.5/10. By the way I tried to write this last night but my computer froze so I ended up throwing my Collins Pocket Dictionary at it.

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Murray Deaker

I listen to Murray Deaker a lot. Everytime i'm in the car i put the radio onto 1386am, and every wednesday at 8.30 im watching deaker on sport. Even though i hate his guts he brings up valid points. But recently i hear him babbling on about how Sachin Tendulkar should have been man of the series in the Commonwealth bank series held recently in Australia. India won the series and Murray said an Indian should have won the Man of the series. I agree with that. The fact is Nathan Bracken of Australia won the man of the series.. But the thing that i dont agree with Murray is that he thought Sachin Tendulkar should have won the man of the series. Sachin Tendulkar was performing poorly for the first 12 games. Nathan Bracken was performing all season for the Aussies, taking the most wickets in the whole competition. Sachin Tendulkar was not given the man of the series and finely so. But don't get me wrong I don't want Bracken to get it either. My first choice would be Gautam Gambhir then probably Mahendra Singh Dhoni and then maybe Bracken then Tendulkar. In the end i ended up throwing my pocket dictionary at my tv.

Frodo

Recently i was going through the Lord of the rings trilogy. It was really good and was very satisfying. The only thing that I hated in it was Frodo. Frodo developed into a character that J.R.R Tolkien knew I would hate. Some of the things that he did to Samwise was unnecessary and not the way that hobbits should talk to each other. For example in the third movie when Golem turned Frodo against Samwise and set him up with the bread crumbs was stupid of Frodo to fall for it. It was elementary. Anyhow i ended up throwing my collins pocket dictionary at my tv.