And thus I get a new friend to counterpoint the new foes I made today. Dawkins should be required reading, though I found "Climbing Mount Improbable" better than "The Blind Watchmaker". It could simply be that the most basic points--which must be made in all of the books--are also the most awesome, and so the first one you read seems the best. Since I'd read the entire collection before hitting TBW it had little if anything to add.
I think the learning explanation, though not great, would still be possible under Darwinian evolution. If the young monkeys learn their gait from parents and have the capacity to walk upright the learned uprightness would spread down generations. If it gave an advantage it would spread far rather than reverting due to the relative ease of quadrupedal motion for these animals (remember at this stage they're genetically the same as the original quadrupeds). Then selections would be made for those who were better adjusted to upright stance (since they're upright most of the time) and that would make them less likely to go back to all fours.
Personally, and I don't think I'm alone in this, I think a much better explanation is a change of habitat that required early human ancestors to walk upright often which made selection pressures favour those who were more naturally upright until we eventually lost the capacity for quadrupedal gaits.
Reminds me of the satirical article I once read about Dublin's new 'sub-zero' tollerance approach to crime-prevention where it was made illegal to have a north-side address. (The area north of the river Liffey being the poorer and less inviting side of the city)
Don't worry about it, I've only had about 70 hits from it in an hour. The version on u.m.o is old anyway so the savvy ones would still be hitting my server. I'm not in danger of any genuine slashdottings any time soon.
On closer inspection it seems to have a second vertical rod as well as the horizontal rod across the top. The top one is fully extended but the side one isn't. I only saw the top rod originally. There aim was to make it look like it was blowing. Looks like it worked!
You know what's confusing? Looking at soylentred.net's referer logs, wondering what comment I posted would generate that much traffic from slashdot, visiting the thread in question, not recognising it as one I'd participated in (which I hadn't) and not being able to find the link because it's below my threshold. You know what's enlightening? Finding the comment that tried to slashdot my extension. Hope you all like it.
Yes, the far side being called dark does seem to be quite common. I'm sure I've seen or heard the near side being refered to like that though, for the reason I stated. 'Far' and 'near' are of course much better terms to distinguish them.
I believe 'dark side' is used to refer to the near side of the moon because it has the dark maria ('seas' of volcanic rock) that the far side lacks (since the far side is constantly being hit by meteors which break them up).
The rod is pretty obvious, but it does look like there's something blowing the flag in photo 2. You'd think it should be hanging straight but it's not. Wire running through the fabric or something?
I'm deaf and I've been looking for some new deaf jokes:-)
It's good that you've been looking because you would get very far just listening for them. Okay, that was terrible. It turns out I haven't used any of these jokes in years and the only ones I remember are the [insert ethnicity] ones. Have you heard the one about...?
600,000 books sitting unread on pretentious people's coffee tables. That's only rivalled by Ulysses. Well some of them were read but I imagine most people didn't get very far into it.
For instance, I could say "Best-selling author Stephen King's new book Big Scary Stuff comes out on Friday", meaning that King has best-selling books. This is distinct from "Stephen King is the author of the best-seller Jurassic Park", for the latter means that particular book was a best-seller.
The latter also means that Michael Crichton's lawyers will be around to your house any second now to corpse you up.
Not having read the FA, heard the lecture or read the paper I'd hazard a guess that nothing crosses the horizon because time stops at the horizon. From our perspective outside the stuff would fall towards the horizon getting slower and slower the closer it got but it would never reach it.
Yeah it's a bit weird that a guy with a computerized voice actually does the guest voices on shows like Futurama and The Simpsons. Of course there was that story a while back about him being worried he'd lose his voice. Apparently his voice-dealy is really old and won't last too long and they can't get a good replacement. All the modern synths are too good!
Slashdot Mirror
And thus I get a new friend to counterpoint the new foes I made today. Dawkins should be required reading, though I found "Climbing Mount Improbable" better than "The Blind Watchmaker". It could simply be that the most basic points--which must be made in all of the books--are also the most awesome, and so the first one you read seems the best. Since I'd read the entire collection before hitting TBW it had little if anything to add.
I think the learning explanation, though not great, would still be possible under Darwinian evolution. If the young monkeys learn their gait from parents and have the capacity to walk upright the learned uprightness would spread down generations. If it gave an advantage it would spread far rather than reverting due to the relative ease of quadrupedal motion for these animals (remember at this stage they're genetically the same as the original quadrupeds). Then selections would be made for those who were better adjusted to upright stance (since they're upright most of the time) and that would make them less likely to go back to all fours. Personally, and I don't think I'm alone in this, I think a much better explanation is a change of habitat that required early human ancestors to walk upright often which made selection pressures favour those who were more naturally upright until we eventually lost the capacity for quadrupedal gaits.
Reminds me of the satirical article I once read about Dublin's new 'sub-zero' tollerance approach to crime-prevention where it was made illegal to have a north-side address. (The area north of the river Liffey being the poorer and less inviting side of the city)
Dublin may be illegal in the US, but when are you ever going to be caught with it there?
Don't worry about it, I've only had about 70 hits from it in an hour. The version on u.m.o is old anyway so the savvy ones would still be hitting my server. I'm not in danger of any genuine slashdottings any time soon.
On closer inspection it seems to have a second vertical rod as well as the horizontal rod across the top. The top one is fully extended but the side one isn't. I only saw the top rod originally. There aim was to make it look like it was blowing. Looks like it worked!
You know what's confusing? Looking at soylentred.net's referer logs, wondering what comment I posted would generate that much traffic from slashdot, visiting the thread in question, not recognising it as one I'd participated in (which I hadn't) and not being able to find the link because it's below my threshold. You know what's enlightening? Finding the comment that tried to slashdot my extension. Hope you all like it.
All this time I only knew the Pulp Fiction meaning of that word.
Yes, the far side being called dark does seem to be quite common. I'm sure I've seen or heard the near side being refered to like that though, for the reason I stated. 'Far' and 'near' are of course much better terms to distinguish them.
Which side is the bright side?
I believe 'dark side' is used to refer to the near side of the moon because it has the dark maria ('seas' of volcanic rock) that the far side lacks (since the far side is constantly being hit by meteors which break them up).
The rod is pretty obvious, but it does look like there's something blowing the flag in photo 2. You'd think it should be hanging straight but it's not. Wire running through the fabric or something?
Seriously dude, 'photoshop' is a perfectly good verb. 'GIMP', I hope, never will be.
Hey! I am, er, no longer illiterate.
It's good that you've been looking because you would get very far just listening for them. Okay, that was terrible. It turns out I haven't used any of these jokes in years and the only ones I remember are the [insert ethnicity] ones. Have you heard the one about...?
That one is a handy-cap.
Pleased to serve. What's your disability? I have jokes about all of them.
600,000 books sitting unread on pretentious people's coffee tables. That's only rivalled by Ulysses. Well some of them were read but I imagine most people didn't get very far into it.
/. making me wait before I post again)
(Lousy
The latter also means that Michael Crichton's lawyers will be around to your house any second now to corpse you up.
Not having read the FA, heard the lecture or read the paper I'd hazard a guess that nothing crosses the horizon because time stops at the horizon. From our perspective outside the stuff would fall towards the horizon getting slower and slower the closer it got but it would never reach it.
Yeah it's a bit weird that a guy with a computerized voice actually does the guest voices on shows like Futurama and The Simpsons. Of course there was that story a while back about him being worried he'd lose his voice. Apparently his voice-dealy is really old and won't last too long and they can't get a good replacement. All the modern synths are too good!
So what you're saying is your real name is Timothy but there are some who call you... Tim?
So why don't you just go by Mike Bolton?
No way! Why should I change? He's the one that sucks.
I read 'wary'.
There's no chance of that.