Ooh, here's another good example of 'the media' not presenting the whole 
story, skewing what people think of something:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,504423,00.html

has a quote markedly absent in most of the other 'wa ha, humans are 
smarter than apes', namely "Human children are not overall more 
intelligent than other primates," concluded the lead researcher, Esther 
Herrmann of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology 
in Leipzig, "but instead have specialized skills of social cognition. 
They learn in a way that chimpanzees don't learn."

then there's this gem, a comment by another scientist in the same field:

http://news.google.com/nwshp?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&oe=UTF-8&channel=s&tab=wn&ned=us&ncl=1120425672&hl=en&btclp=1&scoring=r

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> Ooh, here's another good example of 'the media' not presenting the whole 
> story, skewing what people think of something:
> 
> http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,504423,00.html
> 
> has a quote markedly absent in most of the other 'wa ha, humans are 
> smarter than apes', namely "Human children are not overall more 
> intelligent than other primates," concluded the lead researcher, Esther 
> Herrmann of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology 
> in Leipzig, "but instead have specialized skills of social cognition. 
> They learn in a way that chimpanzees don't learn."
> 
> then there's this gem, a comment by another scientist in the same field:
> 
>
http://news.google.com/nwshp?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&oe=UTF-8&channel=s&tab=wn&ned=us&ncl=1120425672&hl=en&btclp=1&scoring=r

> 
> 


Human Supremecist Party Line:  "We *must* be vastly superior to the 
apes--we're toolmakers!  Oh, sure, an ape will select a rock to use as a 
nutcracker, or strip the leaves off a stick to make a termite fishing 
tool, but *we* make tools just all the time!"

I'd be inclined to guess that the percentage of people who have actually 
made a tool is probably higher here than in some other places, though 
this may depend on whether you consider a computer program to be a tool 
(and I don't count "using the good butcher knife to open a can of 
evaporated milk because you can't find the magnetic church key that's 
stuck to the side of the fridge" as toolmaking).  But, anyway, I got to 
thinking about this a few years back on a camping trip.

When it was time to set up the tent, I looked around and found a nice 
rock to use to hammer in the stakes.  Later, after the campfire was 
built, I stripped the leaves off a couple of long, thin sticks to make 
weenie-cookers...

Well, it just made me think, that's all.

--Sherry Shaw


-- 
#macro T(E,N)sphere{x,.4rotate z*E*60translate y*N pigment{wrinkles scale
.3}finish{ambient 1}}#end#local I=0;#while(I<5)T(I,1)T(1-I,-1)#local I=I+
1;#end camera{location-5*z}plane{z,37 pigment{granite color_map{[.7rgb 0]
[1rgb 1]}}finish{ambient 2}}//                                   TenMoons

Post a reply to this message

http://xkcd.com/258/
-- 
 From a certain point onward there is no longer any turning back.
That is the point that must be reached.
Franz Kafka

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> Ooh, here's another good example of 'the media' not presenting the whole 
> story, skewing what people think of something:
> 
> http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,504423,00.html
> 
> has a quote markedly absent in most of the other 'wa ha, humans are 
> smarter than apes', namely "Human children are not overall more 
> intelligent than other primates," concluded the lead researcher, Esther 
> Herrmann of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology 
> in Leipzig, "but instead have specialized skills of social cognition. 
> They learn in a way that chimpanzees don't learn."

It's been known since the sixties that human children and chimpanzee 
children are developmentally neck-and-neck, with the chimps having the 
lead in some areas.

Until they turn three.

At age three, the chimp stops developing mentally.  The human's just 
getting started.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 17:35:50 -0400, Warp wrote:

>   I think anyone who believes that the 9/11 conspiracy theory has
>   nothing
> of truth in it should watch this video.

Any good conspiracy theory is going to have enough truth in it to be 
convincing.

Post a reply to this message

Late response here. I only just looked at this link because people at work
started talking about the conspiracy theories.

I don't like the link. I was hoping I could send it to some people, but I
would be embarrassed to. Watching this video feels like reading an internet
forum thread. The grammar is completely wrong in places, for starters, so it
doesn't appear intelligent. There's a lot of sarcasm which is unnecessary
and unprofessional. The commentary sometimes seems out of place or
irrelevant or is unclear about its point. In some places it fails to give
any more evidence for its counter arguments than the original video does. I
almost find it harder to believe than the original video, and I feel more
exasperation towards the creator of the commentary than the creator of the
original narrative. The word "prove" is way overused.

I really like the part (about 28 minutes in) where it says "Yes, Wittenburg
is a pilot. He is also a conspiracy theorist who does not believe that ANY
aircraft hit the Pentagon, which makes him stupid or insane. He is the
minority." So, what's the point here? That the people they're taking their
evidence from believe what they're saying? Is this man supposed to be
discredited because the person who wrote the commentary thinks he's "stupid
or insane?" Or because he's the minority? That's really bad logic. Worse, in
fact, than the logic the conspirists are using.

There are some good parts, but too much of it is condescending.

Anyway, I don't believe in the conspiracy theories in the slightest. I'm not
trying to make a case in favor of Loose Change. I just wish that this video
did a better job of making its argument.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message

My point with posting the video was that one should know what the
conspiracy theorists are saying and what's the true explanation for
those things.

  If you don't know what they are saying and someone confronts you
with those arguments, you may well be left silent.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>   My point with posting the video was that one should know what the
> conspiracy theorists are saying and what's the true explanation for
> those things.
>
>   If you don't know what they are saying and someone confronts you
> with those arguments, you may well be left silent.

I agree with this.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message

Sherry Shaw wrote:
> Human Supremecist Party Line:  "We *must* be vastly superior to the 
> apes--we're toolmakers!  Oh, sure, an ape will select a rock to use as a 
> nutcracker, or strip the leaves off a stick to make a termite fishing 
> tool, but *we* make tools just all the time!"

Actually, I think the difference is that people make tools whose only 
purpose is to make other tools.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Sherry Shaw wrote:
>> Human Supremecist Party Line:  "We *must* be vastly superior to the 
>> apes--we're toolmakers!  Oh, sure, an ape will select a rock to use as 
>> a nutcracker, or strip the leaves off a stick to make a termite 
>> fishing tool, but *we* make tools just all the time!"
> 
> Actually, I think the difference is that people make tools whose only 
> purpose is to make other tools.
> 

Wait a minute, waaaaaaaaiiiit a minute.......If I had found a bigger 
rock and used it to break the tent-stake-hammering rock in half, I could 
have gotten a sharp edge and *chopped* the weenie-cooking sticks off the 
floated-up tree limb instead of just pulling them.......*scraped* the 
leaves off the sticks............

Whoa!  You're a genius! ;)

Seriously, though, I think we all need to get used to thinking of it as 
a gradient, even a really big looong gradient, rather than a dividing 
line.  I don't think the "Lords of Creation" idea is serving us too well 
right now.  But yeah, tools to make tools to make tools....I'd be 
interested to know if those nut-cracking chimps have ever gotten to that 
point, however briefly--you know, the ones who pick out the right base 
to lay the nut on, AND pick out a rock or stick to whack the nut with, 
AND carry the nut-whacker around with them to use again.  It seems like 
eventually some big, burly chimp would miss the nut and whack the base 
hard enough to accidentally chip the whacker into something more useful...

But would (s)he figure out what had happened?  And manage to pass along 
that knowledge to others?  And would a human get a chance to observe it 
in action before those chimps go extinct?  (Heavy sigh.)

Wonder how long our ancestors spent at that point...and how long it took 
the new ideas to catch on...and how many geeky ape-folk became some 
critter's lunch because they got interested in what they were doing and 
forgot to look around every now and then...

Sherry "Yep, We're Apes" Shaw

-- 
#macro T(E,N)sphere{x,.4rotate z*E*60translate y*N pigment{wrinkles scale
.3}finish{ambient 1}}#end#local I=0;#while(I<5)T(I,1)T(1-I,-1)#local I=I+
1;#end camera{location-5*z}plane{z,37 pigment{granite color_map{[.7rgb 0]
[1rgb 1]}}finish{ambient 2}}//                                   TenMoons

Post a reply to this message