(I've got a migraine and news consumption has been low so I thought I'd shoot this out there)
Vegetarianism. The principle (as I understand it from friends who choose this way of life) is that it is wrong to eat animals, whether because of moral grounds, theological grounds, tastes or some other idiopathic reason. Herbivorism if you please, which, as referred to in the Wikipedia link, is the consumption of plant substances.
I adore plant substances, but I am also quite a fan of meat. However, I am not such a fan as to become a carnivore.
Things that irk me about Vegetarians is their obscure and often hypocritical principles.
You will often find vegetarians who wear leather without a second thought, although it is not currently vogue to wear fur. They are generally lucky enough to get substitute jackets but shoes still tend to contain leather.
Therefore I find fault with their principles. I am a great admirer of those with the tenacity to pursue nothing but man-made substances. But as the cruelty of eating other live animals is the core reason for the majority of vegetarians, stop being so bloody hypocritical!
Don't even get me on to Pescatarians.
I'm quite principled. And I'm liberal enough to accept what people do, but I will be inclined to moan about hypocrites.
My own approach to eating meat is a principled one, I believe.
I eat animals where humans make use of the majority of the materials the animal produces in death. For example, a cow produces leather as well as meat, the internal organs are also consumed with offal feeding pets. Therefore eating cows is justified. As are pigs and sheep. But eating game is not. The majority of game meat is wasted, as are skins and internal organs.
It works both ways too. I wouldnt wear mink because we dont consume mink meat. I wear leather, and suede but not rabbit fur.
On a different note, I am vaguely amused by my vegetarian friend who seeks to eat meat at festivals on the basis if it can kill you as meat, it is still an animal.
Showing posts with label Random. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Random. Show all posts
19 May 2011
15 May 2011
The Tale of The Tap - or how not to spend your anniversary
There are better ways to celebrate a wedding anniversary.
When we got married, we hadnt thought about the principles of anniversaries. As my colleague put it to my husband, "It's like a whole other valentines day, mate".
Not that I expect ubiquitous hegemonic excuses for romance.
However, I do not expect a five hour intensive course in amateur plumbing either!
Kitchen tap was leaking. A glance told us our enormous porcelain art-class sink wouldnt be coming out.
Much googling, we discovered our tap is called a "monobloc" mixer with two feeds... no, really.
We then discovered how to take it apart. But our spanner wasnt big enough (not normally a problem).
So, we called a friend, who brought over a spanner and washers. However, his spanner didnt fit either.
After a cup of tea, we decided to drive 9 miles to see my father.
We arrived on the farm and Dad began searching through his stable for the various wrenches he had.
As he was doing this, I noticed his male stud llama having an altercation with a yearling foal. The foal bit the llama's ear and the llama leapt over the fence into the sandschool. The yearling bolted, chased rigorously by the seething llama. I could only wish I had a video camera at that precise point. So we separated the llama and the foal, and put all of the horses into the field.
However, in the mean time the llama jumped back into the sand school and started chatting up the lady llamas in the next field. As Dad and husband searched the stable, one of the female llamas leapt over a hedge and into the gap between the sandschool and the hedge.
We had to stop our search, get help and it took seven people to trap the young flirty female llama and keep her away from the randy stud llama, and keep the horses away as well.
To add to the surreal, my younger sister was doing this in a bridesmaids dress she was getting fitted.
Finally we got an enormous adjustable wrench, some more washers and a strange contraption for something else. It looked like a metal actualisation of Hebrew, but apparently it would be useful.
Once home, it only took forty minutes to get the washer changed.
But yes, a surreal first wedding anniversary.
When we got married, we hadnt thought about the principles of anniversaries. As my colleague put it to my husband, "It's like a whole other valentines day, mate".
Not that I expect ubiquitous hegemonic excuses for romance.
However, I do not expect a five hour intensive course in amateur plumbing either!
Kitchen tap was leaking. A glance told us our enormous porcelain art-class sink wouldnt be coming out.
Much googling, we discovered our tap is called a "monobloc" mixer with two feeds... no, really.
We then discovered how to take it apart. But our spanner wasnt big enough (not normally a problem).
So, we called a friend, who brought over a spanner and washers. However, his spanner didnt fit either.
After a cup of tea, we decided to drive 9 miles to see my father.
We arrived on the farm and Dad began searching through his stable for the various wrenches he had.
As he was doing this, I noticed his male stud llama having an altercation with a yearling foal. The foal bit the llama's ear and the llama leapt over the fence into the sandschool. The yearling bolted, chased rigorously by the seething llama. I could only wish I had a video camera at that precise point. So we separated the llama and the foal, and put all of the horses into the field.
However, in the mean time the llama jumped back into the sand school and started chatting up the lady llamas in the next field. As Dad and husband searched the stable, one of the female llamas leapt over a hedge and into the gap between the sandschool and the hedge.
We had to stop our search, get help and it took seven people to trap the young flirty female llama and keep her away from the randy stud llama, and keep the horses away as well.
To add to the surreal, my younger sister was doing this in a bridesmaids dress she was getting fitted.
Finally we got an enormous adjustable wrench, some more washers and a strange contraption for something else. It looked like a metal actualisation of Hebrew, but apparently it would be useful.
Once home, it only took forty minutes to get the washer changed.
But yes, a surreal first wedding anniversary.
14 May 2011
A Discursive on Death By Television
Is the death of a man on television a significant milestone for the 21st Century?
A man took his dying breaths on the BBC this week, which could be considered a revolutionary step forward for media development, although a much more macabre one than Big Brother.
The "viddy screen" is a huge social and cultural element of our lives, whether you watch while on Twitter or are a regular soap digestor, embracing the best of terrestrial television.
Regular readers will be aware of my dislike for the hyperreal portrayal of events in the media, a sensationalist and dumbing down of social norms which has become more and more invasive and destructive in it's pursuit for instant gratification.
The role of TV takes many forms in our culture, from background noise to all encompassing existence, but the overall understanding of the role of the television is nicely put in this article;
But significantly since the beginning of the 21st Century, there has been a development towards not just consuming a television show, but to vicariously experience a television show.
The showing of a man's death, admittedly in an educational context, contradicts and yet emboldens the philosophical concept that in order to "be" you must "do". Without dissolving into a discursive on existentialism, it is necessary to observe how media, whether television, social media or press, has shaped the current status of human existence, purpose and definition.
Death by television is a further determination of a surrogate experience where culture has evolved to such a degree as to negate the very physicality of the human existence.
When all communication and experience can be simplified into electronic communication, we are conditioned into the human body, and indeed life, as being a circumstantial part of existence rather than a fundamental part.
With computer games that allow activity to be part of the great technology revolution, we are potentially moving swiftly towards an actualisation of "social television", whereby people will interact solely by screen and can be observed and observe through these means. The stark reality of a "telescreen" of Orwell potential is drawing closer.
And as we vicariously die, by screen, we are permitting this change.
In the months to come, we will see Channel Four screen the live consumption of illegal substances, again, commencing in educational context . But don't forget that Big Brother the tv show was borne out of Zimbardo's controversial prison experiment. Let us examine human behaviour, and thus we can understand, empathise and have no need to experience.
As Adrenalin junkies will admit, the rush of hormonal excesses from activity is a hedonistic pursuit. But if television continues down this path, we will have no need to jump from planes, as we can employ similar rushes from watching someone else do it.
So yes, I would say the death of a man on television is a likely milestone. But a milestone of a negative fashion, simply pointing us further down the line towards a "Matrix" like existence.
A man took his dying breaths on the BBC this week, which could be considered a revolutionary step forward for media development, although a much more macabre one than Big Brother.
The "viddy screen" is a huge social and cultural element of our lives, whether you watch while on Twitter or are a regular soap digestor, embracing the best of terrestrial television.
Regular readers will be aware of my dislike for the hyperreal portrayal of events in the media, a sensationalist and dumbing down of social norms which has become more and more invasive and destructive in it's pursuit for instant gratification.
The role of TV takes many forms in our culture, from background noise to all encompassing existence, but the overall understanding of the role of the television is nicely put in this article;
As "modern free time" tends to lend itself to citizen activism and the size of the overall population increases, it is necessary to keep people occupied, and TV is ideal for this purpose
But significantly since the beginning of the 21st Century, there has been a development towards not just consuming a television show, but to vicariously experience a television show.
The showing of a man's death, admittedly in an educational context, contradicts and yet emboldens the philosophical concept that in order to "be" you must "do". Without dissolving into a discursive on existentialism, it is necessary to observe how media, whether television, social media or press, has shaped the current status of human existence, purpose and definition.
Death by television is a further determination of a surrogate experience where culture has evolved to such a degree as to negate the very physicality of the human existence.
When all communication and experience can be simplified into electronic communication, we are conditioned into the human body, and indeed life, as being a circumstantial part of existence rather than a fundamental part.
With computer games that allow activity to be part of the great technology revolution, we are potentially moving swiftly towards an actualisation of "social television", whereby people will interact solely by screen and can be observed and observe through these means. The stark reality of a "telescreen" of Orwell potential is drawing closer.
And as we vicariously die, by screen, we are permitting this change.
In the months to come, we will see Channel Four screen the live consumption of illegal substances, again, commencing in educational context . But don't forget that Big Brother the tv show was borne out of Zimbardo's controversial prison experiment. Let us examine human behaviour, and thus we can understand, empathise and have no need to experience.
As Adrenalin junkies will admit, the rush of hormonal excesses from activity is a hedonistic pursuit. But if television continues down this path, we will have no need to jump from planes, as we can employ similar rushes from watching someone else do it.
So yes, I would say the death of a man on television is a likely milestone. But a milestone of a negative fashion, simply pointing us further down the line towards a "Matrix" like existence.
15 Apr 2011
Random Observation
This Wikipedia Article on Speed Limits states:
I am concerned that someone may consider there to be an enforceable limit on the speed of light.
"This article is about road speed limits. For speed of light, see special relativity."
I am concerned that someone may consider there to be an enforceable limit on the speed of light.
2 Apr 2011
My Submissions to BBC Radio 4 Any Questions
1. Is the news that the Daily and Sunday Sport are going into receivership an indirect win for gender equality in the UK?
I for one am delighted that my newsagents will not be adorning borderline pornography in the Newspaper aisles, now I can only hope for the same fate to become of Nuts, GQ etc.
2. When we impose democratic regime on other countries, does this include lack of tolerance of freedom of political expression?
As per the attacks on UN Workers in Afghanistan yesterday, we are imposing a democratic regime on Middle Eastern Countries but that should not contravene religious expression, and when such religious expression causes such dire human rights breaches, we must reexamine the social regulations we are thrusting upon countries.
I have concerns that History will look back on the Western imposition of democracy on Middle Eastern Nations rather like we now look back on the British Empire imposing Christianity on the Chinese.
Even though we consider that "democracy is not an ideal political system, but it's better than the alternatives".
I for one am delighted that my newsagents will not be adorning borderline pornography in the Newspaper aisles, now I can only hope for the same fate to become of Nuts, GQ etc.
2. When we impose democratic regime on other countries, does this include lack of tolerance of freedom of political expression?
As per the attacks on UN Workers in Afghanistan yesterday, we are imposing a democratic regime on Middle Eastern Countries but that should not contravene religious expression, and when such religious expression causes such dire human rights breaches, we must reexamine the social regulations we are thrusting upon countries.
I have concerns that History will look back on the Western imposition of democracy on Middle Eastern Nations rather like we now look back on the British Empire imposing Christianity on the Chinese.
Even though we consider that "democracy is not an ideal political system, but it's better than the alternatives".
23 Mar 2011
New Name
Discussions with other bloggers, and general observations, have made me reconsider the name of my blog.
While I am a prolific word-geek as some may have observed, and therefore fully embrace the name "disconcerted discursives", it is not, perhaps, the most memorable name for blogging under.
Therefore, I am considering a new blog, with a new name. Same verbose, analytical debate and random observation, but a catchier title and a few more hits.
Do you have any suggestions?
While I am a prolific word-geek as some may have observed, and therefore fully embrace the name "disconcerted discursives", it is not, perhaps, the most memorable name for blogging under.
Therefore, I am considering a new blog, with a new name. Same verbose, analytical debate and random observation, but a catchier title and a few more hits.
Do you have any suggestions?
20 Mar 2011
Considering Renewable Energy in Political Science Terms: An Analogy
For fun, I've been reading up on A Level political science (no, really). This firstly means I learn new words, and secondly, means I can apply obscure and esoteric concepts to the mundane.
Today's dichotomous consideration is energy interpreted in political science terms.
Current Regimes
Energy in western civilisation can be seen as a profit market margin, which means, in capitalist political terms, it is a plutocracy and depotism. Plutocracy because wealth and power control the market forces, driving prices up and service levels down. Depotic because we are, in essence, discussing one main group of providers, who have refined the market to such a degree, they can squash any competitors to retain that power.
Looking Ahead to Renewable Energy
In the current energy crisis, we are seeing all sorts of alternative energy forms being discussed. Do we shift to Wind, as Germany's pledge to commit 50% of energy supplies to renewable sources indicate?
Or solar? Imposing reflective surfaces on every new home?
How about water, using waves to power the generators?
The biggest problem I see initiates with the current plutocracy in oil supplies. The industry is controlling development of alternative energy strands with a vice-like grip. They are unwilling to consider an oligarchy of energy provision, where by their only resolution of the problem of expiring energy resources is a singular, powerful and dominant, forming a Kyriarchy that can cripple competitors with ease.
Combatting the Dictators
The market is prime for kratocracy, for an oppertune company to invest in multiple, egalitarianist provisiong of energy, whereby the larger suppliers cannot cripple their business through Kakistocracy.
By introducing market providers that formulate a more participatory democracy, an egalitarianist interpretation of market access, we may run the risk of a mediocracy, the lowest common denominator of services.
How do we challenge this?
Well, perhaps people need to approach the sources of their energy with a different mindset?
But ultimately, with energy provisions being convinience, which, of course, our plutocratic energy companies cash in on, we are unlikely to be driven to rebel.
Perhaps Virgin should embark upon a multifaceted energy provision, assaulting the market in much the same way they have with Satilite and Cable TV?
Or perhaps we need a strong government commitment to chnaging energy supplies to counter being held captive to oil.
Lateral Discursive on Oil
It would be interesting to analyse what this would free us from.
If we were not dependant on Oil as a provider of energy, would our transport activities change?
How about our food consumption?
Our attitude to work and travel?
The obvious one, how about our attitude to resolving civil conflict in other countries under an opaque cloak of "United Nations Resolution"?
I could go on all day!
Today's dichotomous consideration is energy interpreted in political science terms.
Current Regimes
Energy in western civilisation can be seen as a profit market margin, which means, in capitalist political terms, it is a plutocracy and depotism. Plutocracy because wealth and power control the market forces, driving prices up and service levels down. Depotic because we are, in essence, discussing one main group of providers, who have refined the market to such a degree, they can squash any competitors to retain that power.
Looking Ahead to Renewable Energy
In the current energy crisis, we are seeing all sorts of alternative energy forms being discussed. Do we shift to Wind, as Germany's pledge to commit 50% of energy supplies to renewable sources indicate?
Or solar? Imposing reflective surfaces on every new home?
How about water, using waves to power the generators?
The biggest problem I see initiates with the current plutocracy in oil supplies. The industry is controlling development of alternative energy strands with a vice-like grip. They are unwilling to consider an oligarchy of energy provision, where by their only resolution of the problem of expiring energy resources is a singular, powerful and dominant, forming a Kyriarchy that can cripple competitors with ease.
Combatting the Dictators
The market is prime for kratocracy, for an oppertune company to invest in multiple, egalitarianist provisiong of energy, whereby the larger suppliers cannot cripple their business through Kakistocracy.
By introducing market providers that formulate a more participatory democracy, an egalitarianist interpretation of market access, we may run the risk of a mediocracy, the lowest common denominator of services.
How do we challenge this?
Well, perhaps people need to approach the sources of their energy with a different mindset?
But ultimately, with energy provisions being convinience, which, of course, our plutocratic energy companies cash in on, we are unlikely to be driven to rebel.
Perhaps Virgin should embark upon a multifaceted energy provision, assaulting the market in much the same way they have with Satilite and Cable TV?
Or perhaps we need a strong government commitment to chnaging energy supplies to counter being held captive to oil.
Lateral Discursive on Oil
It would be interesting to analyse what this would free us from.
If we were not dependant on Oil as a provider of energy, would our transport activities change?
How about our food consumption?
Our attitude to work and travel?
The obvious one, how about our attitude to resolving civil conflict in other countries under an opaque cloak of "United Nations Resolution"?
I could go on all day!
6 Mar 2011
22 Jan 2011
Thoughts while on Penicillin: The Symbiotic Relationships in the Media
There's an interesting irony in the 21st Century media consumption.
An honourable friend on Twitter commented that he hated DVDs because of the trailers.
One of the added bonuses of illegal downloading is potentially escaping the thrusting of advertising down our throats at every opportunity.
[That is, of course, as well as not paying, getting it quickly, general social disobedience joy etc, although I am not condoning such action, one must make a psychological assessment of why such a crime would be committed]
The relationship between media and the advertising industry is symbiotic in a capitalist society. One drives the other, creating revenue streams that can perpetuate as one or the other outdates and society moves on.
Therefore the consumer of the media, loathe to take the thorns with the roses, continues to strive to beat the system.
Downloading films illegally is just one area this can be acheived, although one may make small and large sacrifices to avoid the advertising.
Another is the advent of television one can pause, rewind and fast-forward. This is truly a glorious example of a postmodern interpretation of media, where outdated technology references create an illusion of control that existed in the first place.
On top of this, we see the news media circling around increasing advertising to justify free papers, paying for websites (and do you get advert free The Times now?) and other folly.
The push is towards synopsis, the irony is that the consumers of media become like, or actual criminals, racing to beat the advertisers who appear like CCTV and guards trying to justify the costs of the media.
The relationship between police and crime is as symbiotic as media and advertising, although one could analogise police/crime as lion/deer, where as media/advertising is more oak/mistletoe.
But the relationship between media, advertising and the consumer is more complex, and potentially as dependent.
A friend recently complained to me that Gok was filming in Birmingham and had emptied her shop of customers. And I responded, "Oi Gok, you exist to drive people to shops to purchase outfits, not take them away".
There are, of course, more ways of advertising than simply trailers and commercials. I have moaned repeatedly about nauseous product placement in Larrson's Millenium Triology, feeling obligated to eat certain pizzas, use certain computers and drink certain beers.
Even Twitter is now full of endorsement, blighting marketing agencies' bid to get faux recommendations through social networking, the secret is out and people are simply being paid.
Where does it all end? Will we continue to outrun advertising through criminal and non criminal activity? Or are we truly codependent?
An honourable friend on Twitter commented that he hated DVDs because of the trailers.
One of the added bonuses of illegal downloading is potentially escaping the thrusting of advertising down our throats at every opportunity.
[That is, of course, as well as not paying, getting it quickly, general social disobedience joy etc, although I am not condoning such action, one must make a psychological assessment of why such a crime would be committed]
The relationship between media and the advertising industry is symbiotic in a capitalist society. One drives the other, creating revenue streams that can perpetuate as one or the other outdates and society moves on.
Therefore the consumer of the media, loathe to take the thorns with the roses, continues to strive to beat the system.
Downloading films illegally is just one area this can be acheived, although one may make small and large sacrifices to avoid the advertising.
Another is the advent of television one can pause, rewind and fast-forward. This is truly a glorious example of a postmodern interpretation of media, where outdated technology references create an illusion of control that existed in the first place.
On top of this, we see the news media circling around increasing advertising to justify free papers, paying for websites (and do you get advert free The Times now?) and other folly.
The push is towards synopsis, the irony is that the consumers of media become like, or actual criminals, racing to beat the advertisers who appear like CCTV and guards trying to justify the costs of the media.
The relationship between police and crime is as symbiotic as media and advertising, although one could analogise police/crime as lion/deer, where as media/advertising is more oak/mistletoe.
But the relationship between media, advertising and the consumer is more complex, and potentially as dependent.
A friend recently complained to me that Gok was filming in Birmingham and had emptied her shop of customers. And I responded, "Oi Gok, you exist to drive people to shops to purchase outfits, not take them away".
There are, of course, more ways of advertising than simply trailers and commercials. I have moaned repeatedly about nauseous product placement in Larrson's Millenium Triology, feeling obligated to eat certain pizzas, use certain computers and drink certain beers.
Even Twitter is now full of endorsement, blighting marketing agencies' bid to get faux recommendations through social networking, the secret is out and people are simply being paid.
Where does it all end? Will we continue to outrun advertising through criminal and non criminal activity? Or are we truly codependent?
19 Sept 2010
A Few Digressions; Modernity, Choice and Lib Dem Conference
After a devestating start (my blackberry was nicked/lost/dissipated into thin air yesterday), I think the whole day picked up greatly.
I want to, and will, digress on modernity.
I recall a time, twelve years ago, when I didn't have a mobile phone. And I didn't miss it. This morning, when I woke and could not tell the time, I was thrown into complete disarray.
All of a sudden, I was at a major city, at a major political event, and I felt completely isolated. Yet why would such a loss make me feel isolated? Surely, the isolation would only occur if I required such a presence of the internet, contact and reaffirment of the indicative survellance structure?
I would be inclined to say, most people feel they choose to communicate with the internet world, the modernity world of social networking and constant awareness. However, I now realise my dependancy on a postmodern concept of reassurance and support that perhaps I had not considered before.
Without the fundemental, and it is to me, internet contact, I feel I cannot identify support and flock mentality. Yet prior to losing it, I didn't realise it was this!
It is ultimately the choice that I am concerned and analysing. Such is the power of the one dimensional man, that we are convinced our purchases into society through modernity are choice of sorts. We chose to engage with social networking, we do not depend on social net working.
It provides a false sense of intimacy that appeases the ego. That generates a validation of social interraction that is integral to gregarious human nature. And yet it is a facade that is facilitated by and perpetuated by modernity and requires technology to maintain. And we consider the technology to be a "choice".
On choice;
Last week I drove passed a cat dead in the road. So when I came back and it was still there, I stopped the car, collected the cat in a carrier bag and attemtped to find it's owner.
To no avail.
Therefore I was left with a dead cat in a carrier bag.
There is a moral there somewhere. Or a metaphor.
On Conference
Delighted to be demonstrated against. One view; I would have done a better job! Home printed A4 banners in black and white. Really, Labour?
I'm genuinely shocked by The Independent Article> This was not the feel I got from the conference at all.
I do wish members would realise we represent 1/6 of the coalition and focus on positive promotion of what we have acheived; Nuclear Power, AV Referendum, Basic Tax Allowance, Free Schools.
There is a need for the party to promote positively what they have acheived not what they want to. And I think we need to start now, not in the future. Carpe Diem
PS I'm not drunk, just tired and introspective, anyone know what the cat thing means?!
I want to, and will, digress on modernity.
I recall a time, twelve years ago, when I didn't have a mobile phone. And I didn't miss it. This morning, when I woke and could not tell the time, I was thrown into complete disarray.
All of a sudden, I was at a major city, at a major political event, and I felt completely isolated. Yet why would such a loss make me feel isolated? Surely, the isolation would only occur if I required such a presence of the internet, contact and reaffirment of the indicative survellance structure?
I would be inclined to say, most people feel they choose to communicate with the internet world, the modernity world of social networking and constant awareness. However, I now realise my dependancy on a postmodern concept of reassurance and support that perhaps I had not considered before.
Without the fundemental, and it is to me, internet contact, I feel I cannot identify support and flock mentality. Yet prior to losing it, I didn't realise it was this!
It is ultimately the choice that I am concerned and analysing. Such is the power of the one dimensional man, that we are convinced our purchases into society through modernity are choice of sorts. We chose to engage with social networking, we do not depend on social net working.
It provides a false sense of intimacy that appeases the ego. That generates a validation of social interraction that is integral to gregarious human nature. And yet it is a facade that is facilitated by and perpetuated by modernity and requires technology to maintain. And we consider the technology to be a "choice".
On choice;
Last week I drove passed a cat dead in the road. So when I came back and it was still there, I stopped the car, collected the cat in a carrier bag and attemtped to find it's owner.
To no avail.
Therefore I was left with a dead cat in a carrier bag.
There is a moral there somewhere. Or a metaphor.
On Conference
Delighted to be demonstrated against. One view; I would have done a better job! Home printed A4 banners in black and white. Really, Labour?
I'm genuinely shocked by The Independent Article> This was not the feel I got from the conference at all.
I do wish members would realise we represent 1/6 of the coalition and focus on positive promotion of what we have acheived; Nuclear Power, AV Referendum, Basic Tax Allowance, Free Schools.
There is a need for the party to promote positively what they have acheived not what they want to. And I think we need to start now, not in the future. Carpe Diem
PS I'm not drunk, just tired and introspective, anyone know what the cat thing means?!
1 Apr 2010
Electronic Tags
I thought I would have a look this morning and see what the statistics there are on interferrence with electronic tags placed on prisoners and refugees.
This is the first google search result:
This is the first google search result:
10 Mar 2010
One of those "I should really go to bed" posts
Another gem of a Wikipedia daily article popped up in my inbox just now; The Superb Fairywren.
Not only is this a spectacular name for a bird, but it is also a spectacularly dull looking bird with such an exotic name.
The word "superb" is defined as;
–adjective
1.
admirably fine or excellent; extremely good: a superb performance.
2.
sumptuous; rich; grand: superb jewels.
3.
of a proudly imposing appearance or kind; majestic: superb mountain vistas.
Personally, I am struggling to find anything majestic or imposing about this blue and white bird, other than the blue referred to in the article. Given that is is also indicated to be "sedentary", I would imagine the latter adjectival definition is not the chose one.
So is it the first definition of the what is nearly a superlative description of a small and inactive bird? If so, I imagine it is largely a projection of fancy on the "peculiar behavioural characteristics" cited by Wiki, in paticular the social monogamy combined with sexual promiscuity. [Is this, perhaps the ultimate definition of the society in Brave New World in itself?!].
It is, of course, most likely point two is why this abjective is assigned to the bird, by over enthusiastic "twitchers" about the blue plummage. However, it does somewhat lack the brilliance of the common Kingfisher
It seems there is only one bird enthusiast who completes articles on Wiki, or at least on Australian birds, given the similar language for the definitions of Fairywren et al.
Although I was amused to see there is also a "Splendid Fairywren", of which I have no criticism, as it is rather splendid to look at.
However, I can think of other, miscellaneous uses for the term "Superb fairywren", from a rip-off washing up liquid to a fancy dress shop. Suggestions?
Not only is this a spectacular name for a bird, but it is also a spectacularly dull looking bird with such an exotic name.
The word "superb" is defined as;
–adjective
1.
admirably fine or excellent; extremely good: a superb performance.
2.
sumptuous; rich; grand: superb jewels.
3.
of a proudly imposing appearance or kind; majestic: superb mountain vistas.
Personally, I am struggling to find anything majestic or imposing about this blue and white bird, other than the blue referred to in the article. Given that is is also indicated to be "sedentary", I would imagine the latter adjectival definition is not the chose one.
So is it the first definition of the what is nearly a superlative description of a small and inactive bird? If so, I imagine it is largely a projection of fancy on the "peculiar behavioural characteristics" cited by Wiki, in paticular the social monogamy combined with sexual promiscuity. [Is this, perhaps the ultimate definition of the society in Brave New World in itself?!].
It is, of course, most likely point two is why this abjective is assigned to the bird, by over enthusiastic "twitchers" about the blue plummage. However, it does somewhat lack the brilliance of the common Kingfisher
It seems there is only one bird enthusiast who completes articles on Wiki, or at least on Australian birds, given the similar language for the definitions of Fairywren et al.
Although I was amused to see there is also a "Splendid Fairywren", of which I have no criticism, as it is rather splendid to look at.
However, I can think of other, miscellaneous uses for the term "Superb fairywren", from a rip-off washing up liquid to a fancy dress shop. Suggestions?
24 Feb 2010
One of those random "I have been in the pub" comments
I get bored. So bored I get Daily Wikipedia Articles emailed to me.
However, today the daily article from Wiki hit an all time low in the boredom of academics
Here is the beginning of the version that was emailed to me;
"A castle is a defensive structure associated with the Middle Ages,found in Europe and the Middle East. The precise meaning of "castle" is debated by scholars, but it is usually considered to be the "private fortified residence" of a lord or noble. Over the approximately 900 years that castles were built they took on a great many forms with many different features, although some, such as curtain walls and arrowslits, were commonplace."
Now, I appreciate that Wikipedia should list everything to be a comprehensive encyclopedia... but...!
This may keep me amused for some time.
Other gems of academic thought include
Counch
Door
Pet
(These are the things in my immediate eyesight, "Cat" didn't make the grade.)
However, today the daily article from Wiki hit an all time low in the boredom of academics
Here is the beginning of the version that was emailed to me;
"A castle is a defensive structure associated with the Middle Ages,found in Europe and the Middle East. The precise meaning of "castle" is debated by scholars, but it is usually considered to be the "private fortified residence" of a lord or noble. Over the approximately 900 years that castles were built they took on a great many forms with many different features, although some, such as curtain walls and arrowslits, were commonplace."
Now, I appreciate that Wikipedia should list everything to be a comprehensive encyclopedia... but...!
This may keep me amused for some time.
Other gems of academic thought include
Counch
Door
Pet
(These are the things in my immediate eyesight, "Cat" didn't make the grade.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
