Well, the minibarn is clean and our marriage survived. 😀I offered to take Katie to see "King of Kings, but she needs to go grocery shopping for dinner tomorrow night. We'll have all the kids home, so she's making barbeque ribs (in a crock pot), cheesy potatoes, greenbeans, a salad, and a sugar cream pie. Tomorrow evening I am making 15 or 16 devilled eggs. I'll take a dozen to my in-laws for Easter, plus 3-4 for them to eat during the week. I also plan to stop by Uranus Fudge Factory, to buy 2 squares of peanut butter fudge for my MIL Janet (Pam's mom), plus 3 bags of sweetened nuts (1 each of cashews, pecans, and almonds).
It's shaping up to be a warm day here. The people are here to power-wash the back porches, which we have cleaned and sealed every other spring. It will probably rain later, but that's not a problem, because they will be waiting a few days for the surfaces to dry out anyway. I'll be focusing my attention on indoor cleanup.
Katie wants me to clean out the mini-barn, so I know what I am doing the next two hours. Our youngest had already made "golf plans"; Katie let him know she has a list of chores for him. 😬 He realizes the chores I give him are easier...
They are handy. I wanted to add a leanto tool shed on the far side of our home. Katie said "not now", so I had to clean out the minibarn first. But If I can get it, I can move the power washer, snowthrower, and push mower into it, as well as all my rakes/shovels/sledge hammers, etc. Then I can move rubbermaid totes of my oldest son's crap into the mini-barn. Right now I can fit the snowthrower and the push mower into the mini-barn, but not the rakes/shovels, etc., which are in the garage.
What I really want is to buy a tiny home to put out at the farm, but it isn't safe. Because we live 3 hours away, we only visit once a month at best. So it'd be unoccupied 90% of the time. That means vandals and thieves would break in. 😡
That was from his post entitled "Way-too-early 2028 Democratic primary draft with Galen Druke". from reading the article, this was a tradition of Silver's dating back to when he ran FiveThirtyEight.com. IOW, this is not a serious prediction, but more just for fun.
Actually, it was Nate's guest Galen Druke who had AOC at the top of his 10 list of likely nominees. Silver's #1 pick was Josh Shapiro, a somewhat more plausible candidate.
Absolutely. Kamala Harris's defeat was presaged when she rejected the centrist (and swing-state governor) Shapiro in favor of the leftist blue state governor Tim Walz as her running mate. That was a clear indication of where she was going, and it was not the center, where she would have picked up disaffected Republicans and independents.
In fairness, some are pretty insistent that it was Shapiro that rejected the VP slot. I think it may be DougAZ that felt strongly about that, and may be right.
Notice that he's washing people's feet, including women. At my parish, the priests aren't interested in doing the liturgy as intended. "That's optional," said Fr. Redacted. We didn't even have Palm Sunday processions, because they decided not to. They handed out palms as the people were on the way out the door at the end.
At the Spanish Mass, with an attendance of 1,500, we had Father Oscar, the Nicaraguan exile, and although he couldn't defy the pastor, he made sure that we got all the Liturgy of the Word. People don't turn out in those numbers to have "nothing special, get it over as quickly as possible."
I hope Bishop Martin will officially tell all the diocese's clergy to do it right next year.
Back in the 70's, there was a foot washing party trend. 2 people go into a room. One sits in a chair, the other washes the left foot. When done, foot person shifts to the right foot, a new person comes in to do the left foot. When that cycle is done, foot washee goes back to the party, the foot washer moves up to washee, and the cycle repeats for a couple hours until everyone has been a 2 foot washer and the receiving washee. I think I got that right...(?) Basically, everyone gets a turn doing both feet and then gets to receive.
It starts out with everyone being kinda uptight, nervous, self conscious, etc., and by the end of the party, everyone is blissed out. It's not a bad idea, but it's a stretch for the average uptight white guy.
I'm not one who is germaphobic or easily grossed out by much. But something about rubbing feet, even my wife's, that makes me cringey. I realize writing that that I am in even more need of getting over myself.
Reading it, yeah, it sounds complicated the way I described it. It wasn't, though. Once it got going, the cycles moved right along, and the washee would come out into the party and be so blissed out, everyone got excited for their turn. Why does it have to be a religious activity? Jesus would think it was OK.
You can figure out the cycle better than I described it. It being a non-denominational situation, it brought a lot of people together in a nice situation.
We are getting outstanding signals from our new Bishop. I reasonably expect that he will build on the successes of the previous Bishop, who retired last year for medical reasons, and get outstanding results. The Bishop Emeritus, bless his heart, may be said to have tuned up the engine of the car, and then started driving it in the wrong direction (the past). The new one, I hope, will get the Diocese reoriented toward a better destination.
I found that article very weak, especially the conclusion, in which he appears to be saying that, whatever "movement" eventuates, it won't get him, personally, off his couch.
He's not 100% wrong about what institutions "should" do, but the very fact that we're in the situation we are demonstrates that it is vanishingly unlikely - maybe even requiring space alien intervention - that what he imagines could occur.
Brooks was rather vague as to what he expects people to do. Calling for a "comprehensive national civic uprising" is not very specific.
Being a print column, it also lacks the force of Rick Santelli's 2009 rant, live on CNBC from the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade -- the rant that launched the Tea Party movement.
"I was there," so to speak, in 2009. Santelli's rant grew legs because several organizations already existed in that sphere and were ready to kick it up a notch.
Also, it was about change that very many people thought, rightly or wrongly, would be positive for themselves.
Mr. Brooks is proposing that the beneficiaries of yesterday's status quo rise up, hand in hand, to try to restore yesterday's status quo. They certainly have a right to do that - peacefully, or go to jail - but I feel pretty meh about the concept.
I take your point to mean that different people have different status quo's they want to restore, from simply making money to more abstract things like an orderly society and business climate, based on the Constitution and the rule of law.
I didn't read that as calling for a revolution, more like mass protests as happened during the civil rights era -- or perhaps the protests that brought down the Eastern European Communist regimes (and ultimately the Soviet Union itself).
You can't read too much into an article or column headline, as those are written by different people than the writers of the actual article or column.
I understood it to mean that he wants the participants/employees of various interest groups to band together to defend Society as a Whole against Trump. One problem with this is that - like Mesoamerican natives faced with Cortez - the institutions have conflicting interests that prevent them from easily addressing a common threat.
Another problem with his argument is that it is focused on societal elites. Pick any one of the interest groups Mr. Brooks mentioned, in those institutions to which he says we should all "swear loyalty" (Really, sir? Where is your editor? One of his jobs is to prevent you from saying really, really dumb stuff in print.) and you will find that there are large numbers of regular people who don't want those Institution People to be in charge of their lives, who feel like those Institution People are, collectively, "the problem."
Big law firms, federal government employees, university faculty/admin, the journalistical industry, "nonprofits and the scientific community" ... a lot of people see them as rent-seeking accretions that mostly get in the way or introduce bad things into society, while getting lots of money from the government. They tell you that you can't do ... whatever ... and also, you're a horrible hateful hatey hating person for even thinking about it. You should just die.
In summary, I think Mr. Brooks, although he seems to be very nice, could stand to think things through a little more.
If only the more moderate part of the left could see what those people see. Or maybe they do, but they don't have enough influence.
Instead, what we hear is "that's completely made up out of whole cloth by the right wingers, nothing like that was ever done or said, and all the people who see the rent-seeking scolds that have made the Dem brand toxic to them are just imagining things and so they should just forget about it and admit they are wrong and pick up a picket sign and vote for every breathing Dem and that will surely fix everything, so why don't they, the stupidheads?" As opposed to challenging themselves to get real about what voters they should be appealing to (clue: independents exist) and how they should be appealed to, because that would take some work and questioning and reframing and humility.
Those conflicting interests are already evident, as do views on what those interests really are -- short term remaining in business via appeasement versus a principled resistance for long-term benefit.
As to the Aztecs, Cortes happened to match a prophecy regarding the Aztec feathered god, which affected their resistance. Plus, it's really hard to find allies from people when you keep demanding they supply victims for human sacrifice.
Good morning. A blessed Good Friday to all. Temps rising from 56 now to the 70s this PM, cloudy and windy.
The mothership is reporting on the Trump administration negotiations, which seem to be in some disarray, with Iran regarding its nuclear program. What is telling is that it seems unclear if the goal is restraining Iran;s roglran or dismantling it altogether. This is what happens when loyalty to Dear Leader is a higher priority than competence and expertise.
Maybe -- because no one is willing to pay six figures to hear an 82 year old with clear signs of dementia, make a speech? (And -- make stuff up as well).
Happy rehab! Do those daily exercises. I hope you’re not in too much pain. It was really hard on my mom. Interesting how people have such different experiences.
It really looks and sounds absolutely fascinating, but why do I have to sit through 2 hours of back and forth to get the basic bullet points? I'd rather read a book for 2 days than listen to a couple guys jawbone for 2 hours.
Some things I like to listen to, because they are a listening type of experience. But when what I want is information about something, I refuse to play a video. Takes too long. I want text I can skim fast to find what I'm looking for.
You’re not one of those who was or is a fan of radio shows, either, I guess. The transcript features are an option, at least. There’s also the faster playback option available on most podcast apps and now on YouTube. I listen to a lot at 1.25 speed, sometimes on 1.5. They sound like they’re pumped up on meth, but it has the utility of getting through the matter.
On YouTube, playback speed is under the cog wheel for settings.
Good morning. 51Fs and sunshine, 82 this afternoon.
Re the topic, "Yes, but ...". Yes, ancient DNA is providing a lot of new information, but information is always incomplete and subject both to different interpretations and to being completely overturned by additional information, "unknown unknowns."
Morning. We’re starting out around 50 with a forecast for around 80.
It is the interpretation of the available evidence that makes it interesting and memorable. But it is exactly that: telling a story that tries to piece together the bits we can see into something coherent, which may or may not have validity.
Someone somewhere made the analogy that the fossil record for deep *Homo sapiens sapiens* history is akin to finding two or three puzzle pieces for a 3,000-piece puzzle and trying to guess the image based on that information alone.
As R.Rice says, the transcripts feature in Apple Podcasts at least will give you a text you can read or skim. I imagine others offer similar. YouTube does, too, if I’m not mistaken.
I understand some people just don’t care for podcasts. I get a lot of alone time where my ears and mind are free for stuff I wouldn’t otherwise get around to reading: driving, mowing, trimming various sprung vegetation…
For too long podcasts, I give the award to Peter Attia. I don't need to know the biochemical reactions at the cellular level - just tell me that Zone 2 is better for conditioning my body to use fat instead of glucose and be done with it.
For those long podcasts, I very often use the iPhone transcript to turn a 2 hour podcast into a 10 minute read.
I like podcasts because I can learn stuff while I'm doing something else. "Tides of History" is great about giving specific sources and emphasizing the limits of current information.
There was one time the presenter said, "Remember a few months ago when I covered (some topic)? Well, new research has just been published, and it looks like what I told you was all wrong. I'll be doing an episode with the new information soon."
Much of the blame belongs to #Scientists, who can achieve absolute certainty based on the sparsest of data and then leap ... pole vault ... kite surf ... to conclusions imperceptible to the naked eye ... which then become The Science (TM).
That’s pretty much all of prehistory included. I think some of the most intriguing researchers are the ones who acknowledge that what they describe is a “best guess”—but still a guess. Except that our minds don’t like to admit we don’t know stuff. And then in specialized fields, there are experts with conflicting interpretations who have become wedded to their own ideas *because* they spend so much time defending them against critics in their field.
I was fascinated for years by Jared and his GG&S, and like you I read it a couple times and revisited it dozens of times...and now we know he was kinda full of fecal material on several of his most fervent insistences.
There was the usual blowback from academics peeved that he was getting so much traction for his theories and they weren't, and then there were the more reasoned minds that quietly debunked a lot of his thesis. It's still a good book in that he tries to explain the unexplainable. I liked his book "Collapse" more, but that had stuff in it that was also convincingly debunked.
It's been a while since I read GG&S. I thought the book was wonderful and eye-opening. Still, I think I recall thinking the storylines were written with a bit too much certitude? Or as Jonah would put it, too much of a mono-causal explanation.
Well, the minibarn is clean and our marriage survived. 😀I offered to take Katie to see "King of Kings, but she needs to go grocery shopping for dinner tomorrow night. We'll have all the kids home, so she's making barbeque ribs (in a crock pot), cheesy potatoes, greenbeans, a salad, and a sugar cream pie. Tomorrow evening I am making 15 or 16 devilled eggs. I'll take a dozen to my in-laws for Easter, plus 3-4 for them to eat during the week. I also plan to stop by Uranus Fudge Factory, to buy 2 squares of peanut butter fudge for my MIL Janet (Pam's mom), plus 3 bags of sweetened nuts (1 each of cashews, pecans, and almonds).
I can see you grin every time you type "Uranus Fudge."
It's shaping up to be a warm day here. The people are here to power-wash the back porches, which we have cleaned and sealed every other spring. It will probably rain later, but that's not a problem, because they will be waiting a few days for the surfaces to dry out anyway. I'll be focusing my attention on indoor cleanup.
Vlad and his brother are cleaning their room. They plan to pool their resources and buy a television, so they can play video games on it.
Katie wants me to clean out the mini-barn, so I know what I am doing the next two hours. Our youngest had already made "golf plans"; Katie let him know she has a list of chores for him. 😬 He realizes the chores I give him are easier...
I want a mini-barn.
They are handy. I wanted to add a leanto tool shed on the far side of our home. Katie said "not now", so I had to clean out the minibarn first. But If I can get it, I can move the power washer, snowthrower, and push mower into it, as well as all my rakes/shovels/sledge hammers, etc. Then I can move rubbermaid totes of my oldest son's crap into the mini-barn. Right now I can fit the snowthrower and the push mower into the mini-barn, but not the rakes/shovels, etc., which are in the garage.
What I really want is to buy a tiny home to put out at the farm, but it isn't safe. Because we live 3 hours away, we only visit once a month at best. So it'd be unoccupied 90% of the time. That means vandals and thieves would break in. 😡
That means vandals and thieves would break in. 😡
Yes, that's what it means.
Honeydo's. Gottaa love 'em.
I just read where Nate Silver is predicting that AOC is the Dem nominee in 2028. What'd I say about kicking stuff...(?)
That was from his post entitled "Way-too-early 2028 Democratic primary draft with Galen Druke". from reading the article, this was a tradition of Silver's dating back to when he ran FiveThirtyEight.com. IOW, this is not a serious prediction, but more just for fun.
Not sure if it's behind the paywall, but the article (actually an article plus video) is here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/way-too-early-2028-democratic-primary
Can I still kick something?
Just not "the can"...At least not yet for awhile.
:-)
As if I could stop you. . .
Actually, it was Nate's guest Galen Druke who had AOC at the top of his 10 list of likely nominees. Silver's #1 pick was Josh Shapiro, a somewhat more plausible candidate.
As far as I can tell, Shapiro would be welcome as an alternative to the clown car(s).
Absolutely. Kamala Harris's defeat was presaged when she rejected the centrist (and swing-state governor) Shapiro in favor of the leftist blue state governor Tim Walz as her running mate. That was a clear indication of where she was going, and it was not the center, where she would have picked up disaffected Republicans and independents.
In fairness, some are pretty insistent that it was Shapiro that rejected the VP slot. I think it may be DougAZ that felt strongly about that, and may be right.
That could be true. He may have dodged a bullet he saw coming at him.
I think I'm suffering imbecile overload...(looks around for something to kick...)
Oh my. Even fate has fallen on hard times these days…
She's certainly a leader...Just like Jimmy Carter about 1974, Michael Dukakis in 1986 or Bill Clinton about 1989; a clear leader! 😉
Primaries have a way of sorting things out; not always correctly, but sorting happens.
I suspect the Democrats are souring on the idea of running leftist women for President, if not women in general.
The Bishop will be presiding at Good Friday mass today. We have an amazing Bishop so I am looking forward to it.
The Good Friday service is not actually a Mass, of course, but a communion service with previously consecrated hosts.
The services at the Triduum are the highlight of the liturgical year.
"The services at the Triduum are the highlight of the liturgical year."
According to the book, at least.
https://catholicnewsherald.com/90-news/local/11524-on-holy-thursday-bishop-martin-urges-humble-service-to-others
Notice that he's washing people's feet, including women. At my parish, the priests aren't interested in doing the liturgy as intended. "That's optional," said Fr. Redacted. We didn't even have Palm Sunday processions, because they decided not to. They handed out palms as the people were on the way out the door at the end.
At the Spanish Mass, with an attendance of 1,500, we had Father Oscar, the Nicaraguan exile, and although he couldn't defy the pastor, he made sure that we got all the Liturgy of the Word. People don't turn out in those numbers to have "nothing special, get it over as quickly as possible."
I hope Bishop Martin will officially tell all the diocese's clergy to do it right next year.
Back in the 70's, there was a foot washing party trend. 2 people go into a room. One sits in a chair, the other washes the left foot. When done, foot person shifts to the right foot, a new person comes in to do the left foot. When that cycle is done, foot washee goes back to the party, the foot washer moves up to washee, and the cycle repeats for a couple hours until everyone has been a 2 foot washer and the receiving washee. I think I got that right...(?) Basically, everyone gets a turn doing both feet and then gets to receive.
It starts out with everyone being kinda uptight, nervous, self conscious, etc., and by the end of the party, everyone is blissed out. It's not a bad idea, but it's a stretch for the average uptight white guy.
I'm not one who is germaphobic or easily grossed out by much. But something about rubbing feet, even my wife's, that makes me cringey. I realize writing that that I am in even more need of getting over myself.
Fang's feet are gross.
That seems to be overcomplicating a good concept.
Reading it, yeah, it sounds complicated the way I described it. It wasn't, though. Once it got going, the cycles moved right along, and the washee would come out into the party and be so blissed out, everyone got excited for their turn. Why does it have to be a religious activity? Jesus would think it was OK.
You can figure out the cycle better than I described it. It being a non-denominational situation, it brought a lot of people together in a nice situation.
I agree that it doesn't have to be a religious activity.
It's remarkably humbling. It starts out with everyone kinda thinking it's weird, and ends up inclusive and wonderful.
We are getting outstanding signals from our new Bishop. I reasonably expect that he will build on the successes of the previous Bishop, who retired last year for medical reasons, and get outstanding results. The Bishop Emeritus, bless his heart, may be said to have tuned up the engine of the car, and then started driving it in the wrong direction (the past). The new one, I hope, will get the Diocese reoriented toward a better destination.
“Trump Administration” and disarray. That doesn’t seem newsworthy
Is that there one of them tautologies? CW? Bueller? Bueller?
Or, paraphrased Mark Twain..."Trump administration and disarray...but I repeat myself."
"Dog bites man."
From JohnM at the mothership (and sometime poster here):
Worth Your Time II: 'What’s Happening Is Not Normal. America Needs an Uprising That Is Not Normal.' --David Brooks
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/17/opinion/trump-harvard-law-firms.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Ak8.e315.8QmGoDhcPoWf&smid=url-share
I found that article very weak, especially the conclusion, in which he appears to be saying that, whatever "movement" eventuates, it won't get him, personally, off his couch.
He's not 100% wrong about what institutions "should" do, but the very fact that we're in the situation we are demonstrates that it is vanishingly unlikely - maybe even requiring space alien intervention - that what he imagines could occur.
Brooks was rather vague as to what he expects people to do. Calling for a "comprehensive national civic uprising" is not very specific.
Being a print column, it also lacks the force of Rick Santelli's 2009 rant, live on CNBC from the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade -- the rant that launched the Tea Party movement.
"I was there," so to speak, in 2009. Santelli's rant grew legs because several organizations already existed in that sphere and were ready to kick it up a notch.
Also, it was about change that very many people thought, rightly or wrongly, would be positive for themselves.
Mr. Brooks is proposing that the beneficiaries of yesterday's status quo rise up, hand in hand, to try to restore yesterday's status quo. They certainly have a right to do that - peacefully, or go to jail - but I feel pretty meh about the concept.
I take your point to mean that different people have different status quo's they want to restore, from simply making money to more abstract things like an orderly society and business climate, based on the Constitution and the rule of law.
I think Mr. Brooks is solidly in support of good order, business stability, and other things I also support. There are many others like him.
I read that. DB calling for revolution is a novel new take on the day.
I didn't read that as calling for a revolution, more like mass protests as happened during the civil rights era -- or perhaps the protests that brought down the Eastern European Communist regimes (and ultimately the Soviet Union itself).
You can't read too much into an article or column headline, as those are written by different people than the writers of the actual article or column.
I understood it to mean that he wants the participants/employees of various interest groups to band together to defend Society as a Whole against Trump. One problem with this is that - like Mesoamerican natives faced with Cortez - the institutions have conflicting interests that prevent them from easily addressing a common threat.
Another problem with his argument is that it is focused on societal elites. Pick any one of the interest groups Mr. Brooks mentioned, in those institutions to which he says we should all "swear loyalty" (Really, sir? Where is your editor? One of his jobs is to prevent you from saying really, really dumb stuff in print.) and you will find that there are large numbers of regular people who don't want those Institution People to be in charge of their lives, who feel like those Institution People are, collectively, "the problem."
Big law firms, federal government employees, university faculty/admin, the journalistical industry, "nonprofits and the scientific community" ... a lot of people see them as rent-seeking accretions that mostly get in the way or introduce bad things into society, while getting lots of money from the government. They tell you that you can't do ... whatever ... and also, you're a horrible hateful hatey hating person for even thinking about it. You should just die.
In summary, I think Mr. Brooks, although he seems to be very nice, could stand to think things through a little more.
If only the more moderate part of the left could see what those people see. Or maybe they do, but they don't have enough influence.
Instead, what we hear is "that's completely made up out of whole cloth by the right wingers, nothing like that was ever done or said, and all the people who see the rent-seeking scolds that have made the Dem brand toxic to them are just imagining things and so they should just forget about it and admit they are wrong and pick up a picket sign and vote for every breathing Dem and that will surely fix everything, so why don't they, the stupidheads?" As opposed to challenging themselves to get real about what voters they should be appealing to (clue: independents exist) and how they should be appealed to, because that would take some work and questioning and reframing and humility.
Yes, exactly.
Those conflicting interests are already evident, as do views on what those interests really are -- short term remaining in business via appeasement versus a principled resistance for long-term benefit.
As to the Aztecs, Cortes happened to match a prophecy regarding the Aztec feathered god, which affected their resistance. Plus, it's really hard to find allies from people when you keep demanding they supply victims for human sacrifice.
Good morning. A blessed Good Friday to all. Temps rising from 56 now to the 70s this PM, cloudy and windy.
The mothership is reporting on the Trump administration negotiations, which seem to be in some disarray, with Iran regarding its nuclear program. What is telling is that it seems unclear if the goal is restraining Iran;s roglran or dismantling it altogether. This is what happens when loyalty to Dear Leader is a higher priority than competence and expertise.
In case anyone needs a laugh:
https://nypost.com/2025/04/17/us-news/joe-biden-having-trouble-booking-gigs-with-300k-per-speech-asking-price/
Other contract terms:
https://freebeacon.com/newsletters/exclusive-we-got-joe-bidens-list-of-absurd-demands-for-speaking-gigs/
🤔🤔🤔
Maybe he should take up painting.
Hunter has found his art market collapsed: prices are so low Temu is thinking of selling them.
Perhaps the memory care center offers painting as an activity.
I needed that. Gawd, he really needs to just go away. The guy is his own punchline.
In an article full of laugh-lines, this was my favorite:
"The precise reason that Biden is struggling to find top-dollar audiences is unclear."
Maybe -- because no one is willing to pay six figures to hear an 82 year old with clear signs of dementia, make a speech? (And -- make stuff up as well).
Even in his prime, he was a mendacious, obnoxious, boring blowhard.
And he still made up stuff.
Yes! That one made me snort laugh. The entire escapade is a punchline.
I had a knee replacement yesterday so lots of podcasts in my future
Happy rehab! Do those daily exercises. I hope you’re not in too much pain. It was really hard on my mom. Interesting how people have such different experiences.
Physical therapist said I was doing great, but seemed impatient. Has she talked with my family?
If you'd like to get U.S. Mail and aren't afraid of death, I could send you pretty cards with notes about church gossip and teen trauma.
I still write letters too.
I could send you cards! I have mushroom ones and bird ones and tree ones ...
OK! I just saw your comment.
Not afraid of dying, but I’ve had enough church gossip and teen trauma to last a lifetime. Thanks! Always appreciate a prayer!
I only hope we may have long lives, and together, from a thousand miles away, we can share the beauty of the moon.
人有悲欢离合，月有阴晴圆缺，此事古难全。但愿人长久，千里共婵娟。
~ Su Shi (苏轼, 1037-1101), Song Dynasty
Oy, ow.
Oh there's a lot of that going on in my circles. May your recovery be speedy and with as little discomfort as possible.
Thank you!
Thank you!
Problem solved...his book is Kindle-ized for $6.99...and sold.
It really looks and sounds absolutely fascinating, but why do I have to sit through 2 hours of back and forth to get the basic bullet points? I'd rather read a book for 2 days than listen to a couple guys jawbone for 2 hours.
Some things I like to listen to, because they are a listening type of experience. But when what I want is information about something, I refuse to play a video. Takes too long. I want text I can skim fast to find what I'm looking for.
You’re not one of those who was or is a fan of radio shows, either, I guess. The transcript features are an option, at least. There’s also the faster playback option available on most podcast apps and now on YouTube. I listen to a lot at 1.25 speed, sometimes on 1.5. They sound like they’re pumped up on meth, but it has the utility of getting through the matter.
On YouTube, playback speed is under the cog wheel for settings.
True, I should get with the program with transcripts. I'm just feeling prickly today.
Really? 😆
If I was the kicking type, I'd be kicking stuff.
It's best not to. You'd just hurt your foot.
Yes. I got over the self destruction thing a while back. But if I WAS the kicking type, there'd be stuff gettin' kicked.
Good morning. 51Fs and sunshine, 82 this afternoon.
Re the topic, "Yes, but ...". Yes, ancient DNA is providing a lot of new information, but information is always incomplete and subject both to different interpretations and to being completely overturned by additional information, "unknown unknowns."
Morning. We’re starting out around 50 with a forecast for around 80.
It is the interpretation of the available evidence that makes it interesting and memorable. But it is exactly that: telling a story that tries to piece together the bits we can see into something coherent, which may or may not have validity.
Someone somewhere made the analogy that the fossil record for deep *Homo sapiens sapiens* history is akin to finding two or three puzzle pieces for a 3,000-piece puzzle and trying to guess the image based on that information alone.
A decent synopsis of why I hate podcasts. Get to the bullet points and I can take it from there.
As R.Rice says, the transcripts feature in Apple Podcasts at least will give you a text you can read or skim. I imagine others offer similar. YouTube does, too, if I’m not mistaken.
I understand some people just don’t care for podcasts. I get a lot of alone time where my ears and mind are free for stuff I wouldn’t otherwise get around to reading: driving, mowing, trimming various sprung vegetation…
For too long podcasts, I give the award to Peter Attia. I don't need to know the biochemical reactions at the cellular level - just tell me that Zone 2 is better for conditioning my body to use fat instead of glucose and be done with it.
For those long podcasts, I very often use the iPhone transcript to turn a 2 hour podcast into a 10 minute read.
I like podcasts because I can learn stuff while I'm doing something else. "Tides of History" is great about giving specific sources and emphasizing the limits of current information.
There was one time the presenter said, "Remember a few months ago when I covered (some topic)? Well, new research has just been published, and it looks like what I told you was all wrong. I'll be doing an episode with the new information soon."
Well who knew! The Science (TM) isn't as settled as we imagine sometimes?
Much of the blame belongs to #Scientists, who can achieve absolute certainty based on the sparsest of data and then leap ... pole vault ... kite surf ... to conclusions imperceptible to the naked eye ... which then become The Science (TM).
That’s pretty much all of prehistory included. I think some of the most intriguing researchers are the ones who acknowledge that what they describe is a “best guess”—but still a guess. Except that our minds don’t like to admit we don’t know stuff. And then in specialized fields, there are experts with conflicting interpretations who have become wedded to their own ideas *because* they spend so much time defending them against critics in their field.
Yes, and then there's the motivation of keeping your job.
This looks interesting to me as I just finished re-reading 'Guns, Germs & Steel' and there appears to be some overlap between the two. Thanks, MG68.
GG&S was an excellent case for disparate cultural development.
Joseph Henrich’s books apparently are, too, but I’ve only heard/watched his podcast with Dwarkesh, without yet getting around to his books.
I was fascinated for years by Jared and his GG&S, and like you I read it a couple times and revisited it dozens of times...and now we know he was kinda full of fecal material on several of his most fervent insistences.
He was?
There was the usual blowback from academics peeved that he was getting so much traction for his theories and they weren't, and then there were the more reasoned minds that quietly debunked a lot of his thesis. It's still a good book in that he tries to explain the unexplainable. I liked his book "Collapse" more, but that had stuff in it that was also convincingly debunked.
It's been a while since I read GG&S. I thought the book was wonderful and eye-opening. Still, I think I recall thinking the storylines were written with a bit too much certitude? Or as Jonah would put it, too much of a mono-causal explanation.