baD mR fRosTy 
Member since Aug 17, 2009

click to enlarge 179998_5806455918_2068066_n_jpg-magnum.jpg

- grumpy old retired musician - surrounded by old newspapers, failed ideas, bad inventions, half-dead synthesizers, empty vodka bottles and an old smoky Hammond organ...

Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Unskinny bop all night and day yeah

""Remember, the world's scientific scholars once believed the earth was flat....""

Actually, not at all. From the ancient Phoenicians to the Maya, the consensus amongst those with critical thinking abilities was that the world was a sphere. Even sailor's wive's watching their husband's ships appear, masts first, on the horizon knew this.

In fact, the Greeks calculated the diameter of the earth to with a few percentage points using geometry and precise measuring of triangles betwixt land and sea and mountain top etc.

It was the Christian church in the time after the Romans that decreed the earth as 'flat" (the four corners etc), not "science"!

Like most topics in science, there were some monks and priests who had the spare time and the education to dabble in facts...but the CHURCH itself was very much opposed to any contradictions of its collection of children's bible stories.

And so you can bury that tired old meme about "science" thinking the earth was flat. No, that was religion that insisted on THAT.

You're welcome,

An historian (and sailor)

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 04/15/2016 at 12:37 AM

Re: “Holly Bartlett’s unlikely journey

Halifax Regional Police chief Jean-Michel Blais gets a "D" in simple math if he thinks that "0.2% (blood alcohol)...is a lot for (a 95-pound person)".

In fact, being a percentage, it's the SAME concentration of alcohol for a 95 lb person, as it is for a 320 lb linebacker. Of course, the linebacker would have to drink 3-4 times MORE in order to achieve this concentration - so our chief gets it doubly wrong.

It's been in the news that Nova Scotians lag behind the nation in math skills. I did not think this applied to our police force.

35 likes, 9 dislikes
Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 12/15/2013 at 9:02 PM

Re: “A bitch at my own dumb self

...and Daniel, although you are of course correct that 200 years is not enough time for the ENTIRE human population to undergo significant (or ANY, really)genetic drift/evolution etc...it IS enough time for a small isolated group or population to do so. Witness many of the descendants of the Bounty mutineers that had red curly hair on Pitcairn island, for one example off the top off my head - there are many others. But like almost all evolution, they involve a sudden geographical isolation, and many generations - although less are necessary if the population is small. Not all traits that are selected for are advantageous in any physical way....and some is just "genetic drift"...In fact, a peacock's tail is metabolically expensive and a nuisance - like being a ginger, hahaha...

Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 02/05/2013 at 2:04 AM

Re: “A bitch at my own dumb self

"""Mr Frosty A depletion of 200 years of natural selection is nowhere close to any period of time enough to effect the evolution of human genes. """

Why are you addressing this to ME??

When I say that man's use of "technology" has all but eliminated natural selection, I am not speaking of your iPhone, firearms or even Guttenburg's printing press, lol - By 'technology" I mean everything from the throwing stick and the bow and arrow, to the plow, to the fishhook first used tens of thousands of years ago, and so on... THOSE things are considered to be "technology" when discussing the ascent of man.

Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 02/05/2013 at 1:29 AM

Re: “A bitch at my own dumb self

""Mr FRosty or Sonic Love is suggesting that depression and other mental illnesses and disorders which can lead to suicide is "Darwin's Law"?What about Cancer,Arthritis,Ms,ALS...?"" Wasn't me, things like "survival of the fittest" and "Darwin's law" are not part of my vocabulary! Sounds more like Herr Goebbels to me, lol! That sounds more like someone who is confusing "Darwinism" with SOCIAL Darwinism...too entirely different beasts...the former used by scientists, the latter by Hitler et al...

But I WILL point out that in earlier times, say, between our most recent exodus from Africa now thought to be about 70,000 years ago...between that and the advent of agriculture and the domestication of plants and animals, say, about 10-15,000 years ago... ...anyone born with a club foot, missing limb, etc would have been euthanized.

The fossil and acrcheological record backs this up.

What chance would a legless child have in a hunter-gatherer society after all? It's not cruelty - cruelty would be trying to prolong their lives only to the detriment of the tribe or group. Cancer, ALS and other unfortunate situations would likely have led to the same thing...although if the person was considered a wise old crone, or a tribal chief etc etc...perhaps some accomodation would be made. But as hunter-gatherers, we really DIDN'T have the choices we did, even 10,000 years ago when domestication of plants and animals allowed us to stay in one place - plus it allowed SOME people to find other things to specialize in besides searching for food: mystic/healer/storyteller/crone etc...

Before then...on the iceberg with you, sorry...

Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 02/05/2013 at 1:21 AM

Re: “A bitch at my own dumb self

""So now, in your words, what led the exponential rise in human population in the 19th and 20th century?""

The rise of the industrial revolution, that's what, and the mass migrations from the self-sustaining agrarian and barter-based societies in the countrysides, to more urban ones more based on an "economy". Plus not all areas of the world HAD a population boom during that period. Primarily Europe and the colonies. But, suddenly, there was something for the OTHER sons that WEREN'T going to inherit the farm/family business to DO. Move to the cities and work the Satanic Mills. And reproduce.

Interestingly, a recent NGM had a great article about some evolutionary biologists that have proposed that the same set of genes that make people want to be "pioneers" and head out into the great unknown for opportunity, ALSO semed to have encouraged great differential reproductive success. Maybe those long winter nights crossing the prairies in a wagon train, who knows. Not sure how relevent that is, if at all, but it's a great issue. A special edition called "Why we Explore".


Back to your Malthusian explosion:

And, as I said, another cause, far more important than "medical knowledge" wgich remained quackery and bone-setting for the most part throughout this time, was the advent of proper sanitation. And yes, you are correct, the Romans had the right idea...and then the knowledge was, apparently, lost. We call that period the Dark Ages for a reason.

My phrase "not shitting where we eat" is a silly one, but it makes a point, albeit with a blunt tool...the actual truth is far more subtle. Shit stinks and so we have dumped it for eons, that's correct. Only sometimes there were folks living downriver, lol...This continues on to this very day sadly. Diarrhea casued by poor sanitation is still one of the top killers of children in the developing world. So we're not as smart as you think I guess.

"What have the Romans ever done for US??" -Python.

You can SAY that sanitation was understood "for quite a while" all you want, but it is simply not the case, even in the west. Have you heard of Florence Nightingale?

Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 02/05/2013 at 1:14 AM

Re: “A bitch at my own dumb self

""baD mR FrosTy; Did I say Charles Darwin wrote that? NO!! I quoted his teachings at the beginning of my post, then quoted myself "" Like I said, Darwin wouldn't written that. We are in agreement then.

If you, as you admit, mispoke when you made this statement: : ""Meaning that ANY species can continue passing on the undesirable traits of heredity""

Why not just admit that from the start rather than retirting with the unecessarily ad hominem: ""If you do not agree with what I said, stick to facts and don't make up an argument that vents your views and tries to discredit mine. ""

You mispoke, our if you prefer, made a "typo" although a rather large one, IMO, and so no-one, least of all ME was "venting"...as written, your statement was nonsensical.

Posted by baD mR fRosTy on 02/05/2013 at 12:53 AM

All Comments »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Real Time Web Analytics

© 2017 Coast Publishing Ltd.