Genetics and Lack of Brain Matter

Substantial, hmm. I promised substantial. I know, what about a bit of fringe science I discovered today. Ok, so science is not my strong suit so I may get some terms wrong, but I've an earnest interest in it so I'm sure you'll forgive me.

The Penile Spine
I get your attention. Yes, well apparently we were pretty close to evolving keratinized penile spines. What the holy hell? That's not all. We also are around one gene away from sensory whiskers. The link is in the title, so I'll refrain from unnecessary quotes. We lost these spines because apparently it made "copulation" pretty quick which somehow led to a loss in human lineage. So spinelessness makes you less sensitive so you can go the distance. Think about that, we evolved in such a way to make sex less about reproduction and more about a possible emotional bond. Pretty hectic, evolution really set us apart from most animals.

Furries rejoice, we're one gene away from cats. Eish.

Phineas Gage
Gage was a railway worker in 1848, by 1849 he was a sideshow freak and science guinea pig. What happened within that year? Well a railway spike was blown clean through his head removing a large chunk of his frontal lobe. Surviving the whole thing somehow, Gage went on to live 12 more years before dying (redundant sentence is redundant). Whats remarkable is how much he changed as a human being without that part of his brain. Apparently he became profane, insensitive and numb in the social and emotional context and didn't know how to place value on money. In fact when offered $1000 for a hand full of pebbles, Gage declined because he couldn't place value on the pile of pebbles (this was an experiment). This single individual was the foundation of what we know of neuroscience today.

At least it wasn't a penile spine.

I think I'll leave it at that today. Perhaps I'll do more of these science themed ones. I'm a big fan of Theoretical Physics so maybe I'll stumble through some of that sometime.

Thanks for reading, see you next week.

The Lazy Post

So today was pretty hectic. I do extras (as in background artiste, baie fancy) work when I can and I got a sms for a wardrobe fitting this morning. Of course the fitting took place somewhere just off the M5. For those of you not from Cape Town, the M5 is currently a nightmare. There's an endless supply of jam of the traffic variety and they make it next to impossible to take exits with their temporary boundaries. What's the ETA on getting that main through-way done already Madam Zille?

Two head swaps two days in a row...not lazy at all.

Anyway, I eventually arrived at the fitting which lasted about 10 minutes before I was stuck on the roads again. I'm confirmed as a "stadium attendee" for two nights next week. Along with just about every other person in Cape Town I think. All said and done it should be fun, the film is called Safe House and it stars Ryan Reynolds and Denzel Washington. I'm happy to be there just for the opportunity, cause if we're given direction to chant and shout I know what I'll be shouting.

"MAKE DEADPOOL ALREADY!!"

So today's post was a bit lazy, hopefully I can make tomorrow a very substantial one. Not too substantial though cause I know the attention span of internet browsers, I am one myself after all.

Thanks for reading, until next time.

Winning!

Time to take a breather, what shall we dissect briefly this fair morn? What's the deal with Charlie Sheen?

Actually forget that question, what's the deal with the sudden media frenzy surrounding Charlie Sheen? Sure, he was the highest paid actor on American television (it's now Hugh Laurie for House for interest sake) and yeah, he was in the news recently because there was some domestic dispute over who gets to bast the turkey during Thanksgiving. I'll give you he does sound a bit messed up right now.

Gary Busey ain't got Tiger Blood.

Thing is, why should we care? Why should the general public have any right to know anything about Charlie Sheen's current woes? Is it because he is famous? I'm sorry, that's not good enough. When you got the media forcing themselves down Sheen's (and our own) throats like this you expect to to have some urgent significant meaning. Something that will greatly affect our lives if we do not pay attention. I'm sorry to say dead or otherwise, Sheen's life doesn't make a spit of difference to my own or I wager yours.

Can you imagine what would happen if the media threw themselves feet first like they do into celebrities into important political figures or influential warlords? Yeah, you'd have a few dead, imprisoned or castrated journalists. Except, that's the kind of reporting that might change our lives. Given enough pressure on the right places, politicians might be too piss scared to step out of line.

Assange wears this curtain from his basement.

Except, I suspect celebrities make easy targets. It's like Gulliver's Travels, pinning down the celebrity to the chair and forcing them to talk about their dirtiest darkest secrets. Then the attitude is, well they're celebrities it goes with the territory. Some deserve it, some are attention starved, others have problems. In the case of Charlie Sheen I suspect he might be using the spotlight to escape his current domestic situation. Should the media really give a junkie his fix? Well as long as you continue buying that Heat magazine they don't care. As long as you remain star-glazed (I'm trying a new word out) and entertained they don't care if they show the last minutes of Sheen's career and potentially life.

Keep the tiger blood strong and winning.

Freedom of Information

In China, the internet is monitored in much the same way booze was during the Prohibition. All the Prohibition did was make a place for criminals to thrive, causing more serious crime to creep in. People were murdered for bottles of whiskey where before people would just murder themselves with whiskey. So the Prohibition was a failure.

If there was ever a reason to start drinking...

That example is the same for what will happen on the internet if restrictions are imposed. The tighter a corporation or government tightens it's grip on the internet, the more desperate people will fight it. It's not a human right to have internet access, but it is a human right to be educated. Article 26.1 of the Declaration of Human Rights states: "Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit." 

Therefore China, a member of the United Nations, is actively committing human rights violations according to the UN's OWN documents. It's proof that a government looking to keep it's people on a leash only needs to remove information from the equation and this really hits home for us in South Africa. The longer the majority of South Africans are kept without education, the longer the country hangs in the balance of misinformed voters. Voters who might believe voting for one party over another will get you through the pearly gates. Voters who cling to superstition as a way to understand their world, I'm going to come right out and say superstition is stupid and reckless.


Situations like the following work for a country hoping the young remain uneducated so they continue making uninformed decisions.

Nevermind the ramifications of politics, without freedom to information we will continue to have bigger problems. Ever heard of witchdoctors advising men with AIDS to have sex with a virgin to be cured? Well now you have because that's a common understanding that is being proliferated by sages. The internet allows us to say, "Hold on, let's me check that out quickly." How many times have you self-diagnosed something you were worried about using Wikipedia? Wrong or otherwise, never take that for granted.

The only problem is finding the right advice, but that comes with practice...good luck. :)