Friday Ephemera
These guys are way more flexible than you. // Moroccan tree goats, obviously. // Top end kitchen knives made from molten meteorite. // A calendar of tiny dramas. // “It was designed to be an enjoyable ride.” // Only rub the underside. // Bias in social psychology. // Test your ear for pitch. // Candlestick. // “The global number of trees is approximately 3.04 trillion, an order of magnitude higher than the previous estimate.” // Meanwhile, in exploding toilet news. //“No lumps, no waste, no mess.” // Lots of Lithuanian garage doors. // Designing hideous clothes is now even easier. // The Fallout Shelter Handbook, 1962. (h/t, Things) // The earliest known fuck. // And finally, as my dear old grey-haired gran used to say, “When walking past a monkey, don’t ever give it the finger.”
Test your ear for pitch
Following a bit of digging I don’t get pitch, just a couple of hairs and some earwax . . .
Test your ear for pitch
25 of 26. I don’t know which one I got wrong, as it doesn’t tell you; I think on reflection it may have been the Aloha Hawaii, or whatever it is called.
I think The House in the Middle is appropriate here.
Ted’s link made me wonder if the opening of the video inspired this sketch from the Pythons:
https://youtu.be/zekiZYSVdeQ?t=100
26 out of 26, which really surprised me. I was expecting to do pretty poorly.
Perfect 26 for me. It was a little on the easy side. Anyone else notice they repeated some of the tunes?
“Um, Dr Schrodinger…” https://twitter.com/enniscath/status/531319255846125568
I thought things had been too quiet on the exploding toilet front.
Top end kitchen knives made from molten meteorite.
Do these count as +4 or +5 knives?
“When walking past a monkey, don’t ever give it the finger.”
Teachable moment.
Apologies if this has been mentioned before here, but check out high school English teacher Dana Dusbiber, the ‘progressively’ motivated philistine:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/06/13/teacher-why-i-dont-want-to-assign-shakespeare-anymore-even-though-hes-in-the-common-core/
I nominate the recumbent hedgehog as this blog’s mascot.
I nominate the recumbent hedgehog as this blog’s mascot.
It almost looks like some elaborate sandwich preparation. “First, using one hand, you tenderise your hedgehog…”
Now there’s and argument for diversity. We shan’t be expecting a young ethnically-diverse and wonderfully curious student to try to understand the differences and commonalities of a world gone by that they will never encounter. They are best served by being presented with cultural idioms that are warm and familiar. Because the teacher has issues with an early form of the English language that I cannot always easily navigate, for one.
Meanwhile, in Canada – Naomi Klein has revealed her criteria for the perfect society in Canada. She even calls it a “manifesto”, which I think is so adorable. It really is some amazing shit.
https://leapmanifesto.org/en/the-leap-manifesto/#manifesto-content
Pluto up close.
http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/09/pluto-like-youve-never-seen-it-before/405904/
I love the way the mail illustrates the exploding toilet story with a picture of a pretty ordinary toilet roll.
As for Mr Fuckebythenavele. it’s pronounced Furnival.
Oh and 26 out of 26, which surprised me.
25 of 26 for me.
Naomi Klein’s Vision of a Perfect Future Canada:
“If you wouldn’t want it in your backyard, then it doesn’t belong in anyone’s backyard”
No sewage farms?
Last Principled Leftist notices that his cohort isn’t principled at all? http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9637452/why-ive-finally-given-up-on-the-left/
I don’t know enough about Cohen to compare this essay with his actual behavior, but it looks like he’s a True Believer in old-school leftism rather than in taking power by any means necessary or in busting stuff up just for the joy of busting it up.
I’m starting to notice a trend: circumstances becoming obviously dire, whether the “Syrian” “refugee” crisis or economic failure on a grand scale (however slowly it may grind along) or obvious gubmint corruption, instead of looking for a steady hand to guide the ship, people are going for the more flamboyant, extreme ones, whether ideological or merely rhetorical.
Which leads me to wonder how you chaps ended up with Churchill at Just The Right Moment. There were plenty of other Chamberlains to choose from, and yet you got the right man for the job.
Maybe because nobody could plausibly equivocate about the Luftwaffe’s intentions toward the British Isles.
Maybe because people were less tolerant of equivocation.
Which leads me to wonder how you chaps ended up with Churchill at Just The Right Moment.
I’ve thought the same about Ms. Thatcher as well. But considering Churchill’s astute and accurate observation that Americans can be counted on to do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else, perhaps he was projecting a tad.
The world’s most complicated pocket watch:
https://www.hodinkee.com/blog/the-vacheron-constantin-reference-57260
How’s that for an epic piece of engineering?
And just taken the pitch test again, and scored 26/26. It WAS Aloha Oe (I found the correct spelling) I got wrong first time round. I obviously mistook the distortion of the tune to be a suitably exotic modulation, as it’s not a tune with which I’m particularly familiar.
Britain endured Churchill for many, many decades.
And in peacetime he was sh!t. Actually, he was sh!t in WW1 come to that.
His gross egotism only became an advantage when Britain needed a supremely confident leader.
People forget that he was voted out immediately the war was over. It turns out that servicemen didn’t like him. His later adoration is a piece of selective amnesia.
“Maybe because people were less tolerant of equivocation.”
Enter Donald Trump.
~I can’t seem to italicize. Feel like a dummy.
I can’t seem to italicize
David
I’m afraid that I am the outdoorsy type. I’m lucky I can get this iPad to do everything that I need. Off to “tend my garden”, as it were.
Thanks for the assist.
I’ve just managed to read the paper “political diversity will improve social physchological science”. It is seminal, and should be read as widely as possible. Its conclusions have implications not only on social sciences but on humanities as well. When and if its conclusions are accepted, both domains stand to benefit considerably.