And now, a little article about some of my best friends...
Felis catus would be its taxonomic nomenclature, an endothermic quadruped, carnivorous by nature...
Okay, copyright infringement...
What can I say? So far, I haven’t met a cat I didn’t like.
Research was conducted into the origin of domestic cats, including DNA comparison with known subspecies of wildcats worldwide. Five genetic lineages were revealed, but only one, Felis silvestris lybica, included the domestic cat. This species is found mainly in the Middle East, including remote deserts of Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, locations where the wild representatives of this subspecies were collected for the study. This means domestic cats originally came from only that area of the world.
So, Felis catus or Felis silvestris lybica? Is there still a reason to distinguish between the two?
In that region called the Fertile Crescent, cats came to live among humans to feast upon scraps as well as those smaller animals that raid gardens and harvests. Cats cause little damage and even kill off vermin. Once this was realised, humans may even have encouraged them to stick around. If we add the “cuteness” factor, like large eyes, a snub face and a forehead that is high and round, it doesn’t take much to imagine our distant ancestors taking in kittens simply because their faces were irresistible.
Can we know when they were first domesticated? The archaeological record can give us hints. The grave of an adult person who lived on the island of Cyprus, 9,500 years ago was discovered to include the corpse of an eight-month-old cat, its body oriented westward, the same as for the dead human. Since cats are not native to Cyprus, they must have been brought over by boat. The cat’s presence in the grave shows that humans and cats already had a special relationship by at least 9,500 years ago, probably more. Since humans began establishing permanent settlements in the Middle East about 10,000 years ago, the cat must have been in the process of being tamed at about the same time.
Why did this species become the sole domestic species the world over when others, notably the Southern African and Central Asian wildcats, might be just as easily tamed? It’s thought the domestic cats simply followed the patterns of civilisation and exploration from the Middle East outward. As other civilisations established themselves, Felis silvestris lybica arrived, either on the heels of explorers or as trade goods themselves, and was already there to integrate itself into new human habitats, effectively denying a similar chance to local subspecies.
Most domesticated animals are either livestock or were made to work for us somehow. The cat is perhaps the only one to have been adopted in Neolithic times for its cuteness factor.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Ning-a-ding-ding
I posted an article on some Ning nudist social sites last April. I later added an update saying that these sites would no longer be free, and that a contribution might be requested from members in some cases.
Now, the sites will go through another metamorphosis of sorts as the Ning service will allow NO NUDITY WHATSOEVER starting August 19.
The Ning sites I have joined and are nudist per se are Skinbook, Bare Friends International (BFI) and Free Range Nudists (since renamed Free Range Naturists, or FRN). The different services strived to maintain high naturist standards, i.e., no erection or crotch shots, no sexual banter, no swinging, no alternative communities, etc. Some of the sites only required a profile pic. Others insisted that at least three “respectful” nude pictures be posted, and even three pictures in “naturist settings.”
Another Ning site, Lenny's Room of Friends and Fun, isn’t nudist but it allowed nudists (and others) to post nude pictures. Lenny’s Room will continue on Ning despite the new anti-nudity rule. Since nudism is not its main raison d’être, there would be no need to transition, and it will continue “as is” minus the nude photos. For the other sites, though, a nudist social networking site must at least allow nudity, so in that sense at least, staying on Ning would not be an option.
Skinbook says it will first seek an exemption from Ning for its group, but if that doesn’t work out, everything will be transferred intact to a new platform, with no need to re-register. All that will change is the site address. So far, with two days to go as of this writing, I have heard nothing about having received special permission from Ning to continue as is, nor anything about a new Web address having even been chosen.
BFI and FRN have chosen a different path. In the case of BFI, the original creators had backed out of operating the site due to illness, and since Ning refused to deal with anyone besides the creators, the administrators who took over operating the site had their hands tied on certain issues. There was therefore already talk some months ago about moving away from Ning, and the anti-nudity rule seems to have been the final impetus to put the plan in action. The site can now be found at a new address and it would appear the service will continue to be offered at no cost to members. But those who want to stay with BFI must register at the new site and transfer any photos or other material there themselves.
FRN tried first going the diaspora route with members joining groups on MySpace, Facebook, Yahoo, Flickr, Google, etc., and even creating an FRN group on Skinbook. Most recently, they found a new home on the elgg system, which does allow nudity. Like BFI, FRN must work out some bugs in its system, but the service is still offered at no cost to members. However, those who were members before and want to stay must register at the new site.
With all that, it’s still puzzling why Ning, after first having approved “non-Adult” (non-sexual) nudity, suddenly did an about face and decided it didn’t want any nudity after all. This would seem to be in line with Facebook’s policy where even breastfeeding can’t be shown. Only Ning can say why it has now decided to prohibit even the most innocent of nudity. They say many of the problems they encountered with the more “adult” style nudity have been occurring with the other type as well. They don’t say what those problems are.
Now, the sites will go through another metamorphosis of sorts as the Ning service will allow NO NUDITY WHATSOEVER starting August 19.
The Ning sites I have joined and are nudist per se are Skinbook, Bare Friends International (BFI) and Free Range Nudists (since renamed Free Range Naturists, or FRN). The different services strived to maintain high naturist standards, i.e., no erection or crotch shots, no sexual banter, no swinging, no alternative communities, etc. Some of the sites only required a profile pic. Others insisted that at least three “respectful” nude pictures be posted, and even three pictures in “naturist settings.”
Another Ning site, Lenny's Room of Friends and Fun, isn’t nudist but it allowed nudists (and others) to post nude pictures. Lenny’s Room will continue on Ning despite the new anti-nudity rule. Since nudism is not its main raison d’être, there would be no need to transition, and it will continue “as is” minus the nude photos. For the other sites, though, a nudist social networking site must at least allow nudity, so in that sense at least, staying on Ning would not be an option.
Skinbook says it will first seek an exemption from Ning for its group, but if that doesn’t work out, everything will be transferred intact to a new platform, with no need to re-register. All that will change is the site address. So far, with two days to go as of this writing, I have heard nothing about having received special permission from Ning to continue as is, nor anything about a new Web address having even been chosen.
BFI and FRN have chosen a different path. In the case of BFI, the original creators had backed out of operating the site due to illness, and since Ning refused to deal with anyone besides the creators, the administrators who took over operating the site had their hands tied on certain issues. There was therefore already talk some months ago about moving away from Ning, and the anti-nudity rule seems to have been the final impetus to put the plan in action. The site can now be found at a new address and it would appear the service will continue to be offered at no cost to members. But those who want to stay with BFI must register at the new site and transfer any photos or other material there themselves.
FRN tried first going the diaspora route with members joining groups on MySpace, Facebook, Yahoo, Flickr, Google, etc., and even creating an FRN group on Skinbook. Most recently, they found a new home on the elgg system, which does allow nudity. Like BFI, FRN must work out some bugs in its system, but the service is still offered at no cost to members. However, those who were members before and want to stay must register at the new site.
With all that, it’s still puzzling why Ning, after first having approved “non-Adult” (non-sexual) nudity, suddenly did an about face and decided it didn’t want any nudity after all. This would seem to be in line with Facebook’s policy where even breastfeeding can’t be shown. Only Ning can say why it has now decided to prohibit even the most innocent of nudity. They say many of the problems they encountered with the more “adult” style nudity have been occurring with the other type as well. They don’t say what those problems are.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Tintamarre
A similar argument could be made for the flag of the Mi’kmaq. Their flag no longer represents a territory per se, but all Mi’kmaq and all people who integrated into Mi’kmaq society claim that flag for themselves. There can always be a debate as to whether recognising the Acadian flag as an official flag of the province was a good move or not. But that’s an entirely different issue.
The Anglo Society, however, never pretended to be anything more than a provincial organisation. It purportedly represents all the non-Francophones of New Brunswick. But what does this mean, exactly? What historical moment or process led to the creation of a nation called English New Brunswick? That would be 1784, when the territory north of the Chignecto isthmus became New Brunswick. The province included a relatively sizeable number of francophones, the vast majority of them being of Acadian descent, but the province was nonetheless quite English. Therefore, the flag of New Brunswick IS the proper flag of English-speaking New Brunswick. But because New Brunswick actually has a territory to call its own, anyone living there can also call the flag its own. This includes the Acadians who live in New Brunswick.
So, what exactly does the Anglo flag represent? It represents the ultimate goal of the Anglo Society: linguistic inequality. It harkens back to the days where equality was afforded to anyone as long as they spoke English. That’s what they mean by “Equal Rights For All.” The flag represents the myth of French rule in the province, a myth the Anglo Society is only too happy to promote. It advances their slogan of “Bilingual Today, French Tomorrow.” The choice of Sept. 18 as the “national holiday,” the day Quebec surrendered to British forces in 1759, doesn’t help things.
The goal is clearly to put the French in their place. It sounds like they really don’t like the French. Worse, they’re doing their best to convince others to not like the French either. Or at least to not like the French who won’t be English. Denying equality, spreading false information about an identifiable cultural or ethnic group... Doesn’t that meet the definition of hate?
Monday, August 16, 2010
Photos
This year’s Tintamarre in Fredericton wound up being a little more interesting than previous years. Yes, Anglo Society people were there to be seen at least, if not heard. But so were others who seemed to want to have at least as good a time as the Acadians. Here are a few photos I took:
Just in case you can't make them out: "Eastern cougars DO exist," "Diamond Shreddies are just regular Shreddies," "Kittens R Cute," "Puppies R Cuter," an Anglo sign, "This is a sign" and "Is City Hall run by lizard people?"
For those of you can’t make out the sign, it says “I’m not with Crazy→.”
How can an Anglo Society member make a serious point when he has on either side a Diamond Shreddies protester and a believer in the famous Eastern cougar?
J'aime ma pancarte! (I love my placard!)
UPDATE: For different view, go here.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Ecological footprint
The world population is closing in on seven billion, so it may be surprising to learn that our species, Homo sapiens, almost became extinct at one time in the past.
Our species came about shortly before 195,000 years ago, at a time when the African climate was mild and there was plenty of food. At its highest, the population of Homo sapiens at the time consisted of about 10,000 breeding people. This did not include Neanderthals, who lived in Eurasia.
By 195,000 years ago, the planet started a glacial stage known by geologists as the Marine Isotope Stage 6 (MIS6), a stage that would only end about 72,000 years later, or 123,000 years ago. During that time, as the climate grew colder and more arid, and deserts we know of today were probably even larger, most of Africa would have been uninhabitable. During this time, the number of Homo sapiens went from 10,000 people to just hundreds. (Again, this did not include Neanderthals, whose population seems to have remained stable.) This means all people alive today are the descendants of a group which was lucky enough to find a milder part of Africa in which to survive.
It’s therefore ironic that our species eventually came to have such a negative effect on so many other species in the millennia that followed. A TV show called Découverte on Radio-Canada (the French CBC) recently explored the sixth major extinction of Earth’s natural history. Unlike the others which were caused by natural phenomena, this one is caused by human activity.
According to recent research, a certain species of caribou in Quebec avoids anything that smacks of human activity to the point of refusing to even cross logging roads. Imagine what happens when the caribou habitat is affected by clear-cutting.
In various parts of the world, scientists are working to identify new species as quickly as possible in order to better know whether their eventual extinction is caused by human activity. One of the scientists spoke of the homogenization of species around the world. Just like music and news that become the same in all countries, we may one day see only species adapted to human presence, as the others will all be gone.
It’s not that humanity doesn’t follow its conscience. Instead, we must recognise that after only about two hundred thousand years of existence, our species has reached a stage of development that disturbs the natural balance of the entire planet. For years, our species had to constantly struggle against the onslaughts of nature with few defences, little natural strength, and virtually nonexistent technology. Our intelligence, the only special weapon at our disposal, was not always enough.
Over time, we have made remarkable progress and discoveries that have allowed us to overcome diseases that were once deadly, and in many cases, put an end to repeated famines. Mortality rates today are significantly lower than in the 19th century. Today, we no longer die of old age at 40.
These advances occurred in a wink of geologic time, and nature can only compensate partially and slowly. When a natural balance can’t be restored, nature seeks a new equilibrium. However, we have long thumbed our collective nose at nature, always trying to deceive and defeat. Our presence in larger and larger numbers on the planet has already led to negative consequences for biodiversity.
Life has always managed to bounce back after major extinctions. Will it do so again this time?
Our species came about shortly before 195,000 years ago, at a time when the African climate was mild and there was plenty of food. At its highest, the population of Homo sapiens at the time consisted of about 10,000 breeding people. This did not include Neanderthals, who lived in Eurasia.
By 195,000 years ago, the planet started a glacial stage known by geologists as the Marine Isotope Stage 6 (MIS6), a stage that would only end about 72,000 years later, or 123,000 years ago. During that time, as the climate grew colder and more arid, and deserts we know of today were probably even larger, most of Africa would have been uninhabitable. During this time, the number of Homo sapiens went from 10,000 people to just hundreds. (Again, this did not include Neanderthals, whose population seems to have remained stable.) This means all people alive today are the descendants of a group which was lucky enough to find a milder part of Africa in which to survive.
It’s therefore ironic that our species eventually came to have such a negative effect on so many other species in the millennia that followed. A TV show called Découverte on Radio-Canada (the French CBC) recently explored the sixth major extinction of Earth’s natural history. Unlike the others which were caused by natural phenomena, this one is caused by human activity.
According to recent research, a certain species of caribou in Quebec avoids anything that smacks of human activity to the point of refusing to even cross logging roads. Imagine what happens when the caribou habitat is affected by clear-cutting.
In various parts of the world, scientists are working to identify new species as quickly as possible in order to better know whether their eventual extinction is caused by human activity. One of the scientists spoke of the homogenization of species around the world. Just like music and news that become the same in all countries, we may one day see only species adapted to human presence, as the others will all be gone.
It’s not that humanity doesn’t follow its conscience. Instead, we must recognise that after only about two hundred thousand years of existence, our species has reached a stage of development that disturbs the natural balance of the entire planet. For years, our species had to constantly struggle against the onslaughts of nature with few defences, little natural strength, and virtually nonexistent technology. Our intelligence, the only special weapon at our disposal, was not always enough.
Over time, we have made remarkable progress and discoveries that have allowed us to overcome diseases that were once deadly, and in many cases, put an end to repeated famines. Mortality rates today are significantly lower than in the 19th century. Today, we no longer die of old age at 40.
These advances occurred in a wink of geologic time, and nature can only compensate partially and slowly. When a natural balance can’t be restored, nature seeks a new equilibrium. However, we have long thumbed our collective nose at nature, always trying to deceive and defeat. Our presence in larger and larger numbers on the planet has already led to negative consequences for biodiversity.
Life has always managed to bounce back after major extinctions. Will it do so again this time?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)