Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 14-05-2009

In the fast-paced world of social media, there’s now a better chance of communicating with the dead than with Rick on Twitter! You follow me, Greg? 😉

Thanks to Greg, RPJ & Kat

Quote of the Day:

You should view the world as a conspiracy run by a very closely-knit group of people, and you should think of those people as yourself and your friends.

Robert Anton Wilson

  1. Twitter
    I deleted my Twitter account because I honestly didn’t think there was an audience for twitters about my cat Neva. I’ll take this as a hint to leave the Stone Age and join the modern world once more — tweet tweet.

    Re: the oldest female figurine. Why do these experts have to stoop to Freudian analyses? Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Or in this case, a pregnant woman. The figurine looks like a pregnant woman to me. Pregnancy and birth would have been mind-blowing mysteries to prehistoric people, so why not make idols and charms to express their awe, fear and bewilderment. It worked for Greg!

    1. The Female Figure

      “Instead of a head, it has a ring that scientists think meant it was worn as a pendant looped through string.”

      What do you make of the lack of a head? Prehistoric serial killer art or typical male objectification of women (no head, no identity)?

      1. Female figure
        My take is that it was a magical charm worn on a necklace by pregnant women to ensure a successful birth…

        Fat body = mother has plenty of food so the baby within her can grow large and strong

        Oversized genitals = large enough for the baby’s birth to be easy and fast

        Swollen breasts = plenty of milk to feed the baby after it’s born

        As for the ring in the place of a head… By weaving some of her own hair onto this ring, each pregnant woman who used the charm would have ‘made it her own’ — a hopeful little mini-me, as it were.

      2. Off with their heads
        [quote=Delaiah]
        What do you make of the lack of a head?[/quote]

        I’m guessing it was broken. It’s pretty old, afterall. Or it’s stylised to accentuate the features of a pregnant woman (belly, breasts, etc). I honestly think experts over-complicate things, like the “toy hedgehog” found at Stonehenge that just looks like a lump of worn wood that was once carved but doesn’t resemble anything anymore.

      3. Typical male, eh?
        [quote=Delaiah]

        “Instead of a head, it has a ring that scientists think meant it was worn as a pendant looped through string.”

        What do you make of the lack of a head? Prehistoric serial killer art or typical male objectification of women (no head, no identity)?[/quote]

        Heh…

        If it was just typical male objectification, there would have only been breasts. Everything else would have been ignored. 🙂

        Respects,
        Gwedd

  2. Physicists create universe
    Conclusion of the article:
    [quote]The secrets of the universe it seems, aren’t safe for long.”[/quote]

    Does this not sound like déjà vu?

  3. NoNocebo and NotScientist
    I know the placebo effect well. It’s the less formal form of psychosomatic medicine, including pretty much all of biofeedback. It simply means the brain (psycho) affects the body (somatic). Neither more nor less formal versions are intended to represent only positive influences, but rather any ‘top-down’ effects. There is no such term as ‘nocebo’ outside the referenced publication, nor is there any need for it. Contradicting the state of the science in order to foist a useless twitbit on readership for the sake of attention gaining is beneath any publication that at least attempts to represent science. Since the editors of the publication seem to lean towards journalism via imaginary catchphrase rather than reporting science and its effects on society, I suggest they change the name. They’re not writing NewScientist, they’re writing NotScientist. I don’t have a problem with things not scientific, only with those that pretend to be one when they’re the other. Keep things straight or neither is valid.

    No, I am not the brain specialist…..
    YES. Yes I AM the brain specialist.

  4. The reason for Shostak’s zealotry
    [quote]But the field is still trying to overcome the UFO stigma, laments Ain de Horta, a project scientist with the Australian SETI Institute.

    “There are still those in the scientific community who look down their noses at us, but that’s increasingly unusual these days. There’s a growing recognition that this is important science, with the potential to answer one of the most fundamental questions facing humanity. Those who lump us in with the UFO nuts tend not to be scientists,” says de Horta.[/quote]

    And that, is why Shostak is BFF with Randy and all the fundamental skeptics. Because Heaven forbids the public confuse him with a Ufologist.

    —–
    It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
    It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

    Red Pill Junkie

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal