Musicians

"I'm a boy, I'm a boy but my ma won't admit..."  Maybe he never admited it either - who knows.  I used to get upset about the idea of Pete Townshend being gay.  Something about the overt maleness and rebeliousness of The Who created a mental disconnect when I discovered the truth. I guess it was some vestigial homophobia left over from a fairly typical, suburban, white, middle class upbringing.    It doesn't bother me anymore - he's a man in my eyes.  It has nothing to do with who or what you like to bang behind closed doors. It has to do with standing up, taking a risk, being fucking awesome at what you do, not shitting on others, remembering who your friends are and where you came from, writing incredibly great and honest songs, being humble, and a whole host of other things that Mr. Townshend has in spades.        

To date, The Beatles are undoubtedly the most popular British invasion band in the public conscience but the The Who were arguable much more influential on the the course of rock history.  Every garage band that has ever been since the sixties (and there's been lots - The Sex Pistols and Green Day just to name two who made it big) counts at least one Who song in their repertoire - and it's not only due to the time-defying, enduring nature of the songs - the sound and the live performances (and Roger, John, and Keith) had a lot to do with it as well - but it's Pete Townshend's writing that underlies it all! International treasure this man.                                                    

Musicians

I don't know why I would start this series on musicians with John Lennon. I love Lennon and the Beatles but he's not someone I listen to very often anymore.

Also I think a lot of his image has been fabricated by Yoko and the Lennon myth machine she created - frankly I think he had his head up his ass on a lot of issues - certainly towards the end of the Beatles - hello, Allen Klein... Magic Alex anyone?

Songs like working class hero, while sneering at the society that creates class distinctions, can't help sneering at the people in that class a bit at the same time - a kind of: "you're a dupe because you're part of an exploited class, and you're a doubly a dupe because you don't realize it." Pretty harsh for a guy who wasn't working class himself. It's pretentious.

On the other hand - he was a tough son of a bitch who took no shit from anyone. A wit as sharp as a razor and an imagination as big as the universe. He was fearless - or what it just naive? No had been the Beatles before the Beatles... in many ways they created a template for how not to run the business of a band - with John Lennon firmly at the helm - spiritually anyway.

But beyond the image, the hype, the iconic status - is still just a sensitive, funny, artistic soul who wrote great songs - someone who knew that deep down inside, he was a loser like the rest of us.. At least that's how he made us feel. Beautiful.

The virtues of Go...

Go is a board game for two players. It gets compared to chess a lot. It also gets compared to Reversi because it looks similar, but its play and strategy are completely different from both games. For a complete overview of its history and strategy, Wikipedia is as good a place as any to start.

The rules are simple:

• The pieces (called stones) are placed in consecutive turns on the grid points of the board (board size can vary from 9x9 to 19x19) and traditionally, black starts. The stone, once placed, has four adjoining open grid points (called liberties) which can be occupied either by your own or opposing stones.
• If a stone has all four of its liberties cut off by opposing stones, it is dead and removed from play by the opponent. That is to say you can "capture" your opponent's stones (or groups of stones) by completely surrounding them.
• You cannot commit suicide. that is to say you cannot place your stone on a grid point with no open liberties
• (The rule of Ko) - indefinite "mirror" moves are not allowed. One cannot repeat a move twice. If one is in this position - one has to place elsewhere on the board before returning.
• You can pass instead of playing a stone - two consecutive passes indicates the game is over.
• The game ends either when both players pass consecutively or when one of the players resigns - it is considered good etiquette not to drag an obvious loss on too long. Scoring is done by adding the number of grid points captured (territory) to the number of stones captured (prisoners).

That's it in a nut shell. Although the rules are simple, the strategy is extremely complex - professional Go players make millions a year on the tournament circuit - typically they begin their training and study of the game in preschool. For a really great introductory tutorial, I recommend "The interactive way to Go".

Players are ranked by their skill level, and their skill level is dependent on their grasp of strategical concepts of ever increasing complexity, and this in turn is dependent on the number of years spent studying and playing the game. Yep - studying AND playing. you can't progress in Go beyond a rudimentary level just by playing - you actually have to study the game as well.

The ranks are designated as either "Kyu" or "Dan". The Kyu ranks start around 30 and drop down to 1 - these are the beginner ranks (30 Kyu - absolute beginner). The Dan ranks are the master levels - they range from 1 to 9. For the record I'm at about 18 Kyu - still a beginner in terms of my grasp of strategy although I've been playing Go for almost 2 years.

Go is not an easy game to catch on to, but books and online tutorials help a lot - and of course playing helps a lot to - there is saying to the effect that one has to quickly lose his first 100 games before he can really start learning the game. There are many online Go servers where you can find many opportunities to play and learn the game: I use Pandanet and sometimes Yahoo. If you use Yahoo - understand that there are a lot of cheaters on there that don't care about the game - still it's a quick and easy way to get playing. On dedicated Go servers like Pandanet - the experience is much better. The players by and large take the game etiquette seriously and play honorably. Every game is a learning experience and risk taking is encouraged. When you get matched with someone at your skill level it is an intense and exciting experience where luck has little or nothing to do with the outcome. The only time luck plays a role is if your opponent makes a misstep and you're wily enough to recognize it and capitalize on it. You win or lose on your strategic abilities alone. Often you can find advanced players willing to spend time going over games with you to help you learn. It's a great community that I look forward to spending more time in as I get older.

Christopher Hitchens is a great writer. He's brilliant, funny, scholarly, and articulate. I've enjoyed every book of his I've read - including "God is not Great" - but I have to disagree with him on this: religion does not poison everything, no more than science poisons everything. Religion has poisoned a lot for sure, but not everything. I speak from experience.

There was a time in my life that I whole-heartedly agreed with that premise - but my years of volunteering with the Schizophrenia Society of Edmonton has opened my mind. Anyone who spends anytime volunteering in their community will know... many of those who work in the volunteer sector are religious. In fact a recent survey found that people active in their faith's are more likely to be volunteers. Over 41% of Canadians who are active in their various faiths volunteer on a weekly basis as opposed to about 23% of those who are not religious. Now, age may be a factor here - since older people tend to volunteer more than younger people, and there is almost certainly a positive correlation between age and religious fervency - nevertheless, I like to call a spade a spade.

Although I totally disregard any supernatural malarkey that goes with most religions - I need to acknowledge the positive social side of religion. Most rational religious people side step any discussions of the supernatural - they prefer to keep that private - if they are truly rational the reasons for this are obvious. But one cannot deny the positive force religion has in motivating people to get off their duffs and start thinking about the state of the world and their role in it.

Hitchens gets many things right in "God is not Great" - his best point is the fact that many rational religious people act as de facto apologists for fundamentalists when they don't speak out against creationist bullshit or theocratic regimes for fear of "disrespecting" the faithful. Never mind the fact that they're nuts; they have faith, and faith is a virtue right? Well... that is a failing. But I can't help noticing every time I do my volunteering that I'm surrounded mostly by religious people - of all faiths, not just Christians, but my fellow atheists are few and far between.

Legendary Folk Singer & Activist Pete Seeger Turns 90, Thousands Turn Out for All-Star Tribute Featuring Bruce Springsteen, Joan Baez, Bernice Johnson Reagon and Dozens More

"REPORTER: When you were writing “My Dirty Stream,” did you wonder, “Would it work?” Did you ever have doubts that things would get better on the river?

PETE SEEGER: No, I think I figured that sooner or later—I didn’t know it would happen so soon, frankly. But if the human race can keep the scientists from inventing two more foolish weapons, I think we’ve got time to solve our problems. The only question is science—scientists have a religion. They think that an infinite increase in empirical information is a good thing. Can they prove it? Of course not. It’s a religious belief. That’s science for you."

Wow, Pete Seeger thinks science is a religion. I'm really disappointed in that statement - well, he is 90. Does he really think that the blame for all the polluted rivers in America can be laid at the feet of science? What is the alternative to "an infinite increase in empirical knowledge"? Is he hoping for the day we finally give up our curious ways and just be happy with ignorance?

Honestly I don't think so - Seeger is too much of a free inquirer himself for me to believe that. Unfortunately, ill thought out comments like this, from one so respected, will give fuel to the truly ignorant that will use his words to further their own ends. The creationists et. al.

I Think I know what he meant - he meant unrestricted, unregulated, unfettered science free from any moral or ethical anchors is a bad thing. which it is of course. But anyone who thinks science is just another religion really doesn't get it. Science looks for truth based on the evidence - religion looks for evidence to support its truths. Partisan politics is a lot like that to - isn't it Pete.

Cyto-what-ology?

I guess I should write a bit more about what I actually do for a living since it's a really unsung branch of health care - few know what cytology is - or why it matters. Take a look at this picture. What you're looking at are cells. Squamous epithelial cells. The word squamous comes from the Latin "squama" meaning scale. I love how that word describes so perfectly not only the cell's form but its function. That happens a lot in biology - form and function being perfectly matched - love that natural selection. At any rate - these squamous epithelial cells are from the uterine cervix of a human being. Little scales... we are all covered in little scales - cellular scales. You guessed it - these are skin cells. They link together like plate-mail and cover our entire body. But these aren't just any old skin cells; these are abnormal skin cells. If you've been trained in cytopathology you would recognize this as a low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, or LSIL, showing HPV effect. How do we know that these cells are abnormal? It's simple really. We know they're not normal because they don't look normal. See how easy that was? This image here - to the left of this block of text - these are what normal squamous cells look like. See the difference? The nuclei here are much smaller compared to the abnormal ones, the ratio of cytoplasm to nucleus is much higher in the abnormal ones - and notice the cytoplasmic clearing effect that's present in the abnormal cell group? Not present here. See - normal! Easy right? All through the magic of natural dyes and light microscopy. That's how cytology has been done for 100 years. 

The field has evolved considerably, especially in the last 20 years, with the advent of the HPV test and vaccine. And as AI and imaging software gets better and better,  who knows where the field will ultimately end up?  But I have a sense there will always be a need for the skilled healthcare profession of Cytotechnology.

FIRST PHOTOS: Weird Fish With Transparent Head

FIRST PHOTOS: Weird Fish With Transparent Head

I don't know... I just had to blog this... the natural world is so full of real wonders, why do so many people need the supernatural world?

Blogged with the Flock Browser

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | Earliest 'human footprints' found

Those darn gaps in knowledge just keep shrinking.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

NASA - Kepler Mission to Hunt for Earth-like Planets

This is a very exiting study - the mere fact that serious money is being allotted for such a project is itself a reason for celebration.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Was Darwin Wrong? @ National Geographic Magazine

Was Darwin Wrong? @ National Geographic Magazine

In case you're too lazy to read this article, or if the url no longer exists, the answer is unequivocally no! Science magazines are starting to use the same rhetorical tactics that creationists have been using in their dogmazines for years.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Answers in Genesis - Creation, Evolution, Christian Apologetics

Answers in Genesis - Creation, Evolution, Christian Apologetics

This website is an attempt to rationalize bible literalism. I encourage everyone to go to this site and read as you please. This site is its own worst enemy. If you don't think that there is a conflict between the forces of darkness and the forces of light, think again.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Charles Andriashek 1965 - 2000

I've grown up here now
All of my life
But I dreamed
Someday I'd go
Where blue eyed girls
And red guitars and
Naked rivers flow

I'm not all I thought I'd be
I always stayed around
I've been as far as Mercy and Grand
Frozen to the ground
I can't stay here and I'm scared to leave
(Just kiss me once and then)
I'll go to hell
I might as well
Be whistlin' down the wind

The bus at the corner
The clock's on the wall
Broken windmill
There's no wind at all
I've yelled and I cursed
If i stay here I'll rust
I'm stuck like a shipwreck
Out here in the dust

Sky is red
And there world's on fire
And the corn is taller than me
The dog is tied
To a wagon of rain
And the road is as wet as the sea
And sometimes the music from a dance
Will carry across the plains
And the places that I'm dreaming of
Do they dream only of me?
There are places where they never sleep
And the circus never ends
So I will take the Marley Bone Coach
And whistle down the wind

-Tom Waits


On April 26, 2009... it'll be nine years. R.I.P. brother.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Net Neutrality

There is a push to control what comes to your desktop from the internet by broadband providers.  They are a powerful lobby group and include companies like AT&T.  The internet is the single most important, open, grass roots vehicle for the sharing and transfer of information.  No one should be allowed to control it.  Let's not let what happened to Television, happen to the net.  M lab provides you with the tools to check your isp connections to monitor your broadband provider.  By participating you provide them with valuable research which they will use to improve their monitoring abilities.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Trophy Hunting

OK, I'm a hunter and I advocate that responsible hunting is actually good for the environment. But that's the topic of another post. This post is in regards to trophy hunting. The argument goes like this: taking large animals diminishes the gene pool - depriving the population of it's most successful members. Intuitively this seems to make sense, especially when it comes to commercial hunting or "harvesting" animals such as cod. But I'm skeptical of trophy hunting's impact on the population of Big Horn Sheep.

Of course it may be true, but it may also be true that "trophy" hunting is itself just another form of natural selection. Never having been a "trophy" hunter, I never paid too much attention to the issue. Now it appears there's some real hard science on this. There is a new study out claiming that this is in fact happening. Trophy hunters go for the biggest (and presumably most evolutionary fit) members of the population - while natural predators typically go for the weak, sick, very young or very old members. This study says that the mean weights of fecund adults in populations of animals typically harvested by humans is drastically lower than the mean weights in comparable non-human prey populations.

Check out the link:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/12/0809235106

Now check out how scientific claims are typically reported:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/science/13fish.html?_r=2&em

"Human actions are increasing the rate of evolutionary change in plants and animals in ways..." reads the opening line. Alarmist! This is a statement of fact when the study only suggests there is a link. Of course it seems to make sense, and it is more than possible - but is it fact? Not yet.

What is not disputed is that there is a disparity between the mean weights of several populations preyed upon by humans and several populations not preyed upon by humans. Do the findings justify further study.. of course! But the media all to often does a disservice to the causes of science in general in their desire to create punchy copy to sell more papers. If this study turns out to be bunk, it's the scientists who will bare the brunt of the false claims made by the New York Times - not the NY times themselves.

Blogged with the Flock Browser