…and this is a 
This is the skull of an arthrodire, an armored placoderm from the Devonian.
Somehow, 20 foot long predatory fish with a mouth lined with razor-edged bony shears has never made me think of sexy time…until I ran across this comparison image.
Oh, schwiiing. It really doesn't take much to get a mammal to associate just about anything with sex. And then, what do you know, the latest Nature has a short article on an interesting fossil: it's the pelvic region of an arthrodire, Incisoscutum ritchiei, and look what it's got: an ossified clasper, comparable to the erectile organ of modern sharks. This is a bony rod that would have been the core of an intromittent organ in the living animal, so what we have here is a small relic of the sex life of a big fish from a few hundred million years ago.
a, Pelvic girdle in dorsal view; b, pelvic girdle restored.
Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?
Ahlberg P, Trinajstic K, Johanson Z, Long J (2009) Pelvic claspers confirm chondrichthyan-like internal fertilization in arthrodires. Nature 460:888-889.
Life Science
Comments
Posted by: Standard Curve
|
August 18, 2009 1:42 PM
Gah, I feel so inadequate now.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | August 18, 2009 1:44 PM
pffft, I'm Irish.
Posted by: mo | August 18, 2009 1:45 PM
Well, at least I don't use my leg bones for it.
Posted by: ThirtyFiveUp | August 18, 2009 1:45 PM
Manhood is not the penis.
Manhood is character. And goodness is forever.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | August 18, 2009 1:49 PM
Not having a baculum, well, obviously not much will be left in 300 million years. Many of the finest things in life have a limited lifespan, however.
Pretty fine fish derivative there, you know, that organism with the strange hair patterning (what, just on the head?).
I'm guessing the "intromittent organ" means little to later evolution, since these things went extinct without descendents, didn't they?
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: lose_the_woo | August 18, 2009 1:49 PM
Wow. Now I have clasper envy.
Posted by: not a gator | August 18, 2009 1:51 PM
Nothing, I'm female. Gonna have to go by that spread pelvis, now won't they?
Posted by: James Sweet | August 18, 2009 1:54 PM
Hmmm, this makes me wonder if there would be a market for extremely rich but sexually insecure men to have a cast taken of their junk, a concrete replica constructed from the cast, and then the concrete replica launched into space.
I would call the company EternaWang.
Posted by: harv | August 18, 2009 1:54 PM
Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?
If your a right wingnut:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.popularairsoft.com/files/images/AK-47_type_II_Part_DM-ST-89-01131.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.popularairsoft.com/rs-wiki-most-influential-rifle-history-ak-47&usg=__TZvOV5IsNWaAOKe7Z18jbzgttaw=&h=500&w=500&sz=20&hl=en&start=17&sig2=ypTiY-2qi5cHkXor37wn4Q&tbnid=yLh31CWlgDUb_M:&tbnh=130&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dassault%2Brifles%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Dactive&ei=tOqKSvCwJojetAODz4i9DQ
Posted by: Sardine | August 18, 2009 1:56 PM
Note to self:
Fossilize penis, earliest convenience.
Posted by: AdamK | August 18, 2009 1:58 PM
Clasping region?
No want!
Posted by: jimmiraybob | August 18, 2009 2:01 PM
I can only assume that this fish was a vegetarian until after A&E's fall and subsequent journey out of the garden.
Posted by: BAllanJ | August 18, 2009 2:03 PM
Some descendant of our future overlords will dig up a really old vcr and some 1980s porn. That's what they'll think our sex lives were like.
Posted by: bbgunn | August 18, 2009 2:03 PM
Smart-a$$ Paleontologist, 300,000 million years from now... "Hmmm. Must have been cold that day."
Posted by: Nick Gardner | August 18, 2009 2:03 PM
"Manhood" is sometimes used as slang for a penis.
Posted by: MikeM | August 18, 2009 2:04 PM
See? Sara was right! All athiests ever think about is sexsexsex!
These boners were put there by The Flood.
Posted by: Die Anyway | August 18, 2009 2:05 PM
I'm guessing they didn't have to worry about that "lasting longer than 4 hours" thing.
Posted by: Brock | August 18, 2009 2:07 PM
What does that middle image have to do with anything? They wanted to show the size of an arthrodire, and the only thing they could think of for comparison was a young woman in a swimsuit? Odd. Why not a scuba diver?
Maybe... *gasp* these things sill live in the depths and occasionally emerge to chow on innocent beachgoers! Like a bony, ancient Jaws...
Anyway my local natural history museum has a few huge frightening arthrodire skeletons suspended from the ceiling. I'd almost expect the Creation "Museum" to mimic with a saddled fiberglass replica -- but now that word is out about these (ahem) pelvic claspers, they probably don't want kids near one.
Also: Those giant mandibles, razor teeth, and armored plating were just for show in the beginning... arthrodires were *clearly* vegetarians until The Fall (tm).
(that squishy sound is my brain melting out of my ears)
Posted by: Lana | August 18, 2009 2:07 PM
Came for the atheism. Stayed for the science porn.
Posted by: Bill Dauphin, OM | August 18, 2009 2:08 PM
bbgunn (@14):
Would a 300 million year old fossil be able to yell:
"I was in the POOOOL!!!" ;^)
Posted by: Bone Oboe | August 18, 2009 2:10 PM
Or the euphemistic "sudden decrease in vision."
Which sounds only a little more promising than "going blind."
Posted by: daveau
|
August 18, 2009 2:12 PM
BC reference PZ? (I let the Maori one slip by the other day. Never again.*)
*Well maybe.
Posted by: Sanity Jane | August 18, 2009 2:12 PM
Came for the science porn. Stayed for the science porn. And the atheism.
Posted by: bbgunn | August 18, 2009 2:13 PM
Oops! Comment #14 should have said 300 million, not 300,000 million. My math skills have begun to atrophy, much like my 'manhood.'
Posted by: E.V. | August 18, 2009 2:14 PM
I know what costume PZ's wearing for next year's PaleoCon! Killer headdress (and a boner that kills too)!
Whaddya mean there's no PaleoCon?!!
*kicks lint on floor and shuffles off*
Posted by: lose_the_woo | August 18, 2009 2:15 PM
But that's not sexy. Maybe if the diver was female, wearing a fishnet dive suit,...with tassels,...and platform heel-fins.
Posted by: Nangleator | August 18, 2009 2:16 PM
Great. More fodder for the SyFy channel.
Title: Clasping Region!
TVMA: Absurd violence, strong language, improbable sexual content
Posted by: BluesBassist | August 18, 2009 2:17 PM
harv @9:
I'm hardly a right wingnut, but I do enjoy target shooting with my AR-15 rifle. (I prefer it to the AK-47.) Funny, I've never associated that hobby with anything sexual. In fact, it always seems to be the pro victim-disarmament wackos who have a "guns = penis" obsession. It's always struck me as weird and creepy, and given the existence of those nutjobs, it's just one more reason to remain well-armed and proficient with my weapons. (I'm referring to legally justified self-defense.)
Posted by: Jon H | August 18, 2009 2:20 PM
"Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?"
Sigh. It's already a vestigial fossil from disuse.
Posted by: Ms. Crazy Pants | August 18, 2009 2:21 PM
I suddenly have the urge to have fish for lunch.
Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | August 18, 2009 2:23 PM
Arthrodired got penises? I love penises!
http://xkcd.com/194/
Posted by: Bone Oboe | August 18, 2009 2:24 PM
Well said "BluesBassist" @#28.
Posted by: bbgunn | August 18, 2009 2:24 PM
Bill Dauphin, OM (@20):
Only if the fossilized clasper belong to 'Costanza Facilus.'
Posted by: eddyline | August 18, 2009 2:28 PM
#26: But that's not sexy. Maybe if the diver was female, wearing a fishnet dive suit,...with tassels,...and platform heel-fins.
How about: http://classicscifi.com/images/posters/fantvoy.jpg
Posted by: Jojo | August 18, 2009 2:35 PM
I would imagine his Star Wars action figure collection.
Posted by: firemancarl | August 18, 2009 2:37 PM
Meh, after 300 hundred years? The toy collection will be left. Look, lets face, the only reason women keep us around is cause their vibrators wont mow the yard.
Posted by: daveau
|
August 18, 2009 2:41 PM
BluesBassist@28
Seriously, a gun as a phallic symbol never occurred to you?
What do you do if you run over a bass player?
Back up and make SURE.
Posted by: Captain Hammer | August 18, 2009 2:44 PM
The hammer is my penis
Posted by: Geds | August 18, 2009 2:46 PM
Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?
The many songs written to praise it?
Posted by: stogoe | August 18, 2009 2:50 PM
Just like sports cars and Hummers, manly man man manrifles are so obviously a penis surrogate that I'm having a hard time believing it never occurred to you.
Also, Arhrodires are the coolest.
Posted by: DV | August 18, 2009 2:50 PM
Well, since I plan on encasing my corpse in amber when I die, hopefully all of it.
Posted by: Lynna | August 18, 2009 2:51 PM
Hey, I mow my own yard too.
Posted by: Geb | August 18, 2009 2:51 PM
Well I don't know about the rest of you, but I plan to die in a bizarre accident involving fine silt, a sudden flood, and handcuffs...
Posted by: Tim H | August 18, 2009 2:53 PM
There are other options, of course. This article reminded me immediately of a photo in a book on Mesolithic Europe I have. (Prehistoric Europe, An Illustrated History, edited by Barry Cunliffe) There's a beautiful color photo of a 6000 year-old grave from Varna. A 45-year old man was buried with 990+ gold objects, total weight of 1.5+kg . The last line in the caption is, "Note the gold penis sheath."
Not like the cheap plastic ones modern funeral homes provide.
The artifact in question strongly resembles a clarinet mouthpiece cover.
Posted by: Lana | August 18, 2009 2:57 PM
daveau@37
We're doing bad musician jokes now? Sorry, I mean bad jokes about musicians.
What do you call a jazz musician who broke up with his girlfriend?
Homeless.
What's the difference between a dead squirrel in the middle of the road and a dead jazz musician in the middle of the road?
The squirrel might have been on his way to a gig.
Okay, that's out of my system. Thanks, guys.
Posted by: Jim | August 18, 2009 2:58 PM
Am I looking at the pics wrong? I see a size bar that is labeled .5 MM so the clasper rod thing is what 1.5 mm long?
Was this a smaller species of that kind of fish or did the big guy just have a little tool?
Posted by: Lana | August 18, 2009 2:59 PM
Actually, I love jazz, it's my favorite. And I'm always amazed how much talent there is out there. Hence the dark humor.
Posted by: daveau
|
August 18, 2009 3:06 PM
Lana-
Nah. BluesBassist has an appreciation for bassist jokes. Kind of a nostalgia thing on my part regarding a previous thread. Musician jokes always welcome though.
Posted by: Nangleator | August 18, 2009 3:07 PM
Hmmm... Musician jokes...
A rock band is composed of three musicians and a drummer.
Posted by: Darren Garrison | August 18, 2009 3:07 PM
Re: the second photo with the scale object.
There have been several times I've ran across sites about fossils using anime/manga type characters for scale objects. I was able to re-find a few of them:
ammonites:
http://www.tonmo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3684
elephant cousins:
http://big_game.at.infoseek.co.jp/Pleistocene/Deinotherium/Deinotherium.html
Snake:
http://www.ppne.co.uk/index.php?m=show&id=29870
I've seen others-- a giant penguin and a giant beaver (oh, shut up) come to mind, but I can't find them.
There was also a game where you take Cambrian creatures such as anomolocaris and opabinia and evolve them into Japanese schoolgirls:
http://www.gae.co.jp/game/qts/index.html
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&num=100&ei=YPuKSpq4OsWltgeyyKDDDQ&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=cambrian+qts&spell=1&fp=82e34627c46f57f4
Posted by: BluesBassist | August 18, 2009 3:12 PM
daveau @37:
No, a gun as a phallic symbol honestly never occurred to me until I first encountered it debating the RKBA on internet forums. And in that context, it was always brought up by the victim-disarmament folks, some of whom seemed to have a disturbingly creepy obsession about it. (It wasn't most of them, just a predictable minority.) I gather those people had some sort of violent, psycho-sexual fantasy involving firearms. I hypothesized they wanted guns to be banned because they were afraid what they might do with them.
Posted by: Christina | August 18, 2009 3:14 PM
Hmph. I would have liked to see a Beckham-esque fellow in a bathing suit instead of a chick. But that's just me, seeing men only as they suit my needs, not as people. :-)
Posted by: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. | August 18, 2009 3:15 PM
Many of the Japanese manga-style figures used for scale with prehistoric critters come from the following blogsite:
http://ameblo.jp/oldworld/.
Posted by: Flamethorn | August 18, 2009 3:17 PM
Sexytimes? But... she doesn't have tentacles...
Posted by: daveau
|
August 18, 2009 3:21 PM
BluesBassist@51
I'll take you at your word. I guess sometimes a banana is just a banana. ;-)
Posted by: scote | August 18, 2009 3:23 PM
"ThirtyFiveUp | August 18, 2009 1:45 PM
Manhood is not the penis.
Manhood is character. And goodness is forever."
Good luck fossilizing your "goodness." :rolleyes:
Posted by: Nangleator | August 18, 2009 3:30 PM
I think I can strongly recommend using anime girls for size reference in scientific illustrations.
Particularly the ones with short skirts.
Posted by: heliobates | August 18, 2009 3:34 PM
Q: How do you know there's a drummer at the door?
A: The knocking gets louder and speeds up.
Q: What's the definition of an optimist?
A: A trombonist with a pager.
Posted by: Ferrous Patella | August 18, 2009 3:45 PM
See here for better comparison picture.
Posted by: DaveH | August 18, 2009 3:51 PM
Oh, let's just get it over with: link
Though can't remember if they have:
What do you get if you cross a drummer and a musician?
A bass player.
Posted by: Ferrous Patella | August 18, 2009 3:54 PM
So, I had left my car parked my accordion locked in the back seat. Several minutes later a friend came in and said, "Some guy just busted the rear window to you car." I ran out to the parking lot but it was too late. There were three more accordions in the back seat.
Posted by: stogoe | August 18, 2009 4:05 PM
What is with this, dude? Victim disarmament? Really? It's like you're trying to come off like a gun nut with anxious masculinity issues.
Posted by: ThirdMonkey | August 18, 2009 4:20 PM
Is that comparison pic what Mooney and Kirshenbaum meant by better communicating science? Because if it is, I think I like it. ;)
Posted by: Knockgoats | August 18, 2009 4:22 PM
I'm hardly a right wingnut, but... BluesBassist
[Classic right wing gun-nut screed follows - what a surprise!]
Posted by: BluesBassist | August 18, 2009 4:35 PM
Knockgoats @64:
[Classic right wing gun-nut screed follows - what a surprise!]
By the real right wingnuts, I'm typically accused of being a liberal. I must be doing something right to piss off both sides of that coin.
Posted by: Darren Garrison | August 18, 2009 4:41 PM
#57
"I think I can strongly recommend using anime girls for size reference in scientific illustrations."
A new SI unit: the Haruhi.
On a more squid-related (but equally Japanese) note:
http://www.audiocubes.com/product_info.php?products_id=2530
Posted by: Monado | August 18, 2009 4:46 PM
Now, if we can just find a fossil proving that clams had legs!
Posted by: MikeM | August 18, 2009 4:48 PM
Well, this thread went in a tangent I hadn't expected.
Speaking of which,
Q: What does trigonometry have in common with a beach?
A: Tan Gents
(Sorry.)
Posted by: Monado | August 18, 2009 4:54 PM
Actually, gun-control proponents are anxious because they don't want to get shot in an argument about who did (or didn't) use their turn signal.
And because they know that if YOU have a gun in your house, it's five times more likely that a member of your family will get shot. Each person has to decide how to weigh statistics like that against anecdotes about protecting oneself. I might go for a Taser, but not an AK-47.
Posted by: dingo | August 18, 2009 4:59 PM
Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?
Fame and worship.
Posted by: Darren Garrison | August 18, 2009 5:02 PM
"Q: What does trigonometry have in common with a beach?
A: Tan Gents"
What about algae bras?
Posted by: truebutnotuseful | August 18, 2009 5:05 PM
BluesBassist wrote @ #65:
You are truly this generation's Galileo.
Posted by: harv | August 18, 2009 5:18 PM
The image I was really looking for in the original post that of the gun toters outside of the President's last speech in Arizona, settled for the AK at the last instant. (blog commenting at work again I'm afraid) I personally have nothing against carrying guns for protection or hunting or any legitimate reason. The crazies in Arizona were displaying their firearms deliberately for intimidation and fear, and perhaps some psycological need to see who had the biggest (fill in the blank). Admittedly a little subtle.
Posted by: Knockgoats | August 18, 2009 5:26 PM
By the real right wingnuts, I'm typically accused of being a liberal. I must be doing something right to piss off both sides of that coin. BluesBassist
I think that's number 4 on the list of popular but
stupid self-justificatory tropes that convince no-one.
Posted by: Goby | August 18, 2009 5:29 PM
@8
Two Words: Plaster Caster
Posted by: Bronze Dog | August 18, 2009 5:51 PM
Somewhere, I remember seeing a show where they recreated this critter's skull to demonstrate some unusual aspect about how its jaw muscles work, or something like that. And to break large fruits with hard rinds.
Seeing how big it really is, they might as well have named it something like "Guillotine face".
Posted by: Draken | August 18, 2009 5:53 PM
These boners were put there by The Flood.
That's weird. I normally get a boner before the Flood. After that, it's gone.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg | August 18, 2009 6:32 PM
Knockgoats, #74
You take real pride in your ignorance.
The problem isn't people with guns, the problem is stupid people with guns. You would bar all from owning firearms when it's a minority that causes the problem. If every gun owner was prone to killing himself or his family, then the death lists would be much longer, and nobody would pay them any attention. It would, in other words, be an ordinary, everyday part of life.
It's the rarity that makes in home gun deaths such a horror. But you would impose draconian laws on many because a few act like fools.
The problem here is, you need people to disagree with you to be imbeciles. You don't want the opposition to exhibit any brains because it would challenge your beliefs. So gun owners have to be fools, and anybody against government run health care has to be a callous tool of the oppression.
I don't own a gun because they freak me out. Don't ask me why, they just do. But I don't demand that nobody have a gun because of my problem with them. I'm willing to let people have guns because I trust most people with guns. Sorry to hear you don't have that kind of trust.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg | August 18, 2009 6:43 PM
And for you a trickle is a mighty river.
Posted by: Carl Buell | August 18, 2009 6:46 PM
PZ! Is that what's missing from my art? If you want "babes", I can draw and paint them quite well thank you. Want something new for the header?
Posted by: Knockgoats | August 18, 2009 6:56 PM
Alan Kellogg,
You'll note it wasn't me brought guns into this thread - not being American, it's not by any means a central concern of mine, and I accept it's for Americans do decide on their gun laws. I will do my utmost to prevent my country going the same way: it only takes one fool with a gun to kill me, or someone I love.
I'm certainly delighted to hear you don't own a gun.
Posted by: Masks of Eris | August 18, 2009 7:02 PM
Wait.
Biology journals got pictures of half-naked people in them?
Suddenly mathematics seems like a huge mistake. Or an opportunity --- "Analytic Functions Illustrated Swimsuit Edition"?
Posted by: Osthato | August 18, 2009 7:09 PM
Rule #34, there are no exceptions.
Posted by: amphiox | August 18, 2009 7:10 PM
I have no problem with the completely unregulated ownership of guns.
So long as ammunition is strictly controlled.
Posted by: Russell Blackford | August 18, 2009 7:20 PM
What's this sex bit? All I see is a large naked fish and a female Homo sapiens who seems to be wearing some clothing for some reason that is not apparent. Surely they're not about to mate?
Posted by: ehwhatever | August 18, 2009 7:29 PM
"Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?"
Just lots of well preserved fan mail.
Posted by: oldfeminist | August 18, 2009 7:29 PM
Nangleator: "I think I can strongly recommend using anime girls for size reference in scientific illustrations. Particularly the ones with short skirts."
Because there are not enough boys interested in science?
Not enough messages to girls that they don't belong in science and are only accessories for men?
Not enough trivialization of female students in science and math classrooms?
Posted by: Alex | August 18, 2009 7:37 PM
Does anyone else think it looks like that fish/thing from Half Life?
Posted by: PBoing | August 18, 2009 7:42 PM
Hmmm, petrified morning wood.
Posted by: stogoe | August 18, 2009 7:55 PM
Ah, the fallacy of the Golden Mean. How original. Oh, wait - the opposite of that.
Posted by: CatBallou
|
August 18, 2009 8:00 PM
Without registering an opinion about gun ownership and/or control, I have to express my amusement at the poor logic of someone who says "Only the people who oppose us use that unflattering analogy. They must be obsessed." Of course your opponents are going to use the least charitable interpretations of your behavior---that's rhetoric, not obsession.
Many objects are viewed as phallic representations, including guns and sports cars. Whether the owners of those objects feel that connection consciously is irrelevant. In fact, it's the subconscious nature of the connection that makes it interesting. If I were a gun owner, I'd be wary of "protesting too much."
Posted by: Darren Garrison | August 18, 2009 8:16 PM
I like her better riding the fish, PZ style (sans cowboy hat)
http://i313.photobucket.com/albums/ll394/darrengarrison/various/girlonfish.jpg?t=1250640871
Posted by: KevinC | August 18, 2009 8:21 PM
Here's a comparison photo for this creature that avoids the sexist subtext, and could have the added bonus of pissing of Ken Ham!
Posted by: KevinC | August 18, 2009 8:24 PM
@92:
Yikes! We were thinking on the same lines, fortunately for me you chose to use the girl, lol.
Posted by: PsyberDave | August 18, 2009 8:43 PM
Ha ha. You said, "bony rod".
Posted by: kamaka | August 18, 2009 8:54 PM
@ 93
Hahaha... I like it!
Posted by: Tanystropheus | August 18, 2009 9:08 PM
Dunkle's "Bone"...
Posted by: Erl | August 18, 2009 9:45 PM
Think about this, you over-sexed apes: what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?
Porn tv signals, radiating into infinity. They may well last billions of years, growing fainter as time goes by, but still present.
Our junk lives on . . .
Posted by: Darren Garrison | August 18, 2009 10:34 PM
KevinC, maybe we can reach a compromise:
http://i313.photobucket.com/albums/ll394/darrengarrison/various/girlonfishwithpz.jpg?t=1250649214
Posted by: Susan | August 18, 2009 11:16 PM
@ Knockgoats
What?! But But God blesses America!
Posted by: Ichthyic | August 18, 2009 11:20 PM
PZ! Is that what's missing from my art? If you want "babes", I can draw and paint them quite well thank you. Want something new for the header?
Carl! What's the latest? got a link?
Posted by: Ichthyic | August 18, 2009 11:23 PM
The problem isn't people with guns, the problem is stupid people with guns.
The problem here is, you need people to disagree with you to be imbeciles.
quotemining is fun.
Posted by: beanjavert | August 18, 2009 11:57 PM
Men die, cattle die, all things die; I know of one thing that does not die, and that is the glory of one's penis.
Posted by: Milo Johnson | August 19, 2009 12:09 AM
Thousands of shrines lovingly tended by cadres of adoring women, what else?
Posted by: Alan Kellogg | August 19, 2009 12:23 AM
Knockgoats,
I know myself too well. Part of my fear of guns comes from the fact I tend to be impulsive; I simply don't want to be in a position where I can kill just on a fear or anger fueled whim.
That's the problem with having any sort of weapon around the house, the temptation. We hear about gun deaths in the U.S., but what of hammers in Germany, knives, in Britain, or wine bottles in France? When people in Denmark give in to the temptation to murder, what do they use?
Though note how rare, in any stable country, murder is. I don't know the figures, but even if the United States does have more homicides per capita than other nations, it's still a tiny fraction of the population. And a tiny fraction of gun owners. We hear about all those gun deaths because we make such a fuss about all those gun deaths. Our need for news is serviced by a bunch of glory hounding worry warts, a tribe of Bill Donahues with a by-line.
In the last five years I have heard gunshots three times. The lastest was a cop killing a man waving a knife and refusing to respond to orders. Wild men with knives hurt people. Cops take wild men waving knives around seriously. Cops also appreciate cooperation and tend to be much nicer when you do. My main point is, gunfire is not as common in this country as you would think. Firearm assisted homicide is even rarer. I could add more about the difference between the U.S. and Europe regarding physical, political, social, and cultural geography, but I think some reading up on your part on the United States would give you a much better picture.
Just remember, when you talk about the United States of America you're literally talking about a whole 'nother world. For we are a strange and peculiar breed.
Posted by: KevinC | August 19, 2009 12:54 AM
@99:
Don't let the Trophy Wife see that! She could amputate PZ's tentacles and use them as the next Mary's Monday Metazoan! That girl has her hand on PZ's leg! Hahahaa
Posted by: Dr. Worm | August 19, 2009 1:44 AM
Hey Darren, you forgot to include the "Under 12 creationist/90 million scientific years old" sign.
Other than that, pretty perfect.
Posted by: Darren Garrison | August 19, 2009 1:59 AM
One more quick version. Has potential to cause frothing on more than one blog. :-)
http://i313.photobucket.com/albums/ll394/darrengarrison/various/millionsofyears.jpg?t=1250661488
Posted by: Azkyroth | August 19, 2009 2:04 AM
...$70 for a 2GB flash drive?
Posted by: Stephen Wells | August 19, 2009 4:21 AM
It's bad enough that there are furries; now there will be scalies as well.
Posted by: Richard Eis | August 19, 2009 4:22 AM
-what will be left of your manhood 300 million years from now?-
about 100,000 children?
Posted by: No BS | August 19, 2009 5:32 AM
Bah!
I'm having mine cast in Titanium.
Inside will be a cryogenic temperature control delivery system for sperm packets.
Then strategically bury them about the globe.
The mind boggles.
Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | August 19, 2009 5:58 AM
I guess having to choose their own weapons from hammers, knives and wine bottles has a cooling effect - let's see the murder rates: Germany - 0.98 (per 100 000 per year) Britain - 2.03 France - 1.64 Denmark - 0.79 (dem Danes be krazy!) USA - 6.1While it's true that "guns don't kill people, people kill people", people with guns do seem to kill more people.
And as for homicide being extremely rare - the question is "in comparison to what?"
To deaths by cancer - certainly.
To homicide in other Western countries - hardly.
Posted by: Knockgoats | August 19, 2009 9:03 AM
I could add more about the difference between the U.S. and Europe regarding physical, political, social, and cultural geography, but I think some reading up on your part on the United States would give you a much better picture. - Alan Kellogg
I suspect I know more about it, in some ways, than you do - you have certainly pointed to no example whatever of my alleged ignorance. I'm pretty well acquainted with its history, geography, politics, scientific and technological achievements, and literature - while you appear just to have bought into the national mythos. So far as current socio-economics is concerned, I knew the USA has a considerably higher homicide rate than any other rich country - along with far, far more people imprisoned; and along with high income inequality, health spending, infant mortality, teenage birthrates, obesity, religiosity, and rates of mental illness; and low life expectancy, educational achievement and social mobility.
Posted by: Rob Jase | August 19, 2009 9:11 AM
You were paraphrasing Horace weren't you?
O/w I'm an even bigger geek than I thought.
Posted by: Abby Normal | August 19, 2009 1:05 PM
Two questions:
First, was the arthrodire's eye really armored, as it appears on that skull?
Second, related to #13:
Yours isn't?
Posted by: elece.openid.es
|
August 19, 2009 1:15 PM
OK, now I discovered from where the sexy second image come:
http://elverdaderoevangelio.wordpress.com/2007/09/10/el-pez-que-ingerio-a-jonas/
(In Spanish) contains a beautiful explanation about the Bible's Jonas affair - he was not digested by the fish because it was a vegan fish, and herbivores doesn't have digestive enzymes in its guts. Logical.
And what is better to illustrate an herbivore keeping a man inside, than the most terrible predator of Devonian Earth?
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | August 19, 2009 1:46 PM
Re Carl Buell's #80:
Carl, Carl, Carl. We needz moar nekkid MEN! Where da nekkid MENS at? Coupla t'ree-four decades of just NEKKID MEN and (assuming mass-production of course) we just might approach parity.
I trust we can count on you to do your part. You do want to attract women, right? Dude, you got your bait from the wrong bucket. (And I don't want to hear about tying flies.)
Posted by: Hank Roberts | August 19, 2009 1:51 PM
Unrelated to the topic, but charming:
http://www.kuniyoshiproject.com/Fan%20prints%20of%20humorous%20and%20miscellaneous%20subjects,%20part%20II_files/image024.jpg
Description: Octopus and black bear wrestling with a dragonfly officiating
Date: c. 1839
Publisher: Ise-ya Sôemon
Posted by: FastLane | August 19, 2009 4:33 PM
FYI, one of the authors (Per Ahlberg) is commenting on this at http://www.talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=17005
Posted by: Alan Kellogg | August 19, 2009 8:52 PM
Forbidden Snowflake, #113
That an act be not as rare in one place as it is in others does not mean it isn't rare. So let's use your figure for the US in decimal notation, 0.000061; not so impressive is it? larger than Germany's 0.0000098, but nowhere near the slaughter I've seen some claim.
Knockgoats, #114
The impression America is awash in the blood of gunshot victims, with streets lined by homicides? That is the impression you've given me. No, you haven't outright said you believe that. What you have said is that you don't trust people with guns. People with guns use them to hurt, even kill, people, and they can't be trusted not to. It is better to take everybody's gun away so they can't use them to kill or wound.
Cite all the statistics you wish, it won't change the basics here, you are convinced that people are base, violent beasts out to hurt each other unless kept under control.
The U.S. is a larger and more culturally diverse place than most European nations. Greater physical and social mobility as well. A different social and cultural history as well. Because of our mobility we often find ourselves living in communities of strangers. Estrangement, the lack of connection with others, leads to emotional detachment from ones neighbors, and when there is no real emotional attachment with somebody the easier it becomes to hurt them.
But your real problem is, guns bother you. Guns are used to hurt people, guns are used to kill people, that cannot be doubted. But the way you talk one would think that the United States has running gun battles. with corpses scooped up by skip loaders and dumped in mass graves. 0.000068 of the American population died due to homicide in one year. How many of those were gun deaths Forbidden Snowflake did not elucidate. And note that Snowflake did not specify a year.
Yes, murder is a bad way to settle a dispute. Yes, guns make it easier to kill somebody. But, murder by gun in America is a devastating catastrophe? I hardly think so.
That's the difference between you and I. I trust people to do the right thing. You don't.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg | August 19, 2009 9:13 PM
Oops. The last few times I typed out the figure I got it wrong; it's 0.000061%
Now what does this mean?
It means that in a population of 300,000,000 in the year Forbidden Snowflake got his statistics from 0.000183% of the American population died in a homicide. Gosh, that is so impressive.
Don't doubt that homicide is a tragedy, 18,300 deaths certainly is. My point is, it doesn't happen as often as you think, given America's population.
One more thing. Forbidden Snowflake gives us raw data. What's the breakdown? How many were homicides, how many manslaughter? How many were first degree, how many second, and how many negligent, and how many were justified? We do have a lot of murders in this country, but it hardly qualifies as mass slaughter.
Posted by: Azkyroth | August 19, 2009 10:37 PM
Alan, how many close friends and loved ones do you have?
What do you get when you take that number and divide it by the US population?
Now, what do you get when you take that number and divide it by the homicide rate as you've expressed it?
Posted by: Tabby Lavalamp | August 20, 2009 1:56 AM
Hey! I just saw one of those heads at the Royal Tyrell Museum yesterday!
I also overhead a couple of creationists, one of whom said that Darwin became a creationist near the end of his life. I had to speak up and set her straight.
Posted by: Mike in Ontario, NY | August 20, 2009 12:44 PM
I'm with BluesBassist too (on both guns and instrument of choice). I'm so far to the left that Michael Moore often doesn't go far enough to suit me, but I'll never understand the left's hatred of guns, especially guns made expressly for hunting. I personally have no use for assault weapons, but if my neighbor enjoys shooting them off in a safe environment, how is it my business? I'm all for gun safety laws and technology and, of course, background checks. But personal attacks against gun owners and gun enthusiasts? C'mon, you're better than that. Hear me Knockgoats?
Speaking of Moore, in "Bowling for Columbine" he outs himself as being rather pro-gun, and keeps asking the unanswered question "what is it about American society that the people use guns so often to kill each other?" Canada has more guns per capita, and the same exposure to American pop culture and violent video games, yet they don't have the homicide problem. If it isn't guns, media, or video games, it must be that we Americans are just plain fucking nuts (my conclusion, not MM's). I'd like to see the stats about where the US falls in bladed tool-related fatalities. Are they going to have to pry my hatchet from my cold, dead hands?
note: swimming pools kill children at a rate of something like 100:1 compared to guns in the US. Source: http://freakonomicsbook.com/thebook/ch5.html
Posted by: Knockgoats | August 23, 2009 5:54 AM
The impression America is awash in the blood of gunshot victims, with streets lined by homicides? That is the impression you've given me. No, you haven't outright said you believe that. - Alan Kellogg
That's because I don't.
What you have said is that you don't trust people with guns. People with guns use them to hurt, even kill, people, and they can't be trusted not to. It is better to take everybody's gun away so they can't use them to kill or wound.
I don't trust some people with guns; but there's no way to pick out many of the minority who can't be trusted; and if there are a lot of guns in circulation, anyone who wants one, will get one. Aside from the excess homicides in the US, there are of course deliberate shootings that result in serious injury, and the much more common accidents. Most of these incidents, of course, have serious effects not just on the victim but on their family and friends.
Cite all the statistics you wish, it won't change the basics here, you are convinced that people are base
Translation: don't go confusing me with the facts! I am convinced (based on copious evidence) that most people are capable of good and evil, egoism and altruism, violence and peaceful interaction; and that the society they live in has a good deal to do with which of these potentialities are realised. Aside from that, I simply prefer a society where it is not normal, accepted behaviour to carry a loaded gun around, to one where it is. As I've said several times, gun laws in the US are of course for Americans to decide. I'm just struck by the lousy arguments that the gun lobby, here as elsewhere, use.
personal attacks against gun owners and gun enthusiasts? C'mon, you're better than that. Hear me Knockgoats? - Mike from Ontario
I was not the one who brought either guns or personal attacks into this thread - I responded@64 to BluesBassist@28, who (admittedly responding to #9) favoured us with a rant against "pro victim-disarmament wackos". Alan Kellogg then attacked me personally @78 - mind you, I take an attack from him as a compliment.
Canada has more guns per capita, and the same exposure to American pop culture and violent video games, yet they don't have the homicide problem. If it isn't guns, media, or video games, it must be that we Americans are just plain fucking nuts
No, it's inequality. Internationally, homicide rates correlate well with income inequality. The USA, however, is way above the regression line. Canada is right on the line, but two interesting exceptions are Finland (lots of guns, well above the line) and Singapore (very few guns, well below the line). I've also cited previously a recent study, showing that gun ownership and homicide rates correlate across states of the US. Sure, it's not as simple as "more guns always means more homicide"; but once you have the intention to kill, they certainly make it easier to do.
note: swimming pools kill children at a rate of something like 100:1 compared to guns in the US - Mike form Ontario
I suggest you try that line on someone whose kid has just been shot dead.
Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | August 23, 2009 6:34 AM
Quoting Freakonomics? Is this what we've come to? Really?
Translation: if you translate those statistics into decimal form and dishonestly use the number of Americans who lived that year rather than the number that died that year, it makes the figure look small and enables us to burn a blind eye to the fact that American homicide rates are abnormally high in comparison to those of the countries you, Alan, yourself brought up. And here I thought I found myself the world's most effeminate username. Straw man much?The one where the authors warn the readers about mindlessly swallowing skewed statistics and then bring forth this inherently flawed guns vs. pools schtick?
Hint: exposure times matter!