Yep. I’ve decided to balk Xelo’s advice yet again, and click the “New Thread” button. I’ve come up with two questions for you, which probably would have gone in the Tower, were it still here. But it’s gone, so I guess I’ll just inflict them on you.
The first is just one I’m curious about. What are your reading habits? I can’t seem to stop reading different books; usually I’m reading anywhere from four to nine at a time, and generally speaking I only stop branching out when I run out of bookmarks. I’ll run with one for a while, then switch to another if my mood changes. I finish them all in good time though. For example, I recently finished West of Eden, then took that bookmark and went through an entire trilogy of fantasy before I started West’s sequel Winter in Eden. How about you? Do you stick to one book at a time, or do you read a handful or so?
The second question I find at least marginally stimulating. Maybe because it’s hypothetical; hypothetical questions just turn me on, I guess. It deals with the wonderful fringe elements of our society. I’ll use Bigfoot for this example, but it can apply to Crop Circles, UFO’s, “Psychic” phenomena, even faith healing with a little pronoun magic.
If you are one of those who believe that there never was, is not and never will be a Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Yeti, et cetera, are you necessarily a Conspiracy Theorist?
I’ll elaborate; if you beleive that every Bigfoot “sighting” is attached to either a bold-faced liar or a man in a monkey suit; that all footprints are the work of backwoodsmen and hunters who carved wooden feet with their camp knives on some slow day; that every scat sample is the work of a man with an innapropriately high-fiber diet; that every person out there “looking for Sasquatch,” is either a charlatan using grant money to pay his vacation trips to the Pacific Northwest or a fool; if it’s all made up, there must be some kind of conspiracy to convince people that this chimera is real, right?
I read. A lot. I also read pretty fast… I skip from book to book pretty often… I generally get through 2-3 books a week (currently working on Grisham).
AND YOU SAID CONSPIRACY!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
1- I wish I had time to read. I’m taking my last english class ever this summer. I prefer dark drama (like the count of monte cristo, Macbeth, etc)
2-It is mostly all crap. The guy who “discovered” Bigfoot 50 years ago (approx) left in his will that he had made it all up. We only found out when he died. As for Nessy, there are a variety of “sightings” but they’re all dubious, and I think that the extents to which people have gone to find Nessy (like sonar the entire Loch) kinda disprove it. I also saw a show on Discovery that showed how easy it was to make fake pics. It was really neat actually. There’s also a guy that makes UFO stuff for a living and works with sizes and the environment to stimulat a reality effect. As for crop circles, I once saw another show that had a team of teenage kids doing crop circles relatively easily, guided by a piece of string (unchanging radius = circle). The only reason these persist is because or stupid, uneducated people that need to think these things through rationally and don’t.
And giant squid exist. We’ve caught some, just never seen any alive sadly.
If you’re talking about the guy who said in his will that it was him in the infamous “Patterson film,” his claims have been in doubt for a while now. The feet that he claimed made the footprints in the creek mud are genrally agreed to be unable to make the footprints that were found there.
I’m not a believer in the Loch Ness Monster. Not unless there’s a lot more evidence. Nor do I beleive that a sea monster (6/6, Islandhome) sinks ships in the Great Lakes area (which I’m sure is believed by a few, as it appeared in The Weekly World News once.
With Crop Circles, I’m sure that 2x4’s and twine can’t heat the nodes of a wheat stalk 'till they explode without burning the rest of the stalk. Plenty of Crop Circles with that characteristic.
As for architeuthis, there were some babies caught, but they died soon afterward. The scientist in charge of the expedition figured the only way to get a live Giant Squid for the benefit of science would be to catch a baby and raise it in captivity. Didn’t pan out.
Actually, I remember reading something on the discovery channels website talking about the baby squids( Which can be found here http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/giantsquid/feature/feature.html ) Summerized, it just says they died from the wrong food and/or the amount of light they were subject too.
Hmm as for reading, I’m also one of those people who jump from book to book. Sometimes I have three on the go at the same time and I’ll have to limit myself (yeah that sounds geeky…) to one so I can concentrate on each tone and theme and message the book is trying to get across. However I’ll stay within the realm of genre, meaning I’ll read about three fantasy books at the same time…cutting to a horror novel right after I’ve read fantasy just takes away the vibe.
As for cryptology or anything like it…hmm I’m a skeptic. I believe there are animals out there that haven’t been discovered yet, and since I’m a real nut job on anything mysterious, I read all I can about things such as Big Foot, Loch Ness (which are pretty much contained within the realm of decency in the world…), etc. I don’t think there is a Loch Ness. I mean with all of the technology today, we don’t have any decent photographs to prove if something is in there? I think Loch Ness or maybe a Big Foot exists in imagination alone because people want to believe in it. I kind of do, I kind of don’t. It all depends on the documentary I’m watching:p However with creatures such as the “Jersey Devil” I’m entitled to let myself be called a Conspiracy Theorist…there are a lot of wackos in the world, and a lot of them would feed off people’s fear to create a conspiracy. Just my two cents.
As to the first question, there was a time when I would read about six or seven books at once, I had to stop doing that, due to the fact that I took all of them to school with me, and I ran out of room in my backpack. I have been known to read a 700 page book in one day, with time to get half-way through a 500 page book.
For reading, I like technical books and rich literature. By rich I mean something with a deep plot and good grammar. I’m currently reading a book by Emile Couié, who studied the effects of suggestions on the incontient mind. My literature lover side is searching for the second book of the Ramsés series (The One million-years-old Temple).
As for cryptology, I’m a sicentist so I take it scientifically. Some monsters have been proven to exist. For example, Kraken. In the past it was a legend but nowadays we know that Giant Skids do exist. They are considered a species and the scientifical name for them is Architeutis Dux. Creatures like the goatsuckers, the moth man and the Yeti, however, exist only in people’s minds. And Nessie was a fake. The creator of the monster of Loch Ness showed how he did a camera trick to get those famous photos of the monster.
Eva, Ren: It’s cryptozoology. The study of “hidden” animals.
Sin: As for the nodes, best guess is microwave radiation. Some people think that some Crop Circles are due to plasma effects, similar to ball lightning.
StarStorm: I haven’t mentioned it in this thread, but check out a library slough sale. The local library where I live has a sale every year with the boy scouts, and I always go home with at least one box of books.
Actually, I don’t have an opinion on the “monster” sightings; BOTH sides are full of crap! They simply won’t change their opinions for anything, no matter how much evidence they get. In fact, the pro-monster side of this present evidence that can be fabricated by a four-year-old, and the anti-monster side simply say that, “It’s not possible because it doesn’t exist,” which is NOT a debate-worthy argument! So there you have it.
Originally posted by Ren As for cryptology, I’m a sicentist so I take it scientifically. Some monsters have been proven to exist. For example, Kraken.
Yes, indeed. As everyone knows, I am shy, have little-to-no sex life, and have never been seen alive. :ulty:
Edit: I have a third question, I think, which may provide some whimsy/levity to the proceedings. Insurance companies look after their bottom lines by refusing to insure or raising rates on people more likely to cash in unexpectedly; smokers, Evel Knievel, teenage males, Rottweiller owners, et cetera. But I think they’re ignoring a good promotion asset in this. How about benefits to people with phobias? I mean, people who are afraid of height are virtually guaranteed not to die by falling, right? Zoophobes aren’t going to go around handling poisonous repitles either, nor are agoraphobes (I think that’s the one; correct me if I’m wrong) going to be beaten to death/lynched/burned at the stake by an angry mob. Whaddaya think?
I used to read all the time, but lately I’ve only been reading books for Swedish class. Started reading <i>the Cider House Rules</i> a few days ago, though, so I hope I’ll be able to get back to my old reading habits.
Kraken, that idea is good. I’m going to talk to my godfather, he works with insurance, to know why insurance sellers don’t do this kind of stuff. I think it’s because people, specially us men, are afraid to say we have any phobias… But there must be a better reason for them not doing it.
I saw something similar being made, though. A car insurance company from here made a research on automobile accidents statistics. They discovered that women were involved in less than 40% of car accidents. So women got promotions and stuff, since they were less prone to diing in an accident than men.
I read like you wouldn’t believe. Fantasy, Sci-Fi, Classics, I’ll read them if it isn’t realistic. Except Tolkien, his works are to dry for my likings.
I own enough books to fill a medium sized library: Or enough to have piles in my room anyway. I’m the sort of person who can’t read one book at a time: I read all from two to lots; just never one. As for kinds and genres. I couldn’t care less: Either I like the book, or I don’t.
As for the second question. I don’t see why not: They don’t seem to effect us any, and besides, they’re the source of lots of good and entertaining documentaries. And of course, it’s fun to see all those silly people traveling all around the world hoping to get a glimpse of Nessie, or Bigfoot, and those dolphin creatures said to live in some lake in the South-Western USA. Nor would Sam 'N Max Hits the Road have been the same without bigfoots: Something about ‘The Great Hunt for The Dissapeared Gorrila Who was in An Ice Block’ lacks the same appeal.
Originally posted by d Galloway 2. Actually, I don’t have an opinion on the “monster” sightings; BOTH sides are full of crap! They simply won’t change their opinions for anything, no matter how much evidence they get. In fact, the pro-monster side of this present evidence that can be fabricated by a four-year-old, and the anti-monster side simply say that, “It’s not possible because it doesn’t exist,” which is NOT a debate-worthy argument! So there you have it.
I wasn’t going to respond to this originally, but I think maybe I should; you’re painting both sides with too broad a brush. There are plenty of perfectly good cryptozoologists out there, and the newer generations of “Bigfoot Hunters” are using forensics to examine footprints and video. And, intractible as he is, James Randi is a good role model for skeptics. Sure, he’s got a lot of money and prestige invested in his skeptical position, but, for example, his experiments with cognitive dissonance in the study of faith healers (think Peter Popoff) and astrology and other forms of prognostication “oracles” are all quite solid and well polished. I don’t think he’s too biased.
And as for intractibility in general, how often have you seen someone change their mind as a result of an argument on these boards? Think about our religious and political threads. I take it we’re all full of shit too?
Interesting note. A documentary I’m watching now which is examining the Patterson film took the footage to a university with a biomechanics specialist, who pointed out that the creature in the Bluff Creek video had some kind of injury to the right thigh, either to the quadriceps or a ligament/tendon in the region, which created a bulge in the right thigh occasionally and hindered the creature’s gait. Not behavior you’d expect of a monkey suit.
Add on that the dermal ridges in all credible Bigfoot footprint casts (those that are discernible; some are too shallow) are vertical, while human feet have horizontal dermal ridges and all other primates have diagonal dermal ridges on their feet, and you’d really have to beleive in a conspiracy of hoaxers to corroborate on all those details.
I read like you wouldn’t believe. Fantasy, Sci-Fi, Classics, I’ll read them if it isn’t realistic. Except Tolkien, his works are to dry for my likings.