Tuesday, October 19, 2004
A side of beef
Two things that have irked me greatly of late:
1. Use of the term "fossil radiation"
Okay, I know that this is being really anal retentive, but this phrase completely rubs me the wrong way. As it is used, "fossil radiation" refers to observable radiation that reflects a past cosmological event. Cosmic background radiation from the Big Bang would be the best known of these events. Very roughly, calling this "fossil" would seem to make sense: just as fossils are, at best, shadowy remnants of once-living creatures, so the "fossil radiation" represents remnants of long-passed events. But the word "fossil" is derived from the Latin "fossilis", specifically referring something dug up from the Earth. Admittedly, the meaning of the word has changed over time. Initially, fossil referred to anything dug up: such as minerals and rocks in addition to what we would call fossils today. Over time, this definition was narrowed to encompass only those materials derived in some way from prehistoric life, be it the actual organisms, casts or molds thereof, or evidence of their presence in the form of tracks (ichnites) or droppings (coprolites). Despite this narrowing of definition, one aspect of the word has always been retained: reference to being dug out of the earth. Thus, to describe extraterrestrial radiation in any sense as "fossil" is woefully inappropriate.
2. Canine electioneering
Although I consider myself somewhat better-informed politically than the average person on the street, I'll be the first to admit that at most points in the year the bulk of my political information comes from reruns of The Daily Show. Nevertheless, come election time I spend a good deal of time researching the candidates--their voting histories, policy stances, the whole shebang (this is mainly for local officials--goodness knows I hear enough from presidential and congressional candidates to know who I'm voting for without such inquiries.) And I like to think that when it comes down to it, I base my votes on the issues, not appearances. Oh, but I must confess, this is not always the case. For although 99% of my decision may be based on the issues, there is one fraction of appearance that trumps all else, like the lowly spy fells the marshall. That fraction? Political ads featuring dogs. In the past few weeks I've been inundated with political flyers touting various would-be elected officials. Most of these I take the time to read through, but if I see the candidate holding a dog on the cover, I can stop right there, because under no circumstances is that person getting my vote. Never have I seen such shoddy attempts to embody "Americana" photographically as in such canine-clutching candidates. One gentleman who shall remain nameless even went so far as to show his wife and two daughters, each holding a Jack Russell terrier, as his flyer's frontispiece. For shame, sir! For shame. Do I at any time regret this seemingly inconsequential reason for dismissing a future leader of America? Not a whit. For I am convinced that this blatant dog-foistery is symptomatic of greaters evils at root. Samuel Johnson once said that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. To that I would append that showing off your pooch is the last ditch effort of a scoundrel among scoundrels.
If both of today's entries seemed rather capricious and crotchety, then I have succeeded in my task of writing something on the internet.
Two things that have irked me greatly of late:
1. Use of the term "fossil radiation"
Okay, I know that this is being really anal retentive, but this phrase completely rubs me the wrong way. As it is used, "fossil radiation" refers to observable radiation that reflects a past cosmological event. Cosmic background radiation from the Big Bang would be the best known of these events. Very roughly, calling this "fossil" would seem to make sense: just as fossils are, at best, shadowy remnants of once-living creatures, so the "fossil radiation" represents remnants of long-passed events. But the word "fossil" is derived from the Latin "fossilis", specifically referring something dug up from the Earth. Admittedly, the meaning of the word has changed over time. Initially, fossil referred to anything dug up: such as minerals and rocks in addition to what we would call fossils today. Over time, this definition was narrowed to encompass only those materials derived in some way from prehistoric life, be it the actual organisms, casts or molds thereof, or evidence of their presence in the form of tracks (ichnites) or droppings (coprolites). Despite this narrowing of definition, one aspect of the word has always been retained: reference to being dug out of the earth. Thus, to describe extraterrestrial radiation in any sense as "fossil" is woefully inappropriate.
2. Canine electioneering
Although I consider myself somewhat better-informed politically than the average person on the street, I'll be the first to admit that at most points in the year the bulk of my political information comes from reruns of The Daily Show. Nevertheless, come election time I spend a good deal of time researching the candidates--their voting histories, policy stances, the whole shebang (this is mainly for local officials--goodness knows I hear enough from presidential and congressional candidates to know who I'm voting for without such inquiries.) And I like to think that when it comes down to it, I base my votes on the issues, not appearances. Oh, but I must confess, this is not always the case. For although 99% of my decision may be based on the issues, there is one fraction of appearance that trumps all else, like the lowly spy fells the marshall. That fraction? Political ads featuring dogs. In the past few weeks I've been inundated with political flyers touting various would-be elected officials. Most of these I take the time to read through, but if I see the candidate holding a dog on the cover, I can stop right there, because under no circumstances is that person getting my vote. Never have I seen such shoddy attempts to embody "Americana" photographically as in such canine-clutching candidates. One gentleman who shall remain nameless even went so far as to show his wife and two daughters, each holding a Jack Russell terrier, as his flyer's frontispiece. For shame, sir! For shame. Do I at any time regret this seemingly inconsequential reason for dismissing a future leader of America? Not a whit. For I am convinced that this blatant dog-foistery is symptomatic of greaters evils at root. Samuel Johnson once said that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. To that I would append that showing off your pooch is the last ditch effort of a scoundrel among scoundrels.
If both of today's entries seemed rather capricious and crotchety, then I have succeeded in my task of writing something on the internet.
Comments:
Re: Fossil radiation.
I like to use the term "primordial" with regards to the CMBR, since it's the earliest light visible, but some cosmologists would probably object since light was around, it just was coupled with matter.
P.S. Dinosaur bones are often radioactive, as phosphates in the bone absorb uranium quite effectively from groundwater.
Post a Comment
I like to use the term "primordial" with regards to the CMBR, since it's the earliest light visible, but some cosmologists would probably object since light was around, it just was coupled with matter.
P.S. Dinosaur bones are often radioactive, as phosphates in the bone absorb uranium quite effectively from groundwater.
