We all have those friends who find it necessary to forward to us every chain email, list of tasteless jokes, and "big opportunity" from some prince in South Africa, and I am no different. Occasionally, however, you find something of actual interest. Today was such a day for me.
I got sent a link to a quiz that claimed to be able to ascertain what type of accent I had. I couldn't resist, as accents and dialects are parts of linguistics I have always had an interest in. I was skeptical at first, but the test was short and, amazingly, pretty accurate (see my results below). I do, in fact, have a Boston accent....and am damn proud of it, too.
But what about the various sub-types of the Boston accent? We all know about the Beacon Hill / Ted Kennedy / Mayor Quimby brahmin accent, as well as the ever-stereotypical "pahk your cah in Hahvid yahd" popularized by the SNL Jimmy Fallon / Rachel Dratch "Nomaaah" skits and, of course, bad acting in every movie ever shot in Boston....but anyone from around here knows there's much more to it than that, and some people claim to be able to tell just what part of Boston or the Boston Metropolitan area one comes from by merely listening to them speak. Is there a difference between those from the north shore and those from the south shore? Can one find subtleties in accents and discern whether they are from Eastie or Southie, Worcester or the Cape? There are lots of guides to "Boston English" out there, but I think it would be a very interesting undertaking indeed to try to find patterns in the actual Boston accents, and ultimately come up with an almost mathematical way to connect them together and differentiate between them. Until then, I'll have to pass my time doing things that are actually realistic....
Oh, and for the record, nobody here says "wicked pissah".
What kind of American accent do you have?
Your Result: Boston
You definitely have a Boston accent, even if you think you don't. Of course, that doesn't mean you are from the Boston area, you may also be from New Hampshire or Maine.
I love mashups, and while going through some old unread items in my newsreader, I came across a cool one in The Bostonist's feed. In a post called "Finding Beer In The Dark", they review a site called "The Beermapping Project" that uses the Google Maps API to highlight, well, beer things, including places to buy, places that brew, places to drink, etc. There are lots of cities with entries already, and I am happy to report that Boston is one of them. I even submitted our favorite local packey here in Weymouth, John's Liquors (should be up soon, I think). Go beer!
One of my co-workers who'd recently returned from a conference in New Mexico brought us back gifts in the form of big buttons with this not-so-subtle reminder of just how relative things can be. It made me chuckle, but is humor the only goal of the message, if a goal at all? Do Native Americans still resent the fact that 500 years ago Europeans came to this continent and eventually wiped out an enormously large number of their ancestors? Perhaps the fact that as recently as 50 years ago television shows like "Bonanza" and "The Lone Ranger" celebrated this time period leaves a bad taste in their mouths. Or maybe the fact that current day sports teams have names like "Indians", "Seminoles", "Sachems" and "Redskins" (a racial epithet not that long ago, by the way) bugs them a little....go figure.
This makes me think, even a little angry. Almost as angry as when I lose money at Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.
I'm not sure what's more disturbing, finding yourself transfixed on the hypnotic spin of the frames, or occasionally focusing accidentally on the head of the guy holding it.
I found this on LifeHacker. In the words of Jake Mandell, it's creator, it's a "quick online way to screen for tonedeafness. It actually turned out to be a pretty good test to check for overall pitch perception ability.", so it's made intentionally to be pretty difficult, but it's fun so give it a shot. All you have to do is listen to 36 pairs of musical phrases and hit one of two buttons: "same" or "different"....it's that easy. The test was created while Mandell was working at the music and neuroimaging lab at Beth Israel in Boston.
I got an "exceptional performance" at 91.7% correct (and was surprised to see so). Good luck!
Today is "Evolution Day", and amazingly it has nothing to do with the David Duchovny / Julianne Moore / 7-Up Guy / Stiffler comedy classic. It is celebrated today because it is the anniversary of when Charles Darwin's "Origin of Species" first came out back in 1859. This was of course the famous publication that outlined natural selection and an explanation of human evolution, the theory currently accepted by scientists and taught in science classes across the world.
There are, of course, other explanations of our origins, several of which are known as Creationism (that's a nice science-y sounding word). The most prominent of these use the most popular piece of literature in the world as a primary source of information: the Bible. There has been debate in some parts of the US as to which theory should be taught in schools, and though I am completely sold on the theory of evolution, I can see how those who believe otherwise would not want that taught to their children. In fact, in places like Georgia "alternative theories" to evolution are already being taught. Is there a conflict of interest here? Science is never fact, it is simply the best idea we have about things at the time (see "the world is flat" and "the earth is the center of the universe"). In the case of public schools in particular, is there a mixing of church and state?
Well, all of those issues aside, I thought it interesting that a Creation Museum is opening in 2007 in Cincinnati, Ohio, described as a "walk through history" that "will proclaim the Bible as supreme authority in all matters of faith and practice in every area it touches on" and "will counter evolutionary natural history museums that turn countless minds against Christ and Scripture." I wasn't sure what kind of exhibits this museum might have, so I went on the "virtual walk-through". I recommend you go and do the same; it gives some insight into what the purpose of this museum really is. Here are some of my favorite stops on the tour and their descriptions:
Stargazer's Room Peer back into the deepest recesses of the heavens, and discover that the latest images of the stars confirm an all powerful Creator, not a random bang!
Bible Authority Room The Bible is true. No doubt about it! Paul explains God's authoritative Word, and everyone who rejects His history-including six-day creation and Noah's Flood-is ‘willfully’ ignorant.
Ancient Babylon Witness the confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel and the subsequent dispersion of peoples. Unravel the mystery of the origin of the so-called ‘races.’ Discover how the science of anthropology actually confirms the Bible’s history!
Creation Explore the wonders of creation. The imprint of the Creator is all around us. And the Bible’s clear—heaven and earth in six 24-hour days, earth before sun, birds before lizards. Other surprises are just around the corner. Adam and apes share the same birthday. The first man walked with dinosaurs and named them all! God’s Word is true, or evolution is true. No millions of years. There’s no room for compromise.
Random bang? So-called 'races'? No room for compromise? If one thing is evident it is this: of all of the differences one may describe between science and religion, none seems more prominent than the fact the science allows for evolution, in more ways than one.
Today is Conspiracy Theory Day, dedicated to conspiracy theories wordwide. This date was selected because it's the sad anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the subject of one of the most famous (or infamous) conspiracy theories of all time (grassy knoll, etc.). For an interesting "anatomy of a conspiracy", check this out.
After watching the Michael Richards tirade laden with racial epithets , I was of course shocked and appalled at the unbridled rage with which "Kramer" attacked some heckler, and found it simply despicable. This is a career-ender (for whatever career he had left) and is completely indefensible. I'm not sure if his apology on Letterman (which did not sound all that sincere) helped him or hurt him, though I think the veracity of his onslaught makes any attempt at apology moot. Nobody comes out with that kind of language spontaneously, no matter what the rationale. I believe Michael Richards showed his true, racist colors on that stage that night.
Which brings me to my next point. After watching the video, I read some of the discussion boards, and as much as I thought this to be a universally reprehensible act, I was amazed to see almost a third of the posts on TMZ were completely sidestepping the act and the fact that Richards didn't merely use the "N'-word repeatedly (I feel uncomfortable even writing it) and said things like "that's what happens when you interrupt the white man" and "50 years ago we'd have you upside down with a f-ing fork up your ass" (a very clumsy reference to lynching). Instead, those posters decided to focus on the tired "there's a double standard out there" argument, which, by the way, comes off as a defense of what Richards did.
I happen to agree that a double standard exists in that a black man can say the "N"-word and a white man can't. No, let me rephrase that. Anyone can say whatever they want; what we're talking about here are comfort levels in doing so (in fact there are plenty of white people who are perfectly comfortable saying it, just look at footage from any KKK rally). How this changes what Richards did I don't know, and I think that those people out there who use this as an opportunity to complain about reverse racism or whatever ask themselves what really is the issue here. Richards was using these words and phrases in anger, not in jest.
This should not be an argument of what's fair or just, it should be a condemnation of what someone who used to be a comic icon did in a comedy club last Friday night.
Thanks to AL-9000 for this one...this is a serious Time Waster, so be careful. "LineRider" is a beautifully simple concept, and one I wish I'd thought of myself. You draw a line, hit play, and watch a small tobogganer with a ski hat and a red scarf sled down your slope .The only complaint I have of it is that there is no apparent way to erase lines....you can only start over. Maybe that's part of the challenge, I guess.
The region in which you can draw lines seems endless, and you can shoot your Line Rider off into the void for a long time before trying to make him land. Try to make a loop-dee-loop (hint, you can't go through lines). Have fun and remember, you probably have better things to do.
I hope you enjoy your gift this year, and you read this before I give it to you because there's a pretty big hint somewhere in this post (I wonder where...)
Directions: Remove your mouse from the image above. Focus on the black dot in middle of the image for twenty seconds. Keep focus on the dot while you move your mouse back over the image, and the image will appear to be in color. What's cool is that once you do move your eyes away from the dot, you see the picture for what it is: a black a white image.
So, how does it work?
This illusion forces your brain to see color in a black and white photo. It works by first saturating your visual memory with shade and line data, which occurs when you stare at the first picture for more than ten seconds or so. Upon flipping to the second picture, the spectral opposite of the original color data is imposed on the grey lines and shading of the photo.
If the illusions works, it will immediately begin to fade once you move your eyes. This is because a saccade, or a quick lateral eye movement, will effectively "clear" the visual memory buffer with the assumption that the eye is seeking a new pattern to focus on. Even though the visual memory buffer clears with a slight glance in any direction, you will still see a slight fading of illusory effect as the neurochemical saturation in your visual cortex fades.
That explanation was taken from an article at tripzine.com, which looks to be a site devoted to the study of all things scientifically psychedelic, so take it with a grain of salt (or whatever else floats your boat, I guess).
You may have tried this one before. When you click on the link below, you'll see two nearly identical pictures. There are supposedly three differences; I can only find two. If you can find three, you are part of a very small group of elite people (and please, let me know where the third one is). Try it out:
Content found on The Neoteric is of no particular genre, topic, or focus, other than it was all at some point, in some way, interesting enough to me to write about.
