An average of five per state is totally useless, to say nothing of the fact that self-rating on these complex issues is doubly totally useless. Making it at least 250% useless by my totally useless count.
Oh whatever! Repetitive motions CAN mean stress. Not always. They can also mean play, and this looks a lot more like extremely excited play.
The type of repetitive motion stress indicator you're talking about, the sort of thing you see on animals that have been confined in small boring cages for a long time, takes a long duration to develop. It doesn't instantly set in. Lighten up, and make this post again after the owners have posted several hundred videos like this.
I'm quite certain not all of these are really hotels -- the atom monument certainly doesn't seem to be from its website. Would be neat if it was though.
Humans have covered WAY greater distances. Do we count as land mammals? I mean, we evolved as persistence hunters. The very fact that we can run farther and with more endurance than pretty much any animal out there is why we were such impressive hunters historically.
And as a PS., it does look like you can see the squid's eyes in this video, which gives evidence to the theory that the brain is still in place. That said, I will accept that the motion may well be involuntary even if the brain can sense it all. There are some analogous nightmare fuel videos of "dancing" frogs legs.
I'm pretty sure its brain is still there... If you steel yourself and watch the other videos on the subject you can watch the kill process and you'll see that there seem to be three steps -- slitting open the tail and yanking out the body (ie. skinning it I suppose), then cutting off the bone (or whatever the name of what's inside the tail is) which leaves the head and arms writhing, and then cutting off legs and eating them after a bit of torture.
It looks to me like this video is in the middle stage, where the brain and head are still attached to the legs. After what you see in this video, the legs would then be cut off the head and eaten if it's like the other videos on the subject.
Leaving aside all moral commentary, I'm quite certain that this is an animal with a brain, writhing in massive pain, not just a nerve firing trick on braindead tissue. I ate a single live shrimp once at a Korean restaurant, with the tail cut off to be eaten while the twitching legs and head "watched" the horror. It was extremely upsetting... There's no way I could have handled the above.
Not that the horrors that we do on factory farms here and meat processing plants are any better. If people were forced to watch what got the meat to the table and understood the nightmare the animals went through, I suspect vegetarianism would be much more commonplace!
Obviously "Ryan S" is a troll, but I have no idea if he knows it or not. Mostly he comes off as someone who's taken a few philosophy classes, hasn't understood them at all, but remembers enough words to repeat a confused version at length. It probably works when he's chatting with other fools who think themselves profound, but to everyone else it's foolish and more than anything, tiresome. I suppose it is often the most ignorant who believe themselves the most wise.
Clearly evolution needs to be taught in the relevant science classes. It shouldn't even be up for debate, and it's a little disturbing and disheartening (but hardly beyond prediction sadly) to see nearly all these contestants casting their vote for superstition over science. Whether they believe it, or if they just believe the judges believe it is a secondary debate of lesser importance I think.
Anyway, if we are really going to make a case for "teaching the controversy" in favor of the superstition of creationism, then surely one can make just as strong a case for every silly thing that the Bible can seem to apply. As is often asked, should we teach flat earth theory because a Biblical case can be made for it? And the rest of the hilariously primitive cosmology in the various religious traditions of the world? I think most people would say "that's silly, of course not, we know [the earth is round-ish] [we're not riding on the back of a turtle] [it's not turtles all the way down] [etc]"... but... how is this any different than evolution?
Oh yeah, science disproved flat earth theory and so on... The only difference is that "globe theory" is to no small degree related to the fact that it's easier for people to wrap their head around the science of the "theory" that the earth is not flat so it's harder to propagandize against. That said there is a quite hilarious video -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbizzLzcpnM -- in which Sherri Shephard, co-host of THE VIEW waffles on that very subject. On that note, it would have been much more amazing if the girls in this video would have been quoted scripture showing that the Bible says the Earth is flat (which it makes a more compelling case for than, say, homophobia:http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/1flat90.html is a good start) and then asked whether they thought flat earth theory should be taught in school. Now THAT'S something I'd actually watch.
I know I am stumbling into "tl;dr" territory (or more accurately, ran deep into it along side Ryan S... I hope I'm not just as much of a bore), but I must finish up by pointing at this timely and brilliant series of shirts: http://controversy.wearscience.com/
Ryan, you are so, so, so wrong. All of this has been popular for a very long time. And I'm just talking about in our Western/modern society, not in the grander "all of human history" scale. It's only seems that way to you because it's only been a media darling for the last decade or so.
Speaking factually, your comment is highly ignorant and ill-informed.
I'm sure you can find attention whores in every subculture. But don't speak like a bigot because you have a tendency to assume the worst and generalize based on bad apples -- or straw men.
I get that they made a 43x71 bitmap which they then cropped down, but it seems a bit more complicated since some of the "pixels" (ie. individual pieces of toast) have more than one color value. For example, the corners are dark AND light, allowing more complex details than that low resolution version might offer by default. I wonder how they did that. If I only saw this picture alone, I'd assume it was faked. I guess they probably scraped the burn off parts of the bread. Is that cheating? Perhaps...
I have a daughter with lots of Barbies, and I use Barbie parts in various artistic projects, and from that hands-on experience I am quite certain that the proportions of what this girl in the post made are totally nuts and look very little like a scaled up version of the doll!!!
Interesting, and odd or even nonsensical, to combine something very permanent (an engraved stone marker) with something very transient (a telecommunications/data encoding protocol). I think my advice would be to stick with classic engraved text that doesn't rely on infrastructure that will probably not exist more than a decade, let alone millenia.
;)
The type of repetitive motion stress indicator you're talking about, the sort of thing you see on animals that have been confined in small boring cages for a long time, takes a long duration to develop. It doesn't instantly set in. Lighten up, and make this post again after the owners have posted several hundred videos like this.
It looks to me like this video is in the middle stage, where the brain and head are still attached to the legs. After what you see in this video, the legs would then be cut off the head and eaten if it's like the other videos on the subject.
Leaving aside all moral commentary, I'm quite certain that this is an animal with a brain, writhing in massive pain, not just a nerve firing trick on braindead tissue. I ate a single live shrimp once at a Korean restaurant, with the tail cut off to be eaten while the twitching legs and head "watched" the horror. It was extremely upsetting... There's no way I could have handled the above.
Not that the horrors that we do on factory farms here and meat processing plants are any better. If people were forced to watch what got the meat to the table and understood the nightmare the animals went through, I suspect vegetarianism would be much more commonplace!
Clearly evolution needs to be taught in the relevant science classes. It shouldn't even be up for debate, and it's a little disturbing and disheartening (but hardly beyond prediction sadly) to see nearly all these contestants casting their vote for superstition over science. Whether they believe it, or if they just believe the judges believe it is a secondary debate of lesser importance I think.
Anyway, if we are really going to make a case for "teaching the controversy" in favor of the superstition of creationism, then surely one can make just as strong a case for every silly thing that the Bible can seem to apply. As is often asked, should we teach flat earth theory because a Biblical case can be made for it? And the rest of the hilariously primitive cosmology in the various religious traditions of the world? I think most people would say "that's silly, of course not, we know [the earth is round-ish] [we're not riding on the back of a turtle] [it's not turtles all the way down] [etc]"... but... how is this any different than evolution?
Oh yeah, science disproved flat earth theory and so on... The only difference is that "globe theory" is to no small degree related to the fact that it's easier for people to wrap their head around the science of the "theory" that the earth is not flat so it's harder to propagandize against. That said there is a quite hilarious video -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbizzLzcpnM -- in which Sherri Shephard, co-host of THE VIEW waffles on that very subject. On that note, it would have been much more amazing if the girls in this video would have been quoted scripture showing that the Bible says the Earth is flat (which it makes a more compelling case for than, say, homophobia:http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/1flat90.html is a good start) and then asked whether they thought flat earth theory should be taught in school. Now THAT'S something I'd actually watch.
I know I am stumbling into "tl;dr" territory (or more accurately, ran deep into it along side Ryan S... I hope I'm not just as much of a bore), but I must finish up by pointing at this timely and brilliant series of shirts: http://controversy.wearscience.com/
Speaking factually, your comment is highly ignorant and ill-informed.
I'm sure you can find attention whores in every subculture. But don't speak like a bigot because you have a tendency to assume the worst and generalize based on bad apples -- or straw men.