mudcat.org: BS: Seen any bad films recently
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3]


BS: Seen any bad films recently

GUEST,Stim 15 Jan 13 - 05:38 PM
Jack the Sailor 15 Jan 13 - 04:58 PM
Little Hawk 15 Jan 13 - 04:56 PM
GUEST,Stim 15 Jan 13 - 04:37 PM
Little Hawk 15 Jan 13 - 12:19 PM
GUEST,Stim 15 Jan 13 - 03:47 AM
Little Hawk 14 Jan 13 - 06:39 PM
GUEST,Stim 14 Jan 13 - 06:13 PM
Little Hawk 14 Jan 13 - 10:31 AM
Jack the Sailor 13 Jan 13 - 07:35 PM
Little Hawk 13 Jan 13 - 06:27 PM
Jack the Sailor 13 Jan 13 - 06:16 PM
GUEST,Stim 13 Jan 13 - 05:59 PM
Jack the Sailor 13 Jan 13 - 05:47 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 13 Jan 13 - 05:39 PM
GUEST,Lighter 13 Jan 13 - 04:20 PM
Jack the Sailor 13 Jan 13 - 04:17 PM
Little Hawk 13 Jan 13 - 03:24 PM
number 6 13 Jan 13 - 10:03 AM
alanabit 13 Jan 13 - 04:01 AM
Jack the Sailor 13 Jan 13 - 03:20 AM
GUEST,Stim 12 Jan 13 - 10:51 PM
Jack the Sailor 12 Jan 13 - 08:57 PM
Little Hawk 12 Jan 13 - 08:14 PM
GUEST,Stim 12 Jan 13 - 06:52 PM
Jack the Sailor 12 Jan 13 - 06:15 PM
GUEST,Stim 12 Jan 13 - 06:11 PM
Jack the Sailor 12 Jan 13 - 07:55 AM
GUEST,Stim 11 Jan 13 - 02:51 PM
Alaska Mike 11 Jan 13 - 05:06 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 11 Jan 13 - 04:06 AM
Jack the Sailor 10 Jan 13 - 11:13 PM
RangerSteve 10 Jan 13 - 08:49 PM
Stu 10 Jan 13 - 12:07 PM
Little Hawk 10 Jan 13 - 11:55 AM
Stu 10 Jan 13 - 11:46 AM
GUEST,Stim 10 Jan 13 - 11:31 AM
Stu 10 Jan 13 - 09:48 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 10 Jan 13 - 04:05 AM
Jack the Sailor 09 Jan 13 - 06:39 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Jan 13 - 04:18 PM
Stu 09 Jan 13 - 12:42 PM
Stu 09 Jan 13 - 12:37 PM
Stu 09 Jan 13 - 12:26 PM
Jack the Sailor 08 Jan 13 - 07:56 PM
Little Hawk 08 Jan 13 - 07:04 PM
Jack the Sailor 08 Jan 13 - 04:58 PM
Little Hawk 08 Jan 13 - 04:21 PM
Jack the Sailor 08 Jan 13 - 03:19 PM
Jack the Sailor 08 Jan 13 - 03:14 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 05:38 PM

We thought about starting a thread about how to figure out if a movie is bad or not, but couldn't thing of a header for it...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:58 PM

Y'all need yer own thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:56 PM

Hear! Hear! You are so right.

When I point this out to many of the people on this forum, they become extremely annoyed and they hotly deny their own culpability in this respect, seeing it only in their opponents across the political divide.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:37 PM

I think that there are honest differences between the "conservative" and "liberal" way of addressing issues, and either, or both, may work. However, "liberals" and "conservatives" tend to protect their own interests, always primarily and often exclusively, and generally do it in the name of their higher cause. Liberals see this hypocrisy in Conservatives, and Conservatives see this hypocrisy in Liberals, and both try to exploit it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 12:19 PM

Hmmm. Interesting. I'll have to take a look at that clip.

I know a guy who is a classically radical rightwinger in his 70s...whereas I am a classically radical leftwinger in my 60s. We both play music. The odd thing is that although we are way apart in our basic political viewpoints, when we discuss things in detail we find that we agree, surprisingly, on a lot of it.

This may be because we both DO believe in truth, justice, honesty, responsibility, and other basic human moral values like that...and we both see a ruling system around us that is riddled with corruption and deceit. We find that we share a great deal in common, despite coming at it from the opposite angle, so to speak.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 03:47 AM

I don't think Buckley ever was out to score points, or at least not exactly. He did not think much of that certain sort of intellectual who did not tolerated differing opinion, however.The fact that he valued the expression of differing opinions is obvious when you check youtube and find clips from over the years, of his appearances with Christopher Hitchens, who would seem to embody everything that Buckley didn't.

When one listens closely, however, they seem to see a lot of things in the same light. Buckley is kind of like that--if you are a certain kind of leftist intellectual, you agree with him, at least in principle, a lot more than you disagree with him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 06:39 PM

I daresay he thought of himself as virtually the ultimate suave gentleman. You can see it in his demeanor. And, yes, his encounter with Woody Allen on that show was quite genial and friendly all around. They weren't out to score points, but to engage in some humorous repartee.

(He still gives me the creeps anyway...)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 06:13 PM

Buckley seemed very much the gentleman to me. Given that he and Woody were pretty much diametrically opposed politically, the tone was anything but adversarial. An even more surprising clip, from Buckley's show, with Jack Keroauc, Lewis Yablonsky, and Ed Sanders, came up on the right. Again the gentleman, Buckley gave ample opportunity for all three to express their views, social and political.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 10:31 AM

Yeah, that's it. Buckley is interesting to watch, and pretty creepy at the same time. He looks like a man well accustomed to being simply THE most superior intellect that ever walked into a room, and nevertheless willing to indulge the far lesser beings around him with a certain measure of good humour and bonhommie...specially if they are young and female. He's a scary man. (or he was)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 07:35 PM

this it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 06:27 PM

We among the ranks of the culturally sophisticated PRIDE ourselves on being formidable pedantic smartasses. ;-D

Speaking of which, there's an amusing video on Youtube that features Woody Allen in his youth sparring with a similarly youthful William F. Buckley. They're both quite witty.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 06:16 PM

I am not familiar with the story. But I guess if they had lived it would have been called "LES JOYEUX."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 05:59 PM

Jack--Anyone who had "Les Miz" spoiled also will be surprised to learn that Dorothy made it back to Kansas, Scarlett went back to Tara, and Pinocchio turned into a real boy. And yep, I guess I can be "formidable pedantic smartass". Sorry about that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 05:47 PM

You are referring to Bedazzled?

The film does have one redeeming feature. It is better written than the Brendon Frazier remake.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 05:39 PM

Saw a bad one (well, saw the first part and changed channels) on PBS last night. Dudley Moore makes a pact with a devil. Can't remember the title or who played the devil.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 04:20 PM

"The 300 Spartans" couldn't have been worse than "The 300."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 04:17 PM

Forget about what?


Less Miz review. cq (chuckles quietly) Spoiler alert, maybe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 03:24 PM

I am so shocked by your scurrilous attack on Avatar, Number 6, that I am going to go upstairs, have toast and jam, and try to just forget about it. ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: number 6
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 10:03 AM

Watched the 1962 movie 300 Spartans last nigh ... so stupid it was actually hilarious ... as bad as it was it certainly was more meaningful, classy than .... Avatar

biLL   ;)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: alanabit
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 04:01 AM

I saw the first five minutes of the Polanski film "God of Carnage". It was the longest week of the year so far. Some people can be entertained by cringingly insincere people lying, flattering and performing to each other. I guess that is why "reality" TV and soap opera is so popular. It is impossible not to feel superior to such worms - maybe that is why? Just at the point that the scene could have been ended, an excuse was found to prolong it. It was as if a dentist had just performed a difficult wisdom tooth extraction and then suddenly found another which needed his immediate attention. Even a stupid action film came as a relief after that!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 03:20 AM

Stim, I see that you are a formidable pedantic smartass! I was wondering what I liked about you. Obviously it was your similarity to me!

Please allow me to correct myself. A little singing is OK, as long as the whole song is not included and the lyrics do not include any exposition of the story or development of the characters.

When, in real life I see a street vendor converted to society lady expressing the feeling that she could have danced all night, or a group of muscular midgets criticizing the prissiness of their host as he tries to preserve his mother's porcelain, I'll give it a second look when I see such things in movies.

It is strange, but I do enjoy that sort of thing live on stage. Oh well! Next topic please.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 10:51 PM

It did have singing, Jack! They sang, "Rally, Round the Flag" after they passed the ammendment to abolish slavery, and "We are Coming Father Abraham". Where were you?

As to action, they had the freaking Civil War; heaps of dead soldiers and lots of people running around and yelling, which, what with all the Computer Generated Imagery, is the only real action you get in films anymore;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 08:57 PM

I have better culture than "The Hobbit" and "Chicago" growing in the Tupperware in my fridge that I am afraid to open.

There was no action at all in Lincoln, none! Just talking! It is one of my five favorite films. Excellent writing, no singing, that is what makes it a great American film.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 08:14 PM

Yeah, I liked the party in "The Hobbit" too. I think I might be a bit like a Japanese, culturally speaking. They aren't bothered at all by very long films with a plot that moves very slowly by North American standards. We North Americans are taught from birth to have a very short attention span and demand ACTION at short intervals. It didn't always used to be that way, though. I think it's a modern phenomenon.

Kind of like American football as opposed to European football (soccer).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 06:52 PM

You ain't got no culture, Jack..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 06:15 PM

Yeah Stim, I'm sure that some people did.

I hated Chicago. My in laws love it. I hated it because it is a musical. They love it because it is a musical.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 06:11 PM

Well, I liked the party.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 07:55 AM

The problem I had with the Hobbit was the pace. 45 minutes in all that had happened was a dragon attack an very long party and two boring songs. That is when we wrote off our two $16.00 IMAX 3d tickets and went home.

Alaska Mike did you know that the Book will be split into 3 movies?

Carol and I plan to rent all three at once and skip over the boring bits.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 02:51 PM

Sorry, Mike. Though I liked "The Hobbit", I know how you feel.

You have to remember that movies are not the book that they are based on. A lot of times, they don't even tell the same story. The safest way to think about it is that the film makers are telling their own story using characters and situations from the book.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 05:06 AM

I went to see the Hobbit and was very disappointed in the movie. Jackson took one of my favorite books of all time and turned it into a piece of crap. I think I'll just read the book again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:06 AM

I'm afraid that my previous speculations about interstellar travel will probably remain in the realms of fantasy - as will speculations about the evolution of our species. I suspect that we're at the end of our evolutionary history because we've already exceeded the carrying capacity of our home planet - basically, we're already toast! The point at which we finally die out is, from a long-range historical perspective, a mere detail.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 11:13 PM

From Sugarfoots latest link.

Obviously today Lactose intolerance is not an issue keeping humans from breeding. The significant evolution negating technologies? Things as simple as soy milk and baby formula.



>>> The most obvious example of this is lactose, the sugar in milk. Some 10,000 years ago, before humans started farming, no one could digest this beyond a few years of age.

But today, the rate of lactose tolerance in different parts of the world is a clue to the different histories of farming across the globe. While 99% of Irish people are lactose tolerant, in South East Asia, where there is very little tradition of dairy farming, the figure is less than 5%.


So clearly our technology and inventions didn't stop us evolving in the past. But what about today?

Professor Steve Jones, a geneticist at University College London, said: "In Shakespeare's time, only about one English baby in three made it to be 21."

"All those deaths were raw material for natural selection, many of those kids died because of the genes they carried. But now, about 99% of all the babies born make it to that age."

The bulk of medical and other technological developments which protect us from our environment have come in just the past century. So in the developed world today, what is there left for natural selection to act on?

"Natural selection, if it hasn't stopped, has at least slowed down," says Jones.

But although in the developed world today, almost everyone lives long enough to pass on their genes, many of us choose not to. <<<

Choosing not to is NOT natural selection to say the species is evolving because the average person in Framingham is shorter and fatter with all due respect to the BBC, is nonsense. The taller people could simply be moving to Boston, New York and LA and breeding there. The species would remain unchanged.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: RangerSteve
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:49 PM

LH - I agree concerning The Hatfields and McCoys. I've read a few articles about the feud and this version seems to follow the true story. I highly recommend it.
LadyJean - I agree with you, too. Slob comedies have taken over the humor world. I'm hoping the trend will die out and old-fashioned comedy comes back.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 12:07 PM

Interesting article on the human evolution business here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12535647


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 11:55 AM

Back to movies for a moment here...

I saw a good one last night. "Hatfields & McCoys" (the Kevin Costner one). It's 5 hours long, having been a TV series, so I started watching it in the afternoon, had a break at suppertime, and finished watching it after that.

It's quite convincing, seems accurate and faithful to the mountain culture of the time, and it's terribly sad. Once again it is shown that refusing to forgive (if not forget) the past is about the stupidest thing people can do. In this case it led 2 families, their cousins, other relatives, friends, and assorted other people into decades of hatred, bloodshed, and misery, none of which did a thing to resolve anyone's hurt feelings or restore anyone's "honor", but simply ruined a lot of lives.

What a waste! But it is a good movie, well acted throughout, and congratulations to Kevin Costner for treating the subject in a way that shows respect for the people who where involved. He did a great job in this movie, and so did the rest of the cast.

When "Devil" Anse Hatfield finally died (peacefully in bed at an advanced age), 5000 people came to his funeral, and there is a statue of him erected over the graves of himself and his wife.

If you plan to watch this one...make sure you're ready to put in at least 5 hours. Start early. Or do it over 2 days.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 11:46 AM

"The answer is, "extinction"

Well yes, but that hardly needs pointing out and isn't entirely relevant in the context of this discussion and not what Jack the Sailor was talking about, as his premise is that human evolution has halted in the last 113 years.

If we exposed the entire human race to daily doses of Coke over the next 2000 years we might see some adaptions emerging that enable us to cope with the stress of drinking gassy, sugary drinks; these adaptions would be the result of natural selection though.

The argument over the effect of technology on evolution is not whether it's stopped it or not (it can't at present), it's whether it acts as an agent of natural selection at all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 11:31 AM

Well, Jack, how about Gene Therapy?, According to Wikipedia, which says "The most common form of gene therapy involves using DNA that encodes a functional, therapeutic gene to replace a mutated gene."

Now, by my reasoning, that seems, on the face of it, to be an evolution negating technology, and a pretty deliberate one, at that.

I would suggest that it is actually pretty possible to alter genetic mutation processes in a large population by simply introducing mutagens or anti-mutagens of various sort into that population. The thing is, it doesn't really matter how big the population is, if all are exposed to a product from single source, like, say, Coke, or Tylenol, or McDonald's special sauce, then that will effect the whole population.

As to your thought about, "Evolution has been an uninterrupted process on this planet for 3.5 billion years - how could it have stopped in the past 113 years in any single species?" The answer is, "extinction". And anything that is interferes with or alters the reproductive process in any way can end the game.

The thing is that people toss around the word "evolution" as if they understand it. The fact is that "evolution" is the name we give to a process of adaptation that we have observed--but we don't really understand all that well. We can certainly breed dogs, and we can do a lot of handy tricks by splicing things, be they fruit cuttings or genes, but we don't know very much about the underlying mechanism at all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:48 AM

"The 19th century ended 113 years ago and we have added most of our significant evolution negating technologies since then."

With the greatest of respect, that's not the point of the paper (and research is ongoing according to the website). Point is, despite the technological advances in the 15,000 years leading up to the end of the 19C human evolution had not stopped. There is no mechanism in place to have stopped it then so it continues as it always has. What is an evolution negating technology? The wheel? Fire? iPhones? Antibiotics? We might be able to influence some aspects of natural selection in a small number of cases (using techniques such as artificial insemination) but there's no way the processes that enable evolution are being arrested. Evolution has been an uninterrupted process on this planet for 3.5 billion years - how could it have stopped in the past 113 years in any single species? In fact, without evolution occurring, would it be possible for a population to survive at all? The rate of gene mutations would build way too quickly and there would be no way for them to be discarded; a bit like inbreeding.


"Has it occurred to anyone that a civilisation capable of interstellar travel might be able to direct and control its own evolution?"

I would suggest it would be impossible to control (for instance) the rate of gene mutation in large populations artificially. It might be possible, for a few individuals (as mentioned above) but the technology to halt the mutation, identification and passing on of non-advantageous alleles within even an individual is largely the stuff of fantasy, although might be possible in the distant future.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 04:05 AM

"It occurs to me that, interstellar travel would likely be available to only a small percentage of the population and would not likely change the biological evolution of those left behind."

Yes, exactly - it would be a case of 'unnatural selection'!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:39 PM

It occurs to me that, interstellar travel would likely be available to only a small percentage of the population and would not likely change the biological evolution of those left behind.

"In a world where we've tamed our environment and largely protected ourselves from the vagaries of nature, we may think we're immune to the forces of natural selection. But a new study finds that the process that drives evolution was still shaping us as recently as the 19th century."

The 19th century ended 113 years ago and we have added most of our significant evolution negating technologies since then.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 04:18 PM

Has it occurred to anyone that a civilisation capable of interstellar travel might be able to direct and control its own evolution?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Stu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 12:42 PM

Sorry . . . but I've found the paper and it's open access - yay!

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/04/24/1118174109


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Stu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 12:37 PM

Here's a better link to a page at the Sheffield University website, which was involved in the study: http://www.shef.ac.uk/news/nr/darwin-evolution-natural-selection-lummaa-courtiol


. . . and the website of the project itself: http://www.huli.group.shef.ac.uk/study-pop.html



Saw Hunger Games and thought it was pretty average. Saw the last Batman film and thought it was godawful, not a patch on the previous one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Stu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 12:26 PM

"I quite agree that genetic evolution does not function (for the most part) in a technological society."

Evolution certainly does function in a technological society; why would it not? Our ability to reason is a result of evolution, and the cultural variances arising from that ability (and others) might actually be part of the process rather than being separate from it. You can't stop evolution and it could be construed as typically arrogant for us as a species to think we have reached the point where we have so much influence over the process of evolution we can stop it happening.

The agents of evolution continue to work regardless; technology is simply another environmental factor that may or may not influence natural selection. For instance, does the fertilisation of human eggs outside the body affect natural selection? Does the changing climate mean that certain groups with adaptions to localised climactic conditions enjoy an advantage over those who don't share those adaptions? You'd be hard pressed to find any scientist who would agree human evolution has been arrested in an way. I did read a paper that showed natural selection is alive and well: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/05/human-genetic-evolution/. The actual paper is behind a firewall, but I might be able to get it if anyone's interested.

As for bad films, we watched the Ridley Scott version of Robin Hood at the weekend. It looked great, but Crowe's accent was appalling to say the least, although take the rest as utter fiction despite the presence of historical characters and you can't go far wrong. Crowe was questioned by a chap from the BBC about his accent and he got a bit stroppy when it was suggest he was crap. I can't believe no-one on set told him. Wasn't he supposed to be from Yorkshire? Laughable.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 07:56 PM

"What I would like to see in human evolution is pointless to express. I have so little influence that my opinion is inconsequential."

The coolest evolutionary step would be lions, tigers, leopards, and panthers the size of housecats


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 07:04 PM

Our (yours, mine, and everybody else's here) opinions about most things are utterly inconsequential, Jack, in the larger scheme of things, but I haven't seen much reluctance amongst the Mudcat membership to go on expressing them regardless! I think we all enjoy doing so, being human. We like expressing our opinions, and we are usually almost incapable of not doing so. Every thread on this forum bears witness to that.

I quite agree that genetic evolution does not function (for the most part) in a technological society. I don't particularly care that it doesn't, but I do agree with your position that it doesn't.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 04:58 PM

Shimrod was talking about genetic evolution based on the conditions of the planet. I made the point that genetic evolution does not function in a technological society. I think you may understand that point finally. Perhaps you understood and chose to ignore my point. Obviously the difference between genetic and cultural evolution is that culture can be learned by any human infant but genetics are not as malleable.

Physically hardiest? Who said that? If there is a major war, the ones with flat feet, poor eyesight, weak hearts and other "defects" stay home and breed. While in our society people with such defects are raised to breed with transplants, surgery and other extraordinary means.

Perhaps that represents social advancement if not biological evolution.

What I would like to see in human evolution is pointless to express. I have so little influence that my opinion is inconsequential.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 04:21 PM

I'm a lot more concerned about cultural evolution (positive developments in ideals, social responsibility, and social philosophy) than I am about genetic changes, Jack.

Can you describe the sort of genetic type you'd like to see us evolving into in the future? And how would that bear on "thinning the herd"?

Seems to me that the smartest way of reducing the size of the herd would be to raise people's standard of living and their educational levels in poverty-stricken areas, because the birth rate always seems to be highest where the people are the poorest, most desperate, and least educated. (They attempt to cope with existential despair by having as much unprotected sex as possible (it's a momentary psychological refuge), and they attempt to secure their own future by having a lot of kids, some of whom may survive to help them when they're old.)

I'm suggesting reducing the size of the herd by empowering people, helping them, and giving them hope for the future, in other words, not by killing them off through some destructive means such as war, plague or natural disaster.

If we don't do this, we'll reap the whirlwind presently...either by our own hands or by the hand of Nature itself.

I also don't necessarily agree that the physically hardiest people are always the most valuable members of a community. They may be...or they may not...it depends on their moral attitude toward others and toward society, doesn't it? I'd rather have Gandhi as my neighbour than O.J. Simpson....regardless of the genetic comparisons.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 03:19 PM

DMcG, It is OK that you prefer over another for that reason. I prefer authors like Larry Niven who have 200 year old characters and have factors from that be their motivation in adventure stories rather than exploring each aspect in one novel, which is what you seem to be describing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Seen any bad films recently
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 03:14 PM

"Agreed. But that could change any time, couldn't it? And I suspect it will at some point. Nature seems to have a way of periodically "clearing the deck" when a species gets totally overpopulated and out of hand. It can happen locally...and it has (like on Easter Island, for example)...but it can also happen globally."

No, not really, the herd thinning that occurs in humans is usually anti-Darwinian. War generally takes the healthiest men with the fewest genetic defects. Natural disasters like tsunamis kill randomly. I guess that drought, famine and disease to select for resilience and resistance but even there your chances of survival are way more dependent on luck and available cooperation and assistance than your genetics.

Yes society is evolving. Our genetics are not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 25 January 3:53 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.