Re: Cold Fusion

1

So stompy.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
2

It seems to me like just a new way to store energy. Nice, but not revolutionary.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:21 AM
horizontal rule
3

So they can solve global warming and create an endless supply of booze at the same time.

Nobel prize, for sure.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:24 AM
horizontal rule
4

Whether or not it's useful is a chemical engineering question: how well does it scale? how much energy is required per unit of CO2?


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:24 AM
horizontal rule
5

It is unfortunate that the name "Skyy Vodka" is already taken.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:25 AM
horizontal rule
6

Heh.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:26 AM
horizontal rule
7

Whether or not it's useful is a chemical engineering question: how well does it scale? how much energy is required per unit of CO2?

"Herein we report a common element, nanostructured catalyst for the direct electrochemical conversion of CO2 to ethanol with high Faradaic efficiency (63 % at −1.2 V vs RHE) and high selectivity (84 %) that operates in water and at ambient temperature and pressure."


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:36 AM
horizontal rule
8

"Just" a new way to store energy? I thought energy storage was quite a big deal...


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
9

Ethanol's a bulky, volatile, flammable compound - if you're going for sequestration I'd want something a bit better as an end product. Ethene would be nice, then you could polymerise it.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:45 AM
horizontal rule
10

I thought the idea was that you burn the ethanol as a fuel. Obviously, that puts the carbon back into the atmosphere, but to the extent it replaces fossil fuels, it slows the increase in CO2.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
11

7: I read that, but I'm too ignorant to get from Faradaic efficiency to what that means in terms of energy expenditure.

Also of note:

The overpotential (which might be lowered with the proper electrolyte, and by separating the hydrogen production to another catalyst) probably precludes economic viability for this catalyst, but the high selectivity for a 12-electron reaction suggests that nanostructured surfaces with multiple reactive sites in close proximity can yield novel reaction mechanisms.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
12

10 makes sense.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:52 AM
horizontal rule
13

Why not do both? (Insert appropriate meme gif here.)


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:54 AM
horizontal rule
14

Ethanol's a bulky, volatile, flammable compound - if you're going for sequestration I'd want something a bit better as an end product.

I understand that ethanol converts easily into bad decisions.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:11 AM
horizontal rule
15

I'd want something a bit better as an end product

If global warming could be fixed by a giant [pile of diamonds|aquarium filter|aftermarket hood for a Honda Civic], how big would it have to be?


Posted by: Todd | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:13 AM
horizontal rule
16

Not yet a big deal unless they improve robustness and efficiency.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:20 AM
horizontal rule
17

Currently useless. Using electricity from coal or gas fired power plants to make EtOH from CO2 is a tremendous waste of energy. You'd be pissing away over 80% of the energy contained in fossil fuels to make a slightly different fuel.

Where it may have a future is turning solar generated electricity into fuel, but it's still highly unlikely to be better than the 80 kajillion ways we know of turning CO2 into fuels. Plus, even at 400 ppm in the atmosphere, you'd have to work to concentrate the CO2 out of the atmosphere (this only works at 1 atm CO2). You'd only bother to do this if you were trying to reduce atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and you'd have to be doing this out of the goodness of your heart because the fuel you generate would not be worth the cost.

Pro tip: If something is published in ChemistrySelect it is probably not on the verge of transforming the global energy problem.


Posted by: F | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:20 AM
horizontal rule
18

I think the title suggests he had doubts.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:25 AM
horizontal rule
19

Of all the small fuels, ethanol is actually a pretty good one, except for its corrosiveness. It's liquid (so it's as compact as it gets), stable, flammable, and still retains a reasonably large energy density. The only thing as good is gasoline/kerosene.

Its large scale production is problematic because it's water soluble, so separating water from ethanol (so it can burn) is just as energy inefficient now as it was when we learned how to do it 2000 years ago.


Posted by: F | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:28 AM
horizontal rule
20

So stompy.

Squish!

I actually posted without even checking the blog.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:28 AM
horizontal rule
21

So I know this is kind of covered upthread, but talk to me like I'm stupid:

It's the near future, and the grid is 100% renewables (with any of the myriad storage methods working neatly at scale). New FF production is verboten. But batteries are no-go for airplanes, and maybe bad for trucks.

Why couldn't a (fully developed) version of this tech use clean electricity to fuel trucks & planes with zero net atmospheric carbon impact?

That is, forget about why it's a bad idea now; are there concrete reason it could never be significantly useful?


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 3:04 PM
horizontal rule
22

Some sort of closed-circuit carbon capture probably will be useful, not necessarily this particular technology. Carbon is useful for high-energy-density fuels and producing polymers and other organic compounds, and especially for the latter we'll probably never stop needing it in bulk.

I see two potential reasons why it wouldn't take off. First, we come up with some better energy storage mechanism that's cheaper and entirely avoids carbon. (But that'd still leave polymers.) Second is essentially political: this encourages combustion engines, slowing down our movement away from fossil fuels, and it doesn't actually reduce the carbon in the atmosphere.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 3:21 PM
horizontal rule
23

Admittedly, I'm biased towards solutions like these--I think they're cool, and at some point we are going to have to deal with the carbon that's already there. But they're for the future, not now. Non-biological carbon capture mostly isn't feasible now (please correct me if I'm wrong), and has had nasty associations with large fossil fuel producers/consumers who tout it to greenwash their problems away.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 3:24 PM
horizontal rule
24

21.2: When you say "new FF production," does that include the various methods (bio-diesel, various synthetic oils, and those gasoline-analogs they make by compressing biological materials until they turn into something oily) of creating new "fossil" fuel?


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 5:05 PM
horizontal rule
25

Fun fact: almost none of the CO2 we currently use industrially comes from the air. Recovering the 0.04% that's in the atmosphere is just too hard. We mostly get it from burning fossil fuels or from carbonate rocks.

If we did reach a 100% renewable world, and we did want to completely ban the use of all non-renewable fuels, but we had failed to make enough advances in battery technology so that fuels were still more useful than batteries, then some kind of recycling of CO2 back to useful fuels would be necessary. Essentially to do this you need 1) a source of hydrogen atoms and 2) some high energy electrons. In theory, the most efficient way to do this would be something like this report, where you just combine CO2, electrons from solar cells, and hydrogen from water to make ethanol. Alternatively, there are already known processes where you take CO2 to CO or formic acid, then use that to make H2, then use that to make gasoline. That's long and involved, but all the steps are already known. Which will end up being more efficient will depend on 100 complicated factors of efficiency and cost and selectivity and future scientific developments. None of them are currently economically useful, and I'm not sure any of them actually produce more energy than they consume yet.


Posted by: F | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 5:56 PM
horizontal rule
26

Oh, and I forgot biodiesel, which has the huge advantage of actually working well with just 0.04% CO2, but is also more energy intensive than it sounds once you take into account the cost of fertilizer (currently made from fossil fuels) and harvesting.


Posted by: F | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 5:59 PM
horizontal rule
27

Debate thread?


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:07 PM
horizontal rule
28

but is also more energy intensive than it sounds once you take into account the cost of fertilizer (currently made from fossil fuels) and harvesting.

Also when you count cutting down jungles to replace them with palm plantations.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:07 PM
horizontal rule
29

Is the Crappy Pumpkin sedated?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:08 PM
horizontal rule
30

Trump's on Quaaludes.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:08 PM
horizontal rule
31

Did they end up doing the drug testing, or no?


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:11 PM
horizontal rule
32

Would you want to be the tech who had to draw blood from germaphobic whiner Donald Trump?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:12 PM
horizontal rule
33

Sure. "Oops, missed. Oops, missed again. Oops! I'm so clumsy. Was that an artery?"


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:14 PM
horizontal rule
34

"You've got thin skin."


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:15 PM
horizontal rule
35

"[B]ad hombres"?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:20 PM
horizontal rule
36

Anchor babies!


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:21 PM
horizontal rule
37

He seems less sniffy.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:22 PM
horizontal rule
38

Did he randomly say "wall"?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:24 PM
horizontal rule
39

Is there a word for the rhetorical device that reflects and/or persuades irascible older men? E.g., "If we don't have a border, we don't have a country"? "If you want traffic to move faster, tell people to turn right on red"?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:26 PM
horizontal rule
40

You're the puppet!


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:29 PM
horizontal rule
41

Zing! Bring on the puppet meme.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:29 PM
horizontal rule
42

Christ, what an asshole.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:29 PM
horizontal rule
43

Yeah, gonna get a beer now.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:31 PM
horizontal rule
44

The nuclear start up? I guess I'm impressed that he's sort of heard of START.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:33 PM
horizontal rule
45

I think he is still sniffing, but it looks like they managed to train him out of leaning into the mic.

He does seem more coherent than usual though.


Posted by: roger the cabin boy | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:33 PM
horizontal rule
46

Chris Wallace sucks at this.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:35 PM
horizontal rule
47

Yes, the GDP growth rate of China and India is an appropriate comparator for the United States.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:44 PM
horizontal rule
48

If we had a Cultural Revolution, imagine how good our GDP growth could be three decades later.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:45 PM
horizontal rule
49

What a whiny asshole!


Posted by: roger the cabin boy | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:48 PM
horizontal rule
50

I'm super bored by all of their words but super enthralled by watching their faces while the other one talks. Donald is like a magical color changing ball of playdough.


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:48 PM
horizontal rule
51

Also the captioner (at least the one PBS is using) is making some weird mistakes that detract from the solemnity of the occasion.


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:50 PM
horizontal rule
52

Trump needs some new material. I've heard all his shit like dozens of times before.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:50 PM
horizontal rule
53

He is obsessed with Chicago.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:51 PM
horizontal rule
54

Chicago is the boogeyman these days. Used to be San Francisco, but these days its Chicago.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:53 PM
horizontal rule
55

Not watching. It's very freeing.


Posted by: Chopper | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:54 PM
horizontal rule
56

YOU'RE THE PUPPET


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:55 PM
horizontal rule
57

Why not? This show is hilarious and its the season finale.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:55 PM
horizontal rule
58

56: I AM RUBBER AND YOU'RE THE PUPPET

If you're behind, wait until you get to (sorry, spoilers) "I didn't even apologize to my wife."


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 6:59 PM
horizontal rule
59

"They turned around and bought a six foot painting of Donald. I mean, who does that?!"


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:01 PM
horizontal rule
60

[42 repeats.]


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:05 PM
horizontal rule
61

Jesus Christ.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:06 PM
horizontal rule
62

"Horrifying." Good description.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:06 PM
horizontal rule
63

He really did deserve that Emmy.


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:07 PM
horizontal rule
64

"I, for one, am appalled..." is a great statement in any context.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:09 PM
horizontal rule
65

Damn those Considereddish Forces


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:09 PM
horizontal rule
66

63: "Time travel to award Donald Trump an Emmy" is going to be the new "time travel to get Hitler into art school."


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:11 PM
horizontal rule
67

It is really upsetting how much his eyes and mouth are exactly the same.


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:11 PM
horizontal rule
68

Does he think that he is landing devastating haymakers with this Twitter/Breitbart rubbish? Does he know that women can vote now?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:16 PM
horizontal rule
69

Now let's turn to Owe Left Poe.


Posted by: E. Messily | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:17 PM
horizontal rule
70

Wow, talk down the moderate. Very temperament. Much sad.

69: Oof you weren't kidding. The Owe Left tolls for thee.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:18 PM
horizontal rule
71

He needs to work on not looking like a turd when she's talking.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:22 PM
horizontal rule
72

No climate change questions. Again.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:24 PM
horizontal rule
73

Oh fuck the moderator. What an ass.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:28 PM
horizontal rule
74

Is someone fact checking Chris Wallace?


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:28 PM
horizontal rule
75

What the fuck was that "such a nasty woman" non sequitur to?


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:31 PM
horizontal rule
76

Ha! Chris Wallace is a dick!


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:32 PM
horizontal rule
77

I think he just handed her a great line when he ended with, "We cannot take four more years of Barack Obama, and that's what you get if you vote for her." Isn't his popularity sky high right now?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:34 PM
horizontal rule
78

I thought Clinton's final statement wasn't particularly responsive to Wallace's question and then Trump responded with a minute of non sequiturs.

Oh fuck the moderator. What an ass.

I only tuned in for the last 20 minutes, and that was my thought. Was he any better earlier.


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:35 PM
horizontal rule
79

Relive the excitement!

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/19/498293478/fact-check-trump-and-clinton-s-final-presidential-debate


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:35 PM
horizontal rule
80

75- HRC was digging at his tax evasion.


Posted by: roger the cabin boy | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:36 PM
horizontal rule
81

78- I thought he was doing OK for the first 10-15 minutes.


Posted by: roger the cabin boy | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:37 PM
horizontal rule
82

The post-debate talking head on CNN is talking about how Trump should have pressed harder on Bill Clinton being a sex abuser, too. Christ. Can he not accept that Hillary is the one who's running?

81: He was relatively mellowed out in the beginning. Sometime around 9:30 he started losing it.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:41 PM
horizontal rule
83

Well, the human suit starts to get itchy after a while under the studio lights.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 7:41 PM
horizontal rule
84

Clinton and Trump keep improving as debaters, and it doesn't really matter b /c everything else.

Don't think Trump's polish will help even a little because he what he's saying isn't popular or agreeable.

Think the moderator was OK apart from the last question.


Posted by: David Weman | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:10 PM
horizontal rule
85

Maybe the most important part of the debate was Clinton could be interpreted there'd be no no fly zone without negotions with the Russians. Let's hope so b / c it's a really scary idea.


Posted by: David Weman | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 8:13 PM
horizontal rule
86

HRC was digging at his tax evasion

Yes, and I was half-thinking she should have stopped and pointed out that *he* was the one who said it made him "smart" so what's his complaint about her bringing it up. But actually much stronger this way--it certainly got heard (probably #2 moment after the accepting the results crap) so that can be pointed out over the next few days and people will get the context.

What I want now is GOP war over the "accepting the results" stuff. Pence (who has been on 3 sides off this question) and Jeff Sessions (and Guiliani of course) seeming to be agreeing. A lot of other Repubs quickly distancing themselves.

Snap polls were 52-39 and 49-39. I suspect basically whoever you intend to vote for "won," so any Repub taking him on does so at their peril. Ryan went from +6 favorable among Rs to minus 20 (something like that) over a two week period).


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 9:38 PM
horizontal rule
87

What I want now is GOP war over the "accepting the results" stuff. Pence (who has been on 3 sides off this question) and Jeff Sessions (and Guiliani of course) seeming to be agreeing. A lot of other Repubs quickly distancing themselves.

The thing about rich people is that they have a lot to lose.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 9:47 PM
horizontal rule
88

So the Republican base is totally down to go full-nihilist, but Republican elites are reluctant to follow.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 9:50 PM
horizontal rule
89

86- Good points.

My favorite moment was when she was talking about her 30 years experience. I agree with John Rodgers who tweeted: "

Just catching up -- Jesus it's like watching a child. And she frikkin DRAGGED him on the 30 year career question.
"


Posted by: roger the cabin boy | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
90

He really is talking in a really childlike way.


Posted by: David Weman | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:09 PM
horizontal rule
91

OMG it was excruciating to watch.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:11 PM
horizontal rule
92

I'm not sure Trump's full-throated praise of Putin counts as a great opening. Sure he wasn't beet red and shouty, but he was still basically admitting he supported anti-American espionage and foreign meddling in our democracy.


Posted by: Buttercup | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:18 PM
horizontal rule
93

If you want to feel good about the debate this is a satisfying article: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/19/13340828/hillary-clinton-debate-trump-won


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:19 PM
horizontal rule
94

92- He appears to benefit from being able to clear an incredibly low bar, and all you can do is point out how low the bar is?


Posted by: roger the cabin boy | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:22 PM
horizontal rule
95

It really is an incredibly low bar, though, and based on initial media reports he doesn't seem to have cleared it.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:27 PM
horizontal rule
96

90 No, you're talking in a childish way.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:38 PM
horizontal rule
97

Trump really does seem to like seeing how much his followers are willing to debase themselves. Set a bar low, he'll go lower just to watch everyone else crawl behind.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:41 PM
horizontal rule
98

86.2: After further review; not so sure the Rs are ready to war with each other on that yet. Even though Fox, and standard R talking heads (and big WSJ headline) are no ton board, Reince is still sticking with the "could be big fraud" line, and it seems most are keeping silent other than a few already off the bus. I was assuming from TV sample that more were jumping on that, but may have been wrong. But see what tomorrow brings when they (hopefully) get pressed on it by local media.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 10-19-16 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
99

Your mom talked to me in a childish way last night.

This is the trash-talk thread, right?


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 12:33 AM
horizontal rule
100

Not if all you bring is weak shit like 99 it isn't.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 1:00 AM
horizontal rule
101

The fact is that under eight years of the Obama administration the US economy has only grown by an average of 2% a year. That is well behind the growth rate of India and China, and also, of course, of your mom.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:24 AM
horizontal rule
102

76: No, kidding. Pet/er Wall/ace (Chris's son) is also kind of a dick, but Mike Wallace always seemed so great.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 3:27 AM
horizontal rule
103

Your mom is a finger puppet.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 3:49 AM
horizontal rule
104

That's not me saying it. That is seventeen intelligence agencies of the US government saying that hackers in the employment of the Kremlin have conducted a successful hostile penetration of Democratic Party computer servers, and, also, of your mom.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:01 AM
horizontal rule
105

The Republican Party is now useful* idiots.

* for very strange values of 'useful'.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:08 AM
horizontal rule
106

If Putin was to hack the voting machines in a swing state the smart thing to do would be to make it an obvious rigging in favor of Clinton. The country would be all but ungovernable. That's my nightmare scenario, right behind your mom.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:10 AM
horizontal rule
107

30 years ago, while Clinton was protecting poor, pathetic, starving children in Arkansas, Trump was banging your mom.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:15 AM
horizontal rule
108

Finger puppet banging your mom.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:40 AM
horizontal rule
109

Do you know where your mom was last night?


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 6:12 AM
horizontal rule
110

I'm gonna leave you in suspense, OK?


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 6:17 AM
horizontal rule
111

The way I suspended your mom.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 6:57 AM
horizontal rule
112

Such a nasty woman, your mom.


Posted by: One of Many | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:12 AM
horizontal rule
113

Not as nasty as yours. IYKWIMAITYD.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:25 AM
horizontal rule
114

Stolen from Twitter:

Chinese steel in the streets, nasty woman in the sheets.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
115

Limousine in the streets, your mom in the sheets.


Posted by: Donald J. Trump | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
116

I think my favorite thing about the debate (and Trump's previous bullshit about rigged elections) is how he's turned the story into "what will Trump do after he loses?"


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:05 AM
horizontal rule
117

He'll do your mom.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:16 AM
horizontal rule
118

116-117 are hilarious.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
119

Locker room talk.


Posted by: bill | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
120

I have nothing to say about that kind of talk.


Posted by: OPINONATED TOM BRADY | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 1:24 PM
horizontal rule
121

Could someone calmly explain why I should not be freaked out about the IBD/TIPP poll?


Posted by: jms | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 1:34 PM
horizontal rule
122

121: The margin of error is much greater than Trump's lead. This is why people average polls.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 1:40 PM
horizontal rule
123

But according to my google search results multiple independent mostly conservative news sources that totally aren't copying the same language from a common source, it's America's Most Accurate* Poll!

*Some headlines say most precise, probably because they have access to a thesaurus but not a dictionary.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:21 PM
horizontal rule
124

Based on current polling I'd like Clinton to win Texas and South Carolina but lose Iowa and Indiana, just to mess with internet liberals' perceptions about the South/red-state blue-state issues.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:24 PM
horizontal rule
125

What about recent Indiana politics makes it perceived as liberal?


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:30 PM
horizontal rule
126

I dunno I set a low bar for my messing with internet liberals plan.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:36 PM
horizontal rule
127

But like I think the perception is something like "Indiana is bad, but not South Carolina bad." So it would be fun to just fuck with the perception.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:37 PM
horizontal rule
128

Even better would be Texas and South Carolina but not New Hampshire (extremely unlikely). Fuck New Hampshire.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:40 PM
horizontal rule
129

Indiana and Iowa don't make liberals hiss with disgust the way Texas and South Carolina do. I'm soooo excited about Texas lately even though it will probably go for trump.


Posted by: heebie | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:41 PM
horizontal rule
130

I definitely have an irrational anti-South Carolinian bias, and support reality disabusing me of it.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:46 PM
horizontal rule
131

Based on current polling I'd like Clinton to win Texas and South Carolina but lose Iowa and Indiana, just to mess with internet liberals' perceptions about the South/red-state blue-state issues.

The second half of that is already expected to happen, with those states being predominantly old white people with limited education. As for the first half, she is already leading in North Carolina and Arizona, and winning those other states would be credited to having an incredible get-out-the-vote disparity.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 2:48 PM
horizontal rule
132

So? That wouldn't make it less gratifying. The people would have to exist to be gotten to vote.


Posted by: heebie | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 3:01 PM
horizontal rule
133

an incredible get-out-the-vote disparity.

I'm really hoping for this. It would be fabulous for down-ballot races.


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 3:09 PM
horizontal rule
134

No, Halford, fuck you.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:10 PM
horizontal rule
135

It's on, NH. I can take you.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:26 PM
horizontal rule
136

I will fuck up your face like the wind fucked up the Old Man of the Mountains.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:31 PM
horizontal rule
137

Like I took your mom.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:33 PM
horizontal rule
138

Live free or die, bitch.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:35 PM
horizontal rule
139

How's being shit Vermont working out for you?


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:36 PM
horizontal rule
140

Bah, Vermont. Vermont's upside down.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:43 PM
horizontal rule
141

BTW, Vermont knows that shit you were talking about Bernie Sanders. You best be careful if you don't want an icicle in your back.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 4:46 PM
horizontal rule
142

More like kitchen granite-counter-top state, bitch.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:00 PM
horizontal rule
143

LEAVE US OUT OF IT, NEW HAMPSHIRE IS ONLY GOOD FOR BIG LIQUOR STORES AND SEPARATING US FROM MAINE


Posted by: OPINIONATED VERMONT | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:03 PM
horizontal rule
144

Whatever. I'll be over here enjoying my under-regulated fireworks. You know you can't resist a hop over the border to buy them.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:05 PM
horizontal rule
145

TRUE HEROES OVER-REGULATE FIREWORKS FOR THEIR CITIZENS AND UNDER-REGULATE THEM FOR EVERYONE ELSE


Posted by: OPINIONATED PENNSYLVANIA | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 5:26 PM
horizontal rule
146

I had a phone interview with a place in Vermont today. They didn't seem to hate me. It could happen.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 6:19 PM
horizontal rule
147

It's 3pm. I'm here in the high school parking lot. I knew you wouldn't show, New Hampshire, like the bitch you are.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 6:43 PM
horizontal rule
148

Fuck you. I was there. 3PM Eastern Daylight Time.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:21 PM
horizontal rule
149

Nice dinger, Cubs. Way to humiliate the Dodgers.


Posted by: New Hampshire | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:30 PM
horizontal rule
150

So apparently Trump totally bombed at the Al Smith dinner. People actually booed him.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:30 PM
horizontal rule
151

The Al Smith dinner is rigged!


Posted by: Trump | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 7:31 PM
horizontal rule
152

Did he say a vote for Al Smith is a vote for the Pope?


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:00 PM
horizontal rule
153

He said he was surprised Hillary actually showed up because she only pretends not to hate Catholics.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:24 PM
horizontal rule
154

153 is not a joke or an exaggeration. That's literally what he said.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:27 PM
horizontal rule
155

People on Twitter are pointing out the irony that around the time Al Smith ran for president Trump's dad got arrested for participating in an anti-Catholic Klan riot.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:28 PM
horizontal rule
156

153: WTF??


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 8:58 PM
horizontal rule
157

Has it been noted here that Mike Pence identifies as a born-again Catholic?


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 9:12 PM
horizontal rule
158

153: I appreciate the effort.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 9:24 PM
horizontal rule
159

Since Trump spends all day reading Breitbart and Matt Drudge like any other white father-in-law, he is filled with rage at the story which the MSM IGNORES, about how in one of the Wikileaks emails some random person working for Hillary insulted the Catholic Church in the course of insulting Rupert Murdoch, and then some other random person agreed with the first random person. I was surprised to discover that this week's top right-wing headline is "Hillary hates Catholics", because, well, the MSM is in fact ignoring that "story", but over at Breitbart they think it's a winner.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 9:26 PM
horizontal rule
160

As has been amply demonstrated throughout this campaign, Trump is really running for president of the Breitbart comments section rather than president of the United States. This may or may not be a shrewd attempt to monetize his popularity through a targeted media outlet as the ultimate end goal.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 9:29 PM
horizontal rule
161

He just launched a Facebook Live streaming channel. Which either represents a shrewd first step toward a media empire or a hopelessly disorganised presidential campaign. Like the whole election!


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
162

America is so fucking weird these days. Sorry, rest of the world.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:10 PM
horizontal rule
163

It's not like the rest of the world is behaving excessively normally. What the fuck is with the Philippines, for example?


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:34 PM
horizontal rule
164

True enough, but the Philippines is a regional power at best. If we start down the same route it will affect the entire world.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:37 PM
horizontal rule
165

The only good thing about Brexit is that it keeps the Brits from being smug about our fuckeduppitude. Keir could probably still be smug, unless NZ politics have gone crazy in some way. The Canadians can of course be smug but we're close enough that they fear and internalize our crazy more viscerally.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:39 PM
horizontal rule
166

I have, however, literally heard someone propose "Philippine" solutions for a recent spate of weird murders in my neighborhood. It's a scary time all around.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:40 PM
horizontal rule
167

Aren't the weird murders themselves the Philippine solution?


Posted by: jms | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:41 PM
horizontal rule
168

166 to 163, but 165 is very true.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:41 PM
horizontal rule
169

167: Yes, but I'd like to think we have different solutions in America.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:43 PM
horizontal rule
170

If the murders are only a neighborhood problem it could probably be fixed by One Man Who Is Not Afraid. That could be you.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:43 PM
horizontal rule
171

Not me. I've never even shot a gun.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:43 PM
horizontal rule
172

Crossbow? That bolt airgun thing from No Country for Old Men?


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:44 PM
horizontal rule
173

And they're not only a neighborhood problem, but they do seem to be weirdly clustered in my primarily white, middle-class neighborhood.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:44 PM
horizontal rule
174

172: Nope and nope. I've shot BB guns, years ago. (I'm very much a fake Alaskan in this respect.)


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
175

NB: It's not just the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines, Duterte is telling us to fuck off, he's aligning with China and Russia now, presumably giving up the South China Sea claims.
Turkey's fucked, France will have a Le Pen in power soon enough, the UK is a shitshow and Australia's running concentration camps. Canada remains unfucked.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:12 PM
horizontal rule
176

174: Super soaker? That boxing glove on an extending arm thing that you order from ACME?


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:16 PM
horizontal rule
177

It's not just the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines, Duterte is telling us to fuck off, he's aligning with China and Russia now, presumably giving up the South China Sea claims.

Presumably. We'll see.

Turkey's fucked, France will have a Le Pen in power soon enough, the UK is a shitshow and Australia's running concentration camps. Canada remains unfucked.

No argument there. A scary time all around.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:16 PM
horizontal rule
178

176: Not sure about super soaker. They were certainly popular when I was a kid, but I don't remember ever shooting one myself. On the boxing glove thing, no.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:19 PM
horizontal rule
179

But while we're here, FM, was it you who was interested in Polynesian origins a little while back? I forget. I have a book recommendation for whoever it was.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:20 PM
horizontal rule
180

173: So you're saying you live in Trump's idea of Clinton's America?


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:38 PM
horizontal rule
181

Yeah, it was. I'm halfway through The Austronesians: Historical and Comparative Perspectives. It took some doing getting through the latter part of the linguistics, but I'm on to archeology.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-20-16 11:43 PM
horizontal rule
182

Any one awake? I have a C.V. question.

I know it sounds odd but I'm a PI on a project here in partner with another institution. How do I list this on a CV? As a separate job or as part of my duties for my current job?


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 12:56 AM
horizontal rule
183

The only good thing about Brexit is that it keeps the Brits from being smug about our fuckeduppitude.

It also keeps us terrified that your vote is going to go as badly as ours. Brexit is just going to make us poorer; Trump would actually endanger our security.

182: I would say it's part of your duties for your current job. But I'm not an expert on style for academic CVs.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 2:07 AM
horizontal rule
184

This job is actually for a commercial outfit selling the kind of historical materials I deal with. A bit of a different thing for me.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 2:50 AM
horizontal rule
185

I'd say ajay is right on the CV.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 4:59 AM
horizontal rule
186

Also, I'm not sure exactly what you do, so I'm going to have to assume 184 involves grave robbing.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:16 AM
horizontal rule
187

The denizens of the Mineshaft fall into two categories: those who have actually explicitly revealed what they do for a living (LizardBreath, heebie, Tigre etc) and those who haven't, and for whom I have therefore had to invent careers. The second group seem (from inside my head) to be having much more fun. Moby, for instance, is a consulting detective. teo is a professional elk-hunting guide. Barry is a player-character from Call of Cthulhu.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:28 AM
horizontal rule
188

Sorry, Barry should of course be in the first category, but revealing that might be VSOOBC.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:29 AM
horizontal rule
189

Because we're living in a simulation, Barry works for a weapon shop in a village right before the end boss.


Posted by: Todd | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:31 AM
horizontal rule
190

I don't think I've been that closed about what I do for a living, but maybe I should start.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:41 AM
horizontal rule
191

Relevant to 187 and 189, I have recently been reminded of the RPG that consumed way too much of my spare time while at school, and in particular of its robustly unromantic list of careers which your character could have. Dungeons and Dragons had "Warrior" and "Wizard" and "Bard" and "Rogue". This one had, among others, "Beggar", "Agitator", "Bawd", "Labourer", "Scribe", "Artisan's Apprentice", "Herdsman" and, IIRC, "Lackey".


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:44 AM
horizontal rule
192

Thomas Piketty presents "Dungeons and Dragons, 2.0".


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:46 AM
horizontal rule
193

Honestly, "Artisan's Apprentice" sounds like a much nicer life than "go into cave and die".


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:47 AM
horizontal rule
194

Not so far off. I've dug out the rulebook and (for the benefit of my neighbours) am writing a scenario, and I am finding quite a bit of Piketty creeping in. "Of course the villagers don't actually have any Gold Crowns for most of the year - they just keep ledgers of each other's debts and set them off against each other, so there's nothing for you to loot."


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:48 AM
horizontal rule
195

187 Close, I'm the curator for the historical cartography of non-Euclidean spaces.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:51 AM
horizontal rule
196

i.e. "planets".


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:53 AM
horizontal rule
197

And your mom.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 5:57 AM
horizontal rule
198

187: ajay, I don't know what exactly you do now, but it's of questionable legality and gives you lots of opportunity to take advantage of the skills you learned in the SAS.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 6:31 AM
horizontal rule
199

198 I think it's Moby who's in the SAS.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 6:41 AM
horizontal rule
200

It's a very well used acronym.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 6:41 AM
horizontal rule
201

No, he uses it, which more or less makes him M. Or the queen. Whoever calls the shots over there.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 6:43 AM
horizontal rule
202

dalriata's imaginary career for me, like my imaginary careers for everyone else, bears no resemblance to reality but is so much fun that continued belief in it should be encouraged.

But then I would say that, wouldn't I?


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
203

187. No, Barry is the consulting detective. He said on the other thread that he was moonlighting as a PI.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
204

202: I also imagine that you wear an eyepatch, have a perpetual two day stubble, and always have at least three knives on you. (One more than the UK average.)


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:11 AM
horizontal rule
205

203: good catch sir.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
206

181: Sorry to disappear like that last night! The book I wanted to recommend is Patrick Kirch's On the Road of the Winds, which I'm most of the way through. It seems to be pretty much the standard introductory work on Pacific prehistory. Probably a lot of overlap with the one you're reading now, but more of an archaeological focus.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 7:49 PM
horizontal rule
207

teo is a professional elk-hunting guide.

This is so hilariously wrong I don't even know where to start. Not that ajay wants me to burst his bubble, I'm sure.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 7:53 PM
horizontal rule
208

Don't worry. I'm sure the Olympic committee knows you're serious about maintaining your amateur status.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 7:56 PM
horizontal rule
209

Canada remains unfucked.

Well, the Walloons are currently screwing them out of a trade deal with the EU, but it's that that's not the Canadians' fault. Instead it should be credited to Belgium, probably the world leader in fuckedupness per unit of area.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 7:59 PM
horizontal rule
210

208: It's particularly funny that he said it just a few comments after I had admitted to having never fired a gun.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:00 PM
horizontal rule
211

207: Well, sure, 1) he meant moose (yay, confusing US/UK English differences), as elk/wapiti aren't found in Alaska, and 2) you do it for free. For the love of the hunt.

181/206: These sound interesting. Are they accessible to a non-specialist? I can probably make it through a historical linguistics text, and have read the heavier side of popular archeology.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:00 PM
horizontal rule
212

Once you see a guy kill an elk with his bare hands, that's the only guide you'll ever want.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:04 PM
horizontal rule
213

Moby, for instance, is a consulting detective.

I would read or watch the chronicles of Moby's consultations.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:05 PM
horizontal rule
214

he meant moose (yay, confusing US/UK English differences), as elk/wapiti aren't found in Alaska

Ha, I hadn't thought of that, but yes, he presumably meant moose rather than wapiti. Point to ajay.

These sound interesting. Are they accessible to a non-specialist? I can probably make it through a historical linguistics text, and have read the heavier side of popular archeology.

The Kirch definitely is; it's very much an introductory survey. I haven't read the other one, even though I was the one who pointed FM to it, but it's available free online, so you can judge for yourself.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:13 PM
horizontal rule
215

I mentioned that I have an urge to investigate a murder. I'm just waiting for a good one.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:15 PM
horizontal rule
216

173 to 215.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:17 PM
horizontal rule
217

Ooh, thanks! Bookmarked.

I also assume that you have "TEO" and "FILO" knuckle tattoos.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:18 PM
horizontal rule
218

I also assume that you have "TEO" and "FILO" knuckle tattoos.

As if I would reveal my secret identity so openly.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:19 PM
horizontal rule
219

And you're welcome! Always glad when the random things I run across on the internet are of interest to other people.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:21 PM
horizontal rule
220

Then you have it interlaced, the letters alternating between your hands, so that the complete word only becomes visible when you're strangling a moose.

...which might be the perfect murder. Our intrepid detective, assisted by a specialist in ancient non-Euclidean geometries and a grizzled British mercenary...but I should stop now, to not violate the sanctity of off-blog communications.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:23 PM
horizontal rule
221

Have you ever seen a moose? They're huge. No way is anyone strangling one with their bare hands, least of all me.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:26 PM
horizontal rule
222

That's why you need the non-Euclidean geometry.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:33 PM
horizontal rule
223

Wait, I'm the specialist in non-Euclidean geometry? That seems... improbable.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:35 PM
horizontal rule
224

That's why it'd be so perfect when you pull it off. Dammit, teo, this isn't how yes-ands work.

No, never been lucky enough to see one. I haven't spent significant time in their range. The only intuitive feel I have as to their size is due to warnings to avoid hitting them in a car--they're much more likely to be fatal, since you'll take out their legs, leaving the bulk of their mass to fall through the windshield. Realistically, I think most white-tailed deer could kick my ass*, so moose must be utterly awe inspiring.

* Not an unreasonable fear.I often end up uncomfortably close to them when going on walks in the parks/cemeteries around here.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:37 PM
horizontal rule
225

Nah, Barry's the non-Euclidean specialist. I got it a bit off:

Close, I'm the curator for the historical cartography of non-Euclidean spaces.

I mean, unless you want to be. This can become a GURPS campaign.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:40 PM
horizontal rule
226

No, never been lucky enough to see one. I haven't spent significant time in their range. The only intuitive feel I have as to their size is due to warnings to avoid hitting them in a car--they're much more likely to be fatal, since you'll take out their legs, leaving the bulk of their mass to fall through the windshield. Realistically, I think most white-tailed deer could kick my ass*, so moose must be utterly awe inspiring.

I saw three last weekend, which was admittedly more than I had seen in a long time. But they are all over the place around here. And yeah, hitting one will absolutely total your car, with a strong chance of causing serious injury as well.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:43 PM
horizontal rule
227

Biggest animal I've seen here is a goddamn pigeon. My colleagues freaked out hilariously over an itsy-bitsy spider the other day.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:50 PM
horizontal rule
228

Last week, I saw a groundhog majestically sunning itself on a tombstone. Oh, and a buck did chill out for a few hours in our neighbor's driveway, less than twenty feet from three different houses. It was fairly penned in, and if they had come home it might have panicked with unfortunate consequences.

227: Aren't there poisonous spiders there? I may be making an inappropriate assumption that anywhere tropical and vaguely in the same region of the globe as Australia is going to have venomous critters.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:54 PM
horizontal rule
229

Probably yes, but we're talking seriously itsy and bitsy here.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 8:59 PM
horizontal rule
230

206: Thanks a lot. I originally got on this kick to address a different question (who was sticking the dead in boxes halfway up cliffs) which research hasn't really helped with, but I've long since become interested in the Austronesians for their own sake. Do you have any thoughts on the relationship between Austronesian and Tai Kadai?


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:00 PM
horizontal rule
231

Do you have any thoughts on the relationship between Austronesian and Tai Kadai?

I'm skeptical, personally, but part of that is just the standard skepticism of mainstream linguistics toward proposals for long-distance relationships. I did download one of Sagart's papers making the case for a connection, but I haven't read it yet. I'll let you know if and when I do. Blevins's proposal of a close relationship between Austronesian and some of the languages of the Andamans seems to be a significant problem for Sagart's scheme if it stands up to scrutiny, but I haven't read that paper either.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:06 PM
horizontal rule
232

Actually on further reflection I'm not sure how significant the Blevins proposal is for Sagart's, but I'm still skeptical.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:08 PM
horizontal rule
233

But that's because Sagart is claiming Tai-Kadai is a subfamily of Austronesian rather than a coordinate branch, which seems crazy to me on first glance but then again I don't actually know anything about any of these languages personally.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:26 PM
horizontal rule
234

Do you mean spatial or temporal distance? Because, as I understand it, in the time frame were talking about the physical distance was basically the strait of Taiwan. Even today you've got 50 million Zhuang speakers 500 miles away. Not that I've got a dog in this fight either way.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
235

None of the Austronesian languages are tonal, and at least Thai, Lao, and Zhuang (the only Tai Kadai languages with which I have any familiarity) all are.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:34 PM
horizontal rule
236

234: Genetic (some prefer the term "genealogical") distance. Although as noted in 233, Sagart at least is claiming not that there is a long-distance relationship between Austronesian and Tai-Kadai but that the latter is actually a sub-unit of the former, which is a much stronger claim that would require very strong evidence to support. And he may well have such evidence; I don't actually know anything about the details of these languages, again as noted in 233. This sort of dispute is why I think it would be very useful for historical/comparative linguistics to adopt some sort of quantitative way of evaluating genetic relations between languages, the way every other discipline that addresses comparable issues does. If I ever go back into linguistics, which is unlikely, this is what I would focus on.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:35 PM
horizontal rule
237

235 is one of the reasons I'm skeptical about this proposal, but in fairness Chinese influence is a plausible explanation for the development of tonality in Tai-Kadai languages.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
238

Anyway, we should acknowledge Mossy as our correspondent in the Austronesian Urheimat, even though it has changed quite a bit in the intervening millennia.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:48 PM
horizontal rule
239

236: on the lack of quantitative comparison, do you see that as being more due to a conservative field or due to the fundamental difficulty of doing so? Defining what a quantum of change is, or having a way to predict expected rate of linguistic change in certain circumstances, seem really hard. And that's before you take into account language areas.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:52 PM
horizontal rule
240

Definitely a conservative field rather than fundamental difficulty. Phonology has done a great job in defining fundamental units, so defining a quantum of change is not necessarily going to be very hard. (Historical linguistics still relies very heavily on phonological changes, though changes in other aspects of language are of course relevant too.) Predicting expected rates of change, on the other hand, is very difficult, but I think that's due in part to a reluctance to try. And areal features are definitely another complication that needs to be kept in mind throughout all of this.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
241

Not many blocks from my residence is a concrete plaza which stands on the site of a Han village that was built on the site of a village of Austronesians who have long since vanished into the mountains. Or just intermarried with the Han, but no-one seems to mention that.


Posted by: Mossy Character | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 10:09 PM
horizontal rule
242

I guess I was thinking more like: if a phonemic feature starts appearing in one environment, how big of a change is that relative to that feature appearing in a different environment? Can you compare their size if one environment doesn't strictly contain the other? But maybe that's better to think of as a question of rate of change and not what a unit of change is.

This is a good goal, and I hope that we see it start to happen in earnest in our lifetimes.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 10:13 PM
horizontal rule
243

I guess I was thinking more like: if a phonemic feature starts appearing in one environment, how big of a change is that relative to that feature appearing in a different environment? Can you compare their size if one environment doesn't strictly contain the other? But maybe that's better to think of as a question of rate of change and not what a unit of change is.

All good questions, and all sadly underconsidered in standard historical/comparative linguistics, which has largely been focused on just documenting which changes appear where without much attention to why. (Sociolinguistics has tried to fill this gap to some extent; I particularly like the approach of John Ohala, which tries to bring phonetics in as well.)


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10-21-16 10:18 PM
horizontal rule
244

Well, the Walloons are currently screwing them out of a trade deal with the EU, but it's that that's not the Canadians' fault. Instead it should be credited to Belgium, probably the world leader in fuckedupness per unit of area.

Give those Belgians a medal! CETA is basically a test run for a do-over of TTIP, which we DO NOT WANT!


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 10-22-16 3:34 AM
horizontal rule