Revealed: Mascots for the 2010 Olympics held in Vancouver, Japan

Pacey Says:

Coming up with decent mascots must be a near-impossible task if this is the best of the bunch. Can you tell which one is the Sasquatch? The "sea-bear"? The "animal guardian spirit"? An outsider might be thinking that Vancouver, Canada must have no natural or cultural icons if committee members had to invent mascots to promote their entry to the world stage.



Bigfoot is a long-running unfunny hoax that has nothing to do with welcoming anyone to Vancouver and/or promote good sportsmanship. Bigfoot is named "Quatchi" apparently after Quatchi Plateau (aka Terre de Barre) near Togo, on the continent of Africa. You may remember Togo as the tiny republic that experiences daily earthquakes as reported by SCTV news.




There is no such thing as a "sea-bear", but it apparently it is a mythical First Nations creature. This is a good start, because First Nations contribute greatly to Canadian culture. However, I assume there must be no actual First Nations names, because this sea-bear is apparently named "Miga" after a Japanese and Korean BBQ restaurant in Mississauga, Ontario.

Even though "animal spirits" don't exist, "Sumi" has potential because it (?) wears an orca whale hat. Why this creature would be named after a type of Japanese calligraphy ink is beyond me.

All together, Vancouver came up with three creatures, yet not one of them are actually real. And these creatures are named with words that have nothing to do with the region of Vancouver, First Nations, or Canada, from what I can tell. And they're weird looking, except for the one with the orca hat.

Perhaps the best mascot the committee came up is not an official mascot, but a "sidekick" mascot. Named "Mukmuk", this creature is a rare marmot that lives on Vancouver Island and is named after a similar Squamish word for "food". Mukmuk has advantages over every other mascot in that a) it is a 'real' creature (a marmot), b) it lives in British Columbia, c) indicates the hospitality of sharing a meal, and d) and it has a name inspired by a First Nations language. Somehow, this creature did not make the cut as one of the official mascots.

Beauty of Biology

Penny Says:
Aww isn't that cute

This little fella would probably make a fantastic appetizer. But the Dumbo Octopus is much too cute for me to eat! The color and artistry in biology always impresses me. The Book The Deep -The Extraordinary Creatures of the Abyss by Claire Nouvian - is full of jaw-droppingly amazing images of previously hidden biological treasures. The folks at Chapters may ask if you are alright if you take the time to flip through before you purchase! The inevitable reflexive gasps, oohs, and aahhs are definitely attention getting.



I can only imagine the delight of an interior designer who spots these tubes worms and instantly imagine a room designed around their intense color and structure.











Imagine a child's delight to find a great glossy print of this green globe sponge on their bedroom wall.













This astonishing undefined species - has yet to be identified taxonomically. A fashion designers muse or simply a undersea delight. I am happy to have had the pleasure of seeing it!







The Deep offers 220 color images, some of which could go straight into a frame and onto your walls, but others might go straight to your nightmares.





This nasty looking entity reminds us that there is virtually no light and definitely no mirrors in the depths of the ocean.






I am left wondering what they eat? Do they play? Are they social? How do they communicate with their friends and foes? And how on earth can we study them without ripping them out of their secret world and flopping them onto the laboratory bench?


FYI - for those of you who are worried about conserving precious ocean species, while still creating fantastic recipes and eating delicious entrees, check out the Smithsonian's Guide to Ocean Friendly eating.

.

In a Skeptical World ....

Pacey Says:

A recent event involving one of my good friends has lead me to once again figure out why people (who I consider intelligent) do such stupid things. Repeatedly. I realize that this world contains all kinds of people, and not everyone is going to do things the smartest and most pragmatic way, but there are some cases of abject nonsensical behavior which are easily avoidable for anyone possessing a basic intellect. In particular, this friend of mine got involved in a pyramid scheme costing $1000s that issues some kind of magic juice (it ‘reverses menopause, stabilizes blood glucose levels!1!!’). It is obvious to me that getting involved in this kind of thing is a bad play, but my pal got involved against my best reasonable logic.

He’s smart. He successfully completed high school, earned a college diploma, and now runs a profitable business. Yet, periodically, he gets swept up in near-cults and the above mentioned schemes. So, how did (does) this happen?

I have now come to believe that the educational system failed him, as it has failed me and most others. The educational system does not get people to think critically. The fallout of this is the myriad of scams, schemes, and BS that is ripe in nearly every sector of society, and good, intelligent people end up endorsing all of this baloney to a great drain on resources that could be used to make this world a better place.

I, of course, understand this solution will not fix everything, but I do think it will severely curb the BS in the world. The solution I propose is to add a mandatory class tentatively titled “Skepticism”. Hopefully, it can start as early as Grade 1 and will need to be passed by everyone earning a HS Diploma. At the very least this needs to be done at the University level, where everyone needs to not only satisfy the conditions of their major to graduate, but also pass a course in “Skepticism” in every year of their program.

This course would outline the most common pitfalls of logic and reasonable thinking, and how to identify them. Topics in Skepticism would include:

- Charities

- Lawyer Speak

- Politics

- ESP

- What Science Is and What Science Is Not

- Religion

- Credentials

- Pyramid Schemes

- Spam

- Environmentalism

- Infomercials

- News

- Etc.

Not that I think every topic included above means that it is BS, but to point out where/when/how these topics use BS to get you to stop thinking critically. They are listed above because these topics have a tendency to issue a lot of BS. Note that this class would not teach people what to think, but how to think: how to evaluate evidence reasonably, and notice what tools people use to manipulate you.

Along with core topics, classes will include the memorization of logical fallacies. Kids would hopefully know logical fallacies at the end of high school like they know their times tables. Common logical fallacies everyone should be aware of include:

· Faulty generalization Inductive fallacies such as

• Biased sample
• Half-truths
• Hasty generalization
• Misleading vividness
• Package-deal fallacy or False dilemma
• Proof by example
• Data-snooping

· Questionable cause Informal causal fallacies

• Begging the question, circular logic "petitio principii"
• Correlation implies causation "Cum hoc ergo propter hoc"
• Post hoc ergo propter hoc
• Appeal to probability & Slippery slope

· Informal Relevance fallacies

• Irrelevant conclusion "Ignoratio elenchi" like Red herring
• Straw man
• Association fallacy
• Ad hoc
• "Ad hominem" — Attacking the person rather than the argument

· Informal Verbal fallacies

• Equivocation & Loki's Wager
• Undistributed middle & No true Scotsman
• Special pleading
• Where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption.
• Red herring
• An argument, given in reply, that does not address the original issue.
• Gambler's fallacy
• The incorrect belief that the likelihood of a random event can be affected by or predicted from other, independent events.
• Inverse gambler's fallacy
• Where it is concluded, on the basis of an unlikely outcome of a random process, that the process is likely to have occurred many times before.
• Fallacy of distribution
• Where an argument assumes there is no difference between a term in the distributive (referring to every member of a class) and collective (referring to the class itself as a whole) sense.
• Fallacy of composition
• Where one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some (or even every) part of the whole.
• Fallacy of division
• Where one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts.
• Begging the question
• Where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises.
• Fallacy of many questions (Also: "loaded question")
• Where someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved.
• Perfect solution fallacy
• Where an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it was implemented.
• Denying the correlative
• Where attempts are made at introducing alternatives where there are none.
• Suppressed correlative
• An argument which tries to redefine a correlative (two mutually exclusive options) so that one alternative encompasses the other, thus making one alternative impossible.
• Accident (fallacy)
• When an exception to the generalization is ignored.
• Converse accident
• When an exception to a generalization is wrongly called for.
• Appeal to tradition
• Where a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it has a long standing tradition behind it.
• Appeal to authority
• Where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.
• Argument from ignorance (Also: "appeal to ignorance")
• Where a premise is claimed to be true only because it hasn't been proven false, and vice versa.
• Argumentum ad populum (Also: "appeal to belief", "appeal to the majority", "appeal to the people")
• Where a proposition is claimed to be true solely because many people believe it to be true.
• Appeal to novelty
• Where a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern.
• Appeal to emotion
• Where an argument is won due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning.
• Appeal to flattery
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is won due to the use of flattery to gather support.
• Appeal to fear
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is won by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side.
• Appeal to consequences
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument concludes a premise is either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences for a particular party.
• Appeal to pity
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is won by exploiting an opponent's feelings of pity or guilt.
• Appeal to ridicule
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is won by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous.
• Appeal to spite
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is won through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party.
• Wishful thinking
• A specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason.
• Argumentum ad baculum (Also: "appeal to force", "appeal to the stick")
• Where an argument is won through coercion or threats of force towards an opposing party.
• Appeal to motive
• Where a premise is dismissed, by calling into question the motives of its proposer.

This above list of fallacies and much more were found following this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

It would also be key to note that people who use such fallacies are not necessarily bad people, and that we often use fallacies on ourselves, such as in cases of self-deception. Simply, I think it would be great if everyone were aware of these cognitive pitfalls so they can act accordingly.

I wonder how the culture would be affected if people were generally made aware of how they are being manipulated. As it stands, people are left to themselves and good luck to sidestep these cognitive pitfalls, and any knowledge of how these manipulations occur is passed word-of-mouth by family and friends. And, as we all know, this isn’t good enough, because of the all the BS that, as I mentioned before, permeates every sector of society. People are graduating from educational institutions with an incomplete framework to interact with the world. I think there is much to be gained by a formal institution that teaches Skepticism, just as they teach History, Social Studies, and Science.

All I would need to do is convince the school board that teaching kids to be skeptical would be beneficial. That doesn’t sound difficult, does it?

What do you love to do?

Penny Says: for those you trying to find what it is that you love to do here is a little infrastructure for you to build on.

http://briankim.net/blog/2006/07/how-to-find-what-you-love-to-do/

In this article Steve Jobs recommends that we ask the Question:

What would I love to do on a daily basis utilizing both my skills and interests that will add significant value to people? And he gives us a simple plan to accomplish this often daunting task.

Quotes from the article -

Steve Jobs :

“Be honest. Have you actually sat down by yourself with no distractions, with your sole focus on asking yourself what you love to do without picking up your cell phone, surfing the net, watching TV, chatting on AIM, listening to your favorite song, playing solitaire or minesweeper, checking your email, returning a call, getting a drink of water, going to the bathroom, looking at the clock, reading a magazine article, I could go on and on but you get the point. I’m going to go out on a limb and say you haven’t for the sole purpose of you reading this article. Why is that?

Fear of what the answer will be if you ask yourself what you love to do.

The answer is:”I don’t know.”

“Step 2: Make a list of your skills and interests in two columns and WRITE THEM DOWN”

I was tempted to not follow these instructions. But I did for a simple reason. It’s the same reason busy people use appointment books or day planners or personal assistants – to make room in your head for actual thinking and marinating of ideas and concepts that allow for mental creativity.

I suggest that you make a list and then have 3 of your closest people make a list for you as well (friends, family, spouse, who ever they are they must know you and have seen you in action, happy, sad, good bad, unemployed, working, and so on.).

I know that I am more critical of myself than anyone else is of me; I suspect I am not alone in this. Other people’s perspective will help you to see your strengths, skills and maybe even point out an interest that you may have not noticed because for you it may be an obligation - but if it makes you happy and you like to do it – it is an interest and belongs on the list.

Steve Jobs uses the example of listing blowing bubbles in your spit as a skill to remind us that we are not limited to marketable skills – this was the hardest part for me. Skills that are relevant to the work place or to helping other people is what I wrote down first but others flowed out as I allowed myself to be more relaxed with the exercise.

Do I know what I love and how I can make money doing it?

No. But to be fair I just found this article this morning I want to make some cross comparisons with my people’s lists of my skills and interests, mull it over and integrate the trends on the lists with real-life.

Reality maybe the downfall to this process for some people, knowing what is and is not marketable, or even the kinds of jobs that are out there might be a stretch for academics or young people. In those cases I would suggests taking your list to an outside source like a career counselor or even your parents, your friends, and your friends parents.

What most of my adult life has taught me (usually through hard lessons) is to use your network. Your people are yours’, they want to help, and they are all different offering a rich tapestry of experiences that you can draw upon when faced with life’s little and big questions.