Olympinonsense

[Bryn]

I think you need to mug up on your evolutionary biology....

http://www.quora.com/Evolutionary-Biology/Is-there-a-competition-between-humans-and-their-DNA-evolution

Oh, and:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/competition-pressures-hit-evolutionary-biology/

[Richard Tarleton]

Serving the intelligent design community ?

[John Wright]

I am surprised you are surprised. How many medals have been awarded? A few hundred? It is typical elitist behaviour. There is nothing at all natural about spending hours 365 days a year jumping or swimming or sitting on an animal. It is not in kilter with ordinary behaviour.

But it IS natural to compete, Lat. It's part of evolution, and, as part of that, animals play at games so do humans.

I suppose you have no-one to compete against at the things you are good at? What ARE you good at, other than typing?

[Lateralthinking1]

But it IS natural to compete, Lat. It's part of evolution, and, as part of that, animals play at games so do humans.

I suppose you have no-one to compete against at the things you are good at? What ARE you good at, other than typing?

It has only been on rare occasions when what I thought was a good performance from me aligned with others' opinions.

Managers found that I was the only member of staff who would argue both for higher and lower marks in my report, depending on my own assessment of the components of their appraisal. Obviously they found that realism difficult and bizarre. It said something about them, about me and about the rules of the game. It couldn't really be taken on board.

The world changes. The country changes. It is not only how an individual changes with age that determines how skills are scored. What is extraordinary in one era can be mundane in another. I'm not sure that life is enjoyed to the full if it is assessed on a scale of "am I good or bad at this or that?". The yardsticks are not only ridiculously narrow but modish.

[Bryn]

Serving the intelligent design community ?

No, just hinting at the fact that evolutionary biological theory is very much subject to fashion. Currently the ideology of the likes of Pinker is in fashion, but the Stephen Jay Gould et al line still has some credence within the community. Even Dawkins was careful to take a step back from the stand he took in The Blind Watchmaker when he came to update The Selfish Gene (what an embarrassingly quasi-anthropomorphic phrase that was).

[John Wright]

So, Lat, you could not compete in sports?

Well, all part of evolution, we also need people who are good at cooking, designing, nursing etc.

[Lateralthinking1]

So, Lat, you could not compete in sports?

Well, all part of evolution, we also need people who are good at cooking, designing, nursing etc.

Well, with respect, this is just crackers. For the record, I have at some time in my life done the following:

Football, cricket, hockey, rugby, volleyball, rounders, judo, cycling, pitch and putt, golf, tennis, badminton, squash, running, long jump, high jump, triple jump, javelin, shot put, snooker, pool, table tennis, shooting - .22 and SLR, darts, orienteering, abseiling, water polo, diving, basketball, jumped up and down on a trampoline, sat on a horse, chess, cribbage, scrabble, hill walking, fairground rides, crown green bowls, ten pin bowling, been in the army cadets for two years, cooking, gardening, visited castles, sat on a camel, conker competitions, climbed up wall apparatus, whist, swimming, typed things on a forum, got a university degree.

So what?

[John Wright]

Well, with respect, this is just crackers.

You said it, Lat. At last.

[Lateralthinking1]

You said it, Lat. At last.

Most of them are just games, aren't they. I didn't expect the organisation of society - can't think of a better phrase, sorry - to be in that mental frame. It wasn't and isn't how I operate.

Even the Archbishop of Canterbury has to comply procedurally with the church equivalent of FIFA. There are similar constraints on professors in Higher Education. I find that completely ludicrous. This is not though a high brow point. It applies to regular life too.

Role to me is nonsense. It should only be relevant to the stage. Generally I think "how can that person expect to be taken seriously when he is so obviously in a role?". And, generally, I wonder what ever happened to heart and soul.

[John Wright]

Most of them are just games, aren't they.

Er, yes, over 1000 posts and you just realise now it's the Olympic Games.


Look, Tom Daley, has just dived a beaut. I'm off.

[Lateralthinking1]

Er, yes, over 1000 posts and you just realise now it's the Olympic Games.


Look, Tom Daley, has just dived a beaut. I'm off.

Fair enough. I hope he wins for you and the rest of the country.

[Nick Armstrong]

Apologies if this has been noted elsewhere, I haven't been able to follow assiduously over the last week or so.

But I found the following interesting (and I remember mercia commented on the unfamiliar arrangement of the anthem somewhere above):


Why has the British national anthem been modified for medal ceremonies? At almost every venue, some parts of it are being played in the minor key. This is not quite how we normally hear it. Am I the only one to notice this? asks Peter Holland

The anthem was rearranged by composer Philip Sheppard, who recorded 205 national anthems with the London Philharmonic Orchestra, fresh for the 2012 Games. Responding to readers' queries, Sheppard says the arrangement of God Save the Queen is not in a minor key. The new version, like the original, is in the key of G major, but Sheppard says some "goosebumpy" chords have been added to create tension - this includes a passing E minor chord.

"The harmony has been subtly shifted in the bassline which means that from a musical point of view, it creates a stronger cadence returning into the home key."

Two versions have been recorded - a two-verse version and one that is only a single verse. The single verse version has been played on most occasions, according to Sheppard. "The anthems are meant to sit between a minute and a minute and [a] half - traditionally that's how long it takes to raise the flag," he says. The 3/4 (three crochets per bar) time signature remains the same as the original.

The bridge passage that leads into the "Send her victorious..." (referred to by some readers as the 'Nah-Nah, Nah-Nah' section) are not featured, because "it is not in the original tune. It is such a strong feature of another known arrangement, not a melodic feature of the original anthem," the composer says. All the changes to all the anthems were checked and approved with either the heads of state themselves or their representatives, as was God Save the Queen, over an 18-month consultation period.

Sheppard says a number of athletes were consulted over the arrangement, and it is former British triple jumper Jonathan Edwards who plays the final clash of cymbals.

"It was the loudest note in the whole of the 52 hours of recording at Abbey Road," says Sheppard.

(BBC News website)

[John Wright]

I noticed this too:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9427805/Olympics-2012-National-Anthem-the-third-verse-challenge-facing-Team-GB.html

'Team GB members will be expected to sing both the first and the third verses of the National Anthem in front of the cameras....

... The third verse goes: “Thy choicest gifts in store/ On her be pleased to pour/ Long may she reign/ May she defend our laws/ And ever give us cause/ To sing with heart and voice God save the Queen.”

International Olympic Committee had decided that all national anthems should last about 90 seconds, and because Britain’s anthem was very short when only one verse was played, it had been extended'.

The 90 second rule may have led to removal of the bridge?

[Flosshilde]

But it IS natural to compete, Lat. It's part of evolution, and, as part of that, animals play at games so do humans.

A typical mis-understanding of what Darwin expressing in the theory of evolution. Nothing to do with competition, & certainly not with others of the same species. Evolution is adaptation to cope with the environment.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

A typical mis-understanding of what Darwin expressing in the theory of evolution. Nothing to do with competition, & certainly not with others of the same species. Evolution is adaptation to cope with the environment.

Yes; "Survival of the fittest" meaning "survival of those who fit into their environment best"/"those most fitting". Not "the strongest".