Birthday and 101 in 1001

Last week was JV's birthday. He turned 33 on Thursday. We had a great weekend out in Uppsala, but I'd like to celebrate in a small way here:

"I Love You More Than Scary Movies" card by HopSkipJumpPaper

Genuine NES Controller Wall Art by RandomID

Aren't they cool? Happy (belated) birthday to my favorite man!

Anyway, on to my list:


In progress:

I'm still biking towards Rivendell. (6 - 1) I'm at 415 kilometers!

Another post and comment. (1 - 3) (7 - 3)

I finished another nonfiction book, A History of Histories. (9 - 2) Very dense, but a very interesting read and I'd recommend it to anyone with a fondness for history and politics. He also includes a selected bibliography of recommended historical works, which might become part of a future 101 list.

I finished another WhatCulture article and have started on another. (10 - 16) I have two more to pitch stewing at the back of my brain.


Completed:

 I'm embarrassed to say that it took me so long to finish A History of Histories that it qualified as an "owned for over a year" book. (2 - 12) Any other book I've owned for over a year is currently packed up in a box across the Atlantic Ocean, so that's the end of my "book backlog" goals for this list. Still, I read more this time around than I did the first list, so that's a promising trend!

I also brushed my teeth every night for two weeks. (6 - 6) I'm not sure if it's a habit now because I live with someone, or if it's a habit because of the goal; I think both are factors, to be honest.

Failed:

None!

The entire list is after the jump.

Pat Robertson Comes Out in Support of Evolution

This is a textbook case of what I had hoped for in the last post.

(I still think some of the views Robertson holds about women are vile and backwards, but in this particular case he is spot on.)

Dinner Debate: Bill Nye and Ken Ham

I'm going to open with a quick little metaphor. Fable. Something.

Two people are sitting down to dinner. They've agreed that they'll both have the same dish, but they have two choices to pick from (without getting a taste test of either first). One looks so-so but smells amazing; the other looks amazing but smells only so-so. Unfortunately for our diners, one of them is blind and the other is an anosmic; both have been afflicted since birth. How can they come to an agreement over what to eat? The most salient evidence available to one party is practically nonsense to the other.

If you cruise the atheist/science Internet, you will come across quite a few stories of conservative religious people who came to science as a result of scientific evidence and debate, and all the more power to them. However, when you consider the kind of traction that religion, Christianity, and young Earth creationism still has in American society, you have to admit that this method isn't accomplishing much: those people are the exception that proves the rule. Scientists are a bunch of anosmics trying to explain to blind people why the dish with the more appetizing presentation is the way to go (or a bunch of blind people trying to describe just how mouth-watering the other dish smells, take your pick).

Fossil records and carbon dating do not and will not (in most cases) convince the typical Young Earther to change their mind, in the same way that accounts of miracles or God's providence will not (in most cases) convince scientists. They're like visual accounts to the blind, or descriptions of smell to the anosmic. The two different groups have such different ways of prioritizing and sorting information that they forget: a case that convinces themselves and their peers is NOT going to convince the people they're trying to convince.

Why do Young Earthers try so hard to discredit things like fossil records and carbon dating? Because they get that if they can somehow discredit the science of anything, that the scientists will admit defeat. They've realized that they've got to talk the science language and play the science game to even have a chance at "winning" the debate. In that sense, they're one step ahead of the other side, because no one on the science side is as public and strident about playing the faith game.

If nonsense non-science is ever going to lose traction in the public's view, it has to be because not believing in the non-science won't carry the stigma of being a bad Christian, NOT because the science itself is airtight. Being religious is fundamental to an identity in a way that being a scientist often isn't. For many people being a good Christian means they have to reject evolution (because the loudest leaders at the top of the faith pyramid say they have to), and nine times out of ten the identity they have as a "good Christian" and the desire they have to remain part of one the more important social groups in their lives is more salient to them than good science.

Debates like the one between Bill Nye and Ken Ham will always be counterproductive for that reason. What we need are debates between Christians and Christians that avoid the science entirely but instead tackle the socio-theological issues that are at the root of this (i.e. Biblical literalism, the top-down nature of some denominations of Christianity). When you can change what it means to be a "good Christian" by the group's standards, that's when progress can begin.

For a helpful model, refer to the debate between Christianity and gay marriage. As often as people have been arguing that some people's religious beliefs shouldn't be the basis for national legislation (that is, making an argument that disregards the primacy of faith for many believers), people have also been using the Bible itself to defend the thesis that gay rights and Christianity are not incompatible. Matthew Vines is an example that immediately springs to mind.

Wake me up for that debate. But $favorite_famous_scientist and $loudmouth_evangelist? No thanks, I'll pass.

Birthstones: Aquamarine (March)

March is the first of a few calendar months we're going to see whose stone in the first Kansas City list differs from the poems given by Tiffany & Co. The latter suggests bloodstone, which I'll come to eventually in this series. First: aquamarine.

Aquamarine is a kind of beryl, along with emerald. When you look close enough, aquamarine (and emeralds, and all other members of the beryl family) look like this:

Be₃Al₂(SiO₃)₆

The blue-green coloration of aquamarine in particular is due to the presence of Fe2+ and Fe3+ ions in that mix. Note that these ions are different from iron oxides, which are associated with warm colors, such as the orange in carnelian and red aventurine, or the brown in mahogany obsidian. 

On its own, Fe3+ will produce a golden yellow color, but Fe2+ produces a pale blue. The combination of the two results in the light blue-green gemstone named after the water of the ocean (from the Latin aqua marina).The first recorded use of "aquamarine" for this particular kind of beryl dates back to 1609, but names for it have always likened it to the color of water and the sea.

Aquamarine comes in a variety of shades and hues; it depends very much on the balance between Fe2+ and Fe3+ ions. The darkest blue is called maxixe, or blue beryl. It's named after the Maxixe mine in Brazil where it was first discovered, though it is often found in Madagascar as well. The dark blue of maxixe is due to radiation, and it will fade easily in sunlight. 

Aquamarine is a relatively hard gemstone. It ranks between 7.5 and 8 on the Mohs scale (depending on the specimen), so it's a great stone to use in rings, pendants, bracelets, and other pieces that tend to see a lot of abuse. If you're stringing, be careful not to put it right next to anything too much softer than it, such as pearls. 

Often times, aquamarines are heat-treated to enhance their color. It (and other beryls) are also irradiated with high-energy waves to change or deepen their natural color. In particular, it removes greenish undertones to make it a clearer blue.

Perhaps the most impressive aquamarine ever found is the Dom Pedro, a record-breaking specimen discovered in Brazil in the 1980s. Cutting it took German master Munsteiner six months. He worked no more than two hours a day, so as to keep his mind clear (and hand steady). The final result is a gorgeous crystal over a foot tall and nearly 5 pounds. It is the largest cut aquamarine in the world. 

Because of its color and association with the sea, aquamarine has long been a stone valued by sailors and worn for good luck and to guard against seasickness. 

In a use not quite as intuitive to us today, aquamarine was touted as a remedy against poison in the Middle Ages. Other stones used for similar purposes had to be crushed into powders and consumed for the desired (imaginary) effects; aquamarine was thought to retain its powers whole, so long as the person was carrying it. As a result, aquamarine found its way into lots of royal jewelry and adornments (since there was always a lot of poisoning going on in all of that palace intrigue).

Whatever the purpose, in earlier times the greener variety of aquamarines were more popular than the bluer ones, whereas today people prefer the clear, sky blue as exemplified by the Dom Pedro aquamarine.

Let's wrap things up with some lovely aquamarine items I found on Etsy:

'Awesome Aquamarine' by Kokoba

Moss Aquamarine Faceted Onio... SerendipityGem... $15	Brown and Blue Glittering Th... Papernaut $5.5	Aquamarine Feather Painting ... jodyvanB $40
Museum Quality Genuine Aquam... gembeadswholes... $3500	Aquamarine Necklace, Y Style... BlueRoomGems $245	Stained Glass Tea Light Hold... FebruarySkyStu... $20
MAREI handled Vase 4300 / Fa... ScandiModa $41	Aquamarine Fluorite Rose Gol... BijaMalas $70	Vintage Antique 3ct Aquamari... DiamondAddicti... $410
Aquamarine Tumbled Gemstone ... crystalsenses $2.8	Methyl Blue Molecule Necklac... BioArrays $11	Stacking Rings-Silver Ring-s... thestellablueg... $60
CLEARANCE - Milky Blue Aquam... CraftyMothers $6.85	Aquamarine Simplistic Guitar... DesignsByJewel... $20	Fractal Necklace - Koch Snow... DragonNerd $19
Aquamarine Blue Faceted Nugg... TerraFinds $16.8

Sponsored by send bulk email from excel.

101 in 1001

Happy year of the horse!

In progress:

I'm still biking towards Rivendell. (6 - 1) I'm over the halfway mark by this point!

Another post and comment. (1 - 3) (7 - 3)

I watched another documentary, this one called Cocaine Unwrapped (9 - 6). Very interesting, very eye-opening.

I also watched two foreign movies. (9 - 5) The first was Lady of Steel, which we watched to ring in the lunar new year. It was a fun kung fu popcorn flick with a badass and heroic female lead, I'd recommend it. The second was Hidden Floor, a SK horror film from 2006. Not too gory (a lot of off-screen deaths), kind of spooky, also worth a watch.

Completed:

None!

Failed:

None!

The entire list is after the jump.

Etsy Townhall: Assorted Reactions (in gifs)

Considering the Internet shitstorm that when down after Etsy's last townhall meeting, I'm surprised they didn't have a follow-up one sooner. A couple other sundry points were touched on, but the most important one was their response to the freakout over outside manufacturing.

Some Etsy members were concerned that the new allowance for manufacturing would change the character of our community. We’re right there with you — that’s why we decided to create an application process and we’ve been very selective about who we’ve approved. So far, we have approved less than 50% of applications reviewed. (Applications may be rejected if they did not demonstrate authorship or responsibility, but also pertinence, for example describing a hypothetical new product or disclosing information about where supplies were purchased.)

Reaction 1: If a majority of the applications you received were filled out out of confusion (i.e. "disclosing information about where supplies were purchased"), that's not you being "selective," that's your userbase being confused (or your standards misleading).

Reaction 2: Etsy seems to be completely deaf to the real concerns about outside manufacturing: resellers. I don't care about your guidelines for handmade, Etsy, or how many applications you have sellers fill out. If you have 20 new staff members going over applications for outside manufacturing, they're not doing half the good they could be doing were they devoted to going over flagged items and reseller accusations. (It would also be great if people were allowed to call out resellers in the forums, but I guess I understand the reasoning behind that rule.)

I think out of all my reactions this is the most important one: Etsy can't (or won't) understand the concerns of a majority of its users. They're still not getting it. Now their not getting it is throwing a whole bunch of t-shirt designers and print-makers under the bus.

Reaction 3: Someone in the Etsy thread devoted to the clarifications on outside manufacturing suggested that if you need outside manufacturing to do the work you used to do—like if I hired small children with nimble fingers to do the bead stringing I used to do but still according to my designs—maybe you've outgrown Etsy. I'm inclined to agree.

The common sense response to more work than you can handle would be (initially) to adjust prices (i.e. raise them) so that you are at least getting good money for your time, but also so that you filter out orders so that only the most interested parties will purchase. Supply and demand. Eventually, theoretically, you find the "sweet spot" between number of sales and free time. If you've outgrown even that tactic, then yes, you've probably outgrown Etsy.

As a smalltime seller, I can't help but wish that the top 10% or so of shops would disappear and set up house under their own names on their own websites. I think it would do a lot to level the playing field and give people who are just starting out, or who haven't been quite as lucky, the chance to get noticed.



Reaction 4: Of course, some of this is definitely sour grapes. Some Etsy sellers list items that are instant best sellers and they manage to turn their craft into a viable business over the course of just a couple of years and I guess a small part of the "do what you love" culture rubbed off and made me think I could do it, too. Lesson learned, I suppose: just having a niche item isn't enough.

Life is hard, yo.

Science Saturday: Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. But how do we know this? Who do we credit for this insight?

I'll answer that for you: Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin.

In 1925, she was awarded the first Ph.D in astronomy ever. Payne-Gaposchkin was the first to suggest that stars consist primarily of hydrogen—the prevailing theory at the time was that the sun (and therefore all stars) had a chemical composition more or less similar to Earth's. Instead, Pyane-Gaposchkin argued that silicon, carbon, and other metals content was more or less similar, but that helium and hydrogen were far more abundant in the sun than on Earth (for hydrogen, she calculated that it was more prevalent in the sun by a factor of one million). By all rights a discovery as important to science as gravity, special relativity, or evolution, yet it's one that often gets omitted from science curricula.

After a long career of crappy pay and little formal recognition, by 1956 Payne-Gaposchkin was one of the first female professors at Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences. She retired ten years later, at the age of 66, having taught and mentored astronomical luminaries such as Helen Sawyer Hogg, Joseph Ashbrook, Frank Drake and Paul W. Hodge.

If you'd like, you can read her paper "On the Physical Condition of the Supernovae" in its entirety at the website for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.