I subscribe to the Smithsonian’s newsletter. I should probably subscribe to their magazine but I don’t really need paper copies showing up where I live. Their short stories are generally enough and if I do chance on something that piques my interest, I gots Wikipedia providing me with references, photos, and leads to more in-depth stuff.
That said, I do contribute to both Wikipedia and the Smithsonian.
Anyway, I figure I would sit and share a few articles I found interesting and also share a few random photos from my phone.
Before I get to the articles, I wanted to share a video about surfing the Great Lakes . . .
Obviously, you don’t have to watch it all (or any of it) but you could move the slider around to get a feel for the video (warning – music accompanies the video).
Anyway, on with some of the Smithsonianing I have been doing. First up, the Ghost Shark. The cool name aside, there is a cool video taken by underwater drones. You can click on the link and read the article, but this video gives you the information.
The creature looks strange enough that I thought it was a CGI representation of what scientist thought this shark might look like . . . but no; this is actual footage. The cool name makes me want to write a story about Ghost Sharks. Also, it brought this song to mind.
For them who are not going to click on the videos, here is a photo of an honest-to-goodness Ent . . .
Look at them feet!
. . . here’s another view — from a different angle — on them feet . . .
This next story has a video associated with it, but I’m not linking it. You can click on THIS link and read the full story and — if you have the stomach for it — watch the video.
So, people studying woodpecker have filmed adult woodpeckers drill into the heads of baby doves and eat their brains. Some theorize the birds are doing this because it’s a way to get water in environments where water is at a premium. Others point out that it’s not functionally different from birds eating the eggs of other birds.
Whatever the reason, we humans have a nasty tendency of anthropomorphizing the behavior of animals. I see this as a case where the same bird that a few moments ago might have been looked at as a cute and interesting bird might now be viewed by some as being “evil”. The bird, of course, has no feelings one way or the other about what it is doing.
We like to imagine woodpeckers use their skill as borers mostly to attack things like this . . .
But, they do eat grubs and pick at carcasses. Also, put out a basket of suet, and one of the first birds to come feast on the suet could very well be a woodpecker. . . if the crows don’t beat it to it. The point is, they obviously know to eat animal fat. Which means it’s already in their diet before you put the suet out.
As far as observers can tell, there is no malice on the part of the woodpecker and, unlike cats, it’s not killing for pleasure.
Cats. I love cats, but they are too efficient at killing. I’ve posted before about the toll they take on songbirds and other native small game populations. It’s staggering. In Australia, THIS article talks about the problem — 99.8% of Australia is infested with feral cats — and its eventual solution. They refer to feral cats, but I know a few cat owners who insist cats belong outdoors and their killing sprees — the cat’s, not their owner’s — are perfectly natural. It’s just nature, they say. It’s also nature when bears and cougars maul people, but boy don’t humans get all worked up about it when the shoe is on the other foot.
The eventual solution, of course, is culling. I mean the cats, not the people, although at the rate we are going, we’ll have to eventually do something about them as well. Some people have already taken it upon themselves to do something about it. I don’t approve of it; I would prefer “fixing” them too, but that’s for another article.
Culling is a nice-sounding word; it sounds almost like cuddling. But, no; it means killing the animals to thin a given herd or population.
People don’t like it when other people start talking about killing cats.
The place where we walk has a large population of cats that are being fed by a group that also captures them and “fixes” them. Of course, this does not keep the cats from killing anything that moves and that is smaller than them. It’s what they enjoy doing, you see. Plus, other places where similar programs are in force do not see any reduction in the cat population; the numbers still increase, but slower. And songbirds and other animals are still paying the bill for our inability to manage our lives responsibly.
So, two depressing article in a row . . . let me get to some lighter fare . . .
THIS article surprised me. It never occurred to me anyone would do this. It’s a 702 miles hike pulling a 265-pounds sled.
What Am I talking about? Sweden’s Johanna Davidsson skied to the South Pole. She did it in 38 days, 23 hours and 5 minutes, beating by ten hours the previous record for a female skiing to the South pole. That means there were others.
I walk 4.5 miles every morning and I go to the gym for an hour or so where I row for 30 minutes . . . but now, I would like to hike to the South Pole. I have one huge challenge ahead of me; no, not the hike . . . the challenge is my wife letting me do it. I’ll drop a few hints and see how they land. I predict “flat” but you never know.
Regardless if I ever do it, an impressive feat . . . but, I have questions. How does one go to the bathroom? I mean, it’s cold, right? Does one have to dig holes in the snow or ice or does one just leave cairns-like markers? Are there a number of different routes mapped out as little piles on the ice? Inquisitive minds want to know.
Regardless, an impressive feat.
Another impressive lady — Dorothy Levitt — is a person I can identify with. One, she raced automobiles. Two, she gives advice (something I’ve been known to do once or twice).
But, it’s this advice to women planning to drive that led me to have a soft spot for the lady:
Don’t forget your gun. Although Levitt, an experienced hunter, wrote that she never had to use hers, “it is nevertheless a comfort to know that should the occasion arise I have the means of defending myself.” She recommended an automatic Colt, or, should you be disinclined towards firearms, a dog.
The only objection is that last part about the dog. For one, you can’t throw a dog all that far, and the dog won’t like it when you do. A gun has a much longer range and more shots. Unless you travel with a pack of eight dogs . . . but, even if you do, dog projectiles are notoriously difficult to aim and, again, the dogs don’t like it much.
Thanks for letting me indulge in a bit of fun. I enjoy sharing things that cross my path and that I find interesting. These are only a few of many.
Here, let me end with something for them pesky woodpeckers . . .
That’s it. This post has ended . . . except for the stuff below.
Note: if you are not reading this blog post at DisperserTracks.com, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website. Could be they also torture small mammals.
Please, if you are considering bestowing me recognition beyond commenting below, refrain from doing so. I will decline blogger-to-blogger awards. I appreciate the intent behind it, but I prefer a comment thanking me for turning you away from a life of crime, religion, or making you a better person in some other way. That would mean something to me.
If you wish to know more, please read below.
Note: to those who may click on “like”, or rate the post; if you do not hear from me, know that I am sincerely appreciative, and I thank you for noticing what I do.
. . . my FP ward . . . chieken shit.
Finally, if you interpret anything on this blog as me asking or wanting pity, encouragement, or advice to better my life, know my subtle mix of irony, sarcasm, and humor is blowing right by you.