I själva verket var det exakt ingen alls som "förstod" detta, men okej, det tyder väl på att Nooshi Dadgostar faktiskt behöver "kommunikatörer". Eller att Ida Gabrielsson gör det...
Geezus. Det här börjar bli lika dumt som under Gudrun Schyman. Eller faktiskt ännu dummare. Kremlologin övergår i delfinologi.
 |
| - So how *does* bhoga become yoga? - Dude, you´ve been a monk for too long! |
If your religion includes a talking donkey (viz. Judaism and Christianity) or a talking man-horse with wings (viz. Islam), you have no leg to stand on if mocking Hinduism for believing in a talking equid all its own...
This is an extremely silly story, since a Golden Retriever *isn´t a fucking guard dog*. Period!
Friendly "guard dog" greets alleged San Diego burglar with toy in mouth
Forbidden cryptids in *North* Korea?! Clearly a counter-revolutionary provocation, since it doesn´t mention the famed unicorn lair outside Pyongyang, LOL.
 |
| Credit: JM Ligero Loarte |
Källan är en avhoppare, men även den amerikanska militären undersökte ju om djur kunde ha övernaturliga förmågor. Och människor! Så visst kan detta vara sant. Och sanslöst.
Makabert experiment skulle testa kaniners övernaturliga förmågor
Another video on the Homo florensiensis situation. Recent research suggests that the "Hobbit" might not be a dwarfed Homo erectus (sensu stricto) but some kind of pre-human or almost-human. Perhaps an australopith (sensu latto)? I´m not surprised. I had a hunch in this direction already seven years ago. So can we go home now? Second breakfast, guys!
Or is it Mahodgaja-Gaṇapataye Namaḥ? So I asked Gemini to make a picture of Ganesha as a mammoth, rather than as an elephant. This was the result. Would you worship god if he was a mammoth? Interesting question, I suppose! And instead of venerating Baby Krishna, how about doing it with a dwarf elephant? I know, I should go to sleep...
Something new is always coming out of Africa. Or something old. Primordially old. Muh-hah-hah!
 |
| Credit: Daniel Rosengren |
En glad nyhet? Kanske. Eller kanske inte. Likweli-apan har upptäckts av sina evolutionära kusiner...
Attributed to Charles Darwin: "Whilst Man, however well-behaved, at best is but a monkey shaved!"
 |
| Credit: The Devonshire Association(?) |
I never heard of the mysterious Three Hare symbol before, so here we go! It must be some kind of swastiska stuff...
Can you tell me about the Three Hares symbol?
The Three Hares is one of the most fascinating and mysterious symbols in world art. It consists of three hares running in a circle, with each hare sharing an ear with its neighbor. Although there are only three ears in total, each hare appears to have two—a clever visual illusion.
What makes the symbol especially intriguing is that it appears across a vast geographical area—from China to the Middle East and Europe—over more than a thousand years.
At first glance, you see three hares chasing one another.
Looking more closely, you notice:
This ingenious construction has fascinated artists and mathematicians alike.
The earliest known examples appear along the Silk Road.
Some of the oldest surviving examples are in the Mogao Caves, dating to around the 6th–7th centuries CE.
These Buddhist cave temples contain paintings of the Three Hares on their ceilings.
The motif spread westward along Silk Road trade routes.
Examples occur in:
The design appears in medieval Islamic decorative art, where geometric and symbolic motifs were highly developed.
It seems to have been appreciated primarily as an elegant ornamental pattern.
The motif eventually reached Europe.
It is especially famous in:
Many medieval churches have the Three Hares carved into wooden roof bosses.
This is the mystery.
No medieval text explicitly explains the symbol.
Scholars therefore propose several possibilities.
Because the hares form an unbroken circle, the symbol may represent:
Each hare shares an ear.
Nothing is completely separate.
Modern interpreters often see this as expressing:
This interpretation resonates well with Buddhist philosophy, although we cannot say with certainty that it was the original intention.
Since hares are ancient lunar animals throughout Asia, the Three Hares may have had lunar symbolism.
Possible meanings include:
This fits comfortably with both Chinese and Indian traditions.
Because the oldest examples are found in Buddhist cave temples, many scholars think the symbol originally had Buddhist significance.
Possible associations include:
However, no Buddhist scripture specifically explains the motif.
When the motif appears in churches, some have interpreted it as representing the Holy Trinity:
The geometry certainly lends itself to this reading.
However, there is little evidence that this was the original meaning. It is more likely that medieval Christians adopted an already existing motif and gave it a Christian interpretation.
Quite possibly.
Unlike symbols with a fixed doctrinal explanation, the Three Hares seems to have been remarkably adaptable.
As it traveled across cultures, different communities could understand it in ways that fit their own traditions:
Hares themselves already carried rich symbolism across Eurasia.
They were associated with:
Using three hares naturally amplified these associations.
The Three Hares also appeals because of its mathematical elegance.
It demonstrates how:
can all appear anatomically complete.
The design beautifully balances:
Ground sloths are scarier than Sasquatch! OK, maybe not, but apparently people all over the Americas keep seeing strange large & largely hairy beasts they assume are "ground sloths" (which have been extinct since circa 9000 BC). Or perhaps overhunted by our noble savage forebears?
Speaking of bears...yes, people are either making shit up, or they are simply seeing ursids. The YouTube content-creator (who is really a skeptic) points out that there are trail cameras all over the United States "wilderness", yet no ground sloth has ever been caught on one.
Verdict: killed for food by the Natives over 10,000 years ago. "They are part of our stories". Well, how did they taste? I aint judgin´.
New research on the mysterious "human" (?) species known as Homo floresiensis suggests that they didn´t and couldn´t hunt dwarf elephants in their island habitat of Flores 100,000 years ago. Rather, the Hobbit (as this species of Homo is colloquially called) was feeding on carcasses of said pachyderm. The unfortunate proboscids had already been hunted and killed by Komodo dragons! That is, the extremely large monitor lizards known as "Komodo dragons" (this species of reptile is of course still around).
Not sure what to make of this. If Homo floresiensis is an example of insular dwarfism - a shrunken Homo erectus as it were - then the erecti weren´t fully "human" in our sense of the term, still being subject to natural selection (which our species can at least try to escape or transcend). But isn´t there also evidence that Homo erectus were smarter than hitherto assumed? I mean, how on earth did they even *reach* Flores in the first place?
So I don´t know. Something strange is going on here. Either evolution can in extreme cases "go backward" even in a lineage were intelligence is developing. Or the good ol´ Hobbit wasn´t really a human in the first place, but some kind of stray australopith a long way from home...
Both perspectives are pretty mind-boggling. So if Frodo and his 57 half-cousins keep you up at night, pray that the Hobbits (those at Flores) were just monkeys!
"Apparently, some so-called scientists (big game hunters, more like it) of the Afrikan Ape persuasion claim that tigers and panthers are products of a blind process of evolution which didn´t have us in mind?! May the holy were-cat curse and consume these blasphemers!"
"Oh, and they claim that tigers are orange and panthers black, when everyone knows that we´re actually green and blue. I mean, what the heck is `orange´anyway? As any feline philosopher can tell you, color is an objective property of reality."
"Read my lips before I eat you: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ORANGE ON THE PLANET OF THE CATS!!!"
"What?"
