I don't know what i think about this map right now. These maps are based on genetic data... most of which I tend to trust, but there are a good number of strong assumptions made.
It has at least one serious problem: Recent studies have shown that our most recent common ancestor was alive some time from 5,000 years ago to 50,000 years ago (this map says 150,000, but I've seen some of this data and tend to agree more with the more recent dates). Different methods give different numbers, but they're all recently quite small numbers of years. By "recent common ancestor", I mean the single person (or couple really) who begat everyone on the planet. Our "Adam" so to speak, though scientifically, it doesn't mean he and she were the only he and she alive at the time... just that only their family line survived. Anyway, if our heritage is that young, then a map like this would be making very significant assumptions about our history. In other words, you can not extrapolate genetics beyond our common human ancestor, so if the study that found our ancestor to be only 5,000 (or even 50,000) years ago is right, then judging back 150,000 years is not going to produce accurate results. Again, this study goes with 150,000 years as our common ancestor, but that number has been hotly debated in recent years in favor of small numbers.
Well, one thing is almost certainly true however, and that is that We all began somewhere in, or just as likely near, Africa. The genetics just screams it.
And for comfort to those who are religious, "in or near Africa" also includes the bits of the Middle-east that are thought to have possibly contained Eden. It's not outrageous at all to think people started there and moved south for a bit.
Ya. So of course everyone wants peace. Go go world peace. Well, not exactly "everyone," (e.g. Ahmedinejad) but in general, most people want world peace. It's how you get there that no one can agree on. Frustrating.
But anyway, the video compares our cultures a little to simply. Take one second and compare women's rights in the west to those in the staunch Islamic areas of the middle east. In court there, it takes 2 women to "equal" one man. If you get raped, there must be at least 2 other men there who saw it and are willing to testify to the rape... otherwise it was the woman's fault and SHE gets penalized. Obviously she was acting too seductively and the man couldn't help himself. please -.- Are we that different? Ask men there if they're cool with that set-up, then ask men here if that would be acceptable.
Concentrating on similarities is great, but idealistically pretending that we're all the same is an exercise in self-delusion. You gotta be realistic before you can start to solve problems. Well, IMO at least.
Let's just say my definition of "bad call" is a bit broader than yours, anyway I didn't say it was a "minor" bad judgment call. I'm just saying that some corporate loony made a bad decision that soiled the spirit of the organization. The salvation army is non-profit and somebody probably got too caught up in keeping the budget tight. or maybe they got greedy, but that doesn't explain it too well since they don't really pocket the money. I mean, there aren't shareholders.
Anyone picturing Mr. Burns writhing his hands and going all "Smithers! Go take those dead people's money this instant! ...Excellent." is probably less right than someone picturing an overstressed budget-managing executive going all "How am I gonna keep this place running?! I'm gonna get canned!"
It doesn't matter anyway really since they will lose the lawsuit, greenpeace will get their cut, as they should, and somebody at salvation army will hopefully get the axe.
Psh. Every organization, charitable or otherwise makes some bad judgment calls. And honestly, I'd rather if Greenpeace didn't get the money. Those folks are the Corleones of the green movement.
Highly recommended viewing.
"Your can really dance!"
"You're on FIRE!"
"...no seriously."
It has at least one serious problem:
Recent studies have shown that our most recent common ancestor was alive some time from 5,000 years ago to 50,000 years ago (this map says 150,000, but I've seen some of this data and tend to agree more with the more recent dates). Different methods give different numbers, but they're all recently quite small numbers of years. By "recent common ancestor", I mean the single person (or couple really) who begat everyone on the planet. Our "Adam" so to speak, though scientifically, it doesn't mean he and she were the only he and she alive at the time... just that only their family line survived. Anyway, if our heritage is that young, then a map like this would be making very significant assumptions about our history.
In other words, you can not extrapolate genetics beyond our common human ancestor, so if the study that found our ancestor to be only 5,000 (or even 50,000) years ago is right, then judging back 150,000 years is not going to produce accurate results. Again, this study goes with 150,000 years as our common ancestor, but that number has been hotly debated in recent years in favor of small numbers.
Well, one thing is almost certainly true however, and that is that We all began somewhere in, or just as likely near, Africa. The genetics just screams it.
And for comfort to those who are religious, "in or near Africa" also includes the bits of the Middle-east that are thought to have possibly contained Eden. It's not outrageous at all to think people started there and moved south for a bit.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=2872369&postcount=2488
But anyway, the video compares our cultures a little to simply. Take one second and compare women's rights in the west to those in the staunch Islamic areas of the middle east. In court there, it takes 2 women to "equal" one man. If you get raped, there must be at least 2 other men there who saw it and are willing to testify to the rape... otherwise it was the woman's fault and SHE gets penalized. Obviously she was acting too seductively and the man couldn't help himself. please -.- Are we that different? Ask men there if they're cool with that set-up, then ask men here if that would be acceptable.
Concentrating on similarities is great, but idealistically pretending that we're all the same is an exercise in self-delusion. You gotta be realistic before you can start to solve problems.
Well, IMO at least.
Anyone picturing Mr. Burns writhing his hands and going all "Smithers! Go take those dead people's money this instant! ...Excellent." is probably less right than someone picturing an overstressed budget-managing executive going all "How am I gonna keep this place running?! I'm gonna get canned!"
It doesn't matter anyway really since they will lose the lawsuit, greenpeace will get their cut, as they should, and somebody at salvation army will hopefully get the axe.