incipit vita nova

Cannabis Baby: Mascot for One and All!

I've never had call to categorize something under so many categories before!

Cannabis Baby is the loveable mascot for our line of tshirts made for one and all ...

Right now he's the top-selling shirt and I'm sure everyone can see why ...

He successfully completed the Masters last week, and President Obama has appointed him Drug Czar ... vote yeah baby!!

It's all in a day's work for Cannabis Baby. With a lifestyle like this, he can't help but be rich and famous.

 

Bunny Rabbit!!

When I came back from the market at noon today, a cute little jackrabbit was eating flowers on the lawn right by my apartment.  There are many jackrabbits that have a whole colony on the hill behind my apartments, which extends into an Aliso Viejo park.  These bunnies don't have much fear.  They run when they see or hear Badger, but otherwise, they do what they want.  It reminds me of the lab rabbit colony at Chapman (and parrots!).  These are semi-tame animals.  They probably would accept food if offered.

His back is a little damp from the rain.  The sun had just come out - it's been raining off and on for several days here in South Orange County.  He let me come very close to take this picture.

In this one, he's hiding in plain sight before I got out of the Land Rover.

Greenspot Monster

I get regular traffic here from the Unexplained Mysteries forums due to my posts on the Beast of Gevaudan, a 17th Century French werewolf-like creature, also called a "mauler."

Naturally I started wondering about cryptids closer to home.  Cryptids are mysterious, possibly legendary monsters - the most famous are probably Bigfoot, Yeti, and the Loch Ness monster.

Well, growing up, we were all extremely afraid of the Greenspot Monster.  [This is a picture of one from the CurlyQ Cuties Etsy Shop] If you were 12 and growing up in Mentone, you had no alternative but to terrorize the 6-year-olds with the Greenspot Monster.

I confess, I never actually saw the Greenspot Monster.  I have, however, seen three ghosts.  Now as to what ghosts are, one of the ghost sightings scared me to death, and the two others weren't scary at all - they were more at a distance, and confirmed things my friends had said.  In addition, they just didn't look like scary people - just average, ordinary people from the 1880's or so.  Mr. Scary, however?  He was walking across the upstairs library at Toll Hall from one wall to the other, or I should say - gliding - about 3 feet off the floor.  Scary.

My opinion of ghosts is that they are not necessarily "dead spirits," but images that we can sometimes perceive of things that happened in another place, at another time.  I think our perception provides us with a world we can order and comprehend.  "Seeing ghosts" just means there is something that breaks through our perception that, ordinarily, we do not see or comprehend.  They look hazy, strange or out of place because . . . they are, for example, Mr. Scary was walking somewhere - it just wasn't exactly where I was solidly in the real world.  It could be a parallel universe, it could simply be something that occurred in the same space previously or even in the "future" (mindblowing, huh?) or it could be a form of waking dream.  One thing that I experienced in my limited, brief ghost sightings was, it definitely didn't seem like the "ghosts" saw me.

Oh!  But back to the Greenspot Monster.  The Greenspot Monster is a California cryptid, and was rumored to be about 7-8 feet tall.  As to what he looked like, as I said, I never saw him, but I knew he was "out there" in the Santa Ana River wash, and could "get" any of us kids at any time.  I imagined him like the "mud monster" in the famous Night Gallery episode featuring "Brenda" and her friendship with this horrible monster.  This episode made a powerful impression on me - obviously I saw it later in the 70's watching "wholesome" afternoon TV (Star Trek, Night Gallery, Wild, Wild West).  The actual episode was made in 1971, which means "Brenda," with whom I somewhat identified (played by Laurie Prange, who is a Christian actress now - and I guess was then, too) was older than I was, but then again, Meredith thought the Brady kids were her same age for a time . . . well . . . not exactly.

I think it was the long blonde hair and tortured psyche thing.

I seriously can find no suitable Greenspot Monster pictures.  Could it be because "he" is a very successful cryptid, and has hidden all these years, only coming out to grab unwary kids and . . . what does he do with them?  Something about mud, out there in the wash.  A quarry . . .

All I could find was this picture of Leonard Nimoy.

Priceless, huh?

That's WILLIAM BELL . . .

Kitty Genius

Meredith's cat Oliver (he isn't a kitten any more, but he is small) is very smart, very sweet, and a little bit dog-like.  He follows me around and looks for attention and affection much like Badger does.

He is also much more curious than Badger and into everything.

When Meredith and Anthony are gone, he is a much better-behaved cat - he doesn't seem inclined to misbehave or cause trouble when they're not around.  He still wants to play, is still incredibly nosy and curious, and still wants to make friends with Badger - who loathes him and is highly suspicious of his every move.  Oh - and jealous, too.

Right now, Badger's toys are piled on my bed and partially stuffed under a pillow, to keep them away from nosy Oliver.

This is a link to a fascinating, animal-centered discussion of cat intelligence.  The article points up many flaws in old-fashioned, lab-based tests of animal intelligence.  Although cats have been used as lab subjects for many years, the author points up that "Having evolved to be self-sufficient, they [cats] lack the urge to appease social superiors or gain acceptance into a pack or herd." 

Like dogs, cats have vision that differs significantly from humans (more acute in some ways, less acute in others, with lack of ability to distinguish some colors, like red).  They navigate by feel (ultra-sensitive whiskers) and have far better hearing than people do. A cat's sense of smell is much more sensitive than humans, but less sensitive than a dog's.  Cat paws are much more dexterous than dog paws, hence - all the stuff they can manipulate, open, and as unfortunate mice have discovered throughout history - play with.  Much of cat play is hunting behavior - as anyone who has watched their cat hide, sneak, and pounce - such as Oliver grabbing my pant leg when I walk by him and he thinks I haven't seen him.

Cats learn from observation and have excellent short- and long-term memory.  Their spatial view of the world explains why Oliver feels "at home" in every inch of our house that he can reach, but unlike even Badger, will sit by the door and not leave even if strongly invited.  Oliver apparently feels no need to leave his small world right now, and his curiosity is limited to the walls of his house.  He is very funny, very sweet, and a very smart little cat.  I'll miss him a lot when he is gone.

 

To Tame A Fox

Some time ago, I heard about and watched a show about the taming of wild foxes in Siberia.  A Russian geneticist, Dr. Dimitry Belyaev, was asked by Siberian fur farmers to help breed foxes that would be less wild and vicious, and thus more manageable on the fur farm.  Starting with 100 female foxes or vixens and 30 male foxes, Dr. Belyaev soon bred more tame foxes simply by allowing only the tamest 5% of fox offspring to breed the next generation.

However, beyond simply becoming more calm, the foxes also began to change appearance and acquired behaviors very different from wild foxes, such as barking and tail-wagging.

These adorable pups are available for adoption right now from the official importer of tame Siberian foxes to America, Sibfox, which is located in Las Vegas.  They are so cute!  But you can see they have more doglike markings than wild foxes, and much variation in color.  Also, they aren't for the casual pet owner - Sibfox says it takes up to 3 months for the pet to arrive after verified purchase, and the price is nearly $6,000.  Unlike many individuals associated with exotic animals sold as pets, Sibfox seems like genuine advocates for the foxes and highly responsible and caring.

These foxes, you see, really aren't "wild" animals any longer.  They have been truly domesticated.

This is the fox that I am familiar with - the red fox.  Most people in Southern California have never seen one, but they are quite widespread.  Apparently the local population was introduced for hunting purposes, and the only true native California red foxes are in the Sierra Nevada range.  But growing up, I saw a red fox while on one of my many foraging adventure trips in the Santa Ana riverbed and foothills and it remains one of the most beautiful wild animals I've ever seen.  It gave me a look much like this picture, then bounded away into the brush.

I don't think it's wrong to try to domesticate animals like the Siberian fur foxes, because they were destined to be killed for their fur, and were being trapped in cages.  Being turned into pets is a far more positive outcome for them.

Through the Siberian fox breeding experience, many geneticists believe they have come to understand how the dog, which started out 10,000 years ago as a wolf scavenging around human encampments, has undergone such extreme change.  With the incredible variation in dog breeds, from chihuahuas to Great Danes and everything in-between, it is hard to imagine the different breeds actually being genetically almost identical, and all originally descended from wolves who once became tame.

There Are More Things on Heaven and Earth . . .

Chris Dolley pointed up a series of photos that appeared in the UK Daily Mail of cheetahs apparently playing with a young impala.

The photo is not photoshopped.  A whole series of pictures by the French wildlife photographers who caught the incident is posted here.

Michel & Christine Denis-Huot told the Daily Mail that the cheetahs played with the young impala for about 15 minutes, and then let it go.  The series of pictures that end with an impala being eaten may or may not be the same impala.  Some people say then can see horns on the impala that's being eaten by the 3 cheetah brothers, and the one that is being "played with" has no horns and seems smaller and younger.

Apparently the Daily Mail had to close comments on the original pictures because people took it so seriously.  There were angry criticisms about "anthropomorphizing" animals.  Well . . . people are animals too.  We all have cats and know that they "play with" the small animals they capture frequently prior to eating them.  I myself own a dog who has killed two rats without hesitation, and inexplicably been terrorized by another one, letting it go.

 

Of course cheetahs hang out together, chase down prey together, and might very well let one or two animals go here and there.  It isn't "anthropomorphizing" animals to recognize common behaviors.  Would people chase down and "play with" a human enemy, or with animal prey they are hunting?  Nah, never.  (not)

Oliver's Daily Adventure

A few weeks ago, I lost an important piece of mail.  As I seldom lose anything, this was really upsetting.  I suspected Oliver the kitty, but had no proof of any type.

Last evening, I realized that my suspicions were definitely along the right lines.  A couple of days ago, the notice for renewing the LandRover's registration came.  This is a big envelope with several papers and a return envelope in it.  I put it in the prominent bill stack on my second desk.  I was using my computer when I heard Oliver walking around on the other desk.  Then I heard him jump down, and saw him saunter past into the living room.

I looked over and saw he had a large envelope in his mouth.  "Hey, cut that out!" I yelled.  I jumped up, while he casually sat there and looked at me, the entire renewal notice in his mouth.  He was just randomly carrying it away.

He really enjoys being petted and loves to play with his toys and . . . well, pretty much anything else, including car registration bills.

Human-Caused Extinction: Devastating the Entire Earth?

As to human-caused destruction of wildlife and biodiversity, I can attest to three recent deaths in my local area.  I have seen three raccoons by the side of the road near where I live in Playa del Rey in the past two weeks - two were near the Ballona wetlands/Wildlife preserve area, and a third was on the ordinary city street in my neighborhood.  I also saw something I've never seen before about two weeks ago:  while driving home at night, I saw a group of six raccoons, four large and two small, boldly crossing the road and giving me and some nearby bicyclists the hostile, evil "raccoon eye," also near the Ballona wetlands.

For several months, I've been slowly reading a detailed and interesting account of the end-Permian extinction event that occurred about 251 MYA (million years ago).  This is not the "end of the dinosaurs" extinction, it is a much-earlier disaster that occurred over approximately 1 million years, and which eliminated anywhere from 90 to 95% of existing life on earth - or perhaps (difficult for me to ascertain the difference yet, as I am not 100% finished with the book) - 90 to 95% of species/biodiversity (not the same as every living creature, eh?).  I already know that When Life Nearly Died by Michael J. Benton, a distinguished paleontologist and fine writer, degenerates into Al Gore worship/total buy-in of Gore's alarmism/Global Warming/humans-destroying-all-life b.s. at the end, despite a chapter of reasonable speculation as to the total number of species currently living on the earth and potential human impacts.

Basically, there may be as few as 2 million species living on earth, of which humans had identified and described approximately 1.9 million as of 2009 - a very low, outer estimate, and as many as 200 million species of all varieties, a high upper estimate.  It should go without saying that "Holocene Mass Extinction" advocates, a separate, yet closely-related group to "Anthropogenic Global Warming" advocates, believe that people are the agents of an unbelievably rapid period of mass extinction that will soon destroy every living creature on the planet.

I don't have to be a giant throbbing genius to explain the bizarritude of this belief, or call into question how an obviously competent and skilled scientist like Michael J. Benton could so drive his jeep off the proverbial alarmist cliff after spending hundreds of pages building up a careful theory and amassing considerable factual evidence that an approximately 1 million-year period of severe volcanic eruptions called the Siberian Traps led to the end-Permian extreme mass extinction.  The diminution in species-variation - or loss of 90-95% of living species that occurred at the end of the Permian era 251 million years ago took place over approximately 1 million years.

I'm just going to quote this "authoritative statement" regarding this issue from "The Encyclopedia of Earth" to illustrate how easily this bohunk gets repeated:  "The IUCN Red List estimates that 12-52% of species within well-studied higher taxa such as vertebrates and vascular plants are threatened with extinction. Based on data on recorded extinctions of known species over the past century, scientists estimate that current rates of species extinction are about 100 times higher than long-term average rates based on fossil data. Other plausuble estimates suggest that present extinction rates now may have reached 1000 to 10,000 times the average over past geologic time. These estimates are the basis of the consensus that the Earth is in the midst of the sixth mass extinction event in its history; the present extinction event is termed the Holocene Mass Extinction."

Well, look - it's "well-studied higher taxa."  Prof. Benton discusses the reliability of human knowledge of past taxa of all sorts and utilizes a variety of techniques and analysis to come up with the scope and range of devastation that occurred during the end-Permian extinction event.  He covers sedimentation, and compares vegetation, microscopic fossils when possible, and larger and smaller oceanic and land species.  All evidence combined is used to present the degree and level of species destruction, the time period that it took (approximately 1 million years), and potential recovery periods.

We are all aware of recent direct destructive acts of people that eliminated entire species.  The passenger pigeon, the dodo, the great auk, the aurochs, and Steller's sea cow are all species cited, correctly, as species destroyed by reckless human predation and wanton destruction.  The World Wildlife Fund, the adorable panda, the whale - and those pictures of beautiful white polar bears trapped on tiny icebergs - are all things we terrorize little kids with, in order to make them feel horrible and feel concerned that we, humans, are destroying every bit of life on this planet by merely existing.  Much like people have to continue to be terrified of AIDS in order for international AIDS charities to continue to pay themselves their own salaries, kids have to continue to eat Rainforest Crunch for the sales, marketing, and guilt-market to continue to survive - because "everybody knows" that "people are destroying all life on the planet."

If this is the case, why can we name only half a dozen well-known species where actual anthropogenic destruction has caused their extinction, and the vast majority of those, prior to the turn of the last century?  I can add a few more to the list - and many "factual" articles cite island-based environmental/species devastation - i.e. the numerous native Hawaiian species that are extinct, and the terrible disaster that occurred on Easter Island.  The Tasmanian wolf:  this wolf lived on an ISLAND.  So did the native Tasmanian people, who were also made extinct by human abuse and predation on others. 

The truth is, we do not know the full extent of living species in all taxa, and estimates in many regards may be highly unreliable.  I can say that our current "biodiversity" samples equivalent to the Siberian sedimentary record studied by Prof. Benton are far more diverse, even to my layperson's view, than the end-of-extinction samples that were used to show how terrible the volcanic eruptions and environmental devastation were, over a long period of time.  If the rates of extinction are "1,000 to 10,000 times faster than the average" extinction rates discovered through the fossil record, it should be a very spectacular number of extinctions that is quite apparent to everyone.  If, for example, we have 1.9 million species on earth (the number officially counted so far) then we should, percentage-wise, see how many becoming extinct each year, without fail, to achieve these extraordinarily higher than average rates?  Looking on a purely mathematical basis, the "ordinary" background extinction rate by some estimates is "if there are a million species on the planet earth, one would go extinct every year."  We already know there are 2 million species - so 1,000 times that "rate" would be 2,000 species becoming extinct every year, and 10,000 times that "rate" would be 20,000 becoming extinct every year.  According to the reliable Edmund O. Wilson, "27,000 species are becoming extinct every year" so there ya go.  But since we have already identified 1.9 million species and have computing capabilities - why not keep something like a running count?  Because . . . the actual identified extinctions are far, far lower than that amount, even counting bugs and all types of bacteria/viruses.

However, amazingly, someone who hasn't yet been edited out of Wikipedia's article on "background extinction rates," points up, "The fact that we do not currently know the total number of species, in the past nor the present, makes it very difficult to accurately calculate the non-anthropogenicly influenced extinction rates."

Without question.  What we are looking at is clearly human-caused extinction of some species - all of which, or nearly all, are localized phenomena.  We can observe similar phenomena in nature on a daily basis in interactions between other species - from bacteria and viruses to higher-orders of animals.

Am I saying that human behavior such as clubbing baby seals to death for fur and fun, or nearly destroying all American bison by massive shooting from the back of a train, or destruction of millions upon millions of passenger pigeons, apparently for "sport" or "fun" is right?  Of course not - it is brutal and genocidal behavior with no place in nature or life.

We have a number of human-created species among us right now, a factor absolutely never discussed in any of these chitchats.  There's a clear divide between people devoted to human agriculture, breeding of livestock, pet owners and breeders, and the Defenders of Wild Nature who think we're killing tens of thousands of animals every day just by sitting around breathing.  We have a clear divide between those interested in the potentially harmful effects of genetically modified foods - plant and animal - and those who are interested in stopping all human activity in general (breeding, eating, breathing, etc). 

I am a defender of wild nature, yet I can see many instances with my own eyes where animals live in relationship to people - they do not "die" in relation to them.  Several species of larger animals are on the rise in Southern California, and are impinging upon human settlements, occasionally with dangerous results to animals and people:  these are opossum, raccoon, coyote, and small and larger raptors.  These animals eat our smaller pets, can spread disease such as rabies, and can even harm children on very rare occasions.  I'm not giving these examples of animals causing harm to humans as an excuse to "kill" them - I do not believe that animals should be killed for entertainment or convenience.

What we are looking at is not the ignorant and anthropogenic alarmism of strange individuals with odd desires to control others in potentially devastating ways, we are looking at what should be dawning on everyone in all aspects of science and life:  there is so much we do not know, and when in doubt, we should always err on the side of caution and respect for nature and others.

This is the adorable "Mr. Blobby," a fathead sculpin fish discovered in 2003, just one of the many species discovered during the 10-year Census of Marine Life.

You see, we know that foolish and vicious men clubbed many baby seals to death and nearly destroyed the seal population.  We know that cruel and wantonly-destructive men stood on the back of locomotive cars and shot thousands upon thousands of American bison, leaving their bodies to rot.  These horrific events occurred over 100 years ago.

Yes, today, some species are still predated upon by humans to excess.  Many tortoises have lost their lives, and valuable species are endangered because people continue to want to make combs and decorative items from their shells when superior synthetic substitutes have been available for many years.  And for all the millions of caring pet owners and adopters who practice the best in care and do not irresponsibly fail to alter/neuter their pets, there are some who allow their pets to breed indiscriminately, and others who do horrible, barbaric things like Michael Vick's dogfighting ring.  These are specific behaviors and problems.  They are things that can be solved over time.  Michael Vick served time in prison for the felony dogfighting charges and is only now returning to professional football.  He is now advocating for humane treatment of dogs and working to stop illegal, cruel dogfighting.  People can be assisted to find other ways to earn a living than killing endangered sea turtles to make their shells into decorative items. 

But to compare human activity, no matter how heedless, to something like the million-year eruptions of the Siberian Traps that nearly stopped all life on earth, is simply bizarre.  It is the same as stating that all life will soon end because we are driving cars that produce approximately 20% of the world's CO2 increases, which is in itself, not the primary "greenhouse" gas. 

It's the problem with 90% of science fiction that ever was.  Today, we recognize the foolishness of the old sci-fi stories where a green-skinned, reptilian monster from another planet was lusting after busty earth-babes.  We acknowledge that the stereotype of the "mad scientist" who invents some doomsday machine to "destroy the Earth" or even "the Universe" is akin to a fable of a man trying to outdo the Gods (i.e. Prometheus - there was a reason why one of the earliest science fiction books, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, was subtitled "or the Modern Prometheus"). 

If people cannot tell by now that our senses and our minds easily can "fool" and misdirect us, then what hope is there? Obviously there is a reason why these extreme, exaggerated fears and beliefs about human power and influence over the world are so prevalent.  My main objection, however, is that in undertaking one action for what we believe at the time to be a good, important reason, may have unintended negative results - for humans as a species, and for the rest of the living species in the world.  As one example, I offer up the strong unintentional breeding and propagation program that has given rise to many new strains and even species of bacteria - in other words, the overuse and prescription of antibiotics.  This may well lead to extinction someday, but not of the bacteria directly, but rather, their host species:  us.

The Truth About Cats and Dogs

I've had my buddy Badger for about 10 years now.  He's the best dog ever, as everyone knows . . .

Meredith got a kitten about a year ago named Oliver.  Oliver came from the Westside Animal Shelter - both Oliver and Badger are rescue animals.  I know there's a big group of people who breed and love pedigreed animals and I support everybody who takes good care of their pets, but for those who don't particularly care if their pet has "papers" or not and doesn't intend to breed or show them, I think it's mandatory to pick a pet from an animal shelter.  With over 1 million dogs and even more cats euthanized each year, it's a simple thing to do to save an innocent pet's life.  Not only that, but you will bring home a friend who will quickly become a part of your family.

From the beginning, tiny kitten Oliver acted more like a puppy than a cat.  He followed us around, "talked" a lot, and came when his name was called.  He would bring (and still does!) one of his toys when ready to play.  Oliver grew up around Badger and Taz (our former departed Chihuahua).  For a long time I thought Oliver's doglike behavior was a result of growing up around two dogs, with no other cats around.

I hadn't had a cat for years and I was struck by how smart Oliver was compared to the cats I'd had years ago (not that I didn't love them a whole lot, too).  I thought - cats have pretty short generations.  They might be "evolving" to become more like dogs, because this is just more appealing to human owners and rewarding for the cats themselves.  

That's just a theory that I have, but the cat sitting there "like a person" is a PuppyKat.  Southern California breeder Dawn Houston developed these cats after years of breeding from rescued cats that shared dog-like traits -- folded ears, short tails, and calm, "puppy-like" personalities.  These traits are out there among many cats today, or Dawn wouldn't have been able to find the rescue animals that shared them.  Oliver doesn't have folded ears or a short tail, and he's got a funny little kitten Roman nose, but he's got a big, puppy-like personality.  

So, if Oliver weren't neutered (he is), I guess we could have worked on breeding more "HyperKats".  He's puppylike, all right - the world's most active, hyper, into-everything puppy.  He's active all night long, all day long, and has developed many creative ways to play - including opening all doors and cabinets and hurling any object he can find off any surface, just to "watch it fall."

Some studies have shown that some people are "cat people" and some people are "dog people," and they share characteristics with the pets that they love.  Cat people are supposedly "more neurotic," but "open" to new experiences.  Dog people are theoretically more outgoing, conscientious and social.

A lot of people surveyed in that study said they were "both" and loved both animals equally - but it doesn't look like the study, which was looking for "differences," took that into account.  I think I fit in the "both" category.  But I have to say that Badger is pretty jealous of Oliver, especially when Oliver rolls over and wants his belly scratched, something he does a LOT of.

 

The Sessile Eye of the Isopod

Ever since I saw the picture of the giant isopod brought up the the submarine crew last week, I was fascinated by this creature, which amounts to a deep water-dwelling pillbug.  Some people think it looks like a giant, animated lobster tail.

 This thing is like . . . ALIENNNNN!!!

That alien face - it supposely has a "sessile" compound eye, by which it is meant - not on a stalk.

If you like it, you can learn more about it here.

Its scientific name is apparently bathynomus gigantius and it lives at depths of 2,000 feet or below.  It mainly navigates by its long feelers, and is a carnivorous scavenger.  It's so large, in comparison to its land-dwelling relative, the familiar and even slightly cute pillbug or sowbug, because of the phenomenon of deep sea gigantism, which also gives rise to the giant squid.

I want to say there's a story in this, but I'm not sure it's a very good one.  (Look at that face!!!).

It advances slowly on its clattering chitinous legs, ravenous, implacable, its pincers snapping . . . 

And on a slightly different note, another lovely dinner at Akasha this evening.  Service great and food very nice as always.  Meredith and I shared three small cupcakes for dessert.  Two of them had tiny little marshmallow rabbits on top.  I ate mine, biting off his head first.  Then I mushed his body with some frosting and ate it too.