rivendellrose: (scully red)
One of the neat things about the Flipboard app on iPad is that it makes a quick scan through news and other happenings online veeeery easy. This morning, while I was drinking my tea and going through my usual mix of New Scientist, assorted news feeds and various lifestyle blogs (where I found this lemon cake that I am now dying to try to make for Thanksgiving, but sort of afraid I am not sufficiently baker-skilled to manage), I found something (else) very interesting: it was a picture of some really beautifully-preserved mummies that had, in life, been subjected to skull flattening.

What's skull-flattening? I'm glad you asked, imaginary reader!

You see, our modern cultures around the world today aren't the first Human cultures to get the idea that something unnatural (like, say, over-inflated lips or silicon filled breats) are attractive. Most cultures throughout history seem to have practiced some kind of body alteration for the purpose of beauty, basically based on the idea that if you're spending a bunch of time and energy doing (x) to your body (or your kid's body), you must have enough resources not to be worrying about whether or not you're going to eat today. Body modification, whether it's scarring, foot-binding, or, in this case, strapping boards to your infant's head to flatten and elongate his or her skull while it's still soft, is a great way to advertize that you don't have to spend your time working. In other words, it's like having really absurdly long fake nails, high heels, absurdly exaggerated musculature, or a perfect tan even in winter. It's a sign that says "I'm so successful I can waste my energy on stuff that doesn't make sense from a pure survival standpoint!"

Think of it like the Human equivalent of a peacock tail. It's a shitty idea as far as avoiding predators, but the people around you (particularly the lady peacocks) think it's damned impressive, and from an evolutionary standpoint, that's what matters.

So, hey, this is exciting! I've seen illustrations of people with flattened foreheads, and I've seen a few dull pictures of the skulls, but I'd never seen anything so nicely preserved. I got very excited. ...And then I noticed the headline next to the photo.

"Scientists think this triangular skull belongs to an alien"

Um, what? No... no, not if they've ever so much as flipped through a basic archaeology textbook, they don't. Especially not since the skulls were found in Peru. Guess what region notably picked skull-flattening out of the bazillion body-modification options available to pre-industrial humanity? Peru. I even looked it up for you, to prove it - a quick Google search for "peru skull-flattening" gets you this Wikipedia article on artificial cranial deformation, which is the technical term for this kind of body mod. Down under "Reasons" you'll see a great little diagram of the methods the Mayans used, and next to the "History" section are a pair of skulls pictured underneath an 18th century painting of a Chinookan child undergoing the process, being held by a woman on whom the adult result can be seen. The top skull is labeled as Incan. Where did the Inca live, ladies and gentlemen? Peru. Relevant quote:

Artificial cranial deformation, head flattening, or head binding is a form of permanent body alteration in which the skull of a human being is intentionally deformed. It is done by distorting the normal growth of a child's skull by applying force. Flat shapes, elongated ones (produced by binding between two pieces of wood), rounded ones (binding in cloth) and conical ones are among those chosen.

Take another look at that Inca skull. Now look at the 'alien' mummies. I think I'll rest my case.

I shall refrain from commenting on the probable credentials of those Russian and Spanish "doctors" who think these things are from outer space, except to say that there's no law anywhere saying a total crackpot nutjob can't have a PhD in something. Io9 has an article about the same thing. I like to think they're being more than a little tongue-in-cheek about it, which makes me happy, but they're not quite clear enough about the "wtf, no" as I might prefer.
rivendellrose: (Seattle rain)
Met with photographer last night. Seems like great guy, really seems to know his stuff, pretty sure we're going with him. Spent entirely too much time chatting with him... long enough that Starbucks wanted to close. Well. There went our Cunning Plan of calling a cab from the Starbucks. So we walked Photographer out and said goodbye, and started off back in the direction of home(ish) for lack of a better idea, while we tried to ascertain the best next move. Theoretically, the same bus that brought us there might be running... but it was freezing (literally - it'd been snowing earlier but was now too clear for it), and I hate standing waiting for buses when I'm cold. Better, if you're not too far from known areas, to walk. So we did.

Walked for a while down empty industrial/business area until we found a familiar street that looked like nothing, but which I knew would go through because it was the street address of one of my former jobs at the Seattle Center, walked up that, and followed our noses (and the neon lights) back to a populous strip of restaurants and so on. Had dinner at 10:30 at a pub in Queen Anne, then spent twenty minutes having pub call us a cab, watching for cab, seeing no cab, having cab company call pub to say they came but couldn't find us. Eventually stood outside for ten minutes, watched cab settle in in front of another restaurant a block away. Thought "hang on, that's how they keep saying they've come without us seeing them." Attempt to get cab's attention. ...Cab picks up another fare and drives off, the bastard.

Eventually we gave up on the pub calling them (since clearly the cab company couldn't figure out that this pub with the giant sign proclaiming its name was not whatever that other unmarked restaurant was), and walked over to where bartender said there was a taxi stand. Did not find taxi stand. Did not find anything at all. Suspect bartender just wanted to get rid of us so they have the place to themselves until closing. Started walking back so that we could just catch a cab in front of the other damned restaurant, since it seemed to be such a magnet for them, but fortunately only got halfway down the street before another cab showed up and accepted our hail. Hurray!

Herein came an interesting discovery: When I first moved to the city, I was petrified of cabbies' driving. I mean, really - I thought I was going to die pretty much every time I got in one, because of their habit of speeding and zipping between obstacles and all. But... turns out now that The Boy and I have been using them often enough in the last few years that I'm pretty much over it, and now regard the whole thing with much the same attitude one takes to a roller-coaster. Yes, it seems like you're going slightly too fast and you might hit that monorail pylon, but it's just an optical illusion. Or, you know, a guy who spends his whole working life driving. Same thing, right? Sure.

This realization, I have decided, should not be questioned too much. And should not be applied to cabbies in Las Vegas, who are, in my experience, actually insane and possibly slightly homicidal.

So we got home at about 12:30 (oh god oh god oh god, weeknight), threw ourselves into bed...

And I woke up this morning with a really awful sore throat.

Argh.


But there were nifty things online this morning, at least: IKEA instructions for a Henge. Yes, like Stone Henge. It's adorable. ♥
rivendellrose: (archaeological imagination)
...Five minutes after my last entry, I remember that, duh, I wouldn't want to major in psych. I would want to specialize in archaeology, as I should have done all along (and would have, if I hadn't been trying to finish my 2nd degree in only a year!).

Giant fossil bird found on 'hobbit' island of Flores.

It is not, alas, an eagle. (/Tolkien geek) But it is fantastically awesome. ♥ Particularly given the fabulous reverse-fairy-tale logic of giant storks eating 'hobbit' babies. Sick and wrong, yes, but oddly amusing as well...
rivendellrose: (archaeologists (the Doctor laughs at the)
Seattle is finally going to get King Tut again! Within my lifetime! YAY!!!

...And now that I've spammed Twitter, Facebook and LJ, I'll go continue my archaeology-squee quietly in private. ♥♥♥ Re: comments made to both [livejournal.com profile] windrose and [livejournal.com profile] kusanivy recently, I take it all back - every now and then, Seattle does get the awesome stuff. ♥
rivendellrose: (try science)
Snagged from fellow-skeptic [livejournal.com profile] seachanges: How skeptics know the world is not going to end because of some supposed Mayan calendar in 2012. AKA actual real information on the subject, with primary sources and everything! ♥
rivendellrose: (octopus)
Remote-control deep sea camera captures an "elbowed" squid on film.

Totally worth checking out - the film is jerky and short, but the squid in question is absolutely amazing. Jointed tentacles!

(And yeah, this gets the 'octopi' tag because for some reason I have that instead of 'cephalopods.' *Sigh* Someday I should really go through and reorganize my tags...)

...And while I'm linking, take a look at this huge Anglo-Saxon gold hoard that was found recently. Some really impressive pieces in there. I'm totally jealous of the guys who found it. ♥
rivendellrose: (archaeological imagination)
'2,000-year-old feet found in Dublin attic 'closely resemble a bog body in appearance,' states reporter with a knack for ferreting out the blindingly obvious.

The feet are 2,000 years old. They're not a matched pair (one clearly came from an adult, one equally clearly from a child), and they're stained brown and, hey, really well-preserved for soft-tissue remains that are 2,000 years old. Just like a bog body. Funny that - do you suppose they might be - *gasp* - from bog bodies?

While this is an interesting story, there's no great mystery here, apart from whether these feet are from bodies we already know about, or whether there are two more bodies out there somewhere that we can find... if we can just track down whoever found them in the first place and make them lead us back to the place they were found. That's the problem with lack of provenance - we're not going to learn a hell of a lot from a pair of disembodied feet.

As to how they ended up in the attic, I should think that was fairly clear - personally, if I didn't know what bog bodies were and I was digging up peat somewhere for construction or whatever, and a pair of feet fell out, I can easily see how there might be a temptation to hide them to avoid potentially awkward questions. Not to mention the halting of whatever construction project brought them to light. So, that's my bet. And, sadly, I'm betting that'll mean we won't be seeing the full bodies that go with these feet anytime soon, either. Just my two cents of guessing.
rivendellrose: (yay!)
Oh, YES. YESS!!!

RARE OCTOPUS FOSSIL FOUND!

Check out that picture, guys. Seriously. Isn't that so unbelievably awesome?? ♥ And there's a video of an octopus squeezing through a maze, but I can't watch it because I'm at work, and that makes me sad. Because I bet it's fabulous.

Why don't I have an octopus icon? Must fix this!
rivendellrose: (archaeological imagination)
An interesting archaeological site I haven't heard of before... I'm definitely going to have to look up more details... especially more details that are less sensational and more, y'know, interested in archaeology rather than myth. No offense to the writers, but I like my science with a bit more science than this article. Although it did turn out a lot better than I'd expected from the headline, I'm still... hmm. Dubious. I'm lacking my textbooks and research stuff at the moment (yay, lunch break) but I'm pretty sure this isn't the first sign that humans of the era in question were capable of moving a few stones around. Am sufficiently intrigued by the whole thing (especially the cache of skulls, which I expect is more of a funereal arrangement than a sign of human sacrifice, as the article seems to want to believe) that I'd like to know more, though. :)

Anybody heard anything about this one? [livejournal.com profile] windrose, is there any chatter in the professional world about it?

And, while I'm linking stuff, here's an article about some wackjob woman who's trying to tell women that they'd all be perfectly happy if they'd just submit to making their entire lives all about making their husbands happy. Somewhere, I suspect Jesus is thinking "Hey, I never said that!"

ARGH. And here's yet another example of government-condoned honor killings, this time in Chechnya. I'm going to stop looking at the news, now, before I get totally pissed off and depressed.

Profile

rivendellrose: (Default)
rivendellrose

August 2024

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526 2728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 4th, 2025 01:01 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios