User:Fourdee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This user lives in Oregon.
This user is of English ancestry.
This user is of Dutch ancestry.
This user is of German ancestry.
This user is of French ancestry.
This user is of Welsh ancestry.
This user is of Irish ancestry.
This user is of American Indian ancestry.
Enlarge
Enlarge

Fourdee aka Mike Chapman.

Contents

[edit] The Ruin

A favorite of mine, an Anglo-Saxon poem from the 8th century about Roman ruins and Wyrd.

Original Anglo-Saxon Modern English
by Jack Watson

Wrætlic is þes wealstan, wyrde gebræcon;
burgstede burston, brosnað enta geweorc.
Hrofas sind gehrorene, hreorge torras,
hrungeat berofen, hrim on lime,
scearde scurbeorge scorene, gedrorene,
ældo undereotone. Eorðgrap hafað
waldend wyrhtan forweorone, geleorene,
heardgripe hrusan, oþ hund cnea
werþeoda gewitan. Oft þæs wag gebad
ræghar ond readfah rice æfter oþrum,
ofstonden under stormum; steap geap gedreas.
Wonað giet se ...num geheapen,
fel on
grimme gegrunden
scan heo...
...g orþonc ærsceaft
...g lamrindum beag
mod mo... ...yne swiftne gebrægd
hwætred in hringas, hygerof gebond
weallwalan wirum wundrum togædre.
Beorht wæron burgræced, burnsele monige,
heah horngestreon, heresweg micel,
meodoheall monig mondreama full,
oþþæt þæt onwende wyrd seo swiþe.
Crungon walo wide, cwoman woldagas,
swylt eall fornom secgrofra wera;
wurdon hyra wigsteal westen staþolas,
brosnade burgsteall. Betend crungon
hergas to hrusan. Forþon þas hofu dreorgiað,
ond þæs teaforgeapa tigelum sceadeð
hrostbeages hrof. Hryre wong gecrong
gebrocen to beorgum, þær iu beorn monig
glædmod ond goldbeorht gleoma gefrætwed,
wlonc ond wingal wighyrstum scan;
seah on sinc, on sylfor, on searogimmas,
on ead, on æht, on eorcanstan,
on þas beorhtan burg bradan rices.
Stanhofu stodan, stream hate wearp
widan wylme; weal eall befeng
beorhtan bosme, þær þa baþu wæron,
hat on hreþre. þæt wæs hyðelic.
Leton þonne geotan
ofer harne stan hate streamas
un...
...þþæt hringmere hate
þær þa baþu wæron.
þonne is
...re; þæt is cynelic þing,
huse ...... burg....

This masonry is wondrous; fates broke it
courtyard pavements were smashed; the work of giants is decaying.
Roofs are fallen, ruinous towers,
the frosty gate with frost on cement is ravaged,
chipped roofs are torn, fallen,
undermined by old age. The grasp of the earth possesses
the mighty builders, perished and fallen,
the hard grasp of earth, until a hundred generations
of people have departed. Often this wall,
lichen-grey and stained with red, experienced one reign after another,
remained standing under storms; the high wide gate has collapsed.
Still the masonry endures in winds cut down
persisted on__________________
fiercely sharpened________ _________
______________ she shone_________
_____________g skill ancient work_________
_____________g of crusts of mud turned away
spirit mo________yne put together keen-counselled
a quick design in rings, a most intelligent one bound
the wall with wire brace wondrously together.
Bright were the castle buildings, many the bathing-halls,
high the abundance of gables, great the noise of the multitude,
many a meadhall full of festivity,
until Fate the mighty changed that.
Far and wide the slain perished, days of pestilence came,
death took all the brave men away;
their places of war became deserted places,
the city decayed. The rebuilders perished,
the armies to earth. And so these buildings grow desolate,
and this red-curved roof parts from its tiles
of the ceiling-vault. The ruin has fallen to the ground
broken into mounds, where at one time many a warrior,
joyous and ornamented with gold-bright splendour,
proud and flushed with wine shone in war-trappings;
looked at treasure, at silver, at precious stones,
at wealth, at prosperity, at jewellery,
at this bright castle of a broad kingdom.
The stone buildings stood, a stream threw up heat
in wide surge; the wall enclosed all
in its bright bosom, where the baths were,
hot in the heart. That was convenient.
Then they let pour_______________
hot streams over grey stone.
un___________ _____________
until the ringed sea (circular pool?) hot
_____________where the baths were.
Then is_______________________
__________re, that is a noble thing,
to the house__________ castle_______

[edit] The Fallacies of System, Object and Scale

I believe the following thinking errors play a great role in the modern disputes over ideas such as "emergence", "reductionism", and "consciousness". Feel free to comment on my talk page, particularly with citations of better phrasings of these fallacies.

[edit] The Fallacy of System and Object

There is only one true, objective and real system to the best of human knowledge, which is the Universe. Every part of the universe is affected by every other. Any other system you define is completely arbitrary, and any properties of that system you ascribe are similarly arbitrary and subjective.

For example, you may say there is such thing as a human, and that humans genuinely and discretely exist. However, they do not. At what point does the human end and his environment begin? Do you include the air and water he is constantly exchanging with the environment? If so, which molecules in and around him are part of the man and which are part of the environment? At what point does the food he eats become part of him, and at what point is the waste he excretes no longer part? Which of the energy radiating to and from him is part of him and where is his boundary? There is no answer which has a clear basis in scientific fact, the term "man" and your perception of his boundaries are completely arbitrary and subjective, therefore any behaviors or qualities you ascribe to him are similarly arbitrary and contrived, however useful they may be in interpreting what we perceive.

[edit] The Fallacy of Scale

Let us assume for a moment that the objects and systems you define actually exist or that such definitions are useful. Assuming that, it is incorrect to say that the view of an object or system at a larger scale is more accurate than the view at a small scale. Anything observed at the larger scale (from a greater distance) is intrinsically "less true" than that observed at the smaller scale (from closer).

For example, let's take the earth.

  • From Mars, the earth appears to be a blue speckle.
  • From closer, the earth might appear to be a blue sphere.
  • From the moon, the earth would appear to be blue, white and brown, and a spheroid not a sphere.
  • From the surface, we see that the earth is many colors and has quite a rough surface; it's neither spherical nor spheroid.

Which is the most true description of the Earth? The last, of course. The others are "less true".

Let's take a more subjective example to illustrate the subjectivity involved in this fallacy. Let's say you see a person from a distance whom you find very attractive. However as you get closer you notice a lot of acne or some other feature you do not find attractive. Both observations are "true" in the sense that you genuinely observed and believed them, however they are in outright contradiction. Which observation is "more true"? The latter again.

Observations at a smaller, closer scale are always more valid than those from a distance.

Caveat: This is not to say, of course, that false conclusions and extrapolations drawn from a close scale about that which falls outside what has been observed are true.

[edit] Genetic Evidence for Ethnicity and Race

We have available today genetic testing which clearly indicates the descent of people, and this profiling of mutations shows there is no clear genetic distinction between Nordic, Germanic and Celtic (and no distinct underlying "prehistoric" group aside from the Celts, as had been supposed in the past). It is remarkable to see that a very few male individuals are responsible for each stage in the emergence of the European type - the vast majority of western Celts, from Northern Spain to Ireland and Wales, are descended from the single male individual responsible for the mutation labeled R1b, and they represent one of the most distinct and homogeneous groups in humanity, aside from Native Americans who have an even stronger homogeneity. However the descendants of R1b are also very common in the Germanic countries, along with I, the Nordic type which is the other major contributor to the Celts, and, unlike in the Celtic countries, R1a (eastern european) and several smaller male line contributors, including significant non-caucasoid contributors in Iceland and Norway (Haplogroup Q).

It is conventient to look at the Haplogroups prevalent in people to compare them to groups with which they are supposed to have a common origin. For example, English people have virtually identical Haplogroup distribution to Frisians[1], while the Welsh have very different distribution, validating the historical and linguistic evidence for the origin of the Angles.

Any statements made today about ethnic origin or identity should be based on haplogroup evidence, which is increasingly well documented and mapped. All references to pre-genetic anthropology are suspect and should be provided for historical perspective only, as they made some incorrect assumptions and used subjective terms. This is not to completely discount the study of cranial features or the older labels for groups of people, however we should be careful to be certain that those findings are validated by the facts we know today.

Looking at distribution maps of Haplogroups and a hierarchy indicating the descent of the mutations[2], several things are immediately clear. For one, the genetic makeup of Sub-Saharan Africans, Europeans, and Asians are markedly different from each other. Europeans share essentially no common ancestry with Africans after the mutated individuals. A very few male individuals were responsible for many ethnic groups (such as R1b, western european - all from a single male), although some ethnic groups reflect considerable diversity. However, some problems do arise, particularly with the distinction between Cacuasoid and Mongoloid, as they have an intermixed origin. While Europeans, aside from the incidence of the Q type in Iceland and Norway, have essentially unique Haplogroups not shared with Asians or Africans, the origins of those haplogroups are not so distinct. For example, I, which gives rise to the nordic type, is much farther distant in origin from R1a and R1b (the primary european types) than the Q, Siberian and Native American type.

It is useful to classify Europeans and Caucasoids as distinct from other groups because they are much more closely related to each other than to other groups in terms of stemming from a few distant fathers not shared by other racial categories. Most significantly, the ancestors responsible for I, R1b and R1a (and a few others) are the male line origins of almost all of Europe and very few outside genetic contributors are found in that population, and those genetic fathers are not found to any significant degree in outside populations. This makes Europeans a distinct family of people who are much more closely related to each other than other groups. We should utilize the clear, incontrovertible evidence of genetic research in validating all statements about races, and not allow any particular agenda to load the discussion with unscientific assertions.

[edit] Selection of Articles Edited

[edit] Architecture

[edit] Computers

[edit] Environment

[edit] Historical

[edit] Misc

[edit] Places

[edit] Scale models

[edit] Trains

[edit] Weapons

[edit] Images Donated

Some of these images are useful some are not. The ones not used in any articles, of degraded quality, or not of interesting subjects will be culled sooner or later. All are original and have been released into the public domain to the extent legally permissible.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/o/u/User%7EFourdee_e40c.html"