Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT: 2397-2401 (4-8 March, 2013) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Loki:
I.... didn't actually expect such a helpful answer. But I am afraid I am not willing to order beer for so much money without trying it first. I was just moping around. ...This now catches me off-guard.
Aethien:
Yeah, well, I am Dutch (so hai there neighbor) and a little bit much of a beer geek so I could actually give you a helpful answer. :-P
Also, trying new beers is half the reason to order there and half the fun in drinking beer. That said, I can give you recommendations based on what you like and sites like Beer Advocate and RateBeer are quite helpful in determining whether a beer is good and/or popular.
Valdís:
--- Quote from: Zebediah on 04 Mar 2013, 13:47 ---19th and early 20th century anthropologists were very keen on classifying the human species into distinct sub-groups. The problem was that, in trying to make all the groups homogenous while still trying to make their classification systems account for all of human diversity, they kept dividing us into smaller and smaller groups until their systems became so unwieldy and divorced from reality that they were meaningless.
--- End quote ---
To be fair that's a problem with "subspecies" in general, there not being much of a clear demarcation in how much variation needs to be present in a given population. Makes me think of the bird species with hundreds of "subspecies" with just tiny differences in beak-shape or colouration and so forth. All of evolution is a continuum, not clear distinct categories (dating back to biblical "kinds" etc.), so if one is doing that with the birds then of course it's pretty understandable to do so with the Far-Eastern epicanthal fold, dry earwax and what-not in humans. But like with anything such genetic traits aren't set in stone, so the groupings end up inaccurate as well apart from general guidelines. [Swede] [Southern Africans]
I think it's also rather telling than when doing a quick look on bird subspecies, since they came to mind, the first Google hit was the Royal Society article "Are subspecies useful in evolutionary and conservation biology?". :-D
Sidhekin:
The topics of birds and subspecies make me think of ring species. Anyone interested in speciation might enjoy musing on this special case. Can we say they might find it ... amusing?
Bluesummers:
ROCKEM SOCKEM MOMO FSCK YEAH YOU GUYS
And so forth. ;D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version