Procrastination Technique meets Meditation Technique meets Why do I even still own white sheets? meets Wow, Good thing I don’t have to look respectable/presentable this week…
I probably shouldn’t be allowed to have extra henna cones in my room. Or this happens. (My leg, foot to thigh, is also covered.) And I’m going to run out of skin soon.
But. It is very, very relaxing.
(It’s surprisingly difficult to take a picture of your own arm.)
(PS. No, it’s not black henna. It’s just still wet.)
This right here. The last two months of my life.
kwin-see asked: I'm so glad I found this blog (: I'm in love with archaeology but I'm majoring in anthropology to become a primatologist. I feel like your blog is made for me lol
Thanks! :D
many-lives asked: I'm revising for my first year bioanth exams - your flash cards and cheat sheets are going to be massively helpful, thank you!
Good luck!
These mesmerizing sculptures are the work of William Ricketts, a rare Australian born in 1898 who was in awe of the connection the Aborigine people have with the land. Hidden deep within a lush Australian rainforest are a set of mystical Aborigine sculptures seemingly merged into the natural surroundings. Moss covered torsos of men, women and children protrude from tree trunks and boulders. Some reach heavenward with widespread wings, others envelop each other protectively – all are symbols of the relationship the indigenous Australian Aborigines have with nature.
wow, these are beautiful :)
oh my!
(Source: somewhereinthisuniverse)
A Collection of Desires...: “Our knowledge of size constancy is learned. We’re not born with it....
“Our knowledge of size constancy is learned. We’re not born with it. And there have been reports of people in the world who haven’t learned it. Anthropologist Colin Turnbull told of the Ba Mbuti people who didn’t get a chance to learn about size constancy because they lived in thick jungle where the only objects that could be seen were always just a few yards away. When Turnbull took one of these people out on an open plain, they saw several buffalo grazing a few miles away. The Ba Mbuti asked what kind of insects they were! Turnbull told him that they were buffalo twice the size of the ones his people were used to. Turnbull’s companion refused to believe him. So they drove to where the buffalo were. As they got closer to the animals, and the buffalo appeared to get larger and larger, the Ba Mbuti beccame frightened and said that it was witchcraft. Turnbull writes, ‘Finally, when he realized that they were real buffalo he was no longer afraid, but what puzzled him still was why they had been so small, and whether they really had been small and had so suddenly grown larger, or whether it had been some kind of trickery.’”
(Source: icanread)
Presented for your enjoyment without comment.
(Source: evolvingcomplexityii.wordpress.com)
1. STS 5 (Mrs. Ples) - Australopithecus africanus, 2.5 - 2.1 mya
2. KNM-ER 1470 - Homo rudolfensis, 1.9 mya
3. KNM-ER 1813 (Lucy’s child) - Homo habilis, 1.9 mya
4. Petralona 1 - Homo heidelbergensis, 400 - 300 kya
5. ??? - Homo sapiens
The picture is all over the internet. It probably came from the Smithsonian Institution, and is credited (when credited at all) to Chip Clark, Jim DiLoreto, and Don Hurlbert.
A few places give time frames and species names - which (roughly) match - but none identify the specimen names. I’m confident on all of them (including KNM-ER 1470, which other sites list as H. erectus, since the skull’s been debated) - but I can’t find match the last one…
alphacaeli reblogged this from you and added:
- Au. africanus? - ?
- H. rudolfensis - KNM-ER 1470 (I’d recognise that face anywhere!)
- H. erectus - Sangiran ??
- H. heidelbergensis - Petralona 1
- H. sapiens - I have no idea D:
I’m good with Homo, not so good with the australopithecines.
tutubean reblogged this from you and added:
Am I right?
Australopithecus sp.
H. rudolfensis
H. erectus? or ergaster or heidelbergensis, I can’t tell the difference.
H. sapiens (early archaic)
H. sapiens (Asian modern?)
From left to right…
Actually, I can’t get all of them without looking at a cheat sheet.
But, if anyone wants to guess species (or even specimen)!
(Source: white-0n-white)
I <3 fiddle heads and ammonites.
![loopthelambdoid:
“As an adolescent I aspired to lasting fame, I craved factual certainty, and I thirsted for a meaningful vision of human life —so I became a scientist. This is like becoming an archbishop so you can meet girls.” - Matt Cartmill [x]](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3gp3i0edh1qb8jnwo1_500.png)
“As an adolescent I aspired to lasting fame, I craved factual certainty, and I thirsted for a meaningful vision of human life —so I became a scientist. This is like becoming an archbishop so you can meet girls.” - Matt Cartmill [x]
jessivali asked: I find your blog very interesting, yet im wondering about work.I live in Puerto Rico and archaeology isnt a big thing here so my mom gets all worried when i tell her this is what i find interesting. Currently im studying nutrition, for its curriculum ive taken general biology and so far i prefer biology than nutrition. its my first year at university and i leaning to do a double mayor in biology and anthropology. Can you tell me about job opportunities?
Thanks!
Woo, big question. Careers.
So big that I actually made it a separate post - because it was long, and because I was getting all vague and general.
To start with, I should (have) make it clear that I really don’t know anything about the situation in Puerto Rico. Job-wise or career-wise. Sorry.
(Google tells me there are some really cool, totally awesome sites - but you must know more about them than I do!)
But, I am sure that anthropology professors at your university do, and that (ok, maybe not all of them, but definitely a few of them) would be thrilled to talk to you about it. (Approaching professors can be terrifying, but I’m finding that the further they are from being directly responsible for you, the easier the conversations go. As in, being an undergrad or from another department means you have a much better chance of a smooth conversation. I’m a bit of a hypocrite here because I don’t always go and talk to professors - but, really, you should. They can give you much more relevant advice. People love it when people are curious about their work and considering following in their foot-steps, so…)
Anyway, everything I said is either very general, or at least relevant in the UK and US. (Also, I should make it clear that I’m still in school, not out in “the real world” and haven’t, officially, been on the job-market yet. So, vague, general, and arm-chair.)
—
As to biology, nutrition, archaeology, and anthropology…
I think those would be a fabulous set of things to study together.
Nutrition has to be taken into account when it comes to interpreting archaeological finds - whether its the the skeletal remains themselves (do they show signs of malnutrition? do they show evidence of a specific deficiency? can their diet explain why they are all so small?), or the pottery pieces that might have chemical residue of possible foods, or the city-layout and agricultural logistics (could they be getting enough food from to support the population, etc)…
In biological anthropology, being able to take nutrition into account is not only critical, but I’m certain that it’s going to become increasingly integral to the (academic) discipline of biological anthropology.
Roughly speaking, the sort of “major” research trends (and by major trends, I mean that if you walked into any big bio anth department, got a list of their faculty and a breakdown of research assistants, you’d not only find someone working on these things, but you’d be able to clearly identify the lines between these) are: (1) Genetics - comparative primate, or population-level or maybe disease-based; (2) Growth & disease in developing nations - often parasites; (3) Evolutionary considerations/models.
Nutrition is a perfect fit for ongoing research into growth (stunting, malnutrition, etc) and parasite and disease burden.
And in the Evolutionary side of it - with everyone talking Eco-Devo and all the bones people trying to work plasticity into the fossil record, and every few years a new hominid theory that hinges on dietary change (meat! cooking meat! fish! meat again! underground storage organs! meat!)…
Basically, what I’m trying to say is that if you did want to go into an academic career in archaeology, having a background in nutritional biology is a very strong plus.
